Jump to content
Frobby

MLB.com article on the Wright deal

Recommended Posts

Actually, the best outcome is Wright pitches very well and we can deal him at the deadline for a few solid prospects.

Or Wright goes 15-10, 3.75, the O's extend him early in the year at a reasonable rate, the young pitching steps it up a notch or two, and the O's add enough other pieces to get into contention.

No one said most likely, just best case...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, let me put this this way: What is the absolute best outcome for this trade?

Best case scenario is that Britton eats 20 cheeseburgers a day and sucks in about 20 innings as a Yankee before being sent down or outrighted. And for us, Wright regains form and pitches to a 3.80-4.00 ERA and wins 13-16 games in front of a weak offense then becomes a UFA.

Then what? It's not like it really changes the balance of power in the AL East. We're playing small ball, bunting for base hits when we're down 11-2 in the 7th inning.

If this was the biggest move we made all offseason, then I would agree with you. But it's just an early move at the outset of the FA/trade season. It's more like bunitng for a base hit in the first inning. Like you, I'm not a big fan of this trade, but I think we'll need to see what else happens before leveling the small ball charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or Wright goes 15-10, 3.75, the O's extend him early in the year at a reasonable rate, the young pitching steps it up a notch or two, and the O's add enough other pieces to get into contention.

No one said most likely, just best case...

Maybe Leo can get him to improve enough so he will be a compensable free agent next year (he wouldn't have been this year) and we can get a sandwich pick who will end up being...a bullpen guy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Or Wright goes 15-10, 3.75, the O's extend him early in the year at a reasonable rate, the young pitching steps it up a notch or two, and the O's add enough other pieces to get into contention.

No one said most likely, just best case...

I actually worry about an extension if he pitches well....Don't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, the best outcome is Wright pitches very well and we can deal him at the deadline for a few solid prospects.

Can we discuss the liklihood of this.

The last time the Orioles did this that I can recall is the Ponson deal, which got them Kurt Ainsworth, Damian Moss, and Ryan Hannaman (basically nothing).

Last year they traded Javy after the deadline for Stern.

Do the Orioles have any history of succcess flipping veterans for prospect at the dealines? Do they Os have much goodwill around the league as far as even negotiating trades?

Ignoing the Orioles, is there much deadline flipping even going on these days in baseball? Has the market shifted away from these type of deals?

Assuming the Os could make a deal (a huge leap of faith, IMO), how much can you get for a couple of months of Jaret Wright? More than Britton?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see two troubling things about this trade that have not been discussed yet on this thread.

(1) The O's made this trade even though Jaret Wright was almost certain to hit the market as a free agent when the Yankees declined his option. The fact that the O's nevertheless parted with a valuable commodity means that they had no confidence that they could have signed Jaret Wright or a comparable pitcher at a reasonable price. They were willing to part with Chris Britton just for the security blanket of having a player under their control. This suggests that the FO knows that Angelos will tie their hands when it comes to FA signings.

(2) The O's are once again showing blind faith in Leo Mazzone. I'm convinced that they targetted Jaret Wright solely because he had that one good year for Mazzone. Unfortunately, I don't think the O's blind faith in Mazzone served them very well last year. The FO was convinced that Leo Mazzone could magically turn anyone into a decent reliever, so they went into last season with a bullpen full of question marks...and they got burned. The FO was convinced that Leo Mazzone could turn Russ Ortiz around, so they signed him and (I'm guessing) promised either Leo or Russ that he could stay on the team through the end of the season come hell or high water...and they got burned.

Now they've traded a promising, cheap homegrown reliever to get someone whose main calling card is one good season under Leo Mazzone, even though the bullpen was a much bigger problem for the 2006 Orioles than the starting rotation (at least in the 2nd half of the season, once Loewen and Rodrigo settled down).

Are the 2007 Orioles destined to crash and burn once more on the altar of Leo Mazzone's infallibility?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually worry about an extension if he pitches well....Don't you?

At least it would demonstrate they are being logical, flawed as their premise may be.

If they are correct that Wright is a better pitcher with Mazzone, we should expect them to want to secure Wright before he goes out next season and pitches well and increases what he can demand on the free agent market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(1) The O's made this trade even though Jaret Wright was almost certain to hit the market as a free agent when the Yankees declined his option. The fact that the O's nevertheless parted with a valuable commodity means that they had no confidence that they could have signed Jaret Wright or a comparable pitcher at a reasonable price. They were willing to part with Chris Britton just for the security blanket of having a player under their control. This suggests that the FO knows that Angelos will tie their hands when it comes to FA signings.

There is no way they sign a league average starter (which is pretty much what Wright was last year) for 1 year at 3 million on the free agent market.

Are the 2007 Orioles destined to crash and burn once more on the altar of Leo Mazzone's infallibility?

There's a lot more to blame than just Leo. Even if Leo is correct about Wright the team still crashes and burns absent other major changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually worry about an extension if he pitches well....Don't you?

I don't know. If Leo knows how to get him healthy and pitching well in 2007, I guess you could expect that to continue into the future. Maybe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know. If Leo knows how to get him healthy and pitching well in 2007, I guess you could expect that to continue into the future. Maybe?
Years and years of ineffective or injury prone years or 2 very good years under Leo? Tough to say which is the better track record to go off of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaret Wright is an absolute steal compared to what El Duque just got... 2 years 11 million. This pitching market is insane. The Orioles were proactive and took a cheap risk... you'll just have to wait and find out if it works out.

That being said, Jaret Wright has worked out of the bullpen before for us. He has never caused a fuss about it and is a consumate team player. He's never caused a fuss about anything for that matter as a Yankee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see two troubling things about this trade that have not been discussed yet on this thread.

(1) The O's made this trade even though Jaret Wright was almost certain to hit the market as a free agent when the Yankees declined his option. The fact that the O's nevertheless parted with a valuable commodity means that they had no confidence that they could have signed Jaret Wright or a comparable pitcher at a reasonable price. They were willing to part with Chris Britton just for the security blanket of having a player under their control. This suggests that the FO knows that Angelos will tie their hands when it comes to FA signings.

(2) The O's are once again showing blind faith in Leo Mazzone. I'm convinced that they targetted Jaret Wright solely because he had that one good year for Mazzone. Unfortunately, I don't think the O's blind faith in Mazzone served them very well last year. The FO was convinced that Leo Mazzone could magically turn anyone into a decent reliever, so they went into last season with a bullpen full of question marks...and they got burned. The FO was convinced that Leo Mazzone could turn Russ Ortiz around, so they signed him and (I'm guessing) promised either Leo or Russ that he could stay on the team through the end of the season come hell or high water...and they got burned.

Now they've traded a promising, cheap homegrown reliever to get someone whose main calling card is one good season under Leo Mazzone, even though the bullpen was a much bigger problem for the 2006 Orioles than the starting rotation (at least in the 2nd half of the season, once Loewen and Rodrigo settled down).

Are the 2007 Orioles destined to crash and burn once more on the altar of Leo Mazzone's infallibility?

1. You don't know that there weren't other teams willing to trade something to get him.

2. You don't know what he would have cost if he had been a free agent.

3. They went into the season with a bullpen full of question marks because half the bullpen got hurt before the season started.

4. I doubt Mazzone had any say about whether he could help out what was currently with the Orioles pitching staff.

5. I am tired of people using Russ Ortiz and Brower as an example of Mazzone's failures. Talk about a small sample size in comparison to his overall body of work. This is the kind of thinking that has Yankee fans saying Arod stinks.

6. Rant over.:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can we discuss the liklihood of this.

The last time the Orioles did this that I can recall is the Ponson deal, which got them Kurt Ainsworth, Damian Moss, and Ryan Hannaman (basically nothing).

Last year they traded Javy after the deadline for Stern.

Do the Orioles have any history of succcess flipping veterans for prospect at the dealines? Do they Os have much goodwill around the league as far as even negotiating trades?

Ignoing the Orioles, is there much deadline flipping even going on these days in baseball? Has the market shifted away from these type of deals?

Assuming the Os could make a deal (a huge leap of faith, IMO), how much can you get for a couple of months of Jaret Wright? More than Britton?

If Wright pitches well, then yes, we could get more for Britton because he won't be owed any money and pitching carries a premium at the deadline.

Now, will the Orioles do it? Who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B-Moron, I'm not spewing anyone's line. Your premise seems to be that because the O's have made bad moves in the past, then every move they make must be bad. I can actually look at each deal individually.

If this is the only deal we make this off season, I'll join you in bashing this move, for that reason alone. But the trade itself makes sense. The team had soured on Britton, who dropped off in the second half of the year. They get a starter with a power arm for a minimal investment in years and money. He buys them time to let their young pitching develop. Look at the market that everyone is now describing as going through the roof, and you'll see that Wright would have cost us more in money and years on the free agent market.

And, middle relievers are generally much easier to find now, during the offseason, than they are during the season when teams are reluctant to give them up. Sure, once the season began and our bullpen faltered, we had a difficult time finding adequate replacements. That was then, during the season when players just aren't available, not now, during the offseason.

Another point to keep in mind is that we were never in contention last season. If we had been, the FO may have made a trade for a reliever from outside the system, but we weren't willing to give up someone in trade if we weren't in contention anyway - another reason we only tried to fill the holes in the pen from within.

Again, if this is our only move, pile on. If it's the first step in an effor to improve the overall talent on the field, it's a decent move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if its so easy to stock a good bullpen, then what has the Front Office been waiting for in recent years?

I will say this: It is difficult to imagine that they could put together a WORSE bullpen than we had last season so I don't think the bar is set too high as far as "improving" it. But show me the money. Let's see them put together a good pen this winter if its so damned easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • While Lamar did play better than RG3, keep in mind the league context.  He had a 121 Rating+ (basically OPS+ for passer rating, adjusted for that season's averages. Over 100 is good, less is bad.)  Lamar's 2019 was 128.  So Lamar is still better, but that was RG3 as a rookie.  Who knows how he would have done if he didn't get hurt/if he was drafted by an org not owned by Dan Snyder.   That said, I don't think it's reasonable to use RG3's injury problems as a reason not to sign Lamar long term.  I think that they were specific to RG3 and the team he played for. (I think the Football Team horribly mismanaged him.)   In general running QBs havent had high injury risk, any more than regular QBs.  Look at Steve Young, Randall Cunningham, Russell Wilson, Newton, Culpeper, VIck.  All have been fairly durable, certainly no bigger an injury risk than any other QB.  There is some risk that some injuries are going to be more damaging to Lamar's career because of his reliance on his athleticism, but given that many running QBs have stayed productive into their 30s I think this risk is relatively low. I don't think Vick is a great comp because he didn't really figure out how to be a passer until after he came back from his jail sentence.  Vick's best Rating+ pre-jail/suspension is 104, which is worse than Lamar's 2020.  And that's taking 6 Vick seasons compared to 3 Lamar seasons. I think Deshaun Watson checks off more boxes as a good comp, because of the recency of his contract, his performance, his playoff (lack of) success, and his playing style. If we're being realistic, Lamar has no real comparables.  There isn't a QB in NFL history that generates as much true dual-threat value as Lamar.  I think this actually is a problem when trying to figure out how much to pay him.  He's got the intangibles, sure (at least when it comes to regular season play) but with no real comps, it's kind of impossible to project his development/future performance. We know that the Ravens don't really throw the ball much, but in 2019 they were pretty damn efficient at it, and in 2020 they were middle-of-the-pack.  But when you can run the ball for 6-10 yards a carry, it kind of eliminates the need to throw the ball.  Imagine how good you'd have to be throwing the ball to make it a better proposition than running in most game situations.  And we also don't know how much his running ability affects his passing game.  And there's no way to know that until he can't run anymore.  Which isn't happening for 4-5 years barring injury. Even if it's risky, I think you really have no choice but to pay him, especially if you can get a contract with an out after his age-28 or 29 season.  It's easy to point to our mistake with thinking Flacco was worth an extension, but that's no reason to deny Lamar his extension, especially given that he's already shown the ability to singlehandedly carry us into the playoffs, even if he has struggled once there.  Flacco never carried this team in the regular season the way Lamar does.  In fact it was our multiple HOFers on the other side of the ball that carried Flacco into the postseason so he could be the hero for a couple games.  Credit to him for stepping up in January, but someone has to get us there, and we don't have anyone else who can do that.  The chance that we find someone in the draft that can do that is not that great.  Certainly lower than the chance that Jackson is going to take us to the SB.  I guess we could talk swapping him for someone like Deshaun Watson, but I just don't know how plausible that really is.
    • Lol, you gotta wait until spring training for those gems.
    • Well, now we know why Jim Hunter became redundant.
    • Brob was one of those let go.  I will miss him!  But he  remains as an "ambassador" as does Demper.  
    • I must have missed it, but I haven't seen anyone mention B-rob. Is he gone? I thought I heard him on some broadcasts last summer.
    • Mike Vick, six years into his career (going into the dogfighting arrest) had a 71/52 TD/INT ratio, for a 75.7 QB rating. RG3, three years in, had a 40/23 TD/INT ratio, for a 90.6 QB rating. He then got hurt and was never the same again. Lamar, three years in, has a 68/18 TD/INT ratio, for a 102.6 QB rating. Lamar is head and shoulders above both of those players.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...