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

19 minutes ago, badmamajama said:

All. Of . This.

I give this a D and the Schoop deal a C. If the Intl $ gets them VVM it jumps to  a C, if not, a F.

I just feel as deep as ATL minor league system is and this was the best they could do even with the Intl $$$'s and DoD's salary.

Compare Wade Miley's stats to Kevin Gausman's stats prior to when they were traded. Both had two years of control, Miley was 29 and Gausman is 27:

Wade Miley:

2012 25 ARI NL 16 11 .593 3.33 32 29 0 0 0 0 194.2 193 79 72 14 37 0 144 2 1 6 807 122 3.15 1.182 8.9 0.6 1.7 6.7 3.89 AS,RoY-2
2013 26 ARI NL 10 10 .500 3.55 33 33 0 0 0 0 202.2 201 88 80 21 66 4 147 4 0 13 847 109 3.98 1.317 8.9 0.9 2.9 6.5 2.23  
2014 27 ARI NL 8 12 .400 4.34 33 33 0 0 0 0 201.1 207 103 97 23 75 3 183 4 0 9 866 86 3.98 1.401 9.3 1.0 3.4 8.2 2.44  
2015 28 BOS AL 11 11 .500 4.46 32 32 0 1 0 0 193.2 201 98 96 17 64 0 147 4 1 10 831 96 3.81 1.368 9.3 0.8 3.0 6.8 2.30  
                                                                     
2016 29 SEA AL 7 8 .467 4.98 19 19 0 1 1 0 112.0 117 62 62 18 34 1 82 3 2 5 469 81 4.76 1.348 9.4 1.4 2.7 6.6 2.41

Kevin Gausman

2014 23 BAL AL 7 7 .500 3.57 20 20 0 1 0 0 113.1 111 48 45 7 38 0 88 1 0 9 476 110 3.41 1.315 8.8 0.6 3.0 7.0 2.32  
2015 24 BAL AL 4 7 .364 4.25 25 17 1 0 0 0 112.1 109 56 53 17 29 1 103 2 0 7 470 97 4.10 1.228 8.7 1.4 2.3 8.3 3.55  
2016 25 BAL AL 9 12 .429 3.61 30 30 0 0 0 0 179.2 183 76 72 28 47 1 174 5 0 8 757 119 4.10 1.280 9.2 1.4 2.4 8.7 3.70  
2017 26 BAL AL 11 12 .478 4.68 34 34 0 0 0 0 186.2 208 99 97 29 71 0 179 5 1 8 816 94 4.48 1.495 10.0 1.4 3.4 8.6 2.52  
2018 27 BAL AL 5 8 .385 4.43 21 21 0 0 0 0 124.0 139 62 61 21 32 0 104 5 0 6 534 95 4.58 1.379 10.1 1.5 2.3 7.5 3.25

Not that TOTALLY different. Seattle got Ariel Miranda. The O's got much more than Ariel Miranda.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Evan Phillips is an underrated piece of this deal, kinda like Cody Carroll. Not very interesting at first glance -- but he was one of the 2-3 best relievers at the AAA level, even better than Carroll has been. At age 23. Big K rate (13+ K/9) and a 2.05 FIP. to back up the 1.99 ERA.  With the way that relievers are always in high demand, I like the idea of adding a couple guys who could pitch well out of the pen and become highly valued pieces themselves in a couple years. Zimmermann might end up in that same boat -- pretty dominant against lefties, and his stuff (which seems like it might be a little marginal as a starter) would probably play up out of the bullpen as well.

Brett Cumberland is a top 100 prospect on the recent FG midseason updated top 131, one of their top 7-8 catching prospects in all of baseball (depending on how you view Mejia). So he obviously has some cachet in scouting circles, and it looks like he's been a pretty consistently solid hitter. Encarnacion's BB rate is a little scary, but he looks like he'll be one of the best projectable athletes in the system from the moment he dons a uniform. Sorta odd that the "lottery ticket" prospect would be the most highly valued piece in the deal, but the upside looks tremendous for him. 

It's not exciting, but the international money and the salary relief are also factors. They've gotten their international pool to the point that for VVM  not to be an Oriole, he would have to say "no" to clearly the biggest offer. That's pretty cool. And I don't think we can begrudge ownership a few efforts to try to save some money -- and $12M is more than just "some money." They shelled out a ton to keep that team together and competing from 2015 to 2017, probably more than the profits could really justify, and I think we do have to keep in mind that it's a business.

 

The other thing is, I think we all got really gassed up about the possible return for Gausman when we heard a lot of teams were in on him. But the bottom line is that he's just not that great. Per FG, he's been barely one of the top 50 starters over the last two seasons. That's not likely to return a big haul, even with some control remaining. And to my eye, the signs for the future are not great for Gausman. Substantial drop in velocity, substantial drop in K rate, FIP/xFIP/SIERA way up over the last two seasons. hard hit ball rate is up. Those are all big red flags for me.

In all, I can't say it's an exciting deal. We didn't get back anyone who looks like a star in the making. But we got back a number of solid pieces again, and we got some other assets that will go into the ledger and not straight onto the field but which might have some meaningful value in the long haul. It's not a terrible deal. Especially if the red flags in Gausman's data actually are indicators of possible trouble for him down the road. I think there's a (significantly) greater than zero chance that we might be looking back on this feeling glad we got some value for him when we did, as opposed to beating ourselves up because we should have held out for more. I gave it a C, just because I don't think we had to trade him now instead of in the offseason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, theocean said:

Compare Wade Miley's stats to Kevin Gausman's stats prior to when they were traded. Both had two years of control, Miley was 29 and Gausman is 27:

Wade Miley:

2012 25 ARI NL 16 11 .593 3.33 32 29 0 0 0 0 194.2 193 79 72 14 37 0 144 2 1 6 807 122 3.15 1.182 8.9 0.6 1.7 6.7 3.89 AS,RoY-2
2013 26 ARI NL 10 10 .500 3.55 33 33 0 0 0 0 202.2 201 88 80 21 66 4 147 4 0 13 847 109 3.98 1.317 8.9 0.9 2.9 6.5 2.23  
2014 27 ARI NL 8 12 .400 4.34 33 33 0 0 0 0 201.1 207 103 97 23 75 3 183 4 0 9 866 86 3.98 1.401 9.3 1.0 3.4 8.2 2.44  
2015 28 BOS AL 11 11 .500 4.46 32 32 0 1 0 0 193.2 201 98 96 17 64 0 147 4 1 10 831 96 3.81 1.368 9.3 0.8 3.0 6.8 2.30  
                                                                     
2016 29 SEA AL 7 8 .467 4.98 19 19 0 1 1 0 112.0 117 62 62 18 34 1 82 3 2 5 469 81 4.76 1.348 9.4 1.4 2.7 6.6 2.41

Kevin Gausman

2014 23 BAL AL 7 7 .500 3.57 20 20 0 1 0 0 113.1 111 48 45 7 38 0 88 1 0 9 476 110 3.41 1.315 8.8 0.6 3.0 7.0 2.32  
2015 24 BAL AL 4 7 .364 4.25 25 17 1 0 0 0 112.1 109 56 53 17 29 1 103 2 0 7 470 97 4.10 1.228 8.7 1.4 2.3 8.3 3.55  
2016 25 BAL AL 9 12 .429 3.61 30 30 0 0 0 0 179.2 183 76 72 28 47 1 174 5 0 8 757 119 4.10 1.280 9.2 1.4 2.4 8.7 3.70  
2017 26 BAL AL 11 12 .478 4.68 34 34 0 0 0 0 186.2 208 99 97 29 71 0 179 5 1 8 816 94 4.48 1.495 10.0 1.4 3.4 8.6 2.52  
2018 27 BAL AL 5 8 .385 4.43 21 21 0 0 0 0 124.0 139 62 61 21 32 0 104 5 0 6 534 95 4.58 1.379 10.1 1.5 2.3 7.5 3.25

Not that TOTALLY different. Seattle got Ariel Miranda. The O's got much more than Ariel Miranda.

 

Gausman had an extra year of control on Miley and had 0.5 rWAR the season he was traded.

Share this post


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

Right, but c'mon man.  You're acting like he's a 4 WAR pitcher each year.  He's had only one year with 4 WAR.  1.2, 1.2, 4, 2.0, 2.3 so far this year.  

2.3 this year, on pace for around 3.  Not the greatest season, but ranked 37th in WAR.  So he's a borderline #2/3 this year.  And he was a borderline #1/2 in 2016.  2014 and 2015 were partial seasons for him - he had 20 starts in 2014 and 17 starts in 2015.  But if he played them out, they'd probably be roughly league-average seasons.  So out of his full seasons, he's got 1 good year, 1 pretty good year (assuming he  doesn't implode for the remainder of this season) and 1 mediocre year.  Not an ace, but not exactly terrible.  I don't love this trade because I think that someone with tools as good as as him should be valued a little higher, but it is what it is.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, e16bball said:

Brett Cumberland is a top 100 prospect on the recent FG midseason updated top 131, one of their top 7-8 catching prospects in all of baseball (depending on how you view Mejia). So he obviously has some cachet in scouting circles, and it looks like he's been a pretty consistently solid hitter.

How is Cumberland #99 in the Fangraphs list but listed somewhere in the 20-25 range for their organization? That's not in the same stratosphere.

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-updated-top-131-prospect-rankings/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, LookitsPuck said:

People are Wietersing Gausman. That is, being disappointed in somebody because of original, unrealistic expectations instead of being happy that he was at least productive. 2-4 WAR year in and year out is solid to me.

I just had a flashback to  mattwietersfacts.com.  Sadly, it looks like a domain squatter took over and now the site is a blog about mattresses...

I'm also amazed at how some people thought he was a bust, after going to 3 all star games, winning 2 GGs, and getting MVP votes one year while putting up 5 win and 4 win seasons back-to-back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Yeah, if it's not all potential with him then I don't understand how in every spring I keep seeing people saying "Well, if this is the year that Gasuman can put it together..."

Yup...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SilverRocket said:

How is Cumberland #99 in the Fangraphs list but listed somewhere in the 20-25 range for their organization? That's not in the same stratosphere.

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-updated-top-131-prospect-rankings/

Prospect analysis often differs considerable between evaluators. Fangraphs is high on Cumberland, they love guys with patience and big loft in the swing, Cumberland is both of those things. I think his age vs level is exaggerating how good his approach is. I'm concerned about the hit tool, need to watch more video though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing with the Gausman deal is that the moving of O'Day's salary from a value perspective is almost worth a top 100 prospect.

I know many hate clearing salary instead of getting better/more prospects in return (I do too). If you trust the Orioles to seriously invest in scouting/infrastructure and the international market, you want them to cut salary. Revenue will be down and the team was overextended on MLB payroll. 

The one thing I'll say now before fully assessing the prospect return is that it's been a long time since the Orioles have shown this type of decisiveness (in any direction), which makes me want to give them the benefit of the doubt with moves like this. 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Orioles sign VVM thanks to the boost International signing money from this trade, I'll consider this trade a major success. If they can't ink VVM and are left buying up a lot that's left behind, then I'll have a much different read on the deal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like I spent this morning and afternoon hearing how good Gausman is (better than Archer) and have spent the past three hours hearing how he isn't really that good.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B, but this trade has more upside than the Schoop trade depending on what we do with the essentially $12 million in cash we get.  I like the makeup of 3 of the prospects too (not Encarnacion)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keith Law really isn’t impressed. 

 

This could easily end up a lot of nothing for Baltimore in exchange for a pitcher who was once the fourth overall pick in the draft, has two years of control remaining, and still has all of the raw ingredients required to be a top-end starter or, at worst, a really good reliever.

Jean Carlos Encarnacion is the one significant prospect in this trade, and even he is quite flawed, a 20-year-old who has drawn 12 unintentional walks against 100 strikeouts in 379 PA for low-A Rome this year. The third baseman has arm strength and projection in the body, with potential plus raw power to come, but I can't think of a prospect who struggled this badly with plate discipline and wasn't super young for his level who panned out

http://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/24246659/kevin-gausman-blossom-braves-deal-orioles

 

 

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

    • Just don't give away tomatoes to the fans. 
    • I use cbd on occasion. It does seem to help me fall asleep, but doesn’t help with waking up wide awake a few hours later. 
    • I voted Mancini but I could have gone with Villar as well. I think Villar's lack of effort occasionally and base paths blunders is what shaded me towards Mancini for MVO. Saying that, if Villar did receive it I would not be upset as he clearly has the best WAR despite being forced to play out of position at SS a lot this year.
    • I think when he team is ready to win again if Davis is not preforming in a helpful manner then he  needs to go.   I don't see the O's being at that point yet.   Maybe in another year.    Players get hurt all the time.  As a bench player Davis can step in for them.   Also there are a lot of unproven players that the league may adjust to and they will may be sent down.  (see Mullins, not for Davis but because he is a example of an unproven player that needed to go down)    Davis may find playing time for those players also.   The 26th man makes it easier to keep Davis on the 26 man roster.
    • I have a lot of disconnected, disorganized thoughts on this subject.  I like Tony's suggestions, or at least the acknowledgment of the idea that there are alternate ways of developing players that might be more efficient or at least more cost-effective. A few points: - I've never thought that the current setup was optimal, but rather formed by a series of events more related to economics than player development.  In the beginning all minor league teams were just like major league teams except in small cities.  Only in the 1920s, and then accelerating in the 30s because of the Depression, did the majors start buying up the minors and turning them into development squads instead of teams trying to draw fans and win their pennant.  For 50+ years MLB teams didn't have any full-time affiliates.  That was probably less successful at wringing out all the talent, but MLB got along just fine.  The majors wanted to own the minors to keeps costs down.  They got tired of having to pay $100k for Lefty Grove after a protracted negotiation with Oriole owner Jack Dunn.  Much easier if they just owned Jack Dunn and all the rest of the Orioles. - I think one reason for the sprawling system we have today is MLB contracts, options, and related issues.  I think most good prospects would do just fine as part-time major league players at 20 or 22.  They spend that time in the minors because nobody wants to burn service time.  We've convinced ourselves that prospects would stall if they were utility infielders or relievers at 18 or 20.  But we don't know that, in fact we know many successful MLB players did just that in the pre-draft era, and some even became MLB stars as teenagers.  If service time wasn't a thing (for example, if everyone became a free agent at 28), I think lots of players would shoot through the minors in record time.  And there would be much less need for eight levels of affiliates. - Japan has one level of minors.  I don't know that this is seen as any kind of impediment to development.  Ichiro was in the NPB as a teenager.  They do have more teenagers in the NBP than we see in the US.  But they also don't get to free agency until something like eight or nine years in, so they don't care as much about service time. - Mexico, Korea, Taiwan, the rest of the world... no minors at all.  At least in any cases I know of.  Of course they top out at the equivalent of A or AA levels, so not quite the same.  But nobody else has the resources to have huge, sprawling development systems.  Maybe not optimal, but the world doesn't end when you regularly have 18-year-olds playing alongside 36-year-olds.
    • Obviously we are all hyper sensitive to any kind of soreness with Harvey. I do think this thing is bothering him still an the team wants to be ultra careful with him. At 75.2 IP, he is at twice the amount of innings that he threw in 2018 so he may be near the limit that they wanted to get him this year as well.  Honestly, I wouldn't be upset if they just came out and said they were going to shut him down this year. I have him penciled in as the closer next year and only an injury would get in the way of him having success in that role.
    • One, it's against board rules to call people including players and coaches idiots, so consider this your warning. Secondly, you do know that Harvey was a starter at the beginning of the year and had 10 games with 40 or more pitches. After converting to a reliever, he had two minor league innings where he threw 33 pitches in an inning and one in an inning and a third. Harvey is almost 25-years old. While I don't think anyone, including Hyde preferred that he stayed out there that long in one inning, I don't think Hyde was reckless or an idiot for doing so. If he's incapable of throwing a 30 pitch inning when things aren't going great, what is he then? I think your dislike for Hyde is clouding your judgement here. While you are certainly entitled to your opinion of not liking Hyde, you are not entitled to call him an idiot while doing so here on the Hangout.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...