Jump to content

Dodgers Trade: Thoughts?

Stotle

By Stotle
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

BohKnowsBmore Hangout Grand Counsel

BohKnowsBmore

Posted
Posted
Why does Wieters taking the QO kill the offseason? They paid him 10m last year. They added 6m but subtracted quite a bit of salary too. I know there's arbitration, but the Orioles should have a reasonable estimate on those. If Wieters taking the QO killed the offseason, this team is doomed. I suspect Wieters taking the QO will however be the excuse this year.

If you offer the QO you have to be prepared for a scenario in which its accepted. I don't buy that DD and company didn't consider it as a possibility.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Crazysilver03 Hangout Grand Counsel

Crazysilver03

Posted
Posted
Why does Wieters taking the QO kill the offseason? They paid him 10m last year. They added 6m but subtracted quite a bit of salary too. I know there's arbitration, but the Orioles should have a reasonable estimate on those. If Wieters taking the QO killed the offseason, this team is doomed. I suspect Wieters taking the QO will however be the excuse this year.

If you have a $40M and someone comes along that requires $16M you werent planning to spend, that will have a large effect on the way the rest of the winter will go.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Helmet Hangout Grand Counsel

Dark Helmet

Posted
Posted
If you have a $40M and someone comes along that requires $16M you werent planning to spend, that will have a large effect on the way the rest of the winter will go.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Then you don't offer it to him. Plain and simple. There was a good chance he'd accept it. So if that scenario wasn't in their plans, I have serious concerns about the people running this team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
Then you don't offer it to him. Plain and simple. There was a good chance he'd accept it. So if that scenario wasn't in their plans, I have serious concerns about the people running this team.

They don't need an excuse. They can just tell you they do not wish to spend more. And you'll learn to like that. Or follow another team or another sport. What makes you think they need excuses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
I think most thought the chances were well under 50%. However, we couldn't

Afford to even take a 10% chance. The upside wasn't worth the downside. DD goofed.

Fair enough. He did. But no one here would have been happy if we had not offered either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crazysilver03 Hangout Grand Counsel

Crazysilver03

Posted
Posted
Fair enough. He did. But no one here would have been happy if we had not offered either.

Maybe not happy but would have saw it for what it was. No QO would have been fine in my book. I also understand why they offered. But to me the business decision (not the fan in me) was to not offer.

Sent from my LG-D850 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JayThomas All-Star

JayThomas

Posted
Posted
Fair enough. He did. But no one here would have been happy if we had not offered either.

I know I wouldn't have been happy if we'd not offered. That said, I'm not happy that he accepted it. (And) yes, I do give the front office enough credit to anticipate what might happen if he did accept it: plan B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JayThomas All-Star

JayThomas

Posted
Posted
Why does Wieters taking the QO kill the offseason? They paid him 10m last year. They added 6m but subtracted quite a bit of salary too. I know there's arbitration, but the Orioles should have a reasonable estimate on those. If Wieters taking the QO killed the offseason, this team is doomed. I suspect Wieters taking the QO will however be the excuse this year.

No one is saying or implying that it killed the offseason. Some of us are doing arithmetic and concluding that the front office has to be creative to even put as good a team on the field as last year.

Wieters ~16M. If we resign Davis at $22M per (conservative), we're at $38M of the $40M that we have coming off the books.

How do YOU replace Chen, O'Day, Pearce, etc.?

Some of us are simply pointing out what appears to be obvious that DD is going to have to take chances and be either very good or very lucky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Helmet Hangout Grand Counsel

Dark Helmet

Posted
Posted
They don't need an excuse. They can just tell you they do not wish to spend more. And you'll learn to like that. Or follow another team or another sport. What makes you think they need excuses?

I don't have to like anything. You can like whatever you want. A team that expects fans to shell out thousands a year to watch do owe some sort of reasoning behind their moves. Just because I'm not a fan of every single thing they do, that doesn't make you anymore of a fan then you are. So please stop with the "go root for another team" bs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Helmet Hangout Grand Counsel

Dark Helmet

Posted
Posted
No one is saying or implying that it killed the offseason. Some of us are doing arithmetic and concluding that the front office has to be creative to even put as good a team on the field as last year.

Wieters ~16M. If we resign Davis at $22M per (conservative), we're at $38M of the $40M that we have coming off the books.

How do YOU replace Chen, O'Day, Pearce, etc.?

Some of us are simply pointing out what appears to be obvious that DD is going to have to take chances and be either very good or very lucky.

That's not my point. They knew there was a chance Wieters would take the QO. If their budget is that minimal, they shouldn't have risked it. Hell, at this point, who cares about receiving comp picks. It seems the Orioles are too poor to afford the signing bonuses. Especially if they can't even afford to field a 25 man roster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JayThomas All-Star

JayThomas

Posted
Posted
That's not my point. They knew there was a chance Wieters would take the QO. If their budget is that minimal, they shouldn't have risked it. Hell, at this point, who cares about receiving comp picks. It seems the Orioles are too poor to afford the signing bonuses. Especially if they can't even afford to field a 25 man roster.

See post 115 of this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JayThomas All-Star

JayThomas

Posted
Posted
Plan b = dumpster diving it seems.

Or accepting the position of having to pull rabbits out of hats. Yes.

It appears that the O's took a gamble on offering Matt a QO, that most of us and most of the industry agreed with, and that we all assigned a small likelihood that he'd accept (maybe 20%), knowing full well that if he accepted then we could only maintain a comparable on-field presence in 2016 by getting very fortunate in the trade market.

Does that articulate it clearly enough?

I think that it does, and I'm satisfied that the Orioles took the actions that they did knowing full well that there was a 20-ish% likelihood that we'd end up where we are now. We are between a rock and a hard place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dark Helmet Hangout Grand Counsel

Dark Helmet

Posted
Posted
Or accepting the position of having to pull rabbits out of hats. Yes.

It appears that the O's took a gamble on offering Matt a QO, that most of us and most of the industry agreed with, and that we all assigned a small likelihood that he'd accept (maybe 20%), knowing full well that if he accepted then we could only maintain a comparable on-field presence in 2016 by getting very fortunate in the trade market.

Does that articulate it clearly enough?

I think that it does, and I'm satisfied that the Orioles took the actions that they did knowing full well that there was a 20-ish% likelihood that we'd end up where we are now. We are between a rock and a hard place.

Not sure how they can be fortunate in the trade market. Don't have the farm to make the trades that will make an impact. May as well keep what they have and do the usual. Throw you know what on the wall and hope it sticks. If they weren't going to be able to raise the payroll enough to compensate for Wieters accepting the QO, they shouldn't have risked it. No matter how low the percentage was that he'd take it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JayThomas All-Star

JayThomas

Posted
Posted
Not sure how they can be fortunate in the trade market. Don't have the farm to make the trades that will make an impact. May as well keep what they have and do the usual. Throw you know what on the wall and hope it sticks. If they weren't going to be able to raise the payroll enough to compensate for Wieters accepting the QO, they shouldn't have risked it. No matter how low the percentage was that he'd take it.

Well a lot of people on this board (myself included) and a lot of people in the industry disagree with your last point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Brooks The Great
      Gunnar Henderson 2024

      By Brooks The Great · Posted

      It's fine, but I would personally prefer having Cowser and Adley taking tons of pitches back-to-back before Gunnar further punishes the opposing starting pitcher with high exit velo barrels. 
    • Brooks The Great
      Gunnar Henderson 2024

      By Brooks The Great · Posted

      I was going to say pretty much the same thing about Cowser in my post, but left out my thoughts to keep the post more Gunnar-centric. But I totally agree that Cowser fits the best as this team's leadoff hitter, especially since Holliday doesn't look like he's going to make an impact offensively as early as most of us thought heading into the season.  Going back to last season, I've said Cowser has the best mix of patience, hit tool, power, and speed to be a great leadoff hitter. The strikeouts are most likely always going to be high with him, but he has .380-.400+ OBP makeup, and having someone like that hitting leadoff with Adley and Gunnar hitting directly behind Cowser is going to set things up for an elite offense which is much more dynamic and less one-dimensional than the what we've seen up until this point. Cowser Adley Gunnar Westburg O'Hearn Santander Mountcastle Is an ideal top 7 against RHP for right now, with Kjerstad (replacing Hays) and Mayo (essentially replacing Mateo and bumping Westburg to 2B) making the lineup legitimately scary within the next couple months. Mullins and Hays need to be phased out, with Santander and Mountcastle not far behind if those two continue struggling and not reaching base enough to justify hitting in the middle of the order.
    • Hallas
      Gunnar Henderson 2024

      By Hallas · Posted

      A lot of teams (likely driven by analytics) are putting their best overall hitter at 2 (like the Yankees batting Soto 2, and the Dodgers batting Shohei 2) to maximize ABs while guaranteeing that a high-OBP guy is batting in front of him to give him opportunities with men on base.  That's probably what we want.  It seems logical considering how thoroughly debunked small-ball in the first inning has been.  Rutschman at 3 is fine.
    • Hallas
      Gunnar Henderson 2024

      By Hallas · Posted

      Realistically I think Adley as the leadoff guy is the best lineup for us but if he has trouble batting leadoff in half the games because he can't get his catcher's gear off fast enough then I get it.   Cowser has continued to be incredibly patient, and if Adley can't be our leadoff guy then Cowser is probably our next best option.  Of course Cowser also hits a lot of bombs, so it'd be interesting if he goes on another heater.   If Cowser gets off the schneid then Cowser leadoff and Gunnar at 2 could be incredibly potent.  I don't think Cowser is actually playing that badly, he's just been running into some bad luck.  And he's starting to wake up a little bit anyway.
    • Brooks The Great
      Gunnar Henderson 2024

      By Brooks The Great · Posted

      Agreed, appreciate the stats. Gunnar isn't a leadoff hitter - he's a prototypical #3 hitter or cleanup hitter. Hyde writes poor lineups, and Gunnar hitting leadoff has been one of the consistent problems with the offense this season. Gunnar hitting mostly solo shots is both a consequence and reflection of this offense's flaws - the O's have too many low-OBP hitters in the lineup (hitting in less-than-optimal spots for the most part) and are too reliant on solo homers to generate runs. At least Hyde has started hitting Westburg leadoff against LHP, which is progress, but Hyde is way too stubborn and too slow to make the correct adjustments. He's very similar to Buck Showalter in that respect.  Anyway, I look forward to Hyde waking up and moving Gunnar down to #3/#4 against RHP.  
    • Hallas
      What are the best and worst trades in Orioles history?

      By Hallas · Posted

      While the return on the Tettleton trade wasn't ideal, 1: I don't think you can really expect a 30 year old catcher to put up a career year and then follow it up with another one, and 2: we had Chris Hoiles who played quite well for us following Tettleton's departure.  If we had forward thinking GMs we probably would split them at C and give them DH/1B/OF games on their non catching days, which is what Detroit did with Tettleton to prolong his career after 1992.  (He was basically the same hitter from 1993-1995 but he stopped catching with regularity so his WAR was much lower.)   The Davis trade was so completely undefensible on every level, not the least of which because we already had a player who was at least as good as Davis was on the team, but he didn't fit the stereotypical batting profile of a 1B.  At least today teams wouldn't be so quick to dismiss a 10 HR first baseman if he's got an OBP of .400.
    • OsFanSinceThe80s
      What are the best and worst trades in Orioles history?

      By OsFanSinceThe80s · Posted

      The Glenn Davis trade was so bad it overshadowed another really bad trade in team history. The Orioles traded Mickey Tettleton that same offseason for Jeff Robinson in part because Tettleton had an off year in 1990 with a .223 batting average and a .381 slugging percentage. Except Tettleton drew 116 walks making his OBP .376 and his OPS+ was 116. Jeff Robinson was coming off a 5.96 ERA in 145 innings pitched. I have no idea what the team was thinking with this trade. Robinson did manage to lower his ERA in 1991 to 5.18 his only Orioles season. There's no way this trade is made today in the age of analytics. Tettleton meanwhile put up 171 home runs and an .859 OPS for the remainder of his career. 😬 Just a bad trade that doesn't get talked about enough thanks to Glenn Davis.

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...