414 replies to this topic

[FlavaDave10]

This is a good argument...you know why? No one is really wrong in anything they are saying.

 

I love the fact that the Orioles in a position to do these kinds of moves from the buyer's side. 

[JeffLong]

Block quoting was being difficult so I just posted it like this... sorry for the format everyone.

 

PD - The Rays don't make moves like that because they can't afford to spend money on anyone, so they HAVE to win ONLY by building through their system. The Orioles aren't in that position. You mentioned Texas...they just gave up a very nice haul for 3 months of Matt Garza. You also mention the Red Sox. You must be forgetting about them giving up Gabbard, David Murphy, and Engel Beltre for 18.2 innings of Eric Gagne. Of course, the Red Sox were trying to win, and they actually won a World Series in 2007. You know, the trophy that they'll have for as long as the franchise exists? So no one mentions that trade. Rather, they just look at it as the normal type of trade a winning team makes to try to win.

 

The Rays payroll has fluctuated from $24M to $72M over the past 6 seasons. If they thought trading for a RP would win them a WS I'm pretty sure they'd do it.

 

You basically made my point about the Rangers, they made a trade for a guy that can have a significant impact on their playoff chances by acquiring a guy who can slot in behind Darvish at the top of that rotation. Obviously the Boston trade is one that I would not have made (since I'm anti-trading for relievers).

 

 

PD - You mention looking to help the team in 2013, but also looking to improve the team in 2014 and 2015. What's the point of looking to improve the team in 2014 and 2015, when in 2014 and 2015 you'll just want to look to 2015 and 2016?

 

 

I'm not even going to address this other than saying that you can build for the current time and the upcoming seasons. Imagine the storm that would happen if the O's had Pujols and let him walk like the Cardinals did. People would crush Angelos. In reality, the Cardinals won 2 WS, and are in position to compete for the next 5. Sounds a lot like what I'm talking about.

 

 

PD - I get the notion of wanting to be consistently good and contending year to year rather than be a one year wonder. I'm all for that philosophy. But you have to improve the team when you have a chance to win a World Series, which the Orioles clearly do right now in 2013. 

 

The O's chances of winning a WS in 2013 would be a hell of a lot better if they used guys like Delmonico to acquire Garza. If you're going to use the "win at all costs" mentality, then you may as well do it in a way that actually helps you win (something K-Rod doesn't do).

 

 

 

PD - You mention 2014 and 2015. You realize Delmonico won't help the Orioles in those years, right? Maybe the second half of 2015 if he progresses beautifully. 

 

As I've said before, it's not about letting Delmonico develop to help the O's. It's about being able to extract more value for him. Clearly the Brewers understand this as they specifically asked about Delmonico on multiple occasions. I would've rather tried to get Gallardo than K-Rod if we're moving Delmonico.

 

 

PD - Yet again, you are speaking as though you're operating making moves in a vacuum rather than as the GM of a team looking to win a World Series in less than 3 months. Delmonico, if he progresses and becomes a major leaguer, has 7 years under control vs less than 3 months of K-Rod. Sure, in a vacuum, if you think Delmonico will become that player, it can be argued he has more value. But Delmonico does NOTHING to help the team in 2013, and trading him DOES NOT hurt the Orioles in ANY WAY going forward. The only way it can be argued as a bad move IMO is if you think DD lost out on using Delmonico to get a better player. And that's where for me, trusting DD comes into play. He ain't stupid.

 

Not sure why you think I'm not debating with respect, but whatever...

 

The thing about all of this, and why this trade is such a big talking point is that it highlights a fundamental difference in philosophy about how teams should be built. We all fall into two camps here (to one degree or another) and that's what makes it fun (to piggy back on Rob's point).

[mweb08]

It took me several years to accept WAR in this context with how high they set the replacement value. I think it is still slightly off, but paying more attention to leverage is not going to change things dramatically.

I think the end result though is that the team has replaced about 20-30 innings that would have gone to someone with a 6 ERA. So lets say 18 runs. Now, those 18 runs that will score because Jairo or whoever is there would have overwhelmingly occurred when the team was either winning by a lot or losing by a lot because usually Jairo is the junk 4th RHRP.

Now, you bring in Rodriguez. I think it is a safe assumption that either he will replace Hunter as the third RHRP and put up numbers similar to those Hunter has put up this year or he might become that 4th RHRP. Either way, I think we can say that the 3rd arm as it has performed this year probably won't change. We can assume that the 4th arm performance is what will get better.

So, instead of 18 runs coming in over 30 predominantly unimportant innings, we'll see something more like 9 runs come in over 30 predominantly unimportant innings.

So that begs the question of whether or not those 9 additional runs in unimportant innings is consequential enough to acquire someone for a guy like Nicky Delmonico who likely will be nothing important, but stands a slight chance of being important?

Good post. I do think that the 6th reliever or 4th righty would pitch in medium to high leverage situations at times, but agree that wouldn't be the norm. Also, I think they would likely do much better than a 6 ERA.

[Oriole85]

PD - I get the notion of wanting to be consistently good and contending year to year rather than be a one year wonder. I'm all for that philosophy. But you have to improve the team when you have a chance to win a World Series, which the Orioles clearly do right now in 2013. 

 

The O's chances of winning a WS in 2013 would be a hell of a lot better if they used guys like Delmonico to acquire Garza. If you're going to use the "win at all costs" mentality, then you may as well do it in a way that actually helps you win (something K-Rod doesn't do).

 

 

PD - You mention 2014 and 2015. You realize Delmonico won't help the Orioles in those years, right? Maybe the second half of 2015 if he progresses beautifully. 

 

As I've said before, it's not about letting Delmonico develop to help the O's. It's about being able to extract more value for him. Clearly the Brewers understand this as they specifically asked about Delmonico on multiple occasions. I would've rather tried to get Gallardo than K-Rod if we're moving Delmonico.

If the O's could've used Delmonico as a trade chip to get Garza, I'm all for it, but I don't think that was on the table.

 

To get more value out of Delmonico, he has to stay healthy and produce, neither of which is a given.

[JeremyStrain]

Votto had better plate discipline and had a real position. Votto is the exception, not the rule. Delmonico's rising K-rate is what really worried me. Something has to click for Delmonico as far as his bat that I have yet to see. 

 

I only look at Nick as a 1B, have since his first year, but won't hurt anything to let him TRY at 3B, cause we know he can play 1B already.
 

 

There's BARELY a rise in K rates, 73 in 95 games his first year (at 18 years old) and 59 in 61 games this year (at 19 years old). Votto had 144 K in 130 games as a 19 year old, which is worse than Nicky's this year. With him averaging about a walk every 2 games, (which is a little behind Votto) he's on pace at 18 and 19 years old to walk 80 times a year, which is pretty amazing for his age. Wait til he finishes learning advanced secondaries and laying off more pitches. With 13 HR this year he was on pace for a 30 HR year as a 19 year old.

 

Where is avg has been a little low for what I expect of him, at his age with his walk rates and power, I'm not too upset, as I think it'll come. Even if he splits the difference and ends up more of a .265 hitter, he'd still be slashing .265/.370/.489 which is right about where I projected him on the latter two. If he hits better he gets up to that .900 OPS range.

 

Look, I know it sounds crazy trying to comp him to Votto, who is one of the best 1B in baseball right now, but it's who he's reminded me of for 2 years now, and the only thing he needs to improve to stay on that same trajectory is a kick up in average, which I think is in there.

 

Anyways, again, I would have included him in a package that got us a SP improvement if it was one of the clear upgrades, but I didn't like at all dealing him for a RP rental. I think they could have put together a package that would have gotten Garza, but the FO wasn't going to take on that money, and I think THAT big of a package for a rental could be a mistake too, but today's talk about not being able to meet the price for Norris...I bet Delmonico would have gone a long way towards that.

[FlavaDave10]

I only look at Nick as a 1B, have since his first year, but won't hurt anything to let him TRY at 3B, cause we know he can play 1B already.
 

 

There's BARELY a rise in K rates, 73 in 95 games his first year (at 18 years old) and 59 in 61 games this year (at 19 years old). Votto had 144 K in 130 games as a 19 year old, which is worse than Nicky's this year. With him averaging about a walk every 2 games, (which is a little behind Votto) he's on pace at 18 and 19 years old to walk 80 times a year, which is pretty amazing for his age. Wait til he finishes learning advanced secondaries and laying off more pitches. With 13 HR this year he was on pace for a 30 HR year as a 19 year old.

 

Where is avg has been a little low for what I expect of him, at his age with his walk rates and power, I'm not too upset, as I think it'll come. Even if he splits the difference and ends up more of a .265 hitter, he'd still be slashing .265/.370/.489 which is right about where I projected him on the latter two. If he hits better he gets up to that .900 OPS range.

 

Look, I know it sounds crazy trying to comp him to Votto, who is one of the best 1B in baseball right now, but it's who he's reminded me of for 2 years now, and the only thing he needs to improve to stay on that same trajectory is a kick up in average, which I think is in there.

 

Anyways, again, I would have included him in a package that got us a SP improvement if it was one of the clear upgrades, but I didn't like at all dealing him for a RP rental. I think they could have put together a package that would have gotten Garza, but the FO wasn't going to take on that money, and I think THAT big of a package for a rental could be a mistake too, but today's talk about not being able to meet the price for Norris...I bet Delmonico would have gone a long way towards that.

 

How has he reminded you of Votto? Even when Votto struck out 144 times in 130 games, he was still showing off his ability as a hitter. Delmonico has yet to even hit above .250 in the minors. 

[JeremyStrain]

How has he reminded you of Votto? Even when Votto struck out 144 times in 130 games, he was still showing off his ability as a hitter. Delmonico has yet to even hit above .250 in the minors. 

 

Votto had seasons at lower levels than Nicky where he hit .260. Nick hasn't played 2 full seasons in the minors yet, and if you're judging his hit tool by what he has hit thus far at 18 and 19 you're kinda working backwards. (general you, not you-you).

 

When you scout a player, you do so by his tools and ability, not his production in hindsight. He's got such a smooth swing, with average bat speed and great pitch recognition that he should hit better than you've seen so far. He's still very young.

[mweb08]

No link since I'm on my phone, but Jonah Keri wrote a good article on this move along with the Sox locking up Pedroia.

It's on Grantland.

[FlavaDave10]

Votto had seasons at lower levels than Nicky where he hit .260. Nick hasn't played 2 full seasons in the minors yet, and if you're judging his hit tool by what he has hit thus far at 18 and 19 you're kinda working backwards. (general you, not you-you).

 

When you scout a player, you do so by his tools and ability, not his production in hindsight. He's got such a smooth swing, with average bat speed and great pitch recognition that he should hit better than you've seen so far. He's still very young.

 

He does have good pitch recognition. Not a fan of his swing though. Factor in his injury history and lack of a position, and I'm fine with trading him for K-Rod. He's a guy who probably wouldn't even be with the Orioles until 2016, 2015 at the earliest.

[DJ MC]

No link since I'm on my phone, but Jonah Keri wrote a good article on this move along with the Sox locking up Pedroia.

It's on Grantland.

http://www.grantland...en-gets-a-boost

[PD24]

Block quoting was being difficult so I just posted it like this... sorry for the format everyone.

 

PD - The Rays don't make moves like that because they can't afford to spend money on anyone, so they HAVE to win ONLY by building through their system. The Orioles aren't in that position. You mentioned Texas...they just gave up a very nice haul for 3 months of Matt Garza. You also mention the Red Sox. You must be forgetting about them giving up Gabbard, David Murphy, and Engel Beltre for 18.2 innings of Eric Gagne. Of course, the Red Sox were trying to win, and they actually won a World Series in 2007. You know, the trophy that they'll have for as long as the franchise exists? So no one mentions that trade. Rather, they just look at it as the normal type of trade a winning team makes to try to win.

 

The Rays payroll has fluctuated from $24M to $72M over the past 6 seasons. If they thought trading for a RP would win them a WS I'm pretty sure they'd do it.

 

You basically made my point about the Rangers, they made a trade for a guy that can have a significant impact on their playoff chances by acquiring a guy who can slot in behind Darvish at the top of that rotation. Obviously the Boston trade is one that I would not have made (since I'm anti-trading for relievers).

 

 

PD - You mention looking to help the team in 2013, but also looking to improve the team in 2014 and 2015. What's the point of looking to improve the team in 2014 and 2015, when in 2014 and 2015 you'll just want to look to 2015 and 2016?

 

 

I'm not even going to address this other than saying that you can build for the current time and the upcoming seasons. Imagine the storm that would happen if the O's had Pujols and let him walk like the Cardinals did. People would crush Angelos. In reality, the Cardinals won 2 WS, and are in position to compete for the next 5. Sounds a lot like what I'm talking about.

 

 

PD - I get the notion of wanting to be consistently good and contending year to year rather than be a one year wonder. I'm all for that philosophy. But you have to improve the team when you have a chance to win a World Series, which the Orioles clearly do right now in 2013. 

 

The O's chances of winning a WS in 2013 would be a hell of a lot better if they used guys like Delmonico to acquire Garza. If you're going to use the "win at all costs" mentality, then you may as well do it in a way that actually helps you win (something K-Rod doesn't do).

 

 

 

PD - You mention 2014 and 2015. You realize Delmonico won't help the Orioles in those years, right? Maybe the second half of 2015 if he progresses beautifully. 

 

As I've said before, it's not about letting Delmonico develop to help the O's. It's about being able to extract more value for him. Clearly the Brewers understand this as they specifically asked about Delmonico on multiple occasions. I would've rather tried to get Gallardo than K-Rod if we're moving Delmonico.

 

 

PD - Yet again, you are speaking as though you're operating making moves in a vacuum rather than as the GM of a team looking to win a World Series in less than 3 months. Delmonico, if he progresses and becomes a major leaguer, has 7 years under control vs less than 3 months of K-Rod. Sure, in a vacuum, if you think Delmonico will become that player, it can be argued he has more value. But Delmonico does NOTHING to help the team in 2013, and trading him DOES NOT hurt the Orioles in ANY WAY going forward. The only way it can be argued as a bad move IMO is if you think DD lost out on using Delmonico to get a better player. And that's where for me, trusting DD comes into play. He ain't stupid.

 

Not sure why you think I'm not debating with respect, but whatever...

 

The thing about all of this, and why this trade is such a big talking point is that it highlights a fundamental difference in philosophy about how teams should be built. We all fall into two camps here (to one degree or another) and that's what makes it fun (to piggy back on Rob's point).

 

Not to beat the dead horse, but again, how nice and convenient of you to have rather traded Delmonico in a package for Garza. I would have liked to trade Arrieta and Strop in a package for Giancarlo don't call me Mike Stanton. 

 

Obviously I'm being sarcastic, but again, I don't understand why we are acting as though DD had the chance to use Delmonico to get a better piece. Why are we assuming that? This isn't Syd Thrift we're talking about. 

 

Here's a better question: If there was no other logical piece that could have been acquired using Delmonico as "the" or "a" piece, would you have held onto him vs. doing this trade? 

[You Play to Win the Game]

http://www.grantland...en-gets-a-boost

 

It was a good read. I like our defense behind him. I do see a homer spike, but not a huge shift in BABIP necessarily.

[JeffLong]

Not to beat the dead horse, but again, how nice and convenient of you to have rather traded Delmonico in a package for Garza. I would have liked to trade Arrieta and Strop in a package for Giancarlo don't call me Mike Stanton. 

 

Obviously I'm being sarcastic, but again, I don't understand why we are acting as though DD had the chance to use Delmonico to get a better piece. Why are we assuming that? This isn't Syd Thrift we're talking about. 

 

Here's a better question: If there was no other logical piece that could have been acquired using Delmonico as "the" or "a" piece, would you have held onto him vs. doing this trade? 

 

Yes. I would've held onto him and seen if I could flip him later for a better deal.

 

I would never* trade for a reliever. They can be had so easily that trading for them is silly IMO.

 

 

*never say never, but the only time I would trade for a reliever is if it's like a Kimbrel or Chapman situation.

[PD24]

Yes. I would've held onto him and seen if I could flip him later for a better deal.

 

I would never* trade for a reliever. They can be had so easily that trading for them is silly IMO.

 

 

*never say never, but the only time I would trade for a reliever is if it's like a Kimbrel or Chapman situation.

 

Well I'm with you that the O's should have signed a reliever in the offseason (Koji) which would have obviously been easier than making this deal. 

 

But now that it's July and the O's have had some bullpen issues, and there's a reasonable expectation that the bullpen could be an issue down the stretch, it's hard to get any meaningful reliever "easily." No? 

[PD24]

BTW: Real quick. Everyone keeps pointing to JJ being one of the main pieces in the bullpen. Obviously he is at the moment, but a few weeks ago when he blew 6 saves in a little over a month, there were obviously several fans that felt he should no longer be the closer. Well, if JJ goes through a stretch like that again and we lose confidence in him being the closer, we obviously wouldn't be confident in him pitching the 7th or 8th innings in a close game, right? Because I think most of us are smart enough to acknowledge that in many instances, the 7th or 8th inning presents a higher leverage situation than the 9th, right?

 

My point being that if JJ struggles again and is removed from the closers rule, the O's pretty much lose JJ as a reliable arm at all, because if it happens again, he's screwed up again and not pitching well meaning he goes from being the 9th inning guy to someone that can't even be depended on in a close game. Meaning, K-Rod, or any other arm, would play a much bigger role. 

 

Lots wanted Hunter to replace JJ as closer a month ago. Well, who takes Hunter's spot in that case? Not JJ...

[JeffLong]

BTW: Real quick. Everyone keeps pointing to JJ being one of the main pieces in the bullpen. Obviously he is at the moment, but a few weeks ago when he blew 6 saves in a little over a month, there were obviously several fans that felt he should no longer be the closer. Well, if JJ goes through a stretch like that again and we lose confidence in him being the closer, we obviously wouldn't be confident in him pitching the 7th or 8th innings in a close game, right? Because I think most of us are smart enough to acknowledge that in many instances, the 7th or 8th inning presents a higher leverage situation than the 9th, right?

 

My point being that if JJ struggles again and is removed from the closers rule, the O's pretty much lose JJ as a reliable arm at all, because if it happens again, he's screwed up again and not pitching well meaning he goes from being the 9th inning guy to someone that can't even be depended on in a close game. Meaning, K-Rod, or any other arm, would play a much bigger role. 

 

Lots wanted Hunter to replace JJ as closer a month ago. Well, who takes Hunter's spot in that case? Not JJ...

 

That's a fair point, though I'd still go with internal options (Britton? Hammel?) before acquiring someone like K-Rod.

[bnickle]

As I said, this move is also Hunter and JJ insurance. One, has been shaky recently and the other has been shaky for over two months now.

[Oriole85]

Yes. I would've held onto him and seen if I could flip him later for a better deal.

 

I would never* trade for a reliever. They can be had so easily that trading for them is silly IMO.

 

 

*never say never, but the only time I would trade for a reliever is if it's like a Kimbrel or Chapman situation.

I get what you are saying with trading for relievers. Ideally, you don't. I'm just not sure how much the club valued Delmonico and whether they thought his value was going to go up. And if the internal options were better. I the latter was the case, I agree with you and going with what you have.

[Oriole85]

BTW: Real quick. Everyone keeps pointing to JJ being one of the main pieces in the bullpen. Obviously he is at the moment, but a few weeks ago when he blew 6 saves in a little over a month, there were obviously several fans that felt he should no longer be the closer. Well, if JJ goes through a stretch like that again and we lose confidence in him being the closer, we obviously wouldn't be confident in him pitching the 7th or 8th innings in a close game, right? Because I think most of us are smart enough to acknowledge that in many instances, the 7th or 8th inning presents a higher leverage situation than the 9th, right?

 

My point being that if JJ struggles again and is removed from the closers rule, the O's pretty much lose JJ as a reliable arm at all, because if it happens again, he's screwed up again and not pitching well meaning he goes from being the 9th inning guy to someone that can't even be depended on in a close game. Meaning, K-Rod, or any other arm, would play a much bigger role. 

 

Lots wanted Hunter to replace JJ as closer a month ago. Well, who takes Hunter's spot in that case? Not JJ...

We joke all the time about "proven closers," MLB managers actually believe in that stuff. And for the most part, they are smarter than people typing into a keyboard their opinions. K-Rod meets this criteria. Again, just becuase things are going well for the 'pen now, it might not be that way in a few weeks.

[AgentOrange]

I guess one way to look at it is that the team gave up a second tier prospect to solidify the 4th righthanded arm in their bullpen.

 

Maybe, at best, that is worth about 1 win...maybe more if someone gets hurt.

 

It is a steep price.

 

That is really looking at this deal in a vacuum, which I don't think is fair to do.