Camden Chat: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Last Jannero Pargo Post Bar-right-arrows

Trade Rumors Roundup

Orioooles_palmer_tiny by Baltimo on

  • Apparently the O's aren't ready to trade Sherrill unless they get a boat load in return.
  • Ray Durham to the Brewers makes the Brian Roberts deadline deal options even slimmer.
  • According to an "insider" at Orioles Hangout, the Brewers offered Billy Hall plus a throw in for Bradford.
  • Millar, Walker, Payton and Hernandez have not surfaced in any trade talks at all.
  • The Orioles have fixed all their problems at the SS position by acquiring Juan Castro in a trade for Mike McCoy.  Useful.

I don't think we are going to see that much going on by July 31.  As I thought, the Orioles don't want to trade Sherrill and just throw away countless games without getting a major haul in return, and most other teams aren't overly impressed by the southpaw.  MacPhail has a player who potentially could rack in an entire farm system in Roberts; the speedy switch hitting 2B is a plus defender with a year and a half left on his contract and is widely considered a top leadoff man in the majors.  The problem is that a lot of the teams interested, which is not a very long list, either a.) don't want to give up anything of value or b.) don't have anything of value.  I think you'll see a Bradford be flipped but Huff, Roberts, and Sherrill are all demanding pretty high prices and unfortunately I feel like only Roberts will be the only one to retain that value by the winter.    

Edit 07/23: Will Carroll at BP, who I find very credible, reminded me of an interesting aspect.

"The Orioles haven’t been doing much talking about some of their players. Brian Roberts was thought to be headed out, but as the team has stayed over .500, Andy MacPhail seems more inclined to keep the team intact. As one AL insider told me, “.500 has some value in rebuilding fans. Not many teams can do what the Rays are doing.” The O’s have some relievers (Jamie Walker, Chad Bradford) that will clear waivers and be available on into August, but the team is not interested in dealing George Sherrill unless they’re given a crazy offer."

The O's are gonna have a few guys who clear waivers this year, so if Andy doesn't get much done by the 31st don't be too discouraged as we could get some post deadline deals done, when the market is pretty exclusive.

 

It is well publisized, but the Cardinals have an attrocious bullpen and need help.  They are probably the team that is showing the most interest in Sherrill but aren't going to give Andy what he wants.  He wants Rasmus, they won't give him up.

"Sherrill has 29 saves this season. But his previous personal best was the three games he closed in 2007. He's a 31-year-old second year closer who allows 1.41 baserunners per inning pitched. He has an ERA pushing 4.00, which isn't too hot for a guy that pitches one inning, usually coming in at the start of the ninth with the bases empty. In fact, he has only logged an ERA less than 3.80 once in his five years as a bullpenner.

Want a shortstop, Baltimore? I'd think Brendan Ryan would be plenty. He's got tons of talent that may come out if he gets a chance to play everyday (for a manager who doesn't seem to hate him.) If you want an outfielder, too, okay. Your choice of Joe Mather or Nick Stavinoha. That's it."

http://bellevillenewsdemocrat.typepad.com/viewfromthecheapseats/2008/07/rumor-mill-geor.html

FanPosts do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors of Camden Chat or SB Nation. They might, though.

3 recs | Comment 141 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Sign me up!

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 20, 2008 9:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

not me

Hall is owed $13.2 million over the next two years with a $9.25 million option for the next year ($.5 million buyout). So unless you think he can turn it around, he is not worth it IMO. They should just be glad to get his salary off the books.

by Reddrummer9187 on Jul 20, 2008 10:48 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'd take him

He is 28 and could definitely fill the SS gap for a little while until we can develop one of our own. He isn’t anything spectacular but is far and away better than anything that we have right now, and even if he isn’t used at SS he is a full eight years younger than Mora and could take over there until Rowell/other.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 20, 2008 10:58 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Sherrill

Sherrill is a perfect candidate for a regression/people realizing that he’s not as good as his save totals say. I say trade him. Jim Johnson can trade, and Chris Ray’ll be back by next April at the latest.

by pipkin on Jul 21, 2008 8:09 AM EDT   0 recs

close

Jim Johnson can close

by pipkin on Jul 21, 2008 8:09 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Jim Johnson...

is being penciled in for the rotation next year, I do believe.

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 21, 2008 10:24 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't know...

Did you read that somewhere? The things I have seen in the past is the front office saw him as a bullpen guy, and then he came up is breaking out as a bullpen guy.

With Guthrie, Cabrera, Liz, Olson, Burres, Penn, Bergeson, Tillman, Patton all vying for the rotation next year (I assume that Tillman and Bergeson will get invites though would not be favored to make the team), Johnson would be filling a better need in the pen.

by PWubbs on Jul 21, 2008 11:38 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Penn is questionable

Who knows if Bergeson, Tillman, and Patton will be ready by then? We’ve seen Liz and Olsen come up and struggle mightily, perhaps because they weren’t ready, and I’m not sure if it’s in this teams best interest to push anyone.

Also, I believe that Penn is be terrible most of this season. I recall two games where he didn’t get smacked around. Case in point, July 17th: 4IP, 6 earned, 2 walks, 1 strikeout. That’s not good. I’d be happier with David Hernandez getting a look as a long man or middle reliever then a starter. I know you hadn’t mentioned him, but I wanted to through that out there.

by Dr Orpheus on Jul 21, 2008 12:33 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I like the kid, but....

I don’t see Penn getting another shot with the O’s this year, and maybe slated to a fate of organizational guy in AAA.

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 21, 2008 1:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I forgot Hernandez

But, I agree with you that if the other 2 AA guys would get a look that Hernandez would as well.

I think Burres and Olson have an edge as they are both lefty, and we can’t have a rotation full of righties.

I am not encouraged to put him in a starting role. He did not exactly dominate the minors as a starter; his last 2 years he had ERA’s over 4 and a whip in the 1.40’s. I think he would be a Burres type of pitcher in the rotation, and it is not very valuable. Burres gets burned the 2nd and 3rd time through the order, and I think it would be the same for Johnson. I could be wrong; he could turn into a crafty starter.

by PWubbs on Jul 21, 2008 2:15 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

No alarms and no surprises

I’m all for Burres returning to the pen next season. He’s done as a starter. I just hope there’s someone who can take his place.

One lefty in the rotation is fine. Having two is just a blessing…well, it would be a blessing if they weren’t struggling as much as Burres and Olsen are.

by Dr Orpheus on Jul 21, 2008 2:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Well, consider the source

Dempsey referenced it pre-game a few times. I’m sure I saw it referenced at least once in The Sun.

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 21, 2008 1:51 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He has enough pitches

I’d love him to develop into a Joe Nathan style closer. Not to say he’ll be as dominant as Nathan, just that he uses a plethora of pitches. He seems to have the intensity to close. I mean, look at that scowl!

by Dr Orpheus on Jul 21, 2008 1:58 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Andy should not get greedy for Sherrill

He’s the best trade bait we have right now, assuming B-Rob is going nowhere, and everyone knows his success this season may be fleeting. It’s too bad no one is interested in any of our underperforming veterans, but not at all surprising. JayPay, Melmo, Razor and Millar are pretty much here until they are released/not renewed, unless one of them has a monster second half—not very likely. Personally, my feeling is that Huff still has some good years in him, and we may have some time to move him.

by fishoutawata on Jul 21, 2008 11:56 AM EDT   0 recs

trade while value is high

I doubt that Sherrill’s value will ever be higher than it is right now. He just shut down the game’s best for 2.1 innings. Watching him this year he hasn’t really impressed me much. He always seems to have runners on base, and no save is a sure thing. In a way, I think he’s been very lucky and won’t keep it up. I say trade him at he deadline for what ever the best deal is.

by edsachs1 on Jul 21, 2008 2:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Sherrill trade rumors

On O’s Hangout, a poster mentioned that the Red Sox really like Sherrill according to Buster Olney (I’m assuming this tidbit was hidden ESPN Insider content). Then there was a long ass thread about serious discussion in acquiring either Lowrie or Ellsburg (although some people were joking about the realistic possibility of getting Ellsbury). I’ll just say that RS were reluctant to Ellsbury for Santana , I highly doubt they’ll trade for a reliever. Lowrie is a damn fine prospect. Sickels rates as a A- in the offseason. I can’t imagine the RS giving him up for Sherrill.

Rosenthal reports:

The Orioles are willing to trade left-hander George Sherrill only if a potential suitor wants to overpay. The team’s previous closer, Chris Ray, is recovering from elbow-ligament transplant surgery, and Sherrill is under club control for the next three seasons.

Look, I like Sherrill but I don’t get this dogged determinism in keeping him. Bowden held on Cordero far too long because his asking price was too high. Now Cordero doesn’t have any trade value. I would hate to see the same thing happen to Sherrill.

Wolf, wolf, wolf.

by birdman on Jul 21, 2008 2:55 PM EDT   0 recs

A trade with the Red Sox is very, very unlikely alone, but even more so if you talk about throwing in Ellsbury who they fawn over. I am pretty confident that the O’s won’t trade Sherrill because as much as it makes sense to trade away a guy who we know is going to come down sooner or later, flipping Sherrill pretty much guarantees 5-10 more losses this season, which doesn’t do much for ticket sales etc. Although this is a rebuilding year, trading away Sherrill would be devastating for this team this season, and we all know that Angelos couldn’t stand putting out anything but the best for his fans.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 21, 2008 5:22 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Sherrill can be replaced

Closer is by far the most overrated position in the majors. The O’s are proof. We’ve already found two replacements (Ray and Sherrill) for B.J. Ryan. Alot of people made a big deal when he lost him (I feel it was a mistake not to trade him, rather than not signing him).

Also I think you overestimate the amount of losses we’d add when you subtract Sherrill. In order for him to have an impact on wins, the O’s must already have the lead in the game (or at least a tie). Your assuming that whoever replaces Sherrill will blow 5-10 games the second half. I doubt Jim Johnson (the likely replacement) would be that bad. In fact I think he may be better than Sherrill.

I really think the O’s will miss out on a huge opportunity and step in the rebuilding process, if they choose to hold on to Sherrill.

by edsachs1 on Jul 21, 2008 9:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Your assuming I think Johnson would be the closer

I think that it might be mostly Johnson, but some closer by committe. Trembley is a lot more apt to put in a veteran who is having a worse season over a young guy playing lights out; it wouldn’t be too surprising to see him put in Bradford or Walker for a few closing situations if they aren’t dealt. Your right that 10 games may be too many, but with the amount of 1 run games the O’s play(ed) in it isn’t that far fetched to think that a young guy who has never closed before, whoever it may be, would allow a run or two in six of the 20-30 games he appears in.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 21, 2008 10:28 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Hold on now

Yes, Johnson can replace Sherril more than adequately, but if we move Johnson to closer who locks down the 8th inning? Sarfate? Bradford/Walker again? I think 5-10 more losses in the 7th and 8th inning due to the net loss of Sherrill from our entire bullpen is not unrealistic at all.

by punkrawka on Jul 22, 2008 10:43 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

5-10 seems a bit much

For a team that will most likely win 25-28 games from here out anyway, that would mean we would instead win somewhere between 15-23. I don’t see the team winning just 15 games the rest of the year, or even just 23. I think 5 is the high side of losses we would endure with Sherrill being moved.

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 22, 2008 10:50 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Let's assume Sherrill would appear

In 28 more games in the second half, he played in 44 the first half, is it that out there to think that between a flimsy set up guy, whoever it may be, and an untested rookie closer they blow 7 games?

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 22, 2008 5:06 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Of course

It’s all speculation and subject to change, if the O’s were to deal other key pieces they won’t even be in close games anyways.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 22, 2008 5:07 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

My assumption

lies in the fact I believe the O’s will only have about 28 gaves they WIN, and how many of those would be saves? Even if the bullpen blows 25% of those save opportunities, you’re barely to 5 games.

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 23, 2008 8:57 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

i agree with baltimo here..

I agree with the stance of keeping him unless someone overpays. Trading someone who has been so important for this team for some marginal prospects is a waste. I mean, sure he’s not an ideal closer – but he’d be just as solid as a bullpen guy.

by Y Not on Jul 21, 2008 5:59 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

sherrill

I wouldn’t trade Sherrill for marginal prospects either. Frankly, one good prospect and marginal one is a great haul. But I hear want to two high players which is indeed over paying and isn’t going to happen.

Wolf, wolf, wolf.

by birdman on Jul 21, 2008 6:56 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

At this point I would be willing to give George Sherrill away.

He is so due for a regression just like almost any other stud reliever ever. (can we even call him a stud reliever?) To me, it’s more important to trade Sherrill than it is to trade Aubrey Huff simply because it would be reasonable to expect pretty good prospects in return for Huff even with that contract and I think GM’s are so much less willing now to part with their top prospects than they were three, four years ago.

Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey

by jobe on Jul 23, 2008 11:26 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

This makes no sense to me

Why would Sherrill be due for a regression?

He’s not a fluke. He’s faced 719 ML hitters in his career, and they’ve hit a collective .213/.307/.331 off of him. And he’s death on lefties.

He’s the best reliever on the Orioles and he’ll be cheap for years, so why would you dump him?

by dkdc on Jul 23, 2008 12:09 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Sherrill
He’s not a fluke. He’s faced 719 ML hitters in his career, and they’ve hit a collective .213/.307/.331 off of him. And he’s death on lefties.

His SO/W ratio and WHIP aren’t very good. I wouldn’t necessarily say he’s due for a seriouis regression. I would rather say he’s just not that very good to begin with as a closer. As a LOOGY, he’s awesome.

To me, it’s more important to trade Sherrill than it is to trade Aubrey Huff simply because it would be reasonable to expect pretty good prospects in return for Huff even with that contract

I remembe K-Law said Huff wasn’t very moveable simply because his skills sets are readily available. I don’t know how he ranks among DHs, but I sort of agree with his sentiment. He’s playing well now but he’s been a solid 100ish OPS+ for the last few years now. I imagine he’ll regress back to his recent mean even when considering that he’s typically a better second half hitter. Throw in his contract and you have a guy who isn’t going to be very desireable on the trade market.

Wolf, wolf, wolf.

by birdman on Jul 23, 2008 1:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Actually right now

He is pretty much hitting his career line, except that he is slugging at a much higher percentage. He has proven that he doesn’t wear down as the season goes on, so I’d expect his OBP, AVG and SLG to stay relatively the same. He is actually surprisingly consistent.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/h/huffau01.shtml

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 23, 2008 1:35 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

will the real Aubrey Huff please stand up.
He is pretty much hitting his career line,

Yeah, but I tend to weigh recent performance more. Early in his career, Huff was an awesome hitter. He’s clearly regressed to a lower level in recent years. It’s possible he’s turning into the Aubrey Huff of old but I highly doubt it. The Aubrey Huff we’ve seen the last few years is probably the real Aubrey Huff.

Wolf, wolf, wolf.

by birdman on Jul 23, 2008 1:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He's only an average closer

But no team looking to acquire him would be using him as a closer.

He’s one of the best left-handed relievers in the game. I’d put only Wagner, Ryan, and Mike
Gonzalez ahead of him.

It’s tremendously valuable in the playoffs if you can neutralize David Ortiz in high-leverage situations, and Sherrill is good enough against righties that he can pitch a full inning at a time.

He’s not that old – relievers routinely remaing productive well into their 30s – he costs almost nothing, and he’s under team control for a long time. I don’t see his value going down any time soon.

by dkdc on Jul 23, 2008 1:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I certainly agree that he’s an average closer. I can see him ruining his trade value further because he puts on way too many guys on base. Consequently, he’s an adventure in the 9th, and I’m worried he’ll go on another 4 out 5 streak of blowing saves. if anything, I think his perceived trade value might be higher than expected value because he’s been a bit lucky in inflating his save total and his All-Star performance. In any case, an average closer and or excellent LOOGY isn’t going to land 2 good prospects despite his price and service time.

Wolf, wolf, wolf.

by birdman on Jul 23, 2008 2:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Really, closers aren't subject to be wildly inconsistent season to season?

See Eric Gagne. Get what you can for him.

Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey

by jobe on Jul 23, 2008 1:58 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Gagne

I think Gagne’s case proves that pitchers lose some of their ability have catastrophic arm injuries and stop using HGH.

Sure, Sherrill could decline, but I’d rather take that chance than trade him for C prospect that has almost zero chance of ever contributing.

by dkdc on Jul 23, 2008 2:34 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Fine, what about Guillermo Mota,

Steve Kline, . There was a reason people got on Kenny Williams for giving Scott Linebrink a four year deal. Relievers are short term prospects that you shouldn’t value too much.

Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey

by jobe on Jul 23, 2008 3:08 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

OH assumes too much

Orioles Hangout has some great insider info, but otherwise many people assume we can get too much for prospects. Then once one guy is mentioned it becomes fact over there. I highly doubt the Red Sox would part with Lowrie, given that SS is their weakest position (and with the success of Pedoria and Ellsbury). Lars Anderson would be more realistic, given that he is block by Youkilis and Ortiz. But even he is a reach, as they could probably get a much better player than Sherill.

by edsachs1 on Jul 21, 2008 8:59 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The Janks may be looking for a backup catcher

Looks like Jorge Posada may be out for the season after surgery on his shoulder. Does this increase the likelihood Hernandez gets traded this season?

So far we know the Marlins are looking for a veteran backstop to help Treanor out, but what does this mean?

by Dr Orpheus on Jul 21, 2008 5:21 PM EDT   0 recs

Your not going to get much quality

Out of any team within you division, it might be a way to dump Hernandez but these Red Sox and Yankees rumors won’t amount to anything, and if they do it won’t be for much.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 21, 2008 5:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Maybe the Yankees get David Ross

Does that mean the Marlins become interested in Hernandez?

You’re right, the likelihood of trading within your division isn’t high, but if there are more teams looking for catchers it makes things more interesting.

by Dr Orpheus on Jul 21, 2008 7:06 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The Marlins may be a suitor, but only because we’d bite off most of his contract for nothing in return.

In terms of trading within division, the closest to a blockbuster your gonna get is something like the Javy Lopez to Boston deal, which got us Adam Stern who is posting a robust .221/.254/.303, and Javy is out of baseball.

The only thing going for the Orioles is that the catcher market is terrible as usual, the numbers Ramon is posting actually don’t look that bad in comparison with the other guys out there. I’d consider Miguel Olivo the catch of the class and that is only because of his defense so far. It is pretty obvious that Ramon does not resemble anything of what the O’s want to portray in the future so getting any team to pay just 25% of his contract and give us a throw in would be a win.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 21, 2008 7:31 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

What say you?

So, I was watching the mlbtraderumors chat, and someone mentioned Brandon Wood (3B) and Sean Rodriguez (SS) of the Angels for Sherrill. Needless to say, I got a little excited. If that’s the trade, does MacPhail pull the string? Or does he wait for them to throw someone else in there? Like Stephen Marek, Sean O’Sullivan, or Jordan Walden – Nick Adenhart’s not going to happen?

by Dr Orpheus on Jul 22, 2008 5:19 PM EDT   0 recs

In a second

You more than likely wouldn’t get Wood and Rodriguez in the first place, but Mark, O’Sullivan, Walden and Adenhart are certainly not throw ins. If the Angels were to offer us Wood and Rodriguez that pretty much solidifies the left side of our infield for a while, with Wood being for a good while, and gives us the opportunity to deal Bradford for something more than Billy Hall who would just be a fill in as another SS/3B is developed. I think MacPhail would do that deal immediately as it gives him two guys ready to go at the majors and they’d be able to get some experience before a possible contending year in 2011; if they were to throw in in another extra bonafide prospect like O’Sullivan, I’d be ecstatic. Of course, I am a believer that Sherrill should be a set up man at most, and if he were to continue to stay at closer not only would his ERA balloon but he would blow a ton more saves.
saves.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 22, 2008 5:45 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

not a chance this happens

i’ll eat my hat if the Angels trade Wood AND Rodriguez for Flat Breezy.

Your voice of doom and gloom.

by Dave at Bottomfeeder Baseball on Jul 24, 2008 11:54 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Jon Rauch trade

Rauch for traded to the D-Backs for Emilio Bonifacio. Emilio Bonifacio was rated as a C+ prospect by Sickets before the season. He’s have a decent season at AAA this year as a 23 old 2B (.735 OPS). Again, Sherrill isn’t going anymore. If Rauch, who’s a damn good reliever but not as cheap as Sherrill, can only land Emilio Bonifacio, I don’t see the O’s doing much better.

Wolf, wolf, wolf.

by birdman on Jul 22, 2008 5:55 PM EDT   0 recs

Bonifacio is pretty damn solid

I would take him in a second and then dish Roberts without thinking twice, but your right in that Rauch didn’t net that much as the Nats got one guy who is blocked behind Hudson and gave up a 30 year old guy who is posting better numbers than Sherrill.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 22, 2008 6:21 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

This is shaping out to be a pretty quiet trade deadline for the O's

Roberts is unlikely to be traded as MacPhail is pretty much asking for a package of the same quality as the Bedard haul, Sherrill is only really being pursued by the Cards and they have voiced many times they aren’t ready to part with Rasmus, and Huff isn’t going anywhere.

Andy isn’t going to be cut short at any costs, but this is a very risky move as it is general consensus that the value of Roberts + Sherrill go down by the winter. Roberts is a year older and a year closer to free agency, while Sherrill is likely to come back down to earch and not net nearly as much as what is floating around right now. A ton of teams have inquired about these players but MacPhail is asking each and every team to pay dearly, and as we can tell a lot of the contenders are just getting guys who are worse, but cheaper and get the job done.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 22, 2008 6:12 PM EDT   0 recs

Of the 3...

I’m probably the most surprised that Huff isn’t generating interest. A solid hitter this year, lefty power bat, and can play both corner IF positions, a reasonable conract (after the O’s eat some of it) and no one’s takingh a sniff?

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 23, 2008 8:59 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm guessing most teams look at him as a DH

Which severely limits his appeal.

by dkdc on Jul 23, 2008 9:16 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

While this is true

He’s certainly not a butcher in the field. He’s made some reasonable plays at third and a couple at first. He’s absolutely not as bad as Adam Dunn or Travis Hafner.

Why am I trying to sell him here? We all want him gone and to get the best value for him returned.

by Dr Orpheus on Jul 23, 2008 10:57 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't know about WANTING him gone...

but certainly if he’s to be traded, and most agree that he should be, now is the time to deal him. It would be great if he keeps us this pace (and he is historically a 2nd half hitter), and maybe, just maybe, we can get something more for him in December.

But it seems to me, with 20 teams still in the playoff hunt, that if no one is biting on a left power hitter who can play a corner infield spot in July, they certainly won’t be lined up at the door to acquire him in December.

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 23, 2008 11:17 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The asking price

would be almost as high as Roberts for a guy who doesn’t really work out for many teams. He is posting .285/.350/.524 with 19 homers and 61 RBI’s and is locked up for another year, that would require a haul. Roberts is quicker on the bases but is known to decline in the 2nd half while Huff is known to get much hotter, further upping his value. Most teams are pretty well aware that if they were to pursue Huff that MacPhail would ask for a package only slightly worse than that he demands for Roberts. I think. Also Huff tried out the NL with Houston and it didn’t work out so National League teams aren’t drooling over him; couple that with the fact that not many teams need a 3B and it is slim picking.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 23, 2008 12:13 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I can't see Andy asking near as much for Huff and B-Rob

Relative to their positions, Roberts is clearly better than Huff. Huff’s got a good thing going right now, but B-Rob is probably the 2nd best 2B in the AL right now. Huff’s in the upper 3rd of DHs. I can’t see Andy overestimating the worth of his own players – he just doesn’t do things publicly or quickly. And I’m OK with that.

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 23, 2008 2:39 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Upper third

Is still top four. Let’s say Huff is at three behind Ortiz and Matsui and in a virtual tie with Milton Bradley for third. Bradley is posting slightly better numbers, with a higher OBP, but he is in a hitters ball park with a ton of guys around him for protection and I’d take Huff’s second half plus career numbers. Brian is at two, in part for his defense, and Huff is at three. Although I do agree that Huff should and will rack in a smaller package than Roberts, that isn’t exactly why. Huff is just a year older than Brian, has always put up great numbers, is a second half hitter and has proven that he can handle third effectively. Although the package would be a bit lower I still think that the asking price would be very damn high. Saying that the price will be lower than the deal for Brob isn’t saying much because MacPhail is asking for an entire minor league system.

My best game plan is to sit on the bench and call out specific instructions like 'C'mon Boog,' 'Get ahold of one, Frank,' or 'Let's go, Brooks.' -Earl Weaver

by Baltimo on Jul 23, 2008 7:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

How are more people not talking about

Travis Hafner’s career going down the toilet?

Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey

by jobe on Jul 23, 2008 11:39 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It's past the toilet....

and heading for the wastewater plant at this point….

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 23, 2008 12:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

seriously

what happened to that guy?

"There is a value to breaking the string of losing seasons as an organization or as a franchise. But breaking that streak can’t come at the expense of doing what you need to do to get your franchise to the point where it can reach the postseason." ~Andy MacPhail

by Stacey on Jul 23, 2008 12:05 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The Bedard and Tejada trades were easy decisions. Now the O’s have some tough ones to make. Will Carrol and Jayson Stark have said that the O’s are inclined to stay put because .500 is a possibility.

Compare that to this recent MacPhail quote

“Your ultimate goal has to be to build a team that is capable of getting into the postseason in the AL East,” MacPhail said. “You have to make sure one doesn’t come at the expense of the other. There is a value to breaking the string of losing seasons as an organization or as a franchise. But breaking that streak can’t come at the expense of doing what you need to do to get your franchise to the point where it can reach the postseason.”

Which is the priority? I believe that MacPhail is under some pressure to get a winning season. And yes, I believe the pressure is coming from Angelos, who wants to consecutive losing seasons monkey off his back. (No need to tell me MacPhail is in complete command. If you believe that, we’re just not going to agree.) Adding to this pressure is the fact that the O’s supposed pitching depth that we’ve heard about for the past several years has been a bunch of baloney. Perhaps MacPhail realizes that putting together a competitive team is farther off than he had hoped now that the O’s pitching has flopped. However, since they are flirting with .500, he may as well let it ride and see if he can placate the boss and some fans (what kind of fans I’m not sure) with a .500 season.

I guess we’re likely to see more or less the same team through September. That means no major moves, and we’ll have to wait for the off season to see if MacPhail was giving us the straight dope about the “ultimate goal”.

by drj on Jul 23, 2008 10:41 PM EDT   0 recs

Unless there’s a losing streak, I’d have to agree with you on this.

Sadly, I’m hoping for a losing streak. I want this team to continue getting younger, to trade off these veterans. Markakis, Jones, Scott, and Roberts aren’t enough and there isn’t much outside of Wieters on the farm save pitching. Restocking is going to have to happen sooner or later. I’m just hoping for a quick resolution now.

by Dr Orpheus on Jul 23, 2008 11:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think you'll see trading this winter

Another point of view is, let the vets finish out the season strong. It drives up their trade value. If RZA can put up decent power numbers, if MelMo finds his stroke, if Huff continues on his current pace, we can get actual, live baseball players for them. Maybe not good ones, but still better than a straight salary dump.

I’m not saying I agree with this approach, especially with Sherrill. But it could be the tactic Andy is choosing.

"I wasn't here for the losing years. But it feels a little like the days with Earl in charge and John Lowenstein smashing birthday cakes in the middle of the clubhouse with a bat." - John "T-Bone" Shelby

by duck on Jul 24, 2008 7:26 AM EDT to parent up