Buyer beware- rentals

[DocJJ]

No question Miller was a incredible dominant force in the pen that enabled a playoff run.  But we then had no viable starting pitching for years and sure could have used Rodriguez.  That was a LOT to give up for a 2 month rental.  

Although I guess to be fair, if we had won it all that year, I would probably feel completely different about it!

 

[Tryptamine]

People always complain about trade deadline deal being rip offs. When the Cubs moved Gleyber Torres for Chapman people went crazy and they still bring up what a rip off it was. Yet they won a world series and he was a huge factor, even though he burnt out in the WS from extreme overuse. 

[tntoriole]

2 hours ago, Fiver6565 said:

I’ve never understood the viewpoint that the Miller trade wasn’t a success. He was a vital cog to a team that made the ALCS for the first time since 1997. The fact that they didn’t win that series doesn’t suddenly mean it was a bad trade. 

I agree.  Miller was a key addition and he was NASTY!! at the time 

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

2 hours ago, Fiver6565 said:

I’ve never understood the viewpoint that the Miller trade wasn’t a success. He was a vital cog to a team that made the ALCS for the first time since 1997. The fact that they didn’t win that series doesn’t suddenly mean it was a bad trade. 

Miller did and exceeded what was expected of him the Orioles ran into a really tough matchup in the Royals.

I’m more upset by the Zach Davies trade for Gerardo Parra. Parra was playing over his head in 2015 and I was not surprised when he struggled after joining the Orioles. Plus that 2015 team was not a legit contender and there was no reason to make that trade to try and contend for a wildcard spot.

[LTO's]

The Miller trade wasn't a success or a failure. Miller was great for two months but when you "go for it" and nuke the basically non-existent SP depth in your system you'd hope you'd at least not got swept in the ALCS by a lower seed. IF you want to say it's OK because the Orioles had been so dreadful the previous decade+ that's fine but objectively the O's got the short end of the stick. 

[Frobby]

4 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

Eduardo has had a solid career 16 WAR career but Miller did his job and pitched some big innings for us during our deepest run in recent memory. At least with a rental you are minimizing the risk by trading non-core prospects. I would say the risk of an overpay is even higher for controlled players as the price goes up. If you are worried about overpay risk, rental is probably the best you can do unless you just refuse to participate in the trade market.

We need a Miller type more now than we did in 2014 IMO.   And, we never more prospect depth to deal from.   

[Aristotelian]

7 minutes ago, Frobby said:

We need a Miller type more now than we did in 2014 IMO.   And, we never more prospect depth to deal from.   

Yep, if peak Miller were available now I would him, pretty desperately. At the time Eduardo was MLB-89, so Basallo might be the comp trade today. I'd do that. I don't think I would do Mayo (MLB-74) but I would seriously consider Norby (MLB-65).

[Sports Guy]

11 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Yep, if peak Miller were available now I would him, pretty desperately. At the time Eduardo was MLB-89, so Basallo might be the comp trade today. I'd do that. I don't think I would do Mayo (MLB-74) but I would seriously consider Norby (MLB-65).

Mayo isn’t the 74th best prospect. I think that can be throw out the window at this point.

[interloper]

I recall feeling like Eduardo was a lost cause, like sure it sucks to lose a SP prospect, but I wasn't high on him at that point. Maybe that's just my brain changing opinion over time, I'm not sure. And then he went on to be much better than we would have thought. Not that that's surprising given our development issues at the time. 

[Aristotelian]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Mayo isn’t the 74th best prospect. I think that can be throw out the window at this point.

He would be interesting to add to the Cowser vs Kjerstad (MLB-36) thread.

[Billy F-Face3]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Mayo isn’t the 74th best prospect. I think that can be throw out the window at this point.

Evaluators who don't look at it through Orioles fan goggles tend to disagree...

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10082304-updated-top-100-mlb-prospect-list-where-dylan-crews-other-top-2023-draft-picks-rank

Quote

79. 3B Coby Mayo, BAL

 

https://www.mlb.com/prospects/

Quote 74   Coby Mayo 3B Baltimore Orioles

[Billy F-Face3]

6 minutes ago, interloper said:

I recall feeling like Eduardo was a lost cause, like sure it sucks to lose a SP prospect, but I wasn't high on him at that point. Maybe that's just my brain changing opinion over time, I'm not sure. And then he went on to be much better than we would have thought. Not that that's surprising given our development issues at the time. 

I'm still not sold on him even in the middle of his best season as a pro.

[Hallas]

Rodriguez's outcome was like a top-5% outcome for a pitcher ranked in the top-50 (give or take.)  The average production for 50 or 55 grade prospects is in the range of 3-5 WAR over their first 6 seasons.  So of course you look at it in hindsight and you think you got fleeced.  But no one knew how Rodriguez was going to pan out.  The error bars on prospect performance in the majors, especially pitching prospects, are pretty big - more than 1/3 of prospects in the 50-55 grade range (which I believe is what Rodriguez was graded at) don't make the majors or don't provide positive WAR - so the ones that do pan out after a trade like this are usually going to be really, really glaringly bad.

 

I do think Miller for Rodriguez was a big overpay, because even if you listen to his future projections based on his prospect status, you're giving up like 4 WAR in the future for at best, 1.5 WAR from Miller plus his playoff performance.  I think the flip side to this is that our farm system was so barren at the time that we didn't have any lesser prospects to give.  We had graduated our best prospects and between giving up draft picks for QO signings and ignoring the international market we just didn't have anyone left.  One nice thing about the depth in our current system is that we don't have to make the above trade because we can swap out someone that's closer to appropriate value.

Edited July 20, 2023 by Hallas

[Sports Guy]

17 minutes ago, Billy F-Face3 said:

Evaluators who don't look at it through Orioles fan goggles tend to disagree...

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10082304-updated-top-100-mlb-prospect-list-where-dylan-crews-other-top-2023-draft-picks-rank

 

https://www.mlb.com/prospects/

He 34th by BA. Several others have him comfortably inside the top 50.

Did you just quote Bleacher Report?  Lol

Edited July 20, 2023 by Sports Guy

[pdiddy]

8 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

He 34th by BA. Several others have him comfortably inside the top 50.

Did you just quote Bleacher Report?  Lol

I’ll be surprised if he isn’t top 25 by the end of the season rankings. He’s a monster.