Transaction Scorecard: Jarrett Martin (LHP) and Tyler Henson (OF) for Dana Eveland (LHP)
Another brief survey as to what our brethren in O's bloggery have to say about the deal in which the O's managed to free up space under their league mandated Tyler cap and acquire a burly (not Buehrle), groundball machine.
Overall, the outlook seems decidedly negative on this transaction, though opinions of Eveland, on balance, seem surprisingly high, all things considered.
Daniel Moroz, Canden Crazies: Ugh. The Orioles are in such bad shape they're talking up Dana Eveland as a good pitcher and, perhaps worst of all, he really might actually improve the team's rotation.
Matthew Pouliot, Hardball Talk: It’s kind of hard to believe a team is actually giving up talent for Dana Eveland rather than just signing him to a minor league contract and letting him compete for a job, but here we are.
Don Olsen, Orioles Nation: The Orioles are not in the position of giving away prospects unless it is a lock of cheap service time that can be a building block for their future needs. Again, I like Dana Eveland, but it is long shot that he fits that mold of a "building block for the future".
34 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Can I say that a thumbs down is the consensus opinion?
Kevin Gregg-"You obviously haven't acquired my taste for pitching yet"
cheers, counsellor!
"Three thousand years of beautiful tradition,from Moses to Sandy Koufax,YOU'RE GODDAMN RIGHT I'M LIVING IN THE FUCKING PAST!"- Walter Sobchak
i believe that would be fair.
"Three thousand years of beautiful tradition,from Moses to Sandy Koufax,YOU'RE GODDAMN RIGHT I'M LIVING IN THE FUCKING PAST!"- Walter Sobchak
grazie, signore.
"Three thousand years of beautiful tradition,from Moses to Sandy Koufax,YOU'RE GODDAMN RIGHT I'M LIVING IN THE FUCKING PAST!"- Walter Sobchak
For some reason i read this as Grady Sizemore
and thought I had missed something
I think this is a case of wanting something bigger more than it is the deal itself being bad
The fact is we gave up sixth rate prospects for a fourth rate pitcher. It’s probably a longer shot that either Martin or Henson turn into anything than it is that Eveland has turned a corner.
Eveland has always been solid with the GB%. In his short time with the Dodgers last year he seriously cut down on his BB/9 and put up 0.6 WAR in 5 starts. Think about that. In 5 games he put up 0.6 WAR more than Vlad did last year. And it’s not even costing $8.5 million to see if he can replicate last year’s possibly fluky performance.
I think it’s worth a couple of probably nothings (guys who weren’t even listed as “Others” in John Sickels’ 2012 O’s top prospects) to find out if Eveland can maintain his production from the end of last year.
This is a positive deal for the club. It may be marginal, but given what Duquette has to work with and how long he’s been on the job, I don’t think the complaining is warranted.
I'm not confused brother! I just took picture of my face, and it's deffo not my confused face. - Waj
by Christopher Claxton on Dec 9, 2011 1:29 PM EST reply actions
i agree with all of this.
As an aside, has anyone else noticed Eveland’s crazy splits in those September MLB starts?:
at dodger stadium, 2 starts: 9 IP, 9.00 ERA, 2.00 WHIP, SO/BB 1.25
away, 3 starts: 20-2/3 IP, 0.44 ERA, 0.774 WHIP, SO/BB 5.50
"End of season like this, to make Boston go home sad, crying, I’ll take it all day."—Robert Andino
If he stays away from Dodger stadium
it looks like they’ll rename the Cy Young the Dana Eveland Award.
Mother, did it need to be so high.
Sept. 21
Against the Giants he gave up 5 runs in 4 innings. In that time he managed 6 hits, 1K and 3 walks. Those hits came on 3 fly balls, 3 line drives and 12 ground balls. At least his GB% was solid…
It’s also curious that those two home games were against the same teams he faced in the first two games away… Hopefully that’s just coincidence and not a sign that it just takes one game to figure him out.
I still think it’s worth two non-prospects regardless.
I'm not confused brother! I just took picture of my face, and it's deffo not my confused face. - Waj
by Christopher Claxton on Dec 9, 2011 1:55 PM EST up reply actions
agree
I still think it’s worth two non-prospects regardless.
It seems anytime the O’s trade crap for crap, people seem to get all homer over the crap sent packing like there still might be a chance. not that the people on here are, but I do read other blogs not winning awards like CC does, so I am talking more about “those” people.
If Eveland were not a very real non-tender candidate I would agree.
However, from what I have read, Eveland was likely to be thrown onto the scrap heap, which means that the O’s could possibly have had him for no prospects. There are also free agents of similar or better caliber available right now for no prospects. I understand that this is a low-level move unlikely to hurt the team in any signficant way and it’s probably the equivalent of trading a dollar bill for four quarters but why give up the four quarters if you can have the dollar for free?
Mother, did it need to be so high.
Where's the guarantee...
That you’re even getting the dollar bill without the four quarters?
Also, I’d say it’s more like getting a quarter for a couple nickels.
I'm not confused brother! I just took picture of my face, and it's deffo not my confused face. - Waj
by Christopher Claxton on Dec 9, 2011 2:16 PM EST up reply actions
There is never a guarantee
I’m just saying that Dana Eveland or an equivalent lackluster pitcher can very likely be had without giving up any prospects, regardless of quality of those prospects. I acknowledge that we did not give up anything stellar in return and those prospects are unlikely to sniff MLB. Maybe I’m just being too critical here.
Mother, did it need to be so high.
Not trying to be snarky, but I'm not sure how else to say this...
What other possible non-tenders are gonna be out there who showed signs of a possible turnaround?
I’m genuinely curious.
I'm not confused brother! I just took picture of my face, and it's deffo not my confused face. - Waj
by Christopher Claxton on Dec 9, 2011 2:34 PM EST up reply actions
Sure.
First, I’m not sold on Eveland’s turnaround. The majority of innings pitched last year were for the Dodgers’ AAA squad, in which innings he pitched at a level very similar to his numbers in his last few stints at AAA. When he came back to MLB, he pitched well sometimes and disasterous sometimes but in a sample size of 29.2 innings. I don’t think I need to tell anyone that a 29 IP sample is not particularly significant. Although one can argue that it is a glimmer of a turnaround, I would bet you can find a couple 29 inning stretches from Eveland’s career in which he pitched as well or better. I haven’t done the research so I don’t know.
Additionally, there are a number of signs that Eveland is in decline. His average fastball velocity has decreased from 90.9 mph in his MLB debut to 87.8 mph now. This seems especially important given that his other pitches have not experienced a similar decrease in velocity, which means there is less of a separation between his fastball and offspeed pitches. His K rate has decreased from a creer average of 5.85% to the 4% range. Consequently, hitters are making more contact with Eveland’s pitches as evidenced by his increasing contact percentage rates. I haven’t read anythign about Eveland that indicates a change in pitching approach or learning a new pitch since he learned a cutter in 2009 (or at least that’s when Pitch f/x started picking up that pitch). Moreover, all of Eveland’s fastball, slider, and cutter rank as below average pitches according to Pitch Value and those are the pitches he throws almost 90% of the time.
Anyway, there are a number of FA pitchers available that are as good or better than Eveland, including but not limited to E. Jackson, P. Maholm, J. Vazquez (if he doesn’t retire), B. Colon (esp. if we’re talking about evidence of a turnaround), R. Oswalt, H. Kuroda, and even J. Francis and J. Marquis (who are pretty much Dana Eveland).
I think that pretty much sums it up.
Mother, did it need to be so high.
by salvotion on Dec 9, 2011 4:28 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
supposedly...
he had bone chips removed from his elbow last year and refined his change.
"Three thousand years of beautiful tradition,from Moses to Sandy Koufax,YOU'RE GODDAMN RIGHT I'M LIVING IN THE FUCKING PAST!"- Walter Sobchak
Do you remember when he refined his change up?
2010 is the first year it showed a positive Pitch Value and he threw it much more often, 18% of his pitches v. 10% or less before then. In 2011, it decreased to 12% in SSS from 2011. There is also not much separation in speed between his change and fb, with an average fb speed of 87.8 and average change speed of 83 mph, a less than 4 mph difference. Normal separation tends to be between 8-10 mph. I guess he could still make the pitch effective if it has a lot of movement, especially if he throws the change from the same arm slot and it has a lot of movement different than the fb. Any idea if that is what is going on?
Mother, did it need to be so high.
Ummm...I know about those guys.
I was looking for more diamond in the rough (deep rough even) types that could be had for the price of what Eveland will get (likely about $1m in arbitration #1) or less. Even Colon will likely get $3-5 m.
I was thinking you had some Brandon McCarthy types in your back pocket.
I'm not confused brother! I just took picture of my face, and it's deffo not my confused face. - Waj
by Christopher Claxton on Dec 9, 2011 5:53 PM EST up reply actions
I wish!
And I fully understand your desire to look for value on the dollar. I would like to find guys buried somewhere who are capable of producing at the MLB level. If I knew how to find those guys, I would have a different job (maybe even one that I like). The O’s can afford to spend some money to find a decent mid-rotation starter. After last year, I would like a little reliability on that front, something more than hoping pitchers turn things around.
Mother, did it need to be so high.
And my own father, a handsome and generous man. In addition to our summer and winter estate, he owned a valuable piece of land. True, it was a small piece. But he carried it with him wherever he went.
“Dimitri Pietrovich! I would like to buy your land.”
“This land is not for sale. Some day, I hope to build it.”
He was an idiot. But I loved him.
Mother, did it need to be so high.
well, yeah
if the reports are true but the o’s got him for “next” to nothing so whateves.
btw – i wish we could be debating benjamins for a cleveland trade. but in birdland we play with quarters.
The splits were just as crazy at Alberquerque, an extreme hitters’ park. He did very well on the road last year in AAA.
I can’t take most of the commenters in the OP seriously. It is risible to say that we gave up “prospects” or “talent”, unless prospects is defined as anyone in the minor league system. Henson’t never hit well - career minor league OPS around 700 and he’s not a slick fielding shortstop - and if you want to see some big crooked numbers, look at the number of walks, hit batters and wild pitches Martin gave up last year in A ball.
I think it bears repeating - we cleared out some of the minor league brush for someone who might be serviceable at the major league level. One piece at a time, as Johnny Cash once sang.
i think for someone who is going to arbitration...
and who was likely to be non-tendered BEFORE his former team acquired two free agent pitchers, it’s a little odd. though, it seems sort of reasonable, those things aside and compared to, say, trading chris ray for millwood and the 6 or 9 million the o’s had to pay him, even more so.
"Three thousand years of beautiful tradition,from Moses to Sandy Koufax,YOU'RE GODDAMN RIGHT I'M LIVING IN THE FUCKING PAST!"- Walter Sobchak
This is close to where I'm at on this deal,
I just don’t see what all the fuss is about. Tyler Henson is AAAA stuff, and Jarret Martin, whom I like, realistically is not going to make it to AAA. He has a live arm, but he had a 1.55 WHIP in low-A as a 21 year old. So he is probably a good candidate to repeat low A at 22.
Eveland has a solid FIP and induces grounders. Who is to say he would have signed in Baltimore if given other options? I’d rather see this guy than Alfredo Simon next year.
If you look at those UZR ratings or whatever
by dfa on Dec 9, 2011 2:17 PM EST up reply actions
Dana Eveland for Henson/Martin=A 40 degree day
Nobody remember 40, and Dan Duquette is giving me way too many 40 degree days!
by Dave Mc on Dec 9, 2011 8:03 PM EST reply actions 4 recs
That's the best analogy yet.
"So I said, 'Looks like they've finally got Ogea in the pen. I wonder if the glove fits.' I thought I was going to get fired." - Mike Flanagan, RIP
by Eat More Esskay on Dec 9, 2011 9:21 PM EST up reply actions






















