dew1679666265

The Orioles gave Nick Markakis a six year, $66 million deal to avoid arbitration with the kid. $11 million for a 24-year old who just posted a 134 OPS+.

Is he a Type A or B? It does bring up an interesting question. Is Cruz/Ceda better than Gregg/draft pick?

Juan Cruz and his 176 and 152 ERA+'s the last two years would have looked a lot better than Kevin Gregg. Plus we'd have kept Ceda. He hasn't signed yet, so I wonder if he will get much more than Gregg. He may get more years, though, I'm not sure.

the vast majority of prospects ultimately are busts though. The vast majority aren't extremely well thought of. Vitters is much more highly regarded than most prospects. That doesn't mean he'll necessarily turn into anything, but he still has a greater shot than most. The vast majority of good to great teams out there get a strong aid from their minor league system. Unless you're the Yankees and can throw $250 million around, there are going to be spots that you must fill with cheap talent. That's where the farm system is most important. i don't disagree with any of that. you dont have to try and convince me of the importance of producing talent from the farm. i'm already convinced. but again, you dont let a kid who's never been above A ball (and frankly wasnt overly impressive in A ball) be a deal breaker in a potential jake peavy acquisition. I guess the biggest problem I had was that you seemed to not give Vitters any chance of being great - hence the Kevin Orie reference. The likelihood of busts is the reason you stack your farm as much as possible - in the event that a number of them bust. when we're talking about a guy who was fairly average in A ball, why should i give him any chance of being great? Because he was young (or very young) for A-ball and he has great tools. He's not a 24-year old college player toiling away in A-ball. I'm pretty sure he came out from high school and is just now 20 (or so). He's very young with great skills - he just needs to develop.

Just because Alfonseca sucked, doesn't mean Gregg will. Gregg Home/Away splits also show that Dolphin Stadium had very little effect in his results. Also keep in mind Gregg was pretty good out of the pen for the Angels in 06, his overall era was just higher due to him starting 3 games. He had a 3.45 era in 62.2 IP while striking out 62 and walking 19. Over the last three seasons out of the pen, he has a 3.47 era, striking out 206 with teams hitting just 227 against him in 215 IP. I expect Gregg to have simliar numbers for the Cubs next year. Plus if Gregg isn't pitching in the 8th or 9th who will be then? Vizcaino? Gaudin? Guzman might be a good option if you can count on him staying healthy? Samardzija maybe, but then he can't start and thats big role for such a raw pitcher IMO. Lou wouldn't do this, but I wouldn't have a terrible problem with Wuertz as the closer and Marmol in the eighth inning/fireman role. I don't have a terrible problem with Gregg - I just wonder if Ceda didn't have more value than a decent ML reliever. Maybe not, but that's my only real problem with that move.

Gregg doesn't need to improve. He needs to maintain. And pitchers do not adhere to the age 27/28 bell curve. The fact that Gregg is 30 is irrelevant for a relief pitcher needing to maintain prior years production. Further, Alfonseca is a bad comparison and has nothing to do with Gregg. If Gregg maintains what he's done the last two years, he'll be a slight downgrade from Wood. Wood 2008 - 137 ERA+ 1.085 WHIP Gregg 2008 - 125 ERA+ 1.282 WHIP

Not people...just me. I think that lowly of Kevin Gregg. I think it was the worst move we've made this offseason. Closer experience/success doesn't mean squat. Want proof? Look at the last "closer" we acquired from FL. Alfonseca sucked for us after leaving Florida. Dolphin Stadium, other than 2007 which was a fluke, has always been a pitchers park. Gregg is 30, so it's probably not reasonable to expect any kind of improvement going forward, as he should now be on the downside of his peak. Kind of like Alfonseca when we got him. He very well may prove me wrong, (I hope so), but I'd be more than happy to see him offloaded in some sort of Peavy deal since the Pad's need a closer. It might be wishful thinking, but if we had to swallow 2 mil to help SD get a closer out of that deal, I wouldn't be upset in the least about it. Nah, replacing DeRo's production (or Dunn's if we traded DeRo and acquired a player who could stay healthy for 100 or more games) with a mix of Bradley/Gathright/Miles/Reed/Hoff was the worst move we made - and that's if Hendry does not acquire Peavy. If Hendry does get Peavy, then Gregg might be the worst deal - but primarily only because we gave up Ceda, who I perceive to have more value than Gregg. And Alf wasn't that good when we got him. He just saved a bunch of games (84 in three seasons with Fla).

the vast majority of prospects ultimately are busts though. The vast majority aren't extremely well thought of. Vitters is much more highly regarded than most prospects. That doesn't mean he'll necessarily turn into anything, but he still has a greater shot than most. The vast majority of good to great teams out there get a strong aid from their minor league system. Unless you're the Yankees and can throw $250 million around, there are going to be spots that you must fill with cheap talent. That's where the farm system is most important. i don't disagree with any of that. you dont have to try and convince me of the importance of producing talent from the farm. i'm already convinced. but again, you dont let a kid who's never been above A ball (and frankly wasnt overly impressive in A ball) be a deal breaker in a potential jake peavy acquisition. I guess the biggest problem I had was that you seemed to not give Vitters any chance of being great - hence the Kevin Orie reference. The likelihood of busts is the reason you stack your farm as much as possible - in the event that a number of them bust.

Fontenot was going to get his ABs no matter what. It's Miles/Gathright/Hoff/Reed who will now get a whole lot of ABs when Bradley is hurt. Those ABs previously would have gone to DeRosa.

the vast majority of prospects ultimately are busts though. The vast majority aren't extremely well thought of. Vitters is much more highly regarded than most prospects. That doesn't mean he'll necessarily turn into anything, but he still has a greater shot than most. The vast majority of good to great teams out there get a strong aid from their minor league system. Unless you're the Yankees and can throw $250 million around, there are going to be spots that you must fill with cheap talent. That's where the farm system is most important.

There's no think to it. I'd take DeRosa.

From what I've heard from articles and posters here, it seems that Ricketts is our best bet after Cuban. I'm still pissed Cuban got screwed out of it, but Ricketts sounds decent.

The thing with Vitters, though, is that he could be the next Kevin Orie or he could be the next Aramis Ramirez/David Wright/etc. That's the inherent risk you take when trading a youngster. i realize that. my whole point is that you can't let a risk hold you back from acquiring a jake peavy. if we're talking about an average to above average pitcher, then maybe you don't trade vitters. but we're talking about one of the game's best. you absolutely take a risk to acquire him. I agree with that and would do the Peavy deal whether it included Vitters or not - like BBB said, Vitters isn't going to break the farm, it's already broken. That said, though, you seemed to be erring too much on the side of him busting out. Vitters is still very young and has a good chance to be very good. I'm not sure he'll ever reach the Aramis/Wright level, but I'd say that's more likely than being Kevin Orie.

It appears the Ryan to the Jets deal is done and waiting on an announcement.

The thing with Vitters, though, is that he could be the next Kevin Orie or he could be the next Aramis Ramirez/David Wright/etc. That's the inherent risk you take when trading a youngster.

The Yankees have regressed since the late 90s, they're definitely not as good as they were and part of the problem is how they have changed. I'm not seeing a huge difference - in results at least. They were only really good from '96-'99 in the '90s and in those years they had one 100 win season and three 90-win seasons. From 2002 to 2004 they surged with three straight 100-win years and since have won 90 games three of the past four years. They've had two 80-win seasons since 1996. I'll agree, though, that last year's 89-win campaign was pretty poor for the Yanks - both in record and talent level. NOTE: I'm not arguing that we can abandon the farm and have anywhere near this success. We don't - and likely won't for a long time - have a $250 million payroll. That pitching regressed from where it was from say 97-01, the Yankees tried to outclub teams and that just don't work in the post-season, even in that era. Now that runs are becoming more of a premium, it'll prob. take on a greater importance. It's very true the postseason success hasn't been there - and I agree much of that is poor pitching. Hopefully we can go ahead and get that World Series championship under our belt so that Hendry will feel less pressure to win now.

The Yankees have regressed since the late 90s, they're definitely not as good as they were and part of the problem is how they have changed. I'm not seeing a huge difference - in results at least. They were only really good from '96-'99 in the '90s and in those years they had one 100 win season and three 90-win seasons. From 2002 to 2004 they surged with three straight 100-win years and since have won 90 games three of the past four years. They've had two 80-win seasons since 1996. I'll agree, though, that last year's 89-win campaign was pretty poor for the Yanks - both in record and talent level. NOTE: I'm not arguing that we can abandon the farm and have anywhere near this success. We don't - and likely won't for a long time - have a $250 million payroll.

The Cubs definitely need pitching prospects, just that what they rec'd from Clev. wouldn't classify as anything elite or worth holding onto. That type of thinking is what led the Yankees to where they've been for the last 5 years and not something the Cubs have the capacity to do. While I would have no problem in this case of Vitters being involved for Peavy, they should factor the state of the pipeline and what blue-chip guys are being included even if that player will help the Cubs. They trade Vitters and the cubs have maybe the worst farm in the game, espec. if Samardzija does spend the year in the Cubs' pen. the playoffs? "that type of thinking" has put them in the playoffs 13 out of the last 14 years. if trading vitters leads up to that then i'm more in favor than ever. We don't have a $250 million payroll, though.

The Giants have promoted from within to fill their DC spot.

Man that outfield really lacks power, though. They may end up with less than 30 HR's total between the 3. Probably all from Markakis. He hit 20 last year, Jones hit 9 and Pie hit 1.

Ping mentioned a page ago that he was sixth in both '07 and '06. The Oriole farm system was below average both those years, according to Ping.

I'm pulling for Pittsburgh just for the crap of it. I'm pretty convinced the Titans crapped away a Super Bowl appearance with their turnovers against Baltimore, though. And that makes it all the more frustrating.

MLB.com and B-R both have him listed as just So Taguchi.

He says he's fine.

Brandon LaFell has decided not to enter the draft and will return to LSU.