Mixed feelings about the offseason thus far

[Dipper9]

1000% agree with this post.

I definitely feel like we can deal BRob to either Chicago team(the Cubs depend on Peavy though in all likelihood) but AM can't demand a guy like Floyd, for example. I mean, he can ask for him and if he can get him, rgeat but he can't be "pigheaded" about it and only go after him and no one else.

If AM is willing to take a "fair package" and not one where he is getting the overwhelming advantage, I feel BRob could easily be dealt.

Guys like Scott and Sherrill are kind of in the middle of what you are saying...They are obviously vets and not prospects but they are still cheap and very productive for the money they will get. So, I feel they could be dealt although I do acknowledge that we may not get offered enough to deal them at this point.

So you would rather trade Roberts for whatever we can get rather than extend him 2-3 years? Not me. If MacPhail can get a solid, young return for Roberts, then by all means trade him. Otherwise, extend him. I am not of the mindset that he will not be valuable to us for another 3-4 years. In this market with SO many free agents still unsigned, not too many GM's are going to give up anything good for players like Roberts, Huff, Sherrill, etc. when they can just buy a one or two year guy from the FA market.

[RShack]

We should note that the deflation (and devaluing) of free agents is almost necessarily going to mean an inflation (or increased valuation) of prospects, especially near-ready ones.

Thus, the downturn in FA market activity will also likely make it more it difficult to trade veterans for prospects: you'll get fewer prospects back, or they'll be high risk or lower upside.

Exactly right.

Anybody who goes by the philosophy behind Moneyball, and not just its superficial transient manifestations, will see that good 30-yr-old vets are the current bargain stock.

Trading them for good prospects means paying an all-time-high premium.

Whether it's worth doing it anyway is a different question.

But we should be mindful that, in general, doing deals like that now is a perfect example of "sell low and buy high".

Trading vets for prospects in this market is a very anti-Moneyball thing to do.

[Sports Guy]

So you would rather trade Roberts for whatever we can get rather than extend him 2-3 years? Not me. If MacPhail can get a solid, young return for Roberts, then by all means trade him. Otherwise, extend him. I am not of the mindset that he will not be valuable to us for another 3-4 years. In this market with SO many free agents still unsigned, not too many GM's are going to give up anything good for players like Roberts, Huff, Sherrill, etc. when they can just buy a one or two year guy from the FA market.

Under no circumstance would I extend BRob.

[tywright]

Trading Scott is probably the most appropriate move right now considering the current economic state in baseball . However, I don't necessarily think he's going to satisfy SG's or anybody else's expectations for building this team for the future. Honestly, what is everybody's expectations on what we should get for Scott?

[Sports Guy]

Trading Scott is probably the most appropriate move right now considering the current economic state in baseball . However, I don't necessarily think he's going to satisfy SG's or anybody else's expectations for building this team for the future. Honestly, what is everybody's expectations on what we should get for Scott?

I think a Sherrill/Scott package is something we should look to deal to a team like Philly.

[tywright]

I think a Sherrill/Scott package is something we should look to deal to a team like Philly.

Except that Philly has already signed Ibanez.

[Sports Guy]

Except that Philly has already signed Ibanez.

That's right...I forgot.

[tywright]

That's right...I forgot.

Ok, but what do you expect to get in return for Scott or better yet, what should we be asking for?

[Frobby]

Under no circumstance would I extend BRob.

Wow, that seems like a change in your position. I know you were against giving him 4 years and a huge annual salary (say $12 mm/yr) but now there are "no circumstances" in which an extension makes sense?

Let me just say that I'd extend him for 3/$30 mm in a heartbeat, even in today's economic environment.

[anselmO]

I will feel A LOT better about this offseason if we can come up with another starter to ease the pressure on Guthrie/Uehara. Asking Uehara to come over here and be a #2 is a lot to ask.

Either through a BRob trade or free-agency, let's add a reliable veteran who can give us 150+ solid innings.

[Frobby]

SG, the fact that you have 'mixed' feelings makes me feel better about what we are doing this summer.

We missed out on Tex, we haven't signed any big impact FA (Sheets, Dunn), and we still have not traded Roberts/Sherril, or extended Markakis....... and you have mixed feelings about summer thus far (meaning there have been some good things done this summer).

Where do you live, Argentina? Man, I wish it were summer.

[Sports Guy]

Ok, but what do you expect to get in return for Scott or better yet, what should we be asking for?

I think it depends on the team.

I actually don't disagree with what you are saying....Will we get enough to justify dealing Scott?

I honestly don't know...In my opening post, I talked about dealing BRob and maybe Scott and Sherrill...that maybe goes back to exactly what you are saying.

I think our best bet was the Cubbies or Phils but they have filled their need, so we may not have a chance to deal him at this point.

But i would be shopping him.

[wildcard]

Defining offseason success to me is:

1) Signing or trading BRob and Huff. I don't care which, but this team doesn't not have enough talent to let them walk for draft choices that could be sandwich picks and 2nd round draft choices. Of course, if traded they must get equal or better talent in return.

2) Acquire a decent starting pitcher. Every year this team is short on major league talent. In 2007 there was not leftfielder. Last year no SS. Right now this team is badly in need of a decent starter.

If the O's can do those two things the offseason will be a success IMO. However:

3) The real goal is to get long term solutions. I won't put a timeframe on it -meaning offseason, in season, trade deadline or whenever, but that is where this team has to go.

[Sports Guy]

Wow, that seems like a change in your position. I know you were against giving him 4 years and a huge annual salary (say $12 mm/yr) but now there are "no circumstances" in which an extension makes sense?

Let me just say that I'd extend him for 3/$30 mm in a heartbeat, even in today's economic environment.

The only way i wouldn't be totally upset at an extension is a 3/30 type deal but that is ripping up his 2009 deal...so, basically a 2 year extension.

HOWEVER, I have always said that i would rather take the picks over extending him.

[Sports Guy]

1) Signing or trading BRob and Huff. I don't care which, but this team doesn't not have enough talent to let them walk for draft choices that could be sandwich picks and 2nd round draft choices. Of course, if traded they must get equal or better talent in return.

Extending Huff would be a monsterous mistake.

2) Acquire a decent starting pitcher. Every year this team is short on major league talent. In 2007 there was not leftfielder. Last year no SS. Right now this team is badly in need of a decent starter.

I am fine with adding another starter but they need to add a good pitcher, not a Tim Redding clone just to say they added someone. I am totally against Garland but I will say this...For a 1-2 year deal at 5-6 million a year, I would sign him. That may be all he ends up with.