Schoenfeld gives Os offseason a D+

[DirtyBird]

51 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Yes and no..I talked a lot about trading Mullins to the Marlins..with guys like Edward Cabrera, Lopez and Rogers amongst the targets.

Would have shopped him to the Astros.  Would have wanted to talk to the Brewers about Burnes or Woodruff.

There are lots of packages and players out there. My only off limit players are Adley, Gunnar, Holliday and GRod unless completely blown away to move them and I don’t believe that scenario realistically exists.

Do you really think there is a package not involving Adley, Gunnar, Holliday or GRod that would get us an elite starter from a team that looks to be a contender?

[Number5]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

You did say it.  That's where I got it from.  I quoted you.

We know he will do A, that doesn't mean he will do B.

 

No, what I said was that if a team wants to discuss trading for a better prospect from the Orioles than Hernaiz, they would clearly need to offer more in return than Irvin.  It seems self-evident that the offer would have to be greater.  I did not say that Elias would definitely accept any offer that is better.  The point is that the trade was made, so saying Elias won't trade prospects to improve the MLB team is just plain wrong.  I'm sure he has in mind a price point for most Orioles players and prospects, and likely some that may be untouchable.  Those trying to say otherwise are asking that those of us that disagree with them must prove a negative.  Not going to happen.  

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, DirtyBird said:

Do you really think there is a package not involving Adley, Gunnar, Holliday or GRod that would get us an elite starter from a team that looks to be a contender?

Well, I guess it depends on how you define elite starter. No one I was looking to get from Miami is, at least yet.

Burnes and Woodruff are…however, they are also more expensive and don’t have a lot of controlled time left, so yes I think there are packages out there where you don’t have to trade a top 10ish overall prospect to get them BUT it will depend on how they rate your guys.  Was discussing this today with someone..he said hall, Westburg, Kremer and Kjerstad for Burnes. I don’t think that gets it done unless they are really enamored by some of those guys. 

It also depends on other guys that aren’t prospects…Urias, Mateo and Santander are other guys that teams could want to be part of trades.  Maybe Santander could have gotten you a Trevor Rogers? Or maybe Santander+ gets you E Cabrera. 
 

The Astros have some guys (not trading Javier) that could have potentially been available too. They have a CF need. 

Just a lot of potential ways to go to where you can make moves to make us a lot better.  whether it’s buying them with money or with prospects.

 

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, Number5 said:

No, what I said was that if a team wants to discuss trading for a better prospect from the Orioles than Hernaiz, they would clearly need to offer more in return than Irvin.  It seems self-evident that the offer would have to be greater.  I did not say that Elias would definitely accept any offer that is better.  The point is that the trade was made, so saying Elias won't trade prospects to improve the MLB team is just plain wrong.  I'm sure he has in mind a price point for most Orioles players and prospects, and likely some that may be untouchable.  Those trying to say otherwise are asking that those of us that disagree with them must prove a negative.  Not going to happen.  

 

1 hour ago, Number5 said:

As you know, you edited your post as I was typing my reply.  Why would you pretend otherwise?  Not good. 

Thanks for finally answering.  Of course, we all already knew this.  You would undoubtedly criticize such a trade.  On the other hand, Elias did pull the trigger on the Irvin trade.  It sure seems like he's willing to trade, but isn't willing to just give away our prospects.  You apparently seem to think that some great trades were offered.  There is no evidence to support that.

That is what I was quoting.  That was you right? 

 

[Number5]

23 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

As for this…

No, it’s not my argument. You keep mentioning Hernaiz for Irvin, as if that trade actually matters or is what anyone is talking about.  I have said several times that I liked that move a lot.

This is about upgrading the top end of the roster. Trading a middling prospect for a back end starter isn’t what anyone is talking about and it’s not anything that anyone denies could happen. That trade doesn’t move the needle or bring you closer to the top teams in the AL.  The discussion is about the Os taking advantage of their situation, having a ton of prospects (can’t play them all), lots of money, etc…and failing to do anything to legitimately close the gap with the best teams in the league.

Instead of going on an irrational rant, why don’t you just simply ask a question and not assume you have any idea what you are talking about or what someone else you THINK is arguing.

You are just insulting a poster that disagrees with you, as usual.  There is zero data supporting your claims.  Zero.  What we do know is that Elias did trade a prospect for a pitcher.  That is a fact.  You are pretending that somehow that doesn't matter because, well, because you say so.  That is your typical stance.  I disagree with you quite simply because there is no basis for your claims.  Believe it or not, facts carry more weight with me than your unsubstantiated opinion.  I know this will never end, so go ahead and make 53,500 more posts about how stupid I am for considering actual facts.

[Sports Guy]

5 minutes ago, Number5 said:

You are just insulting a poster that disagrees with you, as usual.  There is zero data supporting your claims.  Zero.  What we do know is that Elias did trade a prospect for a pitcher.  That is a fact.  You are pretending that somehow that doesn't matter because, well, because you say so.  That is your typical stance.  I disagree with you quite simply because there is no basis for your claims.  Believe it or not, facts carry more weight with me than your unsubstantiated opinion.  I know this will never end, so go ahead and make 53,500 more posts about how stupid I am for considering actual facts.

Lol.  I didn’t insult you. 

What claim am I making? Everything I have talked about is a fact. Irvin is not a top of the roster, needling moving guy. What I’m saying is that they failed to acquire those guys. 
 

That is a fact but hey, keep making things up. It’s all you have done this whole thread.

Edited February 18, 2023 by Sports Guy

[Number5]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

 

That is what I was quoting.  That was you right? 

 

Yes!  I am saying that any offer for a better prospect must be a better return.  I'm NOT saying Elias must accept any offer that is better.  I am discussing the offer, not the acceptance.  Common sense tells us all that to get Elias's attention on an offer for a prospect he rates higher than Hernaiz must be greater than what he received for Hernaiz.  How am I failing to communicate here?

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Number5 said:

Yes!  I am saying that any offer for a better prospect must be a better return.  I'm NOT saying Elias must accept any offer that is better.  I am discussing the offer, not the acceptance.  Common sense tells us all that to get Elias's attention on an offer for a prospect he rates higher than Hernaiz must be greater than what he received for Hernaiz.  How am I failing to communicate here?

By phrasing it as "just give away our prospects".

That's just not a good take.

[Number5]

Uh oh, I'm unable to get out of this.  I know, since insults didn't work, I'll downvote the guy.  Heroic.

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

By phrasing it as "just give away our prospects".

That's just not a good take.

By "give away our prospects" I mean getting a lesser return than we should get for the prospect.  I'm not sure how that's unclear.  Did you honestly think I meant we would just cut the prospect?  Seems odd that I need to explain that figure of speech.

[Can_of_corn]

41 minutes ago, Number5 said:

Uh oh, I'm unable to get out of this.  I know, since insults didn't work, I'll downvote the guy.  Heroic.

By "give away our prospects" I mean getting a lesser return than we should get for the prospect.  I'm not sure how that's unclear.  Did you honestly think I meant we would just cut the prospect?  Seems odd that I need to explain that figure of speech.

Right, and that's still a bad take.

No one is suggesting that Elias should clearly overpay in trades.

Only Peter Angelos and message board types are worried about "winning trades". 

[Pickles]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Right, and that's still a bad take.

No one is suggesting that Elias should clearly overpay in trades.

Only Peter Angelos and message board types are worried about "winning trades". 

I got to chime in here.

Do you honestly think GMs aren't trying to actively "win" trades by receiving more value than they give up?

You're just saying that because it happens to support whatever point you're trying to make, right?

Because if not, and I hate to go all Sports Guy here, but that's really f-in stupid to think.

[Can_of_corn]

7 minutes ago, Pickles said:

I got to chime in here.

Do you honestly think GMs aren't trying to actively "win" trades by receiving more value than they give up?

You're just saying that because it happens to support whatever point you're trying to make, right?

Because if not, and I hate to go all Sports Guy here, but that's really f-in stupid to think.

Do you ever trade things with people?

When I do I try and offer something I think is fair.

The goal isn't to "win" it is to improve your team.

Both teams "win" a trade by trading something they have less need for and getting back something they have more need for.

If that isn't how you do things, OK, hope you enjoy spending your time and effort to try and get a little extra.

[Pickles]

10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Do you ever trade things with people?

When I do I try and offer something I think is fair.

The goal isn't to "win" it is to improve your team.

Both teams "win" a trade by trading something they have less need for and getting back something they have more need for.

If that isn't how you do things, OK, hope you enjoy spending your time and effort to try and get a little extra.

Sure, your moronic take- which you don't even believe yourself and are only stating because it so happens to support your larger point- is really proof of your moral superiority and my moral failings.  LOL.

Every GM is trying to win every single transaction they make or they'll be out of a job real quick.  You know how you best improve your team?  You trade less valuable things for more valuable things.

Edited February 18, 2023 by Pickles

[Hallas]

8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Do you ever trade things with people?

When I do I try and offer something I think is fair.

The goal isn't to "win" it is to improve your team.

Both teams "win" a trade by trading something they have less need for and getting back something they have more need for.

If that isn't how you do things, OK, hope you enjoy spending your time and effort to try and get a little extra.

This isnt a totally apt comparison, because trading stuff with people is much less of a zero-sum game than trading major league baseball players.

Edited February 18, 2023 by Hallas

[Frobby]

11 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Do you ever trade things with people?

When I do I try and offer something I think is fair.

The goal isn't to "win" it is to improve your team.

Both teams "win" a trade by trading something they have less need for and getting back something they have more need for.

If that isn't how you do things, OK, hope you enjoy spending your time and effort to try and get a little extra.

I think most trades start with a proposal the other side probably won’t accept because it’s too lopsided.  But it can’t be so lopsided that it doesn’t even start a credible conversation.