Surprise! Eaton getting rocked

[JTrea81]

I would love to see ANYTHING in print that gives you the slightest inclination that Wolf was ever interested in coming here. He flat out wanted to pitch on the west coast. He wasn't coming here. You can stomp your feet for him all you want but the Orioles would have had to throw stupid money at him for him to come here. Stupid as in we would be stupid to throw that much at a mediocre pitcher.

We could have got him for below $10 million per season IMO, probably for 8-9 million per season fir 2 years and an option. The O's never even tried to pursue him. Nor did they Jamie Moyer, who had 19 QS while pitching half of his games in a bandbox last season and he was interested in coming here.

[Fairfax Bird]

We could have got him for below $10 million per season IMO, probably for 8-9 million per season fir 2 years and an option. The O's never even tried to pursue him. Nor did they Jamie Moyer, who had 19 QS while pitching half of his games in a bandbox last season and he was interested in coming here.

Personally, I really don't think we had much of a chance with either player. I have been wrong before, but Moyer will do much better in the NL and Wolf is an LA guy. They both went to competitive situations. Would would have had to massively overpay to get either.

[Sports Guy]

We could have got him for below $10 million per season IMO, probably for 8-9 million per season fir 2 years and an option. The O's never even tried to pursue him. Nor did they Jamie Moyer, who had 19 QS while pitching half of his games in a bandbox last season and he was interested in coming here.

Thank goodness they didn't do this because it would have been a terrible waste of resources.

[JTrea81]

ON Lowe:

Lowe got a four year $60 million deal. And you are saying that he might have come here if the Orioles had offered him less? Does that make any sense at all? If anything the Orioles would have had to offer him more. Moreover, Why would we want him when he is pushing 40 in a division that is like comparing the SEC to the WAC as far as offensive ability.

You can't just say "I don't care if he was pitching in Ripken Stadium" the world doesn't work that way, Dodger Stadium, in fact many stadiums in the NL west are EXTREME pitcher's parks. The fact that Lowe's ERA was almost two runs per game HIGHER away from Dodger Stadium and his batting average against was near .300 away from Chavez Ravine DOES mean something. Especially when he would be moving to a division that favors hitters, with stronger offenses and smaller hitter-friendly parks.

To ignore that is to ignore the reality of Derek Lowe.

On Garland:

Once again you seem to be ignoring Garland's decline over recent years. So I won't even bring that up again. yes he got a one-year deal in Arizona. Do you think there was a REASON that Garland was only able to get a one-year deal? And the Orioles did talk to Garland, there were talks and the Orioles did not like what they saw. You know what, about two dozen other teams did not like what they saw with Garland. Garland might have said that he had no desire to play in Baltimore.

Now, where did Garland go, AH the same place Lowe went after he started declining and getting shelled in the AL East. He went to the NL West, where at least half of the division is routinely in the bottom third of Runs Scored in the majors.

This is from Rotoworld:

Diamondbacks signed RHP Jon Garland, who had been with the Angels, to a one-year, $6.25 million contract with a mutual option for 2010.

The mutual option is worth $10 million and the Diamondbacks can buy it out for $2.5 million. If Garland declines the option himself, he'll get $1 million. It seems unlikely that Arizona will want to pay him $10 million for 2010, so the deal basically becomes a one-year, $8.75 million contract for a guy who had a 4.90 ERA and 90/59 K/BB ratio in 196 2/3 innings last season. Garland has been very durable, starting 32 or 33 games in seven straight seasons, but he's an expensive innings eater for a team that supposedly had budget problems.

From FoxSports scouting report

Pitching

Garland has a solid sinking fastball in the low-90s but has been unable to complement it with another plus pitch. His curveball can be a good pitch, but he does not command it well enough. He does not do a good job of changing speeds and winds up in too many hitters' count, which helps explains how a sinkerballer could give up the fourth-most home runs in the AL.

Garland would cost five times as much, and be much harder to dump midway through the year when/if (most likely when) He isn't making a solid case for you right now, I know ST means nothing but it is hard to defend some of those numbers, especially when baseball people have been predicting his decline for awhile

http://arizona.diamondbacks.mlb.com/stats/sortable_player_stats.jsp?c_id=ari

And what you still seem not to be getting is that the "rockstars" as you so derisvely call them, well some of them could be up here THIS year. And locking into a ML deal with the likes of Garland or Lowe means that they CAN'T come up here because we are committed to those guys and we can't let them go without eating three times the money we have to eat while getting similar production from Hendrickson and Penn.

Just for giggles, Garland had 18 QS last season.

Here are the QS totals some other names that the Orioles could have pursued:

Derek Lowe - 20

AJ Burnett - 19

Randy Johnson - 18

Andy Pettitte - 18

Scott Olsen - 17

Javier Vasquez - 17

Odalis Perez - 14

Tim Redding - 14

Daniel Cabrera - 13 (just for fun)

Rich Hill 2007 - 17

So had the Orioles signed Garland/Moyer, Wolf and Uehara and still traded for Hill

19+18+18+15+15 +/- 5 = 80-90 QS

Combine that with our offense, and you've got a competitive team, and you can keep the kids in the minors until they are ready instead of having them have to bail out a sinking rotation...

[df1570]

ON Lowe:

Lowe got a four year $60 million deal. And you are saying that he might have come here if the Orioles had offered him less? Does that make any sense at all? If anything the Orioles would have had to offer him more. Moreover, Why would we want him when he is pushing 40 in a division that is like comparing the SEC to the WAC as far as offensive ability.

You can't just say "I don't care if he was pitching in Ripken Stadium" the world doesn't work that way, Dodger Stadium, in fact many stadiums in the NL west are EXTREME pitcher's parks. The fact that Lowe's ERA was almost two runs per game HIGHER away from Dodger Stadium and his batting average against was near .300 away from Chavez Ravine DOES mean something. Especially when he would be moving to a division that favors hitters, with stronger offenses and smaller hitter-friendly parks.

To ignore that is to ignore the reality of Derek Lowe.

On Garland:

Once again you seem to be ignoring Garland's decline over recent years. So I won't even bring that up again. yes he got a one-year deal in Arizona. Do you think there was a REASON that Garland was only able to get a one-year deal? And the Orioles did talk to Garland, there were talks and the Orioles did not like what they saw. You know what, about two dozen other teams did not like what they saw with Garland. Garland might have said that he had no desire to play in Baltimore.

Now, where did Garland go, AH the same place Lowe went after he started declining and getting shelled in the AL East. He went to the NL West, where at least half of the division is routinely in the bottom third of Runs Scored in the majors.

This is from Rotoworld:

Diamondbacks signed RHP Jon Garland, who had been with the Angels, to a one-year, $6.25 million contract with a mutual option for 2010.

The mutual option is worth $10 million and the Diamondbacks can buy it out for $2.5 million. If Garland declines the option himself, he'll get $1 million. It seems unlikely that Arizona will want to pay him $10 million for 2010, so the deal basically becomes a one-year, $8.75 million contract for a guy who had a 4.90 ERA and 90/59 K/BB ratio in 196 2/3 innings last season. Garland has been very durable, starting 32 or 33 games in seven straight seasons, but he's an expensive innings eater for a team that supposedly had budget problems.

From FoxSports scouting report

Pitching

Garland has a solid sinking fastball in the low-90s but has been unable to complement it with another plus pitch. His curveball can be a good pitch, but he does not command it well enough. He does not do a good job of changing speeds and winds up in too many hitters' count, which helps explains how a sinkerballer could give up the fourth-most home runs in the AL.

Garland would cost five times as much, and be much harder to dump midway through the year when/if (most likely when) He isn't making a solid case for you right now, I know ST means nothing but it is hard to defend some of those numbers, especially when baseball people have been predicting his decline for awhile

http://arizona.diamondbacks.mlb.com/stats/sortable_player_stats.jsp?c_id=ari

And what you still seem not to be getting is that the "rockstars" as you so derisvely call them, well some of them could be up here THIS year. And locking into a ML deal with the likes of Garland or Lowe means that they CAN'T come up here because we are committed to those guys and we can't let them go without eating three times the money we have to eat while getting similar production from Hendrickson and Penn.

"Similar production" from Hendrickson and Penn. Wow. In their dreams. The only similarity between those two guys and Lowe and Garland is they all four pee standing up.

It's hard to defend Pie's spring training numbers but somehow he's coming north and starting.

It's hard to defend Eaton's numbers but he'll be on that flight to Charm City in early April and he'll be on the mound against the Yankees in week #1.

It's hard to defend a lot of stuff in spring training.

And, what Garland does in Arizona has little, if anything, to do with what he would have done in Baltimore, New York, Atlanta or Cleveland -- because, as you know and have so accurately pointed out, "different parks, different teams, different time zones", etc.

You keep on harping on those two guys when I've said over and over it's really not about names, specifically (although I'll still contend, despite whatever baseball-stat-geek numbers you want to provide, those two guys are better than any of the steamers we brought in off the re-tread market.)

Jon Garland is better than Mark Hendrickson. Derek Lowe is better than Rich Hill and Adam Eaton if they're both on the mound throwing at the same time.

I don't give a rat's behind about when they cut them...etc. You seem to have some magic crystal ball that can tell the future. "They'll only be around a year and then Arrieta or Tillman or Matusz will displace them."

Really? How about this: Maybe Arrieta winds up replacing Uehara. Ever think of that? Maybe Tillman comes up to take the #5 spot and can't stop walking folks and his stay is brief. Maybe Matusz isn't ready in '09 or even '10.

You avoid those possibilities, I guess, because it's either not something you want to think about or you just assume everything is going to work out precisely the way the perfect-world would have it.

Had they signed Jon Garland and ANYONE ELSE, maybe those two guys would have been the #3 and #4 for two seasons while the rock-stars get ready to sing with the headliners instead of with Mr. Greengenes.

My issue isn't with signing Derek Lowe or Jon Garland. Believe me, both of those guys are far better off NOT being here than being here for the short term, that's for damn sure.

The issue is about the team not improving the team's starting pitching staff at all and, in doing so, putting an inferior product on the field in '09 and, likely, '10. And, of course, they're going to expect you to go out to the ballpark and watch it all.

If you don't, they'll come up with some scam-excuse next off-season about "dwindling revenues" and "economic realities" when they don't spend in the free agent market to improve their on-field product.

You won't answer the question I asked of you. I'm not sure why. I don't really have an opinion ready for your answer. I'm just interested to know what you think about the fans and their decision to either support - or not - the team in '09.

I'm not going to criticize your answer to the question. I'm just curious what you think - as a guy who, essentially, has bought into the "plan".

[JTrea81]

Thank goodness they didn't do this because it would have been a terrible waste of resources.

Yeah it's a terrible waste of resources for two years...

Come on, getting potentially 36 QS for 18 million a season would be terrible? Burnett is being paid 16 million per season to give only half that...

[Moose Milligan]

And Garland could blow out his arm...and Lowe, heading towards the end of his career, could hit the wall.

So whats your point, Drew? There are possibilities and nothing is set in stone. You act like the youngsters the Orioles have coming up have no shot in hell at being successful, but you act like Garland and Lowe are surefire things.

Signing Garland, Lowe etc would be the same thing the O's had been doing for the decade prior...signing guys that are no real fit and are part of no real plan.

You act like a youth movement with good, strong talent isn't the way to go about things, when the O's haven't had anything this good for YEARS. When was the last time any national baseball publication had the O's farm system ranked in their top 10?

So whats the alternative? Just spend FA money poorly? Keep "pretending" that we're going to compete by bringing in the Millars and Paytons of the world? Throwing obscene amounts of money at a bullpen?

Whats your alternative master plan, Drew?

You're just That Guy who likes to point out everything wrong, but never offers up any good solutions.

And no one likes That Guy. That Guy's schtick gets real old, real fast.

[Sports Guy]

The issue is about the team not improving the team's starting pitching staff at all and, in doing so, putting an inferior product on the field in '09 and, likely, '10. And, of course, they're going to expect you to go out to the ballpark and watch it all.

If you don't, they'll come up with some scam-excuse next off-season about "dwindling revenues" and "economic realities" when they don't spend in the free agent market to improve their on-field product.

You won't answer the question I asked of you. I'm not sure why. I don't really have an opinion ready for your answer. I'm just interested to know what you think about the fans and their decision to either support - or not - the team in '09.

I'm not going to criticize your answer to the question. I'm just curious what you think - as a guy who, essentially, has bought into the "plan".

This is just foolish.

Uehera is clearly an upgrade over what we were putting out there last year.

Rich Hill was excellent in 2007...one of the better young lefties in the game...Last year he was wild and hurt...Who is the real Hill? Who knows...But if he can bounce back, he is a steal and a clear upgrade.

You may not want to see through his control issues from last year and you may want to think he will be nothing....and you may be right...But you also may be totally wrong and the Orioles are in a perfect position to figure that out.

Plus, we have the young pitching quickly approaching, that will improve.

And, even if you want to poo poo them, guys like Bass, et al...could be ok.

The average 5th starter in the AL gives you around a 5.25 ERA...So, if we are able to get a 5ish ERA out of our 4th and 5th starters, the Orioles will be able to tread water for a while.

Plus, the pen should be improved with Ray coming back..Hendrickson has been solid out of the pen the last 3 years(spanning 90 innings).

Now, is this staff ideal? Obviously not....Anyone who would argue that should have their fan card revoked.

But it is a staff that if Uehera and Hill can give 350+ IP and a 4.25ish ERA, this team will be in decent shape.

Will it bring back the fans? Who knows....And really, right now, who cares?

The important stuff is what is happening in the minors...It is what goes on with the young talent.

This is the wrong year to judge ticket sales anyway because of the economy...So, tooting that horn all year(which we all know you will do), will be a waste of time because attendance is likely to be down across the league.

[Sports Guy]

Yeah it's a terrible waste of resources for two years...

Come on, getting potentially 36 QS for 18 million a season would be terrible? Burnett is being paid 16 million per season to give only half that...

Yes terrible....Moyer for 1/5 or less would have been fine...At his age and with his stuff, he could fall on his face at any minute and considering he would have been in the AL had he signed here, he likely gets crushed.

[JTrea81]

Yes terrible....Moyer for 1/5 or less would have been fine...At his age and with his stuff, he could fall on his face at any minute and considering he would have been in the AL had he signed here, he likely gets crushed.

Fine swap out Moyer with Garland for a cheaper cost. You probably lose a few quallity starts. Wolf and Garland give you at least 33 QS IMO.

19 (Guthrie) +33 +15 (Uehara) +15 (Hill) = 82 QS, which is exactly the # of QS both the Red Sox and Rays had.

[Sports Guy]

Fine swap out Moyer with Garland for a cheaper cost. You probably lose a few quallity starts. Wolf and Garland give you at least 33 QS IMO.

And giving either of them a 2-3 year deal at 8+ million a year would have also been foolish.

[Pat Kelly]

This is just foolish.

Uehera is clearly an upgrade over what we were putting out there last year.

Rich Hill was excellent in 2007...one of the better young lefties in the game...Last year he was wild and hurt...Who is the real Hill? Who knows...But if he can bounce back, he is a steal and a clear upgrade.

You may not want to see through his control issues from last year and you may want to think he will be nothing....and you may be right...But you also may be totally wrong and the Orioles are in a perfect position to figure that out.

Plus, we have the young pitching quickly approaching, that will improve.

And, even if you want to poo poo them, guys like Bass, et al...could be ok.

The average 5th starter in the AL gives you around a 5.25 ERA...So, if we are able to get a 5ish ERA out of our 4th and 5th starters, the Orioles will be able to tread water for a while.

Plus, the pen should be improved with Ray coming back..Hendrickson has been solid out of the pen the last 3 years(spanning 90 innings).

Now, is this staff ideal? Obviously not....Anyone who would argue that should have their fan card revoked.

But it is a staff that if Uehera and Hill can give 350+ IP and a 4.25ish ERA, this team will be in decent shape.

Will it bring back the fans? Who knows....And really, right now, who cares?

The important stuff is what is happening in the minors...It is what goes on with the young talent.

This is the wrong year to judge ticket sales anyway because of the economy...So, tooting that horn all year(which we all know you will do), will be a waste of time because attendance is likely to be down across the league.

1000% spot on - this should be saved and placed on the top of this board for the entire season.

[Singleton]

We could have got him for below $10 million per season IMO, probably for 8-9 million per season fir 2 years and an option. The O's never even tried to pursue him. Nor did they Jamie Moyer, who had 19 QS while pitching half of his games in a bandbox last season and he was interested in coming here.

So you're spending $10 million on a pitcher who threw 102 innings in 07, 56 in 06' and 80 in 05'. Wonderful investment strategy.

As for Moyer, you're talking about a guy who's going to be 47 years old this year. 47! And you think it is reasonable to count on him to give us 19 QS this year? Honestly, what sort of odds would you give on any 47 year old pitcher making it through the season healthy and productive.

If you are determined to complain, could you at least find a reasonable strategy the team should have pursued?

[JBugaboo]

Just for giggles, Garland had 18 QS last season.

Here are the QS totals some other names that the Orioles could have pursued:

Derek Lowe - 20

AJ Burnett - 19

Randy Johnson - 18

Andy Pettitte - 18

Scott Olsen - 17

Javier Vasquez - 17

Odalis Perez - 14

Tim Redding - 14

Daniel Cabrera - 13 (just for fun)

Rich Hill 2007 - 17

So had the Orioles signed Garland/Moyer, Wolf and Uehara and still traded for Hill

19+18+18+15+15 +/- 5 = 80-90 QS

Combine that with our offense, and you've got a competitive team, and you can keep the kids in the minors until they are ready instead of having them have to bail out a sinking rotation...

I for one think this is fair analysis. Like I said, my personal preference would have been Brad Penny. But anyways...

Jon Garland signed the following deal with Arizona:

2009 - 6.25 mil

2010 - 10.0 mil option or 2.5 mil buyout

Randy Wolf signed the following deal with LA:

2009 - 5 mil plus 3 mil in incentives

Those aren't 2-3 year deals "strapping the team". We know the Orioles have the money because:

a) they offered a truckload for Mark Teixeira and

b) they said it was unrelated to their contract extensions to Markakis / Roberts

The only question is, how much more would they have had to give one of these guys to come to Baltimore. Ifs and Buts, Ifs and Buts.

[SrMeowMeow]

You are WAY too hung up on quality starts. Way.