Who would you not trade?

[BRobinsonfan]

6 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

If they trade Yeltsin Gudino I am so out of here.

He is averaging 1 HR for every 424 plate appearances...  but he's still young.  

[atomic]

53 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Nope, I actually agree with you about trading for Trout.  I just don't like you.

Well I had you on ignore first.  I am dealing with the same broken ignore feature as you.   I feel I am suffering more. 

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, atomic said:

How are they trolling.  With logic like that I could say it is trolling to say Trout could be best all around player of all time. 

Responding to how Trout is the best all around player of all time. He isn't as good as Willie Mays was.  

3rd in WAR is important.  Bregman had more WAR than him.  Example of trading a highly rated prospect for Trout.  Bregman is making $640k.  Bellinger who was first in WAR made $605k.   Trout made $36 million this year.  Both Bregman and Bellinger have been to the World Series and are in the playoffs this year. 

 

He's 27 years old and just had his 6th best season, at 8.3 wins.  Through age 27 Mays had four 8-win seasons.  Through 27 Cobb had four.  Through 27 Mickey had four.  Eddie Collins and Albert Pujols had five.  ARod is the only other player to have six 8-win seasons through Mike Trout's age.  

The all time leader in wins above replacement through age 27 is Mike Trout at 72.5, three ahead of Cobb, and about 21 wins ahead of Mays.  Mays did miss about 1 3/4 seasons due to the Korean War, so if you assume he was an 8-9 win player in those years you could give him enough credit to only be about 10 wins behind Trout at this age.

But I'm sure you'll come up with reasons why all that is completely invalid, and Trout is totally overrated and not nearly as good as Andruw Jones or Jim Fregosi or something.

[Natty]

We should keep Means. He could get even better after his very good rookie season. We need good pitching. 

[atomic]

41 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

He's 27 years old and just had his 6th best season, at 8.3 wins.  Through age 27 Mays had four 8-win seasons.  Through 27 Cobb had four.  Through 27 Mickey had four.  Eddie Collins and Albert Pujols had five.  ARod is the only other player to have six 8-win seasons through Mike Trout's age.  

The all time leader in wins above replacement through age 27 is Mike Trout at 72.5, three ahead of Cobb, and about 21 wins ahead of Mays.  Mays did miss about 1 3/4 seasons due to the Korean War, so if you assume he was an 8-9 win player in those years you could give him enough credit to only be about 10 wins behind Trout at this age.

But I'm sure you'll come up with reasons why all that is completely invalid, and Trout is totally overrated and not nearly as good as Andruw Jones or Jim Fregosi or something.

Trout is 28. I am not disagreeing that he is a great player. I am just saying Mays was better all around.  Lets be conservative and say Mays missed 10 WAR by serving his country.  That would make him have 166 WAR.  Say Trout averaged 8 WAR over the next 10 years he would still only have 152.  I don't think he would get there.  

Anyway we are saying best all around.  Mays was a better defensive player than Trout is.  So best all around goes to Mays. 

[Ruzious]

Everyone could be traded, but the player who I could easily see getting traded that I'd hate to see get traded is Mountcastle.  I think he's the most likely asset the o's have of being a quality middle of the lineup hitter - with Mancini.   

[wildcard]

7 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

Everyone could be traded, but the player who I could easily see getting traded that I'd hate to see get traded is Mountcastle.  I think he's the most likely asset the o's have of being a quality middle of the lineup hitter - with Mancini.   

I don't think Mountcastle is any danger of being trade this off season.   The crunch comes when Diaz is ready for the majors and that is probably isn't at least until July, maybe longer with his injury history.

[Can_of_corn]

13 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

Everyone could be traded, but the player who I could easily see getting traded that I'd hate to see get traded is Mountcastle.  I think he's the most likely asset the o's have of being a quality middle of the lineup hitter - with Mancini.   

Don't sell AR short.

[atomic]

13 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I don't think Mountcastle is any danger of being trade this off season.   The crunch comes when Diaz is ready for the majors and that is probably isn't at least until July, maybe longer with his injury history.

Diaz, Mountcastle and Hays in the outfield  and Mancini at first.   Nunez doesn't really hit right handed pitching. You could platoon him and DJ at DH. 

[Hallas]

The notion that no one is untouchable is sort of silly and doesn't add anything to the conversation.  Of course no one is untouchable.  If we got into a 3-way trade with the Astros and the Angels, and received Mike Trout and Yordan Alvarez back in return for AR, I'd drive Adley to the airport myself.  But everyone knows that is not a realistic trade proposal.  If a player is not worth trading for any package that a team would remotely offer up, then they are untouchable.  And frankly unless you're down on any of our top prospects for some reason they should all be untouchable.  Means is probably in the same boat.  Mancini I wouldn't trade, but I can see the argument for.

[DrungoHazewood]

34 minutes ago, atomic said:

Trout is 28. I am not disagreeing that he is a great player. I am just saying Mays was better all around.  Lets be conservative and say Mays missed 10 WAR by serving his country.  That would make him have 166 WAR.  Say Trout averaged 8 WAR over the next 10 years he would still only have 152.  I don't think he would get there.  

Anyway we are saying best all around.  Mays was a better defensive player than Trout is.  So best all around goes to Mays. 

I guess that's fair, as long as you define "best all around" as being distinct from "best".

[LookinUp]

4 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I guess that's fair, as long as you define "best all around" as being distinct from "best".

I almost down voted this post, but I'm sure you know what you're doing. Mays being a better CF (if true), does not mean he's better all around. It means he's better at CF, but still not quite as valuable overall by the only objective measures that exist today*.

Of course, WAR could be wrong, but that's another discussion.

 

*only measure that I've seen being applied is WAR. Maybe there are others favoring Mays, IDK. He was clearly a great player, but so is Trout.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

32 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I guess that's fair, as long as you define "best all around" as being distinct from "best".

 

[weams]

32 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I almost down voted this post, but I'm sure you know what you're doing. Mays being a better CF (if true), does not mean he's better all around. It means he's better at CF, but still not quite as valuable overall by the only objective measures that exist today*.

Of course, WAR could be wrong, but that's another discussion.

 

*only measure that I've seen being applied is WAR. Maybe there are others favoring Mays, IDK. He was clearly a great player, but so is Trout.

WAR is tainted by the ineffective defensive metrics which definitely do not span eras. Mays was pretty darned good. I watched him some. It was harder then. 

[weams]

47 minutes ago, Hallas said:

The notion that no one is untouchable is sort of silly and doesn't add anything to the conversation.  Of course no one is untouchable.  If we got into a 3-way trade with the Astros and the Angels, and received Mike Trout and Yordan Alvarez back in return for AR, I'd drive Adley to the airport myself.  But everyone knows that is not a realistic trade proposal.  If a player is not worth trading for any package that a team would remotely offer up, then they are untouchable.  And frankly unless you're down on any of our top prospects for some reason they should all be untouchable.  Means is probably in the same boat.  Mancini I wouldn't trade, but I can see the argument for.

The Orioles would then have to turn around and trade Trout as they could not afford him.