25 Years ago - Jan 10th - Worse Trade in Orioles History

[Redskins Rick]

From MLBTR:

1991: Cover your eyes, Orioles fans. It was on this day 25 years ago that the O?s sent Curt Schilling, Steve Finley and Pete Harnisch to the Astros in exchange for Glenn Davis. While Davis had been one of the game?s better and more underrated sluggers in Houston, injuries curtailed his production in Baltimore and he didn?t play again after the 1993 season. WAR-wise, it?s not pretty from the Orioles? perspective ? Davis generated just 0.7 bWAR over his three seasons in Baltimore while Harnisch and Finley combined for 24.1 bWAR from 1991-94. As for Schilling, it could be argued that the Astros didn?t really know what they had in him either, as he was dealt to the Phillies for Jason Grimsley in April 1992. It wasn?t until he came to Philadelphia that Schilling put it all together and exhibited his superstar form.

[Redskins Rick]

Mods - Sorry, meant this for the Oriole History Thread. Please feel free to move.

[Whammer]

From MLBTR:

I remember the trade like it was yesterday. We all thought Davis would hit 60 HR's in Memorial Stadium. Schilling was an enigma - had a mullet, wore an earring and strutted around like a peacock - didn't fit well with a very veteran and conservative team like the O's. Finley was redundant with Anderson. We knew Harnish was the piece that would eventually hurt.

Glenn was a great guy. Weird injury involving nerve damage or something. Shame it didn't work out but at the time, it actually made sense.

[Redskins Rick]

I remember the trade like it was yesterday. We all thought Davis would hit 60 HR's in Memorial Stadium. Schilling was an enigma - had a mullet, wore an earring and strutted around like a peacock - didn't fit well with a very veteran and conservative team like the O's. Finley was redundant with Anderson. We knew Harnish was the piece that would eventually hurt.

Glenn was a great guy. Weird injury involving nerve damage or something. Shame it didn't work out but at the time, it actually made sense.

Not all of us liked the trade at the time.

Finely was a 5 WAR outfielder for Houston for his first two seasons with Houston.

There is always room for a plus glove, 5 WAR OF.

You do realize that Harnisch pitched 1600+ innings after being traded and 6 years of 194+ innings?

[Tx Oriole]

From MLBTR:

Pretty bad trade.

[UpstateNYfan]

Now, if we could only blame it on PA.

[Redskins Rick]

Now, if we could only blame it on PA.

Peter most likely signed off on the trade as owner.

But, this trade was the brainchild of Roland Hemond, the GM.

[DrungoHazewood]

I'm adamant in insisting on judging a trade based on what was known at the time. In that respect this deal was at least understandable, at least defensible to some degree. Although it was still pretty high risk, trading three young, talented players for a post-peak first baseman. That's the blueprint for a disaster of a trade. Really only one or two of the guys the Orioles let go had to work out moderately well for this trade to go belly-up.

Davis was coming off an injured season where he was worth about two wins in 93 games. So you could optimistically say he was expected to be a three-win player declining through his 30s.

Finley and Schilling pretty much maxed out their ceilings. You can't really count on that. Finley was 25 and had a .625 OPS in 240 MLB games, he had almost astounding career growth from there.

[DrungoHazewood]

Knowing what we know now: Just using the WAR values of the players involved in the trade in 1990, the year before the deal, the Orioles lost the trade about 3 to 2. The year before the trade of three young players for one older guy. High risk.

[FanSince88]

Just using the WAR values of the players involved in the trade in 1990, the year before the deal, the Orioles lost the trade about 3 to 2.

Woof.

Thank goodness for sabermetrics. Clearly that trade was based more on image and perception than actual production. You know it's bad when your "prospects" are already providing more MLB value than the veteran you're acquiring. It's supposed to be the other way around.

[Redskins Rick]

Woof.

Thank goodness for sabermetrics. Clearly that trade was based more on image and perception than actual production. You know it's bad when your "prospects" are already providing more MLB value than the veteran you're acquiring. It's supposed to be the other way around.

As with Chris Davis here.

Fans love the long ball, and the hope that the team got a big bat, is enticing to fans and some FO folks.

[eddie83]

I'm adamant in insisting on judging a trade based on what was known at the time. In that respect this deal was at least understandable, at least defensible to some degree. Although it was still pretty high risk, trading three young, talented players for a post-peak first baseman. That's the blueprint for a disaster of a trade. Really only one or two of the guys the Orioles let go had to work out moderately well for this trade to go belly-up.

Davis was coming off an injured season where he was worth about two wins in 93 games. So you could optimistically say he was expected to be a three-win player declining through his 30s.

Finley and Schilling pretty much maxed out their ceilings. You can't really count on that. Finley was 25 and had a .625 OPS in 240 MLB games, he had almost astounding career growth from there.

Considering the times it is easy to speculate what lead to Finley's career growth.

Roland Hemond overall I think did a quality job but he is unfortunately remembered for this trade and the Eddie Murray deal. Eddie wasn't happy and wanted out, and being from LA the trade made sense. I don't know how much leverage Hemond had with Murray. I think one key point is that Eli Jacobs was raking in the money with the Orioles. He was going broke otherwise. The Orioles didn't spend in FA and they needed another bat. With Brady and Devo, Finley was a similar player and we also had Mussina and McDonald at the top of the rotation.

[DrungoHazewood]

Clearly that trade was based more on image and perception than actual production.

Kind of. Davis was coming off an injury, but had been worth almost five wins the year prior, and about four the year before that. Although I think the perception at the time was that his 30-homer power in the Astrodome would be 40+ anywhere else. What was missed was that he wasn't that good an offensive player - walk rate under 10% for his career, ISO was good-but-not-great, when the league went all crazy in 1987 he had one of his worst years as a regular. I think the perception was he was one of the better 1B in baseball, which I suppose he was at his best but he was no Fred McGriff or Will Clark.

I'm trying to think of a comparable player from today. Kind of drawing a blank.

[eddie83]

To be fair Mussina wasn't in the rotation yet but he was on the rise. I remember a lot of talk about him. His rookie card was a big deal.

[DrungoHazewood]

Considering the times it is easy to speculate what lead to Finley's career growth.

I'll just think of him as someone particularly well suited to changes sweeping the game. Like many players who saw stalling careers jumpstarted by the early 20s liveball era.