What deal from the past ten years most infuriated you?

Stotle · August 27, 2016

Yep, you replace Gallardo with Davies and the O's are in first.

I'm not convinced Davies is more than a replacement level arm in the AL. He's bad with runners on and lives off the bottom-third of the order. I think there's a risk that adding a DH to the order has a not insignificant impact on his bottom line.

That said, cheap replacement level is a nice thing to have -- especially when you're short on starters. Gallardo/Ubaldo is not a way to sustain a winning club.

Can_of_corn · August 27, 2016

I'm not convinced Davies is more than a replacement level arm in the AL. He's bad with runners on and lives off the bottom-third of the order. I think there's a risk that adding a DH to the order has a not insignificant impact on his bottom line.

If the O's were more than two games out I wouldn't have said it.

I think Davies over Gallardo and the folks filling in while Gallardo was injured is worth a couple wins.

But your input is always welcome.

isestrex · August 27, 2016

I think the premise was which one upset you the most when it happened.
While I wouldn't pick the Atkins deal I could see it being viewed as a continuation of the O's trend of signing older, ineffective free agents rather than fix the underlying issues with the franchise.

Sure... but I never understood even then why people were so frustrated with him when Mike Gonzalez 2 yr/$12M, Ty Wigginton 2 yr/$6M and Miguel Tejada 1 yr/$6M were also signed that off season. I would argue the Atkins deal invested the least.

Can_of_corn · August 27, 2016

Sure... but I never understood even then why people were so frustrated with him when Mike Gonzalez 2 yr/$12M, Ty Wigginton 2 yr/$6M and Miguel Tejada 1 yr/$6M were also signed that off season. I would argue the Atkins deal invested the least.

That's all I got.

I didn't really care since I didn't think the money kept the O's from signing anyone else, he wasn't blocking anyone of note and didn't cost a pick.

Stotle · August 27, 2016

If the O's were more than two games out I wouldn't have said it.
I think Davies over Gallardo and the folks filling in while Gallardo was injured is worth a couple wins.

But your input is always welcome.

I hear ya, and you are probably right. I thought the Davies deal was silly more because Parra was subtraction by addition, and I believe Davies has become a little overvalued on here. But, yeah, even if Davies was a -0.5 to 0.5 WAR arm it could be two games worth of improvement taking everything into account. Good call.

El Gordo · August 27, 2016

Wasn't there a trade Ponson for Adrian Gonzalez that ownership scotched? Imagine if we had acquired him. https://www.sny.tv/mets/news/buzz-os-and-rangers-talk-ponson-and-adrian-gonzalez/149338768

Crazysilver03 · August 27, 2016

DFA of Justin Turner

Crazysilver03 · August 27, 2016

The worst non deal?
Not trading Duquette for Jeff Hoffman or Aaron Sanchez

Let's stay in reality. There was never any real evidence to back this.

Frobby · August 28, 2016

Sure... but I never understood even then why people were so frustrated with him when Mike Gonzalez 2 yr/$12M, Ty Wigginton 2 yr/$6M and Miguel Tejada 1 yr/$6M were also signed that off season. I would argue the Atkins deal invested the least.

Because it was very obvious that Atkins was going to be terrible.

dorfmac · August 28, 2016

While nothing has truly infuriated me, the move I have always disliked was the Brian Roberts extensions. No one has mentioned it yet, but even at the time I didn't like the idea of investing all of that money (a lot for the O's at the time) on a speed-guy on the wrong side of 30. Sure enough, he barely played for us on that deal, and he finished out his career in pinstripes.

eddie83 · August 28, 2016

Because it was very obvious that Atkins was going to be terrible.

That move never bothered me that much because it was a 1 year deal. That being said it was awful scouting.

Scrat1 · August 28, 2016

DFA of Justin Turner

You know, I don't remember much about the circumstances of the Orioles moving on from Turner, so I don't have strong opinions on it, but it's interesting that he isn't discussed much here, considering how successful he's been.

dorfmac · August 28, 2016

You know, I don't remember much about the circumstances of the Orioles moving on from Turner, so I don't have strong opinions on it, but it's interesting that he isn't discussed much here, considering how successful he's been.

Probably because he went on to be a no-name player for the Mets for 2-3 seasons before hitting it big with the Dodgers. It's not like we DFAd him and he became an instant success - we had the opportunity to see him fail with another team to help reaffirm our decision.

OFFNY · August 28, 2016

Scrat1 said:

You know, I don't remember much about the circumstances of the Orioles moving on from Turner, so I don't have strong opinions on it, but it's interesting that he isn't discussed much here, considering how successful he's been.

dorfmac said:

Probably because he went on to be a no-name player for the Mets for 2-3 seasons before hitting it big with the Dodgers. It's not like we DFAd him and he became an instant success - we had the opportunity to see him fail with another team to help reaffirm our decision.

o

Correct. Thank you.

He did have 9 different threads of his own while he was with the Orioles organization, though. )) :eek: