Rosenthal: O's more willing to deal Baez and Sherrill

[Scrat1]

Why is that? Afraid we might fall below 5th place?

Super secret double probation.

[Mashed Potatoes]

Well, FWIW, AM disagrees with you. After he showed up here and took a few months to scope things out, he announced that the O's were a MIN of a couple years away from being decent. He also announced that his plan was to grow young pitching. He also announced that one of his first priorities was to fix the BP, which he promptly did. When you're developing young SP's, you want to ensure that they have a fair shot to win the game.

Did he really fix the bullpen?

Orioles relievers ERA in

2008: 4.57 (AL average 4.13)

2009: 4.59 (AL average 4.28)

We're still pretty below average.

[Sanfran327]

Why is that? Afraid we might fall below 5th place?

See, this is exactly why I'm so sick of the "trade, trade, trade" mantra around here. It's not about falling below 5th place, genius. It's about having a guy that can be a big contributor to our next successful team and keeping him around for exactly that. He's under control for a while still, so we may as well keep him.

Just because he's been "posing as a closer" with us doesn't mean that his future role is going to be closer. And you know what? It may be... he's been pretty good since that players-only meeting back in May.

If you want to trade Sherrill, you may as well trade anyone else, because the minute you trade him, you're going to be looking to replace him. He's cheap, and has very few miles on his arm. Hold on to him.

[Arthur_Bryant]

It's interesting to listen to the broadcast crews from other cities when Jim Johnson pitches. Almost inevitably they rave about his stuff and effectiveness. And he has certainly proved himself in high-leverage situations, now through a year and a half.

He's a closer.

Duh.

[JTrea81]

MacPhail donating Bradford to the Rays seems to run counter to the idea that he'll almost never trade a good player at the expense of current performance. In fact, the Bradford deal is completely counter to rshack's theory: it was a trade for nothing, it only freed up a little cash, it didn't help the team substantially in the short- or long-term, and it arguably contributed to the Orioles' collapse. It was an obvious salary dump of one of the team's best relievers in the middle of the season, by Andy MacPhail.

I think Sherrill and Baez could both be gone for a less-than-stunning return, whether or not there's a guarantee they'll be immediately replaced by someone similar in value.

So are you buying into the "MacPhail tanking the season on purpose" theory? I'm confused. Sherrill, unlike Bradford is under team control until after 2011, and will still be able to contribute to a good bullpen for a competitive team.

Baez could be a salary dump, but you are hearing that teams are more interested in him than they were Bradford. Baez is also younger than Bradford and is more of a strikeout pitcher. Baez has also closed before unlike Bradford.

Unless MacPhail is just tanking the season on purpose, I doubt he just "gives" these guys away...

[Lucky Jim]

Did he really fix the bullpen?

Orioles relievers ERA in

2008: 4.57 (AL average 4.13)

2009: 4.59 (AL average 4.28)

We're still pretty below average.

Long-term, I think he probably has, because starter surplus will be turned into quality relievers. Ideally.

Our pen hasn't been that bad this year, absent Ray and Walker.

[Sanfran327]

I going to be pretty mad if the O's sacrifice wins 86 and 87 in 2010 for wins 73 and 74 in 2009.

Haha... guess what!! 74 wins and 87 wins are going to get you to the same place in October:

Home on your ass watching the Yanks and Sox.

George Sherrill isn't going to cost the O's any wins whatsoever. Most teams do not view him as a closer, and there's not much you're going to get in return for a LOOGY. Just keep him and let him play for us instead of getting two guys that will never make our team.

[DrungoHazewood]

Haha... guess what!! 74 wins and 87 wins are going to get you to the same place in October:

Home on your ass watching the Yanks and Sox.

George Sherrill isn't going to cost the O's any wins whatsoever. Most teams do not view him as a closer, and there's not much you're going to get in return for a LOOGY. Just keep him and let him play for us instead of getting two guys that will never make our team.

Oh, I didn't know that the trade was Sherrill for two guys who'll never make the team.

If that's the case then I'm against it, too. I'm only for trades that'll bring back guys who'll one day play for the Orioles.

[orioole28]

I think David Hernandez could step into the closers role and be successful so I'm not too bothered by trading Sherrill. Although I like him and would want some real value as he's been good, he's cheap, and under control for awhile. What could a new guy gives that tops that? Baez has been somewhat of the glue that's been holding things together for me. I am open to trading him (for the right return), or resigning him if the $$$ for 2 years were right.

Do you really think that the Orioles brass is considering using DHernandez as a closer? Because that does intrigue me.

[Dadaist]

If you want to trade Sherrill, you may as well trade anyone else, because the minute you trade him, you're going to be looking to replace him.

That was the exact same argument put forth by those who didn't want to trade Bedard. "We finally have a homegrown ace and we are supposed to trade him?! How can we replace him?"

[DrungoHazewood]

So are you buying into the "MacPhail tanking the season on purpose" theory? I'm confused. Sherrill, unlike Bradford is under team control until after 2011, and will still be able to contribute to a good bullpen for a competitive team.

I don't know for sure what MacPhail was doing, my real theory is that he just wanted the Rays to beat the Yanks and Sox. Sherrill may well be a decent piece of a good pen, here or somewhere else.

Unless MacPhail is just tanking the season on purpose, I doubt he just "gives" these guys away...

Giving guys away is not the same thing as asking for the moon and rejecting any trade that doesn't involve the moon.

[Sanfran327]

Oh, I didn't know that the trade was Sherrill for two guys who'll never make the team.

If that's the case then I'm against it, too. I'm only for trades that'll bring back guys who'll one day play for the Orioles.

Come on, Drungo. You're better than that. You're always digging up some kind of stuff to support your theories. Tell me how trading George Sherrill is going to earn us 13 wins. I'd love to hear this.

I mean, if you had at LEAST said that you'd be mad if the O's missed out on wins 96 and 97 in 2011, I'd be on board, because that's probably going to be the difference between winning this division and being the WC that year if I had to venture a guess. But then you'd look especially silly claiming that ONE reliever was going to cost os 21-24 wins.

I'm dying to know what exactly you think we can get for Sherrill, even if we package him with another player. Because we're not trading Jones, Markakis, Wieters, [probably] Reimold, or any of our top-tier pitchers. So please, let me know what we're going to get in return for Sherrill and a load of aging, spare parts.

[JTrea81]

I don't know for sure what MacPhail was doing, my real theory is that he just wanted the Rays to beat the Yanks and Sox. Sherrill may well be a decent piece of a good pen, here or somewhere else.

Giving guys away is not the same thing as asking for the moon and rejecting any trade that doesn't involve the moon.

I think with Baez he might take a bit less just because he'll walk for nothing at the end of the season. Still I expect a bidding war for him just because of the lack of quality arms available with so many teams thinking they are still in the playoff race.

However, with Sherrill, despite the increase in salary through arbitration, I think he'll still be able to contribute to justify his expense for the years we have him under team control.

MacPhail will definitely ask for the moon for him and should.

[Sanfran327]

That was the exact same argument put forth by those who didn't want to trade Bedard. "We finally have a homegrown ace and we are supposed to trade him?! How can we replace him?"

You know what? Bedard was a TAD bit better than Sherrill, my man. Bedard brought back the future of our organization. Do you think GS - an afterthought in the Bedard trade - is capable of bringing back five players by himself? If so, go ahead and do it! I'd be all over it.

[Dadaist]

Most teams do not view him as a closer, and there's not much you're going to get in return for a LOOGY

So he has little value to other teams but he's irreplaceable to us?