Orioles Deal Gausman/O'Day to Braves - Schoop to Brewers

[NCRaven]

4 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

I really hate the hindsight trade reviews. Yes Gausman has been terrible this year and yes Schoop was non-tendered in the offseason. All that overlooks the important fact that both players had significantly more value when they were traded. Trade value that I really think we failed to capitalize on by muddying the waters with O"Day and Villar. If you want to argue that salary relief was just as important as prospects that's perfectly fine, but don't preach to me about Villar and his 3 WAR season. He's not part of our future and it really means nothing in a season where wins really don't matter.  

I think that the only way to truly evaluate a trade, or a draft pick, or an international signing, is after the passage of time.  I also think that you may be overstating Schoop’s and Gausman’s trade value at the time of the trade.  Although I giant that the inclusion of O’Day reduced the return for KG, the team clearly valued the salary savings.

[Aristotelian]

6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

No, because Villar's production is irrelevant unless the O's flip him.

 

Still a win due to salary. At the time, Schoop $8.5M vs Villar $2.5M. It's not like we would have gotten anything for Schoop had we held onto him.

[NCRaven]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

No, because Villar's production is irrelevant unless the O's flip him.

 

I’d rather have Villar production at 2B than another Richie Martin bat in the lineup, no matter how “irrelevant.”

[wildbillhiccup]

3 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Still a win due to salary. At the time, Schoop $8.5M vs Villar $2.5M. It's not like we would have gotten anything for Schoop had we held onto him.

We might have gotten more if we hadn't ask for Villar in return...

[weams]

2 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

Exactly. In hindsight I really wish we would have let Elias decide how to handle Schoop and Gausman. My guess is the Angelos brothers issued some sort of mandate about cutting costs and that's what triggered the whole scale purge. I think it had much more to do about saving money (and less about acquiring prospects) then any of us would care to admit. It's just something to keep in the back of your mind as we see how the teams allocate funds going forward. 

I now understand Corn. Trades of 25 man roster players are of no value unless the Orioles win it all. Or make the ALCS. Or the ALDS. Or win the wildcard game. Or lose the wildcard game. 

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Still a win due to salary. At the time, Schoop $8.5M vs Villar $2.5M. It's not like we would have gotten anything for Schoop had we held onto him.

That's a valid point.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

1 minute ago, wildbillhiccup said:

We might have gotten more if we hadn't ask for Villar in return...

I think that was likely one of the conditions for the Brewers going through with the trade.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, wildbillhiccup said:

We might have gotten more if we hadn't ask for Villar in return...

I don't think we were asked.

I think the deal hinged upon Villar being part of the return.

[wildbillhiccup]

Just now, weams said:

I now understand Corn. Trades of 25 man roster players are of no value unless the Orioles win it all. Or make the ALCS. Or the ALDS. Or win the wildcard game. Or lose the wildcard game. 

You're taking it the extreme. This is a very unique season because we knew going in that the goal really wasn't to win games. There's no chance that Elias would have asked for Villar to be part of that trade package. 

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, weams said:

I now understand Corn. Trades of 25 man roster players are of no value unless the Orioles win it all. Or make the ALCS. Or the ALDS. Or win the wildcard game. Or lose the wildcard game. 

Or at least think they might lose the wildcard game.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, wildbillhiccup said:

You're taking it the extreme. This is a very unique season because we knew going in that the goal really wasn't to win games. There's no chance that Elias would have asked for Villar to be part of that trade package. 

If you are the Brewers you demand Villar is part of the trade right?  Or else you don't make the deal.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

Or at least think they might lose the wildcard game.

[wildbillhiccup]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think we were asked.

I think the deal hinged upon Villar being part of the return.

That's fine. I just think it's naive to think that they just included him for free. Honestly I'm more bummed about the Gausman deal because he was rumored to have other suitors (at the time) like the Pirates. That one really seems like a wasted trade chip to me. 

[Frobby]

32 minutes ago, weams said:

How is money for nothing not a an A? Plus the guys. Some folks LIKE Zimmermann. 

The Gausman trade always will be compared to the contemporaneous Archer trade, which brought Tampa Austin Meadows and Tyler Glasnow.    I argued that Archer was more valuable than Gausman and hence warranted a higher return, but some folks felt either that the two were equivalent or that we should have been able to pick up at least one Meadows/Glasnow level talent.    That’s the context in which the Gausman trade does not look like an A.    And of course, at the time nobody knew Gausman would fall apart this year.    Archer hadn’t exactly been lights out either (5.35 ERA in 20 starts).

[wildbillhiccup]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

If you are the Brewers you demand Villar is part of the trade right?  Or else you don't make the deal.

Well the Twins signed him to a contract so we know at least one other team was interested in him. Who knows how it would have played out if we would have let Elias decide what to do with him in the offseason.