Orioles offer BRob 3yr 30 million

[Anonymous]

Interesting. So if this remains the case according to BB, I know at least two posters who shouldn't say anything negative about AM keeping Brob this off-season.

As one of those two posters (presumably), I do think AM should be subject to criticism if he keeps BRob without extending him. He can and should extend him, IMO. But if he presents a truly generous offer and Roberts turns out to be completely unmoveable, then every effort should be made to trade him -- and he should then be dealt, as long as the return exceeds the value of the 2 draft picks. My very strong hunch, though, is that if we put a REASONABLY generous offer on the table, which we should, BRob would take it.

[Anonymous]

Well then you are willing to overpay, which was my point about you and Peace to begin with(hence what I bolded in Soprano's post).

Overpaying, by definition, means paying more than you think a guy is worth. Overpaying is offering Tex the kinds of dollars that you and 95% of the other posters were gleefully willing to throw his way (remember that you went from $132 mil to nearly $200 mil faster than I can say boo as your redline on Tex, for no good reason other than because other clubs offered more than we were offering, a contingency you obviously had to be aware of when you first established $132 mil as your internal limit). Offering what an objective observer would consider "reasonably generous" for BRob, plus a modest premium in recognition of the special role that he serves as one of our absolutely critical core players, is not, IMO, overpaying -- as he is well worth that kind of contract.

The most I would give is 2/24.

I don't for a moment believe that you would want him even for 2/24. Maybe I'm wrong, SG -- but it appears you want him gone yesterday.

[Guest rochester]

Do you see B-rob totally falling off the face of the earth as to your reasoning of getting nothing for him at the deadline? Atlanta didnt do to bad with Tex. Beats getting draft picks.

No, not at all... Pitchers get their worth+ at the deadline and it is too much of a risk. To put BRob in the same category as (ughhh) Tex is apples and oranges. Don't get me wrong, I like BRob and am fine with him staying but I believe he will will very little value for 1/2 season. LAA resigning Tex (to them) was worth the risk - resigning a 30+ BRob is not.

[mweb]

As one of those two posters (presumably), I do think AM should be subject to criticism if he keeps BRob without extending him. He can and should extend him, IMO. But if he presents a truly generous offer and Roberts turns out to be completely unmoveable, then every effort should be made to trade him -- and he should then be dealt, as long as the return exceeds the value of the 2 draft picks. My very strong hunch, though, is that if we put a REASONABLY generous offer on the table, which we should, BRob would take it.

No, you were not one of them, I was refering to SG and Ravenbird, I had a conversation with them the other day that relates.

[Anonymous]

No, you were not one of them, I was refering to SG and Ravenbird, I had a conversation with them the other day that relates.

As Rosanne Rosanna Dana (sp?) might have said ... never mind.

[Lester Freamon]

LOL, so if a marquee guy like Tex or ARod chooses to sign with the Yankees, it makes him "full of greed"?

No chance that the allure of playing in the biggest market, for the most fans, in the poshest stadium, for MLB's marquee franchise with the most championships, richest history, largest payroll, and a virtual guarantee of contending year in and year out, has anything to do with it?

Nope, must just be greed. :rolleyestf:

Well, yeah (just talking about Tex here). Actually when you really think about it, it is greedy. It just kind've depends on how you feel about it and the way you characterize it.

Playing baseball for millions of dollars near your home town would be plenty enough for most. I don't want to give the wrong idea, though, I don't blame Teixeira for his decision. Even if it is greedy .

[Dipper9]

I only want to extend Roberts if we are going to compete from 2010-2012.

Otherwise there is no point. If they do extend Roberts, that is one less IFer they have to worry about and they can wait for Hoes/Miclat to develop. If the Orioles draft Ackley to play 1B for 2010+ then SS and 3B are the only LT positions they have to worry about...

This is the philosophy that's killing the Orioles right now. This attitude of "Well, we didn't sign Tex because we're not one player away from competing." Okay....HOLE at first base.

"We didn't think extending B-Rob was value added to a team that is not ready to compete in the next year or two." Okay...HOLE at second base.

"We do not want to trade away any of our young pitching for fielding prospects." OKAY...hole at short and third.

The O's keep coming up with reasons why NOT to sign players, instead of realizing that if we WOULD sign some of these guys, and the pitching DOES develop by next season, we coulda been a contenda!

[DrungoHazewood]

4/48-52 is insanity for Brian Roberts EVEN if you tear up the contract this year and start the contract in 2009. If Roberts can't find his way to sign for less than that than we need to trade him or take the picks.

I think that's a little over the top.

Look at Fangraphs, and their WAR and value ratings for Roberts. Over the last four years Roberts has been worth an average of 4.75 wins over replacement per season. Let's say for the sake of argument that he's at 4.5 this year, 4.0 in 2010, 3.5 in 2011, and 3.0 in 2012.

At 2008 dollar rates he's worth nearly $70M. But this is a depressed market. Let's say a win is now worth $3.5M instead of $4.5M or so. That means a 4/$52.5M contract would be pretty reasonable for 2009-2012. If you're not tearing up his '09 deal, and you assume he drops another half a win for 2013, then a 4/45 deal would be ok. Or, if you want to build in some insurance for the O's and assume that Roberts falls off more in his mid-30s you could lop off a couple more wins and come up with a 4/39 kind of deal.

If the O's are set on only a three-year deal from 2010-2012, and they are valuing wins at a lower $3.5M level, and they use the accelerated aging numbers... well, then you come up with 3/37 deal being pretty reasonable.

The only way 3/30 makes sense for Brian Roberts is if the true market value has dropped all the way to $2.85M per win (and that's using Oriole-friendly estimates of Robert's future value), after being over $4M for a number of years. You'd have to roll back baseball's revenues and expenses to about the time of the last labor problems to get to that level, and that was at a time when the sport brought in maybe 2/3rds of the $6-$6.5B in revenues expected in 2009.

3/30 is a very owner-friendly number. The only way they should have expected him to accept that would be a hometown discount, or they'd expect him to be very pessimistic about the economy's effect on baseball. If the market bounces back only part way to 2007 or 2008 levels he's worth $50M+. Same thing goes if he doesn't age quite as quickly.

[Frobby]

I was told we may add an option year but won't go much over 3/32 million. That being said there is zippy interest in Roberts right now. Hudson has yet to sign and the Fish will make Uggla available soon.

Very logical approach. If BRob turns that down in this market, it's because he really doesn't want to be here, and I don't want players who don't want to be here.

[Frobby]

I think that's a little over the top.

Look at Fangraphs, and their WAR and value ratings for Roberts. Over the last four years Roberts has been worth an average of 4.75 wins over replacement per season. Let's say for the sake of argument that he's at 4.5 this year, 4.0 in 2010, 3.5 in 2011, and 3.0 in 2012.

Based on the data presented by crawdad and others, that assumption appears very optimistic to me. But it may be that I don't know how 3.0 WAR translates into more conventional statistics.

[TinCup]

Very logical approach. If BRob turns that down in this market, it's because he really doesn't want to be here, and I don't want players who don't want to be here.

Ah, what a question in its own right! Does one Brian Roberts really want to resign and play still for the coming year and a few more with the rebuilding Baltimore Orioles? Does he really? Or is he trying to play a risky Mannyesque game of pricing himself out the door and off the team? :scratchchinhmm:

[Mackus]

Call me what you will, but I dont think 4/48 is overpaying. SG we have this debate every month. You know as well as I do that those numbers would make it a done deal. But I was listening to Bob Haynie's show today, he had on Mark Mussina, and they threw around the idea of putting an out clause in that type of deal by year three. I think that would make the 4.48 not so bad in your eyes. Am I right?

4/$48M is a pretty terrible extension. A 3-year extension is the absolute most we should go, I'd include an option if it got Roberts to sign, but I wouldn't have any intentions of picking it up at the time of the contract signing. Maybe he'll really buck trends and remain good, but no way do I guarantee him $10-12M in 2013.

3/$30M is a very fair extension offer. That's essentially a 4/$39M contract, adding in his contract for 2009. More than fair for Roberts and definitely more than he would get if he was a FA this offseason IMO. If the Orioles are maxing out at 3/$32M and Roberts turns them down, then I have no complaints about the way they handled it. That would essentially be Roberts saying he has zero interest in extending here, because that offer is already a generous one, above market value.

[zff4]

Very logical approach. If BRob turns that down in this market, it's because he really doesn't want to be here, and I don't want players who don't want to be here.

No, today's players are objective and unsentimental when it comes to business decisions, or as unsentimental as a professional can be.

If he believes he's worth more, and the market will provide him with significantly more, he will leave even if he loves it here. It's not personal, it's business, and I don't mind that perspective from a player as long as he plays hard when he's wearing our laundry.

That said, Uggla isn't going anywhere, and we're unlikely to get BRob's production from any quarter soon. I would go 3/40 with a 4th year option.

[BirdMan]

I would probably offer him 4/40m , I honestly dont think Roberts is worth much above 10m a year I would maybe give him 3/33m. I think 3/30 is a fair deal.

Look at Pedroias recent deal, 6/40.5m, I am not a big Pedroia fan by any means but he won the MVP and he is younger then Brian. Also it looks like Orlando Hudson would be ecstatic if a team offered him 3/30m at this point.

So if Roberts wants much more then that I would say forget it and trade him. I would probably trade him either way but thats me.

Roberts has a body of work. Pedroia has one year. If and when and who Roberts signs a contract with it will be over 10 Million a year.

[Ruzious]

3/30 is a fair offer, but why should we think that just a fair offer is going to get BRob to sign with the O's? Why should he want to stay with the O's - when it's clearly not clear that he fits into their long-term plans, and he's made it clear that he wants to play for a winner?