01 August 2014

Orioles Give Up Too Much for Andrew Miller

One of the more active non-waiver trade deadlines in recent memory has now come and gone.  There were several surprising deals that transpired throughout the day, with a flurry of last minute deals that kept the excitement high right up to the 4:00 deadline.  The Boston Red Sox were extremely active, sending off Jon Lester  and Jonny Gomes to Oakland, John Lackey to St. Louis, and Andrew Miller to the Orioles, which brings us to the point of this piece.

Along with closer Zach Britton, Brian Matusz, and T.J. McFarland, the acquisition of Miller gives Baltimore 4 left handed options in their bullpen.  The table below shows how each pitcher has fared during the 2014 season.


As you can see, Miller has been outstanding this season.  He’s accumulated the 11th most wins above replacement (according to Fangraphs) of all relievers in baseball.  He’s posting career bests in his strikeout rate, walk rate, and it’s not even particularly close.  There is no doubt that his addition improves an already steady (yet unspectacular bullpen), as the Orioles now have another option they can feel very comfortable bringing into the game during high leverage situations.
New Oriole Andrew Miller (photo via Keith Allison)

Adding Miller to the bullpen probably means that at least one of the other three lefties in the bullpen will have to go.    Britton, who has been reborn as the team’s closer this season, isn’t going anywhere, so that leaves McFarland to be the one to be sent down.  However, the beauty of the Miller deal is that the Orioles don’t HAVE to make room for him by moving McFarland to the minors.  Miller isn’t your typical left handed reliever, as he has been extremely effective against both left and right handed batters, holding them in 2014 to a .194 wOBA and .243 wOBA, respectively.  This can allow the team to transition Matusz permanently into the LOOGY role.  This is a good move for both Matusz and the team, as right handers have hit him very hard this year, to a tune of .304/.389/.507 (AVG/OBP/SLG).

For the privilege of having Andrew Miller pitch approximately 20 innings in the Orioles bullpen (Miller will be a free agent after the season), Eduardo Rodriguez goes to the Red Sox.   Baseball Prospectus ranked Rodriguez as the 4th best prospect in the Orioles system prior to the start of the season, and No. 61 in their overall Top 101.  At the time, his ceiling was that of a No. 3 starter.  He has struggled this year pitching in AA (4.79 ERA) and spent over a month on the disabled list.  So while he may still hold that ceiling, it doesn’t look quite as likely that he’ll reach it, as it did before the season.  I don’t believe the Orioles will necessarily be “haunted” by Rodriguez potentially pitching for a division rival over the next 6-8 years, but make no mistake, the Orioles gave up a good prospect in this trade.

If the Orioles were a team with fewer glaring holes (like the Nationals, pre-Ryan Zimmerman injury), this trade would make a lot more sense.  In other words, Baltimore is not a team that was one bullpen piece away from being the prohibitive AL East favorites.  I don’t believe that Rodriguez should have been untouchable, but I do think his value could have been leveraged in a more productive way.  Yes, the bullpen needed an improvement, but there was a greater need to provide an upgrade to the rotation or at second base (topics we’ve discussed this month on several occasions).  Using Rodriguez as a centerpiece in a trade and building a package around him for either of those spots would have been more productive.  To illustrate my point, the following table shows the number of wins above replacement (according to the ZiPS projection system) each of the three players will be worth the rest of the season.


In the best-case scenario, Miller replaces McFarland, and the Orioles gain 0.4 wins the rest of the year.  That is not insignificant, but it’s not exactly the difference maker you’d hope to get for a top 100 prospect.

* - The article originally stated that Brian Matusz had an option remaining.  That is not the case.

54 comments:

Matt Perez said...

Matusz doesn't have options remaining. MASN has noted that in a number of places. As a result, MLBTR has reported the same here.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/out-of-options-2014

I expect McFarland to be sent down for a month. E-Rod no longer has the value of a top 100 prospect. And scouts have really soured on him. The Os decided to sell low while he still has value. My post yesterday indicates that's probably a good idea.

pfholden said...

While carrying 4 LHP in the bullpen may be unorthodox, I think Brach goes down until Sept 1. To me, using him for 2 innings last night makes this seems even more likely.

Jon Shepherd said...

He might have been looking at the Arrivals and Departures column I sometimes put out. I confused his 2008 handling and shifted everything over one to the side. If he would have pitched in 2008, it would have counted as a 4th option. He did not, so he had three options.

Matt Perez said...

The situation with Matusz was very confusing. I think we all thought that he had an option until MASN quoted Buck saying he didn't.

Nate Delong said...

I actually didn't think that Matusz had any options left, but I ran across an article in the Sun that said he had one reminaing (April 18). Probably should have looked a little more. I'll make a note.

In my opinion, whether or not the Orioles soured on Rodriguez is irrelevant. As long as the rest of the league still valued him more highly than the Orioles (although I admittedly don't know that they do), I think they should have been able to leverage him more efficiently.

pfholden said...

Agree. Given the return on Prado, it's hard to believe the O's couldn't have targeted him or a similar player, which I think would have been a better use of resources.

I guess the silver lining for me is that, since it's clear Duquette made the bullpen a priority, he at least got one of the best bullpen arms available

Phil said...

This site is a lot lower on Schoop then I think Duquette and Buck are. His poor plate discipline and obvious contact problems cannot be overlooked, but I think until proven otherwise, Buck (and Duquette as well) will value those guys they like and who play great defense over another 0.5 WAR or so over the rest of the season.

The bullpen flexibility of a new and finally dominant LHP brings much more value in their eyes. If not from a pure analytics and metrics-based perspective, certainly from a coaching perspective.

Matt Kremnitzer said...

Schoop isn't even playing full time; he's basically been splitting time with Flaherty. Schoop and Flaherty are decent defenders, but they certainly aren't elite. It would have been possible to pick up a second baseman with around the same level or fielding who could also actually hit.

That doesn't mean Schoop won't hit down the road. But with Davis not hitting and Pearce and Cruz slowing down considerably, the holes in the O's lineup are concerning.

pfholden said...

I can't speak for the site, but speaking for myself, it's not that I'm all that down on Schoop. However, bringing in a better bat for this year made sense to me. It also made sense to bring in someone under team control next year that can play 3B or play 2B and allow Schoop to transition to 3B assuming Manny goes to SS.

Nate Delong said...

I'm actually a big Schoop fan. Decent tools, hard worker (he was probably in the video room TOO much when I worked in Bowie during the 2012 season), and I could definitely see him being an average 2B (my preference) or 3B for Baltimore in the future. He's still very young and has been aggresively promoted at every professional level, despite not having much success.

I think he's an important part of the team's future, but if they want to win this year, they probably need someone better.

Erik said...

Another giving up a prospect for a couple of month rental. I am depressed. Even if E-Rod is not top 100, he is worth more than a guy that we could buy in free agency in two months to not be our closer or setup guy.

He was going to be a cost-controlled player of some value starting in 2015 or 2016, and now he is with Boston and will get a chance. Getting down on a guy for a bad few months or a bad year in the minors is giving up too quickly.

A 1 in 5 chance of winning 1 more game this year is really not worth this kind of deal.

Lee said...

While I agree that Rodriguez may prove to be a little much to give up for miller. As of now it is basing it off of him proving himself in the majors. As of now he has one real good minor league season and now this year he hasn't been half as good and has definitely regressed. There is a very good chance that like a lot of minor league players he may never even male it to the bigs.

Anonymous said...

The verdict on acquiring Miller won't be in until first, he pitches well for the O's. More important is the question of whether he can be re-signed. If he goes elsewhere, possibly back to the Bosox, then we definitely gave up way too much. We certainly didn't have a great need for a 3 month bullpen rental.

Anonymous said...

The verdict on acquiring Miller won't be in until first, he pitches well for the O's. More important is the question of whether he can be re-signed. If he goes elsewhere, possibly back to the Bosox, then we definitely gave up way too much. We certainly didn't have a great need for a 3 month bullpen rental.

Shakapopolous said...

I don't think it's quite fair to analyze the O's bullpen as containing 4 lefties. What we really have is 3 lefties and a closer. Britton's closer role is well defined and as such which arm he throws with is irrelevant. It would not surprise me to see TJ stay and Brach sent down. Miller is an imposing late force if the starters can keep their numbers up. On that note 6 starters is still a tenuous juggling act and one of the righties (Gonzales/Jimenez) may well take on the "innings" role if they are unable to produce them during starts.

Alan said...

The O's really should have been ready to trade Matusz for a prospect at the deadline knowing that the Miller trade was about to get done, and this was another mistake by DD. Other playoff contending teams do trade extra pieces at the deadline while at the same time they are acquiring pieces. Matusz is not very useful for them now with Miller. Also, his split vs rightys is horrific. In addition, many teams put in a right handed pinch hitter when the O's pitch Matusz in a key situation, thus defeating his only role.

Michael Wallace said...

My question is, did Detroit steal David Price or does it just seem like they stole David Price? Was the 20 million for next year that big of a factor? Duquette implied this morning on 105.7 that the money for next season is why they didn't see Price as "a good fit for the Orioles". But man, they gave up Austin Jackson and Drew Smyly and got back David Price for this and next year.

Charles said...

So would this trade look bad if Miller pitched good the rest of the season and decided he liked it here and re-signed for a few years?

Anonymous said...

The addition of Andrew Miller is a step to upgrading our bullpen. But we still need at least another arm in the pen that can be more effective than what we have had so far this season. We are 4th in the league in blown saves while converting only 68% of our save opportunities. That is at the league average, but to be a playoff team conversion needs to be higher. While the starters have settled down as of late, the bullpen has given away 3 wins since the all star break after quality starts. Bring on Andrew Miller and any live arm we can pick up off waivers!

Anonymous said...

I disagree that the Orioles have up too much.

People definitely overvalue prospects. The odds of Miller providing value during a playoff run and postseason are better than for Rodriguez doing so. Even if Rodriguez provides more overall value, postseason value is more important and there's not guaranteed to be a playoff chat next year or in 2016 anyway. I'd think Orioles fans would recognize how rare and valuable these chances are. 0.5 WAR in a pennant chase is way more valuable than 3.0 WAR for a 3rd or 4th place team.

Anonymous said...

I don't like this website. These writers aren't orioles fans, the site should be called oriolespessimist.com

Jon Shepherd said...

We sure are pessimistic. Let us ignore that we projected this team to make the playoffs in the preseason. Second. ..I am glad we don't come off as homers.

Anonymous said...

So many complaints when a majority of these "fans" are bangwagon fans

Matt Kremnitzer said...

So the definition of a fan means that you have to like every move the Orioles make? This site provides a fair analysis of what the Orioles do. It isn't a place for over-the-top praise for every trade or transaction.

Also, if Miller decides to sign with the O's in the offseason, great, I guess. He'll probably be expensive, and spending a significant chunk on a reliever isn't ideal. The O's will have just as much of a chance to sign him as everyone else, so that part probably shouldn't factor much (if at all) into the trade.

Anonymous said...

Why was not Cruz traded ? He is not signed for next year.

Anonymous said...

Probably didn't trade Cruz simply because our offense has been sputtering and you don't trade your cleanup hitter in the middle of a playoff race.

Unknown said...

My first reaction to this trade was similar to this post. Seemed like a steep price for a rental on a reliever. But, Miller is one of the best relievers in the AL. And, even adding just one win due to having Miller could be crucial to either winning the division and avoiding the wild card play-in or, if the O's lose the division, getting the wild card. Also, I think DD clearly was looking at playing in the postseason with this move. Relief pitchers pitch more in the playoffs than the regular season and DD might be hoping that a dominant bullpen can lead to postseason success.

Charles said...

@ Anonymous - Oakland traded Cespedes and he was a middle of the order guy and they have the best record in the AL.

Jeff Stower said...

Anonymous said...

I don't like this website. These writers aren't orioles fans, the site should be called oriolespessimist.com

I agree, when ever I look at this site it is always negative towards the Orioles. All I know is the Orioles obviously know what they are doing and this site downs virtually everything they do. So to me this site has no clue. TheO's did not want to give up Bundy or Harvey to get Price or Lester so they go out and do the next best thing get the best Left Handed relief pitcher they could get. The O'S have better then average starters that have problems getting through the 6th so they went out and got another piece to bridge to the 9th. Sound thinking and this guy is dominant. It's Miller time baby and the O'S or hot. Would not surprise me if they have the best record in Baseball at the end of the season. Suck it Camden Report.

Jon Shepherd said...

We will let the people who run Camden Report know your feelings.

Anonymous said...

Man this blog sucks. The O's have the 3rd highest winning percentage in baseball behind the A's and Angels. And you continue to dismiss them as true contenders. Couple that with the ridiculous trade Manny Machado "article" posted on here, this is a joke website.

Erik said...

I was cheering the '79 Orioles in high school and the '83 Orioles in college and I am dismissing the Orioles as true contenders, so it can't be a lack of devotion that causes such opinions. They may make the playoffs, but that will be because of the failures of other AL East teams, not because the Orioles are world-beaters.

The Oriole offense is the most home-run dependent offense in the major leagues. These are not Earl Weaver 3-run homers because the Orioles can't draw walks (11th in BA, 19th in OBP in the MLB). We have the defense but not the pitching. Our pitchers are fly ball pitchers with a strong infield defense: definitely a championship plan.

The pitching is bad. The ERA is 10th in the AL, but the VORP is last: the defense is the difference I suppose, but we actually have the worst pitchers in the entire AL. Don't let the merely poor ERA fool you.

Yes, we may make the playoffs. Um, have you taken a look at Detroit? Nice team. We are 1-5 against them. Oakland? 2-4. The bright spot is we are 4-2 against the LA Angels. I love cleaning up against the Yankees more than anyone (6-3!), but it does not make us seriously competitive in the playoffs.

And if we keep making trades like that Miller trade, we will never get a roster like Detroit has.

Anonymous said...

Do you think the Cubs would have taken Rodriguez for Russell and Bonifacio? The Braves only gave up their #7 (Caratini) who wasn't even in the top 100. That would have gotten the LH bullpen piece and a 2B upgrade. Also, the O's do have a 2B upgrade at Norfolk. I have been absolutely stunned that they don't give Lombardozzi a chance. He can hit some and he's a gamer.

Anonymous said...

Eric,

You may have been cheering those teams on, but that doesn't mean your opinions on this team aren't stupid. The our pitchers are not good statement is just flat out stupid, look at our month by month stats instead of pointing to the season ERA. The O's struggled out of the gate pitching, other than Ubaldo Jimenez, the starters have been awesome for over 2 months now, Gausman gives us a true #1, Tillman is looking like the All-Star he was in 2013, Bud Norris has been consistently good this year, Chen and Gonzo have done a nice job. In the BP, Britton has been very good as the closer, O'Day has been nearly unhittable, McFarland, Brach have been good, Miller is a terrific addition.

The biggest reason your post is stupid. The team has the 3rd highest winning percentage in all of baseball. You point to the AL East not doing their job, well, only 2 teams in baseball are winning more games than the O's right now, this team would lead every division in MLB aside from the AL West.

Jon Shepherd said...

Anon - Try to refrain from calling people stupid because it makes your own argument seem silly. Name calling typically is an approach used by people who feel uncomfortable of their own knowledge base.

Regarding the Orioles' pitching...what we try to use is use statistics to inform us what will likely happen. ERA has been shown to not be an exactly ideal way to measure this. The same is really true about any goings on over a month or two. It simply is not enough time to firmly establish what the playing level a pitcher really is. That is why preseason projections correlate to second half performance to a greater degree than first half performance does. When you take that into consideration and when you look at peripheral statistics for the pitchers, it paints a gloomy picture.

Re: Gausman. We love him. He had him as the top talent his year in the draft. We think he is a great pitcher and should have started the year in the rotation. That said, he has really done nothing at an ace level performance. He certainly has the potential to be that, but he is not there yet. There are a couple rotations in baseball where he would be having trouble breaking into them right now. The future is bright though.

Finally...we called the Orioles the first Wild Card position before the season began. We had them winning the division at the All Star break. I have a hard time understanding why people are so insistent that we are being unfairly hard on this team. Not every situation is going to be all daisies 24, 7.

One thing I think was remarkable about our draft review series last month was how on target we were with the evaluations. What we said wound up happening, maybe by chance. The only miss was that Saunders did more than solidifying the bullpen when the team acquired him. He had some big starts at the end of the year in 2012.

That said, feel free to go ahead and overreact to any bit of news that questions this club and how it is run. Feel free to suggest that every single thing about this club is full of sunshine. Feel free to feel incredibly uncomfortable and attacked when anyone questions something about a game where a bunch of guys run around after a ball while wearing matching laundry.

Anonymous said...

Jon,

I'd like to hear your answer about Russell/Bonifacio. I think it's an interesting question.

Jon Shepherd said...

Catchers are a unique thing. Caratini has had some prospect heat attached to him and it is very hard to pry a promising catcher away from another club. Catchers are probably one of the rarest things in baseball.

In that light, it may be that the Cubs were very much interested in catchers and I could understand them being more interested in a guy like Caratini than Rodriguez regardless of general prospect rankings suggesting Rodriguez is more valuable. Maybe the Cubs would have preferred someone like Chance Sisco, but the Orioles may be reluctant to deal out a catcher as it is a position of great weakness for Baltimore as well.

That said I think Caratini is a tweener who does not fit behind the plate with his arm and does not fit at third base for the same reason. That puts a lot of pressure on his bat.

I personally would prefer Rodriguez by leaps and bounds, but we do not know what the Cubs are thinking and what their preferences are.

Anonymous said...

My question for Jon is why when the Orioles are moving up the ESPN Power Rankings, you have to use that as a forum for your disagreement for the trade and as a chance to claim the Orioles will "back" into the playoffs.

Could you not have stated how the team ERA has dropped every month of the season or that even with the bats cold in the middle of the order this team scratched out a 10-6 record during one of the toughest streches in their schedule.

Anonymous said...

The Orioles traded not their 1st, 2nd, or even 3rd top rated pitching prospect. They traded their fourth. Miller essentially gives them another shutdown guy to close down the final 3 innings of a game. I find that much more valuable then a guy that wasn't going to pitch this year, has shown to be suspect in talent at a higher level, and could roll around in the minors for another year or so. The Orioles have been much better at grading and developing talent then they have been in the past. I trust that the organization will find a replacement. And I am not being a homer, just enjoying the fact that I can say these things about the Orioles now.

Nate Delong said...

Just want to reiterate the point of the article, which may be getting forgotten as more comments come in (the comments are very much appreciated by the way). The post isn't saying that getting Miller was bad, and it's not saying that they should have kept Rodriguez.

The main point is that Rodriguez's value could have been better leveraged to provide a bigger improvement to the team than Miller. That's should be the take-away message.

Musicturtle said...

So tell me what starting pitcher or 2nd baseman the Os could have gotten with Rodriguez that would have been a MAJOR improvement over what they have now. Price would have been far more expensive and there was no other "ace" available.

This was a move for the playoffs, where bullpens win and lose championships. But let's not let that get in the way of a guy who may be a #3 starter one day.

Musicturtle

Nate Delong said...

Musicturtle - Many of the posts in July offer several different options that we believed would be good acquisitions for the Orioles to make

Jon Shepherd said...

Anon - I generally don't care much about what happened, but what will happen. Going 10-6 on a tough stretch is awesome, but to me that is all done. We have a lot more games to play. I also disagree in that I ever claimed they will back into the playoffs. I have never stated that. This entire season I have had them as playoff bound. The entire season. If you want to harp on me being too negative, you have to square away your perspective that my assessment.

Another Anon - 4th best pitching prospect is a point made that obscures the value of that prospect. I understand they dealt from a relative position of strength (which is a pretty thin thing to say with prospects), but the idea is whether they got good value back for a piece with the kind of value Rodriguez seems to have.

Music Turtle - It is difficult to answer that specific question. Though maybe an answer to that would have been something like Cabrera. We do not know what exactly was dangled and what value those pieces had. What we know is that the Orioles shored up a position that likely has little impact on the success of this club in-season when they were bigger holes. Maybe you subscribe to winning at all costs, but I personally prefer getting what you need at a decent price. This looks like an overpay.

Musicturtle said...

Jon-
If you don't care about what happened, why did you make a point on national media to criticize a trade that is already done?

Also a four month trend in improvement of pitching I think is a worthy reason to believe it will continue.

Jon Shepherd said...

Music Turtle - Is that a real question? I mean, the answer is obvious.

Musicturtle said...

Jon - Oh so the past does matter when it supports your point but not mine. And you just wanted everyone who reads that ranking to know that you disagreed with the trade. That is quite obvious sorry.

The trade for Miller strengthens the major league club and gives them a better chance to win close games THIS YEAR. Who knows when or if Rodriguez will contribute at the major league level.

Jon Shepherd said...

Music Turtle - No, your application of that point is nonsensical. I guess you do not see it, so I will try to elucidate it.

I evaluated a trade that happened in the past. You brought up a data set that happened in the past whose size is similar to many other data sets that has been shown frequently not to be robust enough to make solid judgements on.

I mean, do you see how silly your point is there?

Musicturtle said...

Okay great elucidator you win. I guess I just think that the rotation is actually coming into it's own, and if Davis and Cruz don't come around a slight upgrade at 2nd base would not matter anyway. I think that they added a key piece to a playoff run and have never bought too much into prospect rankings.

It also rankled me that as someone who covers the Os and is asked to comment on their current status, you can only mention your opinion of this trade and not that they have been one of the better teams in baseball for 2/3 of the season, or that their rotation seems to be gelling, or any number of positive attributes associated with this team. This maybe why people think you're pessimistic.

Also, nice win tonight huh? Bats finally woke up a bit.

Jon Shepherd said...

Eh...the big event this past week was the trade deadline. Who knows what I will write next week?

baachou said...

So, your title implies that the O's simply gave up too much for Andrew Miller, but your comments imply that you feel the O's don't get enough marginal improvement for a reliever specifically because it's not perceived as a liability for us at the moment. I'm not sure which it is, but I'll try and address both.

Dave Cameron posted an article that said that you will pay more for talent at the deadline (on the order of double) because teams have more certainty that the wins they will gain are going to be valuable, high-leverage wins. So in raw terms, I think that Miller for a borderline mid/upper tier prospect (but one that is decidedly worse than the cream of our crop) is definitely a high price, but not unreasonable given Miller's apparent current skill level.

Furthermore, I think that your usage of ZIPS ROS is a bit troublesome because it's a pretty good bet that Miller will be good for more than 16 innings for the rest of the summer, unless you think that Miller has a very high chance of injury. And I don't think you should consider him to be an injury risk (not more than any other pitcher, anyway.) His only injury in 2012 and 2013 was the foot problem, and he threw 52 innings in 2012 while getting acclimated to the 'pen. While you probably should drop his projected usage somewhat, I would not drop it by 1/2. Assuming he maintains his current level of production, Increasing his usage rate by 50% would improve his projected WAR to 0.6, which I think more closely represents his expected output for the remainder of the year.

Finally, I believe that while it would have been preferable to get a 2nd baseman, there weren't too many options available other than Bonifacio, and I suspect that the catching prospect would have been preferable over the pitching prospect, all other things equal. Maybe we could have gotten it done by trading Sisco instead of EdRod, but then we have no fallback options when Wieters goes to the Yankees. Furthermore, a win is a win, whether it happens via the bullpen or from a position player.

Jon Shepherd said...

Well, to be clear the writers of this site have not joined our minds together, so there is some difference of opinion.

In my MASN column today, I spoke a bit more about how value per win increases. I did not find that the improvement mattered much given the supposed value Rodriguez carries, which is a thought shared by all of the talent evaluators I know...so I do not think myself being too off base there.

The common phrase I heard was that this was a "comfort move". That it did little to improve the club for the season, but it might have a marginal worth in the post season.

Regarding 15 innings...with two months to go, how many innings is a reliever bound to throw? I think you probably top out around 20 innings unless you are a multiple inning pitcher. O'Day as the primary relief arm was seeing only about half his appearances as high leverage situations. So may we are seeing 7-10 high leverage appearances for Miller...maybe less because of O'Day being here.

Second...few second basemen moved around. Basically, it was Prado, Bonifacio, and Cabrera. I would argue that adding Rodriguez with other prospects for someone like Prado would have been a more effective improvement than Miller. Taking a piece with value and gaining marginal value may wind up being all fine, but that value prospect could be paired with other value prospects to get a much larger piece.

Yes, spending ten minutes looking for a quarter makes you a quarter richer, but spending fifteen minutes to get a dollar lets you go to the vending machine.

Jeff Stower said...

There are a lot of Orioles fans that are down on the Orioles after the trade deadline cause of the two trades by Detroit and Oakland. To them I say suck it up. The Orioles are just as good as them teams. Have a better record then Detroit and are 4 games behind the mighty A'S. Both these teams lost offense and defense in acquiring these star pitchers. Most games in the playoffs are close and come down to the bullpen. I like the Orioles chances there. Remember this the Orioles have the most wins in the AL on the road and play as hard and have team chemistry second to none.

The O'S pitching is doing rather well and as was posted earlier and are getting better every month. Have the 3rd best era sense the ALL STAR break and in that period have played the top teams in the AL.

Sure the O'S are 2-4 vs the A'S. Them games had a playoff atmosphere and the Birds let one of them game get away in the ninth with a 3 run homer. 1-5 I think vs Detroit. Detroit played the Birds in April and that pretty much means zero at this point. Different team now much different.

All in all how could you be anything but happy with how this year is going. 3rd best record in the MLB. Playing their best ball sense the All Star break vs the top teams in the AL. All teams have weakness it is easy to point them out. The O'S have a shot at a championship and if you cant see that you are not a real fan and will never be able to enjoy the game of baseball and I feel bad for ya.

Musicturtle said...

I just think that maybe if the article was titled "The Os May have given up too much" it would have been better received. Jon is going all over the place writing how he is right and everyone else has faulty logic, doesn't understand or is just silly if they disagree with him.

An evaluation is a judgement, not an irrefutable fact, and the responses to those in disagreement of the evaluation of this trade have been at least a bit condescending.

For a site that claims that criticism should not be a measurement of fandom, I think that disagreement should also not be regarded as ingnorance.

Jon Shepherd said...

Then provide me with well communicated criticism because I have yet to read it from you. I am not trying to be mean here. I literally have not seen that. My viewpoint is consistent and has not wavered, but it will if you present me with something logical and meaningful. While we appreciate criticism and to be challenged, that needs to be thoughtful criticism.

Case in point, your comment "If you don't care about what happened, why did you make a point on national media to criticize a trade that is already done?" makes no sense whatsoever. Absolutely none. This is not me chiding people who disagree with me. It is me stating that the particular thought there lacks recognition of what the topic is and what it means.

Perhaps I am too harsh and I should simply ignored poorly written trains of thought. Or maybe my reading comprehension is simply poor, but in this case I doubt it. It simply makes no sense to me. When things make no sense to me, I email writers I know from other sites to help me understand what exactly is being said. The two I sought out also thought the comment was without point and did not reflect an understanding of the conversation at hand.

Personally, I like to be wrong. I like to learn things. I have not recognized you bringing any novel thoughts to the table to challenge my currently held perspective.