The team's situation next winter will be very different

[Singleton]

This is the age-old dilemma. Your stance makes it seem like an easy call (though you credit Schuerholz with doing better than most). But as Lucky Jim points out, everyone we might trade with can come to the same conclusion about uncertain players whom "we think won't make it" - thus reducing the value we can expect in return.

Your logic relies on "hype" and "genius" in order to work. Can you honestly claim that y/our genius in true evaluation and prediction aligns with over-hyped outside opinion of Tillman, Arrieta, Snyder and Pie to create a realistic opportunity to reap that advantage in trade?

Again the logic breaks down with this simple fact: If JTrea (or Now, or any of us amateurs) has strong evidence that player T, A, S or P is going to be a bust, then any potential trade partner will have access to the same evidence. Conversely, if we have an accurate idea that their true value is high, we may as well keep them for our own benefit!

To me Frobby's point makes the most sense: trade once we have more certainty about our surpluses, and trade from those positions to fill other positions of need. Then trades are mutually beneficial, with other teams looking to do the same ... that's why we deal outside the division, btw.

The advantage in this more realistic scenario lies in stockpiling talent and creating cheap surplus in the first place ... which is exactly what AM has been doing since day 1.

Maybe I've gone loopy but I think Trea's general point is reasonable.

I think the strong adverse reaction is because it came from Trea and his focus on Tillman.

The team that sees the guy pitch 200 innings should know more than the one that sees him pitch for 20. The "home" team will also have a better sense of his work habits, mental makeup, etc.

B. Beane trades prospects all the time. I don't think its a stretch to think that often he thinks the prospect is overvalued and he should move the player before the bloom is off the rose.

We should do the same.

Each player in our system is an asset and we need to make the most of our assets. Part of being a good GM is selling assets at their highest value.

I'm not saying that means we should or should not trade Tillman. I am saying that good teams can figure out more often than not which prospects are for real and make the most of their assets.

[Lucky Jim]

Maybe I've gone loopy but I think Trea's general point is reasonable.

I think the strong adverse reaction is because it came from Trea and his focus on Tillman.

The team that sees the guy pitch 200 innings should know more than the one that sees him pitch for 20. The "home" team will also have a better sense of his work habits, mental makeup, etc.

B. Beane trades prospects all the time. I don't think its a stretch to think that often he thinks the prospect is overvalued and he should move the player before the bloom is off the rose.

We should do the same.

Each player in our system is an asset and we need to make the most of our assets. Part of being a good GM is selling assets at their highest value.

I'm not saying that means we should or should not trade Tillman. I am saying that good teams can figure out more often than not which prospects are for real and make the most of their assets.

Give us some examples of these trades? And hopefully they'll include some where pitchers on the cusp of offering real MLB value were traded in this fashion?

[mspeller]

We will stay on the current plan and not deviate from it. :scratchchinhmm:

[Arthur_Bryant]

MacPhail's going to have to seriously buck some trends that he's had.

His biggest FA signing is for $27 million and he's never made a 1 for 4 or 5 trade.

He'll have to do one or both of these things before 2011 for what you expect to happen.

To everything there is a season

A time for every purpose under the sun.

You can imagine Pete Seeger or the Byrds singing it. You can imagine a preaching reading it.

Any way you hear it, it's true. You don't cut hay in April (well, unless you're a farmer in New Zealand).

[Singleton]

Give us some examples of these trades? And hopefully they'll include some where pitchers on the cusp of offering real MLB value were traded in this fashion?

First off, your request suggests that I'm pushing trading Tillman and my post makes clear that I'm not. I was/am supportive of the notion that we may want to trade minor league prospects when the perceived value is higher than what we project.

Back to your request -- the A's traded C. Gonzalez and others for Matt Holliday. The Rangers swapped B. McCarthy and J. Danks. If we have a B. McCarthy in our ranks, I hope we've moving him for the next Danks. Lets see, Carl Pavano was thought to be a stud and he was the key piece in the Pedro deal. If we have the next Carl Pavano in our system, I hope we can turn him into Pedro.

We all know what the Rays got for uber prospect D. Young. Good thing they didn't wait a year. The A's traded J. Bonderman a while back.

Again, there are guys in our system that can bring back more than they are worth. I hope AM can figure out who that is and make the move.

[Lucky Jim]

First off, your request suggests that I'm pushing trading Tillman and my post makes clear that I'm not. I was/am supportive of the notion that we may want to trade minor league prospects when the perceived value is higher than what we project.

Back to your request -- the A's traded C. Gonzalez and others for Matt Holliday. The Rangers swapped B. McCarthy and J. Danks. If we have a B. McCarthy in our ranks, I hope we've moving him for the next Danks. Lets see, Carl Pavano was thought to be a stud and he was the key piece in the Pedro deal. If we have the next Carl Pavano in our system, I hope we can turn him into Pedro.

We all know what the Rays got for uber prospect D. Young. Good thing they didn't wait a year. The A's traded J. Bonderman a while back.

Again, there are guys in our system that can bring back more than they are worth. I hope AM can figure out who that is and make the move.

I didn't mean to suggest anything. Hey, I said earlier that a hedge fund approach that tries to profit off of asymmetrical information is fine by me as one prong of an approach. You just have to realize that it's rare and that it's risky. I'm not convinced that Beane made out particularly well in the Holliday deals, myself, and a lot of that has to do with problematic valuation.

[RShack]

Maybe I've gone loopy but I think Trea's general point is reasonable.

I think the strong adverse reaction is because it came from Trea and his focus on Tillman.

The team that sees the guy pitch 200 innings should know more than the one that sees him pitch for 20. The "home" team will also have a better sense of his work habits, mental makeup, etc.

B. Beane trades prospects all the time. I don't think its a stretch to think that often he thinks the prospect is overvalued and he should move the player before the bloom is off the rose.

We should do the same.

Each player in our system is an asset and we need to make the most of our assets. Part of being a good GM is selling assets at their highest value.

I'm not saying that means we should or should not trade Tillman. I am saying that good teams can figure out more often than not which prospects are for real and make the most of their assets.

His point makes sense only if you think that AM has decided that we have some hyped prospect that he thinks will be a bust, but he's hanging on to that kid anyway for no good reason. Either that or you think that JTrea is a better judge of players he's never seen than the O's talent-evaluators are when they watch a kid closely. Both ideas are flat out goofy.

When people say "we should do the same", why on earth do you think we're not? You think this is some brilliant idea that never occurred to AM?

[Frobby]

It's not optimism, it's being realistic,

I'm sorry but not all of Tillman, Matusz, Bergesen, Bell, Snyder, Arrieta, Reimold, Wieters, Jones, Britton, Erbe etc. are going to hit their ceilings.

Some are going to exceed expectations, some are going to meet them and some are going to disappoint.

And that's fine. We don't need all of them to hit their ceilings. You've named 11 guys there. If 2-3 approach their ceilings, 5-6 meet their average projection and 2-3 are disappointments, we will be in good shape. We will need to add some outside talent to that core at the appropriate time, but that core is plenty sufficient.

And that's being realistic, IMO. Your concept that the O's won't be any good unless all 11 guys (or say, 7 of 11) reach their ceilings is what is pessimistic.

[RShack]

Well just because he hasn't must mean that he never will. I have never been to Australia but I just booked my vacation for next October. Does this mean that I am really not going???

JTrea's assumption is that nobody ever does anything unless other people are pressuring them to do it. The basic idea is that everybody is trying to get away with screwing off, and that it's up to him to apply pressure by repeating the same drivel on a message board. He thinks he's performing a public service that he hopes will somehow force somebody to make AM overcome his natural slacker tendencies. Now, I know that sounds crazy, but that's what it boils down to.

So, in answer to your question, exactly who is making you go to Australia? Because if nobody is, you're obviously gonna sit on your butt with smug satisfaction that you're getting away with not going...

[now]

First off, your request suggests that I'm pushing trading Tillman and my post makes clear that I'm not. I was/am supportive of the notion that we may want to trade minor league prospects when the perceived value is higher than what we project.

Back to your request -- the A's traded C. Gonzalez and others for Matt Holliday. The Rangers swapped B. McCarthy and J. Danks. If we have a B. McCarthy in our ranks, I hope we've moving him for the next Danks. Lets see, Carl Pavano was thought to be a stud and he was the key piece in the Pedro deal. If we have the next Carl Pavano in our system, I hope we can turn him into Pedro.

We all know what the Rays got for uber prospect D. Young. Good thing they didn't wait a year. The A's traded J. Bonderman a while back.

Again, there are guys in our system that can bring back more than they are worth. I hope AM can figure out who that is and make the move.

Sure, some trades (of every kind) work out ... and some don't. It's way easier to judge after the fact, in retrospect ... way harder to call a winner or loser in advance. So your conclusion actually makes sense: we hope AM can "leverage those asymmetries." It's just that when we on OH presume to have insider (and prescient) knowledge of which prospects are "overvalued," we're really just guessing, speculating, predicting. But at least we can come back after the fact and judge our previous evaluations in hindsight (all those who wanted to trade DCab early on, please stand up ). Just as we can judge AM on his track record on trades so far. So far, so good ...

[DrungoHazewood]

MacPhail's going to have to seriously buck some trends that he's had.

His biggest FA signing is for $27 million and he's never made a 1 for 4 or 5 trade.

He'll have to do one or both of these things before 2011 for what you expect to happen.

Well, no. We've pointed out any number of situations where the O's could compete without being on the short end of a Bedard deal or spending $158M on a premium talent.

I don't see it. 2012 is probably when we'll compete and it will be because MacPhail has left the team to be commissioner.

Big surprise there.

[Singleton]

His point makes sense only if you think that AM has decided that we have some hyped prospect that he thinks will be a bust, but he's hanging on to that kid anyway for no good reason. Either that or you think that JTrea is a better judge of players he's never seen than the O's talent-evaluators are when they watch a kid closely. Both ideas are flat out goofy.

When people say "we should do the same", why on earth do you think we're not? You think this is some brilliant idea that never occurred to AM?

Well its a message board where posters make suggestions as to what they hope the team will do. If we limit ourselves to only discussing ideas that the GM has never thought of it will be awfully quiet.

I'm certain that every GM fields calls for their prospects. Though I have zero inside knowledge I feel certain that AM has had calls as well. Some GMs are more open to trading prospects than others. I don't feel that AM needs to be in a rush to trade any of ours. I just don't think it is a crazy idea if he were to trade one of our prospects for something he thought made the team better now or in the future.

I think some of the reactions to even considering trading a prospect were extreme, IMO -- so I spoke up. nuff said.

[jmmarvel]

I don't see it. 2012 is probably when we'll compete and it will be because MacPhail has left the team to be commissioner.

After this statement, I don't know whether to accuse you of being a grumpy old man, or a whiney child. I hope you are drunk and/or not serious. Whether you think AM is great, good, avg or bad , you can't honestly think that replacing him could instantly make us a contender.

[JTrea81]

It just means that there is still the possibility of slow development of many of the young players that might make a big splash next year just as questionable as it was this year.

And the excuses for not adding talent next year are already starting.

I'm sure it won't be the right time before 2012 as well.

Just how long are you willing to watch this team miss the playoffs year after year? At some point you've got to stop waiting for the "right moment" and just go for it.

The Orioles need to do that because as of now after 2014, Roberts, Markakis and Jones are all gone. And if Wieters blows up it's pretty likely he'll be traded in 2014 as well because he likely won't extend as a Boras client.

So if we keep waiting, our window with this "core" group of players isn't going to exist for very long.

[Hank Scorpio]

And the excuses for not adding talent next year are already starting.

I'm sure it won't be the right time before 2012 as well.

Just how long are you willing to watch this team miss the playoffs year after year? At some point you've got to stop waiting for the "right moment" and just go for it.

The Orioles need to do that because as of now after 2014, Roberts, Markakis and Jones are all gone. And if Wieters blows up it's pretty likely he'll be traded in 2014 as well because he likely won't extend as a Boras client.

So if we keep waiting, our window with this "core" group of players isn't going to exist for very long.

Do me a favor, and read the following.

Think about them as rationally as you possibly can. Equate what you read to the real world. Try and use some real critical thinking, here. Understand the realities of what needs to be established.

The first thing I would ask you to do is to forget about the Yankees model. It's far beyond reality for 31 out of 32 teams. Once you're over that, look at the Red Sox very closely. Think about who identified David Ortiz as a guy worth taking a flier on. Think about how they identify, draft, develop and maximize their return on players. Look at their roster and really try to understand how they have accomplished what they've accomplished. Please give it a legitimate, concerted effort.

The best case scenario is one of developing as many of your own as you can, then buying out 2 or 3 of their most productive years and trying to keep that wheel churning.

Obviously, that is an extremely difficult charge. But if you can get a solid group of 3-5 players in their peak years at the same time, it makes your free agent requirements much more realistic. It's all about timing, buying & selling, drafting and developing at the same time.

You have to be extremely good and even luckier than that. It is essentially impossible to achieve.

But that should be the goal.

Maximize your expenditures on guys you'll likely get the most out of, then fill in the gaps however necessary. I think MacPhail is rapidly approaching a nice happy zone where he can identify gaps and fill them accordingly (whether it be via free agency or trade), while winning baseball games at the same time.

Reimold is 26 and he'll be around for 5 more years prior to free agency, so we're likely to get his best years without having to worry about any extension. Jones may be an extension candidate depending on what you see from him this year & next. Obviously, you're cooked on Wieters, but you've got a nice 6 year window with him, too. Same thing with the pitchers, Bell, Snyder, Arrieta, Erbe, etc....

The Orioles have an excellent shot in the next 5-7 years to be very good and relatively cheap (even if they hand out 2-3 extensions), which should leave plenty of expendable talent and money to fill whatever gaps show up.

It's an extremely enviable position IMO, but you really have to be careful and lucky to make a run in this division.

But this is really the most efficient, reasonable way to make a run. You really can't go out checkbook blazing and give it a run that way without expecting a valley.

Think.

Reality.