MLBTR: Three Things

[weams]

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/10/three-needs-baltimore-orioles-2.html

[Moose Milligan]

It's funny how MLBTR went from a dude living in his mom's basement essentially making things up to being some sort of credible insight on baseball webpage.

He's not wrong about any of the stuff he says but it's all stuff that's been talked about ad nauseum on here.  

[weams]

9 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

It's funny how MLBTR went from a dude living in his mom's basement essentially making things up to being some sort of credible insight on baseball webpage.

He's not wrong about any of the stuff he says but it's all stuff that's been talked about ad nauseum on here.  

Quite true. 

[backwardsk]

Walk me through why extending Mancini would be a good idea and why he wouldn’t go through the arbitration process.

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, backwardsk said:

Walk me through why extending Mancini would be a good idea and why he wouldn’t go through the arbitration process.

You are going to have to think he's a valuable player for you team into his 30's for it to make much sense.   As for Mancini, some players prefer the safety of guaranteed money, heck most players do.

[Enjoy Terror]

27 minutes ago, backwardsk said:

Walk me through why extending Mancini would be a good idea and why he wouldn’t go through the arbitration process.

 

1. Depends on how much you like Mancini as a player, and I'm not convinced he's got more than 5 great years in him, but...

2. Obviously Longoria took his contract before his rookie year so that's an extreme example, but lets hypothetically say Mancini was the kind of guy to get a contract like 6/100 in free agency, but you can buy him out now for 9/80 ... his money is 1) a big check guaranteed now and 2) eliminates his risk of losing everything to injury or ineffectiveness .... at the expense of $20M.

[backwardsk]

7 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:

 

1. Depends on how much you like Mancini as a player, and I'm not convinced he's got more than 5 great years in him, but...

2. Obviously Longoria took his contract before his rookie year so that's an extreme example, but lets hypothetically say Mancini was the kind of guy to get a contract like 6/100 in free agency, but you can buy him out now for 9/80 ... his money is 1) a big check guaranteed now and 2) eliminates his risk of losing everything to injury or ineffectiveness .... at the expense of $20M.

Your scenario would be giving up more than $20M because he’d get paid arbitration salaries in the first three years, right?

[MDtransplant757]

1 hour ago, backwardsk said:

Walk me through why extending Mancini would be a good idea and why he wouldn’t go through the arbitration process.

Would be cheaper for the club for his last 3 years, assuming this year is a benchmark on what would we should expect from Trey offensively and defensively if they leave him at 1B; then we'd be keeping him for most likely under market value for the remaining years of the deal if we consider the market for 1st base bats who hit FA around the time Mancini is expected to hit FA in 2023. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, MDtransplant757 said:

Would be cheaper for the club for his last 3 years, assuming this year is a benchmark on what would we should expect from Trey offensively and defensively if they leave him at 1B; then we'd be keeping him for most likely under market value for the remaining years of the deal if we consider the market for 1st base bats who hit FA around the time Mancini is expected to hit FA in 2023. 

He definitely had a better year than I was expecting but I don't think it would be wise to use this year as a benchmark.

[weams]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

He definitely had a better year than I was expecting but I don't think it would be wise to use this year as a benchmark.

I think trading him now would maximize return and save big money. 

[backwardsk]

28 minutes ago, MDtransplant757 said:

Would be cheaper for the club for his last 3 years, assuming this year is a benchmark on what would we should expect from Trey offensively and defensively if they leave him at 1B; then we'd be keeping him for most likely under market value for the remaining years of the deal if we consider the market for 1st base bats who hit FA around the time Mancini is expected to hit FA in 2023. 

So what would be the framework of your proposed deal?  I’ll play the role of Mancini.

[HowAboutThat]

 Extending a limited player is a bad idea. If we haven’t learned anything from Chris Davis we never will, but here we have another limited player. Even discussing extending him is silly. I’m really not sure we’re even going to find a meaningful trade return for him.

[wildcard]

I don't think extending Mancini is a good idea.    A year from now we may be looking at Mountcastle as the 1B for the future with Santander, Hays and Diaz in the outfield.   

Mancini may be the face of the franchise for now.  But until the O's can assemble a pitching staff that can compete all positions  are in flux.

I would put Mancini at 1B in 2020 and Mountcastle in LF after he is promoted on April 10th.  But we know Hyde is going to move players around.  They both could see time at 1B/COF/DH as the season goes on.  They should be a good middle of the order tandem in 2020.

[Redskins Rick]

21 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

It's funny how MLBTR went from a dude living in his mom's basement essentially making things up to being some sort of credible insight on baseball webpage.

He's not wrong about any of the stuff he says but it's all stuff that's been talked about ad nauseum on here.  

I thought MLBTR was just a service that rebroadcast out what other writers had posted?

[Moose Milligan]

40 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

I thought MLBTR was just a service that rebroadcast out what other writers had posted?

Back in the early days, IIRC, it was some of that but it was also unconfirmed rumors that didn't have a source.