Jump to content
DocJJ

Would you trade Means?

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, theocean said:

I really disagree with this. Clubhouse culture, morale, all the behind-the-scenes stuff definitely matters to a winning ballclub, especially over a 162 game season. You can have all the talent in the world - but it takes discipline, dedication, preparation, etc to make the most of that talent and succeed at the top level. I think Hyde's biggest job this year is to create the organizational culture he believes will be successful and have it ready so that future players come into a situation where they can succeed.

John Means has pitched 86 pro innings. He's started 14 games. He's been great - but the numbers suggest he isn't this good. He was also out with a shoulder strain earlier in the year. I don't think any smart Front Office is going to look at that and fall over themselves to trade for John Means. The value the O's would get for him at this point would not exceed his possible future value. If he's pitching great next year - different story.

And for the Astros - Tucker or Whitley gets them Stroman or Bumgarner. John Means isn't bringing that back at this point.

...but none of these players will be part of that winning ball club by the time they turn things around. That was my main point. And I'm not trying to sell Means as something that he isn't. I'm just saying that if someone values him more than Elias thinks he's actually worth then he should strongly consider trading him. You and I have no idea how other teams/front offices value him. That's for Elias to sort out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue with Means, as with each of these guys who perform well at the very beginning of their major league career, is that no one is going to compensate the Os appropriate for what now appears to be considerable upside.  Someone may offer a top 10 prospect or two, and that may represent a heckuva lot more value than what Means appeared to be worth this offseason and wit in hindsight we might regret turning it down ….  but the upside is considerable and it is best that we just keep him and try to keep that upside for ourselves.  If Means became Rodrigo Lopez and had a couple of 2 WAR seasons, that would be incredible.  If Means pitches more like a 2/3, that would be even better.  Why cash in that kind of upside for prospects now?  Let it roll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jerios55 said:

First off, Boyd is arbitration eligible this year, which would be more equivalent to the 2021 season for Means and part of why I listed that as a better time to trade him.  As a result he has 500+ IP for teams to evaluate at a Major League level.  I don't see this as a similar situation.

https://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=15440&position=P

Last years team most would agree should have been better.  Maybe you don't think morale should matter because they are grown men, but I call BS.  Most are just as human as the rest of us, they are just more gifted athletically.  There is definitively losers mentalities and that will impact performance and long term development.  If no one on this team is here, maybe you're right it doesn't matter. 

But I don't believe the return this year will be worth it for all the reasons, that is just an influencing factor.

edit: I wrote out BS and thought it would censor.  My bad...

I don' t think it's up to us to determine John Mean's value. It's up to Elias. The point I was making is that he has to do what's best for this team long term not what's best for the the today, tomorrow or even next year. We are in a rebuild and the players get paid whether we win or lose. And if you're clinging to the thought that our team should have been better last year it makes me think you aren't fully buying into the need for us to tear it down and start over. And that would be a mistake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Philip said:

Sisco is not untouchable. No one is untouchable. I doubt anyone will even ask about him, but no one is untouchable, especially on THIS team.

I was basing it on his age. He's only 24 so it's realistic to think that he could "possible" be part of the rebuild. Everyone else is either too old or just not good enough. There's also potential to play him at 1B or DH so I think it's possible he can coexist with Rutchsman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Myth:  John Means wont be here for the next competitive team.

Reason:  At 26 years old Means has 5 years of team control.  That gives the Orioles until 2024 to compete.

John Means would be at a maximum age 31.

The Orioles could compete by 2022.

The Analogy:  The 2015 and 2016 Brewers, Chase Anderson.

In 2015, Chase Anderson was a mediocre 25 year old SP for the Arizona Diamondbacks compiling a 4.15 ERA over two years.  Anderson was a mid level talent, 9th round pick.

The 2016 Brewers were a team in the midst of a rebuild.  That rebuild didnt have much in the way of assets.  Johnathon LuCroy was the star and netted some prospects when traded to Tex, including Lewis Brinson who was the center piece of the Yelich trade (perhaps the Orioles dont have this level of commodity, but I am also giving them 3 years to turn it around instead of the brewers 2 year turnaround, with top draft picks that the brewers did not have).  Other notables were Braun, Villar, Hill...not much.

Anderson meanwhile has had decent results (sometimes as hood as means in short stints) and is, at 31 years old an important part of a competitive team.

Conclusion.  Means could absolutely be a part of a future competitive team.  Trading him because you think he won't is not a legitimate reason to make the trade.  Trading him for a good set of prospects could make some sense but as Philip pointed out I just dont think you will get that offer.  If you do, if someone does something stupid, you do it. (The Brewers are built on that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

I was basing it on his age. He's only 24 so it's realistic to think that he could "possible" be part of the rebuild. Everyone else is either too old or just not good enough. There's also potential to play him at 1B or DH so I think it's possible he can coexist with Rutchsman. 

Sisco doesn't seem to be popular on OH, but I've always wanted to see him get a fair shot. If Sisco's bat can play the Orioles will find a place for him on the roster. Also it would be cool to have a really good backup catcher to split time with Rutschman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, DocJJ said:

On the one hand, we are in full rebuild mode- so no one should be considered untouchable.    

On the other hand, he's only 26, coming off an All-Star, ROY level campaign, is under team control for a while, and has been our best home-grown Starting pitcher... so I'd be most reluctant to part with him.   But what if someone made us a "WOW" offer?

 

Yes, if some team offered up a package that only over-exuberant Oriole fans on the internet would dream up then I'd pull the trigger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

I don' t think it's up to us to determine John Mean's value. It's up to Elias. The point I was making is that he has to do what's best for this team long term not what's best for the the today, tomorrow or even next year. We are in a rebuild and the players get paid whether we win or lose. And if you're clinging to the thought that our team should have been better last year it makes me think you aren't fully buying into the need for us to tear it down and start over. And that would be a mistake. 

Haha, talking about lasts years team was specifically in response to you saying grown men don't have emotions that are impacted by blowout loses that will impact on field results and/or development.

This team needed exactly what it's getting on every level.  Last years team was dead and buried long before this point a year ago.  I will argue they had more talent, but talent doesn't mean much with poor mental play and it showed, that's literally my point.  To think you can trade any one that shows an ounce of talent and it not impact the team going forward, I think you're missing a big factor for a team sport.  At some point throwing a team of waiver wire pickups, Rule V guys and AAAA fodder isn't going to cut it.  They aren't going to simply have 25 guys to call up the same day that don't suck. 

This year and next year aren't really about W/L.  So Cashner, Villar, Bundy, Mancini make some sense because of that.  With 5.5 years on control Means would require a lot in a trade.  We all hope it will continue, but most put a qualifier knowing his lack of prospect status and minimal workload to this point.  Would I trade a huge haul for that guy?  I don't think I would.  So I have a hard time believing the trade will make the right sense this year.  Maybe it isn't my job to put a value on Means.  I'm here to have a conversation about it.  I don't think Elias is going to come here and tell us his thoughts on the matter.  So you get my unprofessional, weakly research, probably poorly concocted and biased reasoning. 

 

Share this post


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

Means Just doesn’t have enough of a track record to be worth anything to anybody except us at this point in time.  I think you could make a strong argument for trading him next season, because we have so many other, better pitchers on the way. And if he does well the rest of the season and the first part of next then he might bring back a good return. But until and unless, it’s just silly to even consider the possibility

To me, they’re better only once they prove they’re better at the major league level.    Certainly, we’ve had and have many pitchers who had a better MiL track record than John Means.     We’ve also seen a lot of them accomplish nothing at the major league level.  We’ve seen very few pitchers have a first half-season as good as Means’.    I view him as a different, better pitcher than the John Means who pitched for our minor league clubs.   While I doubt he continues his current level of success, the fact is his fastball has ticked up a notch and he has a vastly better changeup than he previously had.    We could be looking at a guy who can be a solid major league starter for years to come.   I hope so, anyway.    We’ll see if any of our MiL pitchers become that.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

Sisco doesn't seem to be popular on OH, but I've always wanted to see him get a fair shot. If Sisco's bat can play the Orioles will find a place for him on the roster. Also it would be cool to have a really good backup catcher to split time with Rutschman. 

I was certainly anti-Sisco, but I also was happy to give him a chance and he’s improving. I’m more positive now. 

Share this post


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

To me, they’re better only once they prove they’re better at the major league level.    Certainly, we’ve had and have many pitchers who had a better MiL track record than John Means.     We’ve also seen a lot of them accomplish nothing at the major league level.  We’ve seen very few pitchers have a first half-season as good as Means’.    I view him as a different, better pitcher than the John Means who pitched for our minor league clubs.   While I doubt he continues his current level of success, the fact is his fastball has ticked up a notch and he has a vastly better changeup than he previously had.    We could be looking at a guy who can be a solid major league starter for years to come.   I hope so, anyway.    We’ll see if any of our MiL pitchers become that.   

I can’t list all the solid prospects in the minors who could play next year, but all of them have more upside than Means. Whether they reach it is a valid question , but next year we’ll have Bundy and four other spots. If 3-4 of our ready guys break camp with the team it makes Means a trade piece. If none of them do and we have to continue with the Ynoa/Hess/Waiver guy system then he’d still be a valid trade piece. We’ll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OFFNY said:

o

 

Nobody does the colors and fonts like OFFNY....... nobody.

 

o

They don't.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is the type of guy we should be trading for. Why in the world would we trade him? If we are still rebuilding in 2022, maybe consider trading him then.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Cy Bundy said:

26 year old starters with 86 innings, a 91.9mph average heater, & approximately a 36% ground ball rate are the kinda fellas we need to move our young assets for. 

we should be trading our *old* assets for potentially overlooked value guys in other organizations who can pitch to a sub 3 ERA in the AL East. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

He is the type of guy we should be trading for. Why in the world would we trade him? If we are still rebuilding in 2022, maybe consider trading him then.

Yeah ... I don’t see the point in trading him. Isn’t he after all the type of pitcher we’ve been trying to develop for years.

 

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

    • Well, thanks.   No one wants to be labeled a kiss ass, brown noser in life.  No one likes being that guy...but sometimes, you've gotta be that guy no matter how great you've been at your job, no matter how many awards you've won, no matter how many years you've grinded it out...because unless you are the BSD who's writing the checks, calling the shots, making the decisions on how the company is going to move forward...well, you can most likely be replaced.  Surhoff comes across as thinking his part time, roving instructor position was irreplaceable, his haughtiness in this article is kind of appalling.   Sometimes you gotta buddy up with the new boss, sometimes you gotta be mocked and laughed at by your co-workers and have them call you a brown noser behind your back because...well, they're not doing it and can't put their egos aside.  And you've gotta play the game to show people that you provide value and do a good job so if all things between you and your co-workers are equal on the day some layoffs need to be made you get to keep your job while they're sent packing.  Meanwhile, they're STILL calling you a brown noser, suck up, kiss ass, etc and acting like they're owed something.  Did anyone mention that this article says that Brady Anderson still has a job? The bitch of it is that Surhoff was probably pretty solid at what he did.  I bet there was nothing wrong with the instruction that Surhoff provided players.  You say too many artifacts clogging up the machine and while I don't disagree with that idea...a roving instructor can't really clog up the machine.  He shouldn't be able to get in the way of player development in the way that a minor league pitching coach or a minor league manager could get in the way.  I imagine that on the totem pole of a baseball organization's coaching staff, a roving instructor has to be near the very bottom.  And therefore easily let go NO MATTER HOW GOOD they are.   You are right, corporate America is about evolving with the times.  Sometimes those evolutions come gradually, sometimes they're very small.  Sometimes they're big and jarring and people freak out because we're creatures of habit and don't like it when our way of doing something is tampered with or overhauled.  Surhoff's failure to evolve with the times, IMO,  didn't come from his instruction on how to hit a baseball or an inability to grasp newfangled analytics...it came from his inability to communicate effectively what he did and how he added value.
    • Moose, that is a perfect response. No doubt, feelings will get hurt when making changes. But, baseball is a Business last time I checked. Connolly is highlighting the whole problem with all these articles: too many artifacts from the old regime were clogging up the machine. Whether he realizes that or not, who knows. But, corporate America is all about evolving with the times.
    • If it was up to Elias, Davis would not be on the team in 2020 and probably not on the roster today. There is no benefit to Davis being on the roster except for the Angelos brothers not wanting to eat the contract.  Mountcastle, Hays and others are going to be on the roster for most of or all the 2020 season, there is no reason for Davis to waste a valuable roster spot. It doesn't matter if the Orioles are ready to win. Young players need to get experience when they are ready. 
    • This is very much like the Redskins.  Everything is a call-back to the glory years of the Gibbs-era 80s.   It's what teams that haven't done much (if anything) in recent memory do...tug on the heartstrings of those who are old enough to remember the good times.  And if you're too young to remember those days, they try to paint a picture of what it COULD be like.  To your point it is a taunt of sorts, for sure. I'm not sure what Surhoff expected here.  To draw another football comparison, does anyone here watch Hard Knocks?  It's practically the same thing every year when they cut players, they have an assistant coach find the guys they're going to cut and they say...."Coach wants to see you, bring your playbook." The player knows what's coming.  Hangs his head, grabs his playbook and goes towards the head coaches office. The head coach goes..."Hey, we've made a decision to release you and move in a different direction today.  Thank you for your hard work, we appreciate it." "Ok, thank you." Maybe, MAYBE they talk for a minute about an area of improvement that needs to be addressed on the players side so he knows what he needs to work on so he can stick with another team.  If not, they shake hands, player gets up, leaves, packs his things and he's gone.  From the time the assistant coach gets him to the time he's in the parking lot, it looks like the whole thing takes less than 10 minutes. And that's for a guy who's fighting for his career.  That's a guy who's dying for a shot at professional football.  That's a guy who is showing up to the facility every day, going through drills, spending time in the film room, playing in preseason games and getting to know his coaches and fellow players.  That's what Hard Knocks is mostly about, the journey of guys who are trying to fight and find a way to make the roster.  Every single one of those guys that gets cut on Hard Knocks spends more time with their coaching staff than Surhoff did with Elias.  And every single one of those guys gets cut in the blink of an eye with a handshake and a thank you. Surhoff had an ENTIRE YEAR to figure out what was going on.  I read the whole article during my morning constitutional today, it was terrible.  Ruined the whole thing.  (FYI, @TonySoprano I know you've been campaigning for The Athletic for awhile now...I got a free year of The Athletic because I subscribed to Joe Posnanski's blog.  And Posnanski got picked up by The Athletic a few weeks ago so he gave his subscribers a free year to The Athletic.  So far, it's been pretty good stuff and I like that it's ad free.  I doubt I'll remember in September of 2020 to cancel it before they bill my card for the next year.  But they do have Ken Rosenthal on staff so I won't mind too much when I see that charge hit my account.) Here's some of the whining that made me roll my eyes: Um, what? My take on Surhoff's sour grapes (make no mistake, he says it's not sour grapes and then proceeds to show us he's a professional vinter) is that he wanted Elias to reach out and kiss his ass from day 1.  Surhoff spent an entire year doing his part time job and sitting by the phone waiting for Elias to call him. Did it ever dawn on Surhoff to reach out to Elias?  Did Connolly even bother to ask? Did Surhoff ever stop to think, "Hey, the Orioles just hired this new guy, he's analytics driven, he's been successful in Houston and...maybe I should call him to introduce myself, tell him that I really like working here and that I want to meet with him to learn everything they're doing and SHOW that I'm adaptable?" Communication is a two way street.  "Present it to us....show it to me....I'll still talk to people if they reach out..." Not ONCE did he say anything about reaching out to them.  All Surhoff wanted was for the new sheriff in town to call him and be like "Hey, you were the #1 draft pick in '85 right?  You had a great career!  Wow, I will really value your insights!  35 years in pro ball, I'm barely over 35 years old myself!  Hey, let's do lunch at Dempsey's next week and you can tell me about everything you know!"  Not once in this whole blathering article did Surhoff ever say anything about "Yeah, I called Elias, like, 50 times to reach out and show that I want to be a part of his vision and a part of what he's doing...and he never got back to me."  I'd be more sympathetic and understanding then. You know, it's funny.  You hear ballplayers, athletes, coaches across all sports talk about being aggressive, having to work for things, "first one in, last one to leave," learning new things, different approaches, blah blah blah...all the old cliches that have been worn out over the years about hard work, dedication, etc...which are cliches because they've been repeated so often but are true in practice.    And for a guy like Surhoff to act like once you hang 'em up, the aggressiveness, the having to work for things doesn't matter anymore because you had a great career and you're kind of a someone in team history and that things and people who ARE NOW YOUR BOSS should come to you is completely naive.  Especially for a part time role that's obviously isn't crucial to the team's success moving forward, the idea that Elias had to reach out and talk to him is asinine.   Again, did he reach out?  Did he ever reach out to Elias to make a case for himself?  Was he proactive in showing Elias that he did make a difference, that he did help out? Baseball is a game of adjustments.  We hear it all the time on the broadcasts.  A guy gets called up from the minors, hammers big league pitching for his first few weeks and then the book gets out on him, the league makes adjustments.  So he needs to see if he can make adjustments back.   BJ Surhoff failed to make adjustments in his plate approach to life.  He sat back and was looking for fastballs that he could drive and got a steady dose of off-speed stuff and breaking balls that he couldn't handle and grounded out weakly to the opposite side.  And then proceeded to cry Paul O'Neill style on his way back to the dugout about how the pitcher was unfair to him.
    • o   Marco Gonzalez has been a workhorse for a bad Mariners team in 2019.  The 2013 1st-Round draft pick is winding down his 2nd consecutive solid season for the men from western Washington.     SEATTLE MARINERS Pending Marco Elias Gonzalez - LHP )) (16-11, 4.14 ERA) ) *   * )) Leads the American League in Games Started (32)   BALTIMORE O RIOLES Pending John Alan Means - LHP )) (10-11, 3.65 ERA)   https://www.baseballpress.com/lineups   o
    • Close enough!
    • And AGAIN!!! My theory holds true! You can put a siren on top of ANY Rock song and it makes it better.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...