Fielder?

[TGO]

And how will signing Paul Konerko, Derek Lee or Carlos Pena to a multi-year contract work out?

Did you really just ask that question to Drungo of all people? I have little doubt that he would not offer multi-year contracts of any significance to any of those guys.

[davearm]

Weight is the only red flag for Fielder. Soriano's game was dependent on his speed, which is one of the first things to go in a player as they age. He was also 30 when he signed (and there are still whispers that he is older). Fielder would be 27 years old next year, still with several prime years left.

Fielder's game doesn't rely on speed but pure power which he generates from his hips and his tremendous upper body strength.

As for his weight, he knows what he needs to do to keep it in check. I can see him remaining very productive until his early 30's.

As for his fire, he supposedly turns it off once he leaves the field (except toward his father). There are several articles that say he laughs and jokes in the clubhouse. It's not like he's Albert Belle and angry all the time...

Well I'm just offering my rationale for avoiding the guy is all.

With respect to the weight, there's one risk that it just spirals out of control. There's another risk that it leads to chronic injuries. While you might be confident that the former won't occur (although who's to say what a $150M contract will do to a guy), the latter is highly unpredictable.

[DrungoHazewood]

And how will signing Paul Konerko, Derek Lee or Carlos Pena to a multi-year contract work out?

(Edit: first time around my numbers were all screwed up)

Certainly better than paying 3, 4, 5 times as much for Fielder, plus valuable players.

So, you're not going to try to work through the numbers to show Fielder will be worth it? Ok, here's a good starting point: PECOTA thinks Fielder will be worth $190M, ~40 WAR, from 2010 through the end of 2019.

Let's say the O's trade Matusz and Tillman and some lesser players for Fielder in July. Or something like that - say 18 WAR of young players who'll earn $15M for their services.

Based on this one projection, the O's would be adding about 22 wins over 8-9 years, for ($5M this year, about $12M next year, and whatever huge contract he's signed to, let's say 7/175) about $190M, minus the $15M for the traded players.

So, walk me through a scenario where it makes sense for the O's to pay $175M for 22 wins. Or show me where my assumptions are drastically wrong.

[Sports Guy]

Certainly better than paying 3, 4, 5 times as much for Fielder, plus valuable players.

So, you're not going to try to work through the numbers to show Fielder will be worth it? Ok, here's a good starting point: PECOTA thinks Fielder will be worth $133M, 28.3 WAR, from 2010 through the end of 2019.

Let's say the O's trade Matusz and Tillman and some lesser players for Fielder in July. Or something like that - say 18 WAR of young players who'll earn $15M for their services.

Based on this one projection, the O's would be adding about 10 wins over 8-9 years, for ($5M this year, about $12M next year, and whatever huge contract he's signed to, let's say 7/175) about $190M.

So, walk me through a scenario where it makes sense for the O's to pay $190M for 10 wins. Or show me where my assumptions are drastically wrong.

Well, this isn't the best way to look at things.

Yes, it needs to be considered but you are also making a lot of assumptions based on a prediction system.

The best thing to take away from this is that PECOTA feels Fielder is going to be very good for many more years.

And what we don't know is what his impact will be on the rest of the lineup.

I think Fielder is a lot more of a known than Tillman and others are...I think we can all agree with that.

I mean, if this is how you always base your ideas of trades and things like that, I don't see how you would ever make a trade. You are almost always trading potential wins for more sure thing wins. That is how most trades work.

[DrungoHazewood]

Well, this isn't the best way to look at things.

Yes, it needs to be considered but you are also making a lot of assumptions based on a prediction system.

The best thing to take away from this is that PECOTA feels Fielder is going to be very good for many more years.

And what we don't know is what his impact will be on the rest of the lineup.

I think Fielder is a lot more of a known than Tillman and others are...I think we can all agree with that.

I mean, if this is how you always base your ideas of trades and things like that, I don't see how you would ever make a trade. You are almost always trading potential wins for more sure thing wins. That is how most trades work.

And I just realized that what I thought was a "Total" row on the PECOTA page was really a some kind of a peak, so my numbers are all off.

Edit: now fixed.

[DrungoHazewood]

Well, this isn't the best way to look at things.

Yes, it needs to be considered but you are also making a lot of assumptions based on a prediction system.

The best thing to take away from this is that PECOTA feels Fielder is going to be very good for many more years.

And what we don't know is what his impact will be on the rest of the lineup.

I think Fielder is a lot more of a known than Tillman and others are...I think we can all agree with that.

I mean, if this is how you always base your ideas of trades and things like that, I don't see how you would ever make a trade. You are almost always trading potential wins for more sure thing wins. That is how most trades work.

One major assumption I'm making (well, that PECOTA made for me) is that he'll still be a very productive hitter playing enough to get 500+ PAs a year, every year through 2019. So even if you assume that, and high inflation, you're not getting equal value unless the players going back tank.

Yes, I think I'd agree that you could rarely justify a trade where you're giving up several good, young, cost-controlled players for 1.5 guaranteed years of a star, followed by (possibly) a market-rate contract for the same guy. You're basically giving up the young guys and the cost of 1.5 years of Prince Fielder for 1.5 years of Prince Fielder. They only possible way that makes sense is if Fielder pushes you over the top and into playoff revenues in that 1.5 years.

Event the Yankees avoid that kind of deal. They just wait until CC Sabathia is a free agent and bypass the whole trade a ton of prospects part.

[JTrea81]

One major assumption I'm making (well, that PECOTA made for me) is that he'll still be a very productive hitter playing enough to get 500+ PAs a year, every year through 2019. So even if you assume that, and high inflation, you're not getting equal value unless the players going back tank.

Yes, I think I'd agree that you could rarely justify a trade where you're giving up several good, young, cost-controlled players for 1.5 guaranteed years of a star, followed by (possibly) a market-rate contract for the same guy. You're basically giving up the young guys and the cost of 1.5 years of Prince Fielder for 1.5 years of Prince Fielder. They only possible way that makes sense is if Fielder pushes you over the top and into playoff revenues in that 1.5 years.

Event the Yankees avoid that kind of deal. They just wait until CC Sabathia is a free agent and bypass the whole trade a ton of prospects part.

The problem with this statement is that the Yankees are an attractive FA destination. The Orioles are not.

We would have a harder time signing Fielder as a FA than we would trading for him and extending him IMO, especially because Fielder is likely to be the only FA power bat option after 2011. The competition for his services would be fierce among the teams that need his services.

The Orioles thought they could wait for Teixeira to be a FA, and we see where that got them. Fielder playing in Baltimore would make him more likely to sign a FA contract with the team if he doesn't want to extend as well.

[Sports Guy]

One major assumption I'm making (well, that PECOTA made for me) is that he'll still be a very productive hitter playing enough to get 500+ PAs a year, every year through 2019. So even if you assume that, and high inflation, you're not getting equal value unless the players going back tank.

Yes, I think I'd agree that you could rarely justify a trade where you're giving up several good, young, cost-controlled players for 1.5 guaranteed years of a star, followed by (possibly) a market-rate contract for the same guy. You're basically giving up the young guys and the cost of 1.5 years of Prince Fielder for 1.5 years of Prince Fielder. They only possible way that makes sense is if Fielder pushes you over the top and into playoff revenues in that 1.5 years.

Event the Yankees avoid that kind of deal. They just wait until CC Sabathia is a free agent and bypass the whole trade a ton of prospects part.

And in most cases, its fine to wait and pay out the contract...but then many people have an issue with spending the money.

I can see reasons being against a Fielder move...As I have said, I am only for it if the deal can be built around Guthrie and Tillman, as Jtrea thinks it can. Not that he knows, just saying that is a scenario where I am fine with making the trade.

[mweb]

One major assumption I'm making (well, that PECOTA made for me) is that he'll still be a very productive hitter playing enough to get 500+ PAs a year, every year through 2019. So even if you assume that, and high inflation, you're not getting equal value unless the players going back tank.

Yes, I think I'd agree that you could rarely justify a trade where you're giving up several good, young, cost-controlled players for 1.5 guaranteed years of a star, followed by (possibly) a market-rate contract for the same guy. You're basically giving up the young guys and the cost of 1.5 years of Prince Fielder for 1.5 years of Prince Fielder. They only possible way that makes sense is if Fielder pushes you over the top and into playoff revenues in that 1.5 years.

Event the Yankees avoid that kind of deal. They just wait until CC Sabathia is a free agent and bypass the whole trade a ton of prospects part.

Yep. That's the only way making a deal like that makes sense. You don't do the deal so you have a better chance at getting him to accept a very debatable contract.

[scOtt]

The problem with this statement is that the Yankees are an attractive FA destination. The Orioles are not.

We would have a harder time signing Fielder as a FA than we would trading for him and extending him IMO, especially because Fielder is likely to be the only FA power bat option after 2011. The competition for his services would be fierce among the teams that need his services.

The Orioles thought they could wait for Teixeira to be a FA, and we see where that got them. Fielder playing in Baltimore would make him more likely to sign a FA contract with the team if he doesn't want to extend as well.

Your very argument works against you. There's no way Fielder re-signs with us or any one else. He WILL be a FA because of all the interest he will generate. Also because of Boras. We would give up a lot to trade for him and STILL be just one of the FA suitors.

[JTrea81]

Your very argument works against you. There's no way Fielder re-signs with us or any one else. He WILL be a FA because of all the interest he will generate. Also because of Boras. We would give up a lot to trade for him and STILL be just one of the FA suitors.

Maybe, but at least he would consider us after playing here instead of never playing in Baltimore and therefore us just being another suitor, and likely a less attractive one at that...

Not to mention we'd have plenty of time to sign him and no competition to do so until so many days after he filed.

I doubt many teams would beat a 7/175 offer.

Trade for him before the deadline and let him play out the 2010 season. Offer the 7/175 extension offer in the offseason and if he doesn't take it, keep it on the table when FA hits. Like I said I doubt he gets more.

[waroriole]

Maybe, but at least he would consider us after playing here instead of never playing in Baltimore and therefore us just being another suitor, and likely a less attractive one at that...

Not to mention we'd have plenty of time to sign him and no competition to do so until so many days after he filed.

I doubt many teams would beat a 7/175 offer.

First, that's an awful contract, and no team should beat it. Second, if no team is going to beat it, they're not going to beat it during free agency. You're not making any sense.

[mweb]

Playing in Baltimore can also make him less likely to want to be with the O's after 2011.

[Sports Guy]

Maybe, but at least he would consider us after playing here instead of never playing in Baltimore and therefore us just being another suitor, and likely a less attractive one at that...

Not to mention we'd have plenty of time to sign him and no competition to do so until so many days after he filed.

I doubt many teams would beat a 7/175 offer.

There was an agent on Mike and Mike this morning...a basketball agent and they were discussing the FA class and what do his clients look for...His clients include guys like Duncan, Grant Hill, Ray Allen and Battier.

Anyway, he said that it would be foolish to think that the #1 consideration isn't money.

He talked about how they give their clients checklists and ask them to rank the importance of different things and that money is always #1. Now, he said that if they have already made a ton of money and want to win, that maybe that is close...And he said that overall, if money is very close, that other things may factor in but at the end of the day, its all about the money.

And, as we know, that is what Boras is all about.

So, whether or not Fielder players here or not isn't going to likely effect things...He may decide that he likes Baltimore and sees it as a place he wants to be at but the Orioles will still have to put the most money on the table, whether or not he was already here.

[AZOriole]

Playing in Baltimore can also make him less likely to want to be with the O's after 2011.

:laughlol:

THAT - just made me choke on my lunch.