What about trading other prospects?

[Philip]

On the surface, it doesn’t seem as if trading prospects is wise, but do we prospects we have who duplicate stuff we already have, whose anticipated arrival in the major leagues is too early or too late for our timeline, or who haven’t planned out as well as we hoped; Not enough to have zero value, but enough that moving him might be a good idea?

I don’t know if we have any guys who might fit in that category, and by definition prospects are all about what we expect from them in the future rather than what they are actually doing now, so if we trade a prospect, we are trading potential.

Given that caveat, are there any prospects in the system with value that we would be willing to move?

 

[MurphDogg]

Prospect-for-prospect trades are rare. Would be better off waiting until we have a surplus of talent at one position at the Major League level (like perhaps at catcher in two years) than try to trade from what we believe might be a position of strength.

[Tryptamine]

Moving prospects before you have an answer at that position in the majors is usually not a good idea. Just stock pile the heck out of the minors and if one of them comes up to MLB and then performs, then you consider dealing the depth.

[thezeroes]

The Orioles have 6 State Side affiliates plus two DSL Affiliates Plus Extended Spring Training Site.  That would make the need for 225 Players to fill out 9 - 25 Man rosters.  It also does not account for those on the Sixty Day IL and the 10 Day IL.  Injuries happen all the time, replacements are needed at the different levels ALL THE TIME.  As players progress upward, players get demoted.  Those that are demoted because of performance or lack thereof are the trad able players BUT you get nothing much back'

[wildcard]

It really depends on what someone wants to give for want the O's have.  

Nunez is not a prospect any more but he is a developing talent.   If some AL contender wants to boost their offense by obtaining  Nunez then I think the O's who be open to getting a position prospect that is more rounded or a developing pitcher in return.    Nunez is ML ready and productive.   The prospect offered may be a couple years away from the majors and still be a good deal for the O's.

By the time the O's are ready to contend I am sure they could develop player that can DH.

[Philip]

5 minutes ago, wildcard said:

It really depends on what someone wants to give for want the O's have.  

Nunez is not a prospect any more but he is a developing talent.   If some AL contender wants to boost their offense by obtaining  Nunez then I think the O's who be open to getting a position prospect that is more rounded or a developing pitcher in return.    Nunez is ML ready and productive.   The prospect offered may be a couple years away from the majors and still be a good deal for the O's.

By the time the O's are ready to contend I am sure they could develop player that can DH.

Are Ortiz  and Tate still considered prospects? Is Mullins? I would not expect he would have it any trade value at all even as a throw in, so I wasn’t thinking of him when I asked my question. 

 I was actually thinking of guys like Harvey, who has an unfortunate past and is now apparently being considered a reliever instead of a starter. It’s likely that he is no longer one of our top pitching prospects, and won’t be among our starting five. But he still has enough of a Pedegree that he might be movable.

If we could move him for a solid infield prospect, for example, who has an arrival date of next June or July, that would be possibly something to consider, even if Harvey still has untapped potential.

 

[JMU_Birdfan]

I had a thought similar to this but more along the lines of, with the regime of Mike Elias and all of the new front office staff and instructors. Are there some prospects in the orioles  system that don't fit what we're trying to do has an organization but have more value to other organizations?

Example: Brennan Hanifee is a tall, built, athletic pitcher who throws heavy fastballs that stay low in the zone. Last year he produced so many groundouts but had very low strikeout numbers. He was very effective but was a pitch to contact pitcher. Elias and the Orioles new system has put a heavy emphasis on strikeouts (as they should) but maybe there is an organization out there that would value Hanifee a lot more than our current regime does. His numbers aren't great this year, but thats because he's trying to change his pitching style to fit the new direction of the organization. 

Do we have more players like this that might be valued higher by other organizations than the orioles value them? Could we get prospects that fit more of our new direction?

[Philip]

Just now, JMU_Birdfan said:

I had a thought similar to this but more along the lines of, with the regime of Mike Elias and all of the new front office staff and instructors. Are there some prospects in the orioles  system that don't fit what we're trying to do has an organization but have more value to other organizations?

Example: Brennan Hanifee is a tall, built, athletic pitcher who throws heavy fastballs that stay low in the zone. Last year he produced so many groundouts but had very low strikeout numbers. He was very effective but was a pitch to contact pitcher. Elias and the Orioles new system has put a heavy emphasis on strikeouts (as they should) but maybe there is an organization out there that would value Hanifee a lot more than our current regime does. His numbers aren't great this year, but thats because he's trying to change his pitching style to fit the new direction of the organization. 

Do we have more players like this that might be valued higher by other organizations than the orioles value them? Could we get prospects that fit more of our new direction?

Thank you, I think you have phrased the question a lot better than I did.

[DrungoHazewood]

3 minutes ago, Philip said:

Are Ortiz  and Tate still considered prospects? Is Mullins? I would not expect he would have it any trade value at all even as a throw in, so I wasn’t thinking of him when I asked my question. 

 I was actually thinking of guys like Harvey, who has an unfortunate past and is now apparently being considered a reliever instead of a starter. It’s likely that he is no longer one of our top pitching prospects, and won’t be among our starting five. But he still has enough of a Pedegree that he might be movable.

If we could move him for a solid infield prospect, for example, who has an arrival date of next June or July, that would be possibly something to consider, even if Harvey still has untapped potential.

 

What kind of player would you offer up for a guy who was drafted six years ago, has never thrown 100 innings in a season, and has a 5.19 ERA in AA?

[DrungoHazewood]

2 minutes ago, JMU_Birdfan said:

I had a thought similar to this but more along the lines of, with the regime of Mike Elias and all of the new front office staff and instructors. Are there some prospects in the orioles  system that don't fit what we're trying to do has an organization but have more value to other organizations?

Example: Brennan Hanifee is a tall, built, athletic pitcher who throws heavy fastballs that stay low in the zone. Last year he produced so many groundouts but had very low strikeout numbers. He was very effective but was a pitch to contact pitcher. Elias and the Orioles new system has put a heavy emphasis on strikeouts (as they should) but maybe there is an organization out there that would value Hanifee a lot more than our current regime does. His numbers aren't great this year, but thats because he's trying to change his pitching style to fit the new direction of the organization. 

Do we have more players like this that might be valued higher by other organizations than the orioles value them? Could we get prospects that fit more of our new direction?

Now that the Orioles have gone all-in on strikeouts are there any MLB organizations left that place any value on pitching to contact?

[VaBird1]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What kind of player would you offer up for a guy who was drafted six years ago, has never thrown 100 innings in a season, and has a 5.19 ERA in AA?

I’d give you Chris Davis 

[wildcard]

17 minutes ago, Philip said:

Are Ortiz  and Tate still considered prospects? Is Mullins? I would not expect he would have it any trade value at all even as a throw in, so I wasn’t thinking of him when I asked my question. 

 I was actually thinking of guys like Harvey, who has an unfortunate past and is now apparently being considered a reliever instead of a starter. It’s likely that he is no longer one of our top pitching prospects, and won’t be among our starting five. But he still has enough of a Pedegree that he might be movable.

If we could move him for a solid infield prospect, for example, who has an arrival date of next June or July, that would be possibly something to consider, even if Harvey still has untapped potential.

 

 I doubt the O's would trade Harvey.  Right now he profiles as the O's closer next year and into the future.  But  at some point  after next season he might be stretched out in ST to become a starter again.    He is still a top pitching prospect IMO.

[wildcard]

17 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What kind of player would you offer up for a guy who was drafted six years ago, has never thrown 100 innings in a season, and has a 5.19 ERA in AA?

I bet there are a dozen teams that would love to have Harvey on there 40 man roster.   I don't see how the O's get a return that is equal to or better than what Harvey may develop into in the future.

[LookinUp]

5 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I bet there are a dozen teams that would love to have Harvey on there 40 man roster.   I don't see how the O's get a return that is equal to or better than what Harvey may develop into in the future.

^^^Facts.

With that said, he's the one guy that I could imagine a prospect-prospect trade for. Many teams need bullpen arms right now. You could argue that he's ready for such a role. You could also argue that he's not. However, for budget strapped teams like Minnesota, Cleveland or Washington, if you squint enough you could see a scenario where they value his arm at something between a top pitching prospect and a solid 7th inning reliever, who's cheap, controllable and ready to help a ML team now, and thus be willing to give up decent prospects in return.

Going back to your post though, it's hard to imagine any team would value him as highly as the O's should value him. Absent a very strong return, I have a guy who looks like he has a solid chance (>50%) to be a bullpen fixture for years to come, and a decent chance (10-20%) to become a valuable starter or dominant reliever. It's hard to give that up for a 19 year old B level prospect.

[DrungoHazewood]

27 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

^^^Facts.

With that said, he's the one guy that I could imagine a prospect-prospect trade for. Many teams need bullpen arms right now. You could argue that he's ready for such a role. You could also argue that he's not. However, for budget strapped teams like Minnesota, Cleveland or Washington, if you squint enough you could see a scenario where they value his arm at something between a top pitching prospect and a solid 7th inning reliever, who's cheap, controllable and ready to help a ML team now, and thus be willing to give up decent prospects in return.

Going back to your post though, it's hard to imagine any team would value him as highly as the O's should value him. Absent a very strong return, I have a guy who looks like he has a solid chance (>50%) to be a bullpen fixture for years to come, and a decent chance (10-20%) to become a valuable starter or dominant reliever. It's hard to give that up for a 19 year old B level prospect.

I think that's a very optimistic view of Harvey.  He's averaged 34 innings a season in six and a half years as a pro.  He has allowed 14 homers and has a 5.19 ERA in 60 innings in AA.  I hope he has a good career for the Orioles.  But he has a very high risk of flaming out.  If I were another team looking for a bullpen arm I wouldn't give up much of anything for him.