Sign Holliday or trade prospects?

[JTrea81]

Holliday is a 25-win improvement over Reimold/Pie + someone like Pena?

Holliday could be in addition to Reimold/Pie and Pena.

We could sign Pena with Holliday on board already.

Pena would be the bat that could put us "over the top" in that case.

Holliday could be the bat that gets you to that point.

[amateurfan]

I don't want to look like I'm completely and totally against any Holliday signing, so I'll preface this by saying there is a chance he could make a 6- or 7-year deal look ok. And a small chance it could look great.

But the risk is there that he's going to tank, and the longer the deal the better the chances. Look at Holliday's BP comps. Sure, #1 is Dave Winfield, and he was good until he was like 84 years old. But #2 is Dave Parker, who had three decent years after he turned 30, only one that would have justified the kind of contract we're talking here. #3 is Bob Watson, whose last really good year was at 32. #4 is Cliff Floyd, who hasn't had 400 PAs in a season since he was 32. Going down the list 2/3rds of the players are on a whos-who of guys who were done at 34 like Richie Zisk and Tim Salmon and Ivan Calderon and Jim Rice.

I think people tend to overestimate the odds of a star at 30 being good at 35. Most of the players like Holliday were either too injured or too unproductive to even be full-timers by the middle of most of the proposed deals we've been throwing around. Most. It's not like this is a small chance. I'd guess the odds are around 75% than Holliday isn't worth half of what he'll be paid the last 3-4 years of a 7-year deal.

Yes, the O's do have the money now. But in 2014 do you want them to punt on a Matusz or a Tillman extension because their .750 OPS LFer who's playing 100 games a year is making $18M per through 2016 or 2017?

I always assumed the Os would not extend even their homegrown pitchers to long term extensions because of the likelihood of injuries and decline. I doubt very much that AM would extend more than one pitcher to a big deal. I think it's more likely he trades them or let's them go for picks.

[Stotle]

There has to be an assumption that Reimold, Pie, and others displaced by Holliday would be traded for equal value at positions of need. Even if that's the case I don't think the numbers add up.

Oh, I agree that was lazy on my part. But once we start making assumptions about who is movable for what, BAL is moving prospects to fill a hole.

So, realistically, if BAL really wants to make the most of its young and cheap talent, wouldn't it make sense to see what IS available next year and determin THEN if there is a need to start trading guys like Reimold/Snyder/Pie/Jones/Bell/various pitchers?

Question not directed at you; I'm just typing out loud.

[Sports Guy]

Then why do you think they'd sign Holliday? Why do you think they'd outbid the Cards by $millions and add more guaranteed years?

I don't think Matt Holliday thinks the O's are the best fit for him unless they make him an offer he can't refuse. And offers that good are probably not going to be worthwhile for the offering team.

Well, I don't know what the Cards are willing to give...so I can't really answer you. If they are willing to give 6/108, then say bye bye to him.

[JTrea81]

I always assumed the Os would not extend even their homegrown pitchers to long term extensions because of the likelihood of injuries and decline. I doubt very much that AM would extend more than one pitcher to a big deal. I think it's more likely he trades them or let's them go for picks.

As it should be as hitters tend to be a better investment than pitchers over the long term.

I would suspect he'd have internal replacements for this wave, such as Hobgood and whoever we sign out of this draft.

Pitchers tend to peak around the same age as hitters and are more volitile aftewards, so it's better to keep a younger core of pitching, and an established core of hitting with a few younger pieces.

We simply aren't going to keep our young core of pitching and hitting talent all together for 10 years. That's just not realistic given the era we are in.

There is hardly any team loyality any more and players for the most part just want to win and get paid when they hit FA. Staying on the same team isn't usually high on the priority list.

[Stotle]

Holliday could be in addition to Reimold/Pie and Pena.

We could sign Pena with Holliday on board already.

Pena would be the bat that could put us "over the top" in that case.

Holliday could be the bat that gets you to that point.

So you think BAL would elect to convert a young OF to a full-time DH? Isn't that a fairly drastic reduction in the player's value, while depriving them of the reps necessary for them to develop into good ML defenders? Also, you're then electing to either throw away Scott or move him with other teams aware that BAL was a gross abundance of COF? Or are we moving Scott to an unnatural position, keeping Atkins at 3B and limiting Pie/Reimold to 4th OF/DH?

[jdouble777]

Holliday could be in addition to Reimold/Pie and Pena.

We could sign Pena with Holliday on board already.

Pena would be the bat that could put us "over the top" in that case.

Holliday could be the bat that gets you to that point.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/09/2011-mlb-free-agents.html

Adam Dunn is younger, available, and not a Scott Boras client.

Age as of next season's free agency:

Jorge Cantu (29)

Adam Dunn (31)

Carlos Pena (33)

Lyle Overbay (34)

Paul Konerko (35)

Derrek Lee (35)

[Stotle]

I always assumed the Os would not extend even their homegrown pitchers to long term extensions because of the likelihood of injuries and decline. I doubt very much that AM would extend more than one pitcher to a big deal. I think it's more likely he trades them or let's them go for picks.

You don't have to wait until 2014 to give Matusz/Tillman/Arrieta/whoever a large extension. You can start in 2012 or 2013 and buy-out a year or two of arbitration in exchange for an extra year or two of control. Seems like this would be a smart way for BAL to extend control on a pitcher or two without having to invest in a huge FA-like contract/extension.

[JTrea81]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/09/2011-mlb-free-agents.html

Adam Dunn is younger, available, and not a Scott Boras client.

Adam Dunn is a horrible defender and wouldn't want to DH, for the Orioles anyway. And you can bet if Washington doesn't want him LT which they've said they do, the Yankees would as Johnson is only signed to a 1 year deal. The Red Sox could also sign him as a replacement to Ortiz.

[Hank Scorpio]

Adam Dunn is a horrible defender and wouldn't want to DH. And you can bet if Washington doesn't want him LT which they've said they do, the Yankees would as Johnson is only signed to a 1 year deal. The Red Sox could also sign him as a replacement to Ortiz.

So, he'd want to DH in Boston, then.

[JTrea81]

So, he'd want to DH in Boston, then.

I think he'd change his mind for a shot at the playoffs.

[Sports Guy]

Adam Dunn is a horrible defender and wouldn't want to DH, for the Orioles anyway. And you can bet if Washington doesn't want him LT which they've said they do, the Yankees would as Johnson is only signed to a 1 year deal. The Red Sox could also sign him as a replacement to Ortiz.

How do you know this?

[Lucky Jim]

Adam Dunn is a horrible defender and wouldn't want to DH, for the Orioles anyway. And you can bet if Washington doesn't want him LT which they've said they do, the Yankees would as Johnson is only signed to a 1 year deal. The Red Sox could also sign him as a replacement to Ortiz.

Wow. This is wildly speculative.

[DrungoHazewood]

I always assumed the Os would not extend even their homegrown pitchers to long term extensions because of the likelihood of injuries and decline. I doubt very much that AM would extend more than one pitcher to a big deal. I think it's more likely he trades them or let's them go for picks.

I would be surprised if there weren't at least serious discussions with the pitchers if they're performing well and the O's are contending. It's one thing to let a great young pitcher go if you're 70-92. But if the O's are in the thick of the race they ain't trading a 16-6 Matusz or Tillman at the deadline, and it would be really hard to justify dumping them for kids or picks in the offseason.

I'm thinking this goes case-by-case and not some blanket no-extend policy.

[Stotle]

Adam Dunn is a horrible defender and wouldn't want to DH, for the Orioles anyway. And you can bet if Washington doesn't want him LT which they've said they do, the Yankees would as Johnson is only signed to a 1 year deal. The Red Sox could also sign him as a replacement to Ortiz.

I could just as easily speculate that Dunn would prefer:

1) a 3-year deal with a vesting option (based on games and All-star voting) on a fourth year to DH, over

2) a 1 or two year deal to maybe play LF or 1B.