ChosenOne21

Mancini is like a 99.5th percentile outcome for his draft position. Still, I was way off about prospect value. According to Fangraphs, average value of a first overall pick while under team control is like $45.5 million. Since Adley is the best prospect to go 1:1 in a few years, you could argue he'll likely be worth more than that EDIT: By my count, there are 55 players drafted in the 8th round with a higher career WAR than Mancini, which would make him something like 96.7th percentile. However, his career is just beginning and I'm sure he will pass many of those above him by the time it's over

$30 million should buy you a ton of prospects. Isn't the average surplus value while under team control of a 1:1 pick like Adley something like $20 million? I doubt the Sox are getting that kind of value

I don't have anything analytical to back it up, but what I noticed is that his slider went from being a pretty much useless pitch to being an effective, but not spectacular one. Regardless, it was enough to help him recapture some of the success he had when the league was still figuring him out

His ERA was more than a run lower than the advanced metrics would suggest. It wouldn't shock me if he regresses some. That said, Means has done everything in his power to get better, the slider got better as the year went along giving him a third pitch, and this organization will get everything out of him if they can with their technological pitching coaching. If his ERA is over 5 for any long period of time this year, I'll be shocked

That's fair. It's really a case of expectation vs. reality. If Mason McCoy thinks he can get a Major League cup of coffee if he busts his ass, I can't say that's unreasonable

I've always been more concerned with "Talent under 25" than prospect rankings. If your farm system sucks because they all graduated to productive Major League careers, that's a good thing

Being an analytical person, I've always wondered how the athletes manage to keep what seems like a self-delusional outlook from the outside. Like, does Mason McCoy wake up and truly believe in his heart of hearts he's going to have a long, storied Major League career? Because objectively that's a longshot

I dunno, he was decent for a while last year after we acquired him. Numbers look worse because he was hellacious in a Mariners uniform. I doubt he's anything more than a decent middle reliever and maybe not even that. The one I scratch my head about is Dwight Smith Jr. Like, he's a below replacement level outfielder who is what he is. Plus with the crowded outfield picture, how is he still here? He'd better not take at-bats from Hays, Santander, Mancini and Mountcastle

From my limited observations, Mancini has an okay arm, but good accuracy. Maybe the accuracy scares runners enough to make up for the fringe-average to average arm strength?

I feel like at least two of them will be in the majors this year I'll take the "under"

Fine, but how do you know it was specifically the physical?

This one would be my guess

I knew it was going to be bad. Who's reading this sort of thing and going, "Yeah, checks out?" "Harper has x years left on his contract" isn't even a joke. It's not even a poor attempt at humor. It's a statement.

Great write-up! I do not understand this organization's fascination with Dwight Smith Jr. We have a crowded outfield and he's, what, replacement level at best and not getting any younger? Every time they take someone off the 40-man, I'm surprised it isn't him

I don't understand why the Tigers are doing this. They're light-years from contention

There is no way Ryan Mountcastle has the arm to play right field. What even is this?

So how did you know Cruz was going to be more valuable from 34-37 than he was from 30-33? Tell me your secrets--I want to work for a MLB front office

I voted yes, but it could have just as easily been meh. Nobody in the return excites me, but what did we expect? I've been a proponent for holding onto Bundy unless someone offered us someone who could be part of the future with the hope that Bundy could drop his home run rate and be worth more at the deadline. The more I think about it, the more I realize that probably wasn't going to happen. Still, no one in that trade is likely to be even a medium-sized part of the next good Orioles team... Bundy will probably be better than last year if for no other reason than he's no longer pitching in, what, the second most home-run friendly park in the majors? If he does have a good season for the Angels it will probably be because he's in a park that fits his skill set. Best of luck to the guy

I was referring to what I would have rather seen done than waving him, I guess. Even so, I'll bet he gets more than a 10M guarantee on the open market (over multiple years) so it's conceivable teams would be willing to trade a prospect rather than enter a bidding war

Because Villar doesn't have zero value, so trading him plus cash would get us more in a trade while avoiding paying his full salary

I feel like at a minimum we could ship him out with some cash to buy a prospect while still saving some money. Why let him go for nothing? Are we so cash strapped that we can't afford to buy prospects? At a minimum, the Indians should be interested. Big hole at 2B, deep farm system, always cash-strapped

How does a middle infielder who was worth 4 wins last year have no trade value at a 10 million salary when the free agent cost of a win is 8-9 million? It's honestly puzzling to me no one wanted to roll the dice--did they just figure the Orioles would cut him anyway?

Okay, but you also have to consider the cost to get those additional wins. If we assume that the difference between 45 and 75 wins is 700 thousand fans and each fan spends an average of $40, that's about 28 million in revenue lost. It might be worth considering shooting for 75 wins if we could get there for say, $15 million or so, but I think that would be pretty hard to do in our situation. You'd also have to count for future value lost because of picking lower in the draft... Maybe you'd be happier and go to more games if the Orioles won 75, but I've got the specter of 1998-2011 looming large. I'd rather they win 45-ish games the next three years and 95-ish the three after that than win 75 games per year over the same timeframe

I doubt that fans are much more eager to see a 70 win team than a 40 win one. Feel free to contradict me with average attendance figures over a ten-year span, or so. If we don't tender Jonathan Villar a contract, I doubt enough fans say, "Well that's it, I'm not going to any games this year" to cost us anywhere near the 10 million we saved. Have you already forgotten the recent Oriole teams that spent and spent on free agents to try to get to .500 before making a run? How did that work out? What brings fans to the game is excellence. And sadly, the best way to get there is to suck for a few years

I agree that the pressure to show endless profits and growth is often harmful, but selling stock is how a lot of companies raise money to grow the business. If you can't do that there could be problems