Will Givens be traded this offseason?

[wildbillhiccup]

Since someone down voted (eye roll) my joke I guess I need to only post serious responses. Will Givens be traded? Probably not,  but he certainly should be. At 28 he is not part of the future on a team that's AT LEAST five years away from being competitive in their division. And that's if everything breaks right. 

[jerios55]

17 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

Since someone down voted (eye roll) my joke I guess I need to only post serious responses. Will Givens be traded? Probably not,  but he certainly should be. At 28 he is not part of the future on a team that's AT LEAST five years away from being competitive in their division. And that's if everything breaks right. 

I agree he should be considered, but I also think relievers seem to make more sense at the trade deadline, not winter.

[wildbillhiccup]

2 minutes ago, jerios55 said:

I agree he should be considered, but I also think relievers seem to make more sense at the trade deadline, not winter.

Agreed. Make him the closer this season and build up his value then trade him before September. 

[Redskins Rick]

20 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

Since someone down voted (eye roll) my joke I guess I need to only post serious responses. Will Givens be traded? Probably not,  but he certainly should be. At 28 he is not part of the future on a team that's AT LEAST five years away from being competitive in their division. And that's if everything breaks right. 

at least five years???????

Everything I have read is, 2-3 years, if done correctly. Yes, I know, you can throw stones at that statement. I am reserving judgement until I see the personnel decisions coming up.

You are just automatically so negative in every post.

[wildbillhiccup]

11 hours ago, jtschrei said:

Did anyone else find Roch's blog post on this a little weird? Like, Roch states, "The Orioles won't consider trading Givens...." 

Um, who is "the Orioles" here? It's obviously no longer Buck or DD. Who is feeding Roch this info? The Angeloses are unwilling to trade Givens? Seems weird. Why would the owners care about a middle reliever and non-superstar?

Is this Brady feeding Roch stuff? If so, it's weird. Do we actually already have our GM? 

I think it was Brady and I actually found some footage of the exchange between two. 

https://youtu.be/J8E1g-cHV5M

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/SIqGRMf3LYc" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[wildbillhiccup]

3 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

at least five years???????

Everything I have read is, 2-3 years, if done correctly. Yes, I know, you can throw stones at that statement. I am reserving judgement until I see the personnel decisions coming up.

You are just automatically so negative in every post.

Dude, I'm being realistic. They're starting with next to nothing. I wish it was a quicker turnaround, but I just don't see it happening in 2-3 years. And I don't think I'm in the minority. 

[jerios55]

5 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

Agreed. Make him the closer this season and build up his value then trade him before September. 

The one thing we'll need to look at is usage.  Someone posted (I don't remember exactly) that Givens was among the highest innings for usage.  If some of his down year is related, then we need to watch that.

Although, if made a closer, that should limit the opportunities.... 

[Redskins Rick]

1 minute ago, jerios55 said:

The one thing we'll need to look at is usage.  Someone posted (I don't remember exactly) that Givens was among the highest innings for usage.  If some of his down year is related, then we need to watch that.

Although, if made a closer, that should limit the opportunities.... 

Givens needs to be more consistent in his outings, and stay away from the meltdowns.

He has great stuff, he probably wont be lights out like Britton was, but then again, most aren't and he spoiled us.

Givens has good enough stuff to be an above average closer.

[jerios55]

6 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

at least five years???????

Everything I have read is, 2-3 years, if done correctly. Yes, I know, you can throw stones at that statement. I am reserving judgement until I see the personnel decisions coming up.

You are just automatically so negative in every post.

I think it's really hard to tell at this point.  If we have a FO that is ready to instill changes, has the means/abilities/resources and a manager that aligns with them it could be faster.  Just like the wait until we have a GM to say we are/aren't trading XXX, we kind of need to wait for the same to have an idea of turn around time (and even then it'll probably take a few years to know how it plays out).

[Can_of_corn]

12 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

at least five years???????

Everything I have read is, 2-3 years, if done correctly. Yes, I know, you can throw stones at that statement. I am reserving judgement until I see the personnel decisions coming up.

You are just automatically so negative in every post.

I'd say realistic best case scenario is three years.  But how often does a best case scenario come around?

[Redskins Rick]

2 minutes ago, jerios55 said:

I think it's really hard to tell at this point.  If we have a FO that is ready to instill changes, has the means/abilities/resources and a manager that aligns with them it could be faster.  Just like the wait until we have a GM to say we are/aren't trading XXX, we kind of need to wait for the same to have an idea of turn around time (and even then it'll probably take a few years to know how it plays out).

This is true, we need to see who is brought in, before we can just assume its going to be at least 5 years.

They did get a ton of decent young prospects in, and there is the draft coming up, and the international market to tap.

[Redskins Rick]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

I'd say realistic best case scenario is three years.  But how often does a best case scenario come around?

Best case 3 years, ok, I get that.

Worse case, at least 5 years, I get that.

But, at this point, its too early to call it either way.

 

[Dipper9]

20 hours ago, wildcard said:

I was kind of surprised by Roch this morning.   Here is what he wrote:

The O's are unlikely to be a winning team next season.  A good closer will not make them a winning team IMO.   Givens will be 29 on May 13th.   He will probably not be with the O's when they are good team again.     Givens will be in his first arbitration year next year and though he will probably not make more than 2M there is not a lot of reason to pay him on a team that isn't likely to win.    If Givens can bring back a good prospect, would you trade him this off season?

I wouldn't put too much stock in any plans the Orioles make right now, as I would think the new GM will be permitted to do whatever he or she wants once hired.  (or at least that's what the Orioles press release said when they announced Buck and Duke leaving.)

[Dipper9]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'd say realistic best case scenario is three years.  But how often does a best case scenario come around?

Agreed.  Take the Orioles out of the equation for a moment.  In the AL East you have three well run organizations who just had 90, 100, and 108 win seasons with young talent and good farm systems.  The Jays are not very well run but are always willing to spend money.  The future is bleak.

Now add in the Orioles incompetence and poor farm system coupled with a GM and Manager search, and 3 years is looking VERY optimistic.  

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Dipper9 said:

Agreed.  Take the Orioles out of the equation for a moment.  In the AL East you have three well run organizations who just had 90, 100, and 108 win seasons with young talent and good farm systems.  The Jays are not very well run but are always willing to spend money.  The future is bleak.

Now add in the Orioles incompetence and poor farm system coupled with a GM and Manager search, and 3 years is looking VERY optimistic.  

The Jays also have some serious high ceiling talent in the minors.