Mancini Trade Package

[ChuckS]

4 minutes ago, Roy Firestone said:

Yes, but that doesn't make my preference any less valid.I think this kid is a solid player and the likelihood of getting another prospect like him in return is not that high. Mancini is young, controllable, affordable and producing. Not every player needs to be traded...

He's all those things, but he is also fairly replaceable.  We will need to find a place for Ryan Mountcastle when he is ready.  Makes sense to move Mancini if you can get a decent package back.  We need more infielders and pitchers, not 1B/DH types.  

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, theocean said:

I agree with you, Roy. I can't see the return on Mancini being that promising - his value to the club exceeds the middling "prospect" he'd bring back.

The O's have approx $30M on the books in 2020 right now - with Bundy, Castro, and Mancini likely the only arbitration eligible players. They can afford him.

Cobb and Davis are 31M.  You think Villar gets non-tendered or traded?

Also it isn't a matter of being able to afford him.  It's a matter of spending intelligently, something the O's have been poor at under Angelos.

[theocean]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Cobb and Davis are 31M.  You think Villar gets non-tendered or traded?

Also it isn't a matter of being able to afford him.  It's a matter of spending intelligently, something the O's have been poor at under Angelos.

They do need to field a team - and they need veterans for plenty of reasons. Mancini probably makes around $2M in his first year of arbitration. I think spending $2M for a guy who can adequately play 1B/LF/RF with solid offense is intelligent spending.

There is plenty of room for Mancini, Mountcastle, and a 60-Day-IL Davis on the team. Trumbo is gone next year and I don't think the O's should be making plans based on a Renato Nunez hot streak.

Everybody here wants to trade a decent player as soon as they hit arbitration so that a player from the minors can be called up and eventually traded when they hit arbitration. How can the O's ever expect to get better when they are making lateral moves at every position? The approx $2M they save from trading Mancini is going to let the O's finally land that big free agent? They can't afford new analytics infrastructure with a $40M payroll versus a $42M payroll?

 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, theocean said:

They do need to field a team - and they need veterans for plenty of reasons. Mancini probably makes around $2M in his first year of arbitration. I think spending $2M for a guy who can adequately play 1B/LF/RF with solid offense is intelligent spending.

There is plenty of room for Mancini, Mountcastle, and a 60-Day-IL Davis on the team. Trumbo is gone next year and I don't think the O's should be making plans based on a Renato Nunez hot streak.

Everybody here wants to trade a decent player as soon as they hit arbitration so that a player from the minors can be called up and eventually traded when they hit arbitration. How can the O's ever expect to get better when they are making lateral moves at every position? The approx $2M they save from trading Mancini is going to let the O's finally land that big free agent? They can't afford new analytics infrastructure with a $40M payroll versus a $42M payroll?

 

How soon until the O's are good?

I'm thinking at least thee years from now.

In three years Mancini will not be the type of player you want on the roster.

If you can trade something for him now why wouldn't you?

Just so some of the fans can watch him play during the rebuild?

 

[Il BuonO]

6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

How soon until the O's are good?

I'm thinking at least thee years from now.

In three years Mancini will not be the type of player you want on the roster.

If you can trade something for him now why wouldn't you?

Just so some of the fans can watch him play during the rebuild?

Yeah, give those 10,000 fans a night something to cheer for!

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Il BuonO said:

Yeah, give those 10,000 fans a night something to cheer for!

Pretty sure you could replace Mancini with Mountcastle tomorrow and half of them wouldn't notice.

[RZNJ]

I'm gonna puke every time I see "fan favorite" and "face of the franchise".

[theocean]

23 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

How soon until the O's are good?

I'm thinking at least thee years from now.

In three years Mancini will not be the type of player you want on the roster.

If you can trade something for him now why wouldn't you?

Just so some of the fans can watch him play during the rebuild?

 

Sure - if they can get something back for him, they should trade him. But, I guess the debate is what "something" is. If it's a right-handed AAAA pitcher, that's not really worth it, is it?  

If someone gifts me a brand new TV - I'm not going to sell my current one for a low-ball offer. I'd put it in another room in the house. It still has value.

[Philip]

Just checked. SD 1B Eric Hoster is hitting 301 right now, and he has an enormous contract. They aren’t interested in Mancini.

[Frobby]

14 hours ago, ChuckS said:

He's all those things, but he is also fairly replaceable.  We will need to find a place for Ryan Mountcastle when he is ready.  Makes sense to move Mancini if you can get a decent package back.  We need more infielders and pitchers, not 1B/DH types.  

I agree with this.    It just depends on whether we can get a decent return in a trade.   If we can, we should jump at it.    If not, then hold on to Mancini.   

[atomic]

13 hours ago, Philip said:

Just checked. SD 1B Eric Hoster is hitting 301 right now, and he has an enormous contract. They aren’t interested in Mancini.

You would think with us getting basically Villar and nothing else in our trade-off last year people wouldn't want to trade our players away.  With so many teams trying to tank we aren't getting much for Mancini and I am not sure why we want to trade him anyway.  He has several more years under team control.  He can DH when Mountcastle comes up.  

[eddie83]

13 hours ago, RZNJ said:

I'm gonna puke every time I see "fan favorite" and "face of the franchise".

Players in some situations I think those arguments are valid.

Mancini is not one of those players.  

[eddie83]

1 minute ago, atomic said:

You would think with us getting basically Villar and nothing else in our trade-off last year people wouldn't want to trade our players away.  With so many teams trying to tank we aren't getting much for Mancini and I am not sure why we want to trade him anyway.  He has several more years under team control.  He can DH when Mountcastle comes up.  

Most players we dealt were heading towards FA or coming off injuries/down years. 

The value of Gausman was negated because ownership wanted to get rid of the O’Day contract. 

Mancini is producing and has 3 more years of control. Not a similar situation. 

[atomic]

10 minutes ago, eddie83 said:

Most players we dealt were heading towards FA or coming off injuries/down years. 

The value of Gausman was negated because ownership wanted to get rid of the O’Day contract. 

Mancini is producing and has 3 more years of control. Not a similar situation. 

Mancini is a first baseman.  The easiest position to fill in baseball.  Those other guys were all much better at their positions than Mancini.  If you are trading him you are just trading him to trade him.  You aren't going to get much in return. Villar has more value than Mancini.

[eddie83]

4 minutes ago, atomic said:

Mancini is a first baseman.  The easiest position to fill in baseball.  Those other guys were all much better at their positions than Mancini.  If you are trading him you are just trading him to trade him.  You aren't going to get much in return. Villar has more value than Mancini.

I don’t know of anyone who wants Mancini dealt for the sake of dealing him. No one is saying he would bring back a for sure prospect. That said you are selling him a little short. He would be a valuable player on a contender. All depends on fit.