Jump to content

CheeryO

Limited Posting Member
  • Content Count

    631
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by CheeryO

  1. Could very well be Peter Angelos' last words.
  2. I think Mancini's value is greatest to a team like Tampa, who could use a top 1B/DH type, who is a contender yet could every well get taken over by New York or Boston, and who doesn't want to spend a lot of money.
  3. If Mountcastle fails to produce you would still have the prospects you traded Mancini for. The point is a) will Mancini still be around by the time the O's can seriously contend again, and b) if he is still around will he still be this good or will he be too expensive? Replacing a player like Mancini isn't easy, but it's easier than finding good pitching prospects or infielders to load up on.
  4. I see your point. Most decent or even bad teams would normally think about trading a cheap player as good as Mancini unless they were really stacked with players. But these Orioles are really, really, really bad. I think even Dan and Andy would have their hands forced.
  5. Top means better than good. Good means better than pretty good. OK, you got me, one top prospect, two good ones, and two OK ones.
  6. Yeah that's clearer, but I don't see why Dan or Andy would not trade Mancini in the same situation. It's old man Angelos who likely wouldn't trade him.
  7. A contender like the Tampa Bay Rays could use a slugger at 1B. What if you could trade Mancini to Tampa for two top prospects and three good ones? A team like Tampa especially would highly value Mancini because he's cheap. Depends who the guys are, but that's how the O's get better faster.
  8. The Orioles under Dan had a shot at contending, so trading Mancini wouldn't have made sense. Under Andy it maybe wouldn't have made sense either because those teams were closer to contending than this one.
  9. The O's should at least consider trading Mancini. His trade value may never be this high again, and by the time the O's might be contenders again he'll probably be expensive.
  10. While Villar and Mancini likely won't continue their great hitting all season, the back of the lineup likely won't continue to be as bad all season as they've been. Also, this Oriole team has some speed, which recent O's teams have not had much of. That might be part of the difference. Despite Bundy's poor start, some injuries and a shaky bullpen, I'm optimistic the pitching staff could be quite a bit better than we expected. The O's have faced some strong offences so far; while they've been battered some games they've looked pretty good in others.
  11. He will if a team offers a haul for him, but our point is that it's unlikely he'll bring back a haul of solid prospects. That said, if Mancini finishes this season or next in or close the top 25 in hitting -- well....
  12. I think it's pretty clear you don't trade him until or unless somebody offers meaningful prospects in return. That may seem like an obvious thing to say, but did the O's trade Kevin Gausman for anyone meaningful? Doesn't appear so. Now the comparison may be off because Gausman was starting to earn a bigger salary, and because the O's were just embarking on the current rebuild. But even though Gausman never lived up to star status, the guy was hardly a bust. A prospect rich team like the Braves should have turned over more for Gaus. It would be tragic to see the O's trade a solid player in Mancini a year or two or now -- for several average prospects -- just to save money. That may be more likely to happen with Bundy, but Bundy has if anything struggled more than Gausman. It would be less painful to cut ties with an underperforming, expensive, former top prospect in Bundy for an average return than it would to trade an overachiever in Mancini for a somewhat above average return -- all just to save money or to extend the rebuild. Not that this team needs to save money, but it doesn't need to send away good players wither without a solid return in place.
  13. I'm not sure Mancini has enough trade value to be classic trade bait. He was never a top prospect, so other teams probably think he's still playing above his head and less willing to trade top prospects for him. Also, he's a DH/1B type. I think the O's are less likely to trade him because he's cheap and good, and because of other teams' skepticism over strong long term performance.
  14. Yeah, trying to bunt might be an idea just to try something different. I wonder if Chris Davis is the main reason Peter Angelos' health deteriorated.
  15. Mike Wright gets extended most days he pitches.
  16. Maybe Angelos meant to sign Khris Davis to a nine figure deal instead of Chris Davis? One can dream.
  17. What this thread should be called: Will the Orioles ever be able to Compete with small Markets like Milwaukee and Cleveland?
  18. I'm thinking San Juan, PR or Santo Domingo, DR would be far better island host cities than a city in Curacao or Aruba. But even then, they're not exactly middle class cities compared to anything in the US or Canada.
  19. Willemstad? Who would watch the games? Tourists, hotel clerks and fishermen? Mexico City is a huge market. But is it a huge baseball market? Do people care about MLB in Mexico City? Or is it all about soccer? And even if they do care is the standard of living high enough for any baseball-loving segment that will watch on local cable TV or pay high prices that can compete with a large American city? Plus there is a long distance to travel for visiting teams -- security problems with Mexico's struggle with violence and drug trafficking, etc. Vancouver or Montreal is more likely. But Montreal is already seen as a non-baseball city with the failure of the Expos. Vancouver makes more sense, but you can be sure the Seattle Mariners will vigorously fight to keep any team out of Vancouver or Portland -- the way the Giants have vigorously fought the A's moving to San Jose. It could take years of legal battling before any team moves to Vancouver or Portland. Moving the Orioles comes with huge risks because it takes a much larger and wealthier population to support an MLB team than a team in any of the other sport. NFL teams only have 16 games a season, compared to 162 for baseball. So the average NFL game has a much higher concentration of viewers than the average MLB game -- by ratio alone theoretically more than 10 times viewers per game. There's a reason only one MLB team has moved in the past several decades -- the Expos to Washington -- because Washington is clearly a bigger and better baseball market than Montreal. Will another team move? If so I'd look for the Marlins to move. Despite a new stadium and two WS wins the past 25 years the team has failed to attract a large fan base.
  20. You sound knowledgeable. Have you crunched the numbers? Please do share.
  21. No it isn't. A new owner cannot just make new distribution deals materialize from nothing. The value of any distribution deal would be determined by the team's market. All of the markets that currently don't have a team are smaller than Baltimore -- with the exception of markets in Canada. Look for those markets to produce distribution deals significantly inferior to MASN and the others. Unless the O's move to New York or LA -- both of which could probably support a third team -- I can't see how any market out there without a team would come close to matching Baltimore. All the other best options are AAAA markets.
  22. What do you mean by "value added of movement"? What value is there moving the Orioles to an inferior market -- especially an inferior local TV market?
×
×
  • Create New...