Jump to content
Frobby

Grade the Gausman Deal

Grade the Gausman Deal  

187 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. What’s your grade for the Gausman deal


  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 8/11/2018 at 01:24

Recommended Posts

Just now, eddie83 said:

Then why did they make the deal? What good is the Int money? 

I guess we will find out. It was only meaningful as a trade asset to the Braves, they couldn't spend it anyway because they were over the limit in the past. Hopefully the Orioles use it and get something out of it. Would love to be wrong. A cost-controlled mid-rotation starter should bring back more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Enjoy Terror said:

The whole thing reminds me Arrieta. A hugely talented pitcher that the Orioles can’t squeeze anything out of.

They had to trade Arrieta, he was unplayable at the end. Gausman was still a solid mid-rotation pitcher for the Orioles.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Simple poll.    Let’s see how it grades out.   

It's really not simple. As others have implied, it's actually premature. IMO, whatever international players the O's wind up signing should be strongly factored into the perceived quality of this trade. Just can't assess at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too soon to rate.  VVW is the key factor.  Clearly, both NYY and MIA were loading up in slot money to sign him away from us.  If we sign VVW, this is a A, IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A+ if the $$$ gets us VVM. If we drop the ball there then it’s a D. Hell, as things stand signing VVM is a mandatory next step or else the whole trade was a wasted opportunity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted B. Could be an A if we get VVM and some extra int'l prospects. We got a back end starter type in Zimmerman, A super high ceiling young 3b in Encarnacion, backup catcher with a moderate ceiling, MLB ready reliever with mid 90's fastball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we are looking at this as Gausman, O’Day for the 4 prospects plus VVM and money saved, then I guess it’s fine.  I’d probably say B.  If we don’t land VVM this is almost certainly a D.  If we land VVM but have more than 2.5 million remaining in our bonus pool for this year when it expires, then this is maybe a C+.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MurphDogg said:

I guess we will find out. It was only meaningful as a trade asset to the Braves, they couldn't spend it anyway because they were over the limit in the past. Hopefully the Orioles use it and get something out of it. Would love to be wrong. A cost-controlled mid-rotation starter should bring back more.

It makes no sense to acquire that money if it isn’t going to be used. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, eddie83 said:

It makes no sense to acquire that money if it isn’t going to be used. 

Indeed. I guess time will tell. I don't have a ton of faith in the Orioles using all of their international slot money, and I have even less faith in them using it particularly well since they have such a limited amount of international scouting infrastructure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MurphDogg said:

Indeed. I guess time will tell. I don't have a ton of faith in the Orioles using all of their international slot money, and I have even less faith in them using it particularly well since they have such a limited amount of international scouting infrastructure.

Is this money isn’t for a top Int player then the deal makes no sense at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I graded this an F.  Not a single top ten prospect back for a mid-rotation innings eater with 2.5 years of team control left. The return was poor, probably a D.  But the fact that there was no rush to trade the guy (not an expiring contract) and they jumped at this deal anyway, makes it an F for me.  

I'm not tough to please either.  I gave positive grades to both the Machado and Britton deal and will give a similar grade for the Schoop return. 

  • Upvote 1

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

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







  • Posts

    • Another article on Reed from May 2019.  The first 33 games of 2019 have featured a paltry .205/.282/.410 slash as a 24-year-old in Double-A. An 84 wRC+ despite being slightly older than his average competition in the Texas League. Those numbers often describe a prospect afterthought, especially with most statistical categories beginning to normalize. Yet, a look under the hood suggests Reed is on the verge of a breakout that could make him a hot commodity throughout the prospect community before the end of the regular season. https://prospects365.com/2019/05/18/buddy-reed-and-buying-before-a-breakout/
    • It was a heck of a lot better than 2000-2009.  2012 was a truly great year, and 2014 wasn't bad, either.  And hopefully we look back at '19 as the year we finally got on track to having a top-to-bottom modern organization for the first time since the 1970s.
    • OK, I will exhale now.    Have a great Thanksgiving, Tony, and enjoy your time off!
    • Actually he would have to be up by the beginning of 2024, because he would be out of options at that point, using his three option years in 2021, 2022 and 2023, which could potentially further mess up his development.
    • If you're taking Javier and having him mostly sit the bench or hit .100 for all of 2020 I think you'd be looking at him as the possible shortstop in 2024.  He was miserable in low A last year.  On a normal track he'd probably go back there in 2020.  Instead you'd have him essentially miss the year, just working out with the O's.  You probably put him in Frederick in 2021. Maybe if he's really good he ends the year in Bowie.  Most of the year in AA in 2022.  If things work out well he's in AAA in '23, maybe a late callup.  But being more conservative you're looking at mid-year 2024.  Things could break better, his talent really comes out and he's ahead of that schedule.  But in no way do you expect him to be the MLB shortstop in '22.
    • In my opinion, you are WAY too worried about Mountcastle’s defense.    He’s not some klutz out there.    He has a weak arm.    The fact that he played 3 seasons on the left side of the infield tells you that he has the athleticism to play 1B or COF at a reasonably good level.       As to whether I’d lock him up now at that price, it’s a little tough to say.   If you think he’s likely to be about on the level with a Josh Bell or Trey Mancini, it’s probably worth the risk.    If you think he’s more of a Mitch Moreland level bat, then probably not.       And before people start poo-pooing Mitch Moreland, the guy has had a respectable 10-year career in the majors and had a career .883 OPS in the minors.    Most top 100 prospects would love to have Moreland’s career.    
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...