Jump to content
bird watcher

Mancini Trade Package

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, nate22 said:

Tyler White. Sorry. Lol. That's who I meant. Travis Shaw is on my fantasy baseball team.

Ha, I figured, Mancini is a better hitter than the guys they DH, but he’s not enough of an upgrade to warrant a trade I wouldn’t think - particularly not when they have a DH raking in AAA & another elite bat waiting in Kyle Tucker. Yordan Alvarez is a moose.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2019 at 12:40 AM, Philip said:

Sure, a lot of teams would rather have smoak Because he offers good defense, good offense, he’s in the last year of his deal and would be very very cheap. Mancini is limited, but he has four more years of control and will probably be cheap for most of them, So a lot of teams would rather have Smoak. Neither player would bring back much, but Smoak would cost less.

Maybe teams would prefer to pay a lower price for Smoak, but I doubt there are any teams that would "rather have Smoak." If price tag wasn't a concern all 29 other teams would prefer Mancini IMO largely due to the option value associated with 3.5 eyars of control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/24/2019 at 8:33 PM, tntoriole said:

If Cleveland wants to get a bat and decides to buy if they stay in touch with the Twins over the next month and Trey heats up again, Mancini could play 1b or Dh back and forth with Santana or replace Luplow in right.

He could easily return 3 prospects, like George Valera , Luis Oveido, Ethan Hankins  18yrs, 20 yrs, 19 years... imho. 

 

http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2019?list=cle

 

 

 

This is a complete message board trade proposal, but I would love it.  Send the Indians Mancini and Smith Jr. in exchange for Jake Bauers, one or two of their back-end top-10 prospect arms (Oviedo, Hankins, Hentges, Torres) and one or two lottery ticket type guys in A ball.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2019 at 2:34 PM, tntoriole said:

None of these I mentiioned are on any Top 100 lists that I can find and I would see them as second tier, developmental and thus higher risk prospects by any objective assessment.  I would not be surprised at all if this happened...IF Trey doesn’t slump between now and then and IF the Indians are  close to the Twins and become buyers.  In fact, it may be a higher return, imho. 

Fangraphs has articles about prospect valuation, and how it plays into trades:

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/an-update-to-prospect-valuation/

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/putting-a-dollar-value-on-prospects-outside-the-top-100/

Using MLB Pipeline’s rankings Valera is a 50, Oviedo is a 50, and Hankins is a 50. That’s probably too high. Fangraphs has Valera as a 50, Oviedo as a 45, and Hankins as a 40+. While I don’t think this is necessarily the gospel, Fangraphs says that a 50 position player is worth $28 million, a 45 pitcher is worth $4 million, and a 40+ pitcher is worth $3 million. Thus, Cleveland would probably want at least $35 million in surplus value for that package. Mancini was worth 1.7 fWAR in 2017 and -.2 fWAR in 2018. This year he has been worth 1.3 fWAR so far. If Mancini settles in at 2 wins per year, and he’s paid about $20 million over the next 3 years, he will have surplus value of only $15 million. That’s one reason why I think a trade like this is unlikely.

That being said I enjoy watching Trey play. I also hope he can bring a package like this to the team and think that despite his limitations he does have some value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick look, but here’s where I think Mancini could be a fit,

TB - 1B (Choi)

Clev - COF/1B/DH

Oak - COF

After that, I don’t know if there is really a market.  Oak and TB are usually never “buyers”.  Clev will likely roll with what they have.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sydnor said:

Fangraphs has articles about prospect valuation, and how it plays into trades:

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/an-update-to-prospect-valuation/

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/putting-a-dollar-value-on-prospects-outside-the-top-100/

Using MLB Pipeline’s rankings Valera is a 50, Oviedo is a 50, and Hankins is a 50. That’s probably too high. Fangraphs has Valera as a 50, Oviedo as a 45, and Hankins as a 40+. While I don’t think this is necessarily the gospel, Fangraphs says that a 50 position player is worth $28 million, a 45 pitcher is worth $4 million, and a 40+ pitcher is worth $3 million. Thus, Cleveland would probably want at least $35 million in surplus value for that package. Mancini was worth 1.7 fWAR in 2017 and -.2 fWAR in 2018. This year he has been worth 1.3 fWAR so far. If Mancini settles in at 2 wins per year, and he’s paid about $20 million over the next 3 years, he will have surplus value of only $15 million. That’s one reason why I think a trade like this is unlikely.

That being said I enjoy watching Trey play. I also hope he can bring a package like this to the team and think that despite his limitations he does have some value.

These valuations don't sufficiently factor in the risk issues involved with the developmental risks of an 18 year old, a 19 year old and a 20 year old versus a proven major league performer, imho.   In fact all three prospects could not even make the major leagues and that is not an  unlikely outcome much less any of them reaching the level of achievement of even a 2 wins a year contribution.   This is part of my problem with the current model of directly translating dollar value based on projections in the lowest age ranges of developmental prospects.  Not only do I think it is inaccurate, it is worse than tea leaves, imho.   I hope ME's analytics are more advanced. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cleveland makes the most sense they need some offense are still trying to win but also don't want to add payroll.  That keeps them away from the older rental guys that would increase their payroll.  They also have a really deep farm system that have a few guys that are young and not needed to be added to our 40 man roster, however they probally don't want to give up all guys just brought in as this was a big part of their strong system with the people they signed in the international signing period.  This would also help keep their payroll down in the future so i doubt they want to give up 2 or 3 super young and talanted guys.  I would look more at a 1 or 2 guys that are very young and then some depth in our upper affiliates.  

Mancini for 

SS Yu Chang  He has some upside but has been blocked by Lindor but could start at SS or 2nd for us.  He has some pop but also some swing and miss in the swing.  I expect Villar to be traded at some point and i don't see Martin as a major league SS in the future as the bat doesn't look like it will play.  We are thin up the middle and Chang could help fill some of that.

RHP Luis Oviedo   He is a young starter that got a nice singing bonus in the international signing period.  He is a high upside high risk type that is in the lower minors and a few years away.

RHP Carlos Vargas  He is another young international signing with a big arm and some high upside and high risk.  Another guy a few years away that we can keep in the minors awhile and hopefully build him up.

RHP  Aaron Civale  He is a starter in double this year and doing decent after an injury to start the year.  He came on late as a college and the cape cod.  He was then drafted in the third round in 2016 and has progressed pretty well.  Why i like him is he is a high spin guy which is something Elias has seemed to like in the Astros organization.  

This would give us one guy that is major league ready a starter that is not a high upside guy but also a low floor along with two lottery tickets of guys that are high upside high risk.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Just a quick look, but here’s where I think Mancini could be a fit,

TB - 1B (Choi)

Clev - COF/1B/DH

Oak - COF

After that, I don’t know if there is really a market.  Oak and TB are usually never “buyers”.  Clev will likely roll with what they have.  

 

 

So I think there are a number of issues with the approach of looking for immediate need in starting line ups.  First obviously, it doesnt account for injuries.  Second, it doesnt account for the fact that playoff teams are looking for depth.  Third, it doesnt account for the long term value of Mancini, the control a team has.

Finally, and I can't stress this enough, is that it is foolish to assume that teams trading to compete act rationally, act with metrics in mind at all times, and act with their best long term interests in mind.  I think teams do more of this but the playoffs is a cruel and tantalizing drug.  

TB.  While maybe an immediate offensive upgrade could be had, Choi provides plus OBP and Defense.  Long term Nate Lowe looks ready to take over.

Cle.  Obviously there are a number of fits here. Mancini looks like a more complete offensive version of Jake Bauers.  Their high K staff could discount the negative of Mancinis defense.  They need the offense.

Oak.  I would counter the argument that Oakland doesnt trade.  They do particularly when they are in it.  They are a wildcard as they churn players and had a similar player in Ryon Healy on the roster a few years ago.  I would think injury would be necessary though. 

Sea.  You can never discount Sea churning through players.  They are also an injury prone team.  They now have the similarly mentioned Healy but could be interested because well DiPoto.

Phi.  I wouldnt discount the Phillies trying to add to what is a very weak bench.  Any injury at all could create a great need here.

NYM.  Have a gaping hole in LF.  Need offense and do stupid things.  Regularly.

SD.  The Padres are currently depending on some very young hitters in the OF.  If they need offense and think they have a shot a more proven hitter like Mancini could be appealing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sydnor said:

Fangraphs has articles about prospect valuation, and how it plays into trades:

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/an-update-to-prospect-valuation/

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/putting-a-dollar-value-on-prospects-outside-the-top-100/

Using MLB Pipeline’s rankings Valera is a 50, Oviedo is a 50, and Hankins is a 50. That’s probably too high. Fangraphs has Valera as a 50, Oviedo as a 45, and Hankins as a 40+. While I don’t think this is necessarily the gospel, Fangraphs says that a 50 position player is worth $28 million, a 45 pitcher is worth $4 million, and a 40+ pitcher is worth $3 million. Thus, Cleveland would probably want at least $35 million in surplus value for that package. Mancini was worth 1.7 fWAR in 2017 and -.2 fWAR in 2018. This year he has been worth 1.3 fWAR so far. If Mancini settles in at 2 wins per year, and he’s paid about $20 million over the next 3 years, he will have surplus value of only $15 million. That’s one reason why I think a trade like this is unlikely.

That being said I enjoy watching Trey play. I also hope he can bring a package like this to the team and think that despite his limitations he does have some value.

That’s a very good comment, but the subsequent one regarding such valuations of very young players is valid.

also we have no idea how a given team values it’s own players. Given information, people interpret it differently.

So if we identify a team that wants/can use Mancini, find out where their own farm is deepest and look for the surplus there. It’s most likely we could get something reasonable from that surplus.

Mancini has value, and is probably more valuable to us as future players than as current production, but still doubtful he would return anything significant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Camden_yardbird said:

So I think there are a number of issues with the approach of looking for immediate need in starting line ups.  First obviously, it doesnt account for injuries.  Second, it doesnt account for the fact that playoff teams are looking for depth.  Third, it doesnt account for the long term value of Mancini, the control a team has.

Finally, and I can't stress this enough, is that it is foolish to assume that teams trading to compete act rationally, act with metrics in mind at all times, and act with their best long term interests in mind.  I think teams do more of this but the playoffs is a cruel and tantalizing drug.  

TB.  While maybe an immediate offensive upgrade could be had, Choi provides plus OBP and Defense.  Long term Nate Lowe looks ready to take over.

Cle.  Obviously there are a number of fits here. Mancini looks like a more complete offensive version of Jake Bauers.  Their high K staff could discount the negative of Mancinis defense.  They need the offense.

Oak.  I would counter the argument that Oakland doesnt trade.  They do particularly when they are in it.  They are a wildcard as they churn players and had a similar player in Ryon Healy on the roster a few years ago.  I would think injury would be necessary though. 

Sea.  You can never discount Sea churning through players.  They are also an injury prone team.  They now have the similarly mentioned Healy but could be interested because well DiPoto.

Phi.  I wouldnt discount the Phillies trying to add to what is a very weak bench.  Any injury at all could create a great need here.

NYM.  Have a gaping hole in LF.  Need offense and do stupid things.  Regularly.

SD.  The Padres are currently depending on some very young hitters in the OF.  If they need offense and think they have a shot a more proven hitter like Mancini could be appealing.

 

The Mets are toast, yes they do dumb stuff, so don’t discount them, but I don’t think they can seriously contend and they know it. Much more likely they fold their tents and trade Edwin Diaz.

The Mariners started out historically great. They opened the season with homeruns in 15 or 18 consecutive games, but boy have they come back to Earth. They also have to make it through the Rangers, and they have to catch the Rays, Red Sox/Yankees, and Maybe Cleveland too. Plus they already have a solid DH/1B in Dan Vogelbach, who is basically a clone of Mancini but younger, better on D, and with two additional years of control.Not gonna happen.

I don’t think Oakland wants a one-dimensional player, and Beane is a shrewd trader.

SD is a possibility but they need pitching.

interesting times ahead...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Roy Firestone said:

I've said it before..Ill say it again. KEEP MANCINI!!!

I'll say it again.  You also wanted us to keep Davis and Trumbo.

For that one poster, I know Roy isn't a decision maker for the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Roy Firestone said:

I've said it before..Ill say it again. KEEP MANCINI!!!

I interpret this post as advocating a trade of Mountcastle. I kid, sort of. It's hard to have too many one-dimensional guys on the team. Maybe Mountcastle does move to left and is effective. That would be the best case scenario.

Share this post


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

I interpret this post as advocating a trade of Mountcastle. I kid, sort of. It's hard to have too many one-dimensional guys on the team. Maybe Mountcastle does move to left and is effective. That would be the best case scenario.

Naw, just put surplus in the outfield.

Share this post


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

Naw, just put surplus in the outfield.

If Mountcastle could play outfield, we could have our outfield of the future all at AA or above right now. That's not even including Smith and Stewart. It would be nice to have a true CF in the mix, but I'm not bullish on that at the moment. 

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

    • Why not. Eddie started at DH. 
    • I'll make this simple.  Here's a list of everyone in MLB history who's caught at least 1500 games.  There's only 33 of them.  Name the 20 who you think are better than Gary Carter.                                                                                                                                                                                               Rk            Player    G From   To   Age    PA   AB    R    H  2B 3B  HR  RBI  BB IBB   SO HBP  SH  SF GDP  SB CS   BA  OBP  SLG  OPS         Pos                                          Tm 1     Ivan Rodriguez 2543 1991 2011 19-39 10270 9592 1354 2844 572 51 311 1332 513  67 1474  58  31  76 337 127 64 .296 .334 .464 .798     *2H/D34                     TEX-FLA-DET-NYY-HOU-WSN 2       Carlton Fisk 2499 1969 1993 21-45  9853 8756 1276 2356 421 47 376 1330 849 105 1386 143  26  79 204 128 58 .269 .341 .457 .797    *2DH/735                                     BOS-CHW 3        Ted Simmons 2456 1968 1988 18-38  9685 8680 1074 2472 483 47 248 1389 855 188  694  39  11 100 287  21 33 .285 .348 .437 .785   *2DH3/759                                 STL-MIL-ATL 4        Gary Carter 2296 1974 1992 20-38  9019 7971 1025 2092 371 31 324 1225 848 106  997  68  33  99 180  39 42 .262 .335 .439 .773    *2H9/375                             MON-NYM-SFG-LAD 5          Bob Boone 2264 1972 1990 24-42  8148 7245  679 1838 303 26 105  826 663  90  608  20 142  78 191  38 50 .254 .315 .346 .661    *2/H35D7                                 PHI-CAL-KCR 6       Johnny Bench 2158 1967 1983 19-35  8674 7658 1091 2048 381 24 389 1376 891 135 1278  19  11  90 201  68 43 .267 .342 .476 .817   *253H/798                                         CIN 7         Yogi Berra 2120 1946 1965 21-40  8359 7555 1175 2150 321 49 358 1430 704  91  414  52   9  44 146  30 26 .285 .348 .482 .830    *2H79/35                                     NYY-NYM 8      Jason Kendall 2085 1996 2010 22-36  8702 7627 1030 2195 394 35  75  744 721  51  686 254  36  63 176 189 89 .288 .366 .378 .744     *2/H79D                         PIT-OAK-CHC-MIL-KCR 9    A.J. Pierzynski 2059 1998 2016 21-39  7815 7290  807 2043 407 24 188  909 308  68  895 129  28  58 241  15 23 .280 .319 .420 .739       *2H/D                 MIN-SFG-CHW-TEX-STL-BOS-ATL 10    Gabby Hartnett 1990 1922 1941 21-40  7297 6432  867 1912 396 64 236 1179 703   1  697  35     127  93  28  8 .297 .370 .489 .858       *2H/3                                     CHC-NYG 11         Tony Pena 1988 1980 1997 23-40  7073 6489  667 1687 298 27 107  708 455  72  846  23  68  38 234  80 63 .260 .309 .364 .673    *2/H39D5                     PIT-STL-BOS-CLE-HOU-CHW 12     Lance Parrish 1988 1977 1995 21-39  7797 7067  856 1782 305 27 324 1070 612  62 1527  37  23  58 197  28 37 .252 .313 .440 .753    *2D/H397                 DET-PHI-CAL-SEA-CLE-PIT-TOR 13     Yadier Molina 1983 2004 2019 21-36  7655 6970  701 1963 379  7 156  916 507  49  782  66  42  70 254  66 37 .282 .333 .405 .738     *2/3HD5                                         STL 14   Benito Santiago 1978 1986 2005 21-40  7516 6951  755 1830 323 41 217  920 430  52 1270  38  26  70 204  91 69 .263 .307 .415 .722     *2H/37D         SDP-FLA-PHI-TOR-CHC-CIN-SFG-KCR-PIT 15       Brad Ausmus 1971 1993 2010 24-41  7102 6279  718 1579 270 34  80  607 634  69 1034  69  82  37 201 102 53 .251 .325 .344 .669    *2/H3456                             SDP-HOU-DET-LAD 16      Jim Sundberg 1962 1974 1989 23-38  6899 6021  621 1493 243 36  95  624 699  31  963  22 118  38 159  20 37 .248 .327 .348 .674      *2/H7D                             TEX-MIL-KCR-CHC 17          Al Lopez 1950 1928 1947 19-38  6608 5916  613 1547 206 43  51  652 556  55  538  14     121 137  46  9 .261 .326 .337 .663     *2/H543                             BRO-BSN-PIT-CLE 18       Mike Piazza 1912 1992 2007 23-38  7745 6911 1048 2127 344  8 427 1335 759 146 1113  30   0  45 229  17 20 .308 .377 .545 .922      *2DH/3                         LAD-FLA-NYM-SDP-OAK 19      Rick Ferrell 1884 1929 1947 23-41  7076 6028  687 1692 324 45  28  734 931  23  277  10     103  55  29 35 .281 .378 .363 .741        *2/H                                 SLB-BOS-WSH 20    Ernie Lombardi 1853 1931 1947 23-39  6352 5855  601 1792 277 27 190  990 430  50  262  46      18 261   8  4 .306 .358 .460 .818         *2H                             BRO-CIN-BSN-NYG 21      Jorge Posada 1829 1995 2011 23-39  7150 6092  900 1664 379 10 275 1065 936  78 1453  74   1  47 186  20 21 .273 .374 .474 .848     *2DH/34                                         NYY 22       Bill Dickey 1789 1928 1946 21-39  7065 6300  930 1969 343 72 202 1209 678  26  289  31      51  49  36 32 .313 .382 .486 .868         *2H                                         NYY 23    Darrell Porter 1782 1971 1987 19-35  6570 5539  765 1369 237 48 188  826 905 106 1025  45  18  63 102  39 37 .247 .354 .409 .763      *2HD/3                             MIL-KCR-STL-TEX 24    Deacon McGuire 1781 1884 1912 20-48  6938 6291  770 1750 300 79  45  840     515  442  84          47 118  0 .278 .341 .372 .713 *2/395678H1 TOL-DTN-PHI-CLE-ROC-WAS-WHS-BRO-DET-NYY-BOS 25      Bill Freehan 1774 1961 1976 19-34  6900 6073  706 1591 241 35 200  758 626  67  753 114  38  48 138  24 21 .262 .340 .412 .752    *23/HD79                                         DET 26      Rick Dempsey 1765 1969 1992 19-42  5407 4692  525 1093 223 12  96  471 592  13  736  18  63  42 131  20 19 .233 .319 .347 .666  *2H/D97315                     MIN-NYY-BAL-CLE-LAD-MIL 27        Ray Schalk 1762 1912 1929 19-36  6240 5306  579 1345 199 49  11  593     638  358  59         214 177 69 .253 .340 .316 .656        *2/H                                     CHW-NYG 28      Brian McCann 1755 2005 2019 21-35  6850 6067  742 1590 294  5 282 1018 640  71 1054  75   9  59 180  25  9 .262 .337 .452 .789      *2H/D3                                 NYY-HOU-ATL 29      Sherm Lollar 1752 1946 1963 21-38  6220 5351  623 1415 244 14 155  808 671  68  453 115  47  34 184  20 10 .264 .357 .402 .759      *2H/35                             CLE-NYY-SLB-CHW 30    Russell Martin 1693 2006 2019 23-36  6648 5701  803 1416 255  9 191  771 792  46 1211 107  12  36 190 101 51 .248 .349 .397 .746 *2/H5D41679                             LAD-NYY-PIT-TOR 31         Jim Hegan 1666 1941 1960 20-39  5321 4772  550 1087 187 46  92  525 456  79  742   4  72  14 113  15 24 .228 .295 .344 .639        *2/H                         CLE-DET-SFG-PHI-CHC 32       Luke Sewell 1630 1921 1942 20-41  6043 5383  653 1393 272 56  20  698 486   0  307  27     145   1  66 44 .259 .323 .341 .665   *2/H39745                             CLE-WSH-CHW-SLB 33      Steve ONeill 1590 1911 1928 19-36  5566 4795  448 1259 248 34  13  534     592  414  43         130  30 26 .263 .349 .337 .685       *2/H3                             CLE-BOS-NYY-SLB  
    • Yeah the WAR components are available, but it’s not like you can easily calculate those yourself.   I mean, the BB-ref player page will show you Rbat, Rpos, Rfield, Rbaser etc., but I certainly couldn’t derive those numbers.    
    • Frankly I don’t remember reading a single negative thing about his personality or any clubhouse issues during his stint with the Orioles.    I don’t see that as a risk at all.   We’re talking about bringing a guy in on a minor league deal to compete for a spot held by Stevie (.669 OPS, -0.8 rWAR) Wilkerson and for which Richard Urena also will compete.    It’s not like we’re expecting him to be a starting infielder, or paying him millions of dollars, or using a spot on our 40-man roster until such time, if any, as he makes the major league team.   It’s simply not a very big deal.      
    • I'm unconvinced.  He's taking one year's worth of data and not really doing any comparisons to anyone else.  He's inferring from the fact that the 2018 Red Sox hit well with runners on second that the entire sign stealing scheme was worth 50 runs.  That's a stretch.  Teams have varying performances in splits every single year.  From '11-14 the Orioles had a mid-700s OPS with runners on 2nd.  From '15-17 they were in the mid-800s.  Did they have a sign stealing scheme going starting in '15? What he should do is look at 10 years of data across all teams in the league and see if the 2018 Red Sox' variation in performance is a big outlier or unremarkable.  
    • There are plenty of athletes/high draft picks that never ban out. There's also a very fine line between confidence and arrogance. The Beckham quotes I've read paint him an arrogant ego maniac and "me first" type of player. Also, let's not forget his was also suspended for 50 games in 2012 for testing positive for marijuana. Why would we want to bring that kind of mojo into our clubhouse? 
    • If you swing at balls in the dirt and take pitches right down the middle , then this has to be one of the few cases where size does not in fact matter. 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...