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!

Trade for Garza

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #16 by CSPitt17130 » June 12th, 2012, 7:21 pm

Matt P wrote:I wouldn't mind giving up 2 of them if we had a window for an extension.


This isn't the type of deal they should be looking at right now. He's not the final piece. There's uncertainty in LF, 3B, and 2B. I don't think it would surprise anyone if Hammel or Chen or the entire bullpen did not continue pitching as well as they are now, and beyond those two middle of the rotation starters, more uncertainty.
CSPitt17130
DSL Orioles
 
Posts: 181
Joined: December 2011
Reputation Score: 10

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #17 by Ampontan » June 12th, 2012, 10:33 pm

A_K wrote:Trading for Garza is a terrible idea.


And trading for Soriano is an even worse idea.

Do not understand the people so ready to give up Schoop at all. I'm not interested in sharing the experience of Seattle fans watching both Adam Jones and Eric Bedard play in other uniforms.
Ampontan
DSL Orioles
 
Posts: 180
Joined: February 2012
Reputation Score: 10

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #18 by A_K » June 12th, 2012, 11:50 pm

Yeah I didn't even think it was worth responding to the idea of trading for Soriano. I wouldn't take him for free.
A_K
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 608
Joined: April 2011
Reputation Score: 43

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #19 by birdwatcher55 » June 13th, 2012, 12:09 pm

Matt P wrote:He is under control through 2013 and would be a perfect fit in Baltimore.


I agree but at what cost?? Are you ready to give up on Schoop or Machado??
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #20 by Matt P » June 13th, 2012, 6:09 pm

birdwatcher55 wrote:
Matt P wrote:He is under control through 2013 and would be a perfect fit in Baltimore.


I agree but at what cost?? Are you ready to give up on Schoop or Machado??

I would have no problem giving up Schoop as the main piece in a deal. It wouldn't be giving up on either of them if either is ever traded.
Matt P
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1717
Joined: October 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Reputation Score: 37

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #21 by mikezpen » June 14th, 2012, 8:55 am

Dempster?

Another question: Could the Orioles work a three-way to get a decent prospect or two to use in such a trade? Reynolds hit 37 (?) homers last year. Would he fetch something decent you could swing for a pitcher?
mikezpen
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 250
Joined: June 2012
Reputation Score: 11

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #22 by dan72 » June 14th, 2012, 10:23 am

Just to fuel the fire, the Orioles broadcasters last night made mention of a rumor that the Orioles were still shopping for a veteran pitcher. In the very next breath he talked about the cubs as a seller........ I really think that the longer we hang around the top of the division the better our chances are for a trade.
I'm not in a hurry to get rid of any prospects but I think a combination of 1 major league ready pitcher plus a couple of mid level prospects would get it done.
dan72
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 367
Joined: July 2011
Reputation Score: 5

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #23 by Tucker Blair » June 14th, 2012, 11:26 am

While I covet a prospect like the next guy,

I think they are sometimes put on too large a pedestal. They are just prospects in reality and have not accomplished anything.
The Orioles could afford to trade one like Schoop if they got an applicable return that made sense in the long run.
User avatar
Tucker Blair
Orioles Nation Staff
Executive Editor
 
Posts: 1601
Joined: October 2011
Location: Elkridge, MD
Reputation Score: 45

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #24 by A_K » June 14th, 2012, 1:24 pm

Individual prospects with which common fans are familiar are absolutely, without question, put on too high of a pedestal.

But the overall approach of non-contending teams (which the Orioles may prove not to be afterall) valuing prospects in general over expensive and/or approaching free agency veterans is absolutely valid.

A straight up Garza for Schoop trade would be fine. There's nothing guaranteed about Schoop, and Garza's a proven starter in the AL East. But even with Schoop as a centerpiece, you'd be looking at probably 4 total prospects heading to Chicago to bring back Garza. Every time you add another player to the deal, you substantially increase the chances that you've just given up a valuable player in the future. And for what? For the chance that the O's can continue to outperform their true ability, and the hope that Garza will want to stay here long term? I honestly think we'd be looking at a Schoop-Delmonico-Bridwell-Glynn Davis type of deal. The O's have an extremely thin farm system as is, and can't reasonably survive by just throwing prospects away in bunches for a single, admittedly accomplished and impressive, veteran player.
A_K
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 608
Joined: April 2011
Reputation Score: 43

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #25 by CSPitt17130 » June 14th, 2012, 4:08 pm

TuckerBlair89 wrote:The Orioles could afford to trade one like Schoop if they got an applicable return that made sense in the long run.


I don't understand this thought that so many people seem to have. What's the long run in this case? Two years? Three? That's not the long run. If the Orioles could get a player worth anything for more than three years, it'll take much more than just Schoop anyway. The Orioles have only been winning for two and a half months. They are not at the point where they should be trading prospects. Re-read my post in this thread about how the Rays operate. That's how the Orioles should run their organization, just with the ability to add expensive free agents when they reach the point of contention on their own.
CSPitt17130
DSL Orioles
 
Posts: 181
Joined: December 2011
Reputation Score: 10

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #26 by OriolesRedskins28 » June 14th, 2012, 8:39 pm

CSPitt17130 wrote:
OriolesRedskins28 wrote:I think the reason the O's have the advantage over the Rays is their ability to resign their OWN star players. The perfect example would be Adam Jones.


I disagree. The Rays are better at signing their own players. They have Longoria and Moore and Price locked up to WAY, WAY better contracts than the one that Jones got. Jones essentially signed a deal close to what he would get in free agency. Longoria was extended for $44 million for 9 seasons, the bulk of which is in the 3 final years as club options. Moore's is similar; 8 years for $37 million with the three final years holding most of the money as club options. This is how Wieters should have been extended a year or two ago. Even the McCutchen extension with the Pirates (6 years for $51 million) came this year and it makes the Jones extension look stupid.

How the Rays operate and how they've become successful isn't a secret to other teams, so there's no reason for other teams to do stupid things (like extend Ethier for a worse contract than Jones got), but they do it anyway. So far, Duquette has been somewhere in between Andrew Friedman with the Rays and Ned Coletti with the Dodgers. We'll see what he does at the deadline with a team that most intelligent people believe is overachieving. If he trades Schoop, Bridwell, Lino, etc., to bolster this season's team for a run at the playoffs, he'll have shifted himself way towards Coletti, in my opinion.


Well said but I am still against signing superstar players like Prince and Pujols to mega contracts under any circumstances.
OriolesRedskins28
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 427
Joined: August 2011
Reputation Score: 25

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #27 by A_K » June 14th, 2012, 9:46 pm

Comparing the Jones contract to those of McCutchen and Longoria doesn't make much sense, given their extremely different arbitration situations. I agree that the Rays approach is the most preferable and that more teams should utilize it, but comparing those contracts to the one Jones got is nonetheless comparing apples to hermit crabs.

By most accounts Jones' contract pays him the going free agent rate for the level of play he's had for the last two seasons. If he performs between his current, unsustainable rate and what he did previously, the contract will generate some surplus value. Anything above that would give the team substantial surplus value. The overwhelming consensus, by which I mean virtually every non-Keith Law analyst, has graded the deal as a good one for both the Orioles and Jones.
A_K
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 608
Joined: April 2011
Reputation Score: 43

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #28 by Matt P » June 15th, 2012, 1:30 am

TuckerBlair89 wrote:While I covet a prospect like the next guy,

I think they are sometimes put on too large a pedestal. They are just prospects in reality and have not accomplished anything.
The Orioles could afford to trade one like Schoop if they got an applicable return that made sense in the long run.


Exactly.

Garza is a proven pitcher in the AL East who would be the O's #1 pitcher if acquired. He wouldn't be a 2 month rental as he is under contract next season. There is no guarantee that Schoop will ever make it and Garza is going to be the best available pitcher that the O's will have a shot at getting this season or next off season. He has done well in the AL East before and has improved in his time with Chicago.

This team this year has something special going on. I can't explain it but there is just something about this team that they will never give up no matter how many runs they are down and they honestly believe they will win every time they step on the field. Adding a #1/#2 starting pitcher into the mix would be another huge push to get this team to the playoffs. I keep reading people saying not to sacrifice the future but the future is not guaranteed. No one that would likely be involved in the trade would have any impact on this year or next years team like Garza would.

We actually might be one or two starting pitchers away from contending this year and next if guys keep playing the way they are. Davis, Hardy, and Jones have been great, Wieters has been good, Reynolds has been great since coming off the DL (and was good the few games before he got hurt as well), Roberts looks like the Roberts of old, they actually have capable hitters off the bench in guys like Andino, Pearce, and Tolleson, Markakis could be back in a few weeks, and imagine if Reimold ever gets healthy. Hammel and Chen have been very good, Matusz has been good for the most part, Arrieta has shown flashes, and Hunter has been bad. The bullpen has been nothing short of phenomenal.

I think people should stop worrying about potentially having good players in 2+ years and worry about getting an impact player for the next 2 seasons.
Matt P
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1717
Joined: October 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Reputation Score: 37

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #29 by CSPitt17130 » June 15th, 2012, 7:11 am

A_K wrote:Comparing the Jones contract to those of McCutchen and Longoria doesn't make much sense, given their extremely different arbitration situations. I agree that the Rays approach is the most preferable and that more teams should utilize it, but comparing those contracts to the one Jones got is nonetheless comparing apples to hermit crabs.


No it's not. It's comparing how the Rays and Pirates chose to deal with extending their star players to how the Orioles chose to deal with it. The Rays and Pirates took care of it early and were able to get great deals. The Orioles waited too long. Because of that, Jones has to play better than what he has before this season for most of the contract in order to earn the money he's getting.

A_K wrote:By most accounts Jones' contract pays him the going free agent rate for the level of play he's had for the last two seasons. If he performs between his current, unsustainable rate and what he did previously, the contract will generate some surplus value. Anything above that would give the team substantial surplus value. The overwhelming consensus, by which I mean virtually every non-Keith Law analyst, has graded the deal as a good one for both the Orioles and Jones.


The goal in extending your superstar players should not be to pay the free agent rate. So while the contract may not hurt the Orioles, it won't be advantageous for the team in the future like those of Longoria and McCutchen.
CSPitt17130
DSL Orioles
 
Posts: 181
Joined: December 2011
Reputation Score: 10

Re: Trade for Garza

PostPost #30 by CSPitt17130 » June 15th, 2012, 7:26 am

Matt P wrote:Exactly.

Garza is a proven pitcher in the AL East who would be the O's #1 pitcher if acquired. He wouldn't be a 2 month rental as he is under contract next season. There is no guarantee that Schoop will ever make it and Garza is going to be the best available pitcher that the O's will have a shot at getting this season or next off season. He has done well in the AL East before and has improved in his time with Chicago.

This team this year has something special going on. I can't explain it but there is just something about this team that they will never give up no matter how many runs they are down and they honestly believe they will win every time they step on the field. Adding a #1/#2 starting pitcher into the mix would be another huge push to get this team to the playoffs.


Garza is not a #1. Maybe a #2. Do you know who has more value than Garza this year? Hammel, Chen, AND Arrieta.

Matt P wrote:I keep reading people saying not to sacrifice the future but the future is not guaranteed. No one that would likely be involved in the trade would have any impact on this year or next years team like Garza would.

We actually might be one or two starting pitchers away from contending this year and next if guys keep playing the way they are. Davis, Hardy, and Jones have been great, Wieters has been good, Reynolds has been great since coming off the DL (and was good the few games before he got hurt as well), Roberts looks like the Roberts of old, they actually have capable hitters off the bench in guys like Andino, Pearce, and Tolleson, Markakis could be back in a few weeks, and imagine if Reimold ever gets healthy. Hammel and Chen have been very good, Matusz has been good for the most part, Arrieta has shown flashes, and Hunter has been bad. The bullpen has been nothing short of phenomenal.

I think people should stop worrying about potentially having good players in 2+ years and worry about getting an impact player for the next 2 seasons.


The Orioles aren't losing anyone going into next year. Why not let this team prove that they can play this well for more than two and a half months and then make a move like this next trade deadline if they're in the same spot? I would be less opposed to this (yet still against it) if the contributors on this team were playing as expected and not much greater than that. Would you be surprised if Hammel and Chen started getting hit around and then the O's had no reliable starters? Or if Jones starts hitting more like last year than this year? Then they would have traded half of their farm system (and that's what it would take if you look at what the Cubs gave up to Garza) for a pitcher that won't make that much of a difference because the rest of the team isn't close to as good as NY, Boston, or Tampa Bay.
CSPitt17130
DSL Orioles
 
Posts: 181
Joined: December 2011
Reputation Score: 10


PreviousNext

Return to Baltimore Orioles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests