On the Record: Better pitchers available that could be had for free instead of Eveland

[DrungoHazewood]

The outrage over the trade was because the pitcher you just described can be had for nothing, ie, not trading two players who will likely never make the majors.

And the non-outrage was because you can round off "two players who will likely never make the majors" to nothing.

[Singleton]

And the non-outrage was because you can round off "two players who will likely never make the majors" to nothing.

Sure. It probably means nothing.

But it was always an odd move because a) he and many like him can be had for nothing and b) we're a team that should be looking to keep young players even if they have a 5% chance of future success. Not trading them for waiver fodder.

Again, it's a tiny move. But it is another in a series of puzzling moves that to me cause an increasing amount of concern.

[Enjoy Terror]

But it was always an odd move because a) he and many like him can be had for nothing and b) we're a team that should be looking to keep young players even if they have a 5% chance of future success. Not trading them for waiver fodder.

In the same vein as the argument against Eveland; everyone says that a pitcher like him can be had for free. Pitchers like Eveland, as others have explained, are a dime a dozen! We shouldn't have had to trade for him!

Let's flip the argument though; there are thousands of A to A+ level pitchers that fit Martin's mold that can be acquired. 21 year old swing man with a 4.5-5.00 ERA? Yeah, what a shame we let him go to the Dodgers! Heck, look at Miguel Socolovich... we got him for nothing and I'd be thrilled to see Martin turned into the kind of pitcher he is.

People concerned with the minor leagues really shouldn't sweat any transaction that doesn't have anything to do with the top 5, maybe top 10 players in the organization.

[NewMarketSean]

And the non-outrage was because you can round off "two players who will likely never make the majors" to nothing.

Do you want to take the chance, no matter how small, that one of those guys turns out to be at worst an above-replacement level player in the majors? All for a pitcher who 99% of baseball fans could tell you was AAAA fodder?

Dana Eveland is synonymous with dozens of pitchers who could be had for nothing...meaning no actual human beings. Now if the O's wanted to literally offer a bag of balls for Eveland, fine. But even then it would have been too much.

[Singleton]

In the same vein as the argument against Eveland; everyone says that a pitcher like him can be had for free. Pitchers like Eveland, as others have explained, are a dime a dozen! We shouldn't have had to trade for him!

Let's flip the argument though; there are thousands of A to A+ level pitchers that fit Martin's mold that can be acquired. 21 year old swing man with a 4.5-5.00 ERA? Yeah, what a shame we let him go to the Dodgers! Heck, look at Miguel Socolovich... we got him for nothing and I'd be thrilled to see Martin turned into the kind of pitcher he is.

People concerned with the minor leagues really shouldn't sweat any transaction that doesn't have anything to do with the top 5, maybe top 10 players in the organization.

If Eveland is claimed, he'll be with his 5th team in 2 years plus a Spring Training. It's not hard to find him or others like him.

I wish DD were on the other side of moves like this. Giving up guys we were preparing to release and stockpiling young arms in the process (and bats). Though I'd know most of the moves wouldn't result in much, I'd understand the logic. As is, I'm just following the trail and crossing my fingers.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Do you want to take the chance, no matter how small, that one of those guys turns out to be at worst an above-replacement level player in the majors? All for a pitcher who 99% of baseball fans could tell you was AAAA fodder?

Dana Eveland is synonymous with dozens of pitchers who could be had for nothing...meaning no actual human beings. Now if the O's wanted to literally offer a bag of balls for Eveland, fine. But even then it would have been too much.

He had a 55% GB rate. A projectible FIP of 3.81 according to at least one system, good recent trends and scouting reports. Gallaraga was had for nothing and Galaraga does not equal Eveland. We gave up next nothing for Eveland. One was nothing and the other player was next to nothing.

[Tony-OH]

Exactly. I was a little more hesitant with what we gave up for Teagarden, and even for him it's probably no big deal. Just a lot of riling up over nothing.

My problem with the Teagarden trade was a guy like Paulino was available for free. In that case, I would not have given up Henry AND Miclat for Teagarden, especially considering he'll get pricey soon.

[allstar1579]

My problem with the Teagarden trade was a guy like Paulino was available for free. In that case, I would not have given up Henry AND Miclat for Teagarden, especially considering he'll get pricey soon.

Yeah I made the same exact argument the other day when someone was asking my critiques of DD this offseason.

[CA-ORIOLE]

My problem with the Teagarden trade was a guy like Paulino was available for free. In that case, I would not have given up Henry AND Miclat for Teagarden, especially considering he'll get pricey soon.

Ignoring Buck's influence on the TT trade, teams tend to value defense at the backup catcher spot. I'm not sure where Paulino falls here but listening to the Pirates broadcast the other day they made it sound Paulino was a fat and lazy loser during his tenure there.

[TGO]

Ignoring Buck's influence on the TT trade, teams tend to value defense at the backup catcher spot. I'm not sure where Paulino falls here but listening to the Pirates broadcast the other day they made it sound Paulino was a fat and lazy loser during his tenure there.

I believe Paulino was thought to be about average defensively in PIT, but recently (in his stint with the Mets in particular) he has developed a reputation for being well below average and not working very hard to get better.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I believe Paulino was thought to be about average defensively in PIT, but recently (in his stint with the Mets in particular) he has developed a reputation for being well below average and not working very hard to get better.

Thanks, the Pirates announcers were kinda dogging him. It does look like he can hit.

[Rene88]

My problem with the Teagarden trade was a guy like Paulino was available for free. In that case, I would not have given up Henry AND Miclat for Teagarden, especially considering he'll get pricey soon.

Amen-just makes no sense. Not a huge deal per se, but doesn't give you a warm and fuzzy for bigger moves.

[DrungoHazewood]

Do you want to take the chance, no matter how small, that one of those guys turns out to be at worst an above-replacement level player in the majors? All for a pitcher who 99% of baseball fans could tell you was AAAA fodder?

If my scouts or sources or whatever told me he had a chance to be better than a random AAAA arm, sure. I try to make choices based on likely outcomes, not standing pat in fear of the 1% chance everything backfires.

[Fan4Life]

And the non-outrage was because you can round off "two players who will likely never make the majors" to nothing.

Funny!

Are you a fan of British comedy? You appear to be right up that alley...