This is A Mess (Mega RANT Thread)

[Redskins Rick]

But we won in consecutive seasons with injuries to Wieters AND production declines from the likes of Davis. We won anyway.

Also, as I have posted, the Os were better immediately after the trade because Jones was major league ready. That's an important point.

Sure, there is the need to satisfy a fan base and be mindful of trading fan favorites, but I think fans most prefer to win and I think I have been advocating the best way to not only win, but to sustain that winning over a period of time. Besides, while our GM did not deal ANY of these guys, he could have dealt some of them. Folks here post like it was a long list (at least eight players) of MUST KEEP TO BE GOOD players after 2012 and that is simply NOT the case. You know, Zach Britton replaced JJohnson just fine.

You might remember, Tommy Hunter, was the first attempt to replace and that didn't work too well.

Jones was not a typical trade, that was a fleece of Seattle and it will go into the books and probably the best trade of all time for the Orioles.

BTW, Jones came in 2008, and the team didn't improve and have a winning season, until 2012.

[weams]

More than 3/4 of the posters supported the Miller trade, according to the poll conducted at the time. I happened to be among the dissenters, and there were some other vocal dissenters as well, but I would not say the FO "cannot win no matter what they do." They had popular support for that move, even if some disagreed with it (and were right ).

Each situation is different. I'd never say you always keep the long-term asset rather than going for short term gain. Exactly how high is the cost, how good is the return you are getting, and how badly do you need the asset you are getting?

All very good points. I was strongly in favor of the trade at the time. I thought we were gonna win a World Series. I did not realize that we would run out of luck.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I don't know, to be honest. I was just thinking back a few years when hoosiers and I used to lock horns a lot.

I think hoosiers has a very good feel for the challenges Duquette is facing, and I bet if you go back to my posts they've been reasonably consistent over the past two winters, down to similar word choice during the offseason (probably something like "the next 24/18/12 months will tell us a lot about how this front office is doing at building up an organization that can succeed long term"). We're nearing "the next six months will tell us a lot" and we've seen the same style of moves throughout the tenure. Hopefully it works out; I don't think doubters are wrong to point out concerns just as I'm sure you believe the supporters aren't wrong to believe that the front office is making the best moves available and there isn't anything more that can/could be done.

I would say Drungo and I probably have the largest fundamental disagreement as to team building, but I get where he is coming from when it comes to the Orioles. I don't think we will see eye to eye as far as the extent to which certain outcomes along the way should be attributable to luck, and that's completely fine. He's a very smart guy and nothing about me makes my analysis any more legitimate than his.

There are a bunch of decision-makers in baseball who look at these issues differently and I'm not (quite) egotistical enough to believe that the folks I agree with are the smart ones and the others are all stupid. But that mentality seems to permeate the board (I'd assume all message boards, but I don't really know).

If there's one thing I would bet on, it is that you are more consistent than Hoosiers.

We have talked long enough that I understand your view on things with respect to Duquette, the minors and team building. So, I understand the issue. Duquette has a more conservative if not unconventional yearly "lets try and field a competitive team approach" often looking toward undervalued ML talent, while you'd like a more aggressive minor league stockpiling guy and need a better idea of what the longer term strategy is with respect to drafting, young talent acquisition (maybe some development issues on top of that, certainly with respect to Gausman).

I see both approaches as viable. The key with DD's approach is having enough of a core at the ML level and enough depth at the minor league to support the ML team. Whatever your criticism, I think it's fair that he did not trade off the top tier minor league talent like Gausman, Bundy, Harvey, Schoop etc. Bundy and Harvey injuries have certainly hurt our outlook.

I have little bit of an issue with this idea that we can trade good players like Davis, Hardy, Wieters and still be good while improving our young talent pool. Part of that being this after the fact, "they weren't good or were injured anyways and we still won" (not necessarily you). Would you be for trading Adam Jones now? Machado before his knees collapse again?

So what about the 4 draft picks in the top 100+ this year, the likely 2-3 QO/supplementals picks we should land in next years draft from Davis/Wieters/Chen? Do you think Gausman will be solid by next year. He'll surely be counted on next year. You think Schoop will develop? Does Machado's offensive breakout look for real? You think Paredes is viable? Seems like it might be a good year for FA COF next year.

Challenges, yeah, but I guess I'm not seeing things quite as dire as some. I'm not predicting a dynasty either. The division will always be tough.

[Frobby]

So, of the cost controlled stars the Os have had in recent years, I count Jones, Tillman, Bedard, Wieters, JJohnson, Hardy and Davis. I advocated dealing the last five names. Of the six, we have seen two injuries, three large production declines and pretty good production despite injuries from Hardy until this season and continued strong production from Adam Jones (who I may have advocated trading at one time, can't recall).

Next time I advocate dealing a cost controlled star, I will add extra language to say that dealing a veteran star (instead of keeping)has an added benefit of avoiding injury and production risk so that it is not a surprise when it happens. Really, who cares how dramatic a production drop occurs? Trade the guy at peak value, gather assets and repeat process.

What I don't get is that folks want to either claim 20/20 hindsight on these production declines or other, but miss the lesson. If you had the chance to go back in time and trade Wieters and Davis, would you? If the answer is yes, please keep that in mind the next time the Os get a four orfive WAR guy and someone advocates a trade. Not just any trade, but an equal trade when a great productive player is traded for an equal haul in top prospects.

But constantly accumulating long term assets and dealing off good players is likely to hurt the team's performance in the short run. We've had three very exciting seasons yielding two playoff appearances. I doubt we'd have had them if we had followed your approach. And I think the rank and file fan would have revolted.

I'm not going to totally dismiss your point of view. If the team hovers at .500 this year and then plummets into a decade of losing because they didn't build up the farm, I don't know that I will feel that the enjoyment of the last three years was worth it. Having sat through 1998-2011, I certainly don't want a repeat of that experience. But there is no guarantee that this is what will happen, nor can we be sure if the players we might have acquired by dealing the players you identified would have worked out. The only solid facts are what actually has occurred over the last three seasons and this year.

[Phantom]

If we fall out of it, trading Adam Jones would actually be a really great idea. Or in the offseason if we lose a lot of talent and aren't planning on making a big push for the playoffs in 2016.

[El Gordo]

Justin Upton was not cost prohibitive for Baltimore. He isn't right now, either.

Trade Zach Britton to the Cubs -- any number of possible deals there.

Cut bait with Bundy and trade him to Milwaukee for Will Smith. Maybe add Sisco and another piece and grab Lind too.

I like this idea. Less excited about the Britton trade unless you can give me the names of specific players I get back. We are talking about the mess DD has made of this season I believe, so the players we get in return would have to be an upgrade this year. Same thing goes for Upton. Who do we give up for a one year or 3 month rental"?

[Redskins Rick]

Justin Upton was not cost prohibitive for Baltimore. He isn't right now, either.

Trade Zach Britton to the Cubs -- any number of possible deals there.

Cut bait with Bundy and trade him to Milwaukee for Will Smith. Maybe add Sisco and another piece and grab Lind too.

Who is the GM there, Syd Thrift Jr?

[TonySoprano]

The Orioles goal was to have a competitive team that had a chance to make the playoffs. 10 games ago it looked like they were ready to "overachieve" again. They still have a competitive team with a chance for the playoffs. I had this team pegged in the mid 80's in the win column before the year. Many agreed. Very few of us had them pegged for 90 and above.

FWIW, 47.7% responded 90+ and a couple wished my poll had a 95+ choice.

[eddie83]

Again, why does it matter if a team is competitive or not, when discussing trading Erik Bedard for Tillman, Jones and other? Wouldn't you rather increase the talent base of the organization almost regardless? Sure the NYY or LAD are not going to trade their Erik Bedards, but a large majority of teams would be better off.

And why are you so concerned about who plays SS, C and 1B if those guys are dealt? Can't you just assume those holes will be filled in a competent manner including possibly from the prospect haul received in trading Wieters, Davis, Hardy. Between, Bedard, Wieters, Davis and Hardy, two became injured almost immediately - so there were (or would have been) immediate holes to fill without the trades anyway. Either way, conceptually, you are better off making a trade. On the surface, conceptually, a trade should be an even exchange of talent so why worry so much about losing what you are giving up if make a good trade.

Give me examples of contending teams that do what you are advocating? The Phillies dealt Lee only after they acquired Halladay. We had just made postseason on a team with Machado and Jones and you are asking me why I am worried about replacing 33% of my starting lineup? I think to assume those holes will be filled is a stretch. The team that you are dealing with is only getting these players for a 2 year stretch so why once again are they dealing away these ready to play guys anyway? A team that takes on players like that isn't going to make those deals of they have pieces ready to play.

[Stotle]

Other thread closed while I was trying to respond to questions about trades. Summary of what I was writing:

Re: Willingness to trade Machado/Jones.

Machado is young, impactful, and cost controlled. Not an asset I look to trade unless I'm getting same back. I advocated trading Jones rather than extending him. He has been better than I expected, for sure. I would have been open to trading him this offseason when San Diego was clearly in need of a CF if it meant bringing back Myers and one or two other cost controlled pieces. Add Britton while we're at it.

BAL - Jones, Britton

SD - Myers, Wisler, Renfroe

And trade for Upton with Harvey anchoring the deal:

ATL - Harvey, Sisco, international money

BAL - Justin Upton

And trade for Jackie Bradley Jr as a down-order bat that will provide plus defense in center field and hopefully grow into an okay bat eventually.

BAL - JBJ

BOS - Norris (BAL paying half of contract)

2015

C - Wieters/Joseph

1B - Davis

2B - Schoop

SS - Hardy

3B - Machado

LF - Myers

CF - JBJ

RF - Upton

DH - Same collection of candidates

SP01 - Tillman

SP02 - Chen

SP03 - Gonzalez

SP04 - Jimenez

SP05 - Gausman

(AAA - Wisler, Wright, Wilson, Davies)

I don't believe that team is any worse than the team Baltimore has now, allows for more roster flexibility because you have everyday players rather than platoons (including cost controlled and cheap Myers and JBJ), and has added to your upper-minors a long term RF solution that could be ready by 2016 (Renfroe) and a potential mid-rotation arm that is ready in 2015 if needed (Wisler, who is also your ready replacement for Chen).

Re: use of 2015 draft picks

I think the Orioles missed an opportunity to load up on collegiate talent that could be ready to help out much more quickly than the HSers. We'll see how it shakes out.

Re: use of 2016 draft picks

Next year's QO picks, likewise, we'll see how many are in play and what comes of them.

Re: Development of various players being legit or not

Machado and Schoop are long term pieces for me, with the latter being available in a deal if the right deal comes along and I have another decent option at 2B. Not a believer in Paredes as a long term solution.

Re: Britton to Cubs

I think you can get one of their low minors arms (Cease would be my target) plus Vogelbach, McKinney, or Almora -- potentially Javier Baez or Castro straight up.

I take whatever deal is best overall value and give the closer job to Will Smith. If I get Baez I'm rotating him, Schoop, Hardy, and Machado through the DH spot to keep legs fresh, and then making a decision as to whether or not he or Machado is the long term shortstop once Hardy leaves.

[clapdiddy]

Justin Upton plays for the Padres, not the Braves.

[Tryptamine]

Why would the Cubs do that trade? They've had the best bullpen in baseball over the last month+, just got back Neil Ramirez and have Rafael Soriano joining the team after the all star break. The Cubs need a bat, not another reliever.

[Stotle]

Why would the Cubs do that trade? They've had the best bullpen in baseball over the last month+, just got back Neil Ramirez and have Rafael Soriano joining the team after the all star break. The Cubs need a bat, not another reliever.

Cubs are looking at relievers.

[clapdiddy]

Why would the Cubs do that trade? They've had the best bullpen in baseball over the last month+, just got back Neil Ramirez and have Rafael Soriano joining the team after the all star break. The Cubs need a bat, not another reliever.

I was actually thinking that Chris Davis would be attractive to the Cubs. But, he's going nowhere right now.

[clapdiddy]

It's what he would have done before the season.

Ahhh...my bad. Public school education and all...