Marlins, Dodgers, Brewers, Cubs and Angels in on Sherrill - Per Rosenthal

[PHRESH]

I'd like for them to get Gordon (SS) from the Dodgers.

It seems he's most likely going to switch to CF.

[Guest BrettMeister86]

I'd love to hear some insight from the Insiders if they have anything on possible moves for Sherrill and what teams are and aren't willing to give up for him???

We know Andy will only move him for a great package so I have faith in him. Now a team just have to want him bad enough. I love Sherrill, I really do, but if we can land a long term solution to 3B + more then its a move I'd be willing to make.

[NCRaven]

I'd love to hear some insight from the Insiders if they have anything on possible moves for Sherrill and what teams are and aren't willing to give up for him???

We know Andy will only move him for a great package so I have faith in him. Now a team just have to want him bad enough. I love Sherrill, I really do, but if we can land a long term solution to 3B + more then its a move I'd be willing to make.

I believe MacPhail has effectively shut down the "insider" pipelines. He doesn't like employees who give out proprietary information to people who don't have a need to know. We only have an "intense desire" to know!

[ChaosLex]

Belkast?

Let's not go down that road again.

[backwardsk]

It seems he's most likely going to switch to CF.

It's definitely a possibility, and maybe more probable if he stays in the Dodgers system. But if the Orioles can get him, I think you have a solid LT prospect at SS--something this organization lacks.

[ejf1025]

Depends on what you get in return.

Of course it does. And we'll never know what was offered. But I don't think it's a poor assumption.

Logic suggestions the market is simply not there, and you can't hang your counter-argument on "some team may think he rebounds because he's a 2nd half player." That reasoning may be WHY someone tries to trade for him...they want to get him on the cheap and hope for a bounce back...but it's not going to cause them to offer more value.

[Sports Guy]

Of course it does. And we'll never know what was offered. But I don't think it's a poor assumption.

Logic suggestions the market is simply not there, and you can't hang your counter-argument on "some team may think he rebounds because he's a 2nd half player." That reasoning may be WHY someone tries to trade for him...they want to get him on the cheap and hope for a bounce back...but it's not going to cause them to offer more value.

The bottom line is there just isn't a whole lot out there to trade for...Huff is close to as good as it gets even with his struggles.

Matt Holliday has been bad for a while and looks to be staying put.

Now, will the Orioles get some great offer for Huff? I doubt it...Could they potential get offered a prospect in the range of 7-12 from some team and perhaps a Scott Moore type guy as well? Yea, that wouldn't surprise me and if they did get an offer like that, they should take it.

[mikezpen]

The Giants have the best second place record in the NL and a first baseman with 7 HR ad 29 RBI. They also have a number of good minor league prospects. I think Aubrey Huff deal would look a lot better to them than to some people here.

[RVAbird]

A legit ML-ready CIer and a young (A or A+) starting pitching prospect would probably be enough for me.

I agree.

I could see scenarios working out with the Angels (Wood + a young pitching prospect), Marlins (Chris Coghlan and Brad Hand?), Cubs (a Jackson/Flaherty combo like Greg proposed would be nice) and Dodgers (Josh Bell plus any number of pitching prospects).

It just depends on who is willing to step up and make the deal. It's unfortunate that the Marlins are slipping right now.

MacPhail definitely has the upper hand here though.

[ejf1025]

The bottom line is there just isn't a whole lot out there to trade for...Huff is close to as good as it gets even with his struggles.

Matt Holliday has been bad for a while and looks to be staying put.

Now, will the Orioles get some great offer for Huff? I doubt it...Could they potential get offered a prospect in the range of 7-12 from some team and perhaps a Scott Moore type guy as well? Yea, that wouldn't surprise me and if they did get an offer like that, they should take it.

Hmmm...the difference between 7 and 12 can be pretty big depending on the system.

I'd really have to see who the prospect is...Scott Moore-type doesn't interest me. I'd rather take my chances on arbitration and bank on the picks or Huff turning in a better 1st half next season then get some avg role players.

Plus, again, would you not be able to get a similar package for him next year? I mean, chances are he won't play much worse...seems like a good gamble.

[Greg Pappas]

It seems he's most likely going to switch to CF.

Its possible that it happens, but that site is shaky at best.

Here's BaseballAmerica's take...

"He has plus range to both sides, a solid arm and the actions of a big league shortstop."

[scottbbfm]

We had the same closer last year.

A 33 save, sub-3 era closer in '06.

BJ Ryan in '05.

Julio had 25 (and a sub 2 era) and 36 close seasons back to back.

I repeat...5th place teams don't need closers.

Last year George Sherrill wasn't even close to the same pitcher post All-Star Break.

07 Ray went down - disaster.

-06 the team was just bad through out the year, August was the team's second best month. Although September was the worst.

05 your theory works, but there were A LOT of factors involved with the losing.

04 We had a better second half than first half.

The closer would have very little to do with finishing 4-24. If it happened, most of those losses would be decided long before the ninth inning.

Over 60 games, for a .500 team, the difference between a good closer and a replacement level pitcher is probably no more than 3-4 wins. That's being generous.

And the Orioles aren't even a .500 team. Over August and September, the O's closer might have 15 save opportunities. Of those, probably no more than than 7 or 8 will be one-run games. You could hand the ball to Albers or Hendrickson in those games and still save at least four or five. But that wouldn't be necessary; the O's would just hand the job to Johnson, and he'll probably be almost as effective as Sherrill would have been. (Being a closer isn't that much different from being the eighth-inning setup guy).

So what you are really losing is the setup guy. Again, you just fill the hole with the next guy down the line. The overall effect is not going to suddenly cause the Orioles to go from a .500 team to just collapsing.

This is closer to the point. Games are decided well before you get to the closer - but why? Part of the blame obviously is on the starting pitching. Last year the starters were responsible for 24 of the team's 37 losses in August and Sept. But also significant blame can be placed on pitchers pitching outside of their comfort levels. Johnson didn't pitch the second half of August and missed all of September. The further down the line you go the worse the pitchers get.

Maybe you don't need a 'closer' I'm sure if the O's have consistently flip-flopped Johnson and Sherrill, the record today would be similar. For every guy that gets moved up a slot the less save opportunities the Orioles will have. You start putting guys in an otherwise close 7th inning that don't belong there, games against patient hitting teams like the Red Sox and Yankees get blown open fast.

So maybe the Orioles don't need a designated closer but you can't tell me losing Sherrill and then bumping Johnson to the closer's role is not going to hurt the bullpen and thus the team's overall record.

That said, I'm not opposed to trading Sherrill for the right return

[ejf1025]

Last year George Sherrill wasn't even close to the same pitcher post All-Star Break.

07 Ray went down - disaster.

-06 the team was just bad through out the year, August was the team's second best month. Although September was the worst.

05 your theory works, but there were A LOT of factors involved with the losing.

04 We had a better second half than first half.

This is closer to the point. Games are decided well before you get to the closer - but why? Part of the blame obviously is on the starting pitching. Last year the starters were responsible for 24 of the team's 37 losses in August and Sept. But also significant blame can be placed on pitchers pitching outside of their comfort levels. Johnson didn't pitch the second half of August and missed all of September. The further down the line you go the worse the pitchers get.

Maybe you don't need a 'closer' I'm sure if the O's have consistently flip-flopped Johnson and Sherrill, the record today would be similar. For every guy that gets moved up a slot the less save opportunities the Orioles will have. You start putting guys in an otherwise close 7th inning that don't belong there, games against patient hitting teams like the Red Sox and Yankees get blown open fast.

So maybe the Orioles don't need a designated closer but you can't tell me losing Sherrill and then bumping Johnson to the closer's role is not going to hurt the bullpen and thus the team's overall record.

That said, I'm not opposed to trading Sherrill for the right return

Of course losing Sherrill hurts the pen. He's a good pitcher.

The point is this team is not in the position to worry about that yet...we still have major holes at both CI spots for 2010, multi-rotation spots up for grabs, and a SS-hole for 2011--if not 2010.

If moving Sherrill helps with any of those situations, it's a lot more valuable to us then having him be our "closer."

[Three Run Homer]

I'm glad that AM wants good value in return for Sherrill, and I think someone will pony up a good package for him.

I would hope that AM isn't too fixated on getting a major league ready corner infielder in return, though. We can get by with Wigginton and Scott as our corner infielders next year if need be. Obviously we need prospects at 1B, 3B and SS, but I'd rather get guys with higher ceilings even if they will take a couple of more years to develop--for instance, I'd rather get Matt Dominguez than Gaby Sanchez even though Sanchez is more "major league ready". [That's just an example--it doesn't look like the Marlins are going to be buyers.]

I don't like what I'm reading about Huff. Maybe AM is just blowing smoke, but maybe he really believes we'll wind up getting draft picks if we hold on to Huff--which would not only be a bad assumption, but potentially a very harmful one if we then offer Huff arbitration.

[PHRESH]

The Giants have the best second place record in the NL and a first baseman with 7 HR ad 29 RBI. They also have a number of good minor league prospects. I think Aubrey Huff deal would look a lot better to them than to some people here.

Huff for Conor Gillaspie, Ehire Adrianza, & Scott Barnes. Too much? Too little?