Welcome to the Orioles Nation Forums! Like most online communities, you must register to post on our message board. However, posting is free--it always will be--and registration is a simple process. Become part of the growing Orioles Nation community and register now!

K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #1 by Jordan Tuwiner » February 3rd, 2012, 5:15 pm

https://twitter.com/#!/Kevin_Goldstein/ ... 9250894849

Nada on Soler; hearing Orioles might be more in on Cespedes than we thought. RT @furso27: @Kevin_Goldstein anything new on cespedes/soler?
User avatar
Jordan Tuwiner
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 2588
Joined: September 2010
Location: Israel
Reputation Score: 57



Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #2 by ofahn » February 3rd, 2012, 5:40 pm

WHY NOT?!?

This is a potential impact player. The team should decide what his value is to them and be willing to spend that amount, if necessary.

Under Andy MacPhail we wouldn't have spent even the TIME to download the YouTube video, much less the money to sign him.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4401
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #3 by docjj » February 3rd, 2012, 6:08 pm

I pray we sign him, even if he turns into a 40 million dollar bust.

Why?

Easy- it gives me something to watch, to follow this season. My list is so short so far: 1. The development of Machado and Schoop. 2. Seeing if either Asian import can pitch effectively in the Majors. 3. Wieters/Jones. 4. Dylan Bundy.


It would be nice to add no 5. Watching Cespedes and seeing if he can develop into an impact player. It would also give us 3 top ten MLB prospects, and that's something you can build upon.
docjj
DSL Orioles
 
Posts: 182
Joined: January 2011
Reputation Score: 3

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #4 by Zach » February 3rd, 2012, 8:56 pm

I would say looking at the development of Britton could easily be a 5 to add to you list. A possible 6 is watching the prospects of contender teams with a need for an arm so we can see possible players to get when we trade Guthrie.
Zach
DSL Orioles
 
Posts: 227
Joined: June 2011
Reputation Score: 3

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #5 by CSPitt17130 » February 3rd, 2012, 9:42 pm

Zach wrote:I would say looking at the development of Britton could easily be a 5 to add to you list. A possible 6 is watching the prospects of contender teams with a need for an arm so we can see possible players to get when we trade Guthrie.


For your number 6, I'd be thinking about watching the prospects of contenders who need a CF (St. Louis, Washington, Miami, Atlanta, maybe even KC), especially if we sign Cespedes. Half a season at Norfolk for Cespedes, trade Jones and then move up Cespedes from AAA.
CSPitt17130
DSL Orioles
 
Posts: 181
Joined: December 2011
Reputation Score: 10

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #6 by Tucker Blair » February 3rd, 2012, 11:36 pm

I'm about to listen to his podcast. I'll see what else he says about this.

I trust anything KG says though, he has a strong track record and talks to a lot of people. Wouldn't surprise me at all if he knew even more about Cespedes.
User avatar
Tucker Blair
Orioles Nation Staff
Executive Editor
 
Posts: 1602
Joined: October 2011
Location: Elkridge, MD
Reputation Score: 45

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #7 by Matt P » February 4th, 2012, 2:35 am

I'd rather just extend Jones.
Matt P
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1717
Joined: October 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Reputation Score: 37

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #8 by ofahn » February 4th, 2012, 9:30 am

Matt P wrote:I'd rather just extend Jones.


IMO his TRADE value is a LOT more than his FIELD value.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4401
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #9 by Tucker Blair » February 4th, 2012, 6:26 pm

ofahn wrote:
Matt P wrote:I'd rather just extend Jones.


IMO his TRADE value is a LOT more than his FIELD value.
ofahn wrote:
Matt P wrote:I'd rather just extend Jones.


IMO his TRADE value is a LOT more than his FIELD value.

It certainly is at this point. But the Orioles are going to need another team to believe that.
The Braves believed it (assuming that trade was a true rumor), but just didn't offer the Orioles the correct package they wanted.
User avatar
Tucker Blair
Orioles Nation Staff
Executive Editor
 
Posts: 1602
Joined: October 2011
Location: Elkridge, MD
Reputation Score: 45

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #10 by birdwatcher55 » February 6th, 2012, 2:55 pm

I wonder if the Guthrie deal might be tied into this in some way financially?? 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #11 by ofahn » February 6th, 2012, 3:47 pm

birdwatcher55 wrote:I wonder if the Guthrie deal might be tied into this in some way financially?? 8-)


I don't think so. The Guthrie deal was almost a wash financially. Besides, we had almost 40M come off of the books at the end of the season. So far, we've spent less than 20M of it including raises. There should be plenty of money left.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4401
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #12 by Jordan Tuwiner » February 7th, 2012, 8:49 am

ofahn wrote:
birdwatcher55 wrote:I wonder if the Guthrie deal might be tied into this in some way financially?? 8-)


I don't think so. The Guthrie deal was almost a wash financially. Besides, we had almost 40M come off of the books at the end of the season. So far, we've spent less than 20M of it including raises. There should be plenty of money left.

Yeah, I believe Guthrie is making 300K less than Lindstrom and Hammel.

But as you stated they definitely have the money for Cespedes if they want him.
User avatar
Jordan Tuwiner
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 2588
Joined: September 2010
Location: Israel
Reputation Score: 57



Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #13 by birdwatcher55 » February 7th, 2012, 6:53 pm

Jordan wrote:
ofahn wrote:
birdwatcher55 wrote:I wonder if the Guthrie deal might be tied into this in some way financially?? 8-)


I don't think so. The Guthrie deal was almost a wash financially. Besides, we had almost 40M come off of the books at the end of the season. So far, we've spent less than 20M of it including raises. There should be plenty of money left.

Yeah, I believe Guthrie is making 300K less than Lindstrom and Hammel.

But as you stated they definitely have the money for Cespedes if they want him.

I wonder is this is DD's call or does PGA get involved??? 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #14 by Old Sneakers » February 8th, 2012, 6:52 am

For $35-40million you can bet DD is the one that will answer for it. Looking brilliant if it works out. As well as the one on a short leash if it doesn't.
User avatar
Old Sneakers
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 775
Joined: March 2011
Reputation Score: 32

Re: K. Goldstein: "O's might be more in on Cespedes than we thought"

PostPost #15 by birdwatcher55 » February 8th, 2012, 1:46 pm

OH chatter today seems to suggest he will sign with Marlins... 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11


Next

Return to Baltimore Orioles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron