Trumbo getting hot

[joelala]

2 hours ago, spiritof66 said:

I don't know why, either.

But there is a pattern to the Trumbo, Davis and O'Day signings that I think provides the most likely explanation. Whether the call was made by an Angelos or Brady or Buck or (doubtful IMO) Duquette, the Orioles decided they had to keep these guys through 2018 in order to give the Ancient Owner his best chance to have a winner, and if one of them insisted on a year or two or four longer than that, the Orioles had to give it to them rather than take the risk of losing him and not being fully stocked for contention through 2018.

Sounds about right.  Its the Oriole way.

[FanSince88]

Now that the rebuild is in full swing, please for the love of God get Trumbo off this team.  

I don't have anything against Trumbo personally, and actually think he's been a useful batter this year.  

But his OF defense is horrible, and at the one defensive position he can play competently, there's two other guys on the roster who probably aren't going anywhere anytime soon. 

Even worse, he's forcing Mancini to left field, which he is horrible at.  Worse than that, his slot on the roster is blocking outfield prospects like Mullins (and next year, he will be blocking Hays, Diaz and/or Stewart).  

By hook or by crook he's gotta go.  Sure, he's been better than Davis and Mancini.  But we can't do jack with Davis, and Mancini still has his whole career ahead of him and can hopefully return to the batting form he had last year.  Even if we have to eat some salary, I hope we can do a deal with someone, anyone, to get him off this roster so we can give some of the young outfielders a shot.  Or even just to finally get Mancini out of left field, that alone makes it worthwhile.  And the sooner the better.  

[gmelson26]

We only have him until the end of next year.  The team's nothing more than a placeholder next year.  Just hold tight, and he'll be gone before you know it.  Hopefully he'll tear the cover off the ball at the start of next year and we flip him.. but it takes two to tango.  We can't just force a team to take him.

[Rene88]

1 minute ago, gmelson26 said:

We only have him until the end of next year.  The team's nothing more than a placeholder next year.  Just hold tight, and he'll be gone before you know it.  Hopefully he'll tear the cover off the ball at the start of next year and we flip him.. but it takes two to tango.  We can't just force a team to take him.

Exactly. It doesn’t really matter. No sense in getting upset about players performance. 

[Lucky_13]

Really hope someone makes a waiver claim and we just let him go 

[FanSince88]

1 minute ago, Lucky_13 said:

Really hope someone makes a waiver claim and we just let him go 

Exactly.  Or even we pay a mil or two in Trumbo's salary in "exchange" for a D+ prospect.  

[ChuckS]

I would like to unclog the 1B/DH situation. 

Moving Trumbo allows the team to play Mancini at 1B or DH and gives our OF prospects a chance to play everyday.  

Find a team to take him for another mediocre player in the offseason and eat half his salary.  Maybe they can do it this August if he gets hot over the next few weeks. 

[NashLumber]

9 minutes ago, gmelson26 said:

We only have him until the end of next year.  The team's nothing more than a placeholder next year.  Just hold tight, and he'll be gone before you know it.  Hopefully he'll tear the cover off the ball at the start of next year and we flip him.. but it takes two to tango.  We can't just force a team to take him.

I like this. I suppose he could be DH all year and stay out of the OF to make room for the young guys. 

Now what about Davis? I posted in another thread that I wonder if with all of the payroll being shed for the next couple of years, I wonder if they will look at Davis as counterproductive to the aggressive rebuild and they just eat the rest of his contract and consider it a sunk cost? The way that it’s backloaded and spread out till he’s 50, it may be doable to eat $17 million a year or whatever it is when deferred. 

[ChuckS]

1 minute ago, NashLumber said:

I like this. 

Now what about Davis? I posted in another thread that I wonder if with all of the payroll being shed for the next couple of years, I wonder if they will look at Davis as counterproductive to the aggressive rebuild and they just eat the rest of his contract and consider it a sunk cost? The way that it’s backloaded and spread out till he’s 50, it may be doable to eat $17 million a year or whatever it is when deferred. 

Davis will be on the team in 2019.  If he has a repeat of 2018 (highly likely) I don't think he finishes the season with the team.  They will negotiate a buy out or just release him outright.  

[NashLumber]

Just now, ChuckS said:

Davis will be on the team in 2019.  If he has a repeat of 2018 (highly likely) I don't think he finishes the season with the team.  They will negotiate a buy out or just release him outright.  

I think we’re on the same page. 

[Rene88]

4 minutes ago, NashLumber said:

I like this. I suppose he could be DH all year and stay out of the OF to make room for the young guys. 

Now what about Davis? I posted in another thread that I wonder if with all of the payroll being shed for the next couple of years, I wonder if they will look at Davis as counterproductive to the aggressive rebuild and they just eat the rest of his contract and consider it a sunk cost? The way that it’s backloaded and spread out till he’s 50, it may be doable to eat $17 million a year or whatever it is when deferred. 

I said this and I think that may be the plan. I bet they give him half a year next year then if it’s the same as we see now then this will happen.

[NashLumber]

6 minutes ago, NashLumber said:

I like this. I suppose he could be DH all year and stay out of the OF to make room for the young guys. 

Now what about Davis? I posted in another thread that I wonder if with all of the payroll being shed for the next couple of years, I wonder if they will look at Davis as counterproductive to the aggressive rebuild and they just eat the rest of his contract and consider it a sunk cost? The way that it’s backloaded and spread out till he’s 50, it may be doable to eat $17 million a year or whatever it is when deferred. 

 

1 minute ago, Rene88 said:

I said this and I think that may be the plan. I bet they give him half a year next year then if it’s the same as we see now then this will happen.

Cool. On the same page. I have often said they could also just melt down all of Davis’ unsold merch and dump it at the bottom of the bay and have a fish reef. Tax write-off. 

[Aristotelian]

I really, really, really dislike Trumbo. Not only his game, he looks sour all the time. When the history books are written, I would be curious to know from people on the inside whether his deal was DD, ownership, Buck, or Brady. Not quite as egregious as Davis, but a terrible deal that gets even worse in hindsight.

[Rene88]

1 minute ago, NashLumber said:

 

Cool. On the same page. I have often said they could also just melt down all of Davis’ unsold merch and dump it at the bottom of the bay and have a fish reef. Tax write-off. 

Lol. Poor Chris. I wouldn’t have turned down all that money but what an awful contract.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, NashLumber said:

 

Cool. On the same page. I have often said they could also just melt down all of Davis’ unsold merch and dump it at the bottom of the bay and have a fish reef. Tax write-off. 

Pretty sure that stuff is toxic.