TT: DD becomes a buyer at the trading deadline (2017)

[schittenden]

6 hours ago, Norfolk orioles said:

Our franchise is in big big big trouble because of who we have running it.

 

From the owner to the GM to the manager, not a single one of them is currently interested in the health of the organization long term preferring instead to continually go "all in" year after year instead of helping the farm and the teams depth.

It is an abomination what Dan Duquette has traded away from this team for a bunch of non needle moving signings.

We better win this year or next because the next decade will be a fast return to the dark ages and there is VERY little that can be done at this point to prevent that outside of firing the worthless GM and replacing him with Jesus himself and even then we will still probably need half a decade to recover.

I can think of a few young players we could have traded this year if we really were trying to go all in. 

[Superbee83]

7 hours ago, 99ct said:

I dont really see these three trades as being "buyers." The term typically implies trading prospects for shorter term, established players. The Hellickson trade is a swap of spare parts. The Ramirez trade is kind of a gamble on a prospect using $ that we weren't using (a seperate debate). And, the Beckham trade gives us a cheap SS for next year, as Hardy is now obviously done. 

We didnt score the big sell we wanted, but we weren't exactly participating in bidding wars eithers. 

     I agree, The Orioles could be considered "minor buyers."

     As  i stated earlier, I am not surprised they were not sellers after announcing that Jones & Machado would not be moved.

[Ruzious]

12 minutes ago, Superbee83 said:

     I agree, The Orioles could be considered "minor buyers."

     As  i stated earlier, I am not surprised they were not sellers after announcing that Jones & Machado would not be moved.

I'd call them patchers.  You can't really call them buyers when they were trying to trade Britton.  And yes, they were trying to trade Britton.  

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

I'd call them patchers.  You can't really call them buyers when they were trying to trade Britton.  And yes, they were trying to trade Britton.  

Not sure how hard they were trying when they had four teams interested and couldn't get a deal done.

My father likes to say things have three prices.

1. I don't want to sell it
2. I'd be willing to sell it
3. I need to sell it.

Britton might have been in the first category, he certainly wasn't in the third category.

[pastorfan]

14 hours ago, eddie83 said:

One young arm. I don't claim to know the minors like others around here. That deal doesn't do much for me. Houston didn't move their big guys. 

And they won't win the series either.

[pastorfan]

10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Not sure how hard they were trying when they had four teams interested and couldn't get a deal done.

My father likes to say things have three prices.

1. I don't want to sell it
2. I'd be willing to sell it
3. I need to sell it.

Britton might have been in the first category, he certainly wasn't in the third category.

Your father is a wise man! I will have to use these phrases in the future.

[VICIOUS]

14 hours ago, LC_O's_87 said:

Well, he certainly is a company man, taking the company line; I will give him that.

I think Roch is the "oriole" having the worst year. He doesn't post as often and if he didn't have batter-pitcher matchups the post would last only one or two paragraphs.

[spiritof66]

23 minutes ago, Black Bat said:

Selling for less than you agree with is part of any bargaining scenario.  That's selling from a desperate leveraging position.  Not wise indeed.  Would you rather we got fleeced?

Dan had owner approval to make deals on our relievers.  Some of you are making assumptions while not being present which makes zero sense. 

That's not what Duquette said. He said he had approval to try to make a deal for certain players. and that any deal for them would be subject to owner approval (possibly, judging from past practice, including a medical exam). 

I've been in negotiations where one or both sides have authority to negotiate but not to enter into a binding agreement, with any deal subject to approval of a board or executive. Where that is the case on only one side, or where it's believed that such approval is more than a formality on only one side, it creates a difficult negotiating environment. 

The most obvious complication is that the other side (like the Dodgers and Astros here) may be reluctant to make its best offer out of concern that the opposing negotiator (Duquette) will say he likes the proposed deal, then come back two days later and say that senior management (Angelos) won't do it. The Dodgers or Astros now have created a floor for future negotiations, have lost a couple of days, and have gotten nothing in return. If you're the Dodgers or Astros, it's much easier to make a deal with a negotiator who has full authority, or at least can tell you with some confidence that the deal being discussed will be approved.

I'm not saying that happened here, but it sounds like it may have.

[99ct]

1 hour ago, Superbee83 said:

     I agree, The Orioles could be considered "minor buyers."

     As  i stated earlier, I am not surprised they were not sellers after announcing that Jones & Machado would not be moved.

Perhaps "opportunists" describes us best. We made trades for relatively uninteresting pieces, but pieces that sort of fit our needs nonetheless. 

[interloper]

Only thing to add here is that Smith, Castillo, even Brach or O'Day could all be moved in August. At the very least I believe we'll move Smith in August, but just something to keep in mind.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, interloper said:

Only thing to add here is that Smith, Castillo, even Brach or O'Day could all be moved in August. At the very least I believe we'll move Smith in August, but just something to keep in mind.

Honest question, how often do August deals contain highly regarded prospects?

And I don't think Brach makes it through waivers.

[interloper]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Honest question, how often do August deals contain highly regarded prospects?

And I don't think Brach makes it through waivers.

I don't know the answer to that question, but you're probably right about Brach. I would retract his name from my original comment.

If we DON'T trade Smith in August and we're no closer to the 2nd Wild Card spot, I'm not sure what we're thinking. You have to get at least a PTBNL for a pending free agent part-time player. 

[DirtyBird]

6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Honest question, how often do August deals contain highly regarded prospects?

And I don't think Brach makes it through waivers.

Would you really be concerned about who we get in return for Castillo or O'Day? They are salary dumps.

[webbrick2010]

17 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

Duquette ended up a buyer vs a seller as most fans and observers thought they should be.

With the trading deadline come and gone and although there were rumors that the Dodgers, Astros, and Indians were all in on closer Zach Britton, it seems that none were able to come up with the kind of prospects Dan Duquette wanted for his closer. Instead, he ends up going full buyer mode by trading a good young right-handed pitching prospect for a questionable major league shortstop with defensive issues.

With another year on Britton's contract, I can understand Duquette expecting a pretty big haul, but what is harder to understand is how Brad Brach, Seth Smith, Welington Castillo, and although the contract is hard to move, Darren O'day weren't linked to anyone. 

Instead, Duquette made three moves, all of which are buyer moves. He started out with a non-needle moving trade of acquiring Jeremy Hellickson for Hyun So Kim, Garrett Cleavinger and international signing slot money. Then on the deadlines last day he gets Double-A RHP Yefry Ramírez from the Yankees in exchange for International Signing Bonus Slots and then traded 18-year RHP Tobias Myers for INF Tim Beckam from the Rays.

Myers was just 18-years old and turning some heads in the NY-Penn league with his command, low 90 to mid 90s heater. Beckam is an upgrade over Hardy/Tejada and won't be a free agent until 2021 so they did improve themselves a little bit at a position of need, but Myers was a good looking prospect. On top of it, Beckam has a career .964 Fld pct at SS, has been suspended twice for drugs, sent to the minors for not hustling, and K's about once every three at bats. 

It says something though that the Rays would trade their SS to the Orioles for a young pitching prospect with upside when the Rays are actually a few games ahead of the Orioles for the wild card. Seems one team is looking long term and the other can't trade a good young pitching prospect fast enough for marginal big league players.

Ramirez was not listed as a top-30 prospect by MLB.com.

While other organizations either made their teams better for this season or added significant prospects to their organizations, the Orioles didn't move their needle this season and actually gave up a good young arm and international signing slots. The Orioles proved that they have no interest in the international market and that they believe they are a contender this year and the next.

It seems as though the worse fears are true. With only one more season under his belt as GM, Duquette had no reason to try and improve fo the future but instead did what he could to marginal improve his team this year and hop that they can jump six teams and make into the one game wild card playoff.

Either way, it's just another disappointing trading deadline for Orioles fans. Don't know why we expected anything different.

 

Tony, I would tell you that DD is lazy but you have already refuted that. You might understand why I was mistook his total lack of effectiveness and largely inactive trade deadline periods as laziness. Whether lazy or incompetent he did nothing to improve the franchise when it was in dire need of an influx of young cost controlled talent. The O's will not begin to climb out of this abyss until DD is gone, and even then I don't have high hopes that ownership can hire an effective GM

[interloper]

5 minutes ago, webbrick2010 said:

Tony, I would tell you that DD is lazy but you have already refuted that. You might understand why I was mistook his total lack of effectiveness and largely inactive trade deadline periods as laziness. Whether lazy or incompetent he did nothing to improve the franchise when it was in dire need of an influx of young cost controlled talent. The O's will not begin to climb out of this abyss until DD is gone, and even then I don't have high hopes that ownership can hire an effective GM

At the end of the day, three things:

1) We clearly weren't offered the top prospects for Britton that we sought.

2) Yes, it was a mistake to trade any young talent.

3) Peter Angelos has to approve, and any GM he hires will have the same problems Duquette has. Any GM can only do so much in the constraints of Angelos.