Grade the Gausman Deal

[DrungoHazewood]

33 minutes ago, weams said:

http://www.brooksbaseball.net/outcome.php?player=592332&time=&startDate=03/30/2007&endDate=09/16/2018&s_type=2

So it does appear he's throwing more splitters.  But his GB% has only gone up a tiny amount.  The primary driver for his better ERA is that .252 BABIP.  Low BABIP coupled with low K rate sounds a lot like the bet the O's took on Cashner.

[weams]

Yep, to remind yourselves.

[gmelson26]

Anyone want to revise their grade in lieu of the MIA Mesa signings?

I think I'm almost willing to go F, but will say a D at the moment.  Who knows, maybe they get Gaston?

[wildcard]

11 minutes ago, gmelson26 said:

Anyone want to revise their grade in lieu of the MIA Mesa signings?

I think I'm almost willing to go F, but will say a D at the moment.  Who knows, maybe they get Gaston?

How would signing Gaston change the grade on the Gausman trade?  They will not need the 2.5m in slot money they got from the Braves.  They already had enough to sign Gaston.

I already gave the Gausman deal a F  and I still think its a F.

[ReclaimTheCrown]

20 minutes ago, gmelson26 said:

Anyone want to revise their grade in lieu of the MIA Mesa signings?

I think I'm almost willing to go F, but will say a D at the moment.  Who knows, maybe they get Gaston?

In light of how the Mesa thing played out, I think it's hard to NOT give this a resounding F, even if they sign Gaston (since, as Wildcard pointed out, they shouldn't have needed the extra cash to do that).  Just a really painful missed opportunity to get greater return for one of our better assets.

[sportsfan8703]

It’s an F. We tied negative value(O’day) to Gausman. Never a good idea. We got nowhere near what the Rays got for Archer. The Braves made a heck of a move. The prospect package we got from him isn’t that good. 

I hope everyone appreciated are run from 2012-August of 2017, because we’re staring down 5 year rebuild in a division where nothing is guaranteed because the division. 

I would sum up this trade like this, we gave away Gausman with 2.5 years left. Over the course of all these top picks we’re about to have, he’s the type of SP you get lucky to land. 

[eddie83]

What is the criteria for grading a trade?

This wasn’t a baseball trade it was ownerships decision to ditch payroll. At the time I thought VVM tied into it but they did all they could do to sign him. He didn’t want to play here. 

[Roll Tide]

I didn’t like the Gausman trade at the time and don’t like it now.

The Orioles couldn’t control the Mesas decision to want to play in Miami.

Getting Gaston should a priority and finding so other international players to use the slot money on is a must. There is no advantage to not using it on somebody

[LookitsPuck]

Is there a grade worse than an F? 

[Rene88]

53 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

I didn’t like the Gausman trade at the time and don’t like it now.

The Orioles couldn’t control the Mesas decision to want to play in Miami.

Getting Gaston should a priority and finding so other international players to use the slot money on is a must. There is no advantage to not using it on somebody

Tampa signed Gastón.

[clapdiddy]

This has turned into a horrible deal now.   If we didn't include O'Day, perhaps we could have received one or two very good prospects in the deal instead of the lower-end prospects we received.    We could have then held on to O'Day, made him closer, and looked to move him in 2019.  

I graded this as a "C" originally, and now look at it as a complete failure.

[TonySoprano]

Gausman was a salary dump that was sold to the fans as an "all-in" on the international market, and, in particular, the Mesas.  The Orioles had plenty of money to sign Gastón before the Gausman deal, so this latest is only a kick while they're already down.   Yes, Gausman underachieved here, but we had a staff full of them.  

[wildbillhiccup]

11 minutes ago, clapdiddy said:

This has turned into a horrible deal now.   If we didn't include O'Day, perhaps we could have received one or two very good prospects in the deal instead of the lower-end prospects we received.    We could have then held on to O'Day, made him closer, and looked to move him in 2019.  

I graded this as a "C" originally, and now look at it as a complete failure.

I feel the exact same way. I tried to give them benefit of the doubt when it was made (i.e., look at the bigger picture), but they've swung and missed on all the international signing so definitely a terrible trade and wasted opportunity. And Gausman's 2.87 era after the trade is just gas on the fire. 

[Ohfan67]

It was dumb to let DD make trades when they probably already knew they were going to cut him loose at the end of the season. A "normal" team would have fired Buck and DD in early June. Shrug. It's the Orioles...how frequently they reach the most pessimistic view of their short term future is shockingly high. 

[Going Underground]

26 minutes ago, TonySoprano said:

Gausman was a salary dump that was sold to the fans as an "all-in" on the international market, and, in particular, the Mesas.  The Orioles had plenty of money to sign Gastón before the Gausman deal, so this latest is only a kick while they're already down.   Yes, Gausman underachieved here, but we had a staff full of them.  

Especially O'Day. 2019 for . $9 million salary and $1 million deferred. Plus Braves paying all of the $3 million deferred for three years. The MASN crew made it out  to be to get international slot money but all about the money. Schoop also.