Jorge Lopez traded to Twins for pitching prospects (edit)

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

I would go so far as to say that if even if you extrapolate Lopez's 1st half performance and assume he's going to maintain that forever, it's still a good deal given the way it's turned out. I would trade 2.5 years of 1st half Lopez for 6 years of Cano plus prospects. I mean, assuming we can extrapolate Cano's 1st half similarly to Lopez'. 

But Cano was a throw in..an afterthought for this deal.

Using hindsight, you would be fine with Cano for Lopez by himself but at the time of the trade, Cano wasn’t much. 
 

BTW, I understand your general point here and I think it is valid.

[glenn__davis]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

His first 3 outings in July weren’t good. They were all by July 4. He gave up almost nothing after. That’s a SSS of stats that skew things.

And, iirc, there were some circumstances there that were more bad luck and out of his control than him pitching poorly (but I can’t say that for 100%).

Nah, he was getting hit around more, the command wasn't as sharp - anyone who was paying attention could see it.  He just wasn't as good.

 

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Let’s look at this whole we think he will decline because of his past thing a different way.

Yennier Cano is 29. He had good but great MiL career. HRs and Ks were good, BBs were bad he was always much older than his competition.

His role hasn’t changed. So, what kind of decline are you expecting from him?

Can't speak for others, I would not be at all shocked if Cano is a DFA candidate next year.

It should not surprise anyone that Cionel Perez is not very good this year after being great last year.

These pop-up bullpen guys rarely last.  You ride the hot hand as long as you can, then move on to the next one.  If you can get someone to give you something of value, all the better.

[Sports Guy]

5 minutes ago, glenn__davis said:

Nah, he was getting hit around more, the command wasn't as sharp - anyone who was paying attention could see it.  He just wasn't as good.

 

Can't speak for others, I would not be at all shocked if Cano is a DFA candidate next year.

It should not surprise anyone that Cionel Perez is not very good this year after being great last year.

These pop-up bullpen guys rarely last.  You ride the hot hand as long as you can, then move on to the next one.  If you can get someone to give you something of value, all the better.

After the 4th of July, he made 10 appearances for 10.2 IP.

He gave up 7 hits, walked 2, struck out 12, no homers, 2 runs (one earned) and had about a 2:1 GB/FB rate.

I don’t see how that is getting hit hard or showing signs of decline.

 

 

Edited June 6, 2023 by Sports Guy

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

After the 4th of July, he made 10 appearances for 10.2 IP.

He gave up 7 hits, walked 2, struck out 12, no homers, 2 runs (one earned) and had about a 2:1 GB/FB rate.

I don’t see how that is getting hit hard or showing signs of decline.

 

 

He allowed 7 balls to be hit over 95 MPH, 3 KC them going over 100.

To put that into perspective, Cano allowed 13 balls to be hit over 100 MPH from May 7- May 30. He allowed 3 over 100 MPH in the Giants series.

[glenn__davis]

44 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

He allowed 7 balls to be hit over 95 MPH, 3 KC them going over 100.

To put that into perspective, Cano allowed 13 balls to be hit over 100 MPH from May 7- May 30. He allowed 3 over 100 MPH in the Giants series.

Well that doesn't put much into perspective for me because I don't think Cano has been all that great lately

All I know is many of us thought he was due for regression, and he regressed.  And those thoughts went beyond "he was bad as a starter" or "all hail Elias".  There were definitely concerns about how he was pitching last July, we discussed it frequently on here.  And after a great start this year he's been pretty bad since the start of May.  He is what he is, an inconsistent BP guy.

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, glenn__davis said:

Well that doesn't put much into perspective for me because I don't think Cano has been all that great lately

All I know is many of us thought he was due for regression, and he regressed.  And those thoughts went beyond "he was bad as a starter" or "all hail Elias".  There were definitely concerns about how he was pitching last July, we discussed it frequently on here.  And after a great start this year he's been pretty bad since the start of May.  He is what he is, an inconsistent BP guy.

Yes, people did discuss it and all of those issues were based on his first 3 outings. The blown saves and getting hit hard in those first 3 games are what was etched in people’s minds.

You can’t argue with the numbers. He didn’t get hit hard after July 4.

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

But Cano was a throw in..an afterthought for this deal.

Using hindsight, you would be fine with Cano for Lopez by himself but at the time of the trade, Cano wasn’t much. 
 

BTW, I understand your general point here and I think it is valid.

How do you know this? We know Povich was the key guy, but I'm no sure we know why the other guys were taken or whether they were considered a priority get by the Orioles. It's really just opinion by anyone not involved with the move. 

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

How do you know this? We know Povich was the key guy, but I'm no sure we know why the other guys were taken or whether they were considered a priority get by the Orioles. It's really just opinion by anyone not involved with the move. 

Don’t “know it” but I think it’s obvious that he was. Again, he hadnt had much of a MiL career up until then and was very old for his league.

I think the deal was Povich and the one DR guy with the other 2 pieces as throw-ins.

Im sure Elias liked what he saw from Cano but he was far from a major piece of that trade imo.

[G54377]

I'm always leery of sinkerballers. I think they have greater variance than other pitchers. If a sinker aint sinkin it's like a fish out of water. Remember how quickly Jim Johnson fell from the sky? That said I'm glad to have Cano, and I'd obviously do this trade 10 times of 10.

[LTO's]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Yes, people did discuss it and all of those issues were based on his first 3 outings. The blown saves and getting hit hard in those first 3 games are what was etched in people’s minds.

You can’t argue with the numbers. He didn’t get hit hard after July 4.

I highly doubt the Orioles were looking at the stats you cite when deciding to pull the trigger on that trade. They aren't looking at statcast bubbles or ERA or EV numbers over a 10 appearance sample. They surely have a more sophisticated evluation tool to couple with traditional scouting inputs from their coaches/scouts. They determined that it was unlikely Jorge Lopez was going to be the pitcher that he was in the first half going forward, or at the very least they determined his subsequent 2 years were likely to be less valuable than what Cano and Povich and the young guys could provide in the near to long term future. That appears to have been a good bet. 

You are trying to diminish Cano's effect on this trade by referring to him as a throw in. Sure, he may have been considered a throw in by the Twins but there is undeniably a reason the O's chose him to be the "throw in" over the probably dozens of other players they could've chosen. What you are arguing makes no sense now. 

[maybenxtyr]

19 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

How do you know this? We know Povich was the key guy, but I'm no sure we know why the other guys were taken or whether they were considered a priority get by the Orioles. It's really just opinion by anyone not involved with the move. 

I can't remember the game, it has been in the last few weeks when Elias was on air. After he was out of the booth later in the game when Cano came in, they specifically said that Elias wanted Cano and had tried to originally sign him. I can't remember when I heard that.

[btdart20]

At the MN smorgasbord take-home window, the O's only had so much room to fit in the box.  I assume Povich took up the bulk of that space.  But there was a reason why the Cano-giblets got chosen over the deep-fried-straight-from-the-freezer whatnots.  Who knows if the Cano-giblets are tasty or not, but it's fairly easy to see if the potato skins are real or frozen.

We know Elias likes some type of signature 'X factor' (spin, velo, slider, changeup...) in his BP arms.  There's a chance the Cano-giblets had something there just hidden in the SSS that MN didn't quite know what they had yet.

[ArtVanDelay]

2 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

I would go so far as to say that if even if you extrapolate Lopez's 1st half performance and assume he's going to maintain that forever, it's still a good deal given the way it's turned out. I would trade 2.5 years of 1st half Lopez for 6 years of Cano plus prospects. I mean, assuming we can extrapolate Cano's 1st half similarly to Lopez'. 

No offense to Cano but the odds of us getting 6 years out of him are slim to none. 

[Sports Guy]

59 minutes ago, LTO's said:

I highly doubt the Orioles were looking at the stats you cite when deciding to pull the trigger on that trade. They aren't looking at statcast bubbles or ERA or EV numbers over a 10 appearance sample. They surely have a more sophisticated evluation tool to couple with traditional scouting inputs from their coaches/scouts. They determined that it was unlikely Jorge Lopez was going to be the pitcher that he was in the first half going forward, or at the very least they determined his subsequent 2 years were likely to be less valuable than what Cano and Povich and the young guys could provide in the near to long term future. That appears to have been a good bet. 

You are trying to diminish Cano's effect on this trade by referring to him as a throw in. Sure, he may have been considered a throw in by the Twins but there is undeniably a reason the O's chose him to be the "throw in" over the probably dozens of other players they could've chosen. What you are arguing makes no sense now. 

What an awful summation of what I said but coming from you, I expect awfulness.  Your reading comprehension is abysmal.

[sportsfan8703]

3 hours ago, maybenxtyr said:

Cost control had nothing to do with Adley Rutschman not making the team out of ST. Please, at least be factual or state that it is your opinion. Now, they farted around and had him down longer than may have been necessary...and that may have been to try and bring him up late enough in season to miss out on qualifying for ROY. That is my opinion.

I didn't say out of ST.  

Overall, I just don't like that we slow played AR a little last year, and sold at the deadline.  We did that in year 1 of 6 out of Adley.  The Adley years are too valuable to sell at the deadline and narrowly miss the playoffs. Povich and Cano look great, but we also didn't make the playoffs last year with Adley burning a year of service time. 

I'm fine with agreeing to disagree with everyone/anyone on this.  I think... We shouldn't have sold last year, our bullpen has been saved by this miraculous run that Cano is on, and that the Adley years of control have more value than other years.