O's acquire LHP Trevor Rogers from Marlins

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, J.D. said:

You really think that would have stopped him if he thought Scott was attainable for a reasonable price and would have helped the ballclub moving forward?

That's... I mean, keep reaching I guess.

I don't know.

I don't think so but it would be humbling to bring back a guy that you traded low on a couple years prior.

[E-D-D-I-E]

5 minutes ago, terpoh said:

Not sure I get your point. We've known for a while that Norby and Stowers had to go. Does keeping them in Norfolk in 2025 help the Orioles stay competitive longer? They didnt hold as much value as a lot of peope here think. In fact Stowers had very little value clearly. Where does Norby play on the Orioles in 2025 to help us stay competitive? The entire infield is pretty much accounted for, as are the corner outfield positions if we keep Cowser and Kjerstad around. Doesnt even count if we re-sign santander. We upgraded our rotation and subsequently our bullpen for two guys that will not play here. 

I am not arguing whether or not they would play here. I am arguing that value for value, this was a bad deal. I don't believe for a second that any of us know what Stowers value was. Stowers might have been the key to the deal. I have no idea. But in my mind, 2 starters for their 2024 team for a #4 is GOOD VALUE for them.

Why do you think the O's always draft the best player instead of a need? Value....I don't always agree with it, but it is a fact.

[ChosenOne21]

3 minutes ago, dystopia said:

Saying, “oh, pitcher X has a 3.50 ERA if you take out this clunker game” defeats the entire purpose of ERA. 

ERA is Earned Run AVERAGE which means by definition it overweighs outlier bad games.

You can definitely be deceptive with the whole "delete the bad and he looks good" argument, but there are cases where doing that a little bit might paint a more accurate picture of what you can expect going forward.

[LookinUp]

24 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

How does this deal help us in October?

By giving innings to Rogers instead of Povich, Irvin, Baker, etc.

It's not Verlander in his prime, I get it, but it's an upgrade.

[HowAboutThat]

1 hour ago, Roll Tide said:

Last 9 starts 3.17 ERA

Sadly, ERA isnt as revealing as WHIP or FIP. How do those look?

[Malike]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

I don't know.

I don't think so but it would be humbling to bring back a guy that you traded low on a couple years prior.

I don't think ego plays into trade decisions. "Hmm, I won't make the team better because it might make me look bad".  Yeah, I don't buy that at all.

[J.D.]

4 minutes ago, dystopia said:

Saying, “oh, pitcher X has a 3.50 ERA if you take out this clunker game” defeats the entire purpose of ERA. 

ERA is far from the best and most instructive stat to measure pitchers by. Kind of like measuring them by wins.

But the other poster's point is valid. Would you rather have a guy that pitches to a 3.00 ERA but had one start in which he got shelled for 10 runs in an inning, so his ERA is 4.00, or would you rather have a guy that just averages giving up 4 runs every game. I'd rather have the first guy personally. Odds are, you're going to get a much better outing out of him, and his advanced stats are probably better than the second guy's.

[LookinUp]

1 minute ago, ChosenOne21 said:

ERA is Earned Run AVERAGE which means by definition it overweighs outlier bad games.

You can definitely be deceptive with the whole "delete the bad and he looks good" argument, but there are cases where doing that a little bit might paint a more accurate picture of what you can expect going forward.

Small sample sizes ruin averages. I think that's the point.

[LookitsPuck]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Or trading for Scott would show he made a mistake trading him away in the first place.

Maybe, but more likely his cost is going to be astronomical. When he traded Scott, he was lackluster for 3 out of the 4 fullish seasons he was with the O's. The walk rate was abysmal, and he really wasn't good with the Marlins until last year. I didn't fault him then. Insert "relievers are volatile" quote here. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, E-D-D-I-E said:

I am not arguing whether or not they would play here. I am arguing that value for value, this was a bad deal. I don't believe for a second that any of us know what Stowers value was. Stowers might have been the key to the deal. I have no idea. But in my mind, 2 starters for their 2024 team for a #4 is GOOD VALUE for them.

Why do you think the O's always draft the best player instead of a need? Value....I don't always agree with it, but it is a fact.

I don't think they do.

I think they have their system tuned to focus on college bats.

[E-D-D-I-E]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Or trading for Scott would show he made a mistake trading him away in the first place.

VERY interesting take. I have no doubt that ego has a place in this game, even in the "front offices". How many times have we all said "He is trading the other GM's guys".

[DocJJ]

Would the Tigers have traded Skubal for Norby, Stowers, and Basallo?

 

(Not that I'd want to part with Basallo, necessarily, but just wondering....)

[J.D.]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't know.

I don't think so but it would be humbling to bring back a guy that you traded low on a couple years prior.

Most GMs have dozens of guys that they have given up on too early and have become successful reclamation projects for other teams.

 

Let's put it this way. Do you not think the Twins would have given up an arm and a leg to get back Yennier Cano from us last year? Of course they would have. Because they're focused on improving the team, period. If you let your ego get in the way of that, you're going to be out of a job really fast.

[bluedog]

2 minutes ago, ChosenOne21 said:

ERA is Earned Run AVERAGE which means by definition it overweighs outlier bad games.

You can definitely be deceptive with the whole "delete the bad and he looks good" argument, but there are cases where doing that a little bit might paint a more accurate picture of what you can expect going forward.

Agreed. It is a common best practice in statistical analysis to throw out the best and worst numbers in a data set because removing extreme outliers gives a significantly more accurate end data set.

[Sports Guy]