Jump to content

Winter Meetings 2017

weams

By weams
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 279
  • Created
  • Last Reply
hoosiers Hangout Grand Counsel

hoosiers

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, weams said:

The Orioles are getting interest in outfield prospects Austin Hays, Cedric Mullins and DJ Stewart, executive VP Dan Duquette told MASNsports.com’s Steve Melewski.  It isn’t known if the O’s are open to dealing any of these youngsters, though Duquette did say that “ in our quest for pitching we have found that clubs like our outfielders,” which at least seems to hint that other clubs could be offering the Orioles some much-needed arms for the prospects.  Of the trio, it would surprising to see Hays dealt for anything less than a big return, as he is considered the top prospect in Baltimore’s system and would become a contributor at the MLB level as early as next season.

I am in an NL dynasty league with some guys who work for some minor league teams - they know their baseball.  Given the roster I inherited and the competitiveness of the league, I punted being competitive the past two seasons and focused on gathering young, cheap talent especially in the minors.  I have dealt with a less than stellar rookie campaign from Dansby Swanson and the injury to Alex Reyes (and to Anderson Espinoza of the Padres), the dealing of Eloy Jimenez to the AL, Otani signing with an AL team, and still have top NL minor leaguers like Robles, Rodgers, Luis Urias and Kolby Allard entering 2018 with a strong major league keeper roster.

That's a long winded way of getting to Kolby Allard and the Braves.  If the Os want top quality, cost controlled pitchers, the Braves pitching-rich minor league system is one to look at.  IMO, even with Acuna - who unbelievably I was offered and turned down last year, I think the Braves could use an OFer.  I would hate to see Allard dealt to the AL, but I have been noodling over the possibility of an Austin Hays for Kolby Allard deal since the middle of last season.  In that time, the relative rankings of the two has likely flipped with Hays now probably considered the higher ranked prospect - but I think it is more shades of gray separating the two than a major production gap in the two top 25 prospects.   If we picked up Flaherty in dealing Manny, we could enter 2019 with a young, high ceiling pitching staff of Allard, Flaherty, Bundy, Gausman and Harvey.  That could be a top three AL pitching staff within two years of Opening Day 2019 around the ETA of Hall.  A young Acuna/Hays OF for the next six years should have nice appeal to the Braves as well.

Would a Hay-Allard deal be a fair one?  Would one side need to add a small kicker?  Or could a package around Mountcastle and one of Mullins/Stewart land Allard?  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moose Milligan Hangout Grand Counsel

Moose Milligan

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, foxfield said:

Well, again, my point is before I bet for or against 72 wins in 2018...I'd kinda like to see the next little bit of time pass.  I could still see taking the under.  

Not to beat a dead horse, but it's the same crap year in, year out.  DD will approach this offseason like he has done with every other one in the past.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roll Tide Hangout Grand Counsel

Roll Tide

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, hoosiers said:

I am in an NL dynasty league with some guys who work for some minor league teams - they know their baseball.  Given the roster I inherited and the competitiveness of the league, I punted being competitive the past two seasons and focused on gathering young, cheap talent especially in the minors.  I have dealt with a less than stellar rookie campaign from Dansby Swanson and the injury to Alex Reyes (and to Anderson Espinoza of the Padres), the dealing of Eloy Jimenez to the AL, Otani signing with an AL team, and still have top NL minor leaguers like Robles, Rodgers, Luis Urias and Kolby Allard entering 2018 with a strong major league keeper roster.

That's a long winded way of getting to Kolby Allard and the Braves.  If the Os want top quality, cost controlled pitchers, the Braves pitching-rich minor league system is one to look at.  IMO, even with Acuna - who unbelievably I was offered and turned down last year, I think the Braves could use an OFer.  I would hate to see Allard dealt to the AL, but I have been noodling over the possibility of an Austin Hays for Kolby Allard deal since the middle of last season.  In that time, the relative rankings of the two has likely flipped with Hays now probably considered the higher ranked prospect - but I think it is more shades of gray separating the two than a major production gap in the two top 25 prospects.   If we picked up Flaherty in dealing Manny, we could enter 2019 with a young, high ceiling pitching staff of Allard, Flaherty, Bundy, Gausman and Harvey.  That could be a top three AL pitching staff within two years of Opening Day 2019 around the ETA of Hall.  A young Acuna/Hays OF for the next six years should have nice appeal to the Braves as well.

Would a Hay-Allard deal be a fair one?  Would one side need to add a small kicker?  Or could a package around Mountcastle and one of Mullins/Stewart land Allard?  

 

Flaherty is a must have in a deal wit the Cards. I think the Os want prospects over Wacha and Wong

Gomber and Helsley should be two nearly ready guys. If you can get a starting SP for Britton you can almost be set signing no free agent starters. Or 1 short term Vargas or M Gonzalez 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hoosiers Hangout Grand Counsel

hoosiers

Posted
Posted

Wong (or Gyorko) has little appeal to me in a MM deal with the Cards unless we absorbed them to help the Cards lower payroll.  They could be pieces to put together a semblance of a decent ML roster, but I wouldn't want them as, say, one-third of the return for MM.  Wong should be at 2B so he holds very little appeal in this regard unless we also deal Schoop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
backwardsk Hangout Grand Counsel

backwardsk

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, hoosiers said:

Wong (or Gyorko) has little appeal to me in a MM deal with the Cards unless we absorbed them to help the Cards lower payroll.  They could be pieces to put together a semblance of a decent ML roster, but I wouldn't want them as, say, one-third of the return for MM.  Wong should be at 2B so he holds very little appeal in this regard unless we also deal Schoop.

I was surprised to see that Gyorko had a higher rWAR than Machado in 2017.  I'd definitely take him if that helps boost the quality of prospects coming back (because StL has no place to play him and it would help to get rid of his contract).  I like what I've read about Flaherty, Alcantara, and Gomber.  I'd see if they could add in the SS Perez.  He's a ways off, but we are thin on IF prospects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Il BuonO Hangout Grand Counsel

Il BuonO

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Frobby said:

More than half the posters here favored the Davis deal when it was made  (though I didn’t).    Hindsight is 20/20 and now you don’t see anyone defending that deal, because Davis seems to have slipped faster than anyone had reason to expect.    

Plenty of people here (probably including you) were well aware of the comps for Davis as he entered FA. The FO should also have had that same evidence and chose to ignore it. The fans here aren’t in control of signing players. Foresight is what has been lacking for far too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Il BuonO said:

Plenty of people here (probably including you) were well aware of the comps for Davis as he entered FA. The FO should also have had that same evidence and chose to ignore it. The fans here aren’t in control of signing players. Foresight is what has been lacking for far too long.

I was just answering the poster’s question: other than Angelos, who thought signing Davis to a long term deal was a good move?   The answer is, there were a lot of people who liked the deal, and others who thought the specific deal was too long and/or pricey but who weren’t against signing Davis long-term in principle.   Put me in that second category; if Davis had been signed for say, 5/$90 mm I would have been OK with it.    In any event, it appears the deal will turn out worse than even most pessimists expected, because it was the earlier years of the deal that held the most potential for value, and now those years have been disappointing (2016) or disastrous (2017).     Most people knew the back end was likely to be bad, but had hoped that the first 3-4 years would be good.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...