Grade our two deadline moves

[Fan4Life]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Gives some perspective on what we have up vs others.

Sure hope Jack goes 6 +/- innings with 3 ER's or less tomorrow.... 

[CaptainRedbeard]

 

Translation: The Sigbot says buyers at the trade deadline always give up more value than they receive. It’s justified only by placing more value on the present than the future, which you do need to do when your team is in the right position, because you can’t be assured to be there every year. 

I think they balanced well this year. Fuji was an a terrific gamble at very low cost. Flaherty came at a higher cost, one more than what he’s probably worth when you plug it into a computer based on $/WAR, but that’s how the market works being a buyer. This team is in position for a playoff run and needed the reinforcement, so they bolstered that opportunity without mortgaging any of the very bright future ahead of them. 

[jamalshw]

I went with a C. I've liked what we've seen from Fujinami so far, at least the last three outings, but we are still dealing with a pitcher with a below replacement level WAR. Most of the bad came as a starter and he's been strong of late, but given the limited MLB track record, it's hard to get too excited. Obviously the price was right and for what we gave up it's a good trade, but it's not quite enough on the RP side. As for Flaherty, the deal is less of a slam dunk, but still not a bad one, the problem is it's still not quite enough. We needed rotation and bullpen help. We got both so I give it a passing grade.  

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, CaptainRedbeard said:

 

Translation: The Sigbot says buyers at the trade deadline always give up more value than they receive. It’s justified only by placing more value on the present than the future, which you do need to do when your team is in the right position, because you can’t be assured to be there every year. 

I think they balanced well this year. Fuji was an a terrific gamble at very low cost. Flaherty came at a higher cost, one more than what he’s probably worth when you plug it into a computer based on $/WAR, but that’s how the market works being a buyer. This team is in position for a playoff run and needed the reinforcement, so they bolstered that opportunity without mortgaging any of the very bright future ahead of them. 

Which is funny because there was an article the other day about how the prospects traded at the deadline fail at a high rate even if it’s been better in recent years.

[Malike]

4 hours ago, Bemorewins said:

The trade feels like a do the bare minimum/least as possible kind of deal to continue to mitigate risk and kick the can of commitment/hard choices down the road for as long as possible. Kind of like what we have already been doing. But not like a typical move in our position in the standings.

However, IMO I don't it's fair to give this trade a grade now.

I think if Fujinama pitches well and/or Cano doesn't blow games in the 8th in big spots/playoffs; it will have proven to be a wise/good move in acquiring Fujinama and not adding to our bullpen otherwise. If not, and our bullpen proves to be our achilles heal and Fujinama blows a game or 2 or is not effective, then that's how this trade should be graded.

Likewise, if Flahrety pitches well down the stretch and in the postseason, it will be a good/great move. However, if not, then Elias should be rightly judge on those results.

At some point (because it's professional sports) winning has to matter and be the standard right? Not we tried hard, not we're still young, not we took "big swings and misses" or any other rational/excuses. If the O's make a deep run in the postseason, you have to grade the moves as successful. If not, I think it's fair that the org take heat and questions be legitimately asked in terms of why these moves? Or why didn't you do more?

So, you need to wait until Fuji blows a game in a big spot before you grade the deal? Sounds like solid reasoning and not like you are trying to use hindsight or cherry-pick at all.

[Gurgi]

That Machado trade probably skews the fail rate real far in the negative all by itself.  

[Pickles]

18 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Which is funny because there was an article the other day about how the prospects traded at the deadline fail at a high rate even if it’s been better in recent years.

All prospects fail at a high rate.

[Frobby]

Tom Verducci:

Here’s the ranking of the most impactful starting pitcher acquisitions: 

Verlander to Astros

Jack Flaherty to Orioles

Scherzer to Rangers

Lucas Giolito to Angels

Aaron Civale to Rays

Michael Lorenzen to Phillies

Lance Lynn to Dodgers

Rich Hill to Padres

===

No mention of Jordan Montgomery.  An oversight?

https://www.si.com/.amp/mlb/2023/08/02/eight-mlb-trade-deadline-takeaways-mets-yankees-orioles-rangers-astros

But then he comments:

7. The Orioles had better be right about Flaherty.

The team with the best record in the AL is in danger of becoming the 2001 Mariners: fun team that might not have the starting pitching to get through multiple rounds of the postseason. Baltimore has a window now to win the World Series and is sitting on a pile of prospects who are backed up in the system because of young players just getting to the major leaguers.

Their answer to this opportunity was a last-minute deal for Flaherty, a guy with a 4.43 ERA, including 5.29 in his past three starts, and a below average strikeout rate. When Flaherty is at his best, he is the kind of pitcher the Orioles need. He just hasn’t been that front-of-the-rotation guy over the past four years (4.12 ERA over 55 games).

 

 

Edited August 2, 2023 by Frobby

[interloper]

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Tom Verducci:

Here’s the ranking of the most impactful starting pitcher acquisitions: 

Verlander to Astros

Jack Flaherty to Orioles

Scherzer to Rangers

Lucas Giolito to Angels

Aaron Civale to Rays

Michael Lorenzen to Phillies

Lance Lynn to Dodgers

Rich Hill to Padres

===

No mention of Jordan Montgomery.  An oversight?

https://www.si.com/.amp/mlb/2023/08/02/eight-mlb-trade-deadline-takeaways-mets-yankees-orioles-rangers-astros

 

Considering at the time of the trade we only had 4 starting pitchers on the roster, I'd tend to agree with this ranking. 

[Number5]

37 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

So if you get a guy like E-Rod or Cease or a better pitcher than Flaherty that, like you said, that isn't known to have been on the market...you've got two months to make, hopefully a deep playoff run or a World Series run.  And then try to retain that rental in free agency.  Does a deep playoff run increase your chances in retaining?  I'd like to think so.

 

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.

[Gurgi]

Honestly the Orioles probably stand pat if Wells had not shown signs of wearing out.  I think this trade for Flaherty is just to help us limp along with at least a league average arm till Wells feels better.  

I am also very happy we did not give any of our real prospects away for rentals.  As much as it must of been tempting I am glad we didnt do it.  Chicago must of wanted to keep Cease and would only trade him if they got blown away by a trade.  We didnt fall for that either.  

I think we get better return on blocked prospects in the offseason.  

[Just Regular]

12 minutes ago, Gurgi said:

That Machado trade probably skews the fail rate real far in the negative all by itself.  

Isn't that return still evolving and already today including a rotation regular for the team with the best record in the league who the Club has a few more years?

I mean Kremer is an October middle reliever for me, but still....the man's doing work.

[Gurgi]

2 minutes ago, Just Regular said:

Isn't that return still evolving and already today including a rotation regular for the team with the best record in the league who the Club has a few more years?

I mean Kremer is an October middle reliever for me, but still....the man's doing work.

Is Kremer from Machado?  I must of forgot that.  

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, Just Regular said:

Isn't that return still evolving and already today including a rotation regular for the team with the best record in the league who the Club has a few more years?

I mean Kremer is an October middle reliever for me, but still....the man's doing work.

I think it’s working out fine.  Machado had a good two months with the Dodgers, worth 2.5 rWAR, about the best the Dodgers could have hoped for.  Kremer’s been worth 3.2 rWAR and we control him for another 4.3 seasons.  Not unreasonable to think he could be worth 12 WAR or so in his team-controlled seasons.  

[Bemorewins]

30 minutes ago, Malike said:

So, you need to wait until Fuji blows a game in a big spot before you grade the deal? Sounds like solid reasoning and not like you are trying to use hindsight or cherry-pick at all.

Did you not see/read the first part when I said "if he pitches well and if Cano performs well"? Or are you "cherry-picking"?