Grade the Gausman Deal

[wildcard]

18 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Right, but your opinion doesn't take into account why he's better all of a sudden.

Gausman pitched like a 3 or 4 for good teams while he was here.  Saying he's probably a #2 in the AL isn't based in any kind of reality.  

Again, his FIP.  I know you won't talk about it because it goes against what you'd like to believe but his FIP isn't great.  Fielding has nothing to do with it.

FIP assumes a pitcher has to be a high strikeout pitcher to be good.  They have been pitchers that have been very good without high strikeout totals.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, wildcard said:

FIP assumes a pitcher has to be a high strikeout pitcher to be good.  They have been pitchers that have been very good without high strikeout totals.

That is overly simplistic and not accurate. 

[sportsfan8703]

How I will evaluate this trade,

• It’s the NL East. Gausman getting better results was expected. 

• Let’s see if we use the saved cash & gained intl slot money on VVM. 

• Let’s see what the players we got from him do. This will obviously take years. 

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, sportsfan8703 said:

How I will evaluate this trade,

• It’s the NL East. Gausman getting better results was expected. 

• Let’s see if we use the saved cash & gained intl slot money on VVM. 

• Let’s see what the players we got from him do. This will obviously take years. 

Wow, logical.  Unbelievable.  

[foxfield]

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

I am completely calm.   Stupid trade.

 

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

You can wait as long as you like it will still be a........stupid trade.

 

2 hours ago, gretzkyscores said:

Another dumb Orioles trade. In addition to winning his last 3 starts including 8 scoreless last night, his ERA is now under 4 which is at least 1.5 earned runs per game better than any of our starters. Way better than Bundy and others. So I concur with other post: Stupid trade

I include this here because you join the same thought.  You might be astounded to know that there are years of evidence where Gausman has performed well in spurts.  Especially in the second half.  Of course it should also be pointed out that IF Atlanta has fixed him and he becomes the second future Cy Young to be traded....He still would not have been here when this team is good again, and it is still not impossible that the assets received in the trade could out perform him over his contract.  It would of course be more difficult...but you know...don't we have to see?

2 hours ago, wildcard said:

Its very simple.  Gausman was worth more than thet got for him  They didn't have to trade him at the deadline.  They didn't have to make the trade a salary dump the included O'Day.     Their payroll next  season iincluding O'Day  and with Gausman and Schoop traded over the winter would have been about 70m next year ( when deferred money is subtracted)   after the O's free agents were not re-signed. 

The O's should have gotten a top 100 prospect for Gausman and probably more.   Period.  Not wait and see if this or that.     Its  was the lack of support from the O's that made him look like a #4  pitcher.  He is probably a #2 in the AL and may be a #1 in the NL.    He had to throw too many pitches every game because the O's defense could not make the outs they should have.  The pitching behind most games because the team could not score made his stress level high and caused him to pitch differently then he would with a lead.

We are now seeing what he can do with good team support.   Atlanta stole him.     Stupid trade.

 

I don't think anyone would deny your right to an opinion of the deal.  I will go so far as to say that you could be right and it could turn out to be as stupid as you say.  However, to make that determination, without seeing one dollar reallocated, one international signing play or any of the prospects perform is the very definition of stupid.  You are being intentionally obtuse and belligerent in making your point in a "because I said so" type of way.

A stupid trade was Schilling/Harnisch/Finley for Glen Davis.  But event that took more than three weeks to prove.  

But I'll be the first to say, that your magic 8 ball is the best if it turns out the way you say.  Of course it still won't be because you said so.

[Aristotelian]

1 hour ago, sportsfan8703 said:

How I will evaluate this trade,

• It’s the NL East. Gausman getting better results was expected. 

• Let’s see if we use the saved cash & gained intl slot money on VVM. 

• Let’s see what the players we got from him do. This will obviously take years. 

Also, what was the better alternative? What better package was on the table than the one we got?

[wildcard]

16 minutes ago, foxfield said:

 

 

I include this here because you join the same thought.  You might be astounded to know that there are years of evidence where Gausman has performed well in spurts.  Especially in the second half.  Of course it should also be pointed out that IF Atlanta has fixed him and he becomes the second future Cy Young to be traded....He still would not have been here when this team is good again, and it is still not impossible that the assets received in the trade could out perform him over his contract.  It would of course be more difficult...but you know...don't we have to see?

I don't think anyone would deny your right to an opinion of the deal.  I will go so far as to say that you could be right and it could turn out to be as stupid as you say.  However, to make that determination, without seeing one dollar reallocated, one international signing play or any of the prospects perform is the very definition of stupid.  You are being intentionally obtuse and belligerent in making your point in a "because I said so" type of way.

A stupid trade was Schilling/Harnisch/Finley for Glen Davis.  But event that took more than three weeks to prove.  

But I'll be the first to say, that your magic 8 ball is the best if it turns out the way you say.  Of course it still won't be because you said so.

Sounds like you are  trying to make my position as a personal assault.    Which is a gross overreaction.   We are talking about a baseball trade.  Its not personal at all.  Its a discussion about the merits of trading a player from one team to another.  

I  think your accusation is actually against the OH rules.  If anyone is be offensive its you.

[atomic]

People supporting the trade would be mocking another team if they made this trade.  People mocked the Stanton trade and he is owed an insane amount of money.

[24fps]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

Sounds like you are  trying to make my position as a personal assault.    Which is a gross overreaction.   We are talking about a baseball trade.  Its not personal at all.  Its a discussion about the merits of trading a player from one team to another.  

I  think your accusation is actually against the OH rules.  If anyone is be offensive its you.

Within the context of your overall argument, what sort of overreaction is this post then?  138 out of 186 voters think the Gausman trade is mediocre at best for the Orioles, so you're hardly alone in wishing for a different outcome.  But taking a wait and see attitude on a baseball trade including this many moving parts seems to only be a crime on message boards requiring an immediate victor.  Offhand, I'm not sure how that fits into the OH rules.

[O-The-Memories]

Saying we should have gotten more for Gausman is like the guy on Ebay who prices everything too high and never sells anything. Someone is worth what you can get for them. Gausman, like Bundy and many others before him, saw his velocity drop and K rate decrease along with an increase in FIP. That shows a mediocre pitcher in the long term. 

I thought we could have gotten more as well, but the market said otherwise I suppose. We love selling too late which hurts the most. Gausman, Britton, Bundy, Machado, and Schoop were not traded at close to peak value.

[weams]

3 hours ago, O-The-Memories said:

Saying we should have gotten more for Gausman is like the guy on Ebay who prices everything too high and never sells anything. Someone is worth what you can get for them. Gausman, like Bundy and many others before him, saw his velocity drop and K rate decrease along with an increase in FIP. That shows a mediocre pitcher in the long term. 

I thought we could have gotten more as well, but the market said otherwise I suppose. We love selling too late which hurts the most. Gausman, Britton, Bundy, Machado, and Schoop were not traded at close to peak value.

Not peak value at all. 

[foxfield]

9 hours ago, wildcard said:

Sounds like you are  trying to make my position as a personal assault.    Which is a gross overreaction.   We are talking about a baseball trade.  Its not personal at all.  Its a discussion about the merits of trading a player from one team to another.  

I  think your accusation is actually against the OH rules.  If anyone is be offensive its you.

I would apologize if you are offended.  That isn't and wasn't my intent.  However, I made no accusation and I most certainly broke no rules.  I stated an opinion, in regard to yours.  You are still making a point by saying because I said so...and I think you missed all the points where I said you may well be correct....in time.  But that kinda makes my point.  Thanks.

[wildcard]

5 hours ago, O-The-Memories said:

Saying we should have gotten more for Gausman is like the guy on Ebay who prices everything too high and never sells anything. Someone is worth what you can get for them. Gausman, like Bundy and many others before him, saw his velocity drop and K rate decrease along with an increase in FIP. That shows a mediocre pitcher in the long term. 

I thought we could have gotten more as well, but the market said otherwise I suppose. We love selling too late which hurts the most. Gausman, Britton, Bundy, Machado, and Schoop were not traded at close to peak value.

If a team thinks it can contend it does not sell its players at their peak preformance.

[foxfield]

29 minutes ago, wildcard said:

If a team thinks it can contend it does not sell its players at their peak preformance.

Well, we are the very definition of a contending team...  

I mean, what you say above is correct and the Orioles will not contend for the 2.25 years that Gausman had left.  So selling him and unloading $ was a wise move.  Right?

Now, the return...well if we are planning to contend in 2020 or 2021, we need to see what those pieces look like...then.  That includes how the money saved and how the international slots are used etc.  I think that's all anyone is saying to you.  

[wildcard]

17 minutes ago, foxfield said:

Well, we are the very definition of a contending team...  

I mean, what you say above is correct and the Orioles will not contend for the 2.25 years that Gausman had left.  So selling him and unloading $ was a wise move.  Right?

Now, the return...well if we are planning to contend in 2020 or 2021, we need to see what those pieces look like...then.  That includes how the money saved and how the international slots are used etc.  I think that's all anyone is saying to you.  

Its hard to see how the O's will contend by 2020 or 2021.   Their best pitching prospects are  listed on the O's website as arriving in the major in 2021 and 2022.   Its probably takes them a year or two tobe TOR starters.  The means 2023 is a better date for contention.