Updated: Orioles acquire Taylor Teagarden

[Lucky Jim]

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.

To pick on me, you'd have to land a blow. The answer is in your post, and it's implied in every reference to fungibility. He's fungible with any number of surplus pieces that we have - both internally and available elsewhere.

But, let's be clear - a dollar bill is not fungible with a Benjamin. We're clearly talking about a likeness of kind, here. Machado is not fungible. Schoop is not fungible.

[PaulFolk]

I guarantee by the end of the offseason, you will see some kind of a back up C acquired for less(either in trade or for little money) than what we gave up for TT.

I would prefer us to make smarter moves.

Of course, I have been complaining about this for years...Most of you think its nothing and now, we see Frobby start a thread about the importance of small moves.

To act as if they aren't important and don't show you bigger things is incredibly naive and that has been proven time and time again.

Put this another way...We just made a trade with a team that is far more intelligent that the Orioles. They gave up what some of you are calling such a valuable commodity and decided that the "dime a dozen" arm was better for them. Guess whose opinion I value more? Hint...its not the losing, pathetic franchise that shows no ability to build a pen.

That's a poor way of looking at it. By that logic, the Orioles automatically lose ANY trade they make with a good organization. It's a bit simplistic to say, "The Orioles are a terrible franchise, and the Rangers are a great one, so clearly the Rangers know what they're doing with this trade and the Orioles don't."

Trades are made for a variety of reasons, as you well know. It's not just about dumping off lousy players on some sucker team. In this case, the Rangers traded Teagarden because they have a catching surplus with Napoli and Torrealba already under contract. And the Orioles were in the market for a catcher. I don't look at this as the Rangers trying to swindle the Orioles.

I can't remember anyone speaking more than two words about Randy Henry before this trade. He's not a prospect that the Orioles should be regretting giving up.

[Tony-OH]

And Keith Law is right. Its a trade that makes no sense, no matter how the lollipoppers want to spin it.

You are better than this comment. You know darn well a number of us are not lollipoppers and we're not spinning nothing. We have a different opinion on the trade. I for one don't have a problem trading a C level prospect for a major leaguer who has shown value, especially defensively. Also, I think it's important that Buck gets the catcher's he's looking for.

From the Sun trade article:

Showalter and Teagarden were really together only during one spring training in 2006, but Showalter has always liked the catcher and pushed the Orioles to acquire him. Ultimately, Duquette said, he worked to make it happen.

"I believe in the catcher being the personal choice of the manager because he really represents the manager on the field," Duquette said. "This made sense for our ballclub. ? And the fact that Buck knows him and likes him, I think, is a big plus for everybody."

[Stotle]

What's TT's medical/injury history? Does he have long term concerns? I noted in his interview that he mentioned that was healthy for the last couple years and was frustrated about not getting more ML time with Texas.

If I remember correctly, some back and neck issues that were viewed as potentially chronic without regular rest and some potential structural issues with his knees. Maybe I'm confusing him with someone else.

[Sports Guy]

You are better than this comment. You know darn well a number of us are not lollipoppers and we're not spinning nothing. We have a different opinion on the trade. I for one don't have a problem trading a C level prospect for a major leaguer who has shown value, especially defensively. Also, I think it's important that Buck gets the catcher's he's looking for.

From the Sun trade article:

Showalter and Teagarden were really together only during one spring training in 2006, but Showalter has always liked the catcher and pushed the Orioles to acquire him. Ultimately, Duquette said, he worked to make it happen.

"I believe in the catcher being the personal choice of the manager because he really represents the manager on the field," Duquette said. "This made sense for our ballclub. ? And the fact that Buck knows him and likes him, I think, is a big plus for everybody."

The idea that Buck likely drove this trade is a negative, not a positive.

[CA-ORIOLE]

If I remember correctly, some back and neck issues that were viewed as potentially chronic without regular rest and some potential structural issues with his knees. Maybe I'm confusing him with someone else.

Yeah, those type of injuries can be problematic.

[Sports Guy]

If I remember correctly, some back and neck issues that were viewed as potentially chronic without regular rest and some potential structural issues with his knees. Maybe I'm confusing him with someone else.

Keith Law made some reference to him having an injury history as well.

[TakebackOPACY]

If I remember correctly, some back and neck issues that were viewed as potentially chronic without regular rest and some potential structural issues with his knees. Maybe I'm confusing him with someone else.

That sounds like Salty.

EDIT: Teagarden missed all of 2006 with Tommy John surgery and a stress fracture in his back. I don't see any real injury history since then, but there were a few times when it was questioned why he wasn't playing more. But between the minors and the majors, he only played:

110 games in 2007

89 games in 2009

91 games in 2010

56 games in 2011

Some of those low numbers are because he was a major league back-up. But there were a few times when Teagarden had apparently earned more playing time, the Rangers said he'd 'split time' and then he didn't. Maybe his health has something to do with that; maybe not.

primary source: rototimes.

http://www.rotoworld.com/recent/mlb/4172/taylor-teagarden

2nd EDIT: Salty had 'Thoracic Outlet Syndrome' and a dozen other problems.

[Slappy]

And Keith Law is right. Its a trade that makes no sense, no matter how the lollipoppers want to spin it.

No sense to trade an oft-injured A-ball pitcher for a ML backup catcher?

Something makes no sense, and it's not the trade...

[Lucky Jim]

I want to be clear, here. I view this as "not stupid" and "not a big deal." I am not endorsing it as a trade that I would have made.

As far as I can tell, we've given up a guy who has about a 60% chance of being Matt Albers - if he can stay healthy. So, in essence, his estimated value is something like 60% of the 1.7 WAR that Albers has put up over the last five years.

If your take is higher, that's fine. And that could change the evaluation. Clearly, this is based on the idea that Henry doesn't have a future as a starter. I don't think he does, and I think the trade indicates that the Orioles don't think he does.

What are the odds that Teagarden provides more than 1.02 WAR over the course of his contract?

[CrimsonTribe]

The idea that Buck likely drove this trade is a negative, not a positive.

Buck shouldn't be running the front office, but he should have input and DD should take his opinion into account. He has a history as a strong evaluator of talent. Plus, he's going to be the one using the guy on the field.

[Mr Snuffleupagus]

Buck shouldn't be running the front office, but he should have input and DD should take his opinion into account. He has a history as a strong evaluator of talent. Plus, he's going to be the one using the guy on the field.

Agreed. He's also stated he doesn't like the his lack of flexibility when he has an aging veteran clogging up the DH hole. That's the sorta thing a manger should tell a GM. It's where the GM's decisions directly correlate to the product the manager needs to manage.

[Frobby]

I want to be clear, here. I view this as "not stupid" and "not a big deal." I am not endorsing it as a trade that I would have made.

As far as I can tell, we've given up a guy who has about a 60% chance of being Matt Albers - if he can stay healthy. So, in essence, his estimated value is something like 60% of the 1.7 WAR that Albers has put up over the last five years.

If your take is higher, that's fine. And that could change the evaluation. Clearly, this is based on the idea that Henry doesn't have a future as a starter. I don't think he does, and I think the trade indicates that the Orioles don't think he does.

What are the odds that Teagarden provides more than 4.2 WAR over the course of his contract?

I am not following this. You seem to be saying Henry's estimated value is 1.0 wins. So, why are you picking 4.2 WAR for Teagarden? The odds of any back-up catcher putting up 4.2 WAR over 4 years is very small. If he could contribute 2-4 wins in 4 years I'd say that was a big win for us.

[Lucky Jim]

I am not following this. Why are you picking 4.2 WAR for Teagarden? The odds of any back-up catcher putting up 4.2 WAR over 4 years is very small. If he could contribute 2-4 wins in 4 years I'd say that was a big win for us.

But that was a typo* because I did it quickly. Should have been 1.02.

*By typo I mean I jumbled my math.

[GoldGlove21]

I want to be clear, here. I view this as "not stupid" and "not a big deal." I am not endorsing it as a trade that I would have made.

As far as I can tell, we've given up a guy who has about a 60% chance of being Matt Albers - if he can stay healthy. So, in essence, his estimated value is something like 60% of the 1.7 WAR that Albers has put up over the last five years.

If your take is higher, that's fine. And that could change the evaluation. Clearly, this is based on the idea that Henry doesn't have a future as a starter. I don't think he does, and I think the trade indicates that the Orioles don't think he does.

What are the odds that Teagarden provides more than 1.02 WAR over the course of his contract?

I think this trade being a win or loss is tied more to the PTBNL than Henry himself.