Jump to content

Aubrey Huff: His Orioles Future...


Greg Pappas

Recommended Posts

With Vlad out, it would be real nice to get Brandon Wood...

Maybe they'll throw in a few more players too? C'mon. Have we learned nothing from this offseason. A. Huff had a very good year. Maybe he will this year too. But what we saw this offseason is that teams are reluctant to spend money and young talent doesn't get moved very much.

If he plays as well as last year, we still have to find a team that needs a firstbaseman AND who will spend the money AND has prospects to offer. Bottom line, maybe we get 1 solid prospect but forget names like Smoak and Wood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

"Expect is a strong word, but I believe MacPhail will look to deal Huff, as well as Luke Scott."

I agree completely about Huff, nothing personal, but it is time to seriously rebuild. Luke is a different story. I'm not sure. I guess it would depend upon what we get in return. Luke is cheap and under control for a few years and that must be considered. Are you sold on trading Luke?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be shocked if AM trades Huff. It's about the last thing I expect him to do.

He shopped him last year but no one bit.

As for the idea that Huff and/or Scott would get us legit ML prospects, I seriously doubt it.

I'm sure they could get players called "prospects" but not anybody who would be a difference-maker.

He's traded players who we thought had no value (Trachsel, Penn, Hernandez) and gotten decent returns. I expect that Huff could get us a decent pitching prospect.

At some point, you need to keep some actual ballplayers if you wanna win anytime soon.

Huff is a FA after the season. I'm confused you would say that about a guy who is going to be a FA. We signed Roberts and Markakis to extensions. I expect Jones to be signed to one in the next year.

I think that's where the O's are now. The idea that they should keep kicking the can down the road, getting prospects for later, is a great way to stay lousy. Yes, we need an ongoing supply of MiL talent, but not at the expense of creating holes in the big-league team.

Other than the draft, which is only once a year, and is a total crapshoot, how else do you expect we're going to get any better pitchers? I guess you were not OK with getting Patton and Tillman in trades?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Expect is a strong word, but I believe MacPhail will look to deal Huff, as well as Luke Scott."

I agree completely about Huff, nothing personal, but it is time to seriously rebuild. Luke is a different story. I'm not sure. I guess it would depend upon what we get in return. Luke is cheap and under control for a few years and that must be considered. Are you sold on trading Luke?

Trading Luuuuuuuuuuuuke would be a NO!:no::old5fan::002_scry:

I love him:)!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Expect is a strong word, but I believe MacPhail will look to deal Huff, as well as Luke Scott."

I agree completely about Huff, nothing personal, but it is time to seriously rebuild. Luke is a different story. I'm not sure. I guess it would depend upon what we get in return. Luke is cheap and under control for a few years and that must be considered. Are you sold on trading Luke?

I would hope that Scott gets dealt... but there would need to be a viable return. If we are able to get a solid return, we should make that deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He shopped him last year but no one bit.

Exactly.

Whether he shopped him or not is 100% irrelevant to any question except, "Is Huff untouchable?"

Nobody has said he's untouchable. Nobody.

Ergo, whether AM invited and/or entertained offers is entirely beside the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly.

Whether he shopped him or not is 100% irrelevant to any question except, "Is Huff untouchable?"

Nobody has said he's untouchable. Nobody.

Ergo, whether AM invited and/or entertained offers is entirely beside the point.

Its not besides the point...it PROVES that AM was/is willing to deal Huff. It proves that if the right deal is put out there, that AM would not hesitate to trade him.

Now, what we don't know is what is that deal? Does he have to be blown away?

Who knows but AM obviously would deal Huff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly.

Whether he shopped him or not is 100% irrelevant to any question except, "Is Huff untouchable?"

Nobody has said he's untouchable. Nobody.

Ergo, whether AM invited and/or entertained offers is entirely beside the point.

Its not besides the point...it PROVES that AM was/is willing to deal Huff. It proves that if the right deal is put out there, that AM would not hesitate to trade him.

Now, what we don't know is what is that deal? Does he have to be blown away?

Who knows but AM obviously would deal Huff.

That's just saying he's not untouchable. It means nothing else.

Nobody said he's untouchable. Ergo, AM would check out what he might get. Big deal. What's your point?

I don't think you have one, unless you're gonna try to spin the fact that he's not untouchable into some "likely trade" story based on nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's just saying he's not untouchable. It means nothing else.

Nobody said he's untouchable. Ergo, AM would check out what he might get. Big deal. What's your point?

I don't think you have one, unless you're gonna try to spin the fact that he's not untouchable into some "likely trade" story based on nothing.

The point is, with Huff having another good season (assuming he does by the ASB), teams will be willing to trade for him knowing that it's a 2-month rental. The contract and its length are what scared teams away last year. They thought Huff's season was a fluke. SO far it looks like he's going to have another solid season.

Teams won't give up much for him, true. But AM will take a prospect similar to Brad Bergesen or David Hernandez for 2 more months of Huff? I think he would and I would want him to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's just saying he's not untouchable. It means nothing else.

Nobody said he's untouchable. Ergo, AM would check out what he might get. Big deal. What's your point?

I don't think you have one, unless you're gonna try to spin the fact that he's not untouchable into some "likely trade" story based on nothing.

The point is that AM is absolutely fine with dealing Huff...You are acting as if AM sees Huff as some long term piece and is adverse to dealing him.

That simply is not true.

And btw, your untouchable stuff is completely wrong...While everyone is available for a price, AM isn't/wasn't actively shopping Nick, Jones, Wieters, etc...

But he was actively shopping Huff...That is a little different than what you are saying.

It comes back to one thing...what kind of package will AM require?

Is he being unreasonable? Will he only make a deal if he doesn't have to eat money? Or will he trade him for the best package he can get because he is afraid he will accept arb and that he won't get the picks?

We don't know...A lot will be determined by the play of Huff, Synder and Reimold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RShack also said that "at some point you have to start keeping players" instead of trading them all away. That made no sense in relation to Huff. You don't say that about 32 year old players who are about to hit FA when you're in the middle of rebuilding. That is exactly when you trade those kinds of players away and hope to get someone that can be a part of your future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RShack also said that "at some point you have to start keeping players" instead of trading them all away. That made no sense in relation to Huff. You don't say that about 32 year old players who are about to hit FA when you're in the middle of rebuilding. That is exactly when you trade those kinds of players away and hope to get someone that can be a part of your future.

Right..Whether it is his intention or not, Rshack is making it sound like that part of AM's plan is to keep Huff and that AM thinks he is an intregral piece for us long term.

If RShack doesn't mean it that way, my mistake but its how I am reading him in all of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right..Whether it is his intention or not, Rshack is making it sound like that part of AM's plan is to keep Huff and that AM thinks he is an intregral piece for us long term.

If RShack doesn't mean it that way, my mistake but its how I am reading him in all of this.

And if AM wanted to sign Huff to a 2 year extension, I would probably be OK with that. Anything more, though and I am not liking it.

I just don't understand Rshack's decision to use Huff as his basis against rebuilding via trades. Huff is exactly the kind of player to do that with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RShack also said that "at some point you have to start keeping players" instead of trading them all away. That made no sense in relation to Huff. You don't say that about 32 year old players who are about to hit FA when you're in the middle of rebuilding. That is exactly when you trade those kinds of players away and hope to get someone that can be a part of your future.

The team just committed themselves to 4 more years to a 31 year old who was about to hit the FA market. I for one, see what Huff will bring on the trade market. If not much, offer arbitration and take the draft pick(s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • Yeah, basically this, that Westburg's underlying numbers (EV, barrel %, xwOBA) seem to point at this being pretty real, or at least that there's nothing 'undeserved / lucky' about this hot streak, if it's just that. 
    • The problem with a Cowser/Kjerstad/Stowers/Bradfield outfield roster is there are no right handers to handle LHP. I don't think and completely left handed outfield is the destination for an organization the values versatility.
    • Looks maybe concussion related. 
    • How can you not be romantic about baseball? This seems slightly poetic. I enjoyed reading, and correlated your experience in the stands back to what I watch in Game 1 on MASN.  It was also pretty cool to hear Jim Palmer give you a shout out in Game 2 of the series on Live TV.
    • I am not worried.  It just doesn’t remotely meet the eye test.  He has been great in the field . I can think of at least 3 outstanding plays he has made and not any that I thought he should have gotten but didn’t. Meanwhile Holliday is 3 OAA and I can’t think of an outstanding play and can think of a number I thought he should have made. 
    • Nicely stated Roy. Every since I was 9 years old and saw the O's vs. the Tokyo Giants in Tokyo in 1971, I've been infected with the Orange/Black virus. There is no cure and I don't want one. You and I sat at the lunch table with Jim Palmer at the 1970 World Series Champs reunion, and its still one of my enduring baseball memories. You said I looked like Carlton Fisk! I was at all 3 games in this Angels series, right behind the O's dugout. I got to see all our boys, and just simply love to watch this team play. And in true baseball fashion, the one game on paper we should have dominated (GRod vs. 8+ ERA Channing), we end up down 7-0 and lose. But watching Gunnar's homers, his electric triple, and he made a fantastic play today on a ball that went under Westburg's glove, Adley do Adley things, Cowser, holy crap. Kimbrel v. Trout with bases loaded, bottom of 9th, 2 outs, down by 2? That was fun. Next game Trout bats leadoff and torches a GRod fastball for a homer to the opposite field.  An observation.... If you didn't know anything about the team, and you only watched game 1 batting practice, you'd think Cowser and O'Hearn were the studs of the team. Mountcastle was taking BP with the reserves and he put on a show as well.  Home after 3 straight days watching this O's team, so jealous of the Balt fans in Balt that get to see the team with regularity. It's a special bunch.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...