This is A Mess (Mega RANT Thread)

[El Gordo]

What would it take to get Cueto and Bruce?

[Stotle]

Yeah, I'm not sure I get it either. Seems like we trade proven longer term guys like Jones and Britton (even reasonably cost controlled) for a one year rental with Upton (certainly a fine player) and Myers (a talented guy with big question marks) and the prospect pieces balance in our favor. Stotle (and you) certainly have more knowledge about prospects than me, but lets just say I'm unconvinced that this is even a marginally better path than the one we're on. Short or longer term.

And here I figured you would be so open to something like this...

[CA-ORIOLE]

And here I figured you would be so open to something like this...

I'm open. Just to believe your plan would have merit, we'd have to win the prospect swaps, probably by a good margin. Quite frankly, I'm just not knowledgeable enough to say one way or another. I'm just unconvinced.

[DrungoHazewood]

If you look at that team I wrote up and consider that "blowing it up" I'm not sure what to tell you. Emotional attachments are great for fans -- it connects us to the teams we root for. They really shouldn't be governing factors in front office or managerial decisions.

Maybe not governing principals, but certainly considerations. It's one thing to tell the fanbase that you have to let popular free agents go for defensible reasons. I certainly was happy with the decisions on Markakis and Cruz. But you darned well better keep winning if you start trading popular stars in their prime signed to reasonable deals.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Folks one day not long ago would have said trading Wieters and JJohnson was a non-starter and yet we just paid the minimum to Caleb Joseph and Zach Britton to replace them.

Too many players listed on this thread as being too critical to the success of the Orioles the past three years that we could not have done without. Wieters, Davis, Hardy, Jones, probably add Tillman, Britton, Chen and maybe a few others (Markakis). I remember people saying how critical Norris was last ... as if the list of untradeables on this team exceeds 10 or more. I understand these are likeable guys, but come on.

IMO, only Chen, Tillman, Machado and Jones have been vital to our success - mostly because of their production v cost.

If the BoSox can trade Nomar Garciaparra in the middle of a playoff race, I think the Orioles list of untradeables should be nowhere near 10 guys. Folks here should be more open to dealing quality, cost controlled veterans to receive quality prospects.

This post takes the "everybody is tradeable" adage to a new level.

Not only is virtually everyone tradeable, but it's bound to give you an advantage (in prospects and performance) if you we only had a GM who was smart enough to trade almost everybody.

[DrungoHazewood]

This post takes the "everybody is tradeable" adage to a new level.

Not only is virtually everyone tradeable, but it's bound to give you an advantage (in prospects and performance) if you we only had a GM who was smart enough to trade almost everybody.

I think some armchair GMs take the idea that fans only root for laundry a bit too literally. While I'll root for the O's no matter what, I think most fans would be very skeptical of turnover of established players for relatively esoteric explanations like increasing the talent base while not taking too big a hit in the present. Yes, if you win the pennant all is forgiven. But if you trade Adam Jones and then finish 75-92, that has to be one of the quicker ways to get fired and have 96% of Orioles Hangout eager to tar and feather you through about 2053.

[eddie83]

Pretty mind blowing that the 1980 Orioles used only TWELVE pitchers all season (and three of those guys Kerrigan/Boddicker/Hartzell pitched only 8 games COMBINED). So essentially a 9 man pitching staff for the entire season. My how times have changed!

I meant to address this earlier. It is truly amazing how much things have changed. I think the swollen pitching staffs have put much more pressure on teams to find everyday and versatile players.

[eddie83]

I think some armchair GMs take the idea that fans only root for laundry a bit too literally. While I'll root for the O's no matter what, I think most fans would be very skeptical of turnover of established players for relatively esoteric explanations like increasing the talent base while not taking too big a hit in the present. Yes, if you win the pennant all is forgiven. But if you trade Adam Jones and then finish 75-92, that has to be one of the quicker ways to get fired and have 96% of Orioles Hangout eager to tar and feather you through about 2053.

I'm still trying to find examples of contending teams dealing proven players for prospects in return? I have seen teams trade good players for financial reasons or trade players for other proven players that serve a different need but not for prospects.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I meant to address this earlier. It is truly amazing how much things have changed. I think the swollen pitching staffs have put much more pressure on teams to find everyday and versatile players.

I recall Palmer marveling the other day when the White Sox brought in some guy out of the BP who was touching 95-96 and he couldn't believe he was selected in the 18th round of the draft.

[Flash- bd]

I think some armchair GMs take the idea that fans only root for laundry a bit too literally. While I'll root for the O's no matter what, I think most fans would be very skeptical of turnover of established players for relatively esoteric explanations like increasing the talent base while not taking too big a hit in the present. Yes, if you win the pennant all is forgiven. But if you trade Adam Jones and then finish 75-92, that has to be one of the quicker ways to get fired and have 96% of Orioles Hangout eager to tar and feather you through about 2053.

It took me a while to figure out what "laundry" meant in that sentence.

But I agree

Though I think we can all agree that two players Duquette should've traded while many fans still quite liked them were Jim Johnson and Bud Norris, and many of us can say that without being accused of hindsight.

[Stotle]

Maybe not governing principals, but certainly considerations. It's one thing to tell the fanbase that you have to let popular free agents go for defensible reasons. I certainly was happy with the decisions on Markakis and Cruz. But you darned well better keep winning if you start trading popular stars in their prime signed to reasonable deals.

Absolutely agree with you. This isn't ideal at all. But it's the best I have been able to come up with if the team is not going to otherwise focus on continuing to build up an infrastructure that can support future winning teams. Make no mistake, I'm absolutely open to hearing any and all other proposals. I just don't believe extra draft picks next year are going to have much of an impact on the major league team's performance in 2016 and 2017.

I really do respect Duquette as a baseball mind, so I continue to be intrigued as to what he is going to do in the off-season. I assumed at some point over the past two off-season we'd see some moves that gave an indication as to the long term direction of the team. Hasn't happened and this year it's go time, one way or another.

[eddie83]

I recall Palmer marveling the other day when the White Sox brought in some guy out of the BP who was touching 95-96 and he couldn't believe he was selected in the 18th round of the draft.

It feels like every single team has great arms in their pens. Not all guys are consistent. I watched a show in the winter on MLB Network where Tom Verducci said that training has helped pitchers increase velocity.

[CA-ORIOLE]

It feels like every single team has great arms in their pens. Not all guys are consistent. I watched a show in the winter on MLB Network where Tom Verducci said that training has helped pitchers increase velocity.

I'm sure there's a lot of truth to that.

[DrungoHazewood]

It feels like every single team has great arms in their pens. Not all guys are consistent. I watched a show in the winter on MLB Network where Tom Verducci said that training has helped pitchers increase velocity.

To me its a little amazing that it took 100 years or more for it to fully sink in that pitchers are far more effective throwing as hard as they can for an inning or two. To the point where there are guys who wouldn't have made it out of AA as starters who can be very good MLB relievers. I mean, in 1980 Earl was still using 9 pitchers for almost a whole season (as someone else noted recently). It worked, and well, but history has just passed that model by. I can't even imagine what Scott McGregor's ERA would be today - I remember the tail end of his career when his fastball couldn't have been 85. It might have barely topped 80. There are relievers today with changeups roughly 10 mph faster than that.

[Stotle]

I'm still trying to find examples of contending teams dealing proven players for prospects in return? I have seen teams trade good players for financial reasons or trade players for other proven players that serve a different need but not for prospects.

Just this offseason we saw the Athletics, who had the best run differential in baseball last year, trade MVP candidate Donaldson for Lawrie and three prospects.

The deals I discussed included getting back three non-prospects (Justin Upton, Wil Myers, Jackie Bradley, Jr.) and two prospects (Matt Wisler and Hunter Renfroe), one of which is ready to help this year.

This isn't taking an all-star and selling him off for rebuilding pieces. It's using both buying and selling to try and redistribute risk and upside across short term and long term trajectories.

If I had said Baltimore should trade Adam Jones for Michael Kopech, Rafael Devers, Yoan Moncada, and Sam Travis, you'd have a great point -- that's potentially a value win for Baltimore but would make no sense for Baltimore in terms of winning in the short term.