Nick Cafardo: Dan Duquette Is 'One Of The Best GMs In The Game'

[Nevermore]

Someone should make a sticky list of all of Dan's successes and failures so we would actually have something to refer to.

But defining who is a "success" or a "failure" are matters of opinion and disagreements within OH.

[Why Not?]

But defining who is a "success" or a "failure" are matters of opinion and disagreements within OH.

And such a compilation means zippy-squat without context anyway.

[Palmoripken]

I'm someone who likes the job both MacPhail and now Duquette have done. I think MacPhail was the man the team needed in the dark years. And I think Dan was the man to push the team over the top. That doesn't mean I agree with all their moves. I think MacPhail was a little too conservative in free agency and didn't go after untapped markets but I loved his trading ability. Duquette I think could be a little better with our prospects but he does take risks i.e. the Miller trade (I know that trade is controversial since E-Rod is doing well in Boston and is under control for a while but Miller made that team a possible WS contender. We have what we have. Honestly, it's a good time to be an Orioles fan. I just try to enjoy it because I'll always remember 1998-2011.

[El Gordo]

But defining who is a "success" or a "failure" are matters of opinion and disagreements within OH.

I don't think so. Anybody think Jake was a success, Trumbo was a bust? Gonzo, Chen? De Aza, Snider, Parra? Cruz? Ubaldo? Where are the arguments there? Eduardo/Miller? Just a list of all the moves would be helpful?

[backwardsk]

Davis, Jones, Hardy, Tillman, O'Day acquired via trades/waiver claims by MacPhail

Machado (2010), Wieters (2007), Schoop (2008), Britton (2006) were all draft picks by MacPhail or Flanagan.

Trumbo, Brach are Duquette pickups and Gausman was a Duquette draft pick.

Did you mean 3 instead of 4?

AM was gone when O'Day signed. We were in GM limbo.

Wieters, O'day, Jones, Davis, Hardy could have left, but DD kept them.

[TradeAngelos]

Draft picks are precious, but nothing more than lottery tickets. With the return DD has had off Rule 5 picks and Asian imports, not too concerned with missing a few picks.

Yes, a few mediocre signings. Ubaldo essentially earned his contract last season, and Gallardo's book is not written. Compare that to the last 25 largest free agent signings. Most are DISASTERS. He hasn't signed a crippling deal, and has competed every year. For those around from 1999 to 2012, I'd think you would have a bit more perspective.

MacPhail never would have had this success. He never thought outside the box, never embraced roster management the right way, never focused on undervalued skills while punting on overvalued skills. The goal of the GM is to put together a winning team without mortgaging the future. A+

Welcome to the board!! Please post more!

[TradeAngelos]

But defining who is a "success" or a "failure" are matters of opinion and disagreements within OH.

Successes and failures are measured by the W/L column for a GM. So far, so good.

When they actually start...losing more than winning....we can discuss it. But doesn't look like that is happening anytime soon. Much to the dismay of some of the board.

[brianod]

Successes and failures are measured by the W/L column for a GM. So far, so good.

When they actually start...losing more than winning....we can discuss it. But doesn't look like that is happening anytime soon. Much to the dismay of some of the board.

Some of us worry that our farm system is poor compared to other teams and include that situation in our grading of DD. Mid market teams can't sustain winning records without good farm systems and many of us worry that DD has built a house of cards that will come crashing down sometime soon

[TINSTAAPP]

I would say this. DD was a really good GM up until the 2014 MLB trade deadline. Ever since, he's mortgaged the future and given up way too many young assets in order to "win now" with very mixed results. He's also been way too inactive during the off-season and his track record with trades and free agent signings have been horrid outside of the Trumbo trade and Kim signing. Plus let me ask everybody this question. Will Duquette leave the Orioles in better shape than they were when he first started? To me, the answer is clearly no.

[Can_of_corn]

I would say this. DD was a really good GM up until the 2014 MLB trade deadline. Ever since, he's mortgaged the future and given up way too many young assets in order to "win now" with very mixed results. He's also been way too inactive during the off-season and his track record with trades and free agent signings have been horrid outside of the Trumbo trade and Kim signing. Plus let me ask everybody this question. Will Duquette leave the Orioles in better shape than they were when he first started? To me, the answer is clearly no.

But that doesn't necessarily make him a bad GM. That makes him a GM with different goals than you or I would like.

I strongly disapprove of the path he has taken but that doesn't mean he's done a bad job of following that path.

Maybe he has a mandate from ownership to act in such a fashion?

[24fps]

The QO to Wieters was a formality that I think almost any GM would have done. The resigning of Hardy has not worked out great so far. The Davis and O'Day contracts are TBD.

I'm not going to give him credit for resigning guys that were already here. He has traded away more talent than he has acquired. He's done pretty good in free agency overall all things considered, especially with position players. Struck gold with Cruz and Trumbo.

It was reported by one of the beat reporters (I forget which one) that the FO was divided on the subject of offering the QO to Wieters. Evidently there was debate and the potential downside was openly discussed. That is to the credit of the front office. I can't imagine any competent executive treating a business risk of that magnitude as a formality.

[backwardsk]

I would say this. DD was a really good GM up until the 2014 MLB trade deadline. Ever since, he's mortgaged the future and given up way too many young assets in order to "win now" with very mixed results. He's also been way too inactive during the off-season and his track record with trades and free agent signings have been horrid outside of the Trumbo trade and Kim signing. Plus let me ask everybody this question. Will Duquette leave the Orioles in better shape than they were when he first started? To me, the answer is clearly no.

They were a sub 70 win team for five years straight before he arrived. I'd bet they do better than that in years 2019-23.

[24fps]

And such a compilation means zippy-squat without context anyway.

Yes. Is Cruz a success because Duquette signed him, or a failure because Duquette didn't resign him?

[Can_of_corn]

They were a sub 70 win team for five years straight before he arrived. I'd bet they do better than that in years 2019-23.

How about total wins from 2019-23 VS 2007-2011?

[backwardsk]

How about total wins from 2019-23 VS 2007-2011?

More than 336 wins (i did that in my head)? Yes I'd wager they do better than that.

You've invoked the Phillies in the past. They've had three losing seasons since their run, but only once under 70.