Updated: Orioles acquire Taylor Teagarden

[Sports Guy]

Because he's a low-upside (i.e., middle relief) arm below AA with significant injury issues that we traded for (marginal) MLB value at a position of need. It's not hard.

I don't love it, but if the cost of a guy Buck personally identified is Randy Henry, I'm not going to get too worked up over it.

You can't maximize every trade. Trying to is one reason why trades don't get done. To your frequent and very very vocal chagrin.

This is a good read: www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/vermeule-occasional.pdf

Agreed but that's no reason to make a poor trade.

And Henry is below AA right now. If he is healthy this year, he will probably be in AA by the end of the year and potentially knocking on the door step for a ML promotion quickly in 2013.

The Orioles have pissed away so much money on the pen over the years and have targeted the completely wrong guys for it and here we have a nice upside arm who doesn't walk guys, doesn't give up homers, keeps the ball down and has a decent K rate and we trade him for a generic, dime a dozen back up C.

End of the day, why trade any value for that? Why not keep Henry for another trade?

[Lucky Jim]

Agreed but that's no reason to make a poor trade.

And Henry is below AA right now. If he is healthy this year, he will probably be in AA by the end of the year and potentially knocking on the door step for a ML promotion quickly in 2013.

The Orioles have pissed away so much money on the pen over the years and have targeted the completely wrong guys for it and here we have a nice upside arm who doesn't walk guys, doesn't give up homers, keeps the ball down and has a decent K rate and we trade him for a generic, dime a dozen back up C.

End of the day, why trade any value for that? Why not keep Henry for another trade?

Because they decided they liked him, that our bullpen prospects were fungible, and that there were enough concerns that there were no reasons not to pull the trigger. This isn't, by any stretch of the imagination, a "poor trade." It's a neutral trade. Calling it anything else is assigning value to your preference above all else. It's not objective. It's not a valid metric for critique, unless you acknowledge that it's just a matter of taste.

[Sports Guy]

Am I wrong to assume Teagarden had a higher WAR last year? I only suppose this because you are specific about it being the last two years combined. If I'm wrong, I apologize.

Yes he did...The reason I didn't use just last year is because Tatum had 87 plate appearances and TT had 36. Yes, an entire 36.

[Sports Guy]

He's not a bullpen arm, though. He's a potential bullpen arm. You need to discount accordingly.

He is pitching out of the pen, right?

[CA-ORIOLE]

I would rather have the BP arm personally, especially one that has exhibited the attributes Henry has and especially since you can acquire a back up C for less.

But at this point he's not even a BP arm. He's a potential BP arm in 2 years. Teagarden is ML ready, has some skills, some interesting Mil credentials and could easily be better than Tatum imo. I wasn't impressed with Tatum's defensive skills and I think he overperformed offensively in 2010.

[Sports Guy]

Because they decided they liked him, that our bullpen prospects were fungible, and that there were enough concerns that there were no reasons not to pull the trigger. This isn't, by any stretch of the imagination, a "poor trade." It's a neutral trade. Calling it anything else is assigning value to your preference above all else. It's not objective. It's not a valid metric for critique, unless you acknowledge that it's just a matter of taste.

Buck decided he liked him and they made this trade and yes, I do have a problem with that because he shouldn't be the decision maker.

And, if Tony's hint is right, the Orioles also gave up another good arm in this deal.

Its a poor trade because you traded more than you needed to, to get a player that you can always find. That's why its poor.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Buck decided he liked him and they made this trade and yes, I do have a problem with that because he shouldn't be the decision maker.

And, if Tony's hint is right, the Orioles also gave up another good arm in this deal.

Its a poor trade because you traded more than you needed to, to get a player that you can always find. That's why its poor.

If we give up another "good arm" then it I may look at it more critically.

[Sports Guy]

But at this point he's not even a BP arm. He's a potential BP arm in 2 years. Teagarden is ML ready, has some skills, some interesting Mil credentials and could easily be better than Tatum imo. I wasn't impressed with Tatum's defensive skills and I think he overperformed offensively in 2010.

All of this is fine.

I am not even saying I am against TT..in fact, I am glad we added him as our back up C vs Tatum or someone like that.

What I don't like is what we traded to get him. That's the issue. We gave up too much IMO. TT may have upside but at this level, he has proven nothing.

[Lucky Jim]

He is pitching out of the pen, right?

Not a major league pen.

[Sports Guy]

Not a major league pen.

Well, i didn't call him a major league BP arm, did I?

[El Gordo]

The O's have 1 C on their 40 man. How many potential RP do they have on their 40 man? They are much deeper at RP than they are at C. That's why you trade one potentially promising RP for a ML ready back up C. We don't have any of those. Go around the league and look at the back up C's numbers. This guy measures up pretty well except for VMart.

[TakebackOPACY]

I hope they make more minor moves like this... I'll bring the popcorn.

[Lucky Jim]

Well, i didn't call him a major league BP arm, did I?

My point was CA-O's - which is that right now, he's a mere probability of BP value, rather than BP value itself. Thus, swapping him for someone with even marginal MLB value is probably a wash, provided there are years of MLB-value remaining.

[Sports Guy]

So far, in Henry's brief career, he has thrown 85.2 IP. He has appeared in 40 games, so he has shown he is more than a ROOGY or a one inning pitcher.

He has 70 K's, which is a K rate of 7.35.

He has walked 14 batters, which is a walk rate of 1.47. That is a 5:1 K/BB ratio and that is one of the more important stats for a reliever.

He has given up a total of 5 homers.

He has a 2.11 GO/AO ratio...again, keeps the ball on the ground.

So, he has shown good command, good control and the ability to keep the ball down...All of this adds up to a pretty good BP prospect. The one thing he misses out on is a bigger K rate. However, with the GB rate being good, its not as important...Plus, he doesn't walk anyone.

Goldstein referred to his fastball in his tweet and made it sound like it was a good one.

One thing people have mentioned is where he was ranked...So what? Middle relievers/set up men aren't usually rated that highly on prospect lists and had he not been injured and pitched more at single A with similar results, I bet Tony has him in the top 20.

For example, Boxberger entered this season as the #18 prospect from Cinci and he is a guy many of us wanted at the deadline.

[Sports Guy]

My point was CA-O's - which is that right now, he's a mere probability of BP value, rather than BP value itself. Thus, swapping him for someone with even marginal MLB value is probably a wash, provided there are years of MLB-value remaining.

Would you trade Dan Klein for a back up C or say, a 4th OFer?(and let's assume that the Orioles have decided to keep Klein as a reliever).