Orioles Acquire Dana Eveland from Dodgers

[Sports Guy]

Sure, but at some point I believe we have to get better at this. I have to afford DD the opportunity to fail.

He's hovered around 89 or so the past few years and he's a sinkerballer. Looks like he throws a cutter pretty reguarly and sometimes they can get confused on pitch fx. He's not a hard thrower and his command issues at the ML level are the biggest concern imo. I assume if they like his stuff hes got decent movement and it looks like he's go multiple pitches.

I disagree. Considering many of them are PCL they're actually quite impresive.

Where is he now? Maybe that affected his ML performance. I assume we considered this.

Again, it's not battle of the spreadseets. We have to have good scouting.

Wow...Well, if you think a 28 y/o in his th stint in the PCL had an impressive season with a 6.2 K rate and 3.5 BB rate, I don't know what to tell you. For someone who is a stat guy, it is pretty mind boggling to me that you think that's impressive.

Does that mean you felt Lou Montanez was going to be a good player for us because he won the triple crown in AA, in a tough hitters league?

[CA-ORIOLE]

Wow...Well, if you think a 28 y/o in his th stint in the PCL had an impressive season with a 6.2 K rate and 3.5 BB rate, I don't know what to tell you. For someone who is a stat guy, it is pretty mind boggling to me that you think that's impressive.

He started pitching in the PCL at 22. Was impressive throughout. You understand k/bb rates can differ for sinkerball pitchers and aren't necessarily that concerning.

[CompuCoach]

Why is it that the Dodgers got two players for him? If the Dodgers intended to DFA him, and he is a faceless, replaceable pitcher that can be had off of the bargain bin at any given moment, then why would they dare to ask for a second player from the Orioles instead of happily smile, nod, and accept less for someone that qualifies as mere refuse?

I have a hard time believing Dan Duquette proposed sending two players initially as the buyer. It's more likely that the Dodgers held out for the inclusion of a second player; and while a few posters here, based on their reaction to the move, would probably take an offer of 'prospect' Jarret Martin (or Tyler Henson, for that matter) alone for Eveland if they were in the same position, the Dodgers did not. They seemingly valued Eveland more than that.

The deal is really minor, and Duquette himself kept using the word 'depth' in speaking of it, but I just figured this might be some food for thought for all of us armchair GMs out there who can't understand why anyone would surrender players for this particular pitcher.

[nate22]

Games vs the Red Sox should be interesting. 16.1 career innings, 31 runs. Mind you, he hasn't allowed a run against us in 14.1 career innings.

[Oh4real]

This - in all likelihood -is the longest thread in Dana's career.

[hoosiers]

It is entirely possible that Dana Eveland and TT contribute more at the major league level than the guys they were dealt for, but I am not a big fan of the deals.

It is difficult to believe that the most realistic production from Dana Eveland is something better than what can be found for free plus these prospects. I really don't care much at the end of the day. Miclat has talent, but Machado could be ready sooner than folks think at SS and we still have Andino and now Flaherty. Martin has talent, but he is way down the pitching depth chart for me - especially with the arms at GCL and Aberdeen last year moving up.

These minor leaguers are not DD's. They are AM's and JJ's. DD does not give a flying leap about the C prospects from the prior regime - that's how it goes.

[SrMeowMeow]

I think explained risk-reward isn't as simplistic as a 50-50 proposition.

It is reducible to that...you're basically saying it's too complex to make a decision? You can't say whether you think it's more likely that Eveland is below or above 5.00 ERA in 2012?

[SrMeowMeow]

Why is it that the Dodgers got two players for him? If the Dodgers intended to DFA him, and he is a faceless, replaceable pitcher that can be had off of the bargain bin at any given moment, then why would they dare to ask for a second player from the Orioles instead of happily smile, nod, and accept less for someone that qualifies as mere refuse?

I have a hard time believing Dan Duquette proposed sending two players initially as the buyer. It's more likely that the Dodgers held out for the inclusion of a second player; and while a few posters here, based on their reaction to the move, would probably take an offer of 'prospect' Jarret Martin (or Tyler Henson, for that matter) alone for Eveland if they were in the same position, the Dodgers did not. They seemingly valued Eveland more than that.

The deal is really minor, and Duquette himself kept using the word 'depth' in speaking of it, but I just figured this might be some food for thought for all of us armchair GMs out there who can't understand why anyone would surrender players for this particular pitcher.

This is exactly what I disagree with. You're saying that since we traded players for Eveland, he must have some value. And if you replace "players" and "Eveland" with anything else, you can justify any transaction ever. Which is why it's not valid.

[Oh4real]

There is no argument that anyone on this board can make that will convince someone that we got a player that is even semi-useful today. Tony did his best, but he doesn't know this pitcher and has no reason to truly believe we upgraded our system in any way with this move.

This is a move people can only like based on faith. Faith that we have someone here, who believes they can make this guy something no one has seen him be before. Thats the absolutely it.

The guy has been about as bad as a pitcher can be and still be hanging around somewhere. Giving up a taco bell coupon would seem unwarranted to me when guys with his stuff and numbers grow on trees and play in decent adult mens leagues.

I have watched him pitch several times and am still not convinced that he is throwing with the arm that he is supposed to be.

We can only chose to believe that someone, who is paid to know pitching, believes that he can make the return worth the expense. I'm in.

[LookinUp]

These minor leaguers are not DD's. They are AM's and JJ's. DD does not give a flying leap about the C prospects from the prior regime - that's how it goes.

Yup. I expect frequent churning along these lines.

[CompuCoach]

This is exactly what I disagree with. You're saying that since we traded players for Eveland, he must have some value. And if you replace "players" and "Eveland" with anything else, you can justify any transaction ever. Which is why it's not valid.

My point was, that if it is universally stupid to trade for someone like Eveland, a clone of which supposedly can be found at any given moment in free agency, why would the Dodgers hold out for a second player? Like I said, as the buyer I don't think Duquette offered two players initially. For someone like Eveland, you probably offer one to see if that will get it done. There was likely some back and forth. Why didn't the Dodgers just take the initial offer if he's garbage that they can replace 'for free?'

[Sports Guy]

He started pitching in the PCL at 22. Was impressive throughout. You understand k/bb rates can differ for sinkerball pitchers and aren't necessarily that concerning.

Lots of walks are always concerning.

[HokieOrange]

Lots of walks are always concerning.

I guess they're not when it comes to Martin.

[LookinUp]

I guess they're not when it comes to Martin.

Oh boy, that's a good one.

[Sports Guy]

I guess they're not when it comes to Martin.

Of course they are...That's a big reason why he is nothing more than a C prospect with potential upside.