Jump to content
bird watcher

Mancini Trade Package

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

The problem for the Orioles is that they never had enough trade chips to get players that would make a meaningful difference when were contending a few years ago. Now we can't trade our best trade chips for meaningful prospects for our future.

You can’t say the bolded part definitively. 

DD got pretty good returns. Heck, he got your boy “Superstar Villar”.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

You can’t say the bolded part definitively. 

DD got pretty good returns. Heck, he got your boy “Superstar Villar”.  


I was responding to the narrative that teams are no longer interested in " teams just don't pony up prospects " by @Can_of_corn

 

Yeah, I know and was more speaking of where we are now. I think if you look back most were disappointed in the returns for Schoop and Manny. You can probably blame Villar on the Brewers as its my understanding that he was sent over to get the deal done in regards to salary consideration. I'm not sure if that take is accurate or not so please don't ask me to find a link to confirm it.

 

 

Share this post


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

The problem for the Orioles is that they never had enough trade chips to get players that would make a meaningful difference when were contending a few years ago. Now we can't trade our best trade chips for meaningful prospects for our future.

Was just thinking this.    Our needs have not met the timing of the market very well.   We gave up Arrieta and Strop for two months of Scott Feldman, and now can’t get a top 100 prospect type for two years of Dylan Bundy.    Sigh.   Hope some of the four guys we acquired turn into something.   

Share this post


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

Was just thinking this.    Our needs have not met the timing of the market very well.   We gave up Arrieta and Strop for two months of Scott Feldman, and now can’t get a top 100 prospect type for two years of Dylan Bundy.    Sigh.   Hope some of the four guys we acquired turn into something.   

I like Luke's evaluation which I'm sure is way more scientific than my attempt at grading those arm. But he has all of them either inside or just out of our top 30. 

I had Bradish there and consider Mattson as a good relief possibly that typically doesn't merit top prospect status. 

I don't know about Easton and I'm not sure how we can rank someone's #6 and #8 draft selections in the top 30 (Luke had one in and one out).

I personally can't do that and wonder if he had our picks 2-6 from last years draft and 7 & 8 ahead of the guy that was selected in their 8th round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mancini and Castellanos are pretty similar on paper. I don’t know if that is the perception of all the teams in MLB though. 

MLBTR has these teams as being fits for Castellanos,

 The Cubs remain an option, and the White Sox, Marlins, Reds, Giants, Diamondbacks, Padres, Indians, and Angels could be possibilities.

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/11/mlb-free-agent-predictions-2020.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Was just thinking this.    Our needs have not met the timing of the market very well.   We gave up Arrieta and Strop for two months of Scott Feldman, and now can’t get a top 100 prospect type for two years of Dylan Bundy.    Sigh.   Hope some of the four guys we acquired turn into something.   

And the flip side of deals hasn’t worked out either...Duquette trades a now 26 year old Zach Davies for two months of Gerardo Parra

And the analysts just were praising this deal profusely at the time....except for one who said well, Davies might be a good prospect , but you have to give up top pitching prospects to get a left fielder.  It seems that kind of thinking is no longer what GMs think.  

 

 https://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/bal-instant-analysis-of-orioles-trade-for-gerardo-parra-from-the-milwaukee-brewers-20150731-story.html

Share this post


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

And the flip side of deals hasn’t worked out either...Duquette trades a now 26 year old Zach Davies for two months of Gerardo Parra

And the analysts just were praising this deal profusely at the time....except for one who said well, Davies might be a good prospect , but you have to give up top pitching prospects to get a left fielder.  It seems that kind of thinking is no longer what GMs think.  

 

 https://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/orioles/bal-instant-analysis-of-orioles-trade-for-gerardo-parra-from-the-milwaukee-brewers-20150731-story.html

I love to look back on the poll threads at the time of the trades.   Everyone now criticizes it, yet when the trade was made, opinions were very evenly split, 49.22% in favor and 50.78% against.    I’m happy to say I was on the “against” side, though I was still hoping it would work out.   
 

 

Share this post


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

I love to look back on the poll threads at the time of the trades.   Everyone now criticizes it, yet when the trade was made, opinions were very evenly split, 49.22% in favor and 50.78% against.    I’m happy to say I was on the “against” side, though I was still hoping it would work out.   
 

 

I voted approval for the deal back then. However, As I recall we had passed or missed out on better players due to the lack of opinion about our system and prospects. I seem to remember a period where every trade rumor about the Orioles was Bundy or Gausman and little interest in anything else when the Orioles said NO.

But let's not pretend that Davies was anything special as a prospect. He was a 26th rounder and I would be surprised if he was ranked anywhere near MLBs top 100. People also point at the deal to Boston of Eduardo Rodriguez and I have nearly the same thought. He was probably higher rated in our system but was he rated in the top 100?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I love to look back on the poll threads at the time of the trades.   Everyone now criticizes it, yet when the trade was made, opinions were very evenly split, 49.22% in favor and 50.78% against.    I’m happy to say I was on the “against” side, though I was still hoping it would work out.   
 

 

I hated it at the time though I somehow missed voting in the poll.  I hated it again in my comment in the thread in 2016. And now.  It was the worst Duquette move imho.   I think I said something like wishing Dan had gone to Toronto...lol.  Trading our remaining top pitching prospect for two months of a left fielder that did not move the needle in a season that was not going anywhere fast anyway.  I supported the Arrieta deal at the time, the Miller deal absolutely then and niw, the Norris for Hader deal at the time and even now it made sense...I understood them.   But that deal for Parra and the Snider deal were just completely perplexing.  And, of course, Dan never deigned to explain his thinking to us fans anyway except for rosy, spin comments.   But, hey, that is all water under the bridge and we are moving on!!  

On a Cubs blog, they were speculating about Trey and postulated Ian Happ and Adbert Alzolay coming back.  Thoughts about that scenario?  Sounds pretty fair to me off first glance. 

 

https://cubbiescrib.com/2019/12/05/chicago-cubs-trey-mancini-trade-target/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

I hated it at the time though I somehow missed voting in the poll.  I hated it again in my comment in the thread in 2016. And now.  It was the worst Duquette move imho.   I think I said something like wishing Dan had gone to Toronto...lol.  Trading our remaining top pitching prospect for two months of a left fielder that did not move the needle in a season that was not going anywhere fast anyway.  I supported the Arrieta deal at the time, the Miller deal absolutely then and niw, the Norris for Hader deal at the time and even now it made sense...I understood them.   But that deal for Parra and the Snider deal were just completely perplexing.  And, of course, Dan never deigned to explain his thinking to us fans anyway except for rosy, spin comments.   But, hey, that is all water under the bridge and we are moving on!!  

On a Cubs blog, they were speculating about Trey and postulated Ian Happ and Adbert Alzolay coming back.  Thoughts about that scenario?  Sounds pretty fair to me off first glance. 

 

https://cubbiescrib.com/2019/12/05/chicago-cubs-trey-mancini-trade-target/

 

The answer was simple ...He was trying to win! They were unable to get anything better based on the fact that nobody valued our system. So they settled for 2nd tier moves as it was the bext they could do

Share this post


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

The answer was simple ...He was trying to win! They were unable to get anything better based on the fact that nobody valued our system. So they settled for 2nd tier moves as it was the bext they could do

It wasn't a team that could win.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

It wasn't a team that could win.

I think that's irrelevant.... They were competitive and fans were buying tickets. They did what they could with what they had to offer. I think the moves were thoroughly disappointing and did nothing to move the needle. But I think the outcry would've been considerable if they had done nothing.

Share this post


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

I think that's irrelevant.... They were competitive and fans were buying tickets. They did what they could with what they had to offer. I think the moves were thoroughly disappointing and did nothing to move the needle. But I think the outcry would've been considerable if they had done nothing.

What?

So the proper move for a GM is to trade future assets for present assets when he knows that the team is not going make the playoffs?

Because he's scared of being criticized by the fanbase?

Share this post


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

What?

So the proper move for a GM is to trade future assets for present assets when he knows that the team is not going make the playoffs?

Because he's scared of being criticized by the fanbase?

He was trying to win ....Likely with pressure from Angelos

I'm not saying that he cared or listened to fans! 

Corn you know as well as I do that the fans here would've went off the deep end if they did nothing. Probably not all but many!

 

Share this post


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

He was trying to win ....Likely with pressure from Angelos

I'm not saying that he cared or listened to fans! 

Corn you know as well as I do that the fans here would've went off the deep end if they did nothing. Probably not all but many!

 

The team needed a lot more help than Parra.  If he couldn't realize that he wasn't doing his job very well.  That team wasn't close.

If you check the Parra thread you will see posters who "went off the deep end" for him trading a future asset for Parra.

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







×
×
  • Create New...