Dan places the blame for losing year squarely on the starters

[da_dirty_bird]

Since 2012 the orioles are 5th with 519 wins. They are only trailing the Dodgers (555), Nationals (553), Cardinals (542) and Yankees (522). This is including this seasons records. The only other teams to have over 500 wins for the time span after this season will be Red Sox, Indians, Royals, Angels and Pirates. It is possible the Indians pass the Orioles since they currently sit at 518 wins.

 

[wildcard]

29 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yes it does.  He dumped Gonzo to save a few bucks and probably cost the 2016 team home field in the WC as an added side bonus.  His resume includes this team and the contracts he handed out for years to come.

He DFA'd Gonzo because he had an injury in 2015 that reduced his velocity and made his ERA go up.  Then Gonzo came to ST and didn't pitch well.   Dan decided he was not worth the contract he had and used the termination clause. Gonzo has some blame in there for not performing.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

He DFA'd Gonzo because he had an injury in 2015 that reduced his velocity and made his ERA go up.  Then Gonzo came to ST and didn't pitch well.   Dan decided he was not worth the contract he had and used the termination clause. Gonzo has some blame in there for not performing.

Sure he does.  But considering the fact that Gonzo could have been sent to the minors and that Dan had just signed a guy that failed the teams physical to a two year deal (forfeiting a pick) I have to question his process.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

Sorry you don't agree. It's good logic.

Maybe you will like this better:

Dan took over a team that could not win. Actually had not had a winning record in 14 years because they could not develop pitchers.   He signed Chen and Gonzo.  He traded for Hammel.  In the 2nd half he promote a SS to play 3B out of AA ball.  Promoted him ahead of schedule.  The results?  The O's had the first winning record in 14 years winning 93 games.   That's right 93 games.   And made the playoffs.    He took a team that could not get out of its own way for 14 years and made it a playoff team.   That Amazzzzzing.

The next year the O's are struggling in 3rd place 5 games back in July so he makes two trades.   He gets a solid but no spectacular  starter in Scott Feldman for two guys  with 7.00 plus ERAs that are not helping the team.  Then he trades for starter Bud Norris for two minor leagues and a competitive balance pick.  One of player  is in low A ball after being a 19th round pick.  So he gets two major leaguers to help the team for guys that were not.  Result: another winning season with 85 wins.

The next year he adds All-Star Nelson Cruz for 8m dollars. Trades minor league Delvin Jones for Brad Brach, who later becomes an All-Star.  Bud Norris win 15 and the team wins the division with 96 wins.  What else is there to say.  Outstanding Job.  He wins Executive of the Year.

Two years later he trades for Mark Trumbo who leads the AL in Homer with 47 to go with 108 RBI.  He also adds Pedro Alvarez and the team slugs its way to a wild card berth in spite of poor pitching.

So, Executive of the Year,  Division winner, added pitching when needed.  Added lead leaguers in homers and  an All-Stars.     Go find me someone with a better resume then that who wants to work for Peter Angelos.

 

 

 

 

See, this is a better argument than just saying the team has done well since Dan became the GM.   I think you oversimplified 2013 a bit by saying the "result" of the 2013 trades was the O's winning 85 games.    The O's were further over .500 when the trades were made than they were when the season ended.

To me, Duquette's performance is a mixed bag.    He made some good moves and some bad ones.   He made some moves I thought were good that didn't work out well.   He got lucky at times, unlucky at other times.   We'll never know whether some other GM would have done better.

[ArtVanDelay]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

The next year the O's are struggling in 3rd place 5 games back in July so he makes two trades.   He gets a solid but no spectacular  starter in Scott Feldman for two guys  with 7.00 plus ERAs that are not helping the team.  Then he trades for starter Bud Norris for two minor leagues and a competitive balance pick.  One of player  is in low A ball after being a 19th round pick.  So he gets two major leaguers to help the team for guys that were not.  Result: another winning season with 85 wins.

You must be related to DD.

[wildcard]

36 minutes ago, jtschrei said:

 

Wow. I like the optimism going forward Wildcard. We'll see what happens.  

I don't like looking at the past decisions DD made because there are many mistakes -- Norris trade, Parra trade, Arrieta, no Manny extension, the Davis contract.

With all those poor decisions, I'm glad there is still room for optimism. 

 

Norris trade  -  Norris won 15 games in 2014 and helped the O's to their only division title in the last 20 years.  You can argue that Dan give up too much but he give up a minor league outfielder that not in the majors, a 19th round draft choice in Hader that is beating the odd to get the majors and a competitive balance pick that normally has less than a 30% chance of being an impact player.   And the O's got a major league starter.

Parra deal - just a bad deal.  Dan keep Wright who looked like the better pitcher at the time.  What if Dan has traded Wright and kept Davies.  No one would be saying its a bad trade.  Sometimes its just how the players develop.

Arrieta - Great talent who just couldn't get it together with the O's.  Probably not Dan's fault  Arrieta was terrible with the O's.  Maybe more the pitching coach and Buck that held him back.  The trade itself was not a bad one.  A solid Major League pitcher in Feldman that got a 3/30 contract from the Astros for two guy with 7.00 ERAs.   The one thing I didn't like about the trade was that Arrieta still had an option left.  He could have been kept until Wallace arrived.  Then things might have been different.

No Manny extension - It ain't over till it over.

Davis contract - An Angelos call.  Jones lobbied Peter to sign Davis.

 

 

 

[wildcard]

5 minutes ago, ArtVanDelay said:

If this is how you view those trades, you're either delusional or related to DD.

How many 19th round draft choices make an impact in the majors?

The competitive balance pick was probably more valuable at the time of the trade but if you get a starter that wins 15 for you on the way to a division title you can't cry about that.

[spiritof66]

It's obvious that, like anyone who's had a job like this for six years, Duquette has a mixed record. That part's easy. As one who had despaired in about 2008 of ever again seeing the Orioles in the postseason, and din't think they would get there with MacPhail in charge, I would say Dan's done a pretty good job. I think he's been above the midpoint of reasonable expectations, under all the circumstances. But there's plenty of room for less positive views that I can't say are wrong. 

I find it difficult to judge his performance and to form an opinion about his future with the Orioles for two reasons. First, some of the moves made by the Orioles pretty clearly were not his decisions, most prominently signing Davis and Trumbo to their current contracts and what appears destined to be the loss of Machado for only a compensatory pick. And I don't know what other decisions were not his or were foisted on him. I understand that other baseball executives have to deal with owners' input, but I think there's a difference in the amount, and the secrecy of, the influence by the Orioles' owner.

Second, I don't know whether the Orioles, having upgraded their image outside of baseball in the last six years, have improved it enough since 2011 that they will be able to find a talented, young head of baseball operations that will take the job and perform with the challenges of working for the Orioles. And with the  majority owner approaching 89, what will a candidate to succeed Duquette be told when he or she asks about the future ownership of the team, and its likely payroll limitations? My instinct is that it won't be easy to hire that talented young person, but others don't think so, pointing out "There are only 30 of these jobs . .  . ," and maybe they're right. 

[Can_of_corn]

He traded a first round pick and 2 players for a guy who wasn't particularly cheap and wasn't good two of the three seasons he was here.  Yes he was one of the top 5 starters (out of 6) on the 2014 squad.  By 2016 they had to DFA him.

Man Norris gets a lot of credit for being one of five in 2014.  I didn't see people excusing Tillman's and Gausman's 2017 performance by mentioning how important they were in 2014.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

How many 19th round draft choices make an impact in the majors?

The competitive balance pick was probably more valuable at the time of the trade but if you get a starter that wins 15 for you on the way to a division title you can't cry about that.

Pitching wins. 

[ArtVanDelay]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

How many 19th round draft choice make an impact in the major?

The competitive balance pick was probably more valuable at the time of the trade but if you get a starter that wins 15 for you on the way to a division title you can't cry about that.

Who cares where he was drafted?  He was dominant from the moment we drafted him.  At that point it doesn't matter where he was drafted.

And Norris put up 1.4 fWAR and 1.9 bWAR in 2014.  We would've won the division easily with or without him.  I don't care about his 15 wins.  Pitcher wins are the worst stat in baseball.

[wildcard]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

He traded a first round pick and 2 players for a guy who wasn't particularly cheap and wasn't good two of the three seasons he was here.  Yes he was one of the top 5 starters (out of 6) on the 2014 squad.  By 2016 they had to DFA him.

Man Norris gets a lot of credit for being one of five in 2014.  I didn't see people excusing Tillman's and Gausman's 2017 performance by mentioning how important they were in 2014.

At the time of the trade it looked fairly balanced.  Not everyone was saying  it was a good trade but it had some merit.  Trading for a major league starter for prospects and a draft choice. Norris goes on to do what he was acquired for.  Helps the O's win a division title an a chance at a World Series.   

If you look at it now, 3 year later,   Norris still did more for the O's then Hader or Fisher has done in the majors.  The two young players should pass Norris achievements in the near future but its taken 4 years to get there.   The O's needed the help in 2014 and they got it.

[ArtVanDelay]

9 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

He traded a first round pick and 2 players for a guy who wasn't particularly cheap and wasn't good two of the three seasons he was here.  Yes he was one of the top 5 starters (out of 6) on the 2014 squad.  By 2016 they had to DFA him.

Man Norris gets a lot of credit for being one of five in 2014.  I didn't see people excusing Tillman's and Gausman's 2017 performance by mentioning how important they were in 2014.

And that first round pick is probably going to be a very good player.  We probably wouldn't have taken him, but still.

[ArtVanDelay]

2 minutes ago, wildcard said:

If you look at it now, 3 year later,   Norris still did more for the O's then Hader or Fisher has done in the majors.  The two young players should pass Norris achievements in the near future but its taken 4 years to get there.   The O's needed the help in 2014 and they got it.

They'll need help in 2018 too.  They aren't going to get it.

[wildcard]

7 minutes ago, ArtVanDelay said:

Who cares where he was drafted?  He was dominant from the moment we drafted him.  At that point it doesn't matter where he was drafted.

And Norris put up 1.4 fWAR and 1.9 bWAR in 2014.  We would've won the division easily with or without him.  I don't care about his 15 wins.  Pitcher wins are the worst stat in baseball.

You don't care how well Norris pitched in getting the O's to the playoff and a division title.  Sorry that is just wrong as a baseball fan.  That is what we root for.  And to say that the O's would have won any way is bunk.  Something that can not be proven.