Aubrey Huff: His Orioles Future...

[RShack]

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.

Of course it's not true. You said it, and you just made it up out of thin air. I never said anything even remotely close to that, and I certainly don't believe it. Quit putting phony words in other peoples' mouth.

[NewMarketSean]

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).

Right... after they tried shopping him aggressively for 2 years.

That said Huff and Roberts are nothing alike when it comes to this subject.

But if they try to trade Huff again, find that there is nothing out there for him, and sign him to an extension (just not 4 years), I'd be OK with that.

[Sports Guy]

Of course it's not true. You said it, and you just made it up out of thin air. I never said anything even remotely close to that, and I certainly don't believe it. Quit putting phony words in other peoples' mouth.

As i said, this seems to be your message...I am not saying you did say it..Just saying that is the impression you are giving me.(and its not just this conversation either...this isn't the first time the Huff trade talk has been discussed and not the first time you have put your 2 cents in)

Your point is, I guess, that AM will value Huff to much and not get what he wants for him and that's why Huff won't be dealt.

If that's your point, I am not going to disagree with that possibility one bit but the way you have phrased things makes me think it is more than that.

[NewMarketSean]

Of course it's not true. You said it, and you just made it up out of thin air. I never said anything even remotely close to that, and I certainly don't believe it. Quit putting phony words in other peoples' mouth.

Give me an S! E! M! A! N! T! I! C! S!

What's that spell? RShack's basis for his next dozen posts in this thread!

[RShack]

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.

If he does well, I bet 2-years is what AM would want, and Huff would want more.

I'm not using Huff as a basis for anything except the most likely 1B-man for next year and maybe the year after. I don't know why you guys are fabricating phony stuff. It's really quite simple: I think Huff will be worth more to the O's as a player than whatever we can get back for him. Nothing more or less than that. I don't think AM will be able to get squat for him, and Huff-money doesn't scare me. The fact that AM could get a mediocre "prospect" or two who likely won't amount to anything is of no concern to me.

[NewMarketSean]

If he does well, I bet 2-years is what AM would want, and Huff would want more.

I'm not using Huff as a basis for anything except the most likely 1B-man for next year and maybe the year after. I don't know why you guys are fabricating phony stuff. It's really quite simple: I think Huff will be worth more to the O's as a player than whatever we can get back for him. Nothing more or less than that. I don't think AM will be able to get squat for him, and Huff-money doesn't scare me.

OK, and I can see where you are coming from. I said that if they don't get a trade for Huff that they like, that I would be OK keeping him assuming he signs an extension.

However, if we can get a Bergesen or Hernandez type pitcher for Huff at the deadline, I would take it in a heartbeat.

[RShack]

Give me an S! E! M! A! N! T! I! C! S!

What's that spell? RShack's basis for his next dozen posts in this thread!

Do you know what "semantics" means? It does not refer to making up BS and putting it in somebody else's mouth.

Plus, it's SPELLING, not semantics. It's the well known Jimmy Foxx curse.

Guys who's names end with double-consonants aren't worth squat on the market.

Penn. Dunn. Huff. Bass. Fudd. Everybody knows that.

[NewMarketSean]

Do you know what "semantics" means? It does not refer to making up BS and putting it in somebody else's mouth.

Plus, it's SPELLING, not semantics. It's the well known Jimmy Foxx curse.

Guys who's names end with double-consonants aren't worth squat on the market.

Penn. Dunn. Huff. Bass. Fudd. Everybody knows that.

Po-tay-to, poh-tat-o.

Like I said, semantics.

You give a lot of people a particular impression after reading your posts. SG and I both thought you were talking about Huff as a player to keep and not trade. Some people would call that a long term fixture.

But when someone mentions the impression they got, you jump down their throats. So maybe it's not them... maybe... just maybe... it's you.

[RShack]

Po-tay-to, poh-tat-o.

Like I said, semantics.

You give a lot of people a particular impression after reading your posts. SG and I both thought you were talking about Huff as a player to keep and not trade. Some people would call that a long term fixture.

But when someone mentions the impression they got, you jump down their throats. So maybe it's not them... maybe... just maybe... it's you.

Whatever. Let's not worry about whether you and SG are the the most fair-minded parsers of what other people say. Instead, just go by what I said, not by what your secret decoder ring tells you I might have meant. Let me spell it out for you, so there will be no future misunderstandings:

• I do not think AM is especially enamored of Huff. Huff has no special characteristics that would warrant that.
• If anything, I bet AM was annoyed with him for the radio comments from back-when. It was a distraction, and AM doesn't like distractions.
• I assume that AM sees Huff as a non-trivial bat who can competently fill a couple different roles, who is not mega-expensive, who has agreed to not be any more trouble on the radio or anywhere else, and who seems to have hit his stride as a hitter.
• My guess is that AM sees him as a commodity who has positive value to the team, who seems happy enough to be here, and who fits in well enough. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

So, unless I say something different, just assume that's what I mean. Because it is. OK?

I don't expect he will be traded because I do not think it likely that a trade exists in reality that will solve more problems for the team than it creates. As for FA, I don't think he will cost that much. I think he's like a Dunn with less bat and more glove: somebody who has considerable value but who nobody seems to want very much. Ergo, I think it likely that he stays. Not certain, but likely.

[Sports Guy]

Whatever. Let's not worry about whether you and SG are the the most fair-minded parsers of what other people say. Instead, just go by what I said, not by what your secret decoder ring tells you I might have meant. Let me spell it out for you, so there will be no future misunderstandings:

• I do not think AM is especially enamored of Huff. Huff has no special characteristics that would warrant that.
• If anything, I bet AM was annoyed with him for the radio comments from back-when. It was a distraction, and AM doesn't like distractions.
• I assume that AM sees Huff as a non-trivial bat who can competently fill a couple different roles, who is not mega-expensive, who has agreed to not be any more trouble on the radio or anywhere else, and who seems to have hit his stride as a hitter.
• My guess is that AM sees him as a commodity who has positive value to the team, who seems happy enough to be here, and who fits in well enough. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

So, unless I say something different, just assume that's what I mean. Because it is. OK?

I don't expect he will be traded because I do not think it likely that a trade exists in reality that will solve more problems for the team than it creates. As for FA, I don't think he will cost that much. I think he's like a Dunn with less bat and more glove: somebody who has considerable value but who nobody seems to want very much. Ergo, I think it likely that he stays. Not certain, but likely.

Hard to argue with much of this although I think he will get much more in FA than you think IF he has another very good year.

Dunn is one way to look at it...but Ibanez and Bradley also could qualify.

Dunn has a stigma against him because of the low BA and the K's.

I also think you slightly underrate what he could get in trade if he is hitting well at the break.

[Anonymous]

If he does well, I bet 2-years is what AM would want, and Huff would want more.

I'm not using Huff as a basis for anything except the most likely 1B-man for next year and maybe the year after. I don't know why you guys are fabricating phony stuff. It's really quite simple: I think Huff will be worth more to the O's as a player than whatever we can get back for him. Nothing more or less than that. I don't think AM will be able to get squat for him, and Huff-money doesn't scare me. The fact that AM could get a mediocre "prospect" or two who likely won't amount to anything is of no concern to me.

If Huff is offered arb and turns it down, so that we wind up with 2 high picks, why would that be considered a mediocre "prospect" or two who likely won't amount to anything? I'd call it 2 premium prospects who have a pretty darn good chance to amount to something. That would be a pretty attractive haul for a guy like Huff, who clearly doesn't provide the defensive skills at his position, nor the baserunning skills relative to others at his position, nor the community service bonus, of a guy like Brian Roberts. And worst case scenario, if he accepts the arb offer, is that we retain Huff and his fine bat and non-horrendous corner IF capabilities, while avoiding any big-buck long-term commitment.

[TonySoprano]

I also think you slightly underrate what he could get in trade if he is hitting well at the break.

That would be to a team that feels he could be THE difference maker for them, considering he would be a short-term rental.

[RShack]

Hard to argue with much of this although I think he will get much more in FA than you think IF he has another very good year.

I think it is possible that, if the team is looking good for 2010 by the end of this year, that Huff might take a discount, depending on what his other options are. I say this because he just got through sitting at home watching his old pals in the WS not long after he left TB. I don't think he wants to do that again. He's got a small window of post-season chances, and if he thinks the O's might go there, I think he might wanna be part of it. There are some things dollars can't buy, and that's one of them. (I said possible, not guaranteed.)

I also think you slightly underrate what he could get in trade if he is hitting well at the break.

In general, I think talk about deadline deals is way over-rated, while you seem to take it very seriously. So, I am likely to rate that as less-probable than you are, just in general. This would be just another case of our very different views about that.

[RShack]

If Huff is offered arb and turns it down, so that we wind up with 2 high picks, why would that be considered a mediocre "prospect" or two who likely won't amount to anything?

I think the chances of him being offered arb and turning it down are about nil.

I think the only way they even start the arb thing is as foreplay for an out-of-court settlement.

[Sports Guy]

I think the chances of him being offered arb and turning it down are about nil.

I think the only way they even start the arb thing is as foreplay for an out-of-court settlement.

If he has another excellent year, he will get much more than a 1/10 contract.