New article evaluates the Duquette 2018 trades and suggest we lost most all the trades badly.

[Gurgi]

https://www.mlb.com/news/look-back-at-orioles-trade-deadline-2018?game_pk=633078

But ample time has passed now to warrant reflection. Of the five regulars the Orioles dealt at the time, only one remains with the team to which he was traded. And of the 15 players (14 prospects) Baltimore acquired, more than half are no longer with the organization. Most of the others have reached the Majors or are close to doing so.

With that as a backdrop, let’s look back on those deals one by one:

 

[El_Duderino]

Can’t believe we got so little for Britton

[Can_of_corn]

14 minutes ago, El_Duderino said:

Can’t believe we got so little for Britton

He was expensive, coming off an injury and not as effective as previous years.

The Yanks basically cleared the chaff off their 40 man.

 

[TonySoprano]

Machado did better for the Orioles that season than the Dodgers.  In the Series, which the Dodgers lost 4-1, Machado batted .182.   As Manny would say, "OOF."  The contract Manny got after it was over was even too rich for the Dodgers.  

The Braves dumped Gausman after 16 starts in 2019 and Cincinnati mainly used him out of the BP.  If the argument is Gausman would have the same 2021 here that he has in SF, only then we "lost."  

Zach Britton was becoming an expensive piece of the BP for a team going nowhere.  Could the return have been better?  As the article says, part of the return was a "former No. 4 overall pick."

[GuidoSarducci]

All those guys were soon to be pending FAs who weren’t going to resign.  So the word “lost” doesnt make much sense,  The alternative was letting them go for nothing, except Machado who would have certainly been offered a QO , and tne Os would have received a first round pick who they might have used on someone with more collective value than Kramer/ Bannon / Diaz

[Sports Guy]

Yawn

[sportsfan8703]

If we hadn’t lost Pop, we were looking at eventually having Diaz, Pop, Tate, Zimmerman, and Kremer, all on the team together at some point next season. 5/26 aint bad. Almost 1/5th of our next “possibly good” team in 2023. 
 

Plus then all the money DD saved. I’m sure that will make it back to the club in some capacity. Haha

[ChosenOne21]

I don't know that it's possible to lose a trade "badly" when you're trading away a guy with half a season of team control left. Only one of those I think you can argue we lost badly was Machado, and that's with 20/20 hindsight. Given how awful everyone we got for him has been, the draft pick might have been better but at the time I think you take the players over the pick

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

6 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

If we hadn’t lost Pop, we were looking at eventually having Diaz, Pop, Tate, Zimmerman, and Kremer, all on the team together at some point next season. 5/26 aint bad. Almost 1/5th of our next “possibly good” team in 2023. 
 

Plus then all the money DD saved. I’m sure that will make it back to the club in some capacity. Haha

The trades were just as much about reducing payroll as acquiring prospects. Any return for Gausman got reduced by including O'Day and his contract in the trade. 

Britton was getting paid $12M in 2018, when he wasn't putting up elite closer numbers and on an Orioles team where having a closer didn't matter much. 

[Sports Guy]

This year you saw teams paying salary to get a better return.  Even teams like Oak did it.  Even teams like the Yankees asked for it and got it.

The Os didn’t care about the returns on those trades.  They just wanted to save money.

Now, that said, I think the deals for everyone but KG were fine.  Likely could have been better but they were fine.  The Gausman deal was terrible and ironically, may end up producing the best player.

[Il BuonO]

12 minutes ago, ChosenOne21 said:

I don't know that it's possible to lose a trade "badly" when you're trading away a guy with half a season of team control left. Only one of those I think you can argue we lost badly was Machado, and that's with 20/20 hindsight. Given how awful everyone we got for him has been, the draft pick might have been better but at the time I think you take the players over the pick

Extending him at the time isn’t really hindsight. And I know that’s not your point. Plenty of us said coming off the two knee surgeries (congenital, NOT chronic) was the time to do it. 

They definitely waited too long if they weren’t going to get an extension done. That would have got them more quality at a minimum. Although, with Duquette, there are many who think he woulda screwed it up regardless. Remember, though, he was Executive of the Year at one point. 

[ChuckS]

14 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

This year you saw teams paying salary to get a better return.  Even teams like Oak did it.  Even teams like the Yankees asked for it and got it.

The Os didn’t care about the returns on those trades.  They just wanted to save money.

Now, that said, I think the deals for everyone but KG were fine.  Likely could have been better but they were fine.  The Gausman deal was terrible and ironically, may end up producing the best player.

Yep, that's what I thought at the time too.  I gave the Gausman deal an F.  Britton a C and the other two a B.  All of these trades were made a year too late. 

Zimmerman was topping out at 90 when we made the deal.  Gained some added zip to his fastball after coming over here so if it wasn't for that, he would probably would never had made it to the big leagues.   

[oriole]

The Gausman trade was an O’Day salary dump. Britton was not at his peak anymore and coming off injury and expensive...to think we’d have been offered more than we got seems silly. Only the Machado trade seems bad but it was probably the best anyone offered. Who’d have thought Diaz would be this close to a bust? He seemed good at the time and the book isn’t closed on him.

[HowAboutThat]

Hardly a surprise…

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, oriole said:

The Gausman trade was an O’Day salary dump. Britton was not at his peak anymore and coming off injury and expensive...to think we’d have been offered more than we got seems silly. Only the Machado trade seems bad but it was probably the best anyone offered. Who’d have thought Diaz would be this close to a bust? He seemed good at the time and the book isn’t closed on him.

The only questions I have are this:

 

1) Had we paid some money, would the offers have been better?  Logic says yes but its not 100%.

2) Did Duq look for quantity over quality.  

An example is this...I wanted Lux and May for Manny.  At that time, neither player was a top 100 guy.  Lux was a first round pick(I believe) the year before, so the organization obviously liked him and May was an ascending player in their system.  Both appeared to be on the path to be top 100 guys by the offseason.  Now, I have no idea if the Os could have had those players.  There were rumors they were interested in May but who knows.  My question is, if they could have had those guys, does DD take that deal or does he take the deal with 5 players, one of which was a top 50 guy?  

That is the info we just don't have and may never know.  

 

My guess is that the O's could have done better if management wasn't so keen on pocketing money.  I didn't (and still don't) mind the deals with the info we know is true.  I would say that the info we don't have likely means we wouldn't like these deals, even without the benefit of hindsight.