Royale: LaRoche bid made

[Carllamy]

Saw this on Jen Royale's blog today:

"It was a lazy Saturday until a little birdie told me Adam LaRoche was, in fact, offered the three years he was seeking from the Orioles, as I had initially reported. Now I hear the deal is worth at least $15 million and could be between $16-18 million or more. "

So, if true, we'll see if he accepts it or not.

Also, if true, I should think that it means there is no way we are bidding on Beltre, unless we are getting rid of/trading someone.

[JTrea81]

Seriously, do we need to know when LaRoche has made another friend?

[Ven6]

Now I hear the deal is worth at least $15 million and could be between $16-18 million or more. "[/b]

I could live with that $ amount. If we have to go 3 years to get a solid first baseman for the first time in a long, long time, I'm down with it.

[maybe2050]

I could live with that $ amount. If we have to go 3 years to get a solid first baseman for the first time in a long, long time, I'm down with it.

I believe that whatever the estimated contract offer was, add $1 million to that for the deal to be sealed.

[crissfan172]

I could live with that $ amount. If we have to go 3 years to get a solid first baseman for the first time in a long, long time, I'm down with it.

Personally, I would rather give him a 2/18 deal than a 3/18 deal. Overpaying in money is better than overpaying in years.

[nsw]

Personally, I would rather give him a 2/18 deal than a 3/18 deal. Overpaying in money is better than overpaying in years.

Present value of $? 3/18 is better than 2/18. Unless you're thinking that by the O's signing him for 3 years that they're likely to play him for three years, considering 1B "set" and falling victim to the inertia of paid-for mediocrity (should that be how his hypothetical performance for us turned out). Is that what you mean?

[Arthur_Bryant]

Personally, I would rather give him a 2/18 deal than a 3/18 deal. Overpaying in money is better than overpaying in years.

When the money is the same either way, then you might as well take the third year. Basically it allows the club to backload the obligation.

Now, if the choice were between 2/15 and 3/18, then it would be something to think about.

[maybe2050]

When the money is the same either way, then you might as well take the third year. Basically it allows the club to backload the obligation.

Now, if the choice were between 2/15 and 3/18, then it would be something to think about.

Let me ask you guys something. The way MacPhail likes to keep everyone in the dark about what he's actually doing, what do you think the chances are that he will be signing Lee instead of Laroche? I know it's possible, but anyone think it's conceivable?

[Ven6]

When the money is the same either way, then you might as well take the third year. Basically it allows the club to backload the obligation.

Now, if the choice were between 2/15 and 3/18, then it would be something to think about.

Yeah. This.

Also, you could also trade the guy in year 3 (and his contract would be easier to move).

[waroriole]

Personally, I would rather give him a 2/18 deal than a 3/18 deal. Overpaying in money is better than overpaying in years.

Huh? So you'd rather pay him more in the time value of money and not have an option for a free 3rd year?

[waroriole]

I know it's possible, but anyone think it's conceivable?

Isn't that basically the same word?

[maybe2050]

Huh? So you'd rather pay him more in the time value of money and not have an option for a free 3rd year?

I know this is a reach for some, but isn't it possible that Laroche would do a good job for 3 years? Some already have him traded in the 3rd year. If the man has been a pretty solid player so far, shouldn't we look at him as a problem fixed, instead of a upcoming problem?

[Dodobirds]

I know this is a reach for some, but isn't it possible that Laroche would do a good job for 3 years? Some already have him traded in the 3rd year. If the man has been a pretty solid player so far, shouldn't we look at him as a problem fixed, instead of a upcoming problem?

Very possible & good point. When was the last time we got 25 homers from our starting 1B?

[maybe2050]

Isn't that basically the same word?

"Nope"

Possible -a : being within the limits of ability, capacity, or realization <a possible but difficult task>

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Conceivable : capable of being conceived : imaginable <every conceivable combination>

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[sangar]

Isn't that basically the same word?

Actually 'conceivable' implies less expectation. Kind of backwards.