O's DFA Eveland

[allstar1579]

I must have missed the posts where anyone thought this was some fantastic move. The reactions pretty much ran from "meh" to "this is the worst move of all time Duquette is clearly an idiot the sky is falling!"

I think Tony and I were two of the most positive about the move and we were both FIRMLY in the "meh" category.

[Sports Guy]

I think Tony and I were two of the most positive about the move and we were both FIRMLY in the "meh" category.

Mike Gallo was the most positive.

Believe he said he would throw 150+ innings.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/117364-My-2012-Breakout-performer-is-Dana-Eveland?highlight=

[DrungoHazewood]

What's the difference there Drungo? .5 win? 1 win?

You are the one who always says, why pay x amount of dollars for 1.5 wins when you can spend the league minimum for 1 win.

So, which is it?

You have to be discerning to get the right freely available player, and sometimes you have to pay some trivial price to get the guy you want. The Orioles of the past decade are a perfect example of the kind of well-below-replacement crap you can end up with if you don't actually care who the last 10 guys on the 40-man are.

I think you're simplifying my philosophy. I've always said there's a ton of risk in the middle of the market, and values to be had on the low end. That doesn't mean that you can always find productive major league players who fit your organization for absolutely nothing in return.

[DrungoHazewood]

Mike Gallo was the most positive.

Believe he said he would throw 150+ innings.

http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php/117364-My-2012-Breakout-performer-is-Dana-Eveland?highlight=

Doesn't that kind of prove the point that Frobby was right? You can always find somebody who's five standard deviations from reasonable.

[Sports Guy]

You have to be discerning to get the right freely available player, and sometimes you have to pay some trivial price to get the guy you want. The Orioles of the past decade are a perfect example of the kind of well-below-replacement crap you can end up with if you don't actually care who the last 10 guys on the 40-man are.

I think you're simplifying my philosophy. I've always said there's a ton of risk in the middle of the market, and values to be had on the low end. That doesn't mean that you can always find productive major league players who fit your organization for absolutely nothing in return.

But in this case, we did find those players and so did other teams.

So even if you felt that Eveland was worth a half a win more than player x, why would you trade anything to gain that half win?

[DrungoHazewood]

But in this case, we did find those players and so did other teams.

So even if you felt that Eveland was worth a half a win more than player x, why would you trade anything to gain that half win?

Because he was available for almost nothing at a point in the offseason where the O's were pretty thin on pitching options.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I think Tony and I were two of the most positive about the move and we were both FIRMLY in the "meh" category.

I was a supporter of the trade and made the effort to provide detailed rationale behind it. That said, I clearly stated that we can just evaluate his performance in ST and DFA him if he doesn't perform. The acquisition "cost" really was that insignificant imo. I hope he clears waivers. If it comes down to us needing any SP from AAA (probably Galaraga in this case), I'd much rather have Eveland.

[SrMeowMeow]

I'm sure this has been said a thousand times in the 14 pages I didn't read, but this just highlights how truly pointless and idiotic this move was. Again, not crippling or even damaging, but pointless and idiotic.

[Sports Guy]

Because he was available for almost nothing at a point in the offseason where the O's were pretty thin on pitching options.

But again, you didn't have to trade almost nothing...you could have traded nothing and gotten someone close to, the same or maybe better than what you got.

[CA-ORIOLE]

This circle will keep going round and round because "almost nothing" is something worth arguing over for some people.

Pretty much. "Almost nothing", "any pitcher" and hoarding "prospects" are the central themes.

[Flosman]

With the way the game has started today can we get him back? Who could we trade for him? lol.

[Enjoy Terror]

If Eveland had been cut by the Dodgers and passed through waivers, would he have become a free agent?

If this is the case, wouldn't the Orioles have had to negotiate with Eveland and risk that he could have gone somewhere else?

If we traded for him, doesn't that mean unless he had a no-trade clause, he would have had to play with Baltimore?

Perhaps the Os saw something they liked and didn't want to lose him in free agency.

[Moose Milligan]

How many times have the Orioles made moves where the long term consequences were no big deal, yet it was still poor?

Does it matter that we signed Gregg, Bradford, Walker, baez, Atkins, et al....?

Does it matter that guys like Knott weren't given the chance while we decided to spend 4+M on Atkins?

End of the day, probably not.

Does it signal a bigger picture issue with this organization? It sure does, unless you just want to be a homer.

We have had this discussion time and time again...Its not a big deal, this player doesn't hurt, we won't be affected long term, blah blah blah.

And yet, here we sit..the worst organization in the sport and the title of the pro team that is further away from the playoffs than anyone else.

I know dude, I totally get it and I'm not saying I disagree. I'm just poking a little fun at how worked up you get

[WietersCorner]

I am surprised no one is looking at this with a different and exciting perspective. I love how DD took a chance on a player he believed in, and then had the courage to remove him when that risk did not work. It was a low risk and higher reward scenario that just did not pan out this time. He did not let his ego stop him from holding onto the player for too long. I wish previous GMs had the same courage with players like Pie, Segui, Baez, Grimsley, Daal etc.

[mikegallo]

Doesn't that kind of prove the point that Frobby was right? You can always find somebody who's five standard deviations from reasonable.

Just because I said he could breakout and give us innings doesn't mean I was wrong or 5 standard deviations from everyone else. I clearly stated in that the thread odd of him flaming out were just as likely as him doing anything legit this year. After seeing him in ST I still believe this was a good move and if the spring had a couple different breaks we could be talking about how Eveland is our number 4/5 starter and could give us 150 innings between a 4-5 era this year.

Yeah I thought if he made the team he would surprise the sky is falling crowd but the fact he was DFA after a decent spring is kind of what we all hoped for. At the time of the trade it was completely reasonable to see DANA in the OD rotation and giving us 150-170 decent innings, given we had no idea (neither did DD) DD would go out and get 8-10 more pitchers before the spring.

Nothing that has taken place has shown my reasoning to be not logical and sound. SG's intial and continued outrage over giving up non factors for pitching depth has (something which as been the biggest issue of our team for about 12 years) only recently has SG taken a step toward a more moderate side to "Yeah I was right, DD while not an idiot for this move, is merely dumb". So you can pretend I was wildly optmistic over this trade but that just wasn't the case.

I simply saw a guy who could provide solid depth/production who had two intriuging pitching skills that were more then worth the prospects just to take a look at in ST, even him if doesn't pitch an inning for us or gives us 80 in AAA and 80 in the majors this year.