Do you want anyone from the Marlins?

[crawdad]

We should do both.

And if you have JJ for 3 or 4 years, especially prime years, its fine.

Just because we aren't likely to contend next year doesn't mean we should acquire a long term asset...If that's the case, why waste anytime this offseason on any player...Just wait until next year..That makes no sense.

I am with you on a 2 year player...No need to give up a bunch of talent for 2 years of any player right now...but if you have that player for 3 or more years, they should be going after that player.

Ok, we do both, sign Figgins, Holliday, and Delgado or trade for Fielder or Gonzalez . . . I am with you.

But, in general, building a team with FA pitcher acquisitions is risky and fraught with a thin margin of error. FA pitcher acquisition and trade for MLB ready pitching involves heavy investment in the most expensive and volatile commodity in the talent market.

[Stotle]

You are the one crying about what it would take to get JJ...So, I put a deal out there to guage youre interest and see what you are willing to deal for JJ..That is either too much for you or its not...Really not difficult although you are trying to make it be that way.

We need 3 legit starters that will give us sub 4.20 ERAs to contend in the AL.

Why the hell not? I have said that from the beginning..No extension, no deal...i am not trading a lot of good young talent for 2 years of anyone right now.

I have never once, despite your bs, said that Florida would accept that deal...However, it is a top 50 prospect, a borderline top 100 prospect, a productive OFer who YOU feel will hit 30 homers and a power arm for the back end of their pen...3 of the 4 ML ready, cheap, young and under control for a while and they save money.

I have never said that another team wouldn't beat the offer or that the Marlins would accept it..I put it out there for discussion sake although I see that was a freaking waste of time.

Shrug. My original post was in reference to all of the Josh Johnson discussion. I stated I didn't understand what all the discussion was about when it's not the type of deal BAL should be making, and Johnson would be way to costly.

Later on, you stated "...but shooting down the idea is pretty terrible..." Then, you proceeded to come up with scenarios that trading for Johnson made sense. But the scenarios you gave can't and won't happen. And I responded as much. I'm not going to name call back -- the bottom line is there is a lot of electricity being used to discuss a move that 1) is incredibly unlikely to happen, and 2) doesn't make sense even if BAL had the inclination to make it happen.

I've laid out the argument against paying over-market prices for bananas, and Craw has done a very good job (I think) of explaining in this thread and others the issue with buying pitching early -- it's expensive and tends to get hurt.

I guess I'll sum it up. Would I trade Arrieta, Reimold, Mickolio and Britton for 5-6 years of Josh Johnson. Sure. But I think the series of events that would have to occur for something that out there to take place are too great for the potential trade to merit serious discussion.

To me, it would be the same mental exercise as coming up equivalent "value" to trade for Greinke. I'm sure it's possible to create a scenarios that "makes sense" on paper, but it's not likely that the scenario will be real world applicable.

[Stotle]

This makes some sense.. but you cannot go into next season just with what we have. That is as reckless to me as overspending on a FA pitcher or 2. Is there a happy medium?

I think BAL is in position to do what TAM did in acquiring Jackson and Garza. You look for younger talent that hasn't broken out or that you feel will bounce back. Looking at Homer Bailey last off-season, for example. But investing multiple high tier (in BALs system) prospects or a large contract in years and $$ for a pitcher is not the right move. You can start to make the argument that investing in a more stable commodity (a hitter) would not be as poor an investment, considering the likelihood that he won't suffer a huge injury during the "hold" period, negating the contract's value.

[Fan4Life]

I think BAL is in position to do what TAM did in acquiring Jackson and Garza. You look for younger talent that hasn't broken out or that you feel will bounce back. Looking at Homer Bailey last off-season, for example. But investing multiple high tier (in BALs system) prospects or a large contract in years and $$ for a pitcher is not the right move. You can start to make the argument that investing in a more stable commodity (a hitter) would not be as poor an investment, considering the likelihood that he won't suffer a huge injury during the "hold" period, negating the contract's value.

I don't want to be relying on Guthrie, Tillman, Matusz and BB to produce a sub 4.50 era as a group assuming they can all stay healthy. Looking for the talent you indicate above isn't defraying the risk of another 90+ losing season much. You'd be relying on a pitcher with talent that has under performed lately, or a pitcher coming of an injury with a history of solid pitching, bing able to achieve the production you need. They might, they might not. In the end you're not that concerned with 2010. I am. Sounded like AM is... I hope that's true.

[Sports Guy]

Ok, we do both, sign Figgins, Holliday, and Delgado or trade for Fielder or Gonzalez . . . I am with you.

But, in general, building a team with FA pitcher acquisitions is risky and fraught with a thin margin of error. FA pitcher acquisition and trade for MLB ready pitching involves heavy investment in the most expensive and volatile commodity in the talent market.

The Orioles are going to have to acquire pitching from outside IMO...I don't think it is going to be enough to compete...If one of the big 3 starters doesn't develop, we are screwed because no one else is good enough to be much more than a borderline 3/4 guy in all likelihood.

A rotation of Lackey, JJ, Matusz, Tillman and BB would be pretty damn good right now.

[Stotle]

I don't want to be relying on Guthrie, Tillman, Matusz and BB to produce a sub 4.50 era as a group assuming they can all stay healthy. Looking for the talent you indicate above isn't defraying the risk of another 90+ losing season much. You'd be relying on a pitcher with talent that has under performed lately, or a pitcher coming of an injury with a history of solid pitching, bing able to achieve the production you need. They might, they might not. In the end you're not that concerned with 2010. I am. Sounded like AM is... I hope that's true.

If being concerned about 2010 means making short term moves with ill long-term effects, I'm certainly not concerned about 2010. And I don't think AM would be under that definition.

I'm not sure why you wouldn't want those four to absolutely be in the rotation all year, provided health.

[crawdad]

I don't want to be relying on Guthrie, Tillman, Matusz and BB to produce a sub 4.50 era as a group assuming they can all stay healthy. Looking for the talent you indicate above isn't defraying the risk of another 90+ losing season much. You'd be relying on a pitcher with talent that has under performed lately, or a pitcher coming of an injury with a history of solid pitching, bing able to achieve the production you need. They might, they might not. In the end you're not that concerned with 2010. I am. Sounded like AM is... I hope that's true.

I think the problem that comes up is that sometimes goals for winning more games in 2010 are not always going to be addressed with solutions that double for eventually fielding a championship worthy team. Solidifying our rotation with "proven" veterans would certainly cut down the ERA and prevent us from relying on our young pitchers and our older sliding pitcher. If everything is hunky-dory then Johnson and/or Lackey stay healthy, maybe they are good mentors as well, they teach the kids, they remain very good starters, and they sit around for a year or two until they are able to help out with a team that is ready to win a championship. That is the optimistic way of looking at things. Of course, this relies on them remaining healthy. Pitchers, in general, has issues with staying healthy. They are a very expensive and volatile commodity. Specifically, Lackey has had some curious elbow issues these past two years and Johnson has a history of elbow issues (but not since his TJ surgery). Point being, pitchers often get injured.

So, by acquiring a pitcher and giving up a lot of resources to get him . . . we definitely solidify next year and point ourselves in the right direction. I agree with you in that. I just think using these acquisitions as our sails means that we probably are not going to go far enough with them. There is a good chance they get hurt or lose effectiveness. Now, you have a guy who cost or is costing a great deal of money . . . but not producing. Do you then have the abilities to replace that sunk cost? Typically not.

Therefore . . . if a better year is what you want for next season . . . I think the best way to handle that is let the pitching staff grow and invest in a position player. I find that far more defensible.

[Fan4Life]

The Orioles are going to have to acquire pitching from outside IMO...I don't think it is going to be enough to compete...If one of the big 3 starters doesn't develop, we are screwed because no one else is good enough to be much more than a borderline 3/4 guy in all likelihood.

A rotation of Lackey, JJ, Matusz, Tillman and BB would be pretty damn good right now.

I agree 100% with the idea here. The names are optional. Assuming we sign Lackey first, would you then have any interest in trading for Zambrano if we could get $$$ relief from the Cubs to bring his numbers into the $15m per range? Not sure what kind of prospect would allow us that flexibility, but AM likes to deal with these guys and I think a rotation of:

Zambrano, Lackey, Matusz, Tillman and BB would be equally nice without costing us nearly as much.

Zambrano, JJ, Harden, Vazquez, and perhaps Bedard all need to be looked into...

[crawdad]

The Orioles are going to have to acquire pitching from outside IMO...I don't think it is going to be enough to compete...If one of the big 3 starters doesn't develop, we are screwed because no one else is good enough to be much more than a borderline 3/4 guy in all likelihood.

A rotation of Lackey, JJ, Matusz, Tillman and BB would be pretty damn good right now.

Yeah, it would be good, but it may not be good when our offense comes around. There is a good chance that Lackey will be swallowing 1/6th or so of our team payroll and giving us nothing. At some point this move makes sense . . . that point is when we are ready to compete. I do not see us ready to compete next year unless we are doing all of those things I mentioned.

Yeah, we will need to complement our existing talent (as is true with pretty much any team) . . . now, it is probably a little premature to invest in pitchers.

[Stotle]

The Orioles are going to have to acquire pitching from outside IMO...I don't think it is going to be enough to compete...If one of the big 3 starters doesn't develop, we are screwed because no one else is good enough to be much more than a borderline 3/4 guy in all likelihood.

A rotation of Lackey, JJ, Matusz, Tillman and BB would be pretty damn good right now.

What sets Lackey apart from another pitcher BAL might acquire next off-season? That is, why is it absolutely necessary to take the risk of 2010 in his contract as opposed to trying to trade for or sign a pitcher next of his skill level next year?

It just seems like impatience, to me. Somehow "caring about winning" is turning into "do something quick to show results in the w/l column." I don't think that is a recipe for success.

[Sports Guy]

Yeah, it would be good, but it may not be good when our offense comes around. There is a good chance that Lackey will be swallowing 1/6th or so of our team payroll and giving us nothing. At some point this move makes sense . . . that point is when we are ready to compete. I do not see us ready to compete next year unless we are doing all of those things I mentioned.

Yeah, we will need to complement our existing talent (as is true with pretty much any team) . . . now, it is probably a little premature to invest in pitchers.

Wow...I don't think I have ever disagreed with anything more on this site than this.

[Sports Guy]

What sets Lackey apart from another pitcher BAL might acquire next off-season? That is, why is it absolutely necessary to take the risk of 2010 in his contract as opposed to trying to trade for or sign a pitcher next of his skill level next year?

It just seems like impatience, to me. Somehow "caring about winning" is turning into "do something quick to show results in the w/l column." I don't think that is a recipe for success.

The top FA starting pitchers next year will get more money than Lackey IMO.

And saying it is impatient is short sighted to me...I am not talking about trading a bunch of young talent for an aging pitcher..Its just money and the contract wouldn't hurt us long term IMO.

[Fan4Life]

If being concerned about 2010 means making short term moves with ill long-term effects, I'm certainly not concerned about 2010. And I don't think AM would be under that definition.

I'm not sure why you wouldn't want those four to absolutely be in the rotation all year, provided health.

My comment was relying on them to stay healthy AND as a group putting up a sub 4.50 era. I think there's too much risk there of just one thing not going well and you're headed towards another 90+ losing season. Too much risk of a collapse. I agree paying a FA pitcher $18M in the last year of his contract when he's injured or pitching to a 5+ ERA is also not a good plan. I'm not sure what the best answer is.. somewhere in between for sure... but is that reasonable to accomplish?

[crawdad]

Wow...I don't think I have ever disagreed with anything more on this site than this.

I have no idea what is so disagreeable. Our offense is probably going to take a couple years to become a good offense. Signing or trading for a TOR pitcher right now means he has to stay healthy during this time. Therefore when our offense comes around . . . he might be injured or his effectiveness will be reduced.

How is that a crazy assessment?

I think you are really overstating your case. Again, we can have a nice discussion here or you can resort to hyperbole. It is a disservice to your own perspective when you do the latter because it appears you are having trouble expressing your thoughts.

[crawdad]

My comment was relying on them to stay healthy AND as a group putting up a sub 4.50 era. I think there's too much risk there of just one thing not going well and you're headed towards another 90+ losing season. I agree paying a FA pitcher $18M in the last year of his contract when he's injured or pitching to a 5+ ERA is also not a good plan. Too much risk of a collapse. I'm not sure what the best answer is.. somewhere in between for sure... but is that reasonable to accomplish?

But what is your goal here? What do you think will happen if we sign or trade for these guys? Will we get in the playoffs next year?

That is really my concern with this. It feels all too premature. I do not understand why it is something we have to do. If we were 5 wins or so away from the playoffs, I completely understand. I think at best we are 20 games out. That means that we need to acquire roughly 4 big incredibly good pieces. Johnson and Lackey would represent two of those. We would need two more . . . like Fielder and maybe Holliday.