Duquette: "We need to continue to look for a No. 1 starter"

[ofahn]

Greinke, on the other hand I would be ecstatic to see on the team.

I'm probably in the minority here, but I would see signing Greinke to a long term contract as a disaster. First, IMO, he's not a big game pitcher. I see him as a #2 SP at best. Second, I wouldn't want to invest 100M+ in a player that really isn't any better than we already have in the system. We don't have an unlimited payroll and we'll need to use that money to try to hold on to Wieters and some others. Besides, he'll cost us a draft choice and our farm system is almost barren aside from pitching.

If I could get Greinke for ONE year I'd be happy to meet his plane and drive him to the hotel. Five or six years at the salary he'll eventually sign for. Pass.

[ofahn]

Peavy would be a welcome addition to the team. But let the buyer beware. He's really not a lock or a true #1 type

Just for reference~ http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/peavyja01.shtml

Also I would like to see the team find a reliable Left Hander for the rotation.

However, if it's a big name from free agency I would try for Zack Greinke. Significantly fewer innings on the arm and very comparable.

Reference~ http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/greinza01.shtml?utm_campaign=Linker&utm_source=direct&utm_medium=linker-www.typepad.com

Why do you want Peavy so bad? He threw 100 more innings last season than in 2011 and is injury prone. He was great when he was in the NL pitching his home games at Petco but in Chicago he hasn't been a #1.

We would only be on the hook for one year and it would only cost us money if we get our draft pick back when he moves on at the end of the year.

Please name one other top line SP that we could get under those circumstances this winter? Do you think that any SP that as multiple option will want to pitch at Camden Yards unless we THROW money at them? A trade requires them to come and then they can see that they CAN be successful here. Just ask Jason Hammel.

We don't need to acquire SP on a long term basis. We already have it. Why spend our limited payroll and draft pick resources on something we already have?

[birdwatcher55]

I think Peavy would be a low risk, high reward option. He would plug into this rotation very nicely. He would be my #1 offseason move

[Matt P]

We would only be on the hook for one year and it would only cost us money if we get our draft pick back when he moves on at the end of the year.

Please name one other top line SP that we could get under those circumstances this winter? Do you think that any SP that as multiple option will want to pitch at Camden Yards unless we THROW money at them? A trade requires them to come and then they can see that they CAN be successful here. Just ask Jason Hammel.

We don't need to acquire SP on a long term basis. We already have it. Why spend our limited payroll and draft pick resources on something we already have?

Getting Peavy would eat at the available payroll for this season though which would all but disable any chance at upgrading at other positions that we need more than an injury risk pitcher.

[ofahn]

Getting Peavy would eat at the available payroll for this season though which would all but disable any chance at upgrading at other positions that we need more than an injury risk pitcher.

What upgrades do you see costing more than, say, 5M?

If we traded Hardy (to the Padres or some other team) to get Headley their salaries are a wash. If we keep Reynolds at about 8M then adding Peavy would run the payroll to just less than 100M. I don't know how PA feels about it but I see that as reasonable considering the additional 15M or so they made from this season and all of the additional tickets they'll sell next season. If the team gets off to a fast start they may hit 2.6M or better in attendance next year; and that's not counting the additional revenues from MASN for the increased viewership.

After 2013 Peavy's, Roberts', Hammels', and Wada's money comes off of the books. We may resign some of them but we're NOT obligated to anything.

[Matt P]

What upgrades do you see costing more than, say, 5M?

If we traded Hardy (to the Padres or some other team) to get Headley their salaries are a wash. If we keep Reynolds at about 8M then adding Peavy would run the payroll to just less than 100M. I don't know how PA feels about it but I see that as reasonable considering the additional 15M or so they made from this season and all of the additional tickets they'll sell next season. If the team gets off to a fast start they may hit 2.6M or better in attendance next year; and that's not counting the additional revenues from MASN for the increased viewership.

After 2013 Peavy's, Roberts', Hammels', and Wada's money comes off of the books. We may resign some of them but we're NOT obligated to anything.

If they are going to figure out a way to upgrade 2B or LF it will likely cost more than 5M. It really all depends what the real payroll number is that Duquette is allowed.

[ofahn]

If they are going to figure out a way to upgrade 2B or LF it will likely cost more than 5M. It really all depends what the real payroll number is that Duquette is allowed.

First, I don't see a viable option to upgrade 2B that's better than what we have unless we trade prospects we DON'T have to spare. If Roberts can't play at a ML level then I'm willing to platoon Flaherty and Andino. They might not combine to hit like Robbie Alomar but they have the gloves to get the job done and might reach league average because of the splits.

Second, LF seems like a simple fix. McLouth at something between 2 and 3M and Steve Pearce at about 1M. Their splits would place them ABOVE league average.

[DashingDave314]

Would you consider Peavy a number one?

No. Definitely not durable enough.

[DashingDave314]

I'm probably in the minority here, but I would see signing Greinke to a long term contract as a disaster. First, IMO, he's not a big game pitcher. I see him as a #2 SP at best. Second, I wouldn't want to invest 100M+ in a player that really isn't any better than we already have in the system. We don't have an unlimited payroll and we'll need to use that money to try to hold on to Wieters and some others. Besides, he'll cost us a draft choice and our farm system is almost barren aside from pitching.


If I could get Greinke for ONE year I'd be happy to meet his plane and drive him to the hotel. Five or six years at the salary he'll eventually sign for. Pass.

I agree with you. And you didn't even cover the biggest issue: his clear disdain for big markets. I know Baltimore isn't a big market, but we have two big markets in our division. He'd get eaten alive by the media. Just too big of a risk. For one year? Yes. Anything over 4 years? No because if he backfires it's going to be ugly.

[Matt P]

First, I don't see a viable option to upgrade 2B that's better than what we have unless we trade prospects we DON'T have to spare. If Roberts can't play at a ML level then I'm willing to platoon Flaherty and Andino. They might not combine to hit like Robbie Alomar but they have the gloves to get the job done and might reach league average because of the splits.

Second, LF seems like a simple fix. McLouth at something between 2 and 3M and Steve Pearce at about 1M. Their splits would place them ABOVE league average.

Texas needs pitching and could be willing to trade Kinsler. He would be a substantial upgrade. The O's have two legit top prospects in the minors that they aren't trading (Bundy and Gausman). Other than those two they shouldn't be scared to trade anyone in the minors.

[ofahn]

Texas needs pitching and could be willing to trade Kinsler.

Matt,

Have you considered that he's thirty one next season and is signed through his age thirty six season? I kind of see that as Brian Roberts, part II.

[Matt P]

Matt,

Have you considered that he's thirty one next season and is signed through his age thirty six season? I kind of see that as Brian Roberts, part II.

I know that which is another reason why he may be available and wouldn't be as expensive as one would think. As far as I know he has never hit himself in the head with a bat causing a concussion so I don't see how he's Roberts part II.

[ofahn]

Other than those two they shouldn't be scared to trade anyone in the minors.

I don't see Schoop as being ML ready until sometime in 2014, but he will be a candidate foe 2B, SS, or 3B when he comes up. If we trade for Headley Schoop would be a logical choice to replace him if he leaves after 2014 for free agency since he could slot in at 3B or SS if Machado moves back to 3B. I just don't want to trade this guy.

[ofahn]

I know that which is another reason why he may be available and wouldn't be as expensive as one would think. As far as I know he has never hit himself in the head with a bat causing a concussion so I don't see how he's Roberts part II.

OK, you made me laugh. But, seriously; his age, contract, and the demanding position that is 2B causes me a great deal of concern about going after him. I just see another player soaking up payroll dollars that can't play.

[DashingDave314]

I don't think that they are, but I do think they show a poor investment for the 4th pick in the draft and an a heavily over slotted 2nd round picks as relievers.

Both of these guys need to be starters or go IMO

Arrieta, I agree with. Matusz, he showed enough out of the pen to make me think at the very least, he's a very serviceable reliever. No sense in letting his high pick status warp what he is.