Mancini Drawing Interest

[IPlayGM]

My point is, Mancini is a good talent but not really a difference maker when it comes to the future winning Orioles. I would love to have him, but if he nets serious talent (skeptical) then you trade him no questions asked.

[tntoriole]

And Trey must be listening as he is definitely pressing in the last week, 0 for 3 again today so far.....which isn't going to help much. 

[ScGO's]

3 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Tampa is the fit. I’d take Baz and Lowe(1B) in return. 

Maybe Arizona too.  There are a lot of teams in that NL Wildcard Race

[atomic]

22 minutes ago, tntoriole said:

And Trey must be listening as he is definitely pressing in the last week, 0 for 3 again today so far.....which isn't going to help much. 

Or he is going back to what we expected from him. .800 OPS is my expectation.  

[WalkWithElias]

Mancini's controllable years is what gives him his value. Clubs are valuing, well, value more than ever. I don't think there is much of anything that is going to change in his game that will drastically improve his trade value. Getting multiple controllable, cost-controlled seasons is the chip you'll be able to use to leverage for anything in return. 

If you don't trade Mancini this season, you may as well print his picture on the Opening Day programs for the next few years and promote him as the homegrown, face of the franchise, hardworking kid like we did Brian Roberts through the dark ages. His trade value is only going to diminish after this season. 

Edit: And if his current trade value turns out to be underwhelming, I'm totally fine with the keep him and promote him as homegrown fan favorite. I just won't expect to ever get anything more from him in the future than we would now. 

[sportsfan8703]

18 minutes ago, WalkWithElias said:

Mancini's controllable years is what gives him his value. Clubs are valuing, well, value more than ever. I don't think there is much of anything that is going to change in his game that will drastically improve his trade value. Getting multiple controllable, cost-controlled seasons is the chip you'll be able to use to leverage for anything in return. 

If you don't trade Mancini this season, you may as well print his picture on the Opening Day programs for the next few years and promote him as the homegrown, face of the franchise, hardworking kid like we did Brian Roberts through the dark ages. His trade value is only going to diminish after this season. 

Edit: And if his current trade value turns out to be underwhelming, I'm totally fine with the keep him and promote him as homegrown fan favorite. I just won't expect to ever get anything more from him in the future than we would now. 

Why can’t Nunez be the face of the franchise?  

[Morgan423]

We simply can't lose with the Mancini situation.  The team has so much time in control upcoming (I don't think he's a free agent until what... 2023 or so?) that we simply aren't in any position where we are pressured to deal him.   We hold him to be with the team at the end of the rebuild, or someone unexpectedly blows us away with surplus value for him.  It's a win-win.

[Sessh]

8 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Why can’t Nunez be the face of the franchise?  

Do franchises need faces? I always thought the logo was good enough. The Oriole bird is the "face" of the franchise. His/her contract never runs out. I never really understood this terminology "face of the franchise" and attributing it to a player. That's what mascots and logos are for.

Anyway, I'd trade Mancini if the deal was right. As with Cashner, it depends how badly teams want them. I want quality over quantity as much as possible and if we have leverage (high demand for either one of those players), that's what I go for. I'm fine with playing the lottery ticket game, but I'd rather not have them "thrown in" to a deadline deal if at all possible. We can acquire such players in other ways. I don't want lottery tickets watering down deals especially any potential deal for Mancini or Cashner.

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

He’s a 1B and there’s nothing wrong with his defense there. He’s only playing COF here because of Davis and his albatross of a contract. 

He young, cheap, and under control for quite a while.

You ask for the moon...if you don’t get it you keep him. It’s a fairly simple formula.

 

That’s a bad formula.   If you get a solid return of players who have a chance to be good 2-3 years from now, you take it.    That’s something less than “the moon.”

[LTO's]

2 hours ago, atomic said:

Or he is going back to what we expected from him. .800 OPS is my expectation.  

Literally nothing in his advanced stats would predict a fall that far. His walks are up, Ks are down, FBs are up so is his hard contact %. You really can't be ignorant enough to believe this. GMs in charge of winning franchises clearly don't agree with your assessment and as always, if they disagree with you, they're probably right. He has a 1.8 fWar and 130 wRC+ going into the break while being forced to play a position he clearly doesn't belong at. Someone will take him and put him at first or DH and he'll provide immense value for them. Hence why teams are interested.

[Roll Tide]

59 minutes ago, Frobby said:

That’s a bad formula.   If you get a solid return of players who have a chance to be good 2-3 years from now, you take it.    That’s something less than “the moon.”

I think if you go back in the thread you will read how it was suggested that we should just move him regardless of return to clear the log jam, be lucky to get one fringe top 100, etc

A solid return would be a top 100, and 2-3 others. 

[Philip]

7 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Cisco hits well (so far) but not against lefties and everything else is "meh."  Mountcastle hits well, doesn't walk and everything else is "meh".  And Nunez?  He's got nice power but he's looking like a .250 hitter with a .300 OBP type.  

So yeah, I'd kick Davis to the curb and give Mancini first and figure out the rest. 

You're arguing against a player saying he's got no additional significant tools...when the players you'd want to replace him with are equally one dimensional as well.  To me, that doesn't make sense when you don't know if Sisco is for real and will ever be able to hit lefties, if Mountcastle can hit at the ML level and increase his walk rate and if Nunez could get his OBP to the .330 range.  That's why I don't think they should trade Mancini.  Because there's no clear cut better option and a lot more question marks.  

Moose! Hi howya doin’? I’m glad you’re finally out of that cave! While you been gone, the Orioles have gone down the tubes. We are bad now, my friend, and we are currently looking at getting rid of our assets in return for pieces that can help us in the future.

One of those assets is this guy named Trey Mancini. He hits pretty well, but he doesn’t defend great and he doesn’t run great, and his value now is probably at its peak because he’s a one dimensional player. The guys we have with whom to replace him are either too young to come to the show yet,  or equally limited without being as good.

But that’s what a team like ours has to deal with. We need to trade Mancini because his value will probably never be higher, and we have to do so knowing that the guys who will replace him probably will not produce more than he will. But that’s OK. We are bad, and trading Trey will make us, probably, marginally worse… For now. But only for now.

Yay Future!

btw, That cave apparently didn’t have a shower… Maybe you should go get cleaned up...jus’ sayin’....

 

[Moose Milligan]

14 minutes ago, Philip said:

Moose! Hi howya doin’? I’m glad you’re finally out of that cave! While you been gone, the Orioles have gone down the tubes. We are bad now, my friend, and we are currently looking at getting rid of our assets in return for pieces that can help us in the future.

One of those assets is this guy named Trey Mancini. He hits pretty well, but he doesn’t defend great and he doesn’t run great, and his value now is probably at its peak because he’s a one dimensional player. The guys we have with whom to replace him are either too young to come to the show yet,  or equally limited without being as good.

But that’s what a team like ours has to deal with. We need to trade Mancini because his value will probably never be higher, and we have to do so knowing that the guys who will replace him probably will not produce more than he will. But that’s OK. We are bad, and trading Trey will make us, probably, marginally worse… For now. But only for now.

Yay Future!

btw, That cave apparently didn’t have a shower… Maybe you should go get cleaned up...jus’ sayin’....

 

Right.  But if the armchair GMs around here are saying he's not going to fetch us much, if there's speculation that Mancini could get us a Top 100 prospect...I get everyone here is super trade happy but I just don't see how it makes too much sense right now.

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Right.  But if the armchair GMs around here are saying he's not going to fetch us much, if there's speculation that Mancini could get us a Top 100 prospect...I get everyone here is super trade happy but I just don't see how it makes too much sense right now.

I'm down with trading everyone that I don't think has a chance to be part of the next winning core.  Mancini falls into that group for me.

[Moose Milligan]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm down with trading everyone that I don't think has a chance to be part of the next winning core.  Mancini falls into that group for me.

I'm, 50/50 on whether or not he's got a chance to be on the next winning team. I can see scenarios where he is, I can see scenarios where he isn't.