Jump to content

Would trading Mancini be the best option now?

mdbdotcom

By mdbdotcom
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Redskins Rick Hangout Grand Counsel

Redskins Rick

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I think the odds are disconcertingly close to even as to who will be better over the next three years, Trumbo or Mancini.  Both will likely struggle to be 2-win players. 

With no MLB track record at 25 Mancini's trade value is very small.

And the problem with a 1.9 WAR player that hits 47 bombs and decent average along with RBIs is what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcard Hangout Grand Counsel

wildcard

Posted
Posted

There is no rush to trade Mancini.  He has options so the O's do not have to take low value.  He is likely to light it up in ST this spring.   When he does his value will go up.  Someone will need his power and OBP capability.   

I think Harbor Park holds his value down.   His road stats were 305/375/453/828.   If other GMs realize that he should bring back a good player/prospect.  No rush though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DrungoHazewood Hangout Grand Counsel

DrungoHazewood

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

And the problem with a 1.9 WAR player that hits 47 bombs and decent average along with RBIs is what?

That he's over 30 and has never been near that level before?  Also that 1.9 wins is not very good for someone with 667 PAs. Wieters and Hardy were worth about that in 2/3rds the playing time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pastorfan Major Leaguer

pastorfan

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I think the odds are disconcertingly close to even as to who will be better over the next three years, Trumbo or Mancini.  Both will likely struggle to be 2-win players. 

With no MLB track record at 25 Mancini's trade value is very small.

It is just a timing issue IMO. Yes, we'd love to let Mancini play and see what he can do. But the O's window is now and if he is a bust then the season could be lost--I think this is probably what DD and Buck were thinking. Now if I had a younger team that is not going to contend this year, then Mancini is the type of player I would try to trade for and plug him in DH or first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spy Fox Hangout Veteran Council

Spy Fox

Posted
Posted

I agree that Mancini may be worth more to us in a trade than on the roster given our current setup. That said, I think I'll be disappointed if we trade him for another David Lough type and Mancini goes on to be a solid contributor elsewhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
backwardsk Hangout Grand Counsel

backwardsk

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

That he's over 30 and has never been near that level before?  Also that 1.9 wins is not very good for someone with 667 PAs. Wieters and Hardy were worth about that in 2/3rds the playing time.

He has been as good, if not better, offensively than he was in 2016.  He's had two seasons more valuable according to fWAR than 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
esmd All-Star

esmd

Posted
Posted
Just now, Redskins Rick said:

I thought they were going to use Gallo there?

You probably have better info than I do.  Last I heard, they were trying to work a deal with Napoli.  If that was still the case, you could try to sell them, on Mancini as a younger, cheaper alternative that could potentially blossom into a nice player for them.

Either way, I agree they need to trade Mancini.  He's blocked here, so might as well move him for whatever they can get back.  I just hope they don't regret it if he turns into a good player for someone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • Can_of_corn
      Hurricane Milton is looking scarier by the minute

      By Can_of_corn · Posted

      Just did a bit of a walk. Some decently large braches down, one segment of privacy fence missing and standing water on the property in a low spot.  
    • Can_of_corn
      Hurricane Milton is looking scarier by the minute

      By Can_of_corn · Posted

      Just woke up and I don't hear any wind or rain.
    • EddeeEddee
      Do the Orioles need someone like Machado?

      By EddeeEddee · Posted

      Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • NashLumber
      Hurricane Milton has apparently ripped the roof of the Tropicana Dome to shreds

      By NashLumber · Posted

      Wow, that was so strange to see.  Eerie. 
    • OriolesMagic83
      What's Your Top Priority

      By OriolesMagic83 · Posted

      Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • NashLumber
      Any updates on the renovations to OPACY?

      By NashLumber · Posted

      Great points. Definitely agree. 
    • EddeeEddee
      Will MASN be among these soon ? MLB taking over TV broadcasts of 3 teams

      By EddeeEddee · Posted

      Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...