Trevor Rogers 2024

[RZNJ]

2 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think worrying about wining and losing trades is in any way helpful.

I want to see a solid process.  The Burnes trade in my opinion was good process, the Fuji and Flaherty trades last season were not. 

What was wrong with the process of the Fuji trade?    It was like claiming Yohan Ramirez off waivers except we traded a minor league reliever with minimal value, whom I believe has been waived since then by Oakland.   I see nothing wrong with that process.

Also, Flaherty.   Explain the problem with the process there.   
 

Himdsight is 20/20.   

[Can_of_corn]

10 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

What was wrong with the process of the Fuji trade?    It was like claiming Yohan Ramirez off waivers except we traded a minor league reliever with minimal value, whom I believe has been waived since then by Oakland.   I see nothing wrong with that process.

Also, Flaherty.   Explain the problem with the process there.   
 

Himdsight is 20/20.   

I don't think they were the type of impact moves that increase the team's chances once they got to the playoffs.

I'd compare getting Fuji to Dan getting Andrew Miller.  One move is a definitive move designed to increase the team's chances of advancing in the playoffs and the other a buy low lottery ticket.  I think when you have a team that is almost a lock to make the playoffs you make the Miller Move.

Same with Flaherty, I don't want a rental that is going to slot in as a #4.

 

I'm pretty sure I said something similar when the moves happened.

Edited September 4 by Can_of_corn

[DocJJ]

Agree that hindsight is 20/20 and I actually liked  most of those previous trades, even the ones that didn't work out as hoped like the Flaherty trade...

 

But this one was different.  This pitcher had 1 ok season and it was 3 years ago.  His WHIP has always been 1.5-1.6 range.  There was plenty of warning to steer clear.  I was upset when I learned about this trade at the time it was made and thought he'd end up a train wreck...

 

I know we weren't trying to land an Ace pitcher- we just needed an innings eater type to chew up innings and keep us close every 5th day... but it seemed at the time that Norby/Stowers was a pretty steep price to pay for such a pitcher.  Stowers, sadly tanked in his Miami trial, but Norby is looking like a stud that we either should have kept or gotten better value for...

 

 

 

 

[RZNJ]

3 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think they were the type of impact moves that increase the team's chances once they got to the playoffs.

I'd compare getting Fuji to Dan getting Andrew Miller.  One move is a definitive move designed to increase the team's chances of advancing in the playoffs and the other a buy low lottery ticket.  I think when you have a team that is almost a lock to make the playoffs you make the Miller Move.

Same with Flaherty, I don't want a rental that is going to slot in as a #4.

 

I'm pretty sure I said something similar when the moves happened.

Ok.  You didn’t like the targets.   Ok.   The process of the trades themselves I think were fine.    We gave up virtually nothing to take a flyer on Fuji who threw 100 and had been looking better in relief with Oakland.  I saw nothing wrong with that process.   I can get on board with the Flaherty trade but once again they went bargain basement shopping.    They gave up very little in prospect capital for Flaherty who had just had a pretty good July for the Cardinals.    

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Ok.  You didn’t like the targets.   Ok.   The process of the trades themselves I think were fine.    We gave up virtually nothing to take a flyer on Fuji who threw 100 and had been looking better in relief with Oakland.  I saw nothing wrong with that process.   I can get on board with the Flaherty trade but once again they went bargain basement shopping.    They gave up very little in prospect capital for Flaherty who had just had a pretty good July for the Cardinals.    

I consider it a flawed process.  He spent minimal resources for marginal gains.  I think in that situation you should be targeting players that are more likely to make a large, positive, impact.

 

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I consider it a flawed process.  He spent minimal resources for marginal gains.  I think in that situation you should be targeting players that are more likely to make a large, positive, impact.

 

That’s fine.   I don’t think we gave up too much in either case.   I think we’re looking at it differently.

You must think the process is flawed in the Eflin trade.   Didn’t you think we needed to do better?

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, RZNJ said:

That’s fine.   I don’t think we gave up too much in either case.   I think we’re looking at it differently.

You must think the process is flawed in the Eflin trade.   Didn’t you think we needed to do better?

I don't think they gave up too much.

I think they should have given up more to get more.

Elfin was fine as one of a series of moves.  The O's needed reliable starters to lock down a playoff appearance this season.  This deadline wasn't just about setting up for the playoffs.

He's also under team control past this year.  You can make a deadline deal for a impact guy in their walk year a lot less expensively. 

Would I have liked them to go big for a starter?  Sure, but none of the big names ended up being moved.  Last year we know that Eduardo was on the market and that's what I remember being the move I wanted to make (for a starter).

[RZNJ]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think they gave up too much.

I think they should have given up more to get more.

Elfin was fine as one of a series of moves.  The O's needed reliable starters to lock down a playoff appearance this season.  This deadline wasn't just about setting up for the playoffs.

He's also under team control past this year.  You can make a deadline deal for a impact guy in their walk year a lot less expensively. 

Would I have liked them to go big for a starter?  Sure, but none of the big names ended up being moved.  Last year we know that Eduardo was on the market and that's what I remember being the move I wanted to make (for a starter).

But Eduardo vetoed a trade to the Dodgers so I think he just didn’t want to go anywhere.

[Roll Tide]

10 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Nah, what’s asinine is the amount of assumptions going on. One, where you playing Norby at?  Urias was out OPS’ing him at 3B, and nobody was sitting Holliday after his hot start to his 2nd stint. 
 

Then you assume that Elias didn’t maximize Norby’s trade value based on your own assumptions of what Norby was worth and that other GMs valued him as much as you. 

Hindsight is 20/20 and I guess you would’ve started Norby in a perfectly placed game by game rotation with Urias and Holliday. Or convinced GMs they didn’t want the prospects they chose and instead wanted Norby. 

Just assuming you are better at marketing than Elias, and that you would’ve known exactly when to start Norby over Urias/Holliday. 

Is my mother Biff from Back to the Future?   

At 2B with Holliday at AAA. 
 

she’s your mother you should know

[Can_of_corn]

On 9/3/2023 at 8:11 PM, AnythingO's said:

ERod publicly stated he would have approved a trade to BAL, BOS and one other team, maybe MIA.

 

8 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

But Eduardo vetoed a trade to the Dodgers so I think he just didn’t want to go anywhere.

Could be, or maybe he didn't want to go to the west coast because of the family issues he was dealing with.  He also only had no trade protection for 10 teams, one of which was the Dodgers.  Were the O's one of the other nine?  Odds are they weren't. 

The above quote is from a thread last year that doesn't source the statement.

[dystopia]

2 hours ago, ledzepp8 said:

Do you think Elias was offered something vastly better and said, "Nah, I'm going a different route"?

See my previous response:

I’d have preferred him stand pat than trade Norby for someone worse than Irvin. 

[Jagwar]

12 hours ago, Orioles0615 said:

Mateo is can’t field and can’t hit the only thing he can do is run 

What? Mateo and Gunnar were a kicking DP combination.

[HowAboutThat]

4 hours ago, RZNJ said:

That’s fine.   I don’t think we gave up too much in either case.   I think we’re looking at it differently.

You must think the process is flawed in the Eflin trade.   Didn’t you think we needed to do better?

If I may jump in here, I think @Can_of_corn is saying that the price paid isn’t the issue. The TARGET was the issue. Last season we needed some impact arms, and Elias didn’t get them. The Flaherty trade wasn’t egregious, the Fuji trade was, but each was risky.  Elias should have targeted impact arms.

It’s as if Elias only aimed for mediocrity and failed to even get that. Instead he got two guys who were a net negative. What he gave up is irrelevant.

[Frobby]

7 minutes ago, HowAboutThat said:

If I may jump in here, I think @Can_of_corn is saying that the price paid isn’t the issue. The TARGET was the issue. Last season we needed some impact arms, and Elias didn’t get them. The Flaherty trade wasn’t egregious, the Fuji trade was, but each was risky.  Elias should have targeted impact arms.

It’s as if Elias only aimed for mediocrity and failed to even get that. Instead he got two guys who were a net negative. What he gave up is irrelevant.

Meanwhile Flaherty has the fifth best ERA in the majors.  Of all the pitchers who debuted in 2017, he’s 6th in career rWAR. 

He was a credible pitcher to acquire.  He didn’t do well.  
 

[HowAboutThat]

23 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Meanwhile Flaherty has the fifth best ERA in the majors.  Of all the pitchers who debuted in 2017, he’s 6th in career rWAR. 

He was a credible pitcher to acquire.  He didn’t do well.  
 

Fuji was more egregious, certainly.