Photo

Jean Pinto


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 BSLBobPhelan

BSLBobPhelan

    BSL Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 12,999 posts
  • LocationBel Air, MD

Posted 27 July 2021 - 08:15 PM

The "throw in" with Garrett Stallings in the Jose Iglesias trade is anything but. Made his full season debut tonight at 20 years old and had eight strikeouts over four innings. One to watch with filthy secondaries and a 94-96 mph fastball.

 

Before his promotion with the FCL Orioles: FCL: 1-1, 1.80 ERA, 20 IP, 11 H, 4 BB, 28 K


  • You Play to Win the Game likes this

#2 BSLZachSpedden

BSLZachSpedden

    Orioles MiL Analyst

  • Members
  • 202 posts

Posted 27 July 2021 - 08:34 PM

The "throw in" with Garrett Stallings in the Jose Iglesias trade is anything but. Made his full season debut tonight at 20 years old and had eight strikeouts over four innings. One to watch with filthy secondaries and a 94-96 mph fastball.

 

Before his promotion with the FCL Orioles: FCL: 1-1, 1.80 ERA, 20 IP, 11 H, 4 BB, 28 K

 

He got some good swings and misses on his changeup and breaking ball. Looking forward to seeing what he does over the rest of this year.


  • BSLBobPhelan likes this

#3 TwentyThirtyFive

TwentyThirtyFive

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,312 posts

Posted 27 July 2021 - 10:50 PM

Its interesting seeing how Elias has mostly stayed away from pitching in the draft but has targeted it in numerous trades.
  • BSLBobPhelan and BSLJordanKatz like this

#4 BSLBobPhelan

BSLBobPhelan

    BSL Analyst

  • Moderators
  • 12,999 posts
  • LocationBel Air, MD

Posted 03 August 2021 - 08:12 PM

6 scoreless innings with 0 walks and 6 strikeouts tonight. The only two hits he gave up were in the first inning.

 

I'm telling you this is the next top 100 type pitching prospect for the O's...


  • TwentyThirtyFive likes this

#5 TwentyThirtyFive

TwentyThirtyFive

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,312 posts

Posted 03 August 2021 - 08:14 PM

6 scoreless innings with 0 walks and 6 strikeouts tonight. The only two hits he gave up were in the first inning.

I'm telling you this is the next top 100 type pitching prospect for the O's...

Good stuff. Elias out here abusing the Angels.
  • BSLBobPhelan likes this

#6 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,428 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 03 August 2021 - 09:03 PM

6 scoreless innings with 0 walks and 6 strikeouts tonight. The only two hits he gave up were in the first inning.

I'm telling you this is the next top 100 type pitching prospect for the O's...


Paging Mackus lol
  • BSLBobPhelan likes this

#7 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,612 posts

Posted 03 August 2021 - 09:15 PM

It was always Stallings I viewed as being not enough. If Pinto was more than any of us knew, that isn't something we would've been able to judge. I don't recall exactly what his bonus was, I think it was meager, but that and his very few innings in the DSL is all we could grade him on. So yeah, I dismissed him as a unimportant throw in. Glad he's pitching well this year, but not yet sure that he's anything more than that.

I also don't recall anyone saying that it was a good enough deal because we got Pinto along with Stallings.
  • BSLBobPhelan likes this

#8 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,428 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 03 August 2021 - 10:36 PM

It was always Stallings I viewed as being not enough. If Pinto was more than any of us knew, that isn't something we would've been able to judge. I don't recall exactly what his bonus was, I think it was meager, but that and his very few innings in the DSL is all we could grade him on. So yeah, I dismissed him as a unimportant throw in. Glad he's pitching well this year, but not yet sure that he's anything more than that.

I also don't recall anyone saying that it was a good enough deal because we got Pinto along with Stallings.


You were the one that said the return was inadequate and that Elias somehow should have got more than he did; therefore, based on how definitive you were on that, you don't get to do this. You can't act like you know all there is to know about a deal and then if you turn out wrong about the return (not there yet), blame a lack of knowledge.

Elias got the best package available in his estimation and he would of course know the value of who he traded much more so than us. His estimation on lower level players for a player with modest value holds much more weight than people who spend a few minutes researching them. If Pinto turns into a legit prospect, this trade will be a big hit.

#9 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,612 posts

Posted 04 August 2021 - 07:23 AM

Of course he got the best package back in his estimation. I can still think that wasn't enough of a return. I said repeatedly and still think that Stallings wasn't a good enough prospect to consider it a good deal for Iglesias. I wanted a guy a tier up.

We all said we didn't know anything about Pinto. I haven't looked back through the thread but he wasn't a part of it from what I recall. He still isn't, but maybe he can become something.

#10 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,428 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 04 August 2021 - 09:25 AM

Of course he got the best package back in his estimation. I can still think that wasn't enough of a return. I said repeatedly and still think that Stallings wasn't a good enough prospect to consider it a good deal for Iglesias. I wanted a guy a tier up.

We all said we didn't know anything about Pinto. I haven't looked back through the thread but he wasn't a part of it from what I recall. He still isn't, but maybe he can become something.

 

 

On the first line, well that was at the root of our disagreement as you thought he was leaving value on the table. Your quote:

If you're selling a car you no longer use that is worth $10k, unless you are very desperate you don't just take $6k because the money is more important to you than the car. You try to get fair value.

 

Of course he tried to get fair value, though, saying otherwise would be accusing him of baseball malpractice. This was the best deal available to him.

 

On Pinto:

 

Jeremy Strain

I think Stallings is MUCH better than you are thinking he is, and Pinto is 19, just had his first taste of game action last year and had a 12/3 K/BB ratio. Lets see what he does at a year long level before we get too sure what he is, although I'm willing to guess late inning BP arm. Decent FB, mid 90s with good control, and a wipeout slider. Looks like a two pitch guy, and profiles like a Pedro Strop, so it's a matter of seeing if he can get it to work as he moves up now. Still has 2-3 years of growth too, so could end up bigger and throwing a touch harder, but he was the throw in here. 

 

Response by Mackus: Pinto has a <1% chance of ever making the majors.  He doesn't exist

 

 

Note to the mods: delete this thread as the subject does not exist. I repeat, this so called Pinto does not exist. Lol

 

In conclusion, Elias got the best return he could and considering we didn't know a great deal about Stallings and knew almost nothing about Pinto until Jeremy posted an optimistic take, we should have given Elias at least some benefit of the doubt, at least in this type of trade where not much could have been expected. Of course that was the other problem as some overvalued Jose's market and then refused to believe that it was they that were wrong once a trade was made, which you know, is the best way for us to gauge someone's value.

 

Fast forward to August and we have easily had better production at SS than the Angels have gotten out of Iglesias. Some may say that doesn't matter, but it does because while the easily better production would have been on the very optimistic side of the spectrum, getting roughly equivalent value was a middle of the pack outcome, which made the deal more logical. 



#11 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,612 posts

Posted 04 August 2021 - 09:57 AM

Pinto was a nonfactor in my evaluation of the trade for reasons stated previously.  If he becomes something, that would change the results of the trade.  Don't think it will change my evaluation of the trade at the time it was made.  I wanted more for Iglesias or I'd have held onto him and hoped to get more later (or hoped to get good play out of him).  Based on how he's played this year, if we assume he'd have played the same way here, that would not have led to a better result.  I'm aware that his 2020 performance was a small sample and an outlier statistically compared to his recent and historic performance.  I'm ok with the risk I would've been taking on there.

 

Grading the trade at the time, I felt Iglesias was worth a prospect one tier up from my opinion of Stallings and that's why I felt it wasn't a good trade.  Iglesias is someone we should've been looking to deal, but I would've wanted more to actually move him.  It's a low scale issue, as it's not like we're talking about taking back a top-150 guy instead of a top-50.  We're talking about taking back a top-1000 guy instead of a top-500.  

 

I thought Elias did a below average job on the execution of that trade.  Still do, even though the early/immediate results of the trade are good.  Mainly because Iglesias has been bad.  I don't think I've seen anything that makes me think my assessment of the trade was based on significantly flawed assumptions and thus should be reconsidered.  Long term evaluation on the trade will come later.  It'll depend entirely on the prospects we got back.  If either has a jump forward and becomes an asset (even if they flop later), then it's a very good deal.  If both never really become at all relevant, then I'll consider it a not good outcome.  In either case, the room to go up is far more substantial than any negative grade, because of the small magnitude of the asset we were selling.  



#12 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,428 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 04 August 2021 - 11:02 AM

Iglesias wasn't worth a better prospect in return; if he was, it would have happened. Obviously the disconnect could be how Elias viewed the prospects available vs how people that spend a few minutes looking at what's available online view the prospect. I'll side with Elias on that. If this was a trade that involved trading someone with actual solid value and where we heard of different possibilities, I'd be much more open to the type of critique you've engaged in.

#13 Mike B

Mike B

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,624 posts
  • LocationTowson Md.

Posted 04 August 2021 - 11:23 AM

Until some of these players make it to the Orioles, there is really no way to judge the deals.  I trust Bob's opinion that Pinto has a chance to be something. but until some of these guys start performing well for the Orioles, they are still unknowns.  At least to me.


  • BSLBobPhelan likes this
@mikeghg

#14 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,612 posts

Posted 04 August 2021 - 11:25 AM

Iglesias wasn't worth a better prospect in return; if he was, it would have happened. 

 

Disagree with this line of thinking.  If this is the mindset, then neither good trades nor bad trades would ever occur.  Everyone is merely exchanged for exact value just in some other form, otherwise the trade wouldn't have happened.

 

I think Elias has gotten back more than fair value multiple times.  Castro and Givens trades in particular. Those were good trades, as I think he got back more value than what he was selling.  Furthermore, if all the prospects he got back in those trades flop, it won't make me think any less of the execution of the trade.  The result will be bad, but the process was good.  The Iglesias trade is one I thought he got less than fair value, for the reasons I've stated many times now, I didn't like the execution.  If the guys he got back end up doing something meaningful, that will make the result good even if I still don't think the process was good.  Two stages of grading the trade.



#15 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,428 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 04 August 2021 - 11:38 AM

Disagree with this line of thinking.  If this is the mindset, then neither good trades nor bad trades would ever occur.  Everyone is merely exchanged for exact value just in some other form, otherwise the trade wouldn't have happened.

 

I think Elias has gotten back more than fair value multiple times.  Castro and Givens trades in particular. Those were good trades, as I think he got back more value than what he was selling.  Furthermore, if all the prospects he got back in those trades flop, it won't make me think any less of the execution of the trade.  The result will be bad, but the process was good.  The Iglesias trade is one I thought he got less than fair value, for the reasons I've stated many times now, I didn't like the execution.  If the guys he got back end up doing something meaningful, that will make the result good even if I still don't think the process was good.  Two stages of grading the trade.

 

That doesn't add up. 

 

Good and bad trades can of course still occur. Teams can value the wrong things, teams can overpay, circumstances can favor one team over an other, a team can have a poor philosophy regarding where they're at as a franchise and where they're going, and of course teams can simply misevaluate players.  

 

However when it comes to value in this trade, we have nothing to suggest he didn't get back the most value he could. You don't think he did, but what's your supporting evidence? It's literally just that you think he should have gotten back more. There's no reporting I'm aware of that suggests he left value on the table here. There's no reporting of other offers either. If you could point to other offers then ok, let's have that discussion, but that hasn't happened.

 

And while I don't agree with some of the philosophy of the organization at the moment, primarily regarding tanking, where is the evidence to suggest that Elias isn't someone that does his due diligence in the trade market or where's the evidence that he is a poor talent evaluator that deserves no benefit of the doubt in a deal like this? If this were Sid Thrift, then sure, or if we had reporting to show other possible deals, then sure.

 

So it's one thing to not like the profile of the players acquired, but there is nothing to support that he didn't get fair value in this case other than you think it to be the case, which falls short of the high standard you typically set for being so definitive and aggressive with an argument.



#16 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,612 posts

Posted 04 August 2021 - 11:56 AM

 You don't think he did, but what's your supporting evidence? It's literally just that you think he should have gotten back more.

 

It's my opinion based on my evaluation of each of the pieces involved along with an expectation of what Iglesias could've provided the team. 

 

You can't really make a strong evidentiary supported case about anyone's trade value, even other rumors wouldn't tell us much, IMO.  I don't recall haring any rumored offers for Castro or Givens, for example, (and even if there were, trade rumors are notoriously unreliable or non-existent as it relates to the trades that actually get made) and yet many of us here have done a similar evaluation of all the pieces involved and I think unanimously agree that those were good trades.  



#17 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,428 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 04 August 2021 - 12:02 PM

We can speculate on a player's value all we like, but by far the best data comes when a player is actually traded, or at least when we get firm reporting on offers. We got that data and you chose to dismiss it because it didn't confirm your speculation.

#18 mweb08

mweb08

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,428 posts
  • LocationRidgely's Delight

Posted 04 August 2021 - 12:06 PM

The frustration over this trade imo was more based on how some got attached to him due to amazing very brief season where many were happy to have baseball during the pandemic than anything based on logic. That is understandable as well. Besides that, some clearly overestimated his value based on that small sample aberration.

#19 Mackus

Mackus

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 55,612 posts

Posted 04 August 2021 - 12:12 PM

We can speculate on a player's value all we like, but by far the best data comes when a player is actually traded, or at least when we get firm reporting on offers. We got that data and you chose to dismiss it because it didn't confirm your speculation.

 

Every word in this post applies to both criticizing the Iglesias trade and applauding the Castro & Givens trades.



#20 makoman

makoman

    MVP

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,707 posts

Posted 04 August 2021 - 12:33 PM

Iglesias is a guy who was available to the whole league before 2020 and signed for 1/$3M with a club option. For 2019 he signed a minor league contract (made $2.5M in the majors). Those give us some indication of his value around the league, and it's not very high. Those aren't the type of guys that get you much of anything if you're trading them. Maybe a back of top 30 guy? Well Stallings is 26th per fangraphs. 

 

Could his value have gone up due to 2020? Maybe, it was the best hitting "year" of his career. But it was also only 150 PAs, with a BABIP .100 above his career average. And he was hurt most of the time. I doubt 2020 moved the needle much, I would think most teams would see it as an obvious outlier and expect 2021 to be closer to his normal levels (which has happened). His normal levels that are valued by the league at around 1/$3M.


  • mweb08 likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Our Sponsors


 width=  width=