Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sports Guy

The offseason “elephant in the room”

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

rhe·tor·i·cal

: of, relating to, or concerned with rhetoric
b : employed for rhetorical effect especially : asked merely for effect with no answer expected

Smiley Face = sarcasm... 

Share this post


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

6 guys for 5 positions is NOT a problem.   Even 7 including Diaz isn't. 

It might not even be a surplus.

What are the chances all 6 or 7 will be healthy at the same time?   And if they are, what are the chances all 6 or 7 will be good enough to be regulars?

With Hays and Mancini as two of the options? Not a good chance.

Share this post


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

I think Mancini has a higher % chance of producing 1.5+ WAR next year than about 30 of the 40 guys on the roster.   To say HE is blocking someone is ridiculous.   It's just an attempt to be a provacateur by saying something controversial.

No it’s not.  
 

Prior to 2019, Mancini was worth less than 1.5 fWAR in over 1200 ML plate appearances (300+ games).

So, based on what he accomplished for most of his career, it’s absurd to have the stance you do.

However, based on what he did in 2019, it would be absurd to consider non tendering him.

Chances are, the truth would normally lie in the middle...normally be the key word.  There is nothing normal about the situation with him right now.

We have no idea how he is going to come back.  If they sign him and bring him back, he is the starter at first.  There is no doubt about that. He will also get a long leash to get his strength back and shake off the rust.  So yes, he absolutely could be blocking someone while we wait for him to get his game back, if he ever does.

Share this post


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

No it’s not.  
 

Prior to 2019, Mancini was worth less than 1.5 fWAR in over 1200 ML plate appearances (300+ games).

So, based on what he accomplished for most of his career, it’s absurd to have the stance you do.

However, based on what he did in 2019, it would be absurd to consider non tendering him.

Chances are, the truth would normally lie in the middle...normally be the key word.  There is nothing normal about the situation with him right now.

We have no idea how he is going to come back.  If they sign him and bring him back, he is the starter at first.  There is no doubt about that. He will also get a long leash to get his strength back and shake off the rust.  So yes, he absolutely could be blocking someone while we wait for him to get his game back, if he ever does.

We also have no idea if Mullins and Hays will be good enough hitters to be regulars in the majors, nor whether DJ Stewart will have enough value to stick in the majors.   Yet all seem to be in favor of giving them a chance to prove what they can do and I doubt anyone will claim they are blocking anyone.   Mancini certainly has big question marks too.   And yes, he will earn more than they do.   But looking at our potential surplus at CornerOF/1B/DH and defining Mancini as the problem is a skewed way of looking at things to me.  

Share this post


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

We also have no idea if Mullins and Hays will be good enough hitters to be regulars in the majors, nor whether DJ Stewart will have enough value to stick in the majors.   Yet all seem to be in favor of giving them a chance to prove what they can do and I doubt anyone will claim they are blocking anyone.   Mancini certainly has big question marks too.   And yes, he will earn more than they do.   But looking at our potential surplus at CornerOF/1B/DH and defining Mancini as the problem is a skewed way of looking at things to me.  

So much is up in the air.  Can he play next year?  How much and what positions?  Does he expect to make the same as last season or is he willing to accept a more team friendly deal?

If the medical prognosis isn't favorable and he's expecting to make 5M you have to think long and hard on it. 

It is really easy for us to say Sure, pay him 5-8M if he can't play so what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SteveA said:

We also have no idea if Mullins and Hays will be good enough hitters to be regulars in the majors, nor whether DJ Stewart will have enough value to stick in the majors.   Yet all seem to be in favor of giving them a chance to prove what they can do and I doubt anyone will claim they are blocking anyone.   Mancini certainly has big question marks too.   And yes, he will earn more than they do.   But looking at our potential surplus at CornerOF/1B/DH and defining Mancini as the problem is a skewed way of looking at things to me.  

Not really defining him as a problem.

More like we just have several other cheaper options who aren’t coming off a life threatening disease that could zap his skills and strength.

Its not like the team is going to get a look at Trey prior to deciding to keep him or not.  They need to make that decision soon.  
 

Just so much unknown here and yes, if everything is good, you keep him but how much will you know to make that decision?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

No it’s not.  
 

Prior to 2019, Mancini was worth less than 1.5 fWAR in over 1200 ML plate appearances (300+ games).

So, based on what he accomplished for most of his career, it’s absurd to have the stance you do.

However, based on what he did in 2019, it would be absurd to consider non tendering him.

Chances are, the truth would normally lie in the middle...normally be the key word.  There is nothing normal about the situation with him right now.

We have no idea how he is going to come back.  If they sign him and bring him back, he is the starter at first.  There is no doubt about that. He will also get a long leash to get his strength back and shake off the rust.  So yes, he absolutely could be blocking someone while we wait for him to get his game back, if he ever does.

You're discounting his injury in 2018.  Came back pretty strong from that in 2019.  That doesn't play into your concern that he can't come back from cancer so it's not worth mentioning.  

Quote

Things were going great, though. I had doubled to center in the fifth inning to drive in two runs and give us a 3–1 lead. But in the top of the eighth, Yonder Alonso hit a foul ball to left, and I slid into the wall going after it. There was a little part at the bottom of the wall that wasn’t padded — and it just crushed my knee. I had to go to the E.R. that night, and I was out for a few days. In hindsight, I should have gone on the DL. I had never missed time because of an injury, and I wanted to play no matter what. But the truth was I was hurt way worse than I admitted. I couldn’t put much pressure on my right leg. It forced me to change my swing, which created some bad habits that led to failure at the plate … which got into my head. It just spiraled out of control.

I went into a massive, three-month slump. My average fell from .284 to .216. I was sure I was getting sent down to Triple A at that point. I was just totally lost.

https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/i-am-so-lucky-trey-mancini-orioles-cancer

As mentioned, plenty of athletes have come back from cancer to regain their form.  Mike Lowell, Jon Lester, Andres Galarraga, Eric Davis, Mario Lemieux, Lance Armstrong.   You can quibble about Lance but he doped in a sport where everyone doped.  All those athletes came back from cancer and excelled.  And there are a lot of others, I'm not bringing up Olympians and WNBA players because...WNBA.

I'm not worried about Mancini returning to form, I don't see why anyone really should be.  He's got access to incredible doctors and trainers and the Orioles will do everything to make sure he's ready to go next year.  

If there was a correlation between cancer and losing hand-eye coordination, I'd be inclined to worry along with you.  But there's not.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

As mentioned, plenty of athletes have come back from cancer to regain their form.  Mike Lowell, Jon Lester, Andres Galarraga, Eric Davis, Mario Lemieux, Lance Armstrong.   You can quibble about Lance but he doped in a sport where everyone doped.  All those athletes came back from cancer and excelled.  And there are a lot of others, I'm not bringing up Olympians and WNBA players because...WNBA.

I'm not worried about Mancini returning to form, I don't see why anyone really should be.  He's got access to incredible doctors and trainers and the Orioles will do everything to make sure he's ready to go next year.  

If there was a correlation between cancer and losing hand-eye coordination, I'd be inclined to worry along with you.  But there's not.

I’m certainly not going to bet against Trey recovering all of his baseball skills, but it would be a great exaggeration to say I wasn’t worried about it.    There’s certainly an appreciable risk that he won’t.   And as I’ve said several times, my wish for his baseball skills to return is vastly secondary to my wish that he remain healthy and cancer free and live a full, happy like.    Baseball would be the cherry on the sundae.  

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


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

Profar is a dreadful 2B. I don’t want School back either, god bless him. I want a real honest to god stop-gap until Gunnar or Hall or somebody is ready

What's wrong with Schoop? Strong defender and a lot of power. He has his warts but he's a good ballpayer.

Fair enough about Profar. What about Villar? The other infielders I'm seeing are too good (LeMahieu) or too bad (Hechavarria) to make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, luismatos4prez said:

What's wrong with Schoop? Strong defender and a lot of power. He has his warts but he's a good ballpayer.

Fair enough about Profar. What about Villar? The other infielders I'm seeing are too good (LeMahieu) or too bad (Hechavarria) to make sense.

You know who’s just about right for this team, from a price vs. production standpoint?    Hanser Alberto.    

Schoop, by the way, has had a pretty nice season.  
 

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.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






  • Posts

    • Same chance of getting you a championship in 2022.
    • o   lllllllllllllllllllllll. (vs. MARINERS, 12:35 PM)       llllllllllllllll lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll        llllllllllllllllllllll.l (vs. MARINERS, 4:05 PM)     llllllllllllllll lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll    o
    • Contracts like Davis really hurts the game overall more than it hurts the individual team. Typically teams that have a bad contract just pick up and move on from the player...meanwhile the fans hold a grudge towards the player. Baltimore is doing a disservice to the game by not releasing him and moving on.
    • Yikes. Here's what the O's gave up in 24 hrs.:     WAR, 1991 ff.     Finley        43.5     Harnisch    17.6     Schilling    80.2     Tettleton    17.9     Total lost: 159.2 Davis        0.2     Robinson    -0.6     Total gained: -0.4         Total, net: 159.6 10 yrs    16 WAR/yr.     16 yrs.    10 WAR/yr.    
    • My wife and I went to Sunday's game with another couple and had a great time. A couple observations: - Bottom line up front is that I'd very much encourage folks to go. We've been relatively cautious during Covid, but really at no point felt cramped or uncomfortable. Certainly some of that is that now most of the folks I was with were fully vaccinated, but there's plenty of space in between seats and really not that many people. Even coming into the stadium and in concession lines, people were generally respectful of distance and it was no issue. I'm sure, anecdotally, there will always be someone messing up, but it wasn't an issue for us. Just wanted to start with that context for those that harbor understandable apprehensions, acknowledging everyone has different circumstances/risk perceptions. - Definitely make sure you read the modified regulations before you go - the issue with purses and parking, as some folks noted above, are definitely present. You've just got to be aware of them and plan (my wife switched out her purse just before leaving the house, and my friend's wife had a borderline-sized purse that got waved through after a little negotiation). I can't speak for parking, as we just did a garage on Pratt. - Mobile ticketing and electronic payments were all fully in use, so do recommend just coming prepared. If you're comfortable with using them, it's no issue, but understand some people aren't as tech savvy. Just a pretty minor planning factor. - Regarding masks, most people were good about wearing them, though clearly some of that slipped when people were sitting at their seats. I did see a few times where ushers enforced the masking at your seat rule, but it didn't seem overly draconian (it wasn't that if your beer left your lips for more than two seconds and your mask wasn't up, ushers would descend on you). Those patrons I observed were mostly compliant when directed (except the stray Phillies fan who decided to be difficult). Although I know some folks aren't crazy about it, to be honest, I've been at work every day for the last year wearing a mask the entire time for 8+ hours, so I'm not especially sympathetic. Little bit of a pain, but won't kill ya for a couple hours. - As others have stated, most but not all concessions appeared to be open. Prices did feel a touch on the steep side, but I'd bet they're comparable to what they were in 2019. The O's clearly haven't moved to the Ravens modified pricing. - Lastly, the bar scene before the game was of course quite different than normal, but still very workable and pleasant. Pickles, Sliders, etc have taken over huge spaces in front of their buildings, with plentiful tables well-spaced out. We got to Sliders at maybe 11:45 before a 1 o'clock game on a Sunday, and we had no issue getting a table. Again, overall would recommend folks go, if you're comfortable. I'll tell you it was absolutely great to get back out there and do something normal after having been cooped up for so long.
    • One last thought. When the reserve clause died in court and all players could become free agents every year, the players union was smart and agreed to a service requirement. It was good for salaries and good for the sport to control supply/demand, even if it seemed like a giveaway by the players. If there was a non-performance clause built into free agent contracts that gave some level of relief to owners, it would benefit salaries and the sport. Small to mid size teams would have more ability to chase top talent because the affect of a bad contract would be less calamitous to their limited payroll means if it was discounted by some percentage for non-performance. Ask Scott Boras if he’d rather have three teams bidding for his client or six. Our very own Albert Belle contract made insuring contracts fairly cost prohibitive (though it kinda seems like we’re keeping Davis on the roster for some reason other than insanity). But that practice of insuring contracts showed that there’s more money to spend on players if you give owners some level of protection from disaster contracts like Davis. Owners used to pay huge amounts to insure contracts before they became cost prohibitive. So if it’s good for competitiveness by allowing smaller teams to be more aggressive, and it’s good for player salaries, and it’s good for owners by protecting their investments, by what principle is a player entitled to the full value of a contract that they have essentially defaulted on for non-performance? 
    • By the way, I agree that Davis’ contract was insanely stupid long before he showed us how stupid it was by his performance. Angeles victimized himself. But I’m talking more generally about non-performance of contracts. I think the top earners would fare even better if not for the associated risks by ownership. They aren’t playing with Monopoly money. The risk builds a discounting into what owners will spend. And smaller market teams are less able to take risks because the affect of one Davis-like contract on their smaller payroll is huge. On what principle should players receive the full value of a contract they unable to satisfy competently? We’re rained out tonight....I wouldn’t be asking otherwise. Wait, did you call me noob?  
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...