Rate the Guthrie trade (Poll)

[mweb]

I knew what they were making. My comment was based on the belief that the Orioles thought there was a decent chance they might lose the arbitration hearing and shipped Guthrie out as a preemptive move to get what they felt is more value (2 players for the price of 1 + a little more if Guthrie won). And knowing PA it wouldn't surprise me if it was partially based on maintaining his/Smouse's unblemished arbitration record....since with a young team they may likely be headed for arbitration a lot over the next few years and would like to have that record to use as leverage in negotiations.

BTW, You said of course they are saving money as if it were fact. Another reason why I thought you did not know what they were making, since it is far from fact, and is likely not even the case.

[Fan4Life]

Yeah, but that same logic applies to trading Guthrie for cheap players, and it's highly doubtful that he would have won his arb hearing, which is why he settled today for much less.

And hey, I wish they were saving some money here. But Birds of B'more is simply wrong when he says they're saving money here.

This is what I was getting at..

Interesting trade, no. No one was offering prospects (at this point in the offseason, that would most likely mean a team would be ramping up payroll by an additional $10M - I doubt many teams are in that position).

If one wants to rave about not dealing Guts previously, about our owner and GM being too cheap to go to arbitration (when all our FO has done is win those cases), if one wants to wax philosophic about the great acquisition that Guts was when acquired for nothing and leading our pitching for several years, this is not the post for you - save yourself time and move on.

There are many cross-currents to this deal that I find very interesting.

First, there are stat-heads referenced in this thread that claim that Hammel is a better pitcher - using stats like SIERA - while being younger and cheaper. There are articles referenced that say Lindstrom is not swiss cheese and has posted respectable results recently. And I think those two sentences alone give insight into the thinking of our GM.

Second, I think it will be very interesting to see this trade in a year from a stat perspective. Statheads use all sorts of park-adjusted and league adjusted stats, but I assume front offices have more in-depth analysis - like division adjusted stats or stats adjusted for the ballparks in which a pitcher actually pitched. Hammel gets to escape the Rockies, but he also benefited from some relatively weak NL West line-ups and cozy road pitching confines like San Diego and LAD (not sure how much he pitched in those locations). Guts pitched in the uber-competitive AL East and we all know he had many competitive outings against those ferocious lineups. I am not sure how it will turn out - just very eager to see the results - though generally, I would bet with the pitcher leaving the AL East.

Third, our GM is a trader. He likes to trade his pieces. DD has a track record of good and bad deals (unlike AM who only made deals that seem somewhat skewed in his favor) that collectively end up being favorable over the term.

Fourth, let's get out the cliches. Was one of these pitchers mediocre last year and a good buy low candidate? If one of these candidates could now be classified in the "better to sell a year too soon" and could see his stuff go to pot, which one would it be? Is one of these candidates reaching an age where production declines? I am reading the 2% book about the construction of the 2008 Tampa Bay team. Which side of this trade do you believe that shrewd organization would prefer to be on? I think ours.

The thing that I find most interesting about reading this thread is the general vibe that the deal is not so good for the Os even when folks acknowledge that Hammel and Guts may comparable pitchers - and we got the one who is younger, cheaper and farther from free agency as well as a respectable reliever. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. I wish Guts well.

My thanks to the distinguished gentlemen from Jersay. I think he has it exactly right. I mean we....

[glenn__davis]

I usually like to wait a day or so to read all of the analysis before trying to analyze a trade. Just because that knee-jerk reaction can so often be wrong.

So I gave it a B-/C+. If we truly could get no decent younger pieces for Guthrie, then it is what it is. I do not believe his value was somehow going to increase at the deadline. If anything, I think you have a better chance of that happening with Hammel or Lidstrom, plus have the potential added value of them having another year of team control.

So like hoosiers said, maybe not an exciting trade, certainly not something we were hoping for with Guthrie, but if it's the best that was out there, I'm OK with it.