Six pitchers who improved dramatically on dismal 2016 seasons

[tntoriole]

1 minute ago, phillyOs119 said:

We aren’t saying trade him because we think he sucks. We are saying trade him because he has value and could get the O’s something equally valuable at a position of weakness (starting pitching).

I understand.  But that means buying into the win 2018 strategy.  Which I think is misguided.  And that Mancini overperforming for the subsequent years for somebody else would not help us with the necessary rebuild that is only being delayed by this strategy for 2018, no matter who you could get for him in return right now.   Which is why I would value him more than just for what 2018 might bring in return.  

[Frobby]

6 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

Buford's speed and power in the leadoff slot was more of an asset than his arm strength- he was an outfielder at USC but was taken out of the outfield and put at second with the White Sox for two years before being traded to Baltimore and then put in left field under Earl who wanted his leadoff bat and speed in the lineup and who had Davy Johnson at second base.   His speed was definitely better than Mancini.  Russ Snyder played 50+ games in left field in 1966 but was more often in center field.  Mancini is not a center fielder, of course.   Adam Jones would probably be a better left fielder than Mancini but the comparison is with Blefary who, as you note, was terrible in both areas. 

Gary Roenicke had a much better arm than John Lowenstein but Gary too, like Russ Snyder, also played a fair amount of center field.     So arm wise, I would say that Mancini is better than  Blefary and Buford, worse than Roenicke and Snyder and at worst a wash or somewhat better than Lowenstein.  

I wasn’t just focused on the arms, I was considering overall defense.  Honestly, I don’t remember much about Blefary’s arm; “Clank” was just a pretty poor fielder.    Buford’s arm wasn’t strong, but he covered a lot of ground, so to me overall he was better than Mancini.    I consider Roenicke and Lowenstein to have more range than Mancini as well.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, tntoriole said:

I understand.  But that means buying into the win 2018 strategy.  Which I think is misguided.  And that Mancini overperforming for the subsequent years for somebody else would not help us with the necessary rebuild that is only being delayed by this strategy for 2018, no matter who you could get for him in return right now.   Which is why I would value him more than just for what 2018 might bring in return.  

No one is suggesting you only value him at just what 2018 might bring in return.  You would be trading five years of control and that adds value.

[tntoriole]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

It will be difficult for him to ascend to the 4-5 WAR level with his defensive limitations.

Perhaps.   Maybe just one offseason and spring training at a position never played ever might improve him defensively, but you certainly could be right.  But maybe his bat explodes, Davis gets injured or released or moved or whatever, then he goes to first base for the next five years.  

[tntoriole]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

I wasn’t just focused on the arms, I was considering overall defense.  Honestly, I don’t remember much about Blefary’s arm; “Clank” was just a pretty poor fielder.    Buford’s arm wasn’t strong, but he covered a lot of ground, so to me overall he was better than Mancini.    I consider Roenicke and Lowenstein to have more range than Mancini as well.

Of course, defensive statistical ratings were not going to help much with these comparisons, but Blefary's arm was not good.   I agree...I was talking about arm strength really, although again, I think that Trey can certainly be as adequate an overall fielder as Lowenstein was in left- Lowenstein was primarily a Ryan Flaherty type for much of his career, second base, utility infielder...He had more speed again than Mancini but overall his arm strength was nowhere near as good as Gary Roenicke's  or Russ Snyder's.  

[tntoriole]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

No one is suggesting you only value him at just what 2018 might bring in return.  You would be trading five years of control and that adds value.

But does it bring a starting pitcher which seems to be what 2018 would need to contend?  I just don't know.    Maybe it brings near ready pitching and position prospects that would help in 2019 and beyond, but it hard to see from the discussion how Trey returns in trade what 2018 would need given that we only have his rookie season and the various market opinions previously noted (no position, not a top 100 prospect, etc. etc.) to bargain from.    I just think we would not get the return needed to win 2018 and would lose more value than we anticipate going forward if we pull the trigger with Trey this offseason using the valuations of Trey I have seen suggested here ever since last spring training.     Which is why they pay Dan the big bucks....lol.  

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, tntoriole said:

Of course, defensive statistical ratings were not going to help much with these comparisons, but Blefary's arm was not good. 

As I said, I really don’t remember much about Blefary’s arm in the OF, but I’m a little surprised to hear it was weak, considering that the O’s started him at catcher for 38 games in 1968, and he also played a fair bit in RF in his career (210 starts).    As a catcher, Blefary threw out 51% of would-be basestealers.

[tntoriole]

6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

As I said, I really don’t remember much about Blefary’s arm in the OF, but I’m a little surprised to hear it was weak, considering that the O’s started him at catcher for 38 games in 1968, and he also played a fair bit in RF in his career (210 starts).    As a catcher, Blefary threw out 51% of would-be basestealers.

Of course, I was only 10 years old.    lol.   And it was only 50 years ago.   But it seemed that accuracy was an issue too with Clank in the outfield.  Of course, then there was Boog in the outfield...but I don't have any recollection really of seeing him play left.  

[Frobby]

7 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

Of course, I was only 10 years old.    lol.   And it was only 50 years ago.   But it seemed that accuracy was an issue too with Clank in the outfield.  Of course, then there was Boog in the outfield...but I don't have any recollection really of seeing him play left.  

Well, I was about the same age (9 in 1966 when I started paying attention).   Looking at Blefary’s stats at holding runners in the OF, he was well below average in LF and RF, so your memory is probably correct.   

[Tx Oriole]

On 11/2/2017 at 9:26 PM, tntoriole said:

I would not trade Trey unless I was overwhelmed...say a Jonathan Schoop return  or  a Manny return (the one year rental of Manny return).   Plenty of big time left fielders in major league history were limited by throwing arm...Trey’s is much better than many I have seen play left field for past pennant winning Orioles teams. 

I would trade Mancini for pitching. It's not just not for the misguided 2018 go for it. But good pitching could help the O's future. O's need pitching. 2019 and beyond. I'd trade just about anyone for good pitching. DD and Buck will be gone. We will be cheering for this team for years to come. It's so frustrating to me to see other small market teams have some success while the O's really don't. Look at Houston. Small market team wins the WS. Why can't the O's do the same thing? Hire a damn good GM and he hire a good manager. Oh well hell it'd take a different owner. It may not happen in my lifetime but I sure wish it would. When you've been a fan of the O's nearly 60 years you remember the good years the team had. Would like to see those days come around again. 

[Tx Oriole]

On 11/2/2017 at 9:59 PM, Since'54 said:

For sure.  But wouldn't you expect a successful pitcher -- just as Mancini is a successful outfielder.  The question about who is or has been labeled or mis-labeled as a prospect is a non-factor. The man has continuously demonstrated his abilities.  Enough already.

The team needs pitching. So if it took Mancini to acquire it then so be it. Do I think that will happen? No. DD will trade away top prospects for lack luster pitching. Angelos wont allow players to be traded to help the team. 

[tntoriole]

52 minutes ago, Tx Oriole said:

I would trade Mancini for pitching. It's not just not for the misguided 2018 go for it. But good pitching could help the O's future. O's need pitching. 2019 and beyond. I'd trade just about anyone for good pitching. DD and Buck will be gone. We will be cheering for this team for years to come. It's so frustrating to me to see other small market teams have some success while the O's really don't. Look at Houston. Small market team wins the WS. Why can't the O's do the same thing? Hire a damn good GM and he hire a good manager. Oh well hell it'd take a different owner. It may not happen in my lifetime but I sure wish it would. When you've been a fan of the O's nearly 60 years you remember the good years the team had. Would like to see those days come around again. 

Would you trade him for two top flight almost ready pitching prospects while realizing that neither of those prospects will help us in 2018 but have a chance to contribute significantly in 2019 and beyond?    

[Tx Oriole]

44 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

Would you trade him for two top flight almost ready pitching prospects while realizing that neither of those prospects will help us in 2018 but have a chance to contribute significantly in 2019 and beyond?    

Yes I would. I am with you about the 2018 go for it idea. I think  a  partial rebuild would be better for the O's. 

[Frobby]

8 hours ago, Tx Oriole said:

It's so frustrating to me to see other small market teams have some success while the O's really don't. Look at Houston. Small market team wins the WS. 

How is Houston a small market?    It’s the fourth most populous city in the United States.

[Ohfan67]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

How is Houston a small market?    It’s the fourth most populous city in the United States.

It's the 8th largest media market in the USA. Definitely not small market.