Grade the Gausman Deal

[wildcard]

2 minutes ago, theocean said:

Great summary. I felt that money was the motivating factor in this deal. While Gausman had a track record of "consistently mediocre" - he was consistent, durable, and relatively effective with the O's. That's worth a lot in today's game.

While I'm hesitant to 100% believe it - there are a lot of signs that the Angelos sons are getting ready to sell the team. Cut future commitments. Resolve the MASN dispute. Put some sort of International Scouting System in place. 

Why would the Angelos spend the money to put together an international scouting system if the are ready to sell the team?

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

Why would the Angelos spend the money to put together an international scouting system if the are ready to sell the team?

Why refurbish your bathroom before you put your house on the market?

Because you think the money you are spending will be recouped with the sale.

[drjohnnyfeva]

12 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Duquette has been making a lot of public comments about the Orioles dropping a lot of payroll and no matter what people may think of him, he's not a dumb guy.

For the most part, since Duquette has taken back on this public face of the Orioles role once again, his comments seem to be very forthcoming vs the cryptic tones of the past.

This suggests one of two things in my mind, he either thinks he's out of here next year and wants to make sure the rest of baseball knows what he's been under, or that he's truly been told to be more transparent because Orioles ownership (Read John Angelos maybe some of Lou Angelos now) want the fans to know what they are doing.

Either way, the fact that O'day was sent in the deal and the Orioles were unable to to recoup one of the Braves top prospects tells me this was either rushed or a forced salary dump and Duquette took the best deal he had on the table.

Think about how fast this thing seemed to come together? I was on travel for my other work when this trade went down so I didn't have time to really analyze the trade at the time, but it;s pretty clear the prospects the Orioles received seem to lack the caliber they should have received for 2 and a half years of Gausman.

 

This is what scares me most about anything "new" that appears to be going on.  This is something that could have been done with some patience and thought during the off-season.  Of course there was speculation that he might be traded, but not that O'Day was going to be part of it.  That negated any decent prospects, yet the aim seems to be international money.

I'm just worried about quick decisions.  Chris Davis was a quick decision.  Bad.  Now, after having no presence in the International Market suddenly we are going to be huge players.  This FO has no identity, no organization.  Other than whoever being in charge making the "final decision."  I remain very skeptical.

For me, the jury is out on whether this was a good deal.  But my feeling is it was hasty and we probably could have done better.

[Ruzious]

1 hour ago, POR said:

If you want to believe old prospect reports from the off season and think that Wilson was behind a boat load of Braves pitching prospects three weeks ago, go for it.

I'm a Braves fan, and I've been following their minor leagues very closely for years, so I'm not talking out of my ass.

These are starting pitching prospects that were ahead of Wilson at the time of the trade:

Touki Toussaint

Kolby Allard

Mike Soroka

Ian Anderson

Kyle Wright

Luis Gohara

Joey Wentz

Max Fried - maybe not technically a rookie, but he's played most of the season in the minors, and they are still very high on him.  

That's 8 young guys that were not in the Braves rotation rated ahead of Wilson, and some would have put Kyle Muller up there with Wilson.  And if they had signed their high 1st rounder - Carter Stewart - he likely would have been rated up there, as well.  Instead, they get the 9th pick in next year's draft.  The Braves have the best group of young pitchers that any organization in baseball has - maybe the best they've ever had - and they once had Glavine, Smoltz, and Avery.  

If anyone says they expected Wilson to pitch in the majors this early, they're lying.  The Braves were and are in a pennant race, and Gausman was a huge get for them for which they gave up basically nothing of value to them.  And they have him for 2 more years - so this was no rental move for them like a lot of the trades before the deadline were.  And that's a major reason why the trade package should have been much bigger than it was, imo.          

[Redskins Rick]

8 minutes ago, theocean said:

Great summary. I felt that money was the motivating factor in this deal. While Gausman had a track record of "consistently mediocre" - he was consistent, durable, and relatively effective with the O's. That's worth a lot in today's game.

While I'm hesitant to 100% believe it - there are a lot of signs that the Angelos sons are getting ready to sell the team. Cut future commitments. Resolve the MASN dispute. Put some sort of International Scouting System in place. 

There are rampant rumors about the Orioles selling.

I have yet to see any real evidence of this actually having any fruit to it.

 

[Frobby]

I think people are naive when they treat financial considerations and talent as though they’re separate and unrelated.    When you save $15 mm in salary, that’s $15 mm that can be used to acquire talent later.  Or, to develop the infrastructure necessary to find and assess talent.     So, the fact that Gausman didn’t bring back any players currently in the top 100 doesn’t mean that the $15 mm won’t be used to acquire that level of talent later.    

Also, if I may say so, there’s no telling if Encarnacion or someone else we acquired might be considered a top 100 talent later.   Josh Hader wasn’t on anyone’s top 100 list when we traded him.   He was just a promising 19-year old in A ball.   He was traded in 2013 and didn’t crack any major top 100 lists until after the 2015 season, and wasn’t a consensus top 100 guy until after the 2016 season.   So, we’ll see how some of the guys we acquired develop.   

[bobmc]

23 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think people are naive when they treat financial considerations and talent as though they’re separate and unrelated.    When you save $15 mm in salary, that’s $15 mm that can be used to acquire talent later.  Or, to develop the infrastructure necessary to find and assess talent.     So, the fact that Gausman didn’t bring back any players currently in the top 100 doesn’t mean that the $15 mm won’t be used to acquire that level of talent later.    

Also, if I may say so, there’s no telling if Encarnacion or someone else we acquired might be considered a top 100 talent later.   Josh Hader wasn’t on anyone’s top 100 list when we traded him.   He was just a promising 19-year old in A ball.   He was traded in 2013 and didn’t crack any major top 100 lists until after the 2015 season, and wasn’t a consensus top 100 guy until after the 2016 season.   So, we’ll see how some of the guys we acquired develop.   

Interesting fun fact (which accentuates IFA draftees in general) is that both Jean's - Carlos Encarnacion and Carmona both hail from the same small DR villa - San Juan De La Maguana, Dominican Republic.  Encarnacion, the 20 yr old was drafted by the Braves and Carmona, 18,  the Brewers.  Both are interesting players to watch down the road.

Edited August 21, 2018 by bobmc

[Moose Milligan]

OMG GAUSMAN TONITE!!  I HOPE HE DOES WELL SO I CAN BLAST THE ORIOLES FOR MAKING A BAD TRADE!!!

Tell me this isn't the thought process among some posters here.

[LocoChris]

13 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

OMG GAUSMAN TONITE!!  I HOPE HE DOES WELL SO I CAN BLAST THE ORIOLES FOR MAKING A BAD TRADE!!!

Tell me this isn't the thought process among some posters here.

Still not as bad as hoping he does poorly in order to justify a bad trade.

[Moose Milligan]

4 minutes ago, LocoChris said:

Still not as bad as hoping he does poorly in order to justify a bad trade.

How about not caring cause he's not on our team anymore?

[hoosiers]

I don't think there is any question that a primary motivation behind dealing Gausman was to dump salary for next year and beyond and believe that motivation is severely under-appreciated here.  Sure, Gausman and Schoop could have been dealt in the off-season, but the certainty of dealing them now and saving even more $ was probably enticing.  Also, regarding payroll, the opportunity to shed O'Day at the same time may not have surfaced in the off-season.  Lower payroll should help the front office make appropriate investments outlined in prior DD interviews around international scouting and spend as well as technology upgrades going forward.

One key aspect of the Gausman trade that gets lost in the complaints IMO is that this was a competitive bidding process.  Multiple teams inquired and supposedly several teams made offers for Gausman.  It is even likely we told teams we would value shedding O'Day and receiving international slots more than top end prospects.  It is easy to look at the pitching-rich prospect depth of the Braves and wish we could have obtained one of them, but either that was not our ask or it was not offered by the Braves or another team. 

Look at what we received - lesser prospects, shedding of salary and international slots.  Could A + B + C have been traded for a high quality Braves SP Prospect?  Possibly, perhaps likely - though we don't know what the Braves would have parted with.  I believe dealing Gausman enabled the FO to check key objective boxes in lowering salary (O'Day) and obtaining slots (very likely or even clearly at the expense of obtaining a better prospect haul) and I am fine with that.  I think it was a very good trade.

[Ruzious]

15 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

OMG GAUSMAN TONITE!!  I HOPE HE DOES WELL SO I CAN BLAST THE ORIOLES FOR MAKING A BAD TRADE!!!

Tell me this isn't the thought process among some posters here.

I hope he does well because I'm a Braves fan.  I like the other trades the O's made, so I have no interest in blasting the O's over trades.

You should probably say who you mean - when you say something like that.  .

  

 

[Ohfan67]

Gausman's current or future performance is irrelevant for "grading" the trade for the Orioles. It's all about how the prospects develop and what they do with the money. Gausman was going to continue to be Gausman on a losing Orioles team for the next two years. It's irrelevant if he was going to have a 4.75 ERA or a 2.75 ERA. The Orioles are going to lose a ton of games the next two years. Whether or not it was a good trade for the Orioles is all about what happens with the prospects and saved cash. If the prospects fail and the Orioles don't really spend money on developing the minor leagues, international scouting, etc., then it was a bad trade. But it would be a bad trade regardless of how Gausman performs. Just like it will be a good trade if the prospects develop and contribute and the Orioles really do invest in the future of the organization regardless of how well Gausman performs for the Braves. Too many posters listen to and read the goofy sports media "winners versus losers" baloney. 

[Tx Oriole]

9 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

How about not caring cause he's not on our team anymore?

I don't care. I did like the deal when it was made though. 

 

[Moose Milligan]

2 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

Gausman's current or future performance is irrelevant for "grading" the trade for the Orioles. It's all about how the prospects develop and what they do with the money. Gausman was going to continue to be Gausman on a losing Orioles team for the next two years. It's irrelevant if he was going to have a 4.75 ERA or a 2.75 ERA. The Orioles are going to lose a ton of games the next two years. Whether or not it was a good trade for the Orioles is all about what happens with the prospects and saved cash. If the prospects fail and the Orioles don't really spend money on developing the minor leagues, international scouting, etc., then it was a bad trade. But it would be a bad trade regardless of how Gausman performs. Just like it will be a good trade if the prospects develop and contribute and the Orioles really do invest in the future of the organization regardless of how well Gausman performs for the Braves. Too many posters listen to and read the goofy sports media "winners versus losers" baloney. 

I agree with this.  

His future performance is irrelevant if he turns into Arrieta 2.0 because we all know it wasn't going to happen for Arrieta here.  We all know it wasn't going to happen for Gausman here.

I've asked it before, I'll ask it again.  What would people rather have done with these two, not dealt them and just continued to screw up their careers?  

The problem, of course, is the Orioles lack of ability to draft and develop frontline starting pitching.  If people want to take the Orioles to task for that, sign me up.  But if people want to blast the Orioles and bad trades when we should all be able to agree that Arrieta was terrible here and not going to get better and Gausman wasn't going to reach his full potential here....well, it's faulty logic to me.