Choose one

[Sports Guy]

 

[Bahama O's Fan]

Boy that's hard. Machado might cause us to win a World Series. Would have liked to have Weiters and Davis that postseason. We definitely would have won then I believe

[ChosenOne21]

It's nuts how good we were in 2014 without Machado, Davis and Wieters.

We still lose if the McClouth home run is called fair

I think it was fine to use Ubaldo there, but Buck should have had a quicker hook

It's down to Machado and Keeping Cruz over Davis. I think you have to believe we're World Series champions with Machado in 2014 to make that choice, and I can't say for sure that we would have been. I think I have to go with keeping Cruz over Davis, because it might have prevented the 2016 Ubaldo fiasco since Davis was awful in that game and Cruz might have scored us an extra run. Also, it would have been better for the teams long-term flexibility and could have helped the rebuild since we'd likely have been able to ship Cruz out for some good prospects

[Sports Guy]

Yellow is the only one you know for certain ends well. 

[Frobby]

Not a close call for me.   Keep Cruz, let Davis walk.   

Per Fangraphs, Cruz was worth $125.7 mm in his four years with the Mariners, at a cost of $57 mm.  Surplus = $68.7 mm

Davis has been worth -$19.1 mm at a cost of $90.5 mm.  Deficit = $109.6 mm so far.   Two more years to add to that deficit.

And, we wouldn’t need to hear about it every damned day.  

 

[Moose Milligan]

I think I'd have to go with keep Cruz, let Davis walk.  I think we'd be in a much better place right now.  That *might* have let us keep Machado, too.  

[joelala]

Ouch. 
 

Yeah, gotta go with keeping Nelly. 

[Moose Milligan]

Looking back on it, it should have been obvious.  

Cruz's highs weren't as high as Davis' but his lows weren't as low as Davis' either.  

I remember where I was when the Davis signing broke, I was on a hunting trip in Maryland.  After my initial excitement, I paused and thought that the deal would probably mean Davis would most likely be bad for the last three, maybe 4 years.  And there was a real chance that he could be bad throughout the whole contract.  I don't think any of us thought he'd be THIS bad.  I came back a day or so later and posted it here:

On 1/18/2016 at 1:02 AM, Moose Milligan said:

Curious as to who all else was considering Davis in the final days. I was kind of annoyed with the fact that it looks like we bid against ourselves but it's nice to know that the FO got it done.

I've been just trying to think positive about this deal since it's been announced. I think we can all agree that this will probably be pretty bad for the last 3-4 years but the REAL fear is that he just sucks the whole time through.

 

BTW:  This thread is hilarious:  

 

 

I think you can make an argument that the Davis contract is the worst move this franchise has ever made.  Maybe worse than the Glenn Davis deal.  

[scOtt]

Cruz. Like SG said, it's the only one we know works out.

[Number5]

3 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I think you can make an argument that the Davis contract is the worst move this franchise has ever made.  Maybe worse than the Glenn Davis deal.  

No, I think selling the team to Peter Angelos would top the list.

[owknows]

58 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Not a close call for me.   Keep Cruz, let Davis walk.   

Per Fangraphs, Cruz was worth $125.7 mm in his four years with the Mariners, at a cost of $57 mm.  Surplus = $68.7 mm

Davis has been worth -$19.1 mm at a cost of $90.5 mm.  Deficit = $109.6 mm so far.   Two more years to add to that deficit.

And, we wouldn’t need to hear about it every damned day.  

 

This

[scOtt]

Just now, Moose Milligan said:

I've been just trying to think positive about this deal since it's been announced.

See? That's where you messed up! You've been back on track since then tho...

[Moose Milligan]

5 minutes ago, Number5 said:

No, I think selling the team to Peter Angelos would top the list.

Well, yeah.  But as far as player personnel moves go.

[Oriole1940]

Not second guessing.  I said at the time that keeping Cruz should have been a no brainer.  He was during his career,  an RBI machine with a decent BA. A guy like that you have to keep until he shows real evidence of losing it.  He did not show that when they let him go.   

[Number5]

25 minutes ago, Oriole1940 said:

Not second guessing.  I said at the time that keeping Cruz should have been a no brainer.  He was during his career,  an RBI machine with a decent BA. A guy like that you have to keep until he shows real evidence of losing it.  He did not show that when they let him go.   

Orioles did offer Cruz a contract, IIRC.  I believe they offered him a 3-year deal, which seemed reasonable considering his age.  It was a bit of a surprise that he got a 4-year deal from Seattle.  There really wasn't much of an outcry over the Orioles not going 4 years.  It seemed like a prudent decision at the time.