Duquette and the Pennant: This Time It's Personal

[Flacco Machado]

FWIW, Jim Duq has said on XM that there have been no discussiona at the GM level on Greinke. He also is adamant that they won't be trading Machado and Bundy, and they are not going after Garza. I think his contacts are pretty valid.

This is what I think will happen.

Agree. The next 3 weeks will say a lot. Boy, is that an understatement. If the Thome trade had not been made, I would think we were standing pat. BUT, if you make a trade like that and you read between the lines with some of DD's statements, I would not at all be surprised to see Dempster, Saunders, Soriano, and Headley on this roster by the end of the month.

[Dark Helmet]

If what you're suggesting is true, which it is not, then the only reason we haven't won in the past fourteen years is a lack of willpower. Whoda thunk? These past fourteen years all we needed was some handsome, swashbuckling GM to ride into the front office on top of a horse, or maybe a tank, or maybe a horsetank with a horse's body and tank treads, and tell all those cowards to win right NOW. All this time they hadn't actually understood what the purpose of the game was. Finally, everything is clear.

In fact, the inverse of what you're suggesting is true. For the past fourteen years, Andy MacPhail's era aside, almost all of our GMs have been of the swashbuckling variety and it's a significant reason we're in this mess. Now, due to a combination of smart acquisitions and restraint from both MacPhail and DD, we're just now beginning to climb out of that hole. The last thing we need right now is some jackass bursting through the saloon doors and shooting his pistols off.

That's not at all what I said, but thanks for putting words in my mouth.

I never once blamed McPhail nor did I say DD was the end all be all.

I said I agree with him the the future is now. We have a chance to win now. I never suggested we trade the whole farm. Outside of Bundy and Machado, I don't think they would be losing much. DD has never mentioned trading either guy and has basically come out and said they're untouchable .

I was pretty clear in my post and Im not sure how you managed to get out of it what you did. Im shocked what i said bothered you yet the "I hope the orioles lose" didn't.

To each "fan" their own I guess.

[El Gordo]

The better we do this season the more likely PA is to open his wallet, this fall. I think that was DD's charter this year. Prove he could produce a winner with a flat payroll. I think our first tier talent is Bundy, Machado, and maybe Tillman if he does well the next few starts. I think they are off the table. The second tier would be Schoop, Strop, Avery, Hoes, Matusz, itton and Arrieta, IMO. I wouldn't trade any of them for any of the available SP at the deadline.I think we can get a WRod, Colon, Saunders, Vargas, Marcum type for less. I would consider some combination of them for Headley or Juston Upton.

[MrOrange82]

In that case, I'd say the real debate is what we consider to be too steep of a cost to pay.

Exactly. So, when people are saying they're worried DD might do something rash, they're likely talking about his potentially trading someone out of the O's top three prospects for a short-term fix. It's a debatable subject. Holding an opinion one way or another isn't pathetic by default.

[Lucky Jim]

Exactly. So, when people are saying they're worried DD might do something rash, they're likely talking about his potentially trading someone out of the O's top three prospects for a short-term fix. It's a debatable subject. Holding an opinion one way or another isn't pathetic by default.

Right. The amount varies. I'd go wider than the top-3, but that's because I see a lot of issues w/ this team and think it likely that any outlay will be futile. But it's a calculated risk for all but the most insanely optimistic (and no, I'm not taking a shot at bluedog).

[Flash- bd]

That's how scared I am of Duq doing something stupid. Listen, I was fine with the Thome trade and I'd be fine for us going after a relatively cheap vet that can help like Colon or picking up the salary of a Soriano.. I'm also fine with going after a Headley who will help us both this year and beyond. It's just a fine line you have to walk, yes DD should be doing what he can to improve the team but the future has to be kept in the forefront. I can't support trading off say a Matusz, Avery, and Schoop for 2+ months of Greinke in what will likely be an unsuccessful playoff run. We simply aren't good enough to be "all in" and go all out for it. So yeah, if it took us losing coming out of the break to stop DD from making a trade like one above that's what I would prefer to happen.

Holy.... Matusz, Avery, and Schoop? My god, I wouldn't be happy with us trading even one of those guys for 2 months of Greinke, I can't even imagine what I would do if we traded all three.

I just think it's sad if DD is considering these kind of obvious buyers moves in the first place. The kind of forward-thinking, outside-the-box, analytical GM I thought he was wouldn't even bother with these moves (not saying he is, this might all be smoke for all we know). I liked the Thome deal (and have been outspoken in my support of the Eveland and Teagarden deals as well) and I would be fine with more "sneaky value" types like that, but I don't want us anywhere near Garza, Greinke, Soriano, or Headley. I'm honestly a little disappointed DD isn't keeping his eyes open for potential "sellers" type deals.

[TonySoprano]

The better we do this season the more likely PA is to open his wallet, this fall.

My sides are hurting, that's a good one

Oh, you're being serious. Some never learn I guess.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Holy.... Matusz, Avery, and Schoop? My god, I wouldn't be happy with us trading even one of those guys for 2 months of Greinke, I can't even imagine what I would do if we traded all three.

I just think it's sad if DD is considering these kind of obvious buyers moves in the first place. The kind of forward-thinking, outside-the-box, analytical GM I thought he was wouldn't even bother with these moves (not saying he is, this might all be smoke for all we know). I liked the Thome deal (and have been outspoken in my support of the Eveland and Teagarden deals as well) and I would be fine with more "sneaky value" types like that, but I don't want us anywhere near Garza, Greinke, Soriano, or Headley. I'm honestly a little disappointed DD isn't keeping his eyes open for potential "sellers" type deals.

What's wrong with Headley? Price might be too much?

[CA-ORIOLE]

My sides are hurting, that's a good one

Oh, you're being serious. Some never learn I guess.

Maybe I'm naive as well, a but I see attendance revenue as potentially different than MASN revenue.

[Flash- bd]

What's wrong with Headley? Price might be too much?

Right. I just don't think you get pretty wart-less 3B like him with 2 years on their contract for even value, especially at the deadline, and especially when there's a bidding war of sorts.

[MrOrange82]

Right. The amount varies. I'd go wider than the top-3, but that's because I see a lot of issues w/ this team and think it likely that any outlay will be futile. But it's a calculated risk for all but the most insanely optimistic (and no, I'm not taking a shot at bluedog).

I hadn't really thought about it in those terms. Since many/most of the non-top-3 prospects seem as though they're unlikely to have major effects on the ML squad, I think my "gut" reaction to their...um...existences (?) has been that they're all fungible (which really isn't a good/sophisticated view to hold).

[Vertigo]

Exactly. So, when people are saying they're worried DD might do something rash, they're likely talking about his potentially trading someone out of the O's top three prospects for a short-term fix. It's a debatable subject. Holding an opinion one way or another isn't pathetic by default.

Well, I'm just not worried about DD trading our top 2. I don't believe that he will. I'm not very high on Schoop, personally, becoming anything more than a serviceable starter. Which certainly has value, but if we trade him in a package for a player of, say, Greinke's caliber, I won't lose any sleep over him not being in our organization any longer.

My pathetic comment was directed toward hoping the team struggles as a deterrent of preventing the GM of making dumb moves. A GM, who thus far and in my opinion, has given no reason to believe that he will.

[SteveA]

I think there's plenty of room for reasonable disagreement about the merits of "going for it" this year. The question posed was a little different, though - should Duquette's desire for personal redemption be a factor in the moves he makes?

.

Every human being has personal history, desires, emotions, and experiences that make them who they are. We are molded by people who influence us and events that impact us.

We hired a human being as GM. Of course his experiences and his past affects how he views things and how he performs his job; that's true for everybody.

I have seen nothing in the moves he has made, or the statements that he has made, so far that indicates to me that he will be reckless in tossing young talent or players with potential around like they are pocket change.

Obviously, he has made it clear that he is taking this season into account and making some effort to keep us in the race. So if someone is part of the contingent who believes competing this year is so unlikely as to not being worth any loss of future value, than it's already clear that DD is to the left of them on the PRESENT..........FUTURE spectrum where one extreme is giving up the entire future to win this year and the other extreme is not caring a whit about this year in the effort to build a team for the future. But I have seen nothing so far to make me worry that makes me believe DD is as alarmingly far to the left on that spectrum as you seem to fear based on your posts in this thread.

[Lucky Jim]

I hadn't really thought about it in those terms. Since many/most of the non-top-3 prospects seem as though they're unlikely to have major effects on the ML squad, I think my "gut" reaction to their...um...existences (?) has been that they're all fungible (which really isn't a good/sophisticated view to hold).

Individually they're of low-probability. But high-ceiling guys w/ some performance background are rare enough that we should be adding them to, not subtracting them from, inventory. To me. I get that others don't feel that way.

[MrOrange82]

Well, I'm just not worried about DD trading our top 2. I don't believe that he will. I'm not very high on Schoop, personally, becoming anything more than a serviceable starter. Which certainly has value, but if we trade him in a package for a player of, say, Greinke's caliber, I won't lose any sleep over him not being in our organization any longer.

My pathetic comment was directed toward hoping the team struggles as a deterrent of preventing the GM of making dumb moves. A GM, who thus far and in my opinion, has given no reason to believe that he will.

Eh...the struggling comment was hyperbole (i.e., "given a choice between poisons..."). As for Schoop, I'm not through-the-roof high on him, either, but the problem, IMO, is that you could be giving him up not just for a soon-to-be FA, expensive pitcher (Greinke)...but one who, himself, has a LOT of question marks. As as been pointed out many times by others, Greinke's home/away splits are pretty substantial, he's dealt with (diagnosable...i.e., serious) anxiety issues for some time (which is why you don't hear about the Yankees getting involved) (and, small sample size, but Greinke was atrocious in the postseason last year), etc. etc. etc. Greinke's got the shine of a TOR star(ter), but whether he'd earn the title during a playoff run is far from certain...and whether he'd stick around afterwards is even less so.