Dan Duquette did pretty well with July 2018 trades

[spiritof66]

1 hour ago, Redskins Rick said:

Im pretty sure King Peter was the driving force behind that, and was trying to win a WS Trophy, before his lifetime was over.

Exactly. That's the only sort-of-rational explanation for the Davis contract: Angelos convinced himself that Davis could help the team remain competitive for a few more years, and who cares what would happen during the latter years of the contract?

[weams]

1 hour ago, Redskins Rick said:

Im pretty sure King Peter was the driving force behind that, and was trying to win a WS Trophy, before his lifetime was over.

[weams]

4 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

Exactly. That's the only sort-of-rational explanation for the Davis contract: Angelos convinced himself that Davis could help the team remain competitive for a few more years, and who cares what would happen during the latter years of the contract?

[tntoriole]

The guys we had were winning us nothing, so getting rid of them cost us nothing really.  

[Frobby]

9 hours ago, weams said:

Do you honestly think that [Villar’s] value skyrocketed from the perceived no value he had at the trade deadline?

I don’t assume he had no trade value at the deadline.    I assume Elias was dissatisfied with any offers and decided he’d be better off shopping Villar over the winter.

That said, obviously a one-year rental is only worth so much.     

[weams]

6 hours ago, Frobby said:

I don’t assume he had no trade value at the deadline.    I assume Elias was dissatisfied with any offers and decided he’d be better off shopping Villar over the winter.

That said, obviously a one-year rental is only worth so much.     

I would have assumed with his play up to the trade deadline and his known arbitration award that the return was less than two Dominican youths. I think his play up to then mandated a non-tender as well if kept as an Oriole. All this conversation is because he finished real strong. 

[sportsfan8703]

18 hours ago, wildcard said:

I don't think we know if saving 18m dollars is insignificant to Elias' player acquisition and development operation.  Or what Elias will trade Villar for.    Its could be significant or not.

However for Duquette's part I think he traded for a player with some value in Villar and he saved 18m dollars and the teams that acquired Schoop, Gausman/O'Day got very little in return.   We know that much now.

Factor in WAR, salary, DFAs, poor performance, and Villar just in 2019 may have “outperformed” everyone we traded in 2018 singlehandedly. 

I think Villar has a market (Clev, Cinncy, A’s) with the potential to have a bigger market (Bos, NYY, Cubs).

I could see us getting 2 high ceiling, low A/Rk league, Org top 20-30 bats, at the least. 

[Redskins Rick]

23 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Factor in WAR, salary, DFAs, poor performance, and Villar just in 2019 may have “outperformed” everyone we traded in 2018 singlehandedly. 

I think Villar has a market (Clev, Cinncy, A’s) with the potential to have a bigger market (Bos, NYY, Cubs).

I could see us getting 2 high ceiling, low A/Rk league, Org top 20-30 bats, at the least. 

I think if somebody actually offered this to Elias, he would have taken the offer.

I believe, the offers if any, came in on the low side, and Elias chose to keep him.

I have nothing concrete to base this on, just keyboard GMing.

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, weams said:

I would have assumed with his play up to the trade deadline and his known arbitration award that the return was less than two Dominican youths. I think his play up to then mandated a non-tender as well if kept as an Oriole. All this conversation is because he finished real strong. 

Villar was at 1.6 rWAR, 1.4 fWAR at the trade deadline, worth $$11.6 mm per Fangraphs in 2/3 of a season, after being worth $16 mm in 2018.    He was never going to be nontendered to avoid a $7-8 mm arbitration award, IMO.    And he did have some trade value then — I’m not saying it was a ton, but some.    His strong finish obviously  enhanced his value, but it’s not like he had no positive value at the deadline.   

[hoosiers]

I have been quite critical of DD in the past, but I think he did well for the Os at the 2018 deadline.  We shall see which prospects pan out, but those trades were made for a variety of reasons and most guys dealt were rentals.  Rentals did not yield many top prospects.  Further, the Gausman trade was about a salary dump in order to insure cost stability heading into 2018 and that mission was accomplished.

I think we are clear winners in the Schoop trade.  Villar was a strong performer this year and enhanced his player value.  Plus a couple of fringe prospects.

I think getting a BA Top 100 guy plus multiple other prospects for Manny was a good trade.

Conceptually, I think dealing Britton to the NYY was an indication that the NYY would have to be the top bidder and perhaps comfortably so in order to help NYY. 

Folks looking to how these prospects might pan out to help us in our next competitive run might be disappointed, but these deals were made for various reasons and with various teams that I am very comfortable with the end results.     

[HowAboutThat]

This is a pretty busy post. I’d like to point out that it is possible for both teams to win or lose a trade.

Villar has been a big help, but so far it seems that most of the benefit from last summer’s trades has been subtraction of financial obligations.

So far all the pitchers that have actually gotten into the show( Phillips, Tate, Ortiz, Rogers, Carroll) have been pretty bad, although yes it’s too early for final judgement, and Kremer looks like a winner( again, way too soon to tell)

regardless, who cares? We are glad we did not resign Manny, and the new leadership is going to avoid such trades-and bad FA signings-in the future, so it’s all good.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Philip said:

This is a pretty busy post. I’d like to point out that it is possible for both teams to win or lose a trade.

Villar has been a big help, but so far it seems that most of the benefit from last summer’s trades has been subtraction of financial obligations.

So far all the pitchers that have actually gotten into the show( Phillips, Tate, Ortiz, Rogers, Carroll) have been pretty bad, although yes it’s too early for final judgement, and Kremer looks like a winner( again, way too soon to tell)

regardless, who cares? We are glad we did not resign Manny, and the new leadership is going to avoid such trades-and bad FA signings-in the future, so it’s all good.

Yes I'm sure the new FA is only going to make good trades and won't sign any bad Free Agents, well aside from Dan Straily.

[weams]

4 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Factor in WAR, salary, DFAs, poor performance, and Villar just in 2019 may have “outperformed” everyone we traded in 2018 singlehandedly. 

I think Villar has a market (Clev, Cinncy, A’s) with the potential to have a bigger market (Bos, NYY, Cubs).

I could see us getting 2 high ceiling, low A/Rk league, Org top 20-30 bats, at the least. 

I think that would be a return with out the money baggage. Maybe. With it? No way. He is not net valuable. 

[HowAboutThat]

“If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.”

Not completely applicable here, but almost.

[interloper]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yes I'm sure the new FA is only going to make good trades and won't sign any bad Free Agents, well aside from Dan Straily.

I think it's safe to assume they won't trade for Gerardo Parra and sign Travis Snider, etc. 

Straily should have been wildly better than he was, that's a pretty weird one.