Reynolds and McLouth want to return

[ofahn]

No proper evidence to conclude he would have made a difference in Game 3, so that was a bad example. But he would have been better than Machado.

It's the only example that's relevant. It was the only game where our scoring one more run would have made a difference in the outcome of that game or series.

[Matt P]

Looking at one game and claiming that's the only game that would have made a difference makes no sense to me. Who knows if we are even in situations like that if Headley is on the team. It's all just speculation and there is no right or wrong. I shouldn't have brought it up.

[ofahn]

Looking at one game and claiming that's the only game that would have made a difference makes no sense to me. Who knows if we are even in situations like that if Headley is on the team. It's all just speculation and there is no right or wrong. I shouldn't have brought it up.

Please take a look at the Yankees' series. There is only one game where Headley, or any other player, could have made some run difference.

[Matt P]

Please take a look at the Yankees' series. There is only one game where Headley, or any other player, could have made some run difference.

What I mean is, if we had Headley who is to say we don't finish 1st in the division? The guy was an absolute beast and that is with half his games in Petco. And, with him in the lineup batting 3rd, who is to say that when McLouth is on base he doesn't drive him in more? So many if's that it's impossible to say the only impact he could have possibly made is in 1 game since we don't know if we would even be playing that game if Headley was on the team.

[ofahn]

What I mean is, if we had Headley who is to say we don't finish 1st in the division? The guy was an absolute beast and that is with half his games in Petco. And, with him in the lineup batting 3rd, who is to say that when McLouth is on base he doesn't drive him in more? So many if's that it's impossible to say the only impact he could have possibly made is in 1 game since we don't know if we would even be playing that game if Headley was on the team.

You make a valid point but, as they say, 20/20 is hindsight. I'm satisfied with what was accomplished this season and glad we didn't overpay for Headley. Now, let's see if we can make a few moves and if our "core four" can take the next step.

[Matt P]

You make a valid point but, as they say, 20/20 is hindsight. I'm satisfied with what was accomplished this season and glad we didn't overpay for Headley. Now, let's see if we can make a few moves and if our "core four" can take the next step.

Why do you think it would be an overpay though? Even if Arrieta and Matusz turn out to be middle rotation starters (which I'm sure they could in the NL West) we would have one of the elite 3B in the game for the next 2 years.

[ofahn]

Why do you think it would be an overpay though? Even if Arrieta and Matusz turn out to be middle rotation starters (which I'm sure they could in the NL West) we would have one of the elite 3B in the game for the next 2 years.

They weren't the only price for the trade. The Padres wanted some of the few legit prospects we had, too.

At the time I was concerned that trading Matusz and Arrieta would leave us without pitching again. I didn't see Gonzalez, Saunders, and Steve Johnson making the contribution that they did and I really doubt anyone else did either.

[Matt P]

They weren't the only price for the trade. The Padres wanted some of the few legit prospects we had, too.

At the time I was concerned that trading Matusz and Arrieta would leave us without pitching again. I didn't see Gonzalez, Saunders, and Steve Johnson making the contribution that they did and I really doubt anyone else did either.

Right, but neither of them are close to the majors. When you have a team that is competing for a championship and you have a chance to add an elite 3B and a legit #3 hitter for 2 former top prospects and one prospect who is 4+ years away I don't get how that is overpay.

[ofahn]

When you have a team that is competing for a championship

I never considered the 2012 Orioles a championship team. I don't think DD did either. He certainly tried to improve the team, but he didn't mortgage the future for this season.

I'm still glad we didn't overpay.

[Matt P]

I never considered the 2012 Orioles a championship team. I don't think DD did either. He certainly tried to improve the team, but he didn't mortgage the future for this season.

I'm still glad we didn't overpay.

They were 1 hit away from playing in the ALCS against a team they are better than.

[ofahn]

They were 1 hit away from playing in the ALCS against a team they are better than.

That doesn't change the fact that I never considered a team that couldn't manufacture runs a championship team. As I posted before, they reminded me of the 96 Orioles. If you look that team up they hit a s@@t load of HRs, but didn't manufacture runs that well and had some other flaws. The 97 team didn't hit as many HRs, but was better balanced and they won 98 games. If we had THAT kind of team I would have considered mortgaging the future.

[Matt P]

That doesn't change the fact that I never considered a team that couldn't manufacture runs a championship team. As I posted before, they reminded me of the 96 Orioles. If you look that team up they hit a s@@t load of HRs, but didn't manufacture runs that well and had some other flaws. The 97 team didn't hit as many HRs, but was better balanced and they won 98 games. If we had THAT kind of team I would have considered mortgaging the future.

But wouldn't adding Headley help their ability to manufacture runs?

[ofahn]

But wouldn't adding Headley help their ability to manufacture runs?

Sure he would have. But at what long term cost?

There are other factors in that equation, too. How much of a difference at the plate would there have been between Headley and Machado? Your argument assumes that Headley would have contributed more key runs at critical points in a game than Machado. I can't think of any statistic that could validate that. And then there's the question of defense. As much as I like Headley I see him as a lesser defender than Machado. What would that difference have cost us?

I remain satisfied that we didn't mortgage the future to pay a premium for Headley this summer and hope we can work out a fair trade for him this winter.

[Matt P]

Sure he would have. But at what long term cost?

There are other factors in that equation, too. How much of a difference at the plate would there have been between Headley and Machado? Your argument assumes that Headley would have contributed more key runs at critical points in a game than Machado. I can't think of any statistic that could validate that. And then there's the question of defense. As much as I like Headley I see him as a lesser defender than Machado. What would that difference have cost us?

I remain satisfied that we didn't mortgage the future to pay a premium for Headley this summer and hope we can work out a fair trade for him this winter.

Headley is one of the elite defensive 3B as well as one of the elite offensive 3B. How can you not expect him to have been better than Machado was?
What future do you keep talking about? A couple of former prospects and a non top 100 prospect?

[Jordan Tuwiner]

Headley is one of the elite defensive 3B as well as one of the elite offensive 3B. How can you not expect him to have been better than Machado was?
What future do you keep talking about? A couple of former prospects and a non top 100 prospect?

I still don't think I would have traded for Headley during the season but now I'd be more okay with it.