692 replies to this topic

[Mackus]

If the O's were willing to spend whatever to keep him, they would make that offer when they still have control.
And whatever offer they made, it wasn't enough... because Henderson went to FA.
So then he's in FA, and the O's are then going to make the largest offer?

Sure. They wouldn't even necessarily have to increase their offer over what was made before free agency.

Henderson doesn't know what the ultimate biggest offer is until he hits FA, because he can only talk to one team. He turns down 12/$600M before the season because he thinks he can get more or at least get that if he waits. So he waits. Free agency comes and nobody offers more so then the Os offer becomes the biggest and he accepts, if it's still on the table.

Again, wildly unlikely. But we're comparing it to a really high (or low) bar in your mega-massive shorter term deal.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Sure. They wouldn't even necessarily have to increase their offer over what was made before free agency.

Henderson doesn't know what the ultimate biggest offer is until he hits FA, because he can only talk to one team. He turns down 12/$600M before the season because he thinks he can get more or at least get that if he waits. So he waits. Free agency comes and nobody offers more so then the Os offer becomes the biggest and he accepts, if it's still on the table.

Again, wildly unlikely. But we're comparing it to a really high (or low) bar in your mega-massive shorter term deal.

Ok, that's reasonable.
I would assume that Boras would know when the offer was turned down that there was more available elsewhere.

Not suggesting tampering, but would think they would know.

[Mackus]

Ok, that's reasonable.
I would assume that Boras would know when the offer was turned down that there was more available elsewhere.

Not suggesting tampering, but would think they would know.

Matt Carpenter, Blake Snell, Jordan Montgomery and Pete Alonso all turned down more than they ended up signing for in recent Boras client history.

[BobPhelan]

Yeah I think Boras will test the market with Gunnar regardless of any offer we make him pre-FA simply because that offer will likely still be there if nobody else can beat it. But I do think the Orioles will make a run at him regardless.

Maybe by 2028 there’s another up the middle infielder in the system banging on the door and it makes it easier to trade him for a haul and then still potentially try to sign him in FA. But we’re so far away from that it’s hardly worth thinking about.

[dude]

I will correspondingly have higher odds beyond '28, with the return I've added for him, vs. just seeing him leaving and getting a draft pick. And that's true even if the players obtained provide absolutely zero themselves (could be used as trade bait for other). 

 

This is not a fact.  The opportunity to win in the future isn't any more tied to the "return you get from Gunnar" than current winning opportunity is tied to rebuilding. Every situation provides different opportunity, great. 

 

This offseason should have been all about trading and we just signed fringe 1-year guys.  We haven't leveraged any depth for winning.  Because you have more (organizationally) doesn't equal a better 26-man roster. 

 

If Gunnar wants to be here, great, figure it out.  If he doesn't, trade him, don't trade him, anything is fine if you are executing some plan for winning, but there's LOTS and LOTS of ways to add Talent that have nothing to do with the return for Gunnar for those future rosters. 

[BSLChrisStoner]

This is not a fact. The opportunity to win in the future isn't any more tied to the "return you get from Gunnar" than current winning opportunity is tied to rebuilding. Every situation provides different opportunity, great.

This offseason should have been all about trading and we just signed fringe 1-year guys. We haven't leveraged any depth for winning. Because you have more (organizationally) doesn't equal a better 26-man roster.

If Gunnar wants to be here, great, figure it out. If he doesn't, trade him, don't trade him, anything is fine if you are executing some plan for winning, but there's LOTS and LOTS of ways to add Talent that have nothing to do with the return for Gunnar for those future rosters.

I don't care what odds you want to assign it, the Orioles will have a better chance at contending after 28 if they have received the best trade available to them (trade with at least 2 years of team control remaining) vs letting him leave for a draft pick.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Matt Carpenter, Blake Snell, Jordan Montgomery and Pete Alonso all turned down more than they ended up signing for in recent Boras client history.

Do you think the Orioles will ever have the best offer to the best / one of the best players in the game on an open market?

[makoman]

I don't care what odds you want to assign it, the Orioles will have a better chance at contending after 28 if they have received the best trade available to them (trade with at least 2 years of team control remaining) vs letting him leave for a draft pick.

Why is Gunnar so replaceable in '26, '27, '28, but those random unknown prospects are not? We don't need any of those guys to compete.

 

I think we all agree it is a fact that the chances with Gunnar in '26, '27, '28 are better than if he's traded, unless something truly unusual happens like career ending stuff. I think it goes down drastically, but you don't seem to, that's fine.

 

But the prospects just have an incredibly wide range of outcomes. If you end up getting a superstar then yes you've won, you might get 4-5 years of a star instead of 3 or 2 with Gunnar, so maybe your overall 2027-32 chances went up even though 27-28 went down. But if you don't get a star then you didn't really change the odds post '28 because non-stars are often available, they just cost more.

 

That is, I think it's probably more likely you end up getting like a couple 3-4 WARish or less guys, and you can find those guys in FA every year for far less than you'd have to pay Gunnar. It's great to have them cheap, but having say 2x Santander the past several years wouldn't exactly be an irreplaceable thing that would be worth giving up two years of a 8+ WAR guy. So in that case you hurt 27-28 and didn't really do anything to change the after. If your headliner is Yusniel Diaz or Jeter Downs or even Yoan Moncada or Alex Verdugo, you didn't really win much, those kinds of guys are available in FA. You don't need them to compete.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I think this is pretty straight forward. I dont have a problem trading Gunnar at a point. Again, for me that, is in season 2027 if things are going poorly. Its that offseason otherwise. Trading him with 1 full year left should still get you a very nice offer. THe only way I consider trading him heading into 2027 is if the team is completely stalled and stuck. Somehow 2025 and 2026 are mediocre years and its become apparent that the core we have isnt good enough. I dont anticipate that happening but its possible. 

[NewMarketSean]

Forget about the extension talk. Has he played a game in ST since being injured?

[BSLChrisStoner]

Why is Gunnar so replaceable in '26, '27, '28, but those random unknown prospects are not? We don't need any of those guys to compete.

 

I think we all agree it is a fact that the chances with Gunnar in '26, '27, '28 are better than if he's traded, unless something truly unusual happens like career ending stuff. I think it goes down drastically, but you don't seem to, that's fine.

 

But the prospects just have an incredibly wide range of outcomes. If you end up getting a superstar then yes you've won, you might get 4-5 years of a star instead of 3 or 2 with Gunnar, so maybe your overall 2027-32 chances went up even though 27-28 went down. But if you don't get a star then you didn't really change the odds post '28 because non-stars are often available, they just cost more.

 

That is, I think it's probably more likely you end up getting like a couple 3-4 WARish or less guys, and you can find those guys in FA every year for far less than you'd have to pay Gunnar. It's great to have them cheap, but having say 2x Santander the past several years wouldn't exactly be an irreplaceable thing that would be worth giving up two years of a 8+ WAR guy. So in that case you hurt 27-28 and didn't really do anything to change the after. If your headliner is Yusniel Diaz or Jeter Downs or even Yoan Moncada or Alex Verdugo, you didn't really win much, those kinds of guys are available in FA. You don't need them to compete.

The prospects you get back might amount to zero.  That's a legitimate possibility.  Their prospects. 

But a high end package of prospects who have already had MiL success, are more likely to hit than a draft pick.
Their also more likely to be contributing in '29, vs. the draft pick you haven't already made. 

Even if the prospects amount to nothing, once they've been added to the organization, it gives you additional depth to make other moves. They could in fact be traded themselves. 

 

 

And the idea is not have Diaz be the headliner... which occurred because they traded Manny when they did.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Forget about the extension talk. Has he played a game in ST since being injured?

Very good chance he's ready for Opening Day.

[NewMarketSean]

Very good chance he's ready for Opening Day.

 

You didn't answer the question.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

You didn't answer the question.

You know the answer.

[NewMarketSean]

You know the answer.

 

Out for the year?

[BSLChrisStoner]

I think this is pretty straight forward. I dont have a problem trading Gunnar at a point. Again, for me that, is in season 2027 if things are going poorly. Its that offseason otherwise. Trading him with 1 full year left should still get you a very nice offer. THe only way I consider trading him heading into 2027 is if the team is completely stalled and stuck. Somehow 2025 and 2026 are mediocre years and its become apparent that the core we have isnt good enough. I dont anticipate that happening but its possible. 

It is straightforward no matter what other opinions I have, I think we all agree that: 

 

1) He's great.  Because of his fantastic talent, and the fact he came up with the Birds, it would be nice to keep him.

2) The team is likely better with him in any year of his remaining control (2025-28) than without him.

3) Any return you were to get for him, is likely not going to be equal value.

4) The Athletic's posed deal is likely not going to work. The deal I posed is not going to be realistic either.

5) Maybe there is some middle ground there, but the likelyhood is that he's not going to sign any deal prior to testing FA. 

[BSLChrisStoner]

You didn't answer the question.

No, he hasn't.  Get him 3-4 days of ab's, and I think he'll be fine.
Just want to avoid any set-back.  So if he needs an additional week, fine.

[NewMarketSean]

I don't have faith that any of the homegrown talent from the last 2-3 years remains with the team beyond their rookie contracts.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

I don't have faith that any of the homegrown talent from the last 2-3 years remains with the team beyond their rookie contracts.

Well you have 3 known Boras guys in Westy, Henderson, and Holliday. That leaves Cowser, Adley, Basallo, Mayo, Kjerstad on the position player side. Id bet on at least one being extended and at this point that should probably be Basallo more than anyone else. I dont particularly want to extend any pitchers anyway

[RichardZ]

You’d all do better to just assume Gunnar leaves as a FA after the 2028 season. Enjoy and hope for the four best seasons of his career. Someone else will sign him to the 12/600 kind of deal and take the chance that his back doesn’t act up or that he slows down too much and has to move to 3B sooner rather than later. Unless the team hits the skids between now and then he’s not going anywhere until he becomes a FA. The key is hoping that the O’s keep mining the draft and Latin America and come up with their next superstar. Basallo? Holliday? The thing is, you have to start paying Henderson huge annual figures with a long term commitment starting in 2029. If he leaves, you still have that 40-50M per year to spend elsewhere.