Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Transaction Oracle > Discussion
Transaction Oracle
— A Timely Look at Transactions as They Happen

Monday, January 21, 2008

2008 ZiPS Projections - Baltimore Orioles

Before doing the Baltimore projections, I fearlessly claimed that the Red Sox had the best projections of any AL team.  After doing the Orioles projections,

I’m not revising that opinion.

There are some reasons to like the franchise.  That is, if you close your eyes and pretend that this is the time that Angelos won’t short-circuit a long-term

rebuilding job.  Angelos seems to want a painless rebuild, but the time to get a relatively painless rebuild was 10 years ago.  While they could have

rebuilt after the 1997 season, it’s hard to expect any team to rebuild after a 98-win season.  But during the 1998 season, when it was clear that they

weren’t a contender, Angelos stood in the way of any change of direction.  Palmeiro and Alomar and Eric Davis simply walked at the end of the season, there

wasn’t even a whisper of Brady Anderson or B.J. Surhoff being moved, and so on.  The major league talent moved on, no minor league talent replaced them for

years, and the team took one of the highest concentrations of high draft picks in history (7 of the first 50 picks in the draft) and turned it into Brian

Roberts.

Now, a rebuilding job is even more necessary and because the team put it off so long, it’s going to be even more painful.  The Orioles have accumulated a

solid number of minor leaguers, but if there’s never truly an organizational will to use the players that develop and the desire to pretend to compete in

2008 in the back of Angelos’s mind, it won’t help anything.

I think this is the year that the Rays get 4th without needing another team to have horrid luck.


Name               P Age   AVG   OBP   SLG   G AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB   K SB CS
Nick Markakis*        rf 24 .294 .357 .486 160 592 90 174 36 3 24 98 56 98 10 4
AVERAGE 1B——————- 1b——.284 .361 .479—————————————————————
Luke Scott*          rf 30 .264 .360 .477 142 436 58 115 25 4 20 80 62 94 3 0
Brian Roberts#        2b 30 .287 .363 .437 145 579 93 166 39 3 14 80 70 87 36 7
AVERAGE LF——————- lf——.282 .353 .455—————————————————————
AVERAGE RF——————- rf——.282 .350 .456—————————————————————
AVERAGE 3B——————- 3b——.279 .346 .447—————————————————————
Aubrey Huff*        dh 31 .275 .341 .447 140 510 65 140 28 3 18 78 47 92 3 1
Luis Jimenez*        1b 26 .265 .331 .443 126 438 44 116 22 1 18 69 43 100 4 1
AVERAGE CF——————- cf——.276 .339 .424—————————————————————
Jay Gibbons*        rf 31 .265 .318 .448 80 279 34 74 18 0 11 43 21 48 0 0
Kevin Millar         1b 36 .258 .354 .384 109 365 47 94 19 0 9 46 46 66 1 0
AVERAGE 2B——————- 2b——.281 .340 .413—————————————————————
AVERAGE SS——————- ss——.279 .333 .406—————————————————————
Nolan Reimold         rf 24 .251 .329 .445 110 382 42 96 23 0 17 62 43 96 7 7
Ramon Hernandez       c   32 .260 .326 .418 110 385 44 100 20 1 13 55 32 60 1 1
Melvin Mora         3b 36 .265 .333 .397 126 491 70 130 23 0 14 65 43 90 8 2
Brandon Tripp*        rf 23 .246 .315 .430 108 391 43 96 23 2 15 58 30 116 4 1
AVERAGE C———————- c——.263 .323 .400—————————————————————
Jay Payton           lf 35 .268 .311 .401 114 399 55 107 19 2 10 52 22 44 3 2
Luis Terrero         cf 28 .254 .312 .416 119 303 35 77 15 2 10 43 19 71 10 6
Scott Moore*        3b 24 .232 .309 .409 142 499 39 116 23 1 21 75 49 140 7 6
Corey Patterson*      cf 28 .257 .295 .402 140 495 70 127 24 3 14 65 25 92 32 7
Oscar Salazar         3b 30 .254 .285 .417 93 362 31 92 24 1 11 50 14 56 3 1
Tike Redman*        cf 31 .273 .318 .351 109 362 48 99 16 3 2 36 23 35 13 5
Guillermo Quiroz       c   26 .248 .286 .393 70 234 16 58 13 0 7 35 12 49 0 0
Freddie Bynum*        lf 28 .254 .304 .379 103 248 39 63 12 5 3 27 16 61 13 6
Michael Costanzo*      3b 24 .225 .300 .366 134 475 39 107 23 1 14 53 45 154 0 1
Brandon Fahey*        2b 27 .254 .314 .330 126 397 49 101 13 4 3 36 32 54 11 6
Omir Santos         c   27 .243 .283 .336 93 301 23 73 16 0 4 31 15 59 1 1
Billy Rowell*        3b 19 .230 .272 .352 105 421 35 97 20 2 9 47 22 129 3 4
Paco Figueroa         2b 25 .249 .306 .317 108 401 54 100 19 1 2 35 28 55 15 13
Eider Torres#        2b 25 .243 .281 .314 132 497 44 121 18 1 5 45 26 71 28 12
Brandon Snyder       1b 21 .220 .263 .332 117 446 37 98 21 1 9 48 23 129 0 2
Luis Hernandez#      ss 24 .240 .265 .292 140 504 46 121 17 3 1 39 17 67 5 6
Ben Davis#          c   31 .216 .247 .291 46 148 10 32 5 0 2 14   7 31 0 1
Paul Bako*          c   36 .193 .261 .218 44 119   7 23 3 0 0   7 11 37 0 0

* - Bats Left
# = Switch-Hitter

Name           CThr 1b 2b 3b ss lf cf rf
Markakis*                  Av Pr Av
Scott*                    Av   Av
Roberts#            Av          
Huff*            Fr   Pr   Pr   Pr
Jimenez*          Pr            
Gibbons*                  Av   Pr
Millar             Fr            
Reimold                   Pr   Pr
Hernandez       Av                
Mora                 Av        
Tripp*                    Av Pr Av
Payton                     Av Av Av
Terrero                   Fr Fr Fr
Moore*            Av   Fr   Av    
Patterson*                    Ex  
Salazar           Av   Av Pr      
Redman*                    Vg Fr Vg
Quiroz         Vg                
Bynum*              Av Av Fr Av Av Av
Costanzo*              Av        
Fahey*              Av Av Av Vg    
Santos         Av                
Rowell*                Fr        
Figueroa             Av          
Torres#              Fr   Fr      
Snyder             Av            
Hernandez#            Av   Av      
Davis#        Av                
Bako*          Av                  

Player Spotlight - Nick Markakis
Name           AVG   OBP   SLG   G AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB   K SB CS OPS+ DR
Optimistic (15%)  .318 .389 .538 162 600 105 191 41 5 27 111 68 85 14 3 141   0  
Mean         .294 .357 .486 160 592 90 174 36 3 24 98 56 98 10 4 120 -3  
Pessimistic (15%) .268 .327 .416 150 555 60 149 29 1 17 78 41 106 6 4   94 -7

Top Near-Age Offensive Comps: Vic Wertz, Rafael Palmeiro

Player Spotlight - Brian Roberts
Name           AVG   OBP   SLG   G AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI BB   K SB CS OPS+ DR
Optimistic (15%)  .310 .391 .498 152 606 112 188 47 5 19 97 82 77 44 6 133   8
Mean         .287 .363 .437 145 579 93 166 39 3 14 80 70 87 36 7 110   4
Pessimistic (15%) .263 .335 .378 139 555 63 146 33 2 9 64 60 89 28 7   88   0

Top Near-Age Offensive Comps: Bill Doran, Jose Offerman

Name               Age   ERA   W   L   G GS   INN   H   ER HR   BB   K
Erik Bedard*          29   3.34 13   6 28 28   175.0 153   65 15   59 184
Chad Bradford         33   3.38   5   2 65   0   56.0   60   21   1   12   28
Jamie Walker*        36   3.81   2   2 68   0   52.0   53   22   5   14   35
Chris Ray           26   4.12   5   4 58   0   59.0   54   27   9   25   54
LEAGUE AVERAGE RELIEVER———4.34———————————————————————-
Adam Loewen*          24   4.55   5   5 18 16   97.0   96   49   6   57   74
Greg Aquino           30   4.58   2   3 50   0   53.0   52   27   7   25   51
LEAGUE AVERAGE STARTER———- 4.71———————————————————————-
Jeremy Guthrie         29   4.84   6   8 28 23   145.0 159   78 21   50   89
Daniel Cabrera         27   4.85 11 13 31 31   180.0 176   97 20 108 164
Danys Baez           30   4.94   4   5 62   0   62.0   67   34   7   27   36
Fernando Cabrera       26   4.98   3   3 46   0   65.0   65   36 12   31   66
Rocky Cherry         28   5.00   2   3 54   1   72.0   80   40 10   31   46
Roberto Novoa         28   5.08   3   5 71   0   78.0   89   44 12   35   48
Randor Bierd         24   5.09   3   3 34   2   53.0   57   30   8   24   40
Kris Benson           33   5.20   6   9 21 21   128.0 149   74 21   40   61
Ryan Keefer           26   5.26   2   4 33   0   53.0   57   31   7   29   38
James Hoey           25   5.36   2   4 41   0   42.0   44   25   5   23   31
Dennis Sarfate         27   5.37   6   9 44 14   119.0 129   71 15   64   75
Troy Patton*          22   5.41   7 14 28 27   163.0 182   98 27   62   99
Matt Albers           25   5.81   6 12 31 25   155.0 182 100 23   74   83
Bob McCrory           26   5.86   1   3 36   0   43.0   46   28   5   34   30
Garrett Olson*        23   5.91   7 13 29 29   160.0 185 105 29   73 107
Hayden Penn           23   5.95   3   5 11 11   62.0   71   41 12   22   41
James Johnson         25   6.00   6 11 25 24   144.0 171   96 23   65   83
Jon Leicester         29   6.00   3   5 19 13   72.0   84   48 13   33   41
Brian Burres*        27   6.12   4 10 31 19   122.0 143   83 23   57   82
Radhames Liz         25   6.29   5 10 27 25   126.0 135   88 23   91 105
Chorye Spoone         22   6.33   5 13 27 26   138.0 158   97 20 103   72
Ryan Bukvich         30   6.40   1   4 44   0   45.0   51   32   9   26   28
Craig Anderson*        27   6.49   4 10 26 25   140.0 184 101 30   39   56
Brandon Erbe         20   6.69   4 11 28 28   117.0 138   87 22   83   73
Fredy Deza           25   8.15   2 10 41 10   106.0 144   96 33   53   52

* - Throws Left

Player Spotlight - Erik Bedard
              ERA   W   L   G GS INN   H   ER HR   BB   K   ERA+   
Optimistic (15%)  2.23 18   3 31 31 202 151   50 10   54 231   205
Mean           3.34 13   6 28 28 175 153   65 15   59 184   137
Pessimistic (15%)  4.63   8   8 23 23 136 138   70 18   55 135   99

Top Near-Age Comps:  Hal Newhouser, Whitey Ford

Player Spotlight - Daniel Cabrera
              ERA   W   L   G GS INN   H   ER HR   BB   K   ERA+   
Optimistic (15%)  3.66 16 10 34 34 209 180   85 17   99 206   125
Mean           4.85 11 13 31 31 180 176   97 20 108 164   94
Pessimistic (15%)  6.11   6 13 25 25 140 153   95 22 100 122   75

Top Near-Age Comps:  Matt Clement, Bobby Witt

Disclaimer:  ZiPS projections are computer-based projections of performance. 
Performances have not been allocated to predicted playing time in the majors -
many of the players listed above are unlikely to play in the majors at all in 2008. 
ZiPS is projecting equivalent production - a .240 ZiPS projection may end up
being .280 in AAA or .300 in AA, for example.  Whether or not a player will play
is one of many non-statistical factors one has to take into account when predicting
the future.

Players are listed with their most recent teams unless Dan has made a mistake. 
This is very possible as a lot of minor-league signings are generally unreported in
the offseason. 

ZiPS is projecting based on the AL having a 4.49 ERA and the NL having a 4.40 ERA.


ZiPS Frequently Asked Questions




Nationals

Projections

Blue Jays

Projections

Rangers

Projections

Rays

Projections

Cardinals

Projections

Mariners

Projections

Giants

Projections

Padres

Projections

Pirates

Projections

Phillies

Projections

A’s

Projections

Yankees

Projections

Mets

Projections

Twins

Projections

Brewers

Projections

Dodgers

Projections

Angels

Projections

Royals

Projections

Astros

Projections

Marlins

Projections

Tigers Projections

Rockies Projections

Indians Projections

Reds Projections

White Sox Projections

Cubs Projections

Red Sox Projections

Dan Szymborski Posted: January 21, 2008 at 02:25 AM | 251 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 3 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3
   201. GotowarMissAgnes Posted: January 27, 2008 at 11:30 PM (#2677167)
First! Behold! This thread will rival Petco one day.
   202. rlc Posted: January 28, 2008 at 12:06 AM (#2677180)
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...
   203. birdlives is one crazy ninja Posted: January 28, 2008 at 12:29 AM (#2677196)
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.
   204. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 28, 2008 at 01:14 AM (#2677223)
From the message board chatter, it sounds like Bedard to the Mariners for Jones+ and Roberts to the Cubs are very close.
   205. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 01:18 AM (#2677226)
(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.
   206. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 01:20 AM (#2677227)
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.
   207. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 01:39 AM (#2677244)
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.
   208. DKDC Posted: January 28, 2008 at 01:44 AM (#2677246)
The Seattle Times confirms that Jones + others are getting traded for Bedard. It appears Sherril may not be in the deal after all.
   209. DKDC Posted: January 28, 2008 at 01:46 AM (#2677247)
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.
   210. Tom Cervo, backup catcher Posted: January 28, 2008 at 02:17 AM (#2677261)
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.
   211. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 02:19 AM (#2677262)
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.
   212. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 28, 2008 at 02:35 AM (#2677277)
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.
   213. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 02:51 AM (#2677281)
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.
   214. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 03:56 AM (#2677320)
And you'll be upset if they're not traded.
Yes, if they're not traded.
   215. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 28, 2008 at 04:09 AM (#2677324)
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.
   216. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 28, 2008 at 04:12 AM (#2677326)
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?
   217. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 04:23 AM (#2677330)
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.
   218. birdlives is one crazy ninja Posted: January 28, 2008 at 05:24 AM (#2677361)
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.
   219. ddp Posted: January 28, 2008 at 05:53 AM (#2677375)
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?
   220. GotowarMissAgnes Posted: January 28, 2008 at 06:03 AM (#2677383)
MLBTR is reporting that it is Pie and Gallagher, which I like better. Keep George Sherrill. I want 4 prospects from the Mariners.
   221. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 06:05 AM (#2677384)
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.
   222. ddp Posted: January 28, 2008 at 06:51 AM (#2677412)
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.
   223. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 07:33 AM (#2677433)
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.
   224. birdlives is one crazy ninja Posted: January 28, 2008 at 08:09 AM (#2677439)
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.
   225. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 09:31 AM (#2677452)
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.)
   226. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: January 28, 2008 at 09:51 AM (#2677456)
O's fans, would you have preferred a Milledge/Gomez/Humber deal for Bedard?
   227. Boriole Forester Posted: January 28, 2008 at 04:07 PM (#2677538)
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.
   228. birdlives is one crazy ninja Posted: January 28, 2008 at 06:46 PM (#2677702)
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.
   229. DKDC Posted: January 28, 2008 at 07:54 PM (#2677775)
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.
   230. birdlives is one crazy ninja Posted: January 28, 2008 at 08:28 PM (#2677806)
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.
   231. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: January 28, 2008 at 08:39 PM (#2677812)
Not really, since we're getting Jones, F-Mart needs to be in a Mets package.

What if Pelfrey or Guerra replaced Humber?
   232. DKDC Posted: January 28, 2008 at 09:15 PM (#2677842)
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.
   233. ddp Posted: January 28, 2008 at 09:29 PM (#2677858)
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?
   234. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 10:25 PM (#2677892)
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.
   235. DKDC Posted: February 08, 2008 at 09:12 PM (#2686682)
Well, the Bedard deal is finally, mercifully, done.

Roberts needs to go next.
   236. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 09, 2008 at 07:21 AM (#2687010)
Roberts needs to go next.
Nah, the Orioles want to try to sign him to a long term extension first.
   237. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: February 09, 2008 at 07:27 AM (#2687011)
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]
   238. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 09, 2008 at 08:44 AM (#2687025)
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.
   239. ddp Posted: February 09, 2008 at 11:53 AM (#2687047)
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.
   240. Boriole Forester Posted: February 09, 2008 at 12:53 PM (#2687052)
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).
   241. rfloh Posted: February 09, 2008 at 01:18 PM (#2687056)
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.
   242. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: February 09, 2008 at 01:37 PM (#2687059)
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.
   243. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: February 09, 2008 at 05:17 PM (#2687130)
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.
   244. ddp Posted: February 09, 2008 at 08:29 PM (#2687250)
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.
   245. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 09, 2008 at 09:28 PM (#2687299)
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.
   246. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: February 09, 2008 at 09:41 PM (#2687300)
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.
   247. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 10, 2008 at 01:47 AM (#2687392)
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.
   248. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: February 10, 2008 at 02:14 AM (#2687415)
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.
   249. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: February 10, 2008 at 02:17 AM (#2687418)
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.
   250. Boriole Forester Posted: February 11, 2008 at 07:30 PM (#2688214)
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.
Page 3 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
1k5v3L
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 1.0843 seconds
47 querie(s) executed