Oh, sure, THAT makes sense

by zknower on Jan 30, 2008 9:02 AM EST in Commentary Comment 51 comments

This is hilarious.

The Seattle PI writes, essentially, that since the Twins accepted what they did for Santana, the Orioles should now accept what the M's are offering for Bedard.

Translation: The Twins just made a dumb trade, so the Orioles should make an even dumber one:

Gomez had 125 at-bats with the Mets last year. Humber and Mulvey have appeared in a handful of big league games each. Guerra hasn't played above Class A. These are good prospects, but not a package that will make the Twins instant contenders in the American League Central.

The package the Mariners have reportedly offered the Orioles -- outfielder Adam Jones, left-handed reliever George Sherrill and minor league pitchers Chris Tillman and Kam Mickolio (and maybe Tony Butler) -- is as good or better. And Bedard's résumé doesn't include two Cy Young Awards.

The Orioles reportedly spent the past couple of days trying to get the Mariners to improve their offer. The return the Twins are getting for Santana might convince the Orioles that the Mariners' offer is as good or better than anything they could get elsewhere.

Sure, the Twins' stupidity might convince the Orioles that. Or it might convince them that the Twins got fleeced.

I have no doubt, NO DOUBT AT ALL that if we hang onto Bedard until late July, the offers will improve. Not true for the Twins, who would be selling Santana as s rent-a-pitcher in July.

Seriously. Why do all these teams think we should trade an Opening-Day pitcher, a Cy Young candidate, for one strong prospect plus some spare parts? Prospects often don't pan out. That's why we want at least two blue chips for a bona-fide sure-thing ace pitcher. You have to give something to get something. Etc. I'll save you all the time and not repeat the tired clichés.

There now seems to be a full court press by the M's and the Seattle media to make this bad deal happen. As far as I'm concerned, MacPhail should just sit back and wait. As he has said time and again, he will make a deal that is in the Orioles' best interests.

I have yet to see that deal.

0 recs | Comment 51 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

One thing...

One thing everyone forgets about when they compare the trade value of Bedard to Santana; is that Santana is owed $13.5M/year; Bedard could likely be brought in for aournd $5-6M the next 2 years.

Santana is a more valuable commodity than Bedard right now; and is worth far more than 13.5M/year on the Free Market; but that salary difference has to be factored in when talking about who got what in a trade.

"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle

by BirdFanInPhilly on Jan 30, 2008 9:10 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Bedard

"Bedard could likely be brought in for aournd $5-6M the next 2 years."

Bedard asked for $8 million in arbitration and he'll make at least $10 million next year assuming good health. So he looking at least $18 million the next two years.

Rocky Cherry, O's pitcher, not the ice cream flavor.

by birdman on Jan 30, 2008 2:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

RE:

I maybe splitting hairs here; but Bedard is asking $8M; the O's are offering $6M (just looked it up). The Orioles have been horrible at nearly everything; but the one thing they have been very good at is winning arbitration.

"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle

by BirdFanInPhilly on Jan 30, 2008 2:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Just because MIN made a bad trade

doesn't mean we're bound to. For once.

I remember 14 straight foul balls in one at-bat. Do you?

by duck on Jan 30, 2008 9:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I agree

We have Seattle on their heels, if they don't give us something worth our while why should we give up the best AL pitcher, now that Santana is gone.

Baseball is the only field of endeavor where a man can succeed three times out of ten and be considered a good performer. ~Ted Williams

by Baltimo on Jan 30, 2008 9:24 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

re:

Do you mean the best AL pitcher who is openly available? Because you guys calling Bedard the best pitcher in the AL and saying Santana is "arguably" better than him would be getting a bit nuts. He's an ace and I love the guy, but he has injury problems and has had exactly one outstanding season.

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Jan 30, 2008 9:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I meant to say

That he is the best pitcher on the market right now because Santana has been dealt. I am the first to say that Bedard is great, but after looking at lookoutlanding.com and shit I think that he is being way over hyped. We have had a chance to watch him the past few years and he has been real good in 2006 and 2007 but your right, the guy has a bad history with injuries as people forget he had to have Tommy John surgery before and who knows, maybe he has already peaked.

Baseball is the only field of endeavor where a man can succeed three times out of ten and be considered a good performer. ~Ted Williams

by Baltimo on Jan 30, 2008 10:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

one and a half

his latter 2006 was pretty dominant.

Gone, but still haunting us all.

by zknower on Jan 30, 2008 11:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

fine

One and a half.

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Jan 30, 2008 11:26 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

just sayin'

"one year" makes it sound like a total fluke. particularly when it's posted on other boards.

"one-and-a-half" sort of kills the whole "fluke season" meme.

i think anyone who has followed BUHdard closely knows that he has arrived.

Gone, but still haunting us all.

by zknower on Jan 30, 2008 11:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

sure

But there is the problem that he gets hurt every year. I mean you cannot ignore that. It's a problem when he's pitching for us, and it's a problem when trading him.

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Jan 30, 2008 11:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

true

And that certainly ads a layer of difficulty if we wait to trade him until July, and other teams figure he's due for an injury.

"Baltimore? That's like being hit in the head with a crowbar once a day."

by spike2131 on Jan 30, 2008 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

RE:

Which is another reason that we should definitely trade him before the season starts. The O's should obviously hold off for the most they can get; but even if that best offer is a single top level prospect (which I think we can get far more); then we should take it. Bedard's value isn't going to get much higher; but we are only one small injury away from being far lower. And he has little value for us unless you value possibly beating out the DRays.

"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle

by BirdFanInPhilly on Jan 30, 2008 12:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

well, i sort of CAN ignore it,

because it's not true.

"You know, Bedard is injury prone." It's just one of those things that people say without really looking into the facts.

In 2004, straight after coming off TJ surgery, Bedard made his first start in April and spent no time on the DL for the rest of the year (although he did travel back and forth from AAA).

In 2005, he missed two months of the season with a sprained knee ligament. Certainly an injury worth noting, but only one injury nevertheless.

In 2006, Bedard spent no time on the DL whatsoever. He pitched a full season, missing one start for food poisoning, and having another one pushed back for fatigue.

Last year, Bedard missed one start for a strained hamstring, but did not go on the DL. Then as we all know, he was shut down in September for a strained oblique muscle.

So in summary: over a span of four full seasons, Bedard spent a total of three months on the DL: two for a strained knee, and one for a strained oblique. For two of those four seasons, he pitched the entire year, having the regular kinds of setbacks that all pitchers face (fatigue, illness).

No one will ever call Bedard a "workhorse" or an "innings-eater", but he is not "injury-prone" and he does not "get hurt every year". The media just casts him that way.

Incidentally, if you compare the same period for Santana (who also had surgery before the 2004 season), he has spent no time on the DL, but historically has had a myriad of injuries including forearm cramps, forearm spasms, back spasms, hamstring cramps, a sore hip, fingernail issues and blister issues...some of which have occurred more than once.

Gone, but still haunting us all.

by zknower on Jan 30, 2008 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

and he doesn't miss starts because of it

Bedard's injury problems are real. Santana's are nagging little problems that basically all pitchers have, but since he's a long-standing fantasy stud, every little piece of toe jam on him is reported.

The media didn't cast Bedard into making 28 starts last year. He made 28 starts last year. He missed time, as he has every season except 2006.

He's had Tommy John surgery, got shut down last year, missed two months in 2005, and has never thrown 200 innings at age 29. Bedard is not Johan Santana's equal. I don't count him getting shut down in September as a point in his favor when you're talking about negotiating a trade and wanting a bulk of prime talent in return, and I doubt any GM in the league does, either.

The point is, they're going to point to these injuries, the fact that he doesn't give you 200 innings but you're supposed to call him an ace, and the fact that his high level success amounts to a season and a half. None of these things would inspire me to trade three top prospects for Erik Bedard.

Everyone knows he can pitch, and nobody disputes that. And last year he was out of his mind great at times. But he has questions that are going to make any team hesitant to part with more than one stud prospect, and you can't just blame the media for it and not admit that Erik misses time and probably has "toughness" questions. Whether "toughness" is bullshit or not, these things are taken into account.

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Jan 30, 2008 1:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks

Whoever added my sig.

by Baltimo on Jan 30, 2008 3:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

My only issue...

...is that we are not only losing our #1 starter and will need pitching in return, but we also lost our starting SS and stand to lose our starting 2B as well. Therefore, we need to plan to fill three big league positions through these two possible trades. I'd like to see the Bedard trade go though, as position players are always more of a lock than pitchers, especially in the area of health.

As far as the Roberts to the Cubs deal, we wanted CF Felix Pie at one point, but wouldn't need him if we get Adam Jones from Seattle. Therefore, we should focus on getting middle infield help and that is why I can figure out why we haven't tried to get something done with the Angels, who have three major league ready SS on their roster (Aybar, Wood, Itzuris), all of which could start for us. Be it thru trade or free agency, we need to get some middle infielders on this roster by the time these trades are completed.

by Rexx on Jan 30, 2008 9:32 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Why?

At least for this year, why do we really need to replace them? I would rather get the most valuable prospect trot out a guy who would struggle to make a AA team next year at SS and 2B for the 2008/2009 season than to take a lesser deal while picking up some marginal ML player who doesn't have a future with us.

If we get a nice core of young players that end up working out and put us in a position where we are a few players away from making a legitimate playoff run; then we can address that from FA when that time comes. If instead we just keep putting together a team that is built to win 70 games (which is what the O's have done); than that's likely all we'll ever be.

I'm more than ready for a year or two of complete embarassment in order to build a real team. I really don't want to set the ML loss record; but if that's what has to happen to improve than so be it.

"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle

by BirdFanInPhilly on Jan 30, 2008 12:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

wait...

why does everyone think min made a bad trade? they were resigned to losing santana and just lost silva and traded matt garza. their goal was to get some more pitching and carlos gomez will probably be their cf opening day. maybe one of those mets pitchers cracks the rotation, but liriano, baker, slowey, bonser are pretty solid 1-4.

So, I said, uh, lama: how about a little something for the effort?

by jq higgins on Jan 30, 2008 9:41 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I think that the Mariners are offering something..

...better than what Minnesota took for Santana. Adam Jones > Carlos Gomez. Not sure about all the arms. I'd still like to see bats as opposed to arms but I wouldn't hate this deal.

Btw, check new blog post from Roch. He seems more confident that a deal will happen, and seems to dispel rumors about Adam Jones' hip.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/sports/roch/blog/2008/01/commercial_break.html

by KenDixonFanClub on Jan 30, 2008 9:48 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'm fan with the M's deal

Yeah, I hope MacPhail puts the screws to them and gets as much as he can out of the deal, but the framework they are talking about is better than what the Twins got and justifiably so. As many of us have said, two years of a cheap Bedard is worth more than one year of an expensive Santana.

Two years of Bedard means little to us because we aren't going to win in those two years. Yeah, we could wait until mid-season and hope for more, but it's risky.

a) Bedard could get injured.

b) He could have an unlucky couple of months, like the beginning of last season, depressing his value.

c) We still are not guaranteed a package as good as the M's are offering. And if the M's begin the season terribly, don't think they could make the playoffs, and/or Jones tears it up, their deal could be off the table.

Finally, much of the dissent from both Seattle and Baltimore comes down to the natural tendency of people to overvalue what they have and undervalue what others have. See the USS Mariner for a good analysis of the trade from their end.

http://ussmariner.com/2008/01/28/answering-some-questions/

I tend to agree with him. The M's are giving up a lot. We are going to get the better of the deal--unless Jones' hip crumbles.

And here's a thought. Wouldn't it be nice if we trade Roberts and Bedard, build the team back to near contending in a couple years, and then sign them back as free agents to put us over the top? Okay, I can dream, right?

by silverstadium on Jan 30, 2008 10:01 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Fine

Uh, yeah. It should say "I'm FINE with the deal."

by silverstadium on Jan 30, 2008 10:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

By the way

Wrong thread but I am horrible with computers as I had Duck help me with my signature last time but how do I get a picture to show up in my sig again? I am trying to get http://baseball-fever.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=20664&d=1172987704 to display but with just won't work.

Baseball is the only field of endeavor where a man can succeed three times out of ten and be considered a good performer. ~Ted Williams

by Baltimo on Jan 30, 2008 10:13 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

give me a minute

I'll resize and upload it here and set it up for you.

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Jan 30, 2008 10:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks, SC

by Baltimo on Jan 30, 2008 4:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

no problem

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Jan 30, 2008 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This is hilarious

Everybody here thinks that the presumptive deal doesn't bring enough for Bedard; everyone who follows the Mariners seem to think it is too much. Personally, I think the reported 5-1 deal is fair for both teams. I disagree with the contention that the five players previously mentioned are 1 prospect and 4 spare parts. No. There was one stud prospect, two solid prospects, and two "spare parts" that actually aren't spare parts but rather useful players who can improve the team and the system immediately.

To throw a little ice on the idea that the Orioles should get everything they want for Bedard, just a reminder that the dude has never proven he can be a workhorse, and he's had health issues in the past. I am not sure if the Orioles could get a better deal for him at the trading deadline, but I will say that if he's injured, which is certainly a possibility, they would sorely regret having passed up on a future star like Adam Jones.

by crawjo on Jan 30, 2008 10:32 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I agree with you 100%

As long as Jones doesn't have a degenerative hip.

by dfleis on Jan 30, 2008 10:55 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I dont think he does

"A Baltimore radio station is the likely source of a rumor that the reason the Orioles are getting soft on Jones is that they suspect he suffers from a degenerative hip condition. The report is completely unsubstantiated."

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/baseball/349289_mari30.html

That source doesn't seem 100% trustworthy either but the degenerative hip just sounds like a load of BS.

by Reddrummer9187 on Jan 30, 2008 11:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ok ok ok

Does anyone have a source QUOTE for that degenerative hip thing that came from a radio show? Maybe it was an Albert Belle/Peter Angelos joke? I mean, with the attention it's getting, it doesn't seem like that is the case, but it is the first thing I thought of when I heard "radio show says Jones has degenerative hip condition."

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Jan 30, 2008 11:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Someone

should punch Peter Angelos in the hip.

"When you are in with the Lord there's just one reward, and they'd just as soon make it come true." -REK

by BPinOK on Jan 30, 2008 11:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

re:

At the very least, I think Angelos should divert his attention away from the ongoing trade talks and instead concentrate on flushing anyone in the O's system who participated in leaking this rumor. At least them he'd be productive.

"This is Birdland"

by drj on Jan 30, 2008 11:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

So what? We're a bunch of hip degenerates

Forget it, Jake. It's Birdland.

by Titov on Jan 30, 2008 11:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I still think...

... it would be a much better deal if we could somehow force them to take Aubrey Huff off our hands.

"Baltimore? That's like being hit in the head with a crowbar once a day."

by spike2131 on Jan 30, 2008 11:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Problem is..

I don't think anyone in Seattle wants to shake Aubrey Huff's hands...

by dfleis on Jan 30, 2008 11:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I rest my case

Forget it, Jake. It's Birdland.

by Titov on Jan 30, 2008 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

re:

I don't understand why people know the Twins were somehow hoodwinked, or they were stupid. If there were plenty of great offers on the table and they chose the lesser one, then yeah.

The Twins backs are a bit to the wall given that they must unload Santana. His value most likely drops as the seaon progresses. I have to believe that no team was clamoring to trade a set of their very best prospects, or the Twins would have jumped. They saw the offers and had to make a tough pragmatic decision. The lambasting by the armchair GMs is too easy.

I think the moral of the story is the Orioles will continue to face the same. The value of top prospects has increased. They are cheap in a spiraling FA market. Teams are not going to easily part with them. The O's will have to make a similar tough decision and hopefully their scouts can pick the right "B" prospects.

"This is Birdland"

by drj on Jan 30, 2008 11:32 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

apparently...

santana said that after tuesday he would refuse to waive his no trade clause, so, yeah they were in a bit of a take it or leave it position.

i'd still say that the rotation as currently constructed w/ santana and liriano on top would have made a hell of a lot of noise.

So, I said, uh, lama: how about a little something for the effort?

by jq higgins on Jan 30, 2008 11:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm with you.

In addition to your points, I don't necessarily agree that Minny got a poor package. As I understand their roster, they don't necessarily need a lot of help right now. Therefore this deal brings a lot of depth to their system.

Besides, the Twinkies have a pretty good track record of scouting other teams farm systems and picking up some gems.

by timg56 on Jan 30, 2008 4:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

From the cnnsi link below.

Baseball America's recent breakdown of the Mets' farm system ranked those four players as the team's No. 2, No. 3, No. 4, and No. 7 prospects,

Why are people saying the Twins got fleeced?

by timg56 on Jan 30, 2008 4:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

mets system is not deep

Interesting question for comparison is does Sickle grade any of these guys an A?

"This is Birdland"

by drj on Jan 30, 2008 4:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Santana

"Why are people saying the Twins got fleeced?"

Because Humber and Mulvey most likely won't turn out to be anything. Guerra is way too young to project. And Gomez is a very good, but note elite, prospect. For a player of Santana's stature, you need to get starters, not players who will add depth.

Rocky Cherry, O's pitcher, not the ice cream flavor.

by birdman on Jan 30, 2008 5:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

re:

You have to consider the situation, though.

Santana was not going to be with the Twins long-term.
They were not getting better offers. Yeah, there was a deal with Phil Hughes "on the table," but that is ancient history at this point.
They DO need depth. The Minnesota Twins as a franchise thrive on having depth throughout their system.
Their starting rotation should be fine without Santana.
Santana was threatening to stick to his no-trade clause if a deal didn't get done. They had to trade him at that point, because he was saying he'd play out the string with Minnesota and then walk at the end of the year.

#2 is the only one that comes up against what the Twins have done here, I think. They should have taken that Hughes deal, assuming it was real, and it reportedly very much was real. But hindsight is 20/20.

I think they did what they had to do. I also think they overplayed their hand, and then Santana's demands bit them in the ass at the end of the day.

Does anyone else find the Santana saga a bit annoying on his part though? Do you see Erik Bedard demanding he be traded? I'm sure Bedard wouldn't mind being on a competitive team or not part of a rebuilding process that isn't likely to pay dividends any time soon, but he's not out there shitting on the Orioles. Santana took a dump on the Twins, an organization that has won four AL Central titles since he's been around. They are a tough team to beat every year, competitive every year, and more often than not are seriously in contention. What the fuck was he whining about last summer?

Obviously he's worth more than the Twins can comfortably afford to pay him, and he was sure to leave anyway, but he didn't have to ball them out in public in front of God and everybody for having a down year.

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Jan 30, 2008 7:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Santana

forced the Twins hand. Had they not traded him to the Mets he threatened to NOT waive his no-trade clause, play the rest of the year with MIN, and leave via FA next year. At which point MIN would have only received a compensatory pick.

That's from St. Pete Times, via cnnsi.com.

"When you are in with the Lord there's just one reward, and they'd just as soon make it come true." -REK

by BPinOK on Jan 30, 2008 11:36 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Please do this trade

I'm not convinced that a better deal will come around the trade deadline. It's true that there may be more suitors as the season goes on and as teams realize that they are or are not in the race. But all it takes is missing a start due to an unspecified "elbow problem", and trade value will decline.

I like this Mariners trade a ton, and I'm worried that the Twins trade is going to make the Mariners take back some of the pieces of it. Of course, the Twins trade is still contingent on the contract extension...

We're getting our center/leftfielder of the future in a guy than can step in THIS APRIL! We're getting an effective working part for our bullpen (let's face it, we don't have a lot of those), a pitching prospect that has been hitting 95 mph in A ball that has a high ceiling, another hard throwing prospect with a plus curve, and maybe another guy. This is EXACTLY how you rebuild the team.

I'm not buying all the stuff about Angelos holding this up. MacPhail is the only person who has been talking to the media who hasn't changed his story one bit, and good for him for not playing games. We'll find out later what the issue was. And if it was the owner, so be it. But let's not use our jump to conclusions mat yet.

by rbmiller1221 on Jan 30, 2008 12:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

re:

I'm not buying all the stuff about Angelos holding this up.

You might be the only O's fan out there willing to give Peter Angelos the benefit of the doubt.

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Jan 30, 2008 12:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

RE:

No, for some reason I keep kidding myself that he's learned his lesson and this year is going to be different.

The only reason the Orioles shouldn't make a deal for Bedard is because we believe there is a better deal out there. We should not be rejecting trades because we believe Bedard is more valuable than what we are getting; because Erik's value to us is exactly nil.

"Hey Yankees... you can take your apology and your trophy and shove 'em straight up your ass!" --Tanner Boyle

by BirdFanInPhilly on Jan 30, 2008 12:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Please don't make this trade.

You're right, that's a ton of good things for a pitcher who--Bavasi's luck being what it is--will have his arm fall off in mid-May.

If Angelos really does sink this, he will be in my prayers every night for the rest of my life.

by IrritatedMfan on Jan 30, 2008 5:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

re:

I love how varied the reactions are to the package on both sides of the deal. I'm just sort of accepting of it as it is and hoping it works out.

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Jan 30, 2008 5:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

re:

An article from cnnsi: So long, Johan

Nothing earth shattering. Of some interest is the thought that the Twins waited too long, instead of not long enough, and wound up where they were because previous deals were pulled off the table. The assumption is the previous deals were accurately reported. That's something we'll never know.

"This is Birdland"

by drj on Jan 30, 2008 2:20 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Roberts

I know someone said it earlier... but what's with all the reports that Roberts will be traded if/when Bedard is... to the Cubs, for Felix Pie and Sean Gallagher? Would they want Pie AND Jones? I mean, I could you could play one of them in a corner outfield spot... or flip them in another deal?

by ET90210 on Jan 30, 2008 10:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs