Dan Klein for Teagarden?

[Sports Guy]

OK, who is his clone that the Orioles could have had for far less? I mean don't get me wrong, I don't think Teagarden is the next Johnny Bench, but he does have some pedigree and has battled some injuries the last few years that could have contributed to some of his offensive woes. I think he's an upgrade over Tatum but then again, I never thought much of Tatum as a player. If they throw in anyone with top 30-value along with Henry as the PTBNL, then I might be swayed to saying we gave up too much, but if it's Henry and a D level guy then I'm fine with that.

As I have said, I will guarantee that someone is out there this offseason that is similar to TT and will not require much to get.

Maybe the Angels will look to dump Mathis? Maybe Shoppach will sign for 2M or less?

There will be some player(s) out there that will end up making more sense than the trade we made.

[Sports Guy]

I think that's one of the false pretenses. Also, money saved can be used for something else.

A prospect saved could have been used for something else as well...something more useful.

We traded 2 relievers who were not more valuable than Henry for Hardy last offseason.

This offseason, we trade a younger, better and more valuable reliever for a run of the mill, back up C.

And people do not see the issue with that?

[Sports Guy]

I'll note again the inconsistency of asking for both perfect, maximizing trades and more of them (trades).

Well, you can advocate stupidity all you want. You can have your expectations lowered all you want.

I prefer to see smarter, more intelligent moves.

[Lucky Jim]

Well, you can advocate stupidity all you want. You can have your expectations lowered all you want.

I prefer to see smarter, more intelligent moves.

How do you distinguish "not ideal" or "not perfect" from "stupid"?

[CrimsonTribe]

A prospect saved could have been used for something else as well...something more useful.

We traded 2 relievers who were not more valuable than Henry for Hardy last offseason.

This offseason, we trade a younger, better and more valuable reliever for a run of the mill, back up C.

And people do not see the issue with that?

The price for Hardy should be considered an anomaly and shouldn't be used as a barometer for future deals. Everyone, probably even the Twins, knew it was a steal at the time.

[Sports Guy]

The price for Hardy should be considered an anomaly and shouldn't be used as a barometer for future deals. Everyone, probably even the Twins, knew it was a steal at the time.

I do not disagree with your post...but the point is, that these guys can carry more value than what we just did.

The Hardy trade was an example of that.

[CrimsonTribe]

I do not disagree with your post...but the point is, that these guys can carry more value than what we just did.

The Hardy trade was an example of that.

But I don't think those guys carried more value in the Hardy deal. I think Hardy was just sold for pennies on the dollar.

[lovetoaster]

In what way?

Well, from your own post(s):

I prefer Klein and I do agree he is a better relief prospect.

However, for what we have read by some, he is not a true closer prospect...I disagree with that but some feel that way.

At the same level, Frederick, Henry pitched 15 innings and Klein pitched 15.2 innings. Klein K'ed more batters and had one more walk and gave up 1 more HR.

Very similar stats.

Now, Klein does likely have a better assortment of pitches and from a scouting point of view, that does rate him higher. To be honest, I really can't see how anyone can justify trading EITHER of these 2 for a back up catcher who many on here are overrating.

This is what I look at in determining that Klein is a much better prospect. I know that he recently had a pretty major injury, but nothing that I have heard makes me feel like he won't fully recover and Henry has had his own injury problems, although as you point out, not as severe.

You point out their stats at the same level, and I know it is a small sample size, but since you cited it, two things that I look at for minor league arms are WHIP and K/9. Both of these stats were heavily in Klein's favor in Frederick (1.02 WHIP to 1.267, 8.6 K/9 to 6.6) and throughout the system so far (.80 WHIP to 1.216, 10.9 K/9 to 8.3). I know that Henry has almost twice as many innings pitched in the system, but that's really all we have to go by. I think you mentioned earlier that Henry's WHIP could be partially attributed to sketchy defense, and that may be partially true since he alllows more ground balls. But the hitters are going to get better and 6.6 K/9 and 10.2 hits/9 are not great numbers at A ball. I know that there are other things to look at, but those are not very projectible to me right now.

To me, Klein has a lot more options for success. He may be a middle reliever, but he also has the repertoire to possibly be a starter or could be a closer at some point. Henry is a middle reliever, I just don't see many other possibilities there. To me, Klein has the better projectible stats and has many more opportunities to be valuable at a major league level.

To be honest, I really can't see how anyone can justify trading EITHER of these 2 for a back up catcher who many on here are overrating.

I will admit that I may be overrating Teagarden a bit. I loved him in college and thoght that he would be a more productive player at this point. But in all honesty, he is a solid backup catcher that we got for someone that I would be pretty surprised if they reached the ML level in any capacity. I wish Henry nothing but luck, but most teams have a dozen similarly talented guys. I just think that Teagarden is a much more valuable piece and I like the trade. Either way, I don't think it is worth getting worked up about because it is a pretty minor move that does not really predict anything to come, one way or the other.

Welcome Taylor and good luck in Texas, Randy.

[24fps]

I guess my angst, albeit minute, about this trade is that we are trying to build a team for the "long haul". A player like Henry has some "tools" that could indicate he could help a Major League club at some point in the future...i.e. "long haul".

One could argue that Teagarden is a better player than any remaining free agent backup catcher. I just don't understand why we'd give up a possible valuable arm (keyword "possible") for a guy who we could have acquired for JUST money.

I know I'm in the minority on this, and likely making a bigger deal about it than I should, but it just seems to go against the "building from within" philosophy.

I'm beginning to believe that Duquette was not exaggerating when he indicated that the payroll will remain flat. Speculating here, but I'm guessing that he's feeling a lot of budget pressure at the moment. In that context, this move is justifiable.

Even if Henry has some "possible" value, he remains a fringe prospect and Teagarden has some clear present-day value along with some possible upside of his own.

To me it's refreshing if this is an indication that Duquette is not as married to our prospects as some of us (myself included at times) are.

[Lucky Jim]

But I don't think those guys carried more value in the Hardy deal. I think Hardy was just sold for pennies on the dollar.

Crucial difference. And spot-on.

The idea that we should carry surplus relief prospects on the off-chance that another pennies-on-the-dollar opportunity comes up is pretty inefficient.

[GoldGlove21]

But I don't think those guys carried more value in the Hardy deal. I think Hardy was just sold for pennies on the dollar.

Right and the Orioles should have slipped Hardy for a killing and looked at it like giving up two C level relievers for Hardy who netted them a top-40 prospect in return. Hardy would have landed us Wheeler and maybe a guy like Jose Casilla. We know that the Giants were hard up for a middle infielder and we had the best one available on the market. If we could obtain a guy with TOR upside and a relief arm with the upside of a closer than we should have been all over that trade. For those arguing that we wouldn't have had a shortstop, please remember that we do not have a 1B, 3B, Closer, and 2-3 SP as well. That is if we ignore potential holes at 2B and LF.

I will hold off judgement to see how the next 3 years play out for the Orioles and Hardy. If we trade him for some value during his contract than it might be a wash as well. I just think the object of rebuilding is to obtain guys like Reynolds and Hardy for peanuts and flip them at max value. Hardy hit max value last offseason and is not likely to reproduce those types of numbers, stay healthy or have less competition at a trade deadline in terms of available options.

[Mr Snuffleupagus]

As I have said, I will guarantee that someone is out there this offseason that is similar to Randy Henry and will not require anything to get.

Fixed that for you.

[GoldGlove21]

Crucial difference. And spot-on.

The idea that we should carry surplus relief prospects on the off-chance that another pennies-on-the-dollar opportunity comes up is pretty inefficient.

I see your point, but surplus assumes that you have depth and our pen is still a work in progress.

[MrOrange82]

But I don't think those guys carried more value in the Hardy deal. I think Hardy was just sold for pennies on the dollar.

I am doing a poor job of spreading rep. Must...more...

[clapdiddy]

I'm beginning to believe that Duquette was not exaggerating when he indicated that the payroll will remain flat. Speculating here, but I'm guessing that he's feeling a lot of budget pressure at the moment. In that context, this move is justifiable.

Even if Henry has some "possible" value, he remains a fringe prospect and Teagarden has some clear present-day value along with some possible upside of his own.

To me it's refreshing if this is an indication that Duquette is not as married to our prospects as some of us (myself included at times) are.

I don't believe that this move was driven by anything more than Buck wanting "his guy". I don't have a problem with that and see the rationale. I don't like the deal, but if Teagarden is more "affordable" than another backup catcher, I guess it does make some sense.

I do agree with the bold part. I hope that Duquette has the flexibility to not be attached to the guys at the Major League level as well.