Guthrie traded to Rockies for Hammel & Lindstrom

[clapdiddy]

Oh really! Those are just from the first 3-4 pages of the thread.

Well...in retrospect...I don't think it was AWFUL...just questionable.

[Sports Guy]

Oh really! Those are just from the first 3-4 pages of the thread.

I meant pounding fist on the table, pissed off...like I was about the TT and Eveland trades.

[RZNJ]

I have to say.. 24 hours later.. I'm now ok with it. I got caught up like the thread the someone started about favorite players.. obviously there's some guesswork here but in the end we divided Guthrie's salary into 2 players either of which may be moved easier and perhaps under the right conditions, for more than Guthrie alone would get us.

Well...in retrospect...I don't think it was AWFUL...just questionable.

Fair enough.

[LookinUp]

This is very level headed and I mostly agree with it. My only disagreement is that we could have kept him. He wanted to resign here and would have done it last year around $7m per year, and this year around $8m. We didn't HAVE to lose him, we could have just paid him the extension and been secure for 3 more years of 200 innings at about a 4.00 ERA. It was the team's choice not to resign him and let him go, and that's fine, it's a business move, but I think the intangibles of having JG here far outweigh having another pitcher put up the same stats for $3-4m less.

Do you really think this? (genuinely asking)

He'll be 33 on April 8.

I don't know. Maybe I'm underrating Guthrie.

[allstar1579]

Do you really think this? (genuinely asking)

He'll be 33 on April 8.

I don't know. Maybe I'm underrating Guthrie.

I absolutely do. He doesn't have the wear and tear on his arm a lot of guys have, he keeps himself in great shape, and he's a smart pitcher. I think he gets better as he goes, but I think he needs to play somewhere that plays to his strengths, he's a flyball pitcher, he needs a spacious OF to be his best.

[allstar1579]

Fair enough.

I still think it was a terrible trade.

[NCRaven]

My only disagreement is that we could have kept him. He wanted to resign here and would have done it last year around $7m per year, and this year around $8m. We didn't HAVE to lose him, we could have just paid him the extension and been secure for 3 more years of 200 innings at about a 4.00 ERA. It was the team's choice not to resign him and let him go, and that's fine, it's a business move, but I think the intangibles of having JG here far outweigh having another pitcher put up the same stats for $3-4m less.

I think it's very clear that DD and Buck just didn't want Guthrie to be part of this team's future. When Guthrie raised the issue of a long-term deal, they collectively said, "meh...we'll just take it year by year..." I think the writing on the wall was clear, especially given Connor's comment (even though he's no longer here, he seemed to be speaking for management) about even bad teams having a pitcher who wins more than he loses and that it was time for Guthrie to take charge. He never did and they apparently didn't think he ever would, so they cut bait and got the best deal they could.

[DrungoHazewood]

I think it's very clear that DD and Buck just didn't want Guthrie to be part of this team's future. When Guthrie raised the issue of a long-term deal, they collectively said, "meh...we'll just take it year by year..." I think the writing on the wall was clear, especially given Connor's comment (even though he's no longer here, he seemed to be speaking for management) about even bad teams having a pitcher who wins more than he loses and that it was time for Guthrie to take charge. He never did and they apparently didn't think he ever would, so they cut bait and got the best deal they could.

I have no problem trading Guthrie, but that Connor comment was idiotic. He's telling Guthrie to man up and win even if we're supporting him with a ragtag cast of goofballs who can't hit or field, and play in the hardest division in baseball. It's like the Eddie Murray critics who said he was a selfish guy because his .850 OPS and 100 RBI weren't enough to drag Ken Gerhart and Jeff Stone to the playoffs.

[allstar1579]

I have no problem trading Guthrie, but that Connor comment was idiotic. He's telling Guthrie to man up and win even if we're supporting him with a ragtag cast of goofballs who can't hit or field, and play in the hardest division in baseball. It's like the Eddie Murray critics who said he was a selfish guy because his .850 OPS and 100 RBI weren't enough to drag Ken Gerhart and Jeff Stone to the playoffs.

Didn't he get like 2 runs or less of support in over half his starts here? And you tell the pitcher to man up and get more wins??? Really?

[DrungoHazewood]

Didn't he get like 2 runs or less of support in over half his starts here? And you tell the pitcher to man up and get more wins??? Really?

Actually it was 31%. But yea, he said even bad teams have guys who win more than they lose, so Guthrie wasn't worth much because he didn't win. Guthrie sucked because he had a league-average ERA (more-or-less) but his assigned W/L record on the Orioles was 20 games under .500.

If only he had Jake Arrieta's magic powers he could have allowed even more runs, pitch fewer innings per start, but still have a winning record.

[allstar1579]

Actually it was 31%. But yea, he said even bad teams have guys who win more than they lose, so Guthrie wasn't worth much because he didn't win. Guthrie sucked because he had a league-average ERA (more-or-less) but his assigned W/L record on the Orioles was 20 games under .500.

If only he had Jake Arrieta's magic powers he could have allowed even more runs, pitch fewer innings per start, but still have a winning record.

It's just funny because if you mention a pitchers wins or losses to any real talent evaluator they will pretty much stop listening to anything you have to say at that point. Glad to know that he wasn't a good pitcher because he didn't allow less than 2 runs per game and go 9 innings every start, Connor is really revolutionizing the way we evaluate pitchers

[Fan4Life]

Actually it was 31%. But yea, he said even bad teams have guys who win more than they lose, so Guthrie wasn't worth much because he didn't win. Guthrie sucked because he had a league-average ERA (more-or-less) but his assigned W/L record on the Orioles was 20 games under .500.

If only he had Jake Arrieta's magic powers he could have allowed even more runs, pitch fewer innings per start, but still have a winning record.

It's just funny because if you mention a pitchers wins or losses to any real talent evaluator they will pretty much stop listening to anything you have to say at that point. Glad to know that he wasn't a good pitcher because he didn't allow less than 2 runs per game and go 9 innings every start, Connor is really revolutionizing the way we evaluate pitchers

I think when you see comments like these that don't generally make sense from the source they are coming from, it's just the public statement designed to hide the real reason they are making a move. Politics 101.

[Lucky Jim]

It's just funny because if you mention a pitchers wins or losses to any real talent evaluator they will pretty much stop listening to anything you have to say at that point. Glad to know that he wasn't a good pitcher because he didn't allow less than 2 runs per game and go 9 innings every start, Connor is really revolutionizing the way we evaluate pitchers

Let's not isolate the one comment from what we know. Many folks on here have remarked about Guthrie's tendency - in otherwise decent starts - to give leads back almost immediately. And I think that's what he was talking about. I mean, I agree, it's an idiotic statement. But my guess is that he's referring to some tendency of Guthrie to either get tight or lose focus when he gets a lead.

I'm not saying that it's even true, from a statistical standpoint - but it certainly feels true from my experience watching him. And, like I said, others have remarked as much on here.

Again, ridiculous, and poorly phrased. But perhaps not completely empty.

[NCRaven]

Looking beyond the technical accuracy or legitimacy of what Connor said, I think it points to a lack of faith that Buck and Connor had in Guthrie as the guy to lead our rotation in the future. It just seems like they made a decision that it was time, and this was the best deal that they could make, from all accounts.

[JohnnyK27]

FYI ...per Connolly

@BaltimoreMurph @BaltimoreLuke Os didnt deal Guthrie bc of pending hearing. That's incidental. And so that wont factor in w Jones either