Jump to content
Tony-OH

Chris Davis since he broke his 0-fer streak

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

That is the type of move I wouldn't expect to see from Dan or Andy.

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

That is the type of move I wouldn't expect to see from Dan or Andy.

I think current circumstances kind of compel considering it, with Mountcastle needing a 1B/DH spot and Sisco possibly needing one at least part-time.    The calculus is affected by whether Davis plays his way off the team or not.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, tntoriole said:

.  I assume you are only and strictly referring to the sample size of the last 21 games when you are making these comparisons.  Davis OPS of .952 is only for the last 21 games.  He stands at .666 OPS overall for the year.  Trey Mancini is at .914 for the year to lead this team to date and Dwight Smith at .844 and they both have substantially more plate appearances thus far (more than 50 more) than Davis. 

Let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves.  

Yeah, TonyP and I are only talking about 4/13-forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CheeryO said:

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.

I don't think that it is the type of move that Dan or Andy would make if they found themselves in this situation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TonySoprano said:

Yeah, TonyP and I are only talking about 4/13-forward.

I expect regression from  Davis from the last 21 games as pitchers readjust, but we shall see.  If he is over .700 OPS at season’s end, I will be surprised. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tx Oriole said:

Trade Mancini? He should be playing 1st. Davis should be in Texas fishing. 

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.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CheeryO said:

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.  

I don't see Mancini bringing back two top prospects and three good ones.  How are you defining top and good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think that it is the type of move that Dan or Andy would make if they found themselves in this situation.

Was that clearer? 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CheeryO said:

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.  

You are right. I was thinking wrong. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CheeryO said:

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.

Too much team control left. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't see Mancini bringing back two top prospects and three good ones.  How are you defining top and good?

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CheeryO said:

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.

Top equals top 10?  Good equals top 30?  Something like that? 

The O's are also to the point where they need to worry about if the guys they acquire need to go on the 40.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why anyone would want to trade Mancini.  Relatively young, cheap, mashing.  Those are the types of players we've been whining that we don't have for years.

It's cavalier thinking that Mountcastle is going to produce in the majors and that we should just hand him a spot because..well, prospect status.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CheeryO said:

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.

I'm not trying to pin you down to bring this up later, I'm curious.

I'm having a hard time guessing what is value actually is.

On one hand he's a bat only right handed hitter.  On the other hand he's been pretty productive in that role two of the last three seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Moose Milligan said:

I'm not sure why anyone would want to trade Mancini.  Relatively young, cheap, mashing.  Those are the types of players we've been whining that we don't have for years.

It's cavalier thinking that Mountcastle is going to produce in the majors and that we should just hand him a spot because..well, prospect status.  

What do horses have to do with anything?

 

You trade Mancini because he isn't going to be around and affordable when the O's window opens again.  Are you looking to extend him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • Correct. He and clement had cup of coffees.
    • To state the obvious, some drafts are better than others, both regarding the amount of talent available and the choices made by the teams.      To illustrate, I had a brief look at the top 30 picks in every draft from 2000-2014.    I stopped after 2014 because many of the players picked in 2015 or later are still in the minors or have only played 1-2 years in the majors, so the data on those years is woefully incomplete.    Even in this synopsis, the data on years from 2010 on are still very much in progress.    But, I think you can determine which drafts were strong and which were weak, in terms of available talent and the wisdom of the choices. 2000 Players over 10 WAR: 4 Players over 0.0 WAR: 6 Players who made the majors: 16 Top 5: Utley 64.4 (15), A. Gonzalez 43.6 (1), Wainwright 40.5 (29), Baldelli 10.2 (6), S. Burnett 5.9 (19)   2001 Players over 10 WAR: 5 Players over 0.0 WAR: 15 Players who made the majors: 19 Top 5: Mauer 55.3 (1), Teixeira 50.6 (5), Prior 16.6 (2), Floyd 15.7 (4), Lowry 10.0 (30)   2002 Players over 10 WAR: 11 Players over 0.0 WAR: 18 Players who made the majors: 24 Top 5: Greinke 71.0 (6), Hamels 59.5 (17), Cain 29.1 (25), Span  28.1 (20), Fielder 23.8 (7)   2003 Players over 10 WAR: 7 Players over 0.0 WAR: 18 Players who made the majors: 22 Top 5: Markakis 34.2 (7), Hill 24.4 (13), Danks 20.2 (9), Billingsley 17.2 (24), Maholm 11.9 (8)   2004 Players over 10 WAR: 6 Players over 0.0 WAR: 22 Players who made the majors: 27 Top 5: Verlander 71.6 (2), Weaver 34.6 (12), Walker 20.0 (11), S. Drew 15.9 (15), Butler 11.9 (14)   2005 Players over 10 WAR: 12 Players over 0.0 WAR: 20 Players who made the majors: 26 Top 5: Braun 46.8 (5), McCutchen 44.8 (11), Tulowitzki 44.5 (7), Zimmerman 38.5 (4), Gordon 35.0 (2)   2006 Players over 10 WAR: 7 Players over 0.0 WAR: 17 Players who made the majors: 23 Top 5: Kershaw 67.9 (7), Scherzer 60.1 (11), Longoria 56.0 (3), Lincecum 19.6 (10), Kennedy 17.6 (21)   2007 Players over 10 WAR: 6 Players over 0.0 WAR: 16 Players who made the majors: 22 Top 5: Price 39.4 (1), Heyward 36.9 (14), Bumbarner 36.8 (10), Porcello 19.8 (27), Wieters 18.2 (5)   2008 Players over 10 WAR: 7 Players over 0.0 WAR: 20 Players who made the majors: 26 Top 5: Posey 41.8 (5), G. Cole 23.8 (28 – not signed), Hosmer 16.7 (3), Lawrie 15.6 (16), J. Castro 12.1 (10)   2009: Players over 10 WAR: 6 Players over 0.0 WAR: 17 Players who made the majors: 22 Top 5: Trout 72.8 (25), Strasburg 33.5 (1), Pollock 19.2 (17), Minor 17.7 (7), Leake 16.9 (8)   2010 Players over 10 WAR:  7 Players over 0.0 WAR: 14 Players who made the majors: 21 Top 5: Sale 45.3 (10), Machado 36.7 (3), Harper 31.8 (1), Yelich 31.8 (23), Grandal 17.2 (12)   2011 Players over 10 WAR: 9 Players over 0.0 WAR: 23 Players who made the majors: 27 Top 5: Rendon 29.1 (6), Lindor 27.6 (8), Springer 25.4 (11), Cole 23.9 (1), S. Gray 18.1 (18)   2012 Players over 10 WAR: 5 Players over 0.0 WAR: 15 Players who made the majors: 21 Top 5: Correa 24.5 (1), C. Seager 15.7 (18), Stroman 14.7 (22), A. Russell 10.7 (11), Gausman 10.0 (4)   2013 Players over 10 WAR: 2 Players over 0.0 WAR: 15 Players who made the majors: 22 Top 5: Bryant 23.9 (2), J. Gray 10.1 (3), T. Anderson 8.7 (17), M. Gonzales 6.2 (19), Renfroe 6.1 (13)   2014 Players over 10 WAR: 5 Players over 0.0 WAR: 15 Players who made the majors: 20 Top 5: Chapman 19.8 (25), Nola 19.4 (7), T. Turner 14.1 (13), Conforto 12.4 (10), Freeland 10.6 (8)   The 2002, 2005 and 2011 drafts were pretty amazing, both in terms of the number of players chosen in the top 30 who reached the majors and the ones who were/are pretty good.    If I get a chance, I'll add to this post some of the better players who were chosen outside the top 30.      Note that only 20 of 75 players chosen in the top 5 in this 15-year period have actually been among the top 5 of the first 30 chosen players: 7 no. 1's, 4 no. 2's, 3 no. 3's, 3 no. 4's and 3 no. 5's.      We'll see how the class of 2020 pans out.    
    • Here is a list of the top 5 selections for college bats for the last 17 years.  Everyone made it to the majors with 13 having good to great careers.   The O’s should draft a college bat either Torkelson or Martin. 2000 none 2001 Teixeira 2002 none 2003 Weeks 2004 none 2005 Gordon, Clement, Zimmerman, Braun 2006. Longoria 2007 Wieters 2008 Alvarez, Posey 2009 Ackley, Sanchez 2010 none 2011 none 2012 Zunino 2013 Bryant 2014 schwarber 2015 Swanson, Bregman 2016 Senzel, Ray 2017 none    
    • My bad, it was Jeff clement.   Both he and Sanchez did have a cup of coffee in the bigs.
    • I do not want any of those widespread issues brought up by you or discussed in this thread.    Please, no response. 
    • I’m sure they were blinded by all the shinny new objects that Hall was buying them.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...