Jump to content

Dan Duquette is not shocked by anything. The Numbers that some pitchers got were "Staggering"


weams

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Frobby I think you put more intelligence in your response than my snarky post required :-)

My point basically the straight negative reaction to any little thing as if we're still rooting for a perennial loser.

I agree DD should not be surprised by the pitching market. I don't agree that there is some huge propaganda machine he is a cog in that is trying to fool fans.

Sent from my LG-H810 using Tapatalk

I've made your point many times about giving some deference to a management team that has won, and not treating them as perennial losers who deserve to have every little decision questioned. That said, I'm worried about the direction of the club. And I do feel like I'm hearing a bit of BS at times. Free agent prices are what they are, and if you aren't willing to pay them, you'd better have some other strategies for building talent.

When I hear:

1. "We need to acquire a top of the rotation pitcher," followed by defining a "top of the rotation pitcher" as "a no. 1, 2 or 3 starting pitcher;"

2. DD saying he's "shocked" by the "staggering" prices;

3. Reports that Angelos doesn't want to pay for top talent because he feels it's important to maintain "family friendly" ticket prices;

Yes, that begins to sound like propaganda to me. And again, I'm OK with not paying free agent prices for starting pitchers, but if you aren't willing to do it, you need to have put yourself in a position where you've got some cheap young starters with some talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent points.

My issue with it is, he has not only traded away many good prospects, but those players aren't in the organization anymore. Had he traded for players with a couple years on their deals remaining, we wouldn't have all these holes. EVERY player he has acquired for 5-6 pitching prospects, in 3 years, are gone.

Hence my reasoning for not feeling like Duquette isn't a quality GM for a mid-market club.

You don't get multiple years of good players for Zach Davies or the Eduardo Rodriguez with the 4.75 ERA in Bowie. Or the off-the-rails versions of Arrieta and Strop. Acquiring multiple years of good players would have meant parting with guys like Bundy and Schoop and Harvey and Cisco. Or in 2012 Machado. There were plenty of conversations in early summer 2012 about trading Machado for a top pitcher, because you can't compete without a TOR pitcher, you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine that. Next thing you'll tell me is that the Presidential candidates aren't all 100% serious about their carefully considered proposals, and the $3000 undercoating on my new car wasn't really necessary.

My specific issue with Duquette is that most of what comes out of his mouth seems intended as much to distance himself from future criticism as it is to convey the intent of the organization during the off-season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My specific issue with Duquette is that most of what comes out of his mouth seems intended as much to distance himself from future criticism as it is to convey the intent of the organization during the off-season.

I'm not certain that he even thinks of that. I personally would not think he would care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My specific issue with Duquette is that most of what comes out of his mouth seems intended as much to distance himself from future criticism as it is to convey the intent of the organization during the off-season.

I don't really get this. Lord knows there are those that criticize his every word and every move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really get this. Lord knows there are those that criticize his every word and every move.

Calling a TOR pitcher a #3 in the same sentence, for example. Vague (and probably inaccurate) statements about the surprising cost of TOR FAs, for another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calling a TOR pitcher a #3 in the same sentence, for example. Vague (and probably inaccurate) statements about the surprising cost of TOR FAs, for another.

As I mentioned, those statements annoyed me a bit. However, in the end, I care what he does, not what he says. Right now, he has a lot more to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't get multiple years of good players for Zach Davies or the Eduardo Rodriguez with the 4.75 ERA in Bowie. Or the off-the-rails versions of Arrieta and Strop. Acquiring multiple years of good players would have meant parting with guys like Bundy and Schoop and Harvey and Cisco. Or in 2012 Machado. There were plenty of conversations in early summer 2012 about trading Machado for a top pitcher, because you can't compete without a TOR pitcher, you know.

Who said anything about a TOR starter? We haven't seen one of them in 10 years. Glad to hear you have the pulse of other GM's around the league.

It's the pattern of such trades. In 2014 alone, he traded 3 young starting pitchers, knowing full right well he had Chen and Norris going FA, after the season, for rentals or AAAA outfielders.

(Norris should have been dealt in the off-season, but that's a whole other organizational issue, spear-headed by Duquette, with the TOTAL mis-handling of Gausman and the ("Brady Theory".)

How about just a little foresight and trade one or MORE, of these prospects, for a quality player to replace what your losing and can help you this season, with a few years left on their deal? Otherwise, we pay FA money to fill holes, either to our players, available by poor management, or others potenial FA's.

The vicious cycle continues.

-Keep in mind 1 player acquired by Duquette in 2014, is still in the orgainzation. The great Garcia, who will probably be in AA. And its a wonder we have so many holes to fill.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calling a TOR pitcher a #3 in the same sentence, for example. Vague (and probably inaccurate) statements about the surprising cost of TOR FAs, for another.

Thank you for proving my point. You stated that everything he says is to avoid criticism, then in your very next post disproved your own claim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...