Reboulet'sStache

Webb and the draft pick to the Dodgers.

I think the Braves taking on O'Day's salary wasn't costless to us. It's reflected in the return. You think they took on O'Day for free because they are just sweet on Dan or something.

Nothing is free.

Walk me through the logic of this? You're saying the return we got for Gausman is what we would have gotten. Then we asked the Braves if they would also take O'Day, and the Braves said, "Yeah, we're feeling generous. Throw him in too." The Orioles would have to give consideration for the Braves taking O'Day. There's no other way to look at it.

That's not really a "belief." The Braves took on O'Day's salary as a salary dump. They didn't do that out of the kindness of their hearts. All anybody could possibly argue is the extent to which it diminished the return. But nobody could, in good faith, argue it didn't diminish the return.

I can't. I've already explained all of that in numerous other posts. At this point it would just be me copying and pasting.

It's not really overrating Gausman per se. Whatever Gausman's return should have been. What Gausman gets you as a stand alone. "This amount in international slot money and these prospects." By including O'Day in the deal, just so you can free up money for the glorious run next year, that package was diminished to whatever degree. Which makes it a dumb move.

I'm talking about not sacrificing prospect returns. And what is actually the smarter payroll strategy during a real build.

No I'm not.

I have absolutely no point what you're making here? 1. Most teams that would need to get Davis' contract off the books, aren't dumb enough to sign him to that contract, so it's not on the books. Most teams capable of signing Davis, aren't sending his contract to you with prospects, because they don't need you to take on his contract. Think the Phillies with Howard. They never would have dumped his salary on anybody for prospects, because they could afford to keep it on the books if that meant they got to keep their prospects. 2. What does any of this have to do with the Orioles dumping O'Day's salary at the expense of prospects? Can you point to me teams that go into prospect rebuild mode and dump salary at the expense of prospects?

And taking less of a prospect return so you can clear O'Day's salary, is not how you obtain those great prospects.

I already explained this to you. It would increase the prospect return. Which is all that matters during a rebuild. You don't do ANYTHING that comes at the expense of prospects. Rebuilds SUCKKKKKKKKKK. There's no such thing as an enjoyable one. All you can do is hope they don't last long. You know how they don't last long? You get as many good prospects as you can, as quickly as you can, to get you a competitive, cost controlled team. You know how you do that? You don't do anything that comes at the expense of prospects. Instead, you do everything that allows for the maximizing of prospects.

Yes, I'll take every team's Chris Davis and Trumbo right now if their contracts align with our rebuild. Now if they are on the books for the next 10 years, obviously I don't want that. But 0 WAR players that are making too much money and teams want to get rid of? Let me have them. Send me your top prospects and I'll take them. Build up an elite farm system. And about the time where all of these prospects I've "bought" are ready to turn us into a competitor, is the time these salaries are coming off the books. And now I take that money and invest it in legit free agents to supplement the young, cost controlled players I brought. That's called a rebuild.

And the best way to use it for the future would be to keep it on the books for a greater prospect return. Since that of course is the lifeblood of your future.

The Braves basically paid us to keep prospects. When we are the team rebuilding and in need of prospects. This actually makes me envy the Cleveland Browns. They took Osweiller's salary on for a year because they had no intention of investing the money to compete right away. So they invested it in something that allowed them to get back a 2nd Round pick. They brought prospects for their rebuild. We're in a rebuild and shedding prospects. You can't explain it.

Yes, it's a horrible thing. I'm not sure why this is complicated. What do we need to shed payroll for at the expense of prospects? It made some sense sending Webb to the Dodgers with the draft pick to shed his salary. We were trying to compete that year, and so needed the freed up payroll. We aren't trying to compete next year. Our entire mentality should be the complete opposite right now. What can we do to expand the prospect return at the cost of the short term? We just sacrificed a prospect return to free up money to do absolutely nothing with it. Or at least anything we should be doing.

It's a horrible thing. What do we need freed up payroll for next year??? To go out and buy that free agent that is going to allow us to make that run? If EVERY team in baseball said, "Hey Orioles, I'm going to send you our bad contracts for the next two to three years. But along with it, I'm going to give you top prospects," then we should take that deal. Because we won't, and SHOULDN'T, be investing that money in anything intended to compete right away. That's not what you do during rebuilds. You invest the money in ways that allow for a prospect return.

lol. Braves completely owned us in the Gausman trade.

It's crazy how well some of these major market teams have been run the last few years. They all acted like the 90's Billy Beane, except with a huge checkbook to fill in the missing pieces when they were ready.

I'm afraid that's probably going to be your national championship game.

Amazing what a difference a 5* QB can make.

The only thing worse than the trade is the idea that we should have tied up all that money into Miller. We should never have a lot of money tied into a bullpen arm beyond a one year deal.

Because he was always going to be a low ceiling prospect. My issue with him isn't how he has performed in the minors. It's that you don't draft guys who don't have the potential to be stars, in the first round.

Love drafting high upside guys in the first round. If the organization can't develop them, fire everybody in the organization. But that we shouldn't ever be drafting the D.J. Stewart's of the world in the first round.

Flawed team and a bad trade. Parra isn't very good, and Davies should have been kept, either to join the major league team or included in a trade that would have given us a much better return on investment.