Updated: Orioles acquire Taylor Teagarden

[TakebackOPACY]

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.

Right. I haven't chimed in because it's been so entertaining just to read folks repeating themselves. But...

I suspect that if a Calculus-Guru/ProbnStat-guy/Baseball-Executive/Superscout quantified all factors, he'd determine that this is probably a slight win for the Orioles that makes sense for the Rangers. That is, until he/she factors in the unknown other opportunities that the O's might have to acquire an unknown 3rd party back-up Catcher. And this is why we have 17 pages of both sides of the argument being correct.

[GoldGlove21]

There is so many ways that we could look at this deal so I will just be adding my two cents. We traded away an unknown quantity with the ceiling of a quality relief pitcher for a known quantity with the ceiling of a quality backup catcher that can play defense at a high level. The Orioles might have just added 1-1.5 WAR to the team (compared to the 2011 product) without hitting the open market and paying a decent amount ($1.5M-$2M) for a backup catcher. The saving on the backup catcher could be put back into the draft or take a bigger flyer on a veteran starting pitcher on a 1-year deal. I am not impressed by this deal, but it isn't a terrible trade either.

This team needs a great deal of help and upgrading the backup catcher position is another step in the right direction IMO. You don't need to spend a fortune on your bench to build a decent bench. I would rather see the Orioles spend on their biggest weakness and that is pitching. What gets to me a bit is that we have heard rumors of the Orioles discussing Guthrie with the Angels and we have heard the Orioles were tied to Chong and closers, but nothing regarding starting pitching. If that does not get addressed than the bakup catcher, relief pitching and 4th outfielder will be the least of our worries.

[carolinaoriole]

Did we just trade Adam Jones for a back up catcher?

[MikeAD]

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).

I think a good way to look at this right now is Felix Pie. When we got Pie, he was worth a pitcher we couldn't keep and a minor league arm. He was a prospect with extremely high upside that hadn't shown a whole lot. NOW, at 26, hes coming off a season where he was demoted and not heard from again. Would you be happy if your team picked up Felix Pie as your 4th or 5th outfielder for a young minor league arm (20-25 ranked prospect in your system).

Seems like there's a much easier way to do it.

Its not so much this trade that bothers me (this is pretty insignificant), I just wonder how the trades will look moving forward. The guy DD is replacing could work magic with a trade, and we have a world of possibilities and opportunities when it comes to revamping this organization via trades.

[Roll Tide]

DD got Teagarden because thats who Buck wanted.

http://twitter.com/britt_ghiroli

@Britt_GhiroliBrittany Ghiroli

Duquette said Teagarden was high on their list becuz Showalter wanted him. Interesting 2 see if that carries weight in other offseason moves

Does Buck want a MOO Bat ? I'll bet he does:)

[RVAbird]

DD got Teagarden because thats who Buck wanted.

http://twitter.com/britt_ghiroli

@Britt_GhiroliBrittany Ghiroli

Does Buck want a MOO Bat ? I'll bet he does:)

I don't think you had to be a great beat writer (which Ghirloi is, in my opinion) to figure that out. This was an obvious Buck move.

[Floater]

Holy crap, this mostly insignificant trade is nearly 20 pages worth of discussion?

[SrMeowMeow]

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.

Not to pick on you, but why do people keep saying bullpen prospects are "fungible" as if it means "worthless", or at least "something we have so much of that we won't miss"? You know what else is fungible? Money. That has nothing to do with whether or not I should spend it on something.

[hoosiers]

I would generally lean against this trade, but that's because I like Henry.

I do not see the need to give up a C prospect for a backup catcher with limited options. Apparently, there was interest by several teams and perhaps we had to offer the better C level prospect. Who knows. I found this evaluation of the deal from the espn dallas reporter.

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/texas-rangers/post/_/id/4876355/trading-taylor-teagarden-makes-sense

I would rather be the team dealing the backup catcher with limited options for the C prospect than vice versa, but it's a small deal. I imagine we may have an opportunity to flip TT at some point, if desired, for a similar prospect to Henry or possibly better if TT performs well.

As SG posted, you never know which one of the C level prospects will exceed expectations and that why I recommend keeping them generally.

Contrary to an earlier opinion, I do not believe DD will make better smaller deals than AM who was the master at getting something (or something with potential) for nothing.

In a positive light, I do like that DD is not afraid to make a move and provide a player the manager requested.

[GoldGlove21]

Holy crap, this mostly insignificant trade is nearly 20 pages worth of discussion?

That is what happens when there is nothing "real" to talk about. Make believe trade scenarios and what would you do if you were DD responses only go so far due to the fact that we do not know what trade options exist and we are not DD. 20 pages about a backup catcher is what makes real Orioles fans great IMO.

[AgentOrange]

Not to pick on you, but why do people keep saying bullpen prospects are "fungible" as if it means "worthless", or at least "something we have so much of that we won't miss"? You know what else is fungible? Money. That has nothing to do with whether or not I should spend it on something.

But when you make a purchase with said money, how much you have comes into play when figuring out if its a smart purchase or not.

[Slappy]

Is there any other team message board that generates 250+ posts on a trade for a backup catcher? Amazing!

[tinamodotti]

Is there any other team message board that generates 250+ posts on a trade for a backup catcher? Amazing!

Not surprising when one guy decides to make 46 repetitive posts.

[scOtt]

That is what happens when there is nothing "real" to talk about. Make believe trade scenarios and what would you do if you were DD responses only go so far due to the fact that we do not know what trade options exist and we are not DD. 20 pages about a backup catcher is what makes real Orioles fans great IMO.

And the Hangout too! I've said it before... It's what we do here.

[crissfan172]

I understand the logic behind not liking this deal, but I can't be upset that we traded away a player that I've never heard of for a backup catcher. It doesn't make it a good deal...just not outrage worthy.