The 2024 Trade Deadline

[LGOrioles]

20 minutes ago, btdart20 said:

Maybe.  Jung is coming back soon.  Seager just got started.  DeGrom making his way back.  Has Wyatt turned the rookie corner?

Yeah they’re still fine but their offense without Carter OPS’ing over 1.000, with Heim not having a career year, Lowe losing his power, and Garcia losing his plate discipline gains from last year is pretty mediocre. Fangraphs has them as having 11% playoff odds right now, 7 GB of the 3rd wildcard with 5 teams ahead of them. They’re not a definite seller but they definitely could be closer to the deadline. 

[casadeozo]

55 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

Any thoughts on who that “Verlander” like player could be?

I would have said Alcantara but he doesn’t have a larger contract and he is hurt. I can’t identify that kind of player out there right now. None of the obvious selling teams have any really good pitchers. Maybe Berrios or Kikuchi if the Jays decide to sell? But Kikuchi isn’t expensive and is Berios really an ace? Sonny Gray? But the Cards are actually slightly over .500. I just can’t seem to find that kind of guy out there.

Stating the obvious but adding a star level starting pitcher at the deadline is not something this team will do. We have 2x legit #1’S right now, and as SG said  if Cole Irvin is pitching game 3 for you in the playoffs he’s likely not pitching past the 5th inning.  So shoring up the bullpen and adding a bat like Mayo to getting meaningful at bats is the more sound strategy.

Again Elias has said this is a long term strategy multiple times. We’re not the Yankees or dodgers ready to spend wildly with prospect capital to replace a carbon copy of a pitcher the minute they go down with an injury.

[OriolesMagic83]

1 hour ago, Bemorewins said:

Any thoughts on who that “Verlander” like player could be?

I would have said Alcantara but he doesn’t have a larger contract and he is hurt. I can’t identify that kind of player out there right now. None of the obvious selling teams have any really good pitchers. Maybe Berrios or Kikuchi if the Jays decide to sell? But Kikuchi isn’t expensive and is Berios really an ace? Sonny Gray? But the Cards are actually slightly over .500. I just can’t seem to find that kind of guy out there.

De Grom if he comes back healthy?  Not sure why Rangers would trade him, it would be risky to take on his contract.  Could he be starting by trade deadline?  3+ years left on deal 

[Bemorewins]

14 minutes ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

De Grom if he comes back healthy?  Not sure why Rangers would trade him, it would be risky to take on his contract.  Could he be starting by trade deadline?  3+ years left on deal 

That's a good one! I didn't think about him.

[24fps]

11 hours ago, RZNJ said:

1. Mike Elias was the scouting director.  Not the GM.   
 

2.  From what I can see, Franklin Perez, was BA #32 prospect but neither Cameron or Rogers were top 100.

3. Which pitcher available is comparable to Verlander in 2017?

1. If you re-read my post, you'll see that I acknowledged Elias' position at the time in the very first sentence.  I didn't say Elias directed the trade.  I'm very much saying that Elias' experience with the Astros is going to inform his actions with the Orioles.

2.  At the time, Perez, Cameron and Rogers were the Astros' #3, #9 and #11 prospects respectively per Sports Illustrated.  Not nothing, especially considering the salary relief the Tigers were getting.  For context, Orioles #3 is Basallo.

3. The Verlander trade literally came together in the last hour before the trade deadline.  What comparable pitcher will be available this year is unanswerable until around the last week of July at the earliest as teams evaluate their post-season prospects up until the last minute.

Behind my original post is the recognition that this season is different in at least two important respects.  First, the O's are unequivocally a contender and that requires Elias to widen his approach as a general manager.  Secondly, the new ownership is a lot more like Jim Crane than John Angelos ever was, so taking on an expensive contract for the right player is now something that can be considered.

 

[Bemorewins]

25 minutes ago, casadeozo said:

Stating the obvious but adding a star level starting pitcher at the deadline is not something this team will do. We have 2x legit #1’S right now, and as SG said  if Cole Irvin is pitching game 3 for you in the playoffs he’s likely not pitching past the 5th inning.  So shoring up the bullpen and adding a bat like Mayo to getting meaningful at bats is the more sound strategy.

Again Elias has said this is a long term strategy multiple times. We’re not the Yankees or dodgers ready to spend wildly with prospect capital to replace a carbon copy of a pitcher the minute they go down with an injury.

I don't think that I can speak with any certainty about what this team will do. This is the first meaningful stop of meaningful spending that the Rubenstien train has come to. I guess it seems prudent to me to wait, observe, and assess after the dealine to see how it goes. If there is any truth to the rumors that the O's are considering making Basallo available, that means that they are more big game hunting than you suggest.

Just because we may not have the #1, 2, 3 payroll in the sport like the Yankees/Dodgers/Mets, there is still A LONG WAY TO GO between where we are now and even an average MLB payroll, let alone top 10ish.

I agree that the bullpen is a real need. But I do not agree that we are fine with starting Cole Irvin round after round in the playoffs and in a 7 game series possibly two starts in a series. I guess if your goal is to successfully complete ONE round it could work. But I don't believe it is a good idea or reasonable plan for success to believe Cole Irvin will be successful multiple times against some of the best offenses in the league like NYY, Philly/LAD.

I have stated this on numerous occasions, but I believe that the Orioles are good enough to win a World Series this season, if they make 1-3 additions. Pitching happens to be the hole that needs to be filled this year AND we have the prospect capital to do it AND we have an owner with means (this time) and hopefully the will necessary to support winning (I question if Angelos ever had that) AND the front office who is bold and believes enough to land us 1/2 impact players when it is time.

Lastly, Mayo may be the bat that you say. I hope that is true. But I am very skeptical about kids coming from AAA to excel immediately in the Majors. That just doesn't happen very much at all anymore. Almost all struggle to acclimate initially.   

[Just Regular]

Is Justin Verlander toast?     Maybe the future resembles the past.

In Bradish's presumed absence, he's an interesting possible character as one of the three lead SP.

I do believe the Astros staggered his start this year knowing at his age 26 weeks + October is too heavy a lift.    He's presently sidelined with a sore neck after getting scratched a couple days ago (and the Astros getting routed when they had to accelerate a kiddo). 

Last October he had two good games and one bad game against MIN and TEX.

Astros this week have a cold/hot mix with the White Sox before us this weekend, when we might get a live look.

[casadeozo]

9 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

I don't think that I can speak with any certainty about what this team will do. This is the first meaningful stop of meaningful spending that the Rubenstien train has come to. I guess it seems prudent to me to wait, observe, and assess after the dealine to see how it goes. If there is any truth to the rumors that the O's are considering making Basallo available, that means that they are more big game hunting than you suggest.

Just because we may not have the #1, 2, 3 payroll in the sport like the Yankees/Dodgers/Mets, there is still A LONG WAY TO GO between where we are now and even an average MLB payroll, let alone top 10ish.

I agree that the bullpen is a real need. But I do not agree that we are fine with starting Cole Irvin round after round in the playoffs and in a 7 game series possibly two starts in a series. I guess if your goal is to successfully complete ONE round it could work. But I don't believe it is a good idea or reasonable plan for success to believe Cole Irvin will be successful multiple times against some of the best offenses in the league like NYY, Philly/LAD.

I have stated this on numerous occasions, but I believe that the Orioles are good enough to win a World Series this season, if they make 1-3 additions. Pitching happens to be the hole that needs to be filled this year AND we have the prospect capital to do it AND we have an owner with means (this time) and hopefully the will necessary to support winning (I question if Angelos ever had that) AND the front office who is bold and believes enough to land us 1/2 impact players when it is time.

Lastly, Mayo may be the bat that you say. I hope that is true. But I am very skeptical about kids coming from AAA to excel immediately in the Majors. That just doesn't happen very much at all anymore. Almost all struggle to acclimate initially.   

It's been said many times already but the Rangers won with pitchers NO ONE would have said were much better than Cole Irvin last year. In addition, Atlanta lost in the NLDS despite having maybe one of the best rosters ever assembled.

As for ownership,  as stated all evidence is Elias is not going chips all in on one season as much as you may want him to. Rubenstein has said hes taking a hands off approach especially in this first season as has totally faith in the front office. 

Unless you want a repeat of the Duquette years, going all in, prospects be damned, is a strategy from a bygone era.

[Aristotelian]

2 minutes ago, casadeozo said:

It's been said many times already but the Rangers won with pitchers NO ONE would have said were much better than Cole Irvin last year. In addition, Atlanta lost in the NLDS despite having maybe one of the best rosters ever assembled.

As for ownership,  as stated all evidence is Elias is not going chips all in on one season as much as you may want him to. Rubenstein has said hes taking a hands off approach especially in this first season as has totally faith in the front office. 

Unless you want a repeat of the Duquette years, going all in, prospects be damned, is a strategy from a bygone era.

Would you rather have Atlanta's roster or Texas?

[casadeozo]

Just now, Aristotelian said:

Would you rather have Atlanta's roster or Texas?

I dont think it matters in the playoffs.

You need a little bit of luck in a 5 or a 3 game series.

[RZNJ]

39 minutes ago, 24fps said:

1. If you re-read my post, you'll see that I acknowledged Elias' position at the time in the very first sentence.  I didn't say Elias directed the trade.  I'm very much saying that Elias' experience with the Astros is going to inform his actions with the Orioles.

2.  At the time, Perez, Cameron and Rogers were the Astros' #3, #9 and #11 prospects respectively per Sports Illustrated.  Not nothing, especially considering the salary relief the Tigers were getting.  For context, Orioles #3 is Basallo.

3. The Verlander trade literally came together in the last hour before the trade deadline.  What comparable pitcher will be available this year is unanswerable until around the last week of July at the earliest as teams evaluate their post-season prospects up until the last minute.

Behind my original post is the recognition that this season is different in at least two important respects.  First, the O's are unequivocally a contender and that requires Elias to widen his approach as a general manager.  Secondly, the new ownership is a lot more like Jim Crane than John Angelos ever was, so taking on an expensive contract for the right player is now something that can be considered.

 

I would be shocked if Elias traded Basallo, Mayo, or Holliday.   I don’t think it’s happening.  I’m tempted to say zero chance of that happening.

[Bemorewins]

6 minutes ago, casadeozo said:

It's been said many times already but the Rangers won with pitchers NO ONE would have said were much better than Cole Irvin last year. In addition, Atlanta lost in the NLDS despite having maybe one of the best rosters ever assembled.

As for ownership,  as stated all evidence is Elias is not going chips all in on one season as much as you may want him to. Rubenstein has said hes taking a hands off approach especially in this first season as has totally faith in the front office. 

Unless you want a repeat of the Duquette years, going all in, prospects be damned, is a strategy from a bygone era.

Is that the best model to pattern after? The outlier?

Elias does not and should not ever have to go "all in on one season". I've never been sure what that realistically looks like other than a fear mantra that was created by someone who is so attached to the notion that the O's must retain every prospect in order to fulfill some kind of fan fantasy of having an "all homegrown team". Rubenstein should and MUST offer the necessary support to Elias in order to sustain winning. When I hear "hands off" I hear uninterested and uninvolved which is not what I have observed from Rubenstein who has been at EVERY SINGLE GAME that I have attended this year. "Hands off" to me seems to be the opposite of Rubenstein and not desirable at all. IMO great orgs/companies/teams need great leadership from the top.

Also, there can realistically be no repeat of the Duquette years. That org/administration never had a firm foundation and the success was always built on a house of cards. It always felt we arrived at competitive/good by accident.

Lastly, I have NEVER EVER said anything close to "prospects be damned". But I don't it will serve us will to be dogmatic about any singular approach. True genius is in the ability to adapt. We will have a limited ceiling like (Tampa Bay Rays/Guardians) if we are going to limit ourselves to being a prospect only/homegrown team.

[Aristotelian]

8 minutes ago, casadeozo said:

I dont think it matters in the playoffs.

You need a little bit of luck in a 5 or a 3 game series.

I agree you don't want to go overboard, especially on rentals who will be gone after two months. However, within reason you do what you can to give yourself the best chance. Arguably Texas did go all in by signing Degrom. 

[Bemorewins]

11 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

I would be shocked if Elias traded Basallo, Mayo, or Holliday.   I don’t think it’s happening.  I’m tempted to say zero chance of that happening.

I know you and I have our different viewpoints and have our fair share of running disagreements. But I respect you opinion(s) believe it or not.

Question - Let's just say (I'm not saying this will happen) but if we were to re-sign Santander to a 3-4 year market contract (I would argue we can more than afford since we are literally paying NO ONE). If that were to happen, doesn't that make one of Mayo or Basallo expendable? I say Santander because he is the kind of player (who is not a star) but you can project extracting value from him. Because in any era where counting stats are a little devalued, he gives you consistent home runs and rbis but not much OBP and some of his statcast numbers aren't that great. Plus he's a historical slow starter and a very streaky hitter, but he gives you that clutch/big game element as well. Is it possible that he is a late bloomer along the lines of say a Nelson Cruz/David Ortiz (obviously not as good as Ortiz)?

Just something to think/talk about...

[RZNJ]

9 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

Is that the best model to pattern after? The outlier?

Elias does not and should not ever have to go "all in on one season". I've never been sure what that realistically looks like other than a fear mantra that was created by someone who is so attached to the notion that the O's must retain every prospect in order to fulfill some kind of fan fantasy of having an "all homegrown team". Rubenstein should and MUST offer the necessary support to Elias in order to sustain winning. When I hear "hands off" I hear uninterested and uninvolved which is not what I have observed from Rubenstein who has been at EVERY SINGLE GAME that I have attended this year. "Hands off" to me seems to be the opposite of Rubenstein and not desirable at all. IMO great orgs/companies/teams need great leadership from the top.

Also, there can realistically be no repeat of the Duquette years. That org/administration never had a firm foundation and the success was always built on a house of cards. It always felt we arrived at competitive/good by accident.

Lastly, I have NEVER EVER said anything close to "prospects be damned". But I don't it will serve us will to be dogmatic about any singular approach. True genius is in the ability to adapt. We will have a limited ceiling like (Tampa Bay Rays/Guardians) if we are going to limit ourselves to being a prospect only/homegrown team.

Pretty funny that you talk about fear mantras.  Who is the one talking about “disastrous”, “not likely to go deep in the playoffs”, “limited ceiling like TB and Cleveland”, and so on?

Great leadership starts at the top.  Great leaders realize they are not experts in a particular field and take the advice of their top experts.