Jump to content

Duquette: packages offered not better than what we have


SilentJames

Recommended Posts

Here's my problem with all of this .... Why was DD talking trade & specifics with the Phillies if he didnt think he was much of a upgrade. Doesnt really jive with me guys. If you wanna give him the benefit of the doubt so be it! I dont get why he'd waste the last 2 or 3 days discussing a trade for a guy they really didnt want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 125
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Did I say I expected a 200 million dollar payroll? But I expect more than we've gotten the last decade plus. Just because its July 31st, and we are over .500, doesn't mean everything is peaches and buttercups from here on out. Tell me to go be a Yankee or sox fan? If i wasn't a true fan I would care less, and probably would have stopped caring after the 4th or 5th sub .500 season. But thanks for the advice.

Yeah, I hear ya. Hard not to get frustrated. The money made from MASN revenues was never spent and we all know the money never will be. It is a joke. Can we compete with the Sox and Yankees? Probably not, but maybe we could if we hadn't a bunch of stooges in player development and scouting for the past 15 years. Syd Thrift set us back 5 years. There is only one constant. I agree that MLB is out of whack, but Angelos deserves the blame and pretty much everyone knows it. It is impossible to know what is his fault and what isn't. We are a hot mess.

P.S.-Peaches and buttercups sounds kinda gross:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might want a solid Denny's breakfast. But then you realize you have all the components in your fridge.

We would've taken Blanton, at the right price.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

And sometimes you forget and keep things in the fridge past their expiration dates ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really very simple: Blanton is a marginal upgrade over what we have in the rotation. DD would have taken him if he could have bought low. The Phillies asking price was too high so it didn't happen. No need to overanalyze everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really very simple: Blanton is a marginal upgrade over what we have in the rotation. DD would have taken him if he could have bought low. The Phillies asking price was too high so it didn't happen. No need to overanalyze everything.

Most of us didn't want Blanton. In fact, many of us didn't want him to waste any prospects. Still worth discussing what happened.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blanton obviously wasn't going to improve this team much if at all. I think people overrated Headley's long-term value too. He is having a career year. I would enjoy having him and he would be an overall improvement compared to what we have at 3rd but he isn't an elite player, has a lack of power at a power position, and isn't super young like some made him out to be. I wouldn't have cared if Avery or Hoes was the centerpiece with some mid to low level prospects to get him but I wouldn't have offered much more to get him and I think the Padres wanted more than that.

Trading a guy like Arrieta, who apparently had alot of interested as a buy low type from other teams, would have disappointed me because I think he has a lot to offer. But we have missed out on trading guys thinking they would eventually improve before with guys like Tillman, Matusz, Daniel Cabrera...who just continued to regress. I don't think Tillman or Bmat have any value worth trading right now but atleast Tillman is giving us a little hope.

Since we weren't seriously considering trading Machado or Bundy I think we were left with three true trade pieces in the minors- Schoop, Hoes, and Avery. At the major league level I couldn't imagine them trading anyone valuable except for Jim Johnson (I don't consider Reynolds or Betemit valuable). And trading Jim Johnson would have been a pretty bad PR move during a season when the Os actually look to be in the hunt on August 1st.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blanton obviously wasn't going to improve this team much if at all. I think people overrated Headley's long-term value too. He is having a career year. I would enjoy having him and he would be an overall improvement compared to what we have at 3rd but he isn't an elite player, has a lack of power at a power position, and isn't super young like some made him out to be. I wouldn't have cared if Avery or Hoes was the centerpiece with some mid to low level prospects to get him but I wouldn't have offered much more to get him and I think the Padres wanted more than that.

Trading a guy like Arrieta, who apparently had alot of interested as a buy low type from other teams, would have disappointed me because I think he has a lot to offer. But we have missed out on trading guys thinking they would eventually improve before with guys like Tillman, Matusz, Daniel Cabrera...who just continued to regress. I don't think Tillman or Bmat have any value worth trading right now but atleast Tillman is giving us a little hope.

Since we weren't seriously considering trading Machado or Bundy I think we were left with three true trade pieces in the minors- Schoop, Hoes, and Avery. At the major league level I couldn't imagine them trading anyone valuable except for Jim Johnson (I don't consider Reynolds or Betemit valuable). And trading Jim Johnson would have been a pretty bad PR move during a season when the Os actually look to be in the hunt on August 1st.

How do you guys get that Headley is being overvalued? His power numbers and stats suggest he'd be a much better hitter getting away from Petco. He could very easily be a 20-30 homer guy playing 80 at OPACY. Its ok to try to down play the Orioles not getting him...but let's not Get carried away. I'm hoping we can reengage San Diego in the off season and make him our everyday 3B next season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suspicion is DD was ready to take on most of Blanton's remaining salary and then trade another of our SP for a bat. Then he got blindsided by PA who balked at the salary. DD had been under the impression that ownership was on board to spend what was necessary to improve the club and stay in the hunt. He wouldn't be the first O's GM ti have a rude awakening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My suspicion is DD was ready to take on most of Blanton's remaining salary and then trade another of our SP for a bat. Then he got blindsided by PA who balked at the salary. DD had been under the impression that ownership was on board to spend what was necessary to improve the club and stay in the hunt. He wouldn't be the first O's GM ti have a rude awakening.

I trust that Duquette had discussed things in advance with Angelos as to what kind of salary he was willing to absorb. Nice conspiracy theory though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I trust that Duquette had discussed things in advance with Angelos as to what kind of salary he was willing to absorb. Nice conspiracy theory though.

Again ....

Here's my problem with all of this .... Why was DD talking trade & specifics with the Phillies if he didnt think he was much of a upgrade. Doesnt really jive with me guys. If you wanna give him the benefit of the doubt so be it! I dont get why he'd waste the last 2 or 3 days discussing a trade for a guy they really didnt want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again ....

Here's my problem with all of this .... Why was DD talking trade & specifics with the Phillies if he didnt think he was much of a upgrade. Doesnt really jive with me guys. If you wanna give him the benefit of the doubt so be it! I dont get why he'd waste the last 2 or 3 days discussing a trade for a guy they really didnt want.

WHat I heard was they weren't willing to eat 3 million for 8 starts for a marginal upgrade

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • The problem with a Cowser/Kjerstad/Stowers/Bradfield outfield roster is there are no right handers to handle LHP. I don't think and completely left handed outfield is the destination for an organization the values versatility.
    • Looks maybe concussion related. 
    • How can you not be romantic about baseball? This seems slightly poetic. I enjoyed reading, and correlated your experience in the stands back to what I watch in Game 1 on MASN.  It was also pretty cool to hear Jim Palmer give you a shout out in Game 2 of the series on Live TV.
    • I am not worried.  It just doesn’t remotely meet the eye test.  He has been great in the field . I can think of at least 3 outstanding plays he has made and not any that I thought he should have gotten but didn’t. Meanwhile Holliday is 3 OAA and I can’t think of an outstanding play and can think of a number I thought he should have made. 
    • Nicely stated Roy. Every since I was 9 years old and saw the O's vs. the Tokyo Giants in Tokyo in 1971, I've been infected with the Orange/Black virus. There is no cure and I don't want one. You and I sat at the lunch table with Jim Palmer at the 1970 World Series Champs reunion, and its still one of my enduring baseball memories. You said I looked like Carlton Fisk! I was at all 3 games in this Angels series, right behind the O's dugout. I got to see all our boys, and just simply love to watch this team play. And in true baseball fashion, the one game on paper we should have dominated (GRod vs. 8+ ERA Channing), we end up down 7-0 and lose. But watching Gunnar's homers, his electric triple, and he made a fantastic play today on a ball that went under Westburg's glove, Adley do Adley things, Cowser, holy crap. Kimbrel v. Trout with bases loaded, bottom of 9th, 2 outs, down by 2? That was fun. Next game Trout bats leadoff and torches a GRod fastball for a homer to the opposite field.  An observation.... If you didn't know anything about the team, and you only watched game 1 batting practice, you'd think Cowser and O'Hearn were the studs of the team. Mountcastle was taking BP with the reserves and he put on a show as well.  Home after 3 straight days watching this O's team, so jealous of the Balt fans in Balt that get to see the team with regularity. It's a special bunch.
    • emmett16 is right. Uppercut swings produce a lot of groundouts because the bat is not on the same plane as the ball for very long. The best swing stays on the same plane as the ball for a longer time. This will produce contact that creates backspin on the ball which makes it carry. That Ted Williams book is one of the best hitting books ever written.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...