First! Behold! This thread will rival Petco one day.

As for actually posting on the topic -

The O's have screwed up in a variety of ways with the young players they've had. Pickering was blocked (by the Clark signing, when Cal was coming off his monster season in Bowie and Palmeiro had left for Texas), Riley was rushed (brought up to pitch a meaningless September game at the end of a long season; not only did he blow his arm out for the first time, but he was added to the 40 man roster years sooner than necessary, meaning that he ran out of options before he learned to pitch and was traded for Ramon f'in Nivar rather than be lost on waivers), Maine was given up on too soon, Werth couldn't be prevailed upon to give up catching, and lots and lots of guys should not have been drafted in the positions they were. Markakis was the best-looking prospect to come through the system since Pickering, and the fact that they let him play through two lousy months meant that at least they're not as dumb as they used to be. (Hey, there's a potential marketing plan. Your 2008 Baltimore Orioles - Not as dumb as we used to be!)

I think Flanagan became gun-shy of just letting the kids play after the 2004 season, when the young rotation of Ponson, Ainsworth, DuBose, Riley, and Bedard fell so hard on its face that by June the team had to reach down to Bowie for Daniel Cabrera to join Rodrigo Lopez in the rotation. The subsequent trade of Bautista for Grimsley was surely a sign of panic or temporary insanity or DeJean Fatigue or something.

I certainly hope that MacPhail won't be so frightened by the sight of seeing kids struggle, but it's still a little early to tell; exchanging Fiorentino (flawed, but with some potential for improvement) for Roberson (future insurance salesman) certainly wasn't very encouraging...

but he was added to the 40 man roster years sooner than necessary, meaning that he ran out of options before he learned to pitch and was traded for Ramon f'in Nivar rather than be lost on waivers),

Interesting, didn't know that. I guess you can lay that one on Frank Wren (for putting him on the 40 man earlier than necessary that is).

Werth couldn't be prevailed upon to give up catching

They were going to move him to the OF (Thift said he looked like young Dale Murphy!), but he had such a terrible time at AA, they gave up on him.

The subsequent trade of Bautista for Grimsley was surely a sign of panic or temporary insanity.

I emailed a Sun reporter about this and he heard that Angelos ordered Bautista to be traded.

I certainly hope that MacPhail won't be so frightened by the sight of seeing kids struggle, but it's still a little early to tell;

Loewen and Guthrie will be interesting test cases. Flanagan LOVES Loewen, but obviously his influence is minimum now. I don't know how much MacPhail likes the more fringy guys like Hoey, Penn, and Olson. I suspect they'll get their share of playing time this year assuming they don't goof off during spring training, but I just don't know patient MacPhail will be with them. And I'm not familiar with his track record in terms of patience with younger guys when he was with the Cubs and Twins.

From the message board chatter, it sounds like Bedard to the Mariners for Jones+ and Roberts to the Cubs are very close.

(Hey, there's a potential marketing plan. Your 2008 Baltimore Orioles - Not as dumb as we used to be!)

Yeah; the problem is that from what I've read, this slogan is likely to be obsolete in a week or two, after we see what Macfail has done regarding Bedard/Roberts.

I think Flanagan became gun-shy of just letting the kids play after the 2004 season, when

...the Orioles posted their best record of the millennium.

From the message board chatter, it sounds like Bedard to the Mariners for Jones+ and Roberts to the Cubs are very close.

For very poor packages, much less than what we were promised. If the rumors are true.

The Seattle Times confirms that Jones + others are getting traded for Bedard. It appears Sherril may not be in the deal after all.

With Bedard gone, Roberts should also be traded by the end of the week.

However, I think ultimately the success of this rebuilding process will be determined by whether or not MacPhail stops after dealing Bedard and Roberts.

Tear the whole thing down, I say.

However, I think ultimately the success of this rebuilding process will be determined by whether or not MacPhail stops after dealing Bedard and Roberts.

Tear the whole thing down, I say.

Do they have much else after that? I guess Hernandez could get something, and maybe Millar at the trade deadline. It'd be interesting to see if they'd consider dealing Guthrie at a high point. He'll be 29 and is cheap, and I'd think they could get some very good young players for him.

The Seattle Times confirms that Jones + others are getting traded for Bedard. It appears Sherril may not be in the deal after all.

Yes. I like Jones, and will withhold judgment until I hear the rest of the deal.

With Bedard gone, Roberts should also be traded by the end of the week.
However, I think ultimately the success of this rebuilding process will be determined by whether or not MacPhail stops after dealing Bedard and Roberts.
Tear the whole thing down, I say.

Agreed 100%. Can't see it happening, but I will be thrilled if it does.

For very poor packages, much less than what we were promised. If the rumors are true.

Give me an fing break. You'll be upset no matter what the packages look like. And you'll be upset if they're not traded.

Give me an fing break. You'll be upset no matter what the packages look like.

No; I'll be upset if the packages aren't good. Like the rumored Jones/Sherill/Tillman for Bedard, and Gallagher/Murton/Cedeno for Roberts.

And you'll be upset if they're not traded.

Yes, if they're not traded.

No; I'll be upset if the packages aren't good. Like the rumored Jones/Sherill/Tillman for Bedard, and Gallagher/Murton/Cedeno for Roberts.

In the other thread, Mike mentioned a Jones/Clement/Tillman/? rumor. If you're not happy with that, you're overvaluing Bedard. And Gallagher/Murton/Cedeno is a fair return for Roberts IMO.

Posts 213 and 214 also prove my point -- you don't like the rumored packaged (at least that one), yet apparently you'll also be unhappy if the trade doesn't happen. Which is it? If the first package is all the Orioles can get from the Mariners, should they hold on to Bedard?

In the other thread, Mike mentioned a Jones/Clement/Tillman/? rumor. If you're not happy with that, you're overvaluing Bedard. And Gallagher/Murton/Cedeno is a fair return for Roberts IMO.

Well, I'd like to know who the ? is, but Jones/Clement/Tillman/? is probably a good trade. I didn't criticize that rumor. I criticized the ones where one of the players we get is Sherrill; wasting part of Bedard's value on Sherrill would border on criminal.

As for Roberts, I don't think that's a fair return for him at all. Murton is a 26-year old corner outfielder without much power. Cedeno is a 25-year old shortstop who hit well in the PCL, but not before that, and in the majors he has a career 58 OPS+ through 700 PAs. Taking one of these is fine; taking both isn't. It's clear we ain't getting Pie, but I'd rather have the previously rumored Marshall, who I wasn't thrilled with, than Murton.

Posts 213 and 214 also prove my point -- you don't like the rumored packaged (at least that one), yet apparently you'll also be unhappy if the trade doesn't happen. Which is it? If the first package is all the Orioles can get from the Mariners, should they hold on to Bedard?

I don't see how that "proves your point," when your "point" was "You'll be upset no matter what the packages look like." That "point" is just not true. I'll be upset if the trade is bad, and I'll be upset if they don't make a trade. In short, I want them to make a good trade. I don't think that's so unreasonable.

Mike mentioned a Jones/Clement/Tillman/? rumor. If you're not happy with that, you're overvaluing Bedard.

I criticized the ones where one of the players we get is Sherrill; wasting part of Bedard's value on Sherrill would border on criminal.

Obviously Jones/Clement is the better package. Sherrill is damn fine reliever, but to echo David, I don't want him either.

And Gallagher/Murton/Cedeno is a fair return for Roberts IMO.

Gallagher is fine. I don't want Cedeno at all. Murton's not a bad player but he's already racked up two years of service time. He'll already be in arbitration next year.

I have a bad feeling that the whole 'not giving their prospects a fair shake' debate will extend to Hayden Penn. There have already been snippets in stories about him about how 'frustrated' upper management is with Penn and his 'attitude issues.' They're just setting the stages to justify dumping him, losing him to a waiver claim, or signing a fat toad veteran to 'solidify the rotation.' I like Penn a hell of a lot more than Olson or Patton. But it'd be typical of the O's to dump their higher ceiling prospects for crap like Jaret Wright/Kris Benson/Steve Trachsel and the like. And I have to agree with David--why the hell do the O's consider Sherrill such an important piece of the Bedard package?

MLBTR is reporting that it is Pie and Gallagher, which I like better. Keep George Sherrill. I want 4 prospects from the Mariners.

And I have to agree with David--why the hell do the O's consider Sherrill such an important piece of the Bedard package?

Reportedly, this is Trembley's personal demand that MacPhail is trying to accommodate. That's not an excuse, but it's an explanation.

And I agree with you on Penn. The whole thing about 'attitude' is typical Orioles; one of the myriad of ways they justify not using prospects is by finding some flaw -- conditioning, attitude, "head case" -- and hyping that up until people stop looking at the player's actual track record and start focusing on the label. Then the team buries the player until his options run out and cut him, or trade him for dreck.

Trembley's personal demand? That's ridiculous. Typical Orioles crap--valuing a short term asset (and that's questionable) over the long term. Is this something you've read or from a source?

As valuable as Jones is for the O's, if all they end up with is Jones, Sherrill, Tillman, and a Chen/Tuiasoppo or something, then I'm going to be disappointed. If the inclusion of Sherrill ends up being what precluded them from getting a better long-term prospect, then I'm going to hate Trembley.

ddp: it's something I read, but I don't remember the original source now. It was posted on the Os mailing list, so I'm going to have to go back and search my emails to find it. When I say "personal demand," I don't mean that Trembley demanded Sherrill specifically -- just that he was insistent that the Orioles get some "proven" left-handed bullpen help.

As valuable as Jones is for the O's, if all they end up with is Jones, Sherrill, Tillman, and a Chen/Tuiasoppo or something, then I'm going to be disappointed.

You and me both. I've wavered between optimistic and pessimistic lately, as we swerve from rumor to rumor. I don't know Tuiasoppo -- for all I know, you just made up a name -- but Chen isn't anything to write home about, Sherrill is a 31-y.o. LOOGY, and Tillman is a good A-ball pitching prospect (TINSTAAPP). In other words, that's Jones plus filler, and that's just not good enough for Bedard.

As valuable as Jones is for the O's, if all they end up with is Jones, Sherrill, Tillman, and a Chen/Tuiasoppo or something,

Yup, I said this about the Tejada trade and I'll see again here. It's quantity over quality.

It was posted on the Os mailing list,

Which list? I'd like to sign up.

Birdlives: Info here. Mike Emeigh and I are on the list; I don't think any other Primates are. (Dan used to be, but I think he's too busy around here.)

O's fans, would you have preferred a Milledge/Gomez/Humber deal for Bedard?

O's fans, would you have preferred a Milledge/Gomez/Humber deal for Bedard?

Ah, no. I would have sharpened my pitchfork and lighted the torches on my way to the warehouse.

O's fans, would you have preferred a Milledge/Gomez/Humber deal for Bedard?

Not really, since we're getting Jones, F-Mart needs to be in a Mets package.

Do they have much else after that? I guess Hernandez could get something, and maybe Millar at the trade deadline. It'd be interesting to see if they'd consider dealing Guthrie at a high point. He'll be 29 and is cheap, and I'd think they could get some very good young players for him.

I'd say the tradeable assets break down like this:

Cheap, but a little on the old side:
Scott
Guthrie
Cabrera

Tradeable at current contract:
Bradford
Walker
Hernandez
Millar

Tradeable if O's eat part of contract:
Payton
Huff

Tradeable if O's eat most/all of contract:
Gibbons
Mora

It's not a lot to work with, but they could scrape together a decent pile of B-/C+ prospects.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure the Orioles understand the concept of a sunk cost when it comes to bad contracts.

Tradeable if O's eat part of contract:
Payton
Huff

Huff's trade is at high ebb. He just came off a decent year and I doubt things will get better.

Not really, since we're getting Jones, F-Mart needs to be in a Mets package.

What if Pelfrey or Guerra replaced Humber?

What if Pelfrey or Guerra replaced Humber?

Jones >> Milledge
Tillman ~ Guerra

So it comes down to Gomez needing to be significantly more valuable than the rest of the Seattle package.

In the worst case, it's Sherill and filler, and I'd call the Mets package roughly equal (although I think the Orioles would disagree because they seem to be targetting Sherrill).

I still think there's a chance that the Mariners give up another prospect in this deal, and in that case, the Mets aren't even close.

We'll know soon enough.

Jason Churchill was on the radio and says he's heard the deal is Jones, Sherrill, Tillman, Tony Butler, and Mikilayo (or something like that).

Color me disappointed. Where's the offense part of the rebuilding process?

Where's the offense part of the rebuilding process?

Indeed. If the Orioles make that deal, and then they make a Roberts deal centered around Gallagher (with no Pie), this team's disastrous offense isn't going to improve at all. (We're basically swapping Jones-Hernandez-Fahey for Patterson-Tejada-Roberts.) And it won't help the team long term.

Well, the Bedard deal is finally, mercifully, done.

Roberts needs to go next.

Roberts needs to go next.

Nah, the Orioles want to try to sign him to a long term extension first.

Jason Churchill was on the radio and says he's heard the deal is Jones, Sherrill, Tillman, Tony Butler, and Mikilayo (or something like that).

Color me disappointed. Where's the offense part of the rebuilding process?

I think it's official. The most delusional fanbase in the world isn't Red Sox Nation, it isn't even BTF Mets fans. It's the Orioles.

And it won't help the team long term.

[shoots self]

Matt, you're being disingenuous here, pulling quotes out of context. The "won't help the team long term" referred to the possibility (probability?) of trading Bedard and Roberts for Jones and a huge collection of pitching prospects with no other offense. Until they rewrite the rules so that teams play doubleheaders every day, there's a limit to how many pitchers you need.

As for "delusional," you can't have it both ways. You can't argue that Orioles fans are delusional if they think they could have swapped Sherrill/Butler/Mickolio for someone better AND argue that they're delusional to be disappointed about getting Sherrill/Butler/Mickolio. They can either be valuable prospects or not, but not both. The someone better didn't have to be Clement (in fact, given that the Orioles' top prospect is a catcher, I would have preferred not). Triunfel. Balentien.

For that matter, I'd take someone lower down on the prospect list than Tillman, plus one of those guys.

I think it's official. The most delusional fanbase in the world isn't Red Sox Nation, it isn't even BTF Mets fans. It's the Orioles.

And it won't help the team long term.

[shoots self]

Where do you get off calling me delusional? If anything, I'm being one of the more realistic fans of the Orioles.

Yes, I don't like the idea that the rumored deal for Roberts alongside the Bedard deal will have netted the team one offensive prospect (and a good one at that) and five billion arms. The Bedard deal is fine but as has been stated by David, I'd have preferred, if at all possible, to exclude Sherrill, Butler, and Mickolio for for another offensive prospect like Clement or Triunfel. Perhaps it was never possible but the idea that a major component of the Bedard deal was always a 31 year old LH reliever is preposterous to me. The O's aren't competing for anything anytime soon and a 31 year old reliever has no value to a rebuilding team.

It's great to have a ton of arms in the system. But half of the guys they're trading for have ceilings as a 3 or 4 starters at best. If the team traded Roberts for Gallagher, Marshall, and Cedeno, it won't have offensive prospects outside of Jones, Markakis, and Wieters. If Rowell and Snyder don't develop, there are huge holes at 1B/2B/SS and potentially at 3B assuming Rowell doesn't pan out. As optimistic as some are about Nolan Reimold, I'm skeptical and his inability to stay healthy leads me to believe he'll likely be a 4th OF. The O's have NOBODY in the minors who could realistically step up in the middle IF and I don't really buy into Ronnie Cedeno being the answer. One of Rowell or Snyder will eventually need to move to 1B. I'm not convinced about Snyder panning out. Hence, the potential hole at 3B. I have huge hopes for Rowell but that's just one piece of the puzzle.

Only a fool would believe that all of the O's top offensive prospects will pan out. And while I'm happy Adam Jones is manning CF, I'm not going to let that euphoria blind me into thinking that the team's offense is set for the future. So great depth at SP which should translate to solid pitching. But poor depth in the system at offensive positions which should translate into a solid-at best--offense. In the AL East, how is that going to get it done especially when you look at the studs in the TB system on both sides and the unlimited resources of Boston and NYY?

So how does that sentiment make me delusional?

I've waited ten years for the team to rebuild and I'll be d*mned if some fool like Matt Clement in Alexandria who knows very little about the state of the O's tells me I'm delusional for having an opinion on the way that rebuilding goes. Ridiculous. It's not like I was saying that the O's should've held out to trade for Kershaw, Kemp, Laroche, and Loney or some ridiculous fantasy like that.

The most delusional fanbase in the world isn't Red Sox Nation, it isn't even BTF Mets fans. It's the Orioles.

He's right. O's fans are given a huge gift and they are complaining about the color of the wrapping paper. I guess after 10 years of suckitude, carping becomes reflexive. And it's rampant among fans, even the thoughtful ones (see the Belfry).

I'd have preferred, if at all possible, to exclude Sherrill, Butler, and Mickolio for for another offensive prospect like Clement or Triunfel. Perhaps it was never possible but the idea that a major component of the Bedard deal was always a 31 year old LH reliever is preposterous to me. The O's aren't competing for anything anytime soon and a 31 year old reliever has no value to a rebuilding team.

Why do some Orioles fans continue to believe that either Clement or Triunfel were offered ALONG with Jones? Before you say that Bavasi is a bad GM and point to an example, you could do that for Wayne Krvsky too. Do you think that Bedard could have netted say Bruce and Votto?

Would you have preferred someone like Mike Morse to Sherill? Morse is still only 25.

Or would you prefer another Mickolio type?

Only a fool would believe that all of the O's top offensive prospects will pan out. And while I'm happy Adam Jones is manning CF, I'm not going to let that euphoria blind me into thinking that the team's offense is set for the future. So great depth at SP which should translate to solid pitching. But poor depth in the system at offensive positions which should translate into a solid-at best--offense. In the AL East, how is that going to get it done especially when you look at the studs in the TB system on both sides and the unlimited resources of Boston and NYY?

Sure. So draft better. Make better FA signings. Make better decisions when signing existing players to new contracts. Make other good trades.

You are not going to get a team that can compete with the RS or Yanks just by wishcasting that some other GM in MLB is an idiot: the constant refrain by some O's fans is that the O's should have gotten Clement or Triunfel, because, well, Bavasi is an idiot.

The "won't help the team long term" referred to the possibility (probability?) of trading Bedard and Roberts for Jones and a huge collection of pitching prospects with no other offense. Until they rewrite the rules so that teams play doubleheaders every day, there's a limit to how many pitchers you need.

The idea that trading for Adam Jones won't help the team long-term, because they also traded for some pitchers, is the Platonic essence of delusional.

You got Adam Jones! One of the best young players in baseball! That helps the team long-term. Bedard for Jones would have been a pretty solid trade for the O's.

As for "delusional," you can't have it both ways. You can't argue that Orioles fans are delusional if they think they could have swapped Sherrill/Butler/Mickolio for someone better AND argue that they're delusional to be disappointed about getting Sherrill/Butler/Mickolio.

Huh? Of course I can. It's really easy. Sherrill/Butler/Mickolio are throw-ins on top of the excellent return of Jones/Tillman. Asking for more than Jones/Tillman shows a complete disengagement from reality, from the history of trades like this. You're not going to get more. You already got a great return.

I'd have preferred, if at all possible, to exclude Sherrill, Butler, and Mickolio for for another offensive prospect like Clement or Triunfel. Perhaps it was never possible but...

It wasn't possible. My god. Sherrill, Butler, and Mickolio were never going to be replaced by Triunfel. Maybe if you'd thrown in John Parrish, Bavasi would have given up Ichiro, too.

the idea that a major component of the Bedard deal was always a 31 year old LH reliever is preposterous to me.

There's a simple answer here, too: he wasn't. The major component of the Bedard deal is Adam Jones. The minor component of the Bedard deal is Chris Tillman. Then you have the throw-ins, they include George Sherrill. He's basically irrelevant to the quality of the trade.

The idea that trading for Adam Jones won't help the team long-term, because they also traded for some pitchers, is the Platonic essence of delusional.

Absolutely. This is a great trade for the Orioles, and exactly what they needed to do. hell, Jones for Bedard straight up would almost be defensible. The fact that they also got two high upside pitchers and a couple of relievers is fantastic.

There's a simple answer here, too: he wasn't. The major component of the Bedard deal is Adam Jones. The minor component of the Bedard deal is Chris Tillman. Then you have the throw-ins, they include George Sherrill. He's basically irrelevant to the quality of the trade.

Exactly. Butler or Sherrill could have been replaced by a guy like Chen I guess, but it's not like he's anything special. Trading 2 or 3 B guys for one A guy doesn't fly in fantasy baseball, why would it work in real life? Sherrill + Butler + Mickolio =/= Triunfel.

It wasn't possible. My god. Sherrill, Butler, and Mickolio were never going to be replaced by Triunfel. Maybe if you'd thrown in John Parrish, Bavasi would have given up Ichiro, too.

the idea that a major component of the Bedard deal was always a 31 year old LH reliever is preposterous to me.

There's a simple answer here, too: he wasn't. The major component of the Bedard deal is Adam Jones. The minor component of the Bedard deal is Chris Tillman. Then you have the throw-ins, they include George Sherrill. He's basically irrelevant to the quality of the trade.

See, there you go again--taking what I've said and stretched it to fit into your own delusion. What I've been saying is nothing like this crap you're spewing that I'm delusional enough to think that Bavasi would gut the entire team for the O's crap.

Perhaps it wasn't possible to insist on another offensive prospect. Who knows? Do you? It was stated from the outset of negotiations with Seattle that the O's insisted on Sherrill. So don't give me this crap that he was not a major component. If he wasn't a major component, they wouldn't have asked for him from the outset.

Sure. So draft better. Make better FA signings. Make better decisions when signing existing players to new contracts. Make other good trades.

You are not going to get a team that can compete with the RS or Yanks just by wishcasting that some other GM in MLB is an idiot: the constant refrain by some O's fans is that the O's should have gotten Clement or Triunfel, because, well, Bavasi is an idiot.

Did I ever state that the team could completely rebuild in one or two trades? No. For crying out loud, I've been realistic for quite a long time. If you've ever seen any of my other posts on this board or any other major baseball boards, I've been wishing beyond all hope the O's would get into the game on international scouting. I've been complaining that the team should focus more on player development. I've been harping on them to stop signing useless, washed up vets and focus on building long term. So just because I stated a preference that the team pick up some offensive prospects in their major trades does not mean that I'm advocating that the team should have rebuilt Rome in one fell swoop.

That helps the team long-term. Bedard for Jones would have been a pretty solid trade for the O's.

See, that's delusional. Bedard is one of the best players in baseball. Jones is one of the best prospects in baseball. If Jones develops as hoped, he'll be as good as Bedard.

See, that's delusional. Bedard is one of the best players in baseball. Jones is one of the best prospects in baseball. If Jones develops as hoped, he'll be as good as Bedard.

Jones doesn't have to be as good as Bedard (ever) for this to be a good trade for the O's.

They would have had Bedard for only 2 more years, during which time they had zero chance to compete.

They'll have Jones for 6 years. If Jones puts up a 110 OPS+ for 6 years and plays a good defensive CF, it was a good trade for Balt., regardless of what the other 4 do.

If Jones becomes a star, Sherrill is an effective RP for 3 years, and one of the other 3 becomes a productive major leaguer, it will be a huge fleecing of Seattle.

They'll have Jones for 6 years. If Jones puts up a 110 OPS+ for 6 years and plays a good defensive CF, it was a good trade for Balt., regardless of what the other 4 do.

If I have two cars, I can't drive both. But even though I have no use for a second car, that doesn't make it a "good trade" for me to swap one for a lottery ticket. It's not just the use I can make of it that determines whether it's a good trade; it's the opportunity cost of the trade.

If Jones is a star, then of course Bedard-for-Jones is a fair deal. But since we don't know whether Jones will be a star, it's not a good trade unless we get more, to account for that uncertainty.

If Jones is a star, then of course Bedard-for-Jones is a fair deal. But since we don't know whether Jones will be a star, it's not a good trade unless we get more, to account for that uncertainty.

I don't think he needs to be a star, given the salary difference. In 2010, the O's will have Jones and $20M to spend on another player, rather than Bedard.

I don't think he needs to be a star, given the salary difference. In 2010, the O's will have Jones and $20M to spend on another player, rather than Bedard.

The Orioles aren't making the deal to save money, though. If they were running up against budget constraints, then I think your analysis would be valid. But if they keep Bedard, they'll still have $20M available in 2010 if they want to spend it on another player.

If I have two cars, I can't drive both. But even though I have no use for a second car, that doesn't make it a "good trade" for me to swap one for a lottery ticket. It's not just the use I can make of it that determines whether it's a good trade; it's the opportunity cost of the trade.

Of course you could drive each car on alternate days, doubling their effect life. But the analogy is faulty, in any case.

The opportunity cost of this trade is the next best trade that you didn't make. Pretty far down the line would be keeping him for two years and letting him walk for draft picks.

You win in baseball by putting yourself in the best position to contend for the post season, not by maximizing the short-term utility of your players.