Jump to content

Showalter and trades this offseason


JTrea81

Recommended Posts

I find this interesting as it was an excerpt from Camden Chat from a Rangers fan on Showalter's tenure in Texas.

Buck was also seen as a "grass is greener" type when it comes to personnel…the feeling was that Showalter was the type of manager who seemed to only be able to see the shortcomings of his players, and not the positives, while being way too enamored with players on other teams. The infamous trade of Chris Young and Adrian Gonzalez to San Diego for Adam Eaton and Akinori Otsuka is the classic example…the most common take on that deal was that Buck had decided that Gonzalez wasn’t going to hit for enough power to be an everyday first baseman and that Young, despite having a stellar season in 2004, wasn’t going to be durable enough to be a quality starter. Eaton, on the other hand, was tantalizing, and the team needed a veteran arm in the pen. So he supposedly pushed for Young and Gonzalez to be dealt for Eaton, who was seen as the Rangers’ potential long-sought-after ace (despite a mixed track record, a history of injuries, and only a year of team control remaining). Eaton was awful, Young gave San Diego a couple of solid seasons before succumbing to injury, and Gonzalez has blossomed into one of the best first basemen in baseball.

Buck seems to be the type of manager to do exactly what this team needs - to deal young unproven talent (based on his evaluations of them) for proven established veterans that will help this team win now.

The Adrian Gonzalez tidbit is interesting because Buck was proved wrong there, and considering the O's and Padres match up well for a trade and have a recent trade history - the stage could be set for Buck to right a wrong and re-acquire Gonzalez for his current team now that he is an established power threat.

And the O's have several unproven young MLers to deal to get Gonzalez. Arrieta, Tillman, Bell, Pie to name a few, all who would be tantalizing for SD.

Of course Prince Fielder is out there as well, and the Brewers have made ML ready pitching a priority this offseason so they too match up well with the Orioles.

In any regard I think those who are waiting for the young players to blossom in Oriole uniforms are going to be shocked this offseason when they see these players traded for a veteran or two who will help this team win now.

Buck's tenure in Texas and Arizona have shown that he won't stick with young players if he doesn't think they are ready to help the team win, and right now we have too many question marks with the before mentioned players and what we already have in our core group. So IMO Buck will do what is neccessary and have the Orioles trade some of those question marks for surer things so we can win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 132
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It takes a special kind of perspective to look at that description of Showalter's talent assessment, and a trade of Young and Gonzalez for Eaton, and find that it is "just what the Orioles need."

How the heck can undervaluing your own players, and wishfully overvaluing those on other teams, be construed as a positive?

Not that I am down on Buck by any means, and I don't necessarily agree with the description of his proclivities. But if they're accurate, how can that possibly be a good thing?

EDIT: Wait, I get it. All that matters is that the O's trade away a bunch of young players for a bunch of older players. Doesn't matter that one of the young ones might be a future All-Star 1Bman, and that the target might be the 2014 version of a household joke. Just so long as they make the trade. Gotcha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It takes a special kind of perspective to look at that description of Showalter's talent assessment, and a trade of Young and Gonzalez for Eaton, and find that it is "just what the Orioles need."

How the heck can undervaluing your own players, and wishfully overvaluing those on other teams, be construed as a positive?

Not that I am down on Buck by any means, and I don't necessarily agree with the description of his proclivities. But if they're accurate, how can that possibly be a good thing?

Because he's not afraid to take a risk.

He's been willing to deal unproven talent for proven talent before. Now that one didn't work out, but at least he was willing to get the player he thought the team needed and would help the team win regardless of the risk.

That's something that we were lacking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Buck is going to push for something this stupid a second time, I wish we would get rid of him now.

Would a trade for Fielder or Gonzalez really be that stupid?

It's not like either is Adam Eaton...

And at worst you get two draft picks to replace the prospects you dealt. At best the player signs an extension and you grab them before the competition has a chance to bid on them.

I say it's time the team takes a risk like this and Buck has shown he's willing to do something like this in the past.

I'd rather see us get players that have proven they can make a difference than hold on to ones that are unproven that we hope will make a difference and could turn out to be a bust. This team has held on to way too much unproven pitching that has fizzled in the past for example.

It's better to trade a player too early than too late...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would a trade for Fielder or Gonzalez really be that stupid?

Yes.

And while Buck did show that he was willing to take a risk, he also showed a poor ability of evaluating players...if you think this is a good thing, just so that your little premium player obsession can be satisfied, I don't know what to tell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Billy Beane was stupid for trading for Matt Holliday before 2009?

You really need to stop pointing to one or two trades as gospel. Good trades can be made but don't work out (the Bedard deal was a steal, but it doesn't look nearly as good now as it did at the time). Bad trades can be made that turn out pretty good. I'll give you two analogies. 1) Billy Rowell as a 1st round pick. Obviously, he's been a huge disappointment, but ON DRAFT DAY, he was a pretty decent pick. He had a lot of potential, but he just didn't/hasn't panned out (yet). 2) This analogy may be a bit of a stretch, but what about when a guy misses with a FB up in the zone, and the hitter pops it up. Did that pitch result in an out? Yes, which is a good thing. Was it a bad pitch? Yes, and you wouldn't want him to do it again. You use hindsight to back up a lot of your arguments on here, Trea. Sometimes you're right, and sometimes you do make some pretty valid points, but a lot of the times you tend to lack the proper prospective to evaluate or make an argument about players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Billy Beane was stupid for trading for Matt Holliday before 2009?

The A's traded Carlos Gonzalez, Huston Street, and Greg Smith to the Rockies for Matt Holliday.

The A's traded Matt Holliday to the Cardinals for Brett Wallace, Clayton Mortenson, and Shane Peterson.

The A's then traded Brett Wallace to the Blue Jays for Michael Taylor.

So the A's turned Carlos Gonzalez, Huston Street and Greg Smith into Michael Taylor, Clayton Mortenson, and Shane Peterson.

I dunno about you, but I'm pretty sure the A's would rather still have Carlos Gonzalez. Gonzalez has been worth 4.0 WAR this year, Holliday worth 3.8 WAR ... except Gonzalez is making $406,000 and Holliday is making $16.3 million.

So yea, Billy Beane was stupid for trading for Holliday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Posts

    • Twenty people believe there’s a trade before the season that changed the offseason? Hmm I said it when Elias was hired. Nothing of any significance will change until there’s new ownership.  Actually, I questioned his ability to perform his duties with the current ownership. I’m still waiting for an impact signing. However, I think they may have a chance with the young guys. Of course, that assumes a big season from Adley, Gunnar and GrayRod and it’s likely at least one of that group has growing pains.    I also hope Hall gets a real shot as a SP. Too many people didn’t recognize the strides he made in season and he’s always been a starter. His stint in the pen was useful, but that kid has electric stuff.  Don’t get me wrong, Elias has been ok, but how much could he do if they loosened the purse strings? Yes, I know, the Frazier signing, but how bout that Gibson guy!  
    • The biggest development of the season will be the sale of the team.
    • We will be fortunate if GRod has a sub 4 ERA. I don’t see him as any more important than the rest of the starters.  If he is ever a true ace (and the odds are against that), it won’t likely be in 2023. The biggest development to this year will be revolved around all the young players, not just one. Everything about this team and the future success of this organization hinges on them. 
    • I'd say that is a yes. https://www.mlb.com/glossary/transactions/service-time  
    • Unusual, in that Birds usually avoid both Fox and Wolf.
    • Why not keep Al and NL just make each have East and West Divisions. Al East is our current group plus Chicago WS and Cleveland plus an expansion in Charlotte-Nashville. AL west gets the rest NL east is that current group plus Chicago Cubs, Pittsburg, and Cincinnati. the west gets the rest plus an expansion in Vegas or wherever. You play your division 15 times (105 games) and the other division say 6 times (48 games). That gets you to 153, add a 3 game inter league to a close geographic rival (Gnats) you are at 156. Expand Playoffs so top 4 in each Division in. the top 2 advance to face the other geographic Division. league winners in WS
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...