Welcome to the Orioles Nation Forums! Like most online communities, you must register to post on our message board. However, posting is free--it always will be--and registration is a simple process. Become part of the growing Orioles Nation community and register now!

Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #76 by ofahn » January 15th, 2013, 6:44 pm

Seafordeagles wrote:Then if Johnson's at his highest value than Porcello is not nearly enough IMO.


Player evaluation is an art as much as it's a science. I respect that you don't value Porcello as much as some of us on the forum do, but you might want to research what some of the more experienced professional talent evaluators think of Porcello and what they see his ceiling as IF he were to pitch in front of a above average defense. I also think Porcello would benefit from working with a C like Matt Wieters.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4399
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #77 by Seafordeagles » January 15th, 2013, 6:59 pm

ofahn wrote:
Player evaluation is an art as much as it's a science. I respect that you don't value Porcello as much as some of us on the forum do, but you might want to research what some of the more experienced professional talent evaluators think of Porcello and what they see his ceiling as IF he were to pitch in front of a above average defense. I also think Porcello would benefit from working with a C like Matt Wieters.


i'll disagree to an extent. The only reason I'm not a big fan of Porcello is for some reason he lost his position in the Tigers rotation. I know he's a ground ball pitcher, which is a good thing. My other issue with him is why is he on the trading block when pitching is at a premium?

If he lost his place in the rotation and Jim Johnson's value is at a "all time high", then we have got to get more for Johnson than Porcello. I really don't mind trying to get Porcello for the reasons you posted but we need to get him for someone other than both JJ's. I'd offer Patton for him and see what they say.

I agree about Wieters but I think Avila is a pretty good catcher too, but not as good as Matt.
Seafordeagles
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 689
Joined: October 2012
Reputation Score: 18

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #78 by ofahn » January 15th, 2013, 7:16 pm

Seafordeagles wrote: The only reason I'm not a big fan of Porcello is for some reason he lost his position in the Tigers rotation. I know he's a ground ball pitcher, which is a good thing. My other issue with him is why is he on the trading block when pitching is at a premium?


Porcello may be a classic example of a pitcher that needs a change of scenery, kind of like Arrieta. Porcello is a ground ball pitcher in front of a HORRIBLE defense. That HAS to mess with his head.

The Tigers are all in for this year. If they decided that Porcello was a question mark then they would have brought in someone else that wasn't. It also gave them a solid trade chip to look for a SS or a closer.

IMO if you allow Porcello to work with Rick Peterson and pitch in front of our defense he has a very good chance of becoming the SP that he was projected to be.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4399
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #79 by Seafordeagles » January 15th, 2013, 7:21 pm

ofahn wrote:
Porcello may be a classic example of a pitcher that needs a change of scenery, kind of like Arrieta. Porcello is a ground ball pitcher in front of a HORRIBLE defense. That HAS to mess with his head.

The Tigers are all in for this year. If they decided that Porcello was a question mark then they would have brought in someone else that wasn't. It also gave them a solid trade chip to look for a SS or a closer.

IMO if you allow Porcello to work with Rick Peterson and pitch in front of our defense he has a very good chance of becoming the SP that he was projected to be.


Would you offer Patton for Porcello?
Seafordeagles
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 689
Joined: October 2012
Reputation Score: 18

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #80 by ofahn » January 15th, 2013, 7:30 pm

Seafordeagles wrote:
Would you offer Patton for Porcello?


Absolutely, but I doubt the Tigers would make that trade.

Detroit has pennant fever and they believe they need a closer. Fine, give them one for a potential #2 SP with three years of control. On top of that, he's a ground ball machine and that's a survival skill in our ball park. I drool at the thought of having both Porcello and Britton in our 2014 rotation. That's a TON of ground balls.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4399
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #81 by OriolesRedskins28 » January 15th, 2013, 9:38 pm

ofahn wrote:I also think Porcello would benefit from working with a C like Matt Wieters.


Didn't even think of that... and as you said that's on top of putting him in front of a great infield defense and working with Rick Peterson.

ofahn wrote:The Tigers are all in for this year. If they decided that Porcello was a question mark then they would have brought in someone else that wasn't. It also gave them a solid trade chip to look for a SS or a closer.


Agreed! Tigers are in "win now" mode and a proven closer (especially with their mediocre bullpen) is much more important to them than a young SP who has plenty of room to grow but MAY be an issue for them in 2013. I think they would prefer a low ceiling but stable veteran for their 5th spot over the high upside but not very stable Porcello.

The O's on the other hand could definitely use a young high upside SP with their not so high upside and not so young rotation. If Porcello pans out he could be a mainstay in the rotation for years to come, if not then the O's have some decent SP options to replace him (not many with high ceilings under age 25 though). And of course there's the O's spectacular bullpen depth that has plenty of potential closing options which makes it all possible.

I'll throw out some quotes from the Morosi article I like.
"At the moment, Porcello is probably the best fifth starter in baseball – considering his potential (still young at 24) and the Tigers’ pitching depth. Porcello is coming off an unspectacular season, 10-12 with a 4.59 ERA. But his numbers would improve with a better defensive infield – which the Orioles have, with the likes of Hardy and Manny Machado.

Porcello is three seasons away from free agency, Johnson only two. Porcello has averaged a little more than 170 innings per year over his major-league career. Johnson logged just under 70 in 2012, within the normal range for a closer on a winning team.

So, Porcello figures to throw more than 500 innings before becoming a free agent. Johnson might offer only 140. Put another way: Johnson, with less than one-third of Porcello’s expected workload, would need to pitch pretty spectacularly over the next two seasons in order to be more valuable than a theoretically improved Porcello."

I think we can all agree Jim Johnson is a better closer than Porcello is as a starter but starters on average are more valuable than relievers.

I think we can agree to disagree on this one and I certainly wouldn't be upset if the O's keep Johnson because it is nice to have a stable presence in the back of the bullpen (the anti-Kevin Gregg) that also allows the other relievers to stay in their slots. I would just prefer Porcello.
OriolesRedskins28
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 427
Joined: August 2011
Reputation Score: 25

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #82 by ofahn » January 15th, 2013, 9:48 pm

OriolesRedskins28 wrote:I think we can all agree Jim Johnson is a better closer than Porcello is as a starter but starters on average are more valuable than relievers.


I agree with that statement, but I would like to point out that IMO Porcello has not yet gotten close to his ceiling as opposed to Johnson who is probably at (or close to) his limit.

OriolesRedskins28 wrote:I think we can agree to disagree on this one and I certainly wouldn't be upset if the O's keep Johnson because it is nice to have a stable presence in the back of the bullpen (the anti-Kevin Gregg) that also allows the other relievers to stay in their slots. I would just prefer Porcello.


I won't stomp my feet or hold my breath until I'm blue if we don't make this trade, but I see it as a way to convert a strength into a an asset in an area we can use one. Frankly, I see us winning either way.

FWIW - I always enjoy your comments. You seem to get to the heart of things without getting caught up in the emotion of the issue. POINTS!
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4399
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #83 by ofahn » March 5th, 2013, 1:10 pm

Tigers Looking To Trade For Closer
By Zach Links [March 5, 2013 at 11:43am CST]

The Tigers raised eyebrows across baseball this offseason with their decision to install rookie Bruce Rondon as their closer. Now, they are having second thoughts about that plan and pushing hard to find a closer via trade, major league sources tell Danny Knobler of CBSSports.com.

The Nationals could afford to part with a reliever, after the signing of Rafael Soriano bumped back Drew Storen and Tyler Clippard, but so far they are telling teams that they have no interest in moving anyone in the pen. The Red Sox have an extra closer in Andrew Bailey but the Tigers have yet to contact Boston about him.

Detroit could use Rick Porcello to land a ninth-inning option, but they'll want a strong closer in return given his strong play in spring training. There are also two unsigned closers in Jose Valverde and Francisco Rodriguez, but they don't seem terribly interested in either one.


http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/03/t ... loser.html

I have been saying for months on this thread that Detroit was not going to risk this season on a rookie closer. I still think that a trade of Jim Johnson and someone like Jake Arrieta to Detroit for Porcello and Castellanos makes sense for both teams.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4399
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #84 by birdwatcher55 » March 5th, 2013, 1:11 pm

Man I wish the Admin would trash this post. It's getting kind of silly really 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #85 by A_K » March 5th, 2013, 2:23 pm

According to ZIPS projections:

Porcello: 179 innings pitched with a FIP of 4.01, good for a WAR of 2.4. All other projection systems are in the same ballpark, with innings projected ranging between 153 and 186, FIP ranging between 3.72 and 4.07, and WAR ranging between 2.1 and 2.7.

Johnson: 61.7 innings pitched with a FIP of 3.87, good for a WAR of 0.3. Other projection system range between innings of 55 and 70, with a FIP of 3.30 and 3.87, and a WAR of 0.3 to 1.2.

Here are some obvious caveats, that I imagine people have already begun yelling at the screen: projections aren't always right. In fact they have a pretty high margin of error. And WAR isn't a perfect stat, and it certainly isn't the end-all-be-all stat that tells us everything we need to know.

But what these projections do tell us is that, based on the collective history of baseball, we can expect Porcello to pitch almost three times as many innings as Johnson, and to do so while allowing only slightly more runs per 9 innings. If those two things happen, Rick Porcello is a meaningfully more valuable player than Jim Johnson.

If the O's could pull a straight up Porcello for Johnson trade, we should all celebrate by dancing naked in the street. (In different streets, ideally).
A_K
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 608
Joined: April 2011
Reputation Score: 43

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #86 by ofahn » March 5th, 2013, 2:39 pm

A_K wrote:If the O's could pull a straight up Porcello for Johnson trade, we should all celebrate by dancing naked in the street. (In different streets, ideally).


ONLY if SOME of us look like Kate Upton or Marissa Miller.
User avatar
ofahn
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 4399
Joined: May 2011
Reputation Score: 85

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #87 by osforlife » March 5th, 2013, 7:27 pm

This thread is not ridiculous at all. The Orioles have a good closer, but have the needed bullpen depth to replace him, and the Tigers need a good closer. The Tigers are probably interested in Jim Johnson and JJ Hardy, but most importantly Johnson. The Orioles are probably interested in Nick Castellanos, Rick Porcello, and a relief prospect. Johnny Peralta would likely come to the Orioles if we traded Hardy. There are numerous trades within those players.
User avatar
osforlife
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1622
Joined: October 2011
Location: Southern Maryland
Reputation Score: 59

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #88 by birdwatcher55 » March 6th, 2013, 3:32 pm

osforlife wrote:This thread is not ridiculous at all. The Orioles have a good closer, but have the needed bullpen depth to replace him, and the Tigers need a good closer. The Tigers are probably interested in Jim Johnson and JJ Hardy, but most importantly Johnson. The Orioles are probably interested in Nick Castellanos, Rick Porcello, and a relief prospect. Johnny Peralta would likely come to the Orioles if we traded Hardy. There are numerous trades within those players.

Dream on my friend 8-)
birdwatcher55
Aberdeen IronBirds
 
Posts: 1624
Joined: November 2011
Reputation Score: 11

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #89 by A_K » March 6th, 2013, 4:40 pm

birdwatcher55 wrote:Dream on my friend 8-)


He need not dream when the facts are on his side.
A_K
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 608
Joined: April 2011
Reputation Score: 43

Re: Tigers want Hardy, but O's unlikely to deal him

PostPost #90 by LA Detective » March 6th, 2013, 8:50 pm

I find it impressive with the wisdom and belief in Porcello and adding someone we think could pitch in the 3 of a championship rotation It is always a plus but I really wouldnt give up either JJ.

I like our team and I believe we have Pennant Fever. Right now two of our biggest strengths are our D and the Pen. Johnson stabilyzes the Pen. He allows everyone else to fit into their roles. He might not go 51 for 54 again but a 40 for 46 would prove he is good and might actually add to his stock. Hardy is the leader of the infield D. Always in the right spot. Always making the smart play.

Detroit is good but they have some big holes (infield D and the Pen).

A trade for Porcello should resemble more of who he is now than what we believe he could be or at least sit somewhere in between. I would rather deal two of the Calvary and maybe an X.Avery or Hoes.

I just dont want to see us do anything to take from our strengths. I believe these strengths might make us a better team than the star riddled Tigers.
LA Detective
GCL Orioles
 
Posts: 293
Joined: July 2011
Reputation Score: 14


PreviousNext

Return to Baltimore Orioles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ofahn and 9 guests

cron