Source: Orioles Close To Signing Kevin Gregg To Two Year Deal

[DrungoHazewood]

Why didn't Boston do this instead of signing Albers?

They decided his risk/reward profile as defined by their scouts and analysts fit their budget in an appropriate way.

[DrungoHazewood]

Is Kawakami in the bullpen going to be any better than Gregg in 2011?

Kawakami is owed $6.67M in '11... so it would be a salary wash in '11 based on the projected contract for Gregg... but you would be trading something for Kawakami.

That's why I said and salary considerations. Also, Kawakami was really a proxy for all of the 5.00-6.00 ERA starters floating about looking for employment.

[J.D.]

Let me put it another way, the bullpen is a great place to find value, so it's even dumber than usual to pay an Orioles premium for mediocre free agents.

And that right there is the entire argument, summed up beautifully in a sentence.

It's not THAT the O's are overpaying. It's WHERE they're doing it. Overpaying in the bullpen is just stupid, especially when it's with guys like Kevin Gregg.

If Kerry Wood wanted 2/12, I'd rather have him than Gregg. But even that's iffy.

[DrungoHazewood]

You did not answer the question posed though. Do you think Kawakami (or whatever placeholder you want to use) would be any better than Gregg in 2011?

Kawakami specifically? I don't know, but it's certainly possible. An average pitcher is one run per nine better in relief than starting. If Kawakami is a 4.50 ERA starter, he's probably a 3.50 ERA reliever. Obviously you'd have to scout and analyze him to make sure he has other attributes that make him likely to be average or better in transitioning to the pen.

[cgunna]

Ignoring the Gregg deal specifically, I would venture to think that with such a young and relatively inexperienced rotation, Andy decided it was critical for him to have what he considered to be the most reliable and solid pen he could assemble. Perhaps he is OK with overpaying for certain relievers.

Now whether or not Gregg is that sort of reliever is for the board to debate. But considering how critical the success of our young pitchers is going to be this year, if Andy wants to splurge on the pen I can't knock him for it.

[DrungoHazewood]

Ignoring the Gregg deal specifically, I would venture to think that with such a young and relatively inexperienced rotation, Andy decided it was critical for him to have what he considered to be the most reliable and solid pen he could assemble. Perhaps he is OK with overpaying for certain relievers.

Now whether or not Gregg is that sort of reliever is for the board to debate. But considering how critical the success of our young pitchers is going to be this year, if Andy wants to splurge on the pen I can't knock him for it.

Problem is that of all the potential uses for $X, pretty good relievers are among the least likely to get what you pay for. Most of the rational for paying $12M for Gregg could be applied to Danys Baez, Jamie Walker, Chad Bradford, and Mike Gonzalez. All of whom had their moments, but not always when expected or needed, or as often as their salaries implied.

[Sports Guy]

Well.. I said Kawakami or any other place-holder you want to use.

Let's go with Kawakami...

In his 243.2 career ML innings, he has allowed 251 hits, 25 homers, 89 bb's, with 164 k's, .269 baa, 4.32 era, .790 OPS, 0.76 G/F.

It is fair to say that his numbers would likely improve from the rotation to the bullpen, but it is also fair to say that the transition to the American League would probably hurt.

You asked a reasonable question about the O's looking at him (or other). I think you are correct that ATL would agree to pay on his contract to move him... how much though? What prospect are the O's giving up?

Say ATL agrees to pick up $2M, and he is owed $4.66M for 2011... maybe the O's don't want to pay that amount for him, and give up a player.

Maybe they believe Gregg for $6M represents a better bet to produce?

The only real question is if the O's did not spend the money on Gregg (or like reliever) would they reinvest that money into Scouting and Player Development? If the answer is no, (and there is no draft pick at risk) all that matters is for the O's to identify who they think would help the most on the field.

I see no reason to believe that Kawakami represents a better option than Gregg.

He is likely to give you a similar ERA and only signed for one more year.

Atlanta was apparently willing to eat 2/3 or so of his contract and I am sure the player you would have to give up would be a guy with very little upside. Its just a salary dump.

Plus, Kawakami gives you the option of having a spot starter in the pen.

I would much rather have him for 2-3.5 million plus the loss of a nothing prospect than Gregg for 2/8-12. Gregg just isn't all that good.

His K numbers are good but that's about it. He isn't really much more than a generic reliever except he has some high save totals.

Like i said, 51 relievers had an ERA of 3.95 or better last year..in the AL alone(this was based off of pitchers who had 40IP or more out of the pen). You would expect Gregg to be in the 3.5-4 range. So, how much better is he going to be than some generic relievers that you can sign for 1-2 million for 1 year?

[El Gordo]

They decided his risk/reward profile as defined by their scouts and analysts fit their budget in an appropriate way.

I doubt their budget was taxed by what they paid Albers and I hear their scouts and anaysts(Bill James?) are pretty good.

[Hooded Viper]

Have I missed something or has this deal been completed? All of this hububb over a deal that hasn't even been completed seems extreme. Hell even if it is done, put me in the "we didn't lose a pick, so who cares about the money" group.

[Sports Guy]

Have I missed something or has this deal been completed? All of this hububb over a deal that hasn't even been completed seems extreme. Hell even if it is done, put me in the "we didn't lose a pick, so who cares about the money" group.

If some of that extra money prevents us from signing some amateur talent, you should care.

[Frobby]

Like i said, 51 relievers had an ERA of 3.95 or better last year..in the AL alone(this was based off of pitchers who had 40IP or more out of the pen). You would expect Gregg to be in the 3.5-4 range. So, how much better is he going to be than some generic relievers that you can sign for 1-2 million for 1 year?

While I'm fairly lukewarm on Gregg, I think this logic is flawed. The fact that there are 51 relievers who in 2010 had an ERA of 3.95 or under isn't the issue. The issue is, how many of those are as good a bet as Gregg to post a 3.95 ERA over the next 2 years? The fact that Gregg has a relatively consistent track record over the last 5 years makes him a better bet than some guy who's had one year of 3.95 or below.

Now I don't want to go overboard, because it's not like Gregg is any sure thing to have an ERA of 3.95 or below. We saw in the cases of Kline, Baez and Walker (and others) that a track record isn't always meaningful, and Gregg has had a couple of bad years in his career.

[clapdiddy]

Have I missed something or has this deal been completed? All of this hububb over a deal that hasn't even been completed seems extreme. Hell even if it is done, put me in the "we didn't lose a pick, so who cares about the money" group.

No deal has been done on this. I agree with your general thoughts, though.

[Hooded Viper]

If some of that extra money prevents us from signing some amateur talent, you should care.

Well if it did that then I would be very upset but does anyone honestly believe that will be the case? I guess so or we wouldn't be having a 17 page discussion on a potential signing. :rofl::laughlol:

[Sports Guy]

While I'm fairly lukewarm on Gregg, I think this logic is flawed. The fact that there are 51 relievers who in 2010 had an ERA of 3.95 or under isn't the issue. The issue is, how many of those are as good a bet as Gregg to post a 3.95 ERA over the next 2 years? The fact that Gregg has a relatively consistent track record over the last 5 years makes him a better bet than some guy who's had one year of 3.95 or below.

Now I don't want to go overboard, because it's not like Gregg is any sure thing to have an ERA of 3.95 or below. We saw in the cases of Kline, Baez and Walker (and others) that a track record isn't always meaningful, and Gregg has had a couple of bad years in his career.

Yes, he has a consistent track record of being an average-ish reliever...And that is worth 4-6 million a year? Really?

[Sports Guy]

Well if it did that then I would be very upset but does anyone honestly believe that will be the case? I guess so or we wouldn't be having a 17 page discussion on a potential signing. :rofl::laughlol:

Its possible.

The BRadford trade happened so that we could save some money towards picks I believe.

It does happen. A little bit here or there, if your budget is a certain number, could make the difference.

Plus, its just the idea of allocating resources correctly. If you are going to screw up and make poor decisions on the small investments, what does that say about your ability to make them wisely for the large investments?