57 replies to this topic

[SportsGuy]

I think more than 1 teams beat that deal rather easily Chris.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Whereas if you finish out this year, and sign one of those kids for the rotation, you could come back next June with:

Greinke/Hamels
Chen
Hammel
Matusz
Britton
Bundy?

This makes a pretty good argument for either one being the piece to pursue to this off-season. While I started this thread about Hamels (thinking he might be easier to obtain now), I'd prefer Greinke if I was going to sign either long-term.

[SportsGuy]

Are you prepared to hand 140 million to a pitcher? I wouldn't even remotely consider it.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Are you prepared to hand 140 million to a pitcher? I wouldn't even remotely consider it.

I don't know if it will go that far, but I guess that is close enough. As that FG article mentioned, Hamels and Greinke are both likely to be at around or slightly above Cain's 6 yr $127.5M contract.

There aren't many pitchers I'm ever going to want to invest in with a contract like that. That is why I wanted the O's to go high on Darvish, as I thought at his age and ability, he represented strong value.

I feel less confident about giving such yrs and money to Hamels (turning 29), and Grienke (also turning 29); but I would consider it. I might rather take the risk of that contract, vs. spending the internal resources it would take to trade for a younger high end starter, which would be under team control for some time.

I think if the O's were able to add one front-end starter (if not a legit 1, at-least a high 2) to the rotation, the change to the entire staff would be profound. I'd be confident of the ability to put a strong rotation (combination of Hammel, Chen, Matusz, Britton, Arrieta, Bundy) behind that starter, and build a pen behind them.

[clapdiddy]

Are you prepared to hand 140 million to a pitcher? I wouldn't even remotely consider it.

As much as I would like Hamels on this team, I wouldn't give ANY pitcher that kind of money.

[SportsGuy]

What about Shaun Marcum?

He is a poor man's Greinke and won't be nearly as expensive.

[SportsGuy]

http://www.baseball-... ... itch.shtml

http://www.baseball-... ... co01.shtml

http://www.baseball-... ... za01.shtml

Why are Hamels and Greinke such better options than Marcum?

[SportsGuy]

Marcum makes 7.7M this year.

Greinke is at 13.5.

Hamels is making 15.

I bet Marcum could get signed for a 4 year deal at 15M a season or less.

The other 2 will get well over 100 million.

There is enough good starting pitching on the market that will keep the price of a guy like Marcum down but the 2 elite guys, Greinke and Hamels, will still get their 120+ million, especially when the wealthy teams are in need of pitching.

I may be willing to trade for Marcum now but would want an extension..if not, I wait unless I can get him for less than I think we could and we are still in the race.

[BSLChrisStoner]

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/marcush01-pitch.shtml

http://www.baseball-... ... co01.shtml

http://www.baseball-... ... za01.shtml

Why are Hamels and Greinke such better options than Marcum?

Marcum is an interesting name, and a FA for 2013. I always liked him with Toronto. He figures to get a decent contract this coming off-season, but not the crazy dollars that Hamels and Greinke will get.

As you point out, he is fairly close to Hamels and Greinke. The biggest difference would be that he is a bit older.

Hamels
12/27/83
Career: 82-55, 3.34 era, 1,231.2 ip, 1,090 hits, 148 hr's, 306 bb's, 1,163 k's, .680 OPS against, 0.84 G/F
LD% 18.7, Swinging Strike % 12.1, FIP 3.59 5 seasons of 25+ starts, plus 23 starts rookie yr.

Greinke:
10/21/83
Career: 81-75, 3.81 era, 1,338.2 ip, 1,343 hits, 133 hr's, 340 bb's, 1,194 k's, .718 OPS against, 0.74 G/F
LD % 20.9, Swinging Strike % 8.8, FIP 3.45 5 seasons of 25+ starts, plus 24 starts rookie yr.

Marcum:
12/14/81
Career: 53-35, 3.63 era, 854.2 ip, 779 hits, 114 hr's, 262 bb's, 695 k's, .706 OPS against, 0.68 G/F
LD % 18.5, Swinging Strike % 10.4, FIP 4.22 4 seasons of 25+ starts.

[SportsGuy]

Not that worried about the 2 years in age difference...In fact, that is a big bonus because of the huge difference in contracts and the very little difference in terms of production.

I said 4/60 at the highest for Marcum but the reality is he would probably be more in the 40-50 million range I am sure for 4 years and it wouldn't surprise me if he signed for 3 years, which would be even better.

Would love to get him for something like 3/35 with a 15 million dollar 4th year option.

[SportsGuy]

BTW, I would rather trade for Garza vs Hamels and Greinke.

At least you have him for another year and if he walks, you end up with draft picks after next year.

You don't get that with Hamels and Greinke.

[JeremyStrain]

BTW, I would rather trade for Garza vs Hamels and Greinke.

At least you have him for another year and if he walks, you end up with draft picks after next year.

You don't get that with Hamels and Greinke.

I would rather only lose money on Greinke than give up prospects for Garza.

[JeremyStrain]

Not that worried about the 2 years in age difference...In fact, that is a big bonus because of the huge difference in contracts and the very little difference in terms of production.

I said 4/60 at the highest for Marcum but the reality is he would probably be more in the 40-50 million range I am sure for 4 years and it wouldn't surprise me if he signed for 3 years, which would be even better.

Would love to get him for something like 3/35 with a 15 million dollar 4th year option.

I feel like his agent is going to use those same numbers to argue for closer to Hamels/Greinke money, and he's a little more of a risk because he's been a later bloomer. Still wouldn't mind him, but we don't need to nickel and dime at this point, we are where we need to be where a big splash makes sense. Don't settle for 3rd best if we could have the best, it's only money and we have that to spend.

[SportsGuy]

BTW, I would rather trade for Garza vs Hamels and Greinke.

At least you have him for another year and if he walks, you end up with draft picks after next year.

You don't get that with Hamels and Greinke.

I would rather only lose money on Greinke than give up prospects for Garza.

Depends on what prospects you give up to get Garza and how much you are willing to up the payroll to sign Greinke.

In a lot of ways, losing the players(especially when they can be recouped in the draft when/if you lose Garza) is better than the money because of the payroll and the huge chunk Greinke would take up.

[SportsGuy]

Not that worried about the 2 years in age difference...In fact, that is a big bonus because of the huge difference in contracts and the very little difference in terms of production.

I said 4/60 at the highest for Marcum but the reality is he would probably be more in the 40-50 million range I am sure for 4 years and it wouldn't surprise me if he signed for 3 years, which would be even better.

Would love to get him for something like 3/35 with a 15 million dollar 4th year option.

I feel like his agent is going to use those same numbers to argue for closer to Hamels/Greinke money, and he's a little more of a risk because he's been a later bloomer. Still wouldn't mind him, but we don't need to nickel and dime at this point, we are where we need to be where a big splash makes sense. Don't settle for 3rd best if we could have the best, it's only money and we have that to spend.

Well the other 2 have a WAR that is much higher, so his agent loses that battle.

And again, it depends on where you are willing to take the payroll long term. I am not handing out some 6+ year contract for 22+ million a year to any pitcher though.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Not that worried about the 2 years in age difference...In fact, that is a big bonus because of the huge difference in contracts and the very little difference in terms of production.

I said 4/60 at the highest for Marcum but the reality is he would probably be more in the 40-50 million range I am sure for 4 years and it wouldn't surprise me if he signed for 3 years, which would be even better.

Would love to get him for something like 3/35 with a 15 million dollar 4th year option.

If you are paying Marcum 4/60, it is for his age 31 (2013), 32 (2014), 33 (2015), 34 (2016) seasons...

If you are paying Hamels or Greinke 6 $120, it is for their age 29 (2013), 30 (2014), 31 (2015), 32 (2016), 33 (2017), 34 (2018) seasons.

Marcum has been comparable, and I imagine his age 31-34 seasons will probably be similar to Hamels and Greinke's 31-34 seasons.

I understand why you would choose Marcum because of that. Still, you would still be signing him to a significant contract and hoping he holds on throughout. Where as with Greinke and Hamels, you would be hoping they were capable of reaching higher levels in their first two years. Greinke and Hamels have had multiple years where FG says their production was worth over $20M ($40M+ for Greinke in his Cy year). Marcum's high was $14.2M.

Just like you have to consider that Marcum would come considerably cheaper, and could provide equitable production, there has to be consideration that Greinke and Hamels could earn the likely difference in contracts with big seasons the first two years.

Another consideration to me, is that even though they are both 2 yrs younger, both have made more starts than Marcum, and thus to me are reliable.

IDK, you make good points. It is a lot of money to invest into a starter. I can admit that I would not feel great about big money and years for either. I just would not be willing to rule it out completely right now.


Either way, you add another reliable starter to the front of the O's rotation, and I'll expect them to contend next yr.

[SportsGuy]

I feel good about Marcum, Bundy, Matusz, Hammel and Chen/Arrieta/Britton.

[JeremyStrain]

I would rather only lose money on Greinke than give up prospects for Garza.

Depends on what prospects you give up to get Garza and how much you are willing to up the payroll to sign Greinke.

In a lot of ways, losing the players(especially when they can be recouped in the draft when/if you lose Garza) is better than the money because of the payroll and the huge chunk Greinke would take up.

We have $30M to spend just to get back to what we are spending this year, with more big contracts coming off soon. Money shouldn't be an issue here until you get to luxury tax levels, which we are NO where near.

The players you have to give up for Garza are not going to be spare parts, they are going to be pieces we'll actually need in the future. We aren't that well off that giving up the future for one or two seasons is going to pay off.

[RichardZ]

I feel good about Marcum, Bundy, Matusz, Hammel and Chen/Arrieta/Britton.

Haven't read the whole thread but just saw this post. Big buyer beware sign on Shawn Marcum. His shoulder was bothering him all spring and I believe he had a similar problem last year as well. He tired badly last year and was awful in the playoffs. I'd just be very careful about a multi year contract or giving up much to get him.

[SportsGuy]

Depends on what prospects you give up to get Garza and how much you are willing to up the payroll to sign Greinke.

In a lot of ways, losing the players(especially when they can be recouped in the draft when/if you lose Garza) is better than the money because of the payroll and the huge chunk Greinke would take up.

We have $30M to spend just to get back to what we are spending this year, with more big contracts coming off soon. Money shouldn't be an issue here until you get to luxury tax levels, which we are NO where near.

The players you have to give up for Garza are not going to be spare parts, they are going to be pieces we'll actually need in the future. We aren't that well off that giving up the future for one or two seasons is going to pay off.

1) Yes, we are losing payroll but we also have arb raises and things like that, which will impact the payroll.

2) If you are paying 22+ million for Greinke and 16+ million for Jones plus other arb raises, how high is your payroll going to be? It doesn't matter if some deals are coming off, others will be added on. The payroll is going to have to be 130+ million, at least, to justify that.

3) And yes, you won't get him for spare parts but if you can get him for a package similar to what Chris said for Hamels, then I am ok with that.