Wagner in '10?

[ejf1025]

All I'm saying is that regardless of the remainder of the team, there are better ways to spend $4-6M than on a deal for Wagner given the inherent risks of a very old relief pitcher who is just coming back from Tommy John surgery.

And I disgaree...because I think he will bounce back and because it's a signing that fits into the remainder of our team.

[RShack]

No more free agent relievers. We've got plenty of arms on the farm, let them compete

I'm with you.

The idea that we should sign a 38-yr-old FA RP who's coming off surgery for a bunch a money so we can somehow up his trade value and/or get picks for him later is the epitome of loony toons. There must not be enough real baseball to talk about...

[Say O!]

I'm with SG here....why not take a cheap flyer on Wagner?

At worst, you burn $4-5M for nothing.

At best, you get a few good months out of him, PLUS are able to deal him at deadline for a prospect or two.

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised to see a guy like Billy Beane execute this move in the hopes of spinning Wagner into prospects.

[RShack]

I'm with SG here....why not take a cheap flyer on Wagner?

At worst, you burn $4-5M for nothing.

At best, you get a few good months out of him, PLUS are able to deal him at deadline for a prospect or two.

Personally, I wouldn't be surprised to see a guy like Billy Beane execute this move in the hopes of spinning Wagner into prospects.

Has any GM ever done this? Ever? Even once? Is there any precedent whatsoever for any team with any GM paying some old rehabbing FA RP guy several million bucks so they can maybe trade him later? I bet not. I think you guys are completely making this up, based on nothing. Am I wrong?

[Sports Guy]

Because he will insist upon being the closer. I think he could do an ok job, its certainly possible, but I think we can probably fill that internally too and then sign two guys to lesser deals to fill in other roles in the bullpen for the same money. Or use that money to sign a better stop gap at 1B or 3B.

If then money will either be spent on Wagner or not spent at all, then sure, go ahead and get him. But I never like to look at investments that way, because its kind of pointless. I think there are much better ways to invest whatever amount it would take to get Wagner here to be our closer next season.

Making him the closer means he is more marketable and you keep JJ's salary down...Makes perfect sense to me.

BTW, he may not get an offer of a closer's job.

[Mackus]

Has any GM ever done this? Ever? Even once? Is there any precedent whatsoever for any team with any GM paying some old rehabbing FA RP guy several million bucks so they can maybe trade him later? I bet not. I think you guys are completely making this up, based on nothing. Am I wrong?

"You're not wrong Walter, you're just an..."

And you're also probably wrong. I'm sure there have been plenty of players signed to 1-year deals and then traded. I can't remember any specifics, or specifically and RP being treated that way, but I'd be surprised if there aren't any examples. Surely the team won't come out and say they signed him with the intentions of flipping him at the deadline. You can't honestly expect to find an example of that.

[Mackus]

Making him the closer means he is more marketable and you keep JJ's salary down...Makes perfect sense to me.

BTW, he may not get an offer of a closer's job.

You're assuming health and effectiveness from a 38 year old coming back from Tommy John. That's a mighty big assumption.

I just think there are far better ways to invest $4-6M, both short and long term. I understand the upside, but the odds of him reaching anything near that upside are sufficiently low enough that it isn't worth the downside of not doing other things with that money.

[Mitch Connor]

Making him the closer means he is more marketable and you keep JJ's salary down...Makes perfect sense to me.

BTW, he may not get an offer of a closer's job.

Why would Wagner come to the Orioles on a cheap deal? We are currently one of the worst teams in MLB and then you offer him a lowball offer. He is either going to someone for more money or who give him a chance to win, like the Marlins or Tigers. This maybe the type of deal we do in a couple of years, when we are on the verge of contending.

[Mackus]

Why would Wagner come to the Orioles on a cheap deal? We are currently one of the worst teams in MLB and then you offer him a lowball offer. He is either going to someone for more money or who give him a chance to win, like the Marlins or Tigers. This maybe the type of deal we do in a couple of years, when we are on the verge of contending.

He doesn't care about a chance to win. Well, better than saying that, is that a chance to win is not his #1 concern.

His #1 concern is going someplace that he is guaranteed to be a closer. If a contender and an also-ran both offer him a closer's role, then he'd most likely prefer the contender (for similar money), but if its a choice of a big money deal as a setup guy for a contender or a decent money deal as a closer for us or the Nationals or someone else like that, then he's taking the closer's job. He wants to get to 400 saves and have a chance at passing John Franco for #1 all time LHP save total.

[Sports Guy]

You're assuming health and effectiveness from a 38 year old coming back from Tommy John. That's a mighty big assumption.

I just think there are far better ways to invest $4-6M, both short and long term. I understand the upside, but the odds of him reaching anything near that upside are sufficiently low enough that it isn't worth the downside of not doing other things with that money.

This coming from the same person that thought it would be nio big deal to pay Huff 8-10 million next year...that it was a one year contract and wouldn't stop us from doing anything...So, which is it?

[Mackus]

This coming from the same person that thought it would be nio big deal to pay Huff 8-10 million next year...that it was a one year contract and wouldn't stop us from doing anything...So, which is it?

Completely different. I said that before the season, assuming he would have a decent year. And midseason I said if he doesn't improve, then I wouldn't offer him arbitration.

I was right in both cases. If he had a good year, offering him arb would have been a no-brainer. Since he didn't have a good year, and in fact had a terrible year, not offering him arbitration became the no-brainer.

I choose to look at the information I have available, and leave open the possibility of future information changing my course of action. I didn't realize that we had to decide last March if we were going to offer Huff arbitration in November. Maybe I need to read the CBA a little more closely.

[RShack]

"You're not wrong Walter, you're just an..."

And you're also probably wrong. I'm sure there have been plenty of players signed to 1-year deals and then traded. I can't remember any specifics, or specifically and RP being treated that way, but I'd be surprised if there aren't any examples. Surely the team won't come out and say they signed him with the intentions of flipping him at the deadline. You can't honestly expect to find an example of that.

I can't honestly expect that any real-GM would think like that. I think real-GM's sign guys to make the team better. I don't think they pay millions to sign iffy guys in the hope they can "flip" them later. I think that is just stuff fantasy-GM's come up with when they think they're being oh-so-clever. I don't think real-GM's act like used car salesmen.

But let's not worry about that. Let's say you're right. Have circumstances ever worked out in a way that provides any circumstantial evidence that any real GM has ever done any of this "pay millions now for some iffy guy to 'flip' him later" tactic? If it's such a sensible thing to do, then surely there must be several examples where it's pretty obvious that's what they were doing. Got any?

[Mackus]

I can't honestly expect that any real-GM would think like that. I think real-GM's sign guys to make the team better. I don't think they pay millions to sign iffy guys in the hope they can "flip" them later. I think that is just stuff fantasy-GM's come up with when they think they're being oh-so-clever. I don't think real-GM's act like used car salesmen.

But let's not worry about that. Let's say you're right. Have circumstances ever worked out in a way that provides any circumstantial evidence that any real GM has ever done any of this "pay millions now for some iffy guy to 'flip' him later" tactic? If it's such a sensible thing to do, then surely there must be several examples where it's pretty obvious that's what they were doing. Got any?

I think being able to trade a guy if someone young steps up or if your team falls out is often considered as a silver lining or other potential benefit when doing an overall cost-risk analysis of signing any player, to a one-year deal or a multi-year deal.

I'm absolutely positive that every GM at least has that in the back of their heads if they are signing a guy at a position where they have some options in the upper minors that are close but not quite ready, they wouldn't be doing their job if they aren't.

I can't think of any specific examples of players signed to 1-year deals and then traded, so I can't lookup their trades to see if they fit the case or not. Perhaps others can remember some that I can't think of. But me not thinking of any doesn't mean they don't exist, there isn't some database of all trades that is sortable based on things like when the guy signed with the team he was on.

[Arthur_Bryant]

And I disgaree...because I think he will bounce back and because it's a signing that fits into the remainder of our team.

I disagree that Wagner fits on a team that is trying to develop a stream of young pitching talent. His cost would go beyond his salary: it would come at the expense of the development of Johnson and Mickolio and the potential return of Ray to his full value.

Johnson is clearly ready to be a closer. If Wagner is signed, that goes on hold--at least until Wagner proves that he can't hold down the job. Mickolio looks ready to step into JJ's vacant role as setup man and closer-in-waiting. But JJ's role wouldn't be vacant any more. Ray should be a closer candidate. Instead he becomes, basically, Matt Albers. None of them acquires the added value that we could reasonably expect.

You say that the worst that could happen is that Wagner flops and the O's eat the contract. But Wagner would have to be really bad for that to happen. If Wagner ends up being somewhere between awful and dominant -- which is quite likely -- he won't be DFA'd. He'll continue to soak up opportunities and innings until his contract runs out.

No thanks.

[ejf1025]

I disagree that Wagner fits on a team that is trying to develop a stream of young pitching talent. His cost would go beyond his salary: it would come at the expense of the development of Johnson and Mickolio and the potential return of Ray to his full value.

Johnson is clearly ready to be a closer. If Wagner is signed, that goes on hold--at least until Wagner proves that he can't hold down the job. Mickolio looks ready to step into JJ's vacant role as setup man and closer-in-waiting. But JJ's role wouldn't be vacant any more. Ray should be a closer candidate. Instead he becomes, basically, Matt Albers. None of them acquires the added value that we could reasonably expect.

You say that the worst that could happen is that Wagner flops and the O's eat the contract. But Wagner would have to be really bad for that to happen. If Wagner ends up being somewhere between awful and dominant -- which is quite likely -- he won't be DFA'd. He'll continue to soak up opportunities and innings until his contract runs out.

No thanks.

Whose innings is he eating up?

Do you honestly think JJ won't be used? Or Mickolio? Or Ray?

What's the harm in bumping everyone down a slot? How do you know he won't be DFA'd? I'd assume if someone were willing to take a flier on the injury they're also prepared to cut him loose if necessary.