Grade our two deadline moves

[Just Regular]

I believe the only way to interpret Ben Clemens' take would be F from Fangraphs.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2023-trade-deadline-winners-and-losers/

 

[G54377]

If you are that high on your own prospects you shouldn't trade them in a deal you don't like just to make the deal. It was clear that teams wanted one (or more) of the core guys Elias just was not going to trade.

[Hallas]

20 minutes ago, Just Regular said:

I believe the only way to interpret Ben Clemens' take would be F from Fangraphs.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2023-trade-deadline-winners-and-losers/

 

I'm at C-, D+.

They get above an F for doing something, and that something being better than Davies for Parra.. But just entirely underwhelming when you couldn't script a better situation to sell prospects.

[Hallas]

10 minutes ago, G54377 said:

If you are that high on your own prospects you shouldn't trade them in a deal you don't like just to make the deal. It was clear that teams wanted one (or more) of the core guys Elias just was not going to trade.

Even if you're that high on your own prospects you can't play 4 shortstops.  There is almost no situation where the Os can extract better value out of Ortiz or Norby than they could if they used them to acquire Montgomery.

[dystopia]

Death, taxes, and Fangraphs shitting on the Orioles. 

[jabba72]

I would have given the trades an A+ if Showalter wasnt part of the trade. That makes it a C for me.  If O's get the good version of Flaherty you have to call it an A.

I dont expect to ever feel any remorse over Rom and Prieto.

[Pickles]

11 minutes ago, dystopia said:

Death, taxes, and Fangraphs shitting on the Orioles. 

These are the same brilliant commentators that spent all off-season dumping on Mike Elias, right?

[ledzepp8]

32 minutes ago, Just Regular said:

I believe the only way to interpret Ben Clemens' take would be F from Fangraphs.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2023-trade-deadline-winners-and-losers/

 

"This deadline had a ton of impact rental arms"

Did it really though?  I wouldn't have been upset if the Orioles had traded for some of the other names out there. But let's not act like there was a Randy Johnson or CC Sabathia to be had.

 

[baltfan]

37 minutes ago, Just Regular said:

I believe the only way to interpret Ben Clemens' take would be F from Fangraphs.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2023-trade-deadline-winners-and-losers/

 

Well Jim Bowden gave the Orioles a B.  Who are you going to believe a former GM or smart writer.  Never mind, don't answer that.

For the record, I agree more with Bowden but generally prefer Clemens' work.

MLB trade deadline grades for all 30 teams: Astros (A), Rangers (A), Mets (!) … Yankees (D+) - The Athletic

 

[ledzepp8]

13 minutes ago, Hallas said:

Even if you're that high on your own prospects you can't play 4 shortstops.  There is almost no situation where the Os can extract better value out of Ortiz or Norby than they could if they used them to acquire Montgomery.

I don't get this argument. Just because they have a surplus of prospects doesn't mean you trade them for anything, just to trade them.

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, Number5 said:

Have to disagree with what you're saying here.  First, I think it's been made clear that the White Sox weren't really looking to trade Cease.  Elias stated that they insisted on a package headlined by Holliday and refused to come off him.  No deal even remotely possible.  Pretending that Cease was a real possibility is a waste of time. 

The Tigers were unrealistic about ERod, as well.  They wanted a trade partner to whom the opt out risk didn't matter and was willing to offer top prospects.  They found one in the Dodgers, who both have strong prospects and also print their own money, so the risk of paying 3/$49 in the event of injury was worth it to them.  There is nothing about Angelos' history that makes me think that would be a consideration for us.  Maybe with lesser prospects and/or some type of monetary considerations from Detroit in the event of no opt out, but that wasn't going to happen.  When ERod exercised his no-trade clause and nixed the Dodger deal, the Tigers had the opportunity to lower their demands and trade him elsewhere, but chose not to.  Now they have kept the 3/$49 injury risk and are likely to watch ERod walk for nothing if he stays healthy.  If your thought that a playoff run helps in retaining such a player is correct, it's not likely to apply to the Tigers.  Mistake by the Tigers,  IMO.  Whether a playoff run increases your chances of retaining a free agent-to-be is debatable, but if so that would, of course, apply to Flaherty as much as any other rental. 

If you just don't like Flaherty, then you don't like the trade, but the factors you bring up here aren't relevant.  Apparently Elias and his team do see something in Flaherty.

Fine.

Swap out Cease and E-Rod with other pitchers that were rumored to have been on the market.  

I've said it before, I'll say it once more for everyone in the cheap seats:  I don't think Flaherty moves the needle for us all that much.  

[RZNJ]

We could have overpaid for Giolito who is losing his 2nd consecutive start for the Angels. 

[ledzepp8]

8 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Fine.

Swap out Cease and E-Rod with other pitchers that were rumored to have been on the market.  

I've said it before, I'll say it once more for everyone in the cheap seats:  I don't think Flaherty moves the needle for us all that much.  

Perhaps not but I don't think any of the players traded really did that. Maybe Giolito or Sewald but we don't know that Elias wasn't in on those pieces. Maybe they were and he felt they were asking for too much.

[Moose Milligan]

9 minutes ago, ledzepp8 said:

Perhaps not but I don't think any of the players traded really did that. Maybe Giolito or Sewald but we don't know that Elias wasn't in on those pieces. Maybe they were and he felt they were asking for too much.

Yep.  That's one of the reasons I've always felt this speculation and constant rehashing of deals is usually pointless and ultimately uninteresting to me; we'll never know if he'd checked in on Giolito or Sewald.

I've also said that I wanted another legit reliever or two more than a starter.  To your point, we'll never know if he made calls about Robertson and/or Chapman.

[Billy F-Face3]

Just turned on SportsCenter and ESPN was talking about deadline deal winners and losers. ESPN thinks the Orioles are the biggest trade deadline losers because they didn't add the arms they needed. Said Jack Flaherty has command problems and has lost games all by himself the past couple of seasons.

Like Cardinals fans said, Orioles got fleeced.

While Elias is an excellent evaluator of talent, what I'm thinking is that behind the scenes, either Elias is handcuffed by Angelos (who vetoes deals based on player salaries) or Elias has a long way to go before he becomes a highly skilled negotiator.  Probably the prior, if we can say that last year's 2022 deadline trades were good.