Jump to content

So why haven't there been extension talks with Manny in 2 years?


interloper

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, PAOriolesFan said:

According to someone I know very connected with the O's, a potential extension was brought to ownership a couple of years ago for approval and it was shot down. I have not seen it reported elsewhere, but would it honestly surprise anyone? 

This doesn't surprise me. A quality GM would have worked his tail off to get Manny signed well before free agency. If ownership shot down an extension several years back, then that actually adds context to DD's statement that no talks have been held for a couple years...what would be the point? I'm shocked that the organization found it's way out of the losing to make the 5 year run. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, interloper said:

It would not surprise me, no, and would be a valid reason why Dan gave no explicit reasoning in that sound bite. Still, just don't say it. There's no need to give those details unless  you're salty about ownership or the player's agent, which either way is a bad look.

Was he asked a direct question?  I don’t know.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Please!!!!!

 

Any criticism regarding an extension to Manny should not be addressed to the GM.   That's a joke.    That stuff is 100% in the hands of others.     If there was no communication it was because ownership decided that he shouldn't or couldn't be signed.    Probably the latter and they also probably forbade their GM from exploring trades last offseason even though they knew Manny would be walking after this year. 

Let's all wake up and smell the coffee.   Duquette does the day to day small stuff.   He does the leg work.   Buck has veto power and ownership gets involved in any heavy negotiations, particularly with their own players.   

I absolutely agree (other than Buck having veto power, which I tend to disagree with when it comes to major roster decisions). I'm complaining about optics more than the lack of negotiations. The lack of negotiations starts and ends with Angelos, obviously. Dan didn't need to air that out and make himself look bad to others, though that's sort of been his MO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, interloper said:

Duquette admitted as much, for some reason. It makes him sound incompetent out of context, but he didn't really provide any context or reasoning. In text, it just sounds like he wasn't interested in extending Manny. 

What possible reason could there be for :

a) not trying to hold extension talks over the last two years

b) admitting to that

He asked for 300 + million dollars and Angelos said no

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2017/09/22/report-baltimore-orioles-manny-machado-contract-extension/

Manny wasn’t asking for $300 mm.    It was during his pre-arb years and before his offense really took off (though his talent was completely undeniable IMO).    The O’s blew their very good opportunity to lock Manny up and seemingly didn’t try very hard after that.   It’s mind-blowing.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Frobby said:

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2017/09/22/report-baltimore-orioles-manny-machado-contract-extension/

Manny wasn’t asking for $300 mm.    It was during his pre-arb years and before his offense really took off (though his talent was completely undeniable IMO).    The O’s blew their very good opportunity to lock Manny up and seemingly didn’t try very hard after that.   It’s mind-blowing.   

This is what I'm saying. But it stems from Angelos, not Dan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Takes two to tango. If Peter's starting price is $200M and Manny's is $400M, there is no point in talking. His price has only gotten higher in the last two years. It's also possible Manny doesn't particularly like Baltimore and just said flat "no". 

If so, Manny’s repeatedly lied to the press about it.

http://www.12up.com/posts/4483297-manny-machado-says-he-wants-to-remain-with-orioles-long-term

https://www.pressboxonline.com/2016/07/14/espns-jim-bowden-manny-machado-wants-to-stay-an-oriole

https://www.google.com/amp/www.baltimorebaseball.com/2017/01/28/machado-says-orioles-havent-discussed-contract-extension/amp/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Frobby said:

I dont think he has, Manny acts like he enjoys playing here and he seams to get along very well with his teammates and Buck. IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • No one is trading anything close to that for Crochet. But I agree..spend money, not prospects.
    • That's some high standards.  Sinker ball types are always going to have higher FIPs and lower K rates.  The truth is, Quintana is probably out of our price range.  That price range is probably no more than the standard Lyles/Gibson/Kimbrel/Frazier price range until otherwise seen.   Back to Quintana, I think he's the type of guy that if healthy could be a real weapon for us with our home ballpark and a home playoff game if we ever get deep into a series.  
    • That's really the role/opening for next year that we need.  A RHH OF that could play some CF preferably.  Although, I'd lean more to and offensive minded portion of that versus the ability to play CF.  LF is big though at home. I think it's a role that Elias fills through trade, waivers, or maybe even a competition of milb deal types.  Like a RH Sam Hilliard type.  
    • Yeah, he would be good in the Austin Slater role if he was willing to accept it. Not sure that he would be quite as good defensively in CF, given that he has played fewer than 100 innings total in CF since 2021. I highly doubt that he is ready to accept a role as a platoon player though, given that he is not yet 30, and he was an above average starter by rWAR from 2021-23. I doubt he is tendered a contract, given his $6M 2024 salary. His best bet is probably to sign a one year deal with a team that doesn't hope to compete, to attempt to reestablish himself as an everyday player, while the team that signs him can hope to flip him at the trade deadline.
    • I agree. He’d be a great regular season fit in Cinncy’s ballpark. Maybe that confidence of knowing he can hit the ball out to LF at home covers up his other decencies.  As for Crochet… can’t we just resign Burnes?  Crochet would probably cost Holliday, Basallo, and Mayo. Didn’t the deadline teach us the cost of pitching? I’m for trading Mountcastle. I’d hope we can surround the young hitters with a Burnes led staff with adding a vet bat to the DH/1B mix. Other than that, I think we will roll with what we have. And we should. 
    • Hays will want to start somewhere. He shouldn't start for us. We don't want him sitting on the bench looking dejected while Kjerstad and Cowser are mashing bombs onto Eutaw Street.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...