Jump to content

Orioles have traded Alex Gonzalez to the Detroit Tigers

xian4

By xian4
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

CA-ORIOLE Hangout Grand Counsel

CA-ORIOLE

Posted
Posted

With Manny out, I do think Alex Gonzalez would have very well made the team to start the season. As it is right now it'll be Flaherty 3b/Lombardozzi 2b (assuming no Schoop) imo. Meaning they'll want an infielder (maybe two now) with a RH bat or switch hitter who can hit from the right side. We have a few of those. May not be great choices but we have multiple options available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 218
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Rene88 Hangout Grand Counsel

Rene88

Posted
Posted
Not that I knew him then, but it'll be neat to root for a guy I went to high school with! :D

Also, this trade is just ridiculous. Dombrowski must be going crazy with everything going on with his team right now.

I like Lombardozzi.....but it's a minor trade, this isn't Babe Ruth for cash:)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
Do you believe Buck or do you think it's a generic quote to make the Tigers feel better? Also, does that apply only to our Opening Day roster (when Manny is out) or all season (after Manny gets back)?

I find it difficult to believe we were going to carry Gonzalez on our roster all year or even for most of it. This is a non-roster invitee (not that such players aren't talented) with a best case WAR contribution over 200 at-bats of around .3.

I think it is pretty incredible that DD could parlay a non-roster 37 year old SS who last contributed over 1 WAR three seasons ago as an OPS+ 74 offensive, offensive effort and a big DWAR contributor - into Lombardozzi - a player two years removed from being the Nats #10 rated prospect per BA. Lombardozzi may have some decent utility player value and may have a decent chance to be a decent full time contributor at 2B in his age 27 or 28 seasons assuming some incremental offensive improvement.

One issue I have with the trade is the possibility of Lombardozzi at 2B after we already have Schoop, Flaherty and Weeks. This makes little sense to me - even if Lombardozzi is a decent incrementally better talent than either Flaherty or Weeks. It would really call into question why Weeks was picked up in the first place - unless Weeks was offered for free.

The last comment I have is that we don't know what else DD was offered by the Tigers. Could we have picked up a to 10 or top 15 prospect for Gonzalez? And would such a prospect have that much more value than Lombardozzi? DD seems to be good at building a stable of replacement level guys capable of avoiding negative WAR-type contributions at minimal cost.

Though my guy feeling is that DD received a comfortably better player than what he gave up, this appears to be an acquisition of respectable depth since Lombardozzi's ceiling is very limited and mostly makes this trade a non-event.

I believe Gonzalez would have been with the team until Manny returned. I believe Buck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
Do you believe Buck or do you think it's a generic quote to make the Tigers feel better? Also, does that apply only to our Opening Day roster (when Manny is out) or all season (after Manny gets back)?

I find it difficult to believe we were going to carry Gonzalez on our roster all year or even for most of it. This is a non-roster invitee (not that such players aren't talented) with a best case WAR contribution over 200 at-bats of around .3.

I think it is pretty incredible that DD could parlay a non-roster 37 year old SS who last contributed over 1 WAR three seasons ago as an OPS+ 74 offensive, offensive effort and a big DWAR contributor - into Lombardozzi - a player two years removed from being the Nats #10 rated prospect per BA. Lombardozzi may have some decent utility player value and may have a decent chance to be a decent full time contributor at 2B in his age 27 or 28 seasons assuming some incremental offensive improvement.

One issue I have with the trade is the possibility of Lombardozzi at 2B after we already have Schoop, Flaherty and Weeks. This makes little sense to me - even if Lombardozzi is a decent incrementally better talent than either Flaherty or Weeks. It would really call into question why Weeks was picked up in the first place - unless Weeks was offered for free.

The last comment I have is that we don't know what else DD was offered by the Tigers. Could we have picked up a to 10 or top 15 prospect for Gonzalez? And would such a prospect have that much more value than Lombardozzi? DD seems to be good at building a stable of replacement level guys capable of avoiding negative WAR-type contributions at minimal cost.

Though my guy feeling is that DD received a comfortably better player than what he gave up, this appears to be an acquisition of respectable depth since Lombardozzi's ceiling is very limited and mostly makes this trade a non-event.

The Tigers needed to make a 40 man move. And Gonzalez was not free. I bet there was no chance to get any prospect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
Could this be any more of an indictment against Jemile Weeks? I really don't know what to make of this, in regards to Jon Schoop though.

Weeks seems to have done a decent job defensively but perhaps Buck is not a fan. There are things like cut offs and positioning that maybe we don't know about. In Sunday's game no one covered 2B on a stolen base and I'm just assuming that it was Weeks who was supposed to cover. Lombardozzi doesn't look to be much better than Weeks with the bat. Sure seems like Buck wanted an upgrade on defense, which you would think would have been Alexi Casilla. Hmmmm.

Only that he is not going north. Well North. Just not that far north.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Three Run Homer Hangout Veteran Council

Three Run Homer

Posted
Posted

I have to call this a good trade for the O's--they traded a 37 non-roster invite who wasn't in the team's long-term plans for a 25 year old who upgrades the utility infielder position. Lombardozzi is a better hitter than Casilla or Weeks, and is more versatile defensively than Weeks.

Lombardozzi wouldn't be my first choice as a utility player. The ideal utility player for this year's O's would be someone with defensive versatility who could platoon with Ryan Flaherty. Lombardozzi is nominally a switch hitter but his career numbers are much better against RHP than LHP. Ed Lucas of the Marlins would be a good fit--he hits lefties well and can play SS as well as 2B and 3B. But you'd probably have to give up more than Alex Gonzalez to get Lucas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...