Orioles' Duquette: "Our future is now."

[sangar]

I think his bullpen acquisitions were savvy, but not quite the genius-level they looked like early in the season.

That said, as I posted in another thread, Duquette's acquisitions of Teagarden, Eveland and Thome have garnered us all of .2 fWAR (exactly .1, 0 and .1 respectively), for which we spent: Lino, Henry, Martin, Miclat, Simon, and Henson. Even if you don't think there's tremendous talent going out, I think that's strong evidence that there's a disconnect between what we spend and what we get when it comes to prospects.

I've never gotten the sense that DD is coy or clever with the media. Reticent, maybe, but no kind of master manipulator.

You can add Chen and Hammel to this list.

The first sentence of the second paragraph is compelling, your conclusion not so much.

Yep, he is better off avoiding the media and I'm sure he knows it.

[Lucky Jim]

Read the quote from hoosiers again: "There are already too many moves of the Bautista/Grimsley ilk that show a front office completely unable to appropriately assess its competitive position as well as one that plays fast and loose with prospects and draft picks."

That was what I responded "Like?" to. That is: it's not that I've never disagreed with a DD move and that I was asking for examples of one's I should disagree with, I just don't see how you can say "there are already too many moves of the Bautista/Grimsley ilk that show a front office completely unable to appropriately assess its competitive position."

The Teagarden and Eveland trades have also been argued to death by me and others but when you name Lino, Henry, Martin, Miclat, and Henson not one of those names bother me. I still like all three of those trades (Thome, Teagarden, and Eveland) in retrospect. You can use fWAR all you like (fWAR for me isn't a good stat when you're trying to measure actual value given so much as it is useful for judging the value of a player in a vacuum, rWAR is better for that, IMO) but that game we won in which Eveland started earlier in the year vs. TB and Teagarden's HR might have already provided more value than the guys that were traded for will ever give. Henson and Miclat are MiL/organizational guys and Martin's upside is probably something like Eveland while Lino will be lucky to become Taylor Teagarden. If everything works out with Henry he'll become Miguel Socolovich...

I don't know why you mention Simon because he was DFA'd as I recall. If you want to argue with that move, that's a separate issue, but I'm actually inclined to agree that was a bad move. Still, it's hardly indicative of a "front office completely unable to appropriately assess its competitive position."

As for DD being coy or clever with the media, I actually just read the article on Orioles.com containing all his quotes today and yeah, I think I'm swung over to your side on this. I can't interpret those comments any other way than earnest, and it seems like he is definitely serious about acquiring a SP.

I do think there's more value in a half-assed playoff push (and more importantly, for me, a .500 season) than some idealists on this board--including maybe even myself--are willing to admit. If Duquette can toe the line between not sacrificing/offering any detriment (to) the future outlook I'll be okay with it, but if he offers anything of worth for a SP I'll be strongly against it. We'll see--I was officially nervous when the Greinke thread propped up on here--now I'm officially nervouser.

1. Re: Hoosiers, maybe one is one too many?

2. Simon is Kyle.

3. I really don't understand the atomistic approach to evaluating these trades.* It's not about, individually, what prospects are likely to hit. And never has been. You keep inventory because actual MLB value (and the nature of it) is hard to predict (much as we'd like to try). Brian Roberts probably looked like someone who wouldn't provide much value as a MiLB player. Until this year, Xavier Avery and LJ Hoes looked like that. Roberts proved very valuable. The way we view players changes all of the time, and that's a strong argument for keeping cheap inventory. That doesn't mean you don't trade it - of course you do. But you trade it advantageously - not for marginal MLB talent (Eveland), injured back-up catchers (Teagarden) or old DHs who are redundant (Thome), particularly when they cannot offer any value beyond a single year, and even more particularly when equivalent players are available w/o the outlay. It's not a big deal on a Bavasi-like level. But that doesn't make it irrelevant or not worth noting.

*I even less understand the argument that cherry-picks individual moments out of a long season as a means of capturing actual value.

[Flash- bd]

1. Re: Hoosiers, maybe one is one too many?

2. Simon is Kyle.

3. I really don't understand the atomistic approach to evaluating these trades.* It's not about, individually, what prospects are likely to hit. And never has been. You keep inventory because actual MLB value (and the nature of it) is hard to predict (much as we'd like to try). Brian Roberts probably looked like someone who wouldn't provide much value as a MiLB player. Until this year, Xavier Avery and LJ Hoes looked like that. Roberts proved very valuable. The way we view players changes all of the time, and that's a strong argument for keeping cheap inventory. That doesn't mean you don't trade it - of course you do. But you trade it advantageously - not for marginal MLB talent (Eveland), injured back-up catchers (Teagarden) or old DHs who are redundant (Thome), particularly when they cannot offer any value beyond a single year, and even more particularly when equivalent players are available w/o the outlay. It's not a big deal on a Bavasi-like level. But that doesn't make it irrelevant or not worth noting.

*I even less understand the argument that cherry-picks individual moments out of a long season as a means of capturing actual value.

It's simply meant to be a little reality check: those incredibly small contributions have a good chance of being larger than the contributions to be made by the majority of those players in their whole careers.

I don't buy the Roberts/Avery/Hoes argument. None of those guys we traded EVER had the upside that Roberts/Avery/Hoes had even at their lowest point as a prospect, and in Roberts case you could even say (which will come to heresy for some, I'm sure) his upside was probably boosted by use of PEDs. Moreover-- Duquette could've traded Hoes or Avery. He didn't.

The chances of any of those players becoming real contributors at the big league level are infintesimally small. Basically it comes down to the fact I'm willing to take that infintesimally small chance in return for very likely now value, however small it is. I know you and others' primary argument is not that the trades themselves were bad but that the resources could've been used better but I just don't see many people knocking on the door for guys like Miclat, Henson, Martin, and Henry. I think the idea that these guys could be included in other trades to useful effect is mostly illusion.

The Lino/Simon (Kyle--duh. Don't know why it didn't click for me) for Thome trade is a separate argument; Lino is clearly a guy that could've had some (albeit very small) value to another team but I've never accepted the premise that Thome was/is redundant and still don't, and, again, we've already argued the Thome trade to death and you, RZNJ, and the rest of the board who've been paying attention well know my arguments there so we probably don't do ourselves any good rehasing them here.

[CA-ORIOLE]

The O's need to stay in the mix to keep attendance up. That is the name of the game. We need to shore up the SP and add an OBP bat to help the offense. That is what DD will do, and he can do it without mortgaging the future. This is a critical time with the SP in disarray. If some trades can be made to help us now, by Sept. we should have plenty of reenforcements to keep us in the hunt.

Sure, but people don't want to hear or grasp this point. How much is increased attendance, increased interest in the team, and increased revenue worth (even if we don't make the playoffs)? How many dollars is a 23 % increase in attendance worth if maintained for most of the rest of the season? How many C prospects would that additional revenue buy? Whether you think Jim Thome will hit or not (and I think he will and has looked good), how many people are interested in going out to the game or tuning in to see him play. How many people are interested in seeing a team in the wildcard hunt on July 19th?

Sorry, this argument that we should hoard prospect inventory along with a long detailed list of "prospects" we have given up for a fraction of WAR doesn't impress me either. Even if it ends up a fraction of WAR by the end of the year, I bet it's more WAR than the "prospects" list will yield over the next 10 years cumulative. Inventory can be replaced and moved. I believe thats how successful businesses stay in business. The best argument I've heard is "Gabriel Lino's upside", which appears to be about as obtainable as me winning the Mega Lotto. The argument has to be the value and quality of the prospects we gave up to hold any water. It doesn't appear to hold water. It's merely a philosophical trench that people have dug themselves into imo.

Ignoring any trades, I have read or understood DD to have done the following things for this organization in less than one year.

1. Streamlined and modernized scouting techniques by integrating video and statistical analysis.

2. Utilized data to position fielders.

3. Hired a sports psychologist.

4. Focused on conditioning players in the offseason.

5. Hired Peterson to evaluate pitchcers mechanics/biomechanics.

6. Hired a sports economist to evaluate player risk/reward.

7. Improved organizational depth at the upper Mil level.

I even read somewhere that he had to go through and update the organization's antiquated computer software.

In addition to the above. I have consistently heard him talk and focus on improving our horrid record of player acqusition and our development systems. Areas that he has a reputation of excelling at. I also have confidence he will take more risk than AM in the international market and yield more rewards than AM did. The above moves (and probably a lot more I don't know of) in addition to his past history give me every confidence that Dan Duquette knows what he's doing. Yet, we have people on here actually referring to him as clueless (mostly based on deals that haven't even been made yet) or because he traded some C prospects to try and improve the team this year. I personally didn't care for the TT deal (which I'm not sure how much influence he really had on) but it's not a big deal imo. It's just not. Get out of your trench.

I'm sorry, I don't buy into most of the complaints here.

From what I can see/sense, I have every confidence DD can manage a complicated organization, especially a ML baseball team. Unlike AM there will probably be more risks that don't work out. That's because AM didn't take risks. So when DD trades Schoop for Matt Garza I'll be first in line to join the crowd and moan about it. Until then, I'll just wait and see.

[Va Beach O's fan]

I posted weeks ago that I thought Duquette was going all in and this does nothing to change that opinion.

I think he thinks that if he gets anywhere near .500, we will all be thrilled and only the diehards will know that he may have mortgaged the franchise's future to do so, but who cares if he makes us semi-competitive right?

This doesn't surpise me a bit. Of course he's been talking about it for weeks and nothings been done yet so maybe he's just hoping he can find a deal somewhere. I'm kind of glad he hasn't made a move yet because it gives us more time to fade away from the pack (most likely scenario) and then hopefully he will realize this team isn't even close to a contender.

If there is a solid trade out there for a guy like Headley though and not just a rental, I say we take it regardless of whether we are contenders this year or not. Improve the team with major league calibur players when you can because there is no guarantee whatsoever any of our vaunted prospects end up being the studs we all hope they will be.

[joeyc]

I hate to say this but I think they may be giving up allready on some of the young players such as Matusz and Arrietta, Tillman. I think they don't like what they see and figure we need to trade them now. I remember Jim Palmer making a statement about Matusz 2 years ago that he didn't think he was ever going to be the pitcher they projected him to be. Maybe they are starting to think the same way.

[Tx Oriole]

I hate to say this but I think they may be giving up allready on some of the young players such as Matusz and Arrietta, Tillman. I think they don't like what they see and figure we need to trade them now. I remember Jim Palmer making a statement about Matusz 2 years ago that he didn't think he was ever going to be the pitcher they projected him to be. Maybe they are starting to think the same way.

If DD can get somethng good for one of them then why not? I dont mean just a one year rental.

[Hooded Viper]

Sure, but people don't want to hear or grasp this point. How much is increased attendance, increased interest in the team, and increased revenue worth (even if we don't make the playoffs)? How many dollars is a 23 % increase in attendance worth if maintained for most of the rest of the season? How many C prospects would that additional revenue buy? Whether you think Jim Thome will hit or not (and I think he will and has looked good), how many people are interested in going out to the game or tuning in to see him play. How many people are interested in seeing a team in the wildcard hunt on July 19th?

Sorry, this argument that we should hoard prospect inventory along with a long detailed list of "prospects" we have given up for a fraction of WAR doesn't impress me either. Even if it ends up a fraction of WAR by the end of the year, I bet it's more WAR than the "prospects" list will yield over the next 10 years cumulative. Inventory can be replaced and moved. I believe thats how successful businesses stay in business. The best argument I've heard is "Gabriel Lino's upside", which appears to be about as obtainable as me winning the Mega Lotto. The argument has to be the value and quality of the prospects we gave up to hold any water. It doesn't appear to hold water. It's merely a philosophical trench that people have dug themselves into imo.

Ignoring any trades, I have read or understood DD to have done the following things for this organization in less than one year.

1. Streamlined and modernized scouting techniques by integrating video and statistical analysis.

2. Utilized data to position fielders.

3. Hired a sports psychologist.

4. Focused on conditioning players in the offseason.

5. Hired Peterson to evaluate pitchcers mechanics/biomechanics.

6. Hired a sports economist to evaluate player risk/reward.

7. Improved organizational depth at the upper Mil level.

I even read somewhere that he had to go through and update the organization's antiquated computer software.

In addition to the above. I have consistently heard him talk and focus on improving our horrid record of player acqusition and our development systems. Areas that he has a reputation of excelling at. I also have confidence he will take more risk than AM in the international market and yield more rewards than AM did. The above moves (and probably a lot more I don't know of) in addition to his past history give me every confidence that Dan Duquette knows what he's doing. Yet, we have people on here actually referring to him as clueless (mostly based on deals that haven't even been made yet) or because he traded some C prospects to try and improve the team this year. I personally didn't care for the TT deal (which I'm not sure how much influence he really had on) but it's not a big deal imo. It's just not. Get out of your trench.

I'm sorry, I don't buy into most of the complaints here.

From what I can see/sense, I have every confidence DD can manage a complicated organization, especially a ML baseball team. Unlike AM there will probably be more risks that don't work out. That's because AM didn't take risks. So when DD trades Schoop for Matt Garza I'll be first in line to join the crowd and moan about it. Until then, I'll just wait and see.

Must spread rep before giving it to CA again! This is exactly how I feel! Post of the thread, IMO.

[EagleOriole]

That said, as I posted in another thread, Duquette's acquisitions of Teagarden, Eveland and Thome have garnered us all of .2 fWAR (exactly .1, 0 and .1 respectively), for which we spent: Lino, Henry, Martin, Miclat, Simon, and Henson. Even if you don't think there's tremendous talent going out, I think that's strong evidence that there's a disconnect between what we spend and what we get when it comes to prospects.

What do you think the chances that Lino, Henry, Martin, Miclat, Simon, and Henson ever get more than a cup of coffee with a ML team. I am not a huge fan of those trades either, but you can't really use fWAR with Teagarden or Thome, it really isn't fair to either. Teagarden has just come back from injury...in the short time he has been back he hit a game winning HR and apparently helped Hunter a lot in his start. Thome has been on the bench most of the year, this is like April for him.

I guess one of those pitchers could turn into a league average reliever, but nothing there that he did upsets me.

As for the draft, I see you and Hoosiers hate the draft, I guess I am not educated enough to know why? I know they "reached" for some players, but was the draft universally given bad grades by experts? What does Stotle have to say about it? I want to know more...teach me.

[MrOrange82]

Thome has been on the bench most of the year, this is like April for him.

Unless that's the name of the ferryman on the River Styx, I don't think the analogy is a good one. Why would it make sense to trade for a waaay-past-his-prime player whose "April" might stretch into August when the O's were already free-falling at the time the player was acquired?

[Pedro Cerrano]

We better not trade any of our minor leaguers. I'm looking forward to watching them disappoint us in the next few years.

[Ampontan]

What do you think the chances that Lino, Henry, Martin, Miclat, Simon, and Henson ever get more than a cup of coffee with a ML team.

Interestingly, the Rangers are trying to make a starter out of Henry.

[Frobby]

To me, the jury is still completely out on Duquette. There are good arguments on both sides in this thread, and there are things going on behind the scenes that either we don't know much about or are not susceptible to evaluation in a short time frame. For example, if Duquette upgrades our player development system, that is HUGE, but we won't see the results that quickly.

I think this next winter is a better test of Duquette's talents. He walked in here in November and only knew so much about this team, its players, the scouts and the staff. He will know infinitely more by the time this season is complete.

As to what he said about his intentions at the trade deadline, to me they are just words. The players and fans have been sent a message that their GM isn't throwing in the towel on this season. Frankly, that's a good message at this point. But, it doesn't mean you give away the store in an effort to win 85 games and hope that squeaks you into the playoffs. So, I'll see what Duquette does, and not pay too much attention to what he says.

[VeveJones007]

To me, the jury is still completely out on Duquette. There are good arguments on both sides in this thread, and there are things going on behind the scenes that either we don't know much about or are not susceptible to evaluation in a short time frame. For example, if Duquette upgrades our player development system, that is HUGE, but we won't see the results that quickly.

I think this next winter is a better test of Duquette's talents. He walked in here in November and only knew so much about this team, its players, the scouts and the staff. He will know infinitely more by the time this season is complete.

As to what he said about his intentions at the trade deadline, to me they are just words. The players and fans have been sent a message that their GM isn't throwing in the towel on this season. Frankly, that's a good message at this point. But, it doesn't mean you give away the store in an effort to win 85 games and hope that squeaks you into the playoffs. So, I'll see what Duquette does, and not pay too much attention to what he says.

Thanks, Frobby, for more eloquently expressing my sentiments as well.

My argument has never been that DD won't mortgage the future. It's that I see no evidence to suggest that he'll sell true prospects for the here and now. Maybe he will, maybe he won't, but I'm not going to worry about it until there's real reason to.

[EagleOriole]

Unless that's the name of the ferryman on the River Styx, I don't think the analogy is a good one. Why would it make sense to trade for a waaay-past-his-prime player whose "April" might stretch into August when the O's were already free-falling at the time the player was acquired?

Actually, he did get the inter-league to get his bat going, but it is realistic to believe a guy that has been on the bench for a while might need some at-bats to get his timing down. His OBP since the trade is .364...just waiting on the power to come. Using fWAR this soon after he was acquired is a little unfair.