Guthrie traded to Rockies for Hammel & Lindstrom

[Tony-OH]

Tony, can you expand on this (especially since it seems to be a majority opinion)? Why does a trade with a "small gain" so unsavory?

There have been folks here clamoring for our GM to take any and every opportunity to improve the ballclub by even a single iota and here we have such a deal and the reaction is larglely negative. I understand if the reaction is "solid trade, small improvement", but the general reaction is skewed toward the negative.

Small gains by upgrading the bench or adding depth is just fine. Trading away the only pitcher you could count on for 200 innings when your stated goal is to "win more than we lose" is counter productive in my opinion. His trade has the POTENTIAL to have a small gain, but it will require a pitcher to pitch better then he ever has in the AL East while hoping for a breakout year from an expensive set up guy. I just wouldn't move my only 200 inning pitcher for guys that could gain me a small advantage, but most likely not enough to make a difference. I mean, what is the net gain in wins? Could Hammel have more value at the trading deadline than Guthrie, sure, in theory because he's younger and has an additional year of control. However, I don't see anything that suggests he's going to come to the AL East and have that kind of success. Guthrie is a classic pitcher who outperforms his peripherals while Hammel was a classic guy who underperformed his peripherals in his two decent years before the shoe finally dropped.

As I've said before, it's not a horrible "throw ourselves on our sword" trade, I just felt it was unnecessary, especially since there was no way Guthrie was going to win with his $10 million number. I just don't see much of an upside and especially not enough to make a difference in the short or long term.

[Tony-OH]

He'll be lucky to get $12.4 over 3 years.

That's just silly and inaccurate.

[Frobby]

That's just silly and inaccurate.

Yes, it is. But he certainly wasn't going to be offered $12.4 mm by the Orioles next winter, even if he had a very good season this year, so the O's weren't going to get a comp pick for him, which is pretty important in the analysis.

I'm officially neutral on the trade. It is just so hard to know how a pitcher will do moving from Colorado to Baltimore. On the one hand, Coors is so hitter-friendly. On the other hand, you also pitch a lot of games in pitcher-friendly parks in SF, LA and SD, and the NL West lineups aren't as good as the AL East, plus there's no DH in the NL. My gut sense is that Hammel is a tick below Guthrie. I'm more or less expecting a 4.50-4.75 ERA from him in 170-180 IP, compared to 4.15-4.40 ERA and 200 IP if Guthrie were here. But, I'm far from certain about that.

At the end of the day, Guthrie would have been gone in a year, so I just can't get worked up about this one way or the other. I'll just root for the guys we acquired to do well and leave it at that.

[El Gordo]

I think getting something for Guthrie is better than getting almost nothing. If you are heavily invested in 200 IP and maybe .500 this season, then perhaps keeping him and hoping you can get more at the deadline is the better move, but I seriously doubt you could get it. The time to trade Guthrie was several years ago.

[LookinUp]

I think getting something for Guthrie is better than getting almost nothing. If you are heavily invested in 200 IP and maybe .500 this season, then perhaps keeping him and hoping you can get more at the deadline is the better move, but I seriously doubt you could get it. The time to trade Guthrie was several years ago.

This is really where I stand. I think the chances of getting nothing for Guthrie were very high, actually.

[Tony-OH]

I think getting something for Guthrie is better than getting almost nothing. If you are heavily invested in 200 IP and maybe .500 this season, then perhaps keeping him and hoping you can get more at the deadline is the better move, but I seriously doubt you could get it. The time to trade Guthrie was several years ago.

Isn't that exactly what Duquette has stated were his goals this season? he wanted pitchers who can throw 200 innings and win more game then he loses. I don't see how this trade helps those goals.

[El Gordo]

Isn't that exactly what Duquette has stated were his goals this season? he wanted pitchers who can throw 200 innings and win more game then he loses. I don't see how this trade helps those goals.

So you're in favor of keeping Guthrie and getting 200 IP, in the off chance it helps us get to .500, even though you get nothing in return when he leaves?The difference between Guthrie and Hammels may be 30 IP. That's not likely to be the difference between .500 or not. It's certainly not worth getting two serviceable ML pitchers vs. nothing

[crawjo]

In balance I think there's a good chance the trade will make the team marginally better in both 2012 and 2013, simply because we got two useful pitchers in exchange for Guthrie. Lindstrom slots into the seventh or eighth innings and Hammel has a decent shot at matching or coming close to matching whatever Guthrie would have done this year. Logically speaking there's nothing wrong with this trade. It's not great, but there's nothing wrong with it.

What I think Duquette has done up to this point, as others have noted, is to take the core and build around it, adding marginal wins here and there. I think he's determined to see how good a record the Orioles can put up with the young players they have now. All these additions, if they go as planned, from Teagarden and Chavez to Betemit, are additions that should help the club at the margins: improving the defense a bit, adding to the offense a little bit. Nothing major or transformational has happened, but I do think the club's depth is now significantly better than it was in 2011. And I think that matters when you consider that the Orioles gave Felix Pie 175 plate appearances last year, gave Craig Tatum 96 plate appearances, gave Josh Bell 65 plate appearances, etc. etc. And then on the pitching side you had Brad Bergesen pitching 101 innings, a guy like Jakubauskus pitching 72 innings, Jo-Jo Reyes making 5 starts. All that ineptitude adds up over the course of a season, and I think Duquette's moves have made that sort of bench performance significantly less likely in 2012.

[DrungoHazewood]

This just flat out isn't true... because it's really Guthrie AND Rapada for Hammel and Lindstrom. And I know there will be people that say Rapada is no loss, but I'll say again that he held opposing lefties to a .336 OPS. Not batting average. Not On-Base. That's not a typo. A .336 OPS. (And yes, I know that his opp. OPS to righties was 2.212... but I am an advocate for a LOOGY)

And I actually had the chance to speak with a current ML GM, who seemed to be as puzzled with the trade as I was...

It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense...

Rapada's value is zero. The Orioles acquired him for nothing, and they released him the moment they needed a spot on the 40-man despite Buck loving LOOGYs. If you have to have a Rapada on the roster, just keep Eveland and give him the job. Or use Wada as a LOOGY and a real reliever. Or you use Troy Patton. Or you find somebody on the waiver wire. Or you turn over that old log in your back yard and three LOOGY crawl out.

Almost by definition a LOOGY is a replacement-level pitcher who happens to be left handed. Guthrie and Rapada for Hammel and Lindstrom is exactly the same as Guthrie for Hammel and Lindstrom.

[NCRaven]

If the over/under on Hammel losses for 2012 is less than 17, and I'll bet it is, than I'm fine with this trade. In the end, Guthrie is worth what the market says he's worth. In this case, we were able to get a starting pitcher that is four years younger than Guthrie and a decent reliever. But, apparently, we couldn't get a prospect or two who may or may not ever make it to the majors (there is no way we were getting a "sure thing" prospect). As to the goal of winning more than we lose this year, it appears that DD and Buck aren't sure that Guthrie actually helps us do that and it's time to make a change.

[allstar1579]

Yes, it is. But he certainly wasn't going to be offered $12.4 mm by the Orioles next winter, even if he had a very good season this year, so the O's weren't going to get a comp pick for him, which is pretty important in the analysis.

I'm officially neutral on the trade. It is just so hard to know how a pitcher will do moving from Colorado to Baltimore. On the one hand, Coors is so hitter-friendly. On the other hand, you also pitch a lot of games in pitcher-friendly parks in SF, LA and SD, and the NL West lineups aren't as good as the AL East, plus there's no DH in the NL. My gut sense is that Hammel is a tick below Guthrie. I'm more or less expecting a 4.50-4.75 ERA from him in 170-180 IP, compared to 4.15-4.40 ERA and 200 IP if Guthrie were here. But, I'm far from certain about that.

At the end of the day, Guthrie would have been gone in a year, so I just can't get worked up about this one way or the other. I'll just root for the guys we acquired to do well and leave it at that.

This is very level headed and I mostly agree with it. My only disagreement is that we could have kept him. He wanted to resign here and would have done it last year around $7m per year, and this year around $8m. We didn't HAVE to lose him, we could have just paid him the extension and been secure for 3 more years of 200 innings at about a 4.00 ERA. It was the team's choice not to resign him and let him go, and that's fine, it's a business move, but I think the intangibles of having JG here far outweigh having another pitcher put up the same stats for $3-4m less.

[Sports Guy]

Yeah, very funny. Actually, what we saw was almost unanimous negative reaction to the trade. Then we saw a couple of people, including myself, say that it wasn't so bad and possibly could even end up being good. Yes, that's an optimistic take but the same people concede that it could end up badly. It's called taking a logical and balanced look at the trade, free of emotion. Now you see some of the people who were initially negative, backtracking a bit, and for good reason.

No one was really terribly upset about the deal...they just didn't think it was the best way to go. Those people still feel that way.

[Lucky Jim]

No one was really terribly upset about the deal...they just didn't think it was the best way to go. Those people still feel that way.

They may not express it in the same elevated tone that you do, but go back and read this thread. Or, better: http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/118297-HHP-Can-this-organization-even-pretend-it-wants-to-win

[mweb]

Oh really! Those are just from the first 3-4 pages of the thread.

:rofl:

[Fan4Life]

Oh really! Those are just from the first 3-4 pages of the thread.

I have to say.. 24 hours later.. I'm now ok with it. I got caught up like the thread the someone started about favorite players.. obviously there's some guesswork here but in the end we divided Guthrie's salary into 2 players either of which may be moved easier and perhaps under the right conditions, for more than Guthrie alone would get us.