Posted July 21, 200915 yr 1. Jeremy Hermida, $1 million, Chris Coghlan and Brad Hand for Luke Scott ($1 mil #2) and a body, preferably warm but not required. This is really Coghlan and Brad Hand for Scott but the rest opens up a roster spot and pays JH for the remainder of the year which is the only way the Orioles do the deal. 2. Chris LeRoux and Jake Smolinski for Josh Willingham (or your favorite Josh Willingham clone). Enough said. ($1 mil #3). Olsen is dead meat, why not? There's some poetic justice to it too. 3. Aaron Thompson for Arthur Rhodes (a little less than $1 mil #4). Lousy deal but you aren't going anywhere with Pinto down the stretch. If you are going to be accused of renting players (as we always are) to buy your way into the playoffs why not get guys you know and trust. Scott goes to right, Willingham plays left, Ross is in center (until Maybin embarrasses the Marlins into bringing him up or Sept comes, whichever is first.) We have added two relatively cheap bats, we can keep or trade them off after the season depending how Morrison and Stanton are doing and recoup the players we put up this summer. Ditto Arthur Rhodes. The Orioles get two young players to add to their rebuilding efforts, The Nats the same, the Reds get a future starter for an aging lefty specialist. And like I said we have the option of restocking if we trade away our acquisitions later. Have at it. Just idle speculation based more on boredom than anything waiting for a client to send me stuff. it all makes sense in its own way although I'm sure lots of people will not like my choices. The reality is with Hermida, he's worthless, not as a human being, not even as a baseball player but as someone pointed out in a column today his numbers for the last year (the ASG in 2008) are mediocre at best while his price has skyrocketed, that's why his value is nil. We need the roster spot to make other moves happen. And then there's trading Uggla but I have a feeling he stays until the season ends. Again others may have a different opinion on that one.
July 21, 200915 yr I would do #2 and #3, but not the first one. Sending Hermida, Coghlan, AND Brad Hand to Baltimore is a bit much, unless we get someone good to go with Luke Scott. Especially since Chris Coghlan is supposed to become our next second-baseman when Uggla leaves.
July 21, 200915 yr So #2 and 3 we are trading for guys that we let go. Makes absolutely no sense. Luke Scott is a good hitter, but why move a DH onto an NL team? Once again is gonna add to an already bad defense. Sorry Marlins2003, I usually love your ideas, but none of these ideas seem really plausible.
July 21, 200915 yr No offense 2003, but #1 might be the worst fan created trade idea I have ever seen. Luke Scott is 31 and this season has been a statistical aberration when contrasted against his career. Coghlan is the future of 2B for the Fish, Brad Hand is a LHP with great stuff, and Hermida is worth more than Scott on his own IMO.
July 21, 200915 yr Individually, those moves aren't very good, collectively, they scream "desperate attempt" at the playoffs.
July 21, 200915 yr I don't like any of the ideas to be honest. Also...I don't really think we need a LOOGY. We just so happen to have one this year that has been getting righties out, as well, which is even better.
July 21, 200915 yr I don't like any of the ideas to be honest. Also...I don't really think we need a LOOGY. We just so happen to have one this year that has been getting righties out, as well, which is even better. Which is why we need a LOOGY, so he can be saved for when we most need him.
July 21, 200915 yr No offense 2003, but #1 might be the worst fan created trade idea I have ever seen. Luke Scott is 31 and this season has been a statistical aberration when contrasted against his career. Coghlan is the future of 2B for the Fish, Brad Hand is a LHP with great stuff, and Hermida is worth more than Scott on his own IMO. No way I'd value Hermida more than scott. Yeah he's not going to continue to hit .290, he's more a .260 hitter, but guy mashes to the beat of his own drum. And he has less service time then Hermida does. You can have 3 years of luke scotts low to mid .800 OPS or 2 years of Hermida's low to mid .700 OPS hoping he hits luke scotts low to mid .800 OPS. No reasons the Orioles would want another OFer though.
July 21, 200915 yr I don't like any of the ideas to be honest. Also...I don't really think we need a LOOGY. We just so happen to have one this year that has been getting righties out, as well, which is even better. Which is why we need a LOOGY, so he can be saved for when we most need him. LOOGY's are overrated. I'm certainly not willing to trade a young lefty in Thompson to get one. It's not a big deal. We have righties in the pen who can get lefties out. I'd much rather have Thompson providing depth, which we don't have much of in the minor leagues. A lot of our pitching depth is not close to the big leagues...not to mention, he's already giving up Brad Hand in one of his other trade scenarios. Not a fan of the ideas.
July 22, 200915 yr Author Individually, those moves aren't very good, collectively, they scream "desperate attempt" at the playoffs. lolol....yes they do !!!! hey i said I was bored.
July 22, 200915 yr I don't like any of the ideas to be honest. Also...I don't really think we need a LOOGY. We just so happen to have one this year that has been getting righties out, as well, which is even better. Which is why we need a LOOGY, so he can be saved for when we most need him. LOOGY's are overrated. I'm certainly not willing to trade a young lefty in Thompson to get one. It's not a big deal. We have righties in the pen who can get lefties out. I'd much rather have Thompson providing depth, which we don't have much of in the minor leagues. A lot of our pitching depth is not close to the big leagues...not to mention, he's already giving up Brad Hand in one of his other trade scenarios. Not a fan of the ideas. It's not about trading Thompson for a LOOGY, it's that you said we don't need a LOOGY. Having a LOOGY would make our bullpen a lot better. I don't really understand your Meyer thing. You complain when he's used as a LOOGY but you want him coming in in LOOGY roles. Makes me remember that one post game thread when Meyer closed that you were happy Fredi used Meyer as a non-loogy, but then later in your post you complained that he used Pinto instead of Meyer in a LOOGY role earlier in the game.
July 22, 200915 yr I don't like any of the ideas to be honest. Also...I don't really think we need a LOOGY. We just so happen to have one this year that has been getting righties out, as well, which is even better. Which is why we need a LOOGY, so he can be saved for when we most need him. LOOGY's are overrated. I'm certainly not willing to trade a young lefty in Thompson to get one. It's not a big deal. We have righties in the pen who can get lefties out. I'd much rather have Thompson providing depth, which we don't have much of in the minor leagues. A lot of our pitching depth is not close to the big leagues...not to mention, he's already giving up Brad Hand in one of his other trade scenarios. Not a fan of the ideas. It's not about trading Thompson for a LOOGY, it's that you said we don't need a LOOGY. Having a LOOGY would make our bullpen a lot better. I don't really understand your Meyer thing. You complain when he's used as a LOOGY but you want him coming in in LOOGY roles. Makes me remember that one post game thread when Meyer closed that you were happy Fredi used Meyer as a non-loogy, but then later in your post you complained that he used Pinto instead of Meyer in a LOOGY role earlier in the game. I remember that game against Pittsburgh. He could've used Meyer in the LOOGY situation in the 8th, and then closed with him in the 9th. That's what I was going for. 1.1 innings for a very good reliever in 1 game doesn't sound too impossible, does it? And I don't think we need a LOOGY. I'd say LOOGY's become really useful if you have a bullpen of Luis Ayala's and Cla Meredith's. But this isn't a big deal. Our bullpen has been good lately. Just like Meyer is a lefty who can get right-handers out, we have right-handers more than capable of getting lefties out. I don't see the huge need for one.
July 22, 200915 yr It's not about getting lefties out, it's about getting the best hitting lefties out. It's about playing to the percentages. Using Howard as an example, he has a career OPS of over 1 against RHP. It doesn't matter how good Kiko is, Howard is very very good against RHP and he will continue to be very very good. Against kiko he might not be 1 but he'll still be a great hitter. However, he only has a .750 OPS against LHP. This is a HUGE drop. Ontop of that, if we then have somebody like Rhodes or Grabow or whatever who are especially hard against other lefties, this then drops him even further. It's turning a very good hitter until a very bad hitter. With somebody like Chase Utley, no, it doesn't matter. But we have Howard, we have Delgado, we have Ibanez, we have McCann, we have Dunn to worry about.
July 22, 200915 yr I think we should go after Manny and Willis. We get the hitter we need and get Willis back into his comfort zone.
July 22, 200915 yr It's not about getting lefties out, it's about getting the best hitting lefties out. It's about playing to the percentages. Using Howard as an example, he has a career OPS of over 1 against RHP. It doesn't matter how good Kiko is, Howard is very very good against RHP and he will continue to be very very good. Against kiko he might not be 1 but he'll still be a great hitter. However, he only has a .750 OPS against LHP. This is a HUGE drop. Ontop of that, if we then have somebody like Rhodes or Grabow or whatever who are especially hard against other lefties, this then drops him even further. It's turning a very good hitter until a very bad hitter. With somebody like Chase Utley, no, it doesn't matter. But we have Howard, we have Delgado, we have Ibanez, we have McCann, we have Dunn to worry about. Eh, I can't disagree with this. In the NL East, yeah you're probably right now that I think about it. Still though, as was already said...I hope we don't trade a guy like Thompson to get one.
July 22, 200915 yr No offense 2003, but #1 might be the worst fan created trade idea I have ever seen. Luke Scott is 31 and this season has been a statistical aberration when contrasted against his career. Coghlan is the future of 2B for the Fish, Brad Hand is a LHP with great stuff, and Hermida is worth more than Scott on his own IMO. No way I'd value Hermida more than scott. Yeah he's not going to continue to hit .290, he's more a .260 hitter, but guy mashes to the beat of his own drum. And he has less service time then Hermida does. You can have 3 years of luke scotts low to mid .800 OPS or 2 years of Hermida's low to mid .700 OPS hoping he hits luke scotts low to mid .800 OPS. No reasons the Orioles would want another OFer though. Scott is 6 years older than Hermida and is having unprecedented power output so far this year. His OBP is also about 30 points over his career norms. His OPS is 200 points higher at Camden Yards than it is on the road.
July 22, 200915 yr Author Which is exactly why a guy like Luke Scott you only have to pay for three months makes sense. Spike you're making my argument for me. Many, many Orioles fans, reporters and columnists, think Scott was the team's MVO in the first half. He's cheap, he comes without any future obligation, he only lost his outfield job because they had to do something with Pie when they acquired him and out of options. LS started 100 games in either left or right field in both 2007 and 2008. As far as 2010, it's a million years in the future. I realize Spike probably never heard of him until he spent 30 seconds looking at a stats page to find something wrong with him as is his way, but spend a few minutes for yourselves reading what knowledgeable Orioles followers, in and out of the press say about the guy. I would say "beloved" is a good word in 2009 and yet everyone there knows his future is "now". As for Hermida, he's a throw-in in a deal like this. It is 100% true the Orioles don't need another outfielder or Hermida but he's packaged (in my little fantasy trade) just to get rid of him so you can free up the roster spot. You're really trading the other two guys for Scott, and people are 100% able to disagree or think it's too much of a price to pay. My premise - we just don't score enough runs or hit when men are on, and we really aren't going to pay $6 million to a failing Matt Holliday let's be honest with ourselves so yes, absolutely, I confess, in a moment or two of boredom I went bargain-hunting. I don't need to wage a battle over it either because Admin Beinfest isn't calling me for advice. As for the rest, I've hired back dozens of former employees over the years. Sometimes it's a personality fit on a project or because they offer a specific tool or component to whatever you're trying to accomplish (I think we would all agree Willingham "fits" with this group of guys) so I'd have no problem bringing him back and I doubt either FO or JW would have a problem with it. All that matters is three months of his OBP in the middle of the lineup (the same goes for LS) and the ability to play left field for the same amount of time. There would be no illusions going forward. There's no building for 2012. Arthur Rhodes is much the same, a guy we know, a guy who excelled while part of the Marlins and i defy anyone to say we couldn't use what he brings to the table in August and Sept. It is totally irrelevant that he went elsewhere this spring. All that matter now, is well, now. My three fantasy trades were, as I've said, the cheapest way I thought to fix this team and make a difference overnight. It has spurred debate, which is good and there's been some interesting posts, also good, so all in all, agree with the ideas or not, I'm glad I posted. Back to work.
July 22, 200915 yr Rhodes is under contract for next year, no? Yes. --- And you used to yell at people for hypothetical trades 03? What gives? Need attention this week? And a much simpler idea is to trade Hermida, Coghlan, and some pitching prospect for Andy LaRoche and Grabow. They'd do it to get Coghlan.
July 22, 200915 yr Rhodes is under contract for next year, no? Yes. --- And you used to yell at people for hypothetical trades 03? What gives? Need attention this week? And a much simpler idea is to trade Hermida, Coghlan, and some pitching prospect for Andy LaRoche and Grabow. They'd do it to get Coghlan. Wouldn't it be more beneficial to them, though, to not move Andy, but rather, Adam for a similar (maybe not as good) deal and use Andy/Alvarez at the corners? What I mean by this is, (and I could be wrong) I doubt they move Andy... so what would going for Adam (typically a 2nd half player, anyways) look like?
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.