Proposal: Hammel and Britton for Joe Saunders

[mark_beckens]

It's only a bad idea if you're grossly overpaying, as specified in the initial post in the thread. Last year Saunders was acquired for a bit of cash and two months of Matt Lindstrom. If Saunders can be had for two months of a nondescript reliever I'd be fine with it. But I'm also realistic in what I expect out of Saunders: something like his career numbers. An ERA in the mid-4.00s. He's by no means a huge upgrade over Hammel.

I don't get the trading basically the same player Hammel for Saunders who make about the same amount of money and to get the other team to take your player you throw in a player who is younger and probably better Britton. If you want Saunders and to get rid of Hammel, make a three way deal where a C prospect is exhanged. Example, Seattle gets a C prospect for Saunders, we get Saunders, San Fran gets Hammel.

[TradeAngelos]

OK, let's see if you can defend your position.

In the last 10 games Saunders as a 2.60 ERA in 62.3 innings. He has been better on the road than at home with a 1.76 ERA. He has beaten the Reds in Cin, the Rangers in Texas and the A's in Oakland. That's pretty impressive.

Add to that what he did for the O's last year with a 3.63 ERA in 7 regular season games and a 1.59 ERA in post season games.

Meanwhile Hammel has a 4.95 ERA in his last 10 games and can't consistently control his pitches.

So tell me again why trading for Saunders is a bad idea.

Because by doing that, you would be getting the majority of the board to admit that we should have kept Saunders in the first place. That will never happen, because DD is God, they are never wrong, Saunders is terrible, and you better not question letting our #5 go last year for all of 6 million or else.

Hell will freeze over before any of that happens, because anyone we let go because of our cheap owner is no good and not worthy of discussion or on the roster. It is kind of funny that now that group can't use the "well look what Saunders is doing in Seattle" line anymore to try to generate some weak argument as to the reasons why he isn't on this team right now helping us.

[wildcard]

It's only a bad idea if you're grossly overpaying, as specified in the initial post in the thread. Last year Saunders was acquired for a bit of cash and two months of Matt Lindstrom. If Saunders can be had for two months of a nondescript reliever I'd be fine with it. But I'm also realistic in what I expect out of Saunders: something like his career numbers. An ERA in the mid-4.00s. He's by no means a huge upgrade over Hammel.

Lindstrom had a option year. It was the D'backs choice not to exercise it.

I would have agreed that Saunders was not a huge upgrade to the Hammel of last year. I would have agreed that Saunders was not an upgrade earlier this year. However, Hammel has not found his control and Saunders is on a roll. Saunders should be the very good choice to help the O's to the playoffs.

As far as Britton being too much to pay. Well, again I say, any young player the two parties can agree on will do nicely. I have said it again and again and again.

[wildcard]

Because by doing that, you would be getting the majority of the board to admit that we should have kept Saunders in the first place. That will never happen, because DD is God, they are never wrong, Saunders is terrible, and you better not question letting our #5 go last year for all of 6 million or else.

Hell will freeze over before any of that happens, because anyone we let go because of our cheap owner is no good and not worthy of discussion or on the roster. It is kind of funny that now that group can't use the "well look what Saunders is doing in Seattle" line anymore to try to generate some weak argument as to the reasons why he isn't on this team right now helping us.

Well, yes but I will go another direction.

DD was trying to do something, and it has not worked out. He thought out of 12 possible starters they could find 5 quality starters. Well he got three and traded for another that might work. He didn't know Hammel was going to be a mess. He thought one of Britton, Arrieta, Matusz (remember ST) would do well and Gausman and Bundy would be knocking of the door. Garcia and Jurrjens could fill in. Well, baseball often does not cooperate. So, instead of saving 6M he has had to spend one on Garcia, one on Jurrjens and three on Feldman. And he still has a hole to fill.

No harm, no foul if he corrects his bad fortune. What he can't do is stick with Hammel too long and let him cost the O's a playoff spot. Hammel's next two starts aare huge. HUGE.

Boston is adding talent and is 4.5 ahead. Tampa is on a roll with Price back, and Scott hot. The O's can't expect them to falter. The O's have to go get them.

[wildcard]

I don't get the trading basically the same player Hammel for Saunders who make about the same amount of money and to get the other team to take your player you throw in a player who is younger and probably better Britton. If you want Saunders and to get rid of Hammel, make a three way deal where a C prospect is exhanged. Example, Seattle gets a C prospect for Saunders, we get Saunders, San Fran gets Hammel.

No one would want Hammel the way he is pitching. Rental starters with 5.00 ERAs who can't control their pitches are not in demand. There has to be an incentive for someone to take him.

[Crazysilver03]

Because by doing that, you would be getting the majority of the board to admit that we should have kept Saunders in the first place. That will never happen, because DD is God, they are never wrong, Saunders is terrible, and you better not question letting our #5 go last year for all of 6 million or else.

Hell will freeze over before any of that happens, because anyone we let go because of our cheap owner is no good and not worthy of discussion or on the roster. It is kind of funny that now that group can't use the "well look what Saunders is doing in Seattle" line anymore to try to generate some weak argument as to the reasons why he isn't on this team right now helping us.

Saunders is pitching significantly better than he was at the beginning of the season and I was using his early season failures as support as to why I was glad we didn't keep him. But, even if we had kept him, he may have solidified the 5th position, but had he pitched the way he has for Seattle the first two months here, the board would be calling for him to be gone. Now, we are looking to replace out #1 starter Hammel with someone else since Hammel is our 5th best starter now. We still would have had had to trade for at least one starter this summer (if not two in this case).

You keep bringing up the cheap owner but we came in to the season with some decent depth (Britton, Arrieta, Matusz, Johnson) and added to it in ST (Jurrjens and Garcia). There were good reasons to not bring Saunders back. Would he be an improvement now? Maybe. WC cites the good roll he is on and his numbers from Baltimore last year, but he is also capable of completely falling apart. If they are willing to take Chris Jones for Saunders, great, bring him back. But Britton or any other young piece is too much.

[mark_beckens]

No one would want Hammel the way he is pitching. Rental starters with 5.00 ERAs who can't control their pitches are not in demand. There has to be an incentive for someone to take him.

And you think that is Britton. If we were to release Hammel, I bet you a team in contention would sign him. He has one bad inning, makes a few bad pitches and pays for it just about everytime. Saunders is not an upgrade over Hammel. Saunders didn't have a good start against Houston last night. A pitcher like Saunders who's been around long enough to know that he will come back down to earth. So if you trade for him while he's hot, guess what you're gonna get? The guy who runs outta luck his hot streak ends and is who he is.

[atomic]

I don't see why the Mariners would do this deal. Both Hammel and Saunders a re free agents after the season? If so why pay Hammel all that money? Just unload Saunders.

[Ruzious]

I don't get the trading basically the same player Hammel for Saunders who make about the same amount of money and to get the other team to take your player you throw in a player who is younger and probably better Britton. If you want Saunders and to get rid of Hammel, make a three way deal where a C prospect is exhanged. Example, Seattle gets a C prospect for Saunders, we get Saunders, San Fran gets Hammel.

I said this early in the season and still say it - It'd make sense to trade Hammell for an equal pitcher who's more of a groundball pitcher. Hammel's a fly ball pitcher, and that's generally not a good thing for Camden Yards. When he's going poorly, it seems like he simply can't keep the ball down to knee level.

[DrungoHazewood]

I said this early in the season and still say it - It'd make sense to trade Hammell for an equal pitcher who's more of a groundball pitcher. Hammel's a fly ball pitcher, and that's generally not a good thing for Camden Yards. When he's going poorly, it seems like he simply can't keep the ball down to knee level.

I don't think there's any evidence that a fly/groundball pitcher does any better or worse in OPACY than in any other park.

For example, groundball pitchers tend to allow more homers per flyball, while many high-gas-throwing strikeout pitchers are flyball pitchers but they allow fewer BIP because they strike out more batters. So you'd probably be better off with the flyball prone strikeout pitcher in a bandbox than a GB pitcher.

[Ruzious]

I don't think there's any evidence that a fly/groundball pitcher does any better or worse in OPACY than in any other park.

For example, groundball pitchers tend to allow more homers per flyball, while many high-gas-throwing strikeout pitchers are flyball pitchers but they allow fewer BIP because they strike out more batters. So you'd probably be better off with the flyball prone strikeout pitcher in a bandbox than a GB pitcher.

Well, Hammell would allow a lot fewer homeruns and be much more effective in a park where the ball doesn't carry as much OPACY. I can't speak to what the average groundball pitcher does.

[Ruzious]

And a groundball pitcher playing for Baltimore - when Roberts isn't playing - should do pretty well.

[DrungoHazewood]

Well, Hammell would allow a lot fewer homeruns and be much more effective in a park where the ball doesn't carry as much OPACY. I can't speak to what the average groundball pitcher does.

But everyone would allow a lot fewer homers in a park where the ball doesn't carry as well.

[Il BuonO]

This is not a trade I want to make; but if Hammel does not pitch better between now and the trade deadline DD may have to make a trade like this.

Money wise Hammel and Saunders are a wash. The incentive to make the trade for Seattle is to get Britton. And it doesn't have to be Britton. It could be any young player that the O's and Mariners can agree on.

Joe Saunders has pitched well in June and so far in July. The O's know Joe and what he can do. He is similar to Feldman as a back of the rotation starter. He is probably better than the 5.00 something ERA that Hammel has been performing at.

Saunder signed a one year contract with Seattle for 6.5M with a mutual option for 2014. So there is a chance Saunder stays another year if the O's want him to or not.

I don't like giving up young talent for a rental and that is what his would be. But the O's can't let the playoffs slide away because Hammel can not find his control. This is just an option that DD may have in his back pocket that might be considered.

Well, yes but I will go another direction.

DD was trying to do something, and it has not worked out. He thought out of 12 possible starters they could find 5 quality starters. Well he got three and traded for another that might work. He didn't know Hammel was going to be a mess. He thought one of Britton, Arrieta, Matusz (remember ST) would do well and Gausman and Bundy would be knocking of the door. Garcia and Jurrjens could fill in. Well, baseball often does not cooperate. So, instead of saving 6M he has had to spend one on Garcia, one on Jurrjens and three on Feldman. And he still has a hole to fill.

No harm, no foul if he corrects his bad fortune. What he can't do is stick with Hammel too long and let him cost the O's a playoff spot. Hammel's next two starts aare huge. HUGE.

Boston is adding talent and is 4.5 ahead. Tampa is on a roll with Price back, and Scott hot. The O's can't expect them to falter. The O's have to go get them.

I don't know what the controversy is here, even with a bad start or two I'd prefer Sauders to Hammel. Hammel doesn't look like the same pitcher to me and Saunders does. And as Drungo says, even if that's his career numbers I'll take it.

[DrungoHazewood]

And a groundball pitcher playing for Baltimore - when Roberts isn't playing - should do pretty well.

Maybe, but we're talking about things on the margins. There's a complex interaction here - flyballs have lower BABIPs (ie more of them are turned into outs than GBs), but flyballs sometimes turn into homers. There are more errors and hits on grounders than flyballs, but they less often go for extra bases. I think it's very much an oversimplification to say that a GB pitcher is better than a FB pitcher in any park.