Who would you not trade?

[DrungoHazewood]

10 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

It's not a no-brainer either way, is it? I think factoring salary and Trout's age pushes it in favor of the entire O's system but I could certainly see the case for Trout over a bunch of guys with no MLB experience.

Yep.  I think there are a lot of farm systems that haven't developed 60 wins over a decade.  And even more that got over the line with a bunch of Luis Matos kind of careers that don't have much of a real impact on a contending team.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

1 hour ago, LookinUp said:

To piggy back Drungo's post about changes in baseball, you might think Jordan would be hardest to ever replace because he had athleticism that will likely be elite or close to it for at least another 50 years. He also had the intangibles, defense, etc.

What he didn't have was a league that shot 32 3-pointers per game. It was never above 10 per game until the 94-95 season, and 7 footers were usually camped in or close to the lane, not at the 3 point line. So even the NBA is a totally different game than it was even 20 years ago. It's really crazy how much these things have changed.

The league also changed hand checking rules on defense and call a much tighter game now. I think Jordan would thrive even more today with the advantage that offense has now in the NBA. The Pistons would foul Jordan almost every time he drove into the lane, and Jordan got the calls but not every time. That wouldn't fly today and Jordan would average 45 points a game. 

[drdelaware]

After reading through this thread and the whole Mike Trout vs. Willie Mays comparison one thing that gets missed.  Willie Mays sold cars in the offseason, Trout doesn't have to.  Big money, technology, and knowledge allows Trout to be better in the statistics.  It's why I choose not to compare eras.  Just say they are the greatest of their era.

As for the who not trade thing this goes against the grain, but I wouldn't trade Mancini.  You still need some face of the franchise on the big league team and I don't think he would garner much in return.  After seeing what was in the Red Sox lineup the other day at positions not first base, I think Mancini means more to the Orioles than he would to a contending team.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

The league also changed hand checking rules on defense and call a much tighter game now. I think Jordan would thrive even more today with the advantage that offense has now in the NBA. The Pistons would foul Jordan almost every time he drove into the lane, and Jordan got the calls but not every time. That wouldn't fly today and Jordan would average 45 points a game. 

Maybe he wouldn't get beat up as much, but wouldn't you just be trading free throws for normal shots and it's all a wash?

[DrungoHazewood]

51 minutes ago, drdelaware said:

After reading through this thread and the whole Mike Trout vs. Willie Mays comparison one thing that gets missed.  Willie Mays sold cars in the offseason, Trout doesn't have to.  Big money, technology, and knowledge allows Trout to be better in the statistics.  It's why I choose not to compare eras.  Just say they are the greatest of their era.

It's not just Trout is better in the statistics, he's a better player because he can work on his game year-round.  But then again, so does almost everyone.  So the league is much better, even before you start introducing data and technology and scouting etc, etc.

But that also brings up the point of players today can differentiate themselves more with work ethic.  Before the 1980s few players used weights.  Read Ball Four and you'll know  "working out" often meant the pitchers would do some running in the outfield.  Few, if any, players spent a bunch of their time in the gym or running or all offseason in a specialized training program.  Today you don't necessarily have to do all those things, but if you do it's a competitive advantage.  You have to assume a guy like Trout fully takes advantage of things that nobody even thought about doing in Mays' time.  I think you can say a Mays' or a Williams' advantages were more natural-talent based, while today players are forced by competition to work harder to develop attributes they wouldn't otherwise have.

[Can_of_corn]

2 hours ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

The league also changed hand checking rules on defense and call a much tighter game now. I think Jordan would thrive even more today with the advantage that offense has now in the NBA. The Pistons would foul Jordan almost every time he drove into the lane, and Jordan got the calls but not every time. That wouldn't fly today and Jordan would average 45 points a game. 

I've discussed this before and I'll admit the NBA isn't a strength.

But if you look at MJ's shot chart and you look at the shot chart of any successful NBA player today they are almost complete opposites.  Jordan played before analytics became a thing and his game was predicated on shots that are seen today as inefficient.  He'd have to change his game drastically since I'm not at all sure any team would revamp their team offense around his style of play.

[Natty]

"Who would you not trade?"

If we had a hitter who ended up with a higher batting avg than say Altuve, Betts and Trout...I would keep that guy. Oh wait...we did.