Should the Os look into Kris Bryant?

[LookinUp]

1 minute ago, Tony-OH said:

In fairness, I think SG's idea would be to try and flip him for better assets at the trading deadline then the ones we would be giving up. 

Right, and if the Cubs think that's likely at all, they'll just do it themselves. 

[Aristotelian]

1 hour ago, OsFanSinceThe80s said:

I don't want it to happen, but if Trey Mancini proves that he is in 2019 form again the Orioles will trade him by the 2021 trading deadline. 

Absolutely. And from an organization building standpoint, I do want it to happen. Better than nontendering him next offseason. 

[Number5]

1 hour ago, Camden_yardbird said:

You are looking at the term of the deal and not the investment in the asset. 

 

No, I am looking at both.  You, on the other hand, are apparently looking at neither.  The two contracts are obviously not comparable.  That it needs to be said twice is, frankly, amazing.  Feel free to have the last word, but please understand that any further effort to claim that 1/18.6 = 2/12.5 will fall upon deaf ears.  If this is the best example you can find to support your argument that Tampa Bay spends freely on expensive free agents, I think you may want to reexamine your theory.

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, LookinUp said:

Right, and if the Cubs think that's likely at all, they'll just do it themselves. 

Unless they need to shed his salary now

[Tryptamine]

8 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Unless they need to shed his salary now

If they needed to shed his salary they wouldn't have tendered him a contract at all. I'm not naive enough to think he's going to net a haul,  but in a market where 37 year old Charlie Morton just got 15M for 2021, 28 year old Bryant, 34 games off a 5fwar season is going to bring something decent. 

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

If they needed to shed his salary they wouldn't have tendered him a contract at all. I'm not naive enough to think he's going to net a haul,  but in a market where 37 year old Charlie Morton just got 15M for 2021, 28 year old Bryant, 34 games off a 5fwar season is going to bring something decent. 

Well why NT him when you can likely can trade him for players?

[Tryptamine]

21 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Well why NT him when you can likely can trade him for players?

So your opinion is they're going to give away a 5fwar player and the draft pick attached to him through the QO all so they can save the salary and net a couple guys who have a sub 10% chance at ever sniffing the majors and a far lower chance at being an everyday player, even though they could have saved the money by non tendering him? By the way, the Cub payroll is already down considerably with Lester and Schwarber gone, so I don't think they're near as desperate as you think.

[Just Regular]

I will volunteer though that money is usually less of a crucial asset; its relative position to talent is probably higher than normal in these crazy times.  I can't fathom the Reds-Angels trade in any other context.   Sure all 30 owners are collectively crying poverty, but there very likely is some considerable variability in the 30 clubs making up that average.   At least on Suspicious Transaction #1, the Angels seem to be well off (a perk for Trout/Bundy/J. Iglesias -- all the Iglesiases come to think of it), and the Reds not so much.

I guess its possible Cincinnati thinks Raisel is washed up like Cleveland did with Kluber last year, but he didn't really exhibit the obvious chinks in the armor Kluber had.

[Tony-OH]

2 hours ago, LookinUp said:

Right, and if the Cubs think that's likely at all, they'll just do it themselves. 

I don't disagree.

[Sports Guy]

52 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

So your opinion is they're going to give away a 5fwar player and the draft pick attached to him through the QO all so they can save the salary and net a couple guys who have a sub 10% chance at ever sniffing the majors and a far lower chance at being an everyday player, even though they could have saved the money by non tendering him? By the way, the Cub payroll is already down considerably with Lester and Schwarber gone, so I don't think they're near as desperate as you think.

Well first of all, I’m not saying they are desperate.  I don’t know but everything you read says he’s readily available.  Maybe that’s all bs.  We will see.

And no, I’m simply saying he has value and NT a guy with value is dumb.  You are better off getting something for him than nothing.  The issue with Bryant vs many other years is his salary combined with last years performance.

Personally, I think the Cubs would be dumb to trade him right now unless there is a deal out there for him that I don’t anticipate but that may not be their thought process.

[Camden_yardbird]

3 hours ago, Number5 said:

No, I am looking at both.  You, on the other hand, are apparently looking at neither.  The two contracts are obviously not comparable.  That it needs to be said twice is, frankly, amazing.  Feel free to have the last word, but please understand that any further effort to claim that 1/18.6 = 2/12.5 will fall upon deaf ears.  If this is the best example you can find to support your argument that Tampa Bay spends freely on expensive free agents, I think you may want to reexamine your theory.

I think I am done with this board for awhile.  

This post is first intensly rude, second twists my stance to create an indefensible strawman, and third, fails to engage on the merits of the argument.

[Frobby]

18 hours ago, LookinUp said:

But why would the Cubs be willing to pay $6 million? I say they only do that if it improves the prospects coming back in a deal. And if we're giving up good prospects, do we really want to do that for a guy who's a rental in a rebuild? I'd say no.

There's a narrow range in there where I'd want this deal. First, is if we actually re-sign him and he's a core part of our rebuild. I'm cool with that if our talent evaluators make that evaluation. Second is if he's very cheap in terms of prospects we'd have to give up in a trade, which I doubt is the case.

Good post.

By the way, if Bryant has some “clubhouse flaw” as some seem to suspect, you’d think Hyde would know about it.    

The irony here (can’t wait for Can_of_corn’s reaction to this) is that the Cubs seemingly manipulated Bryant’s service time to gain an extra year, and now it turns out they don’t want it.   
 

[Sports Guy]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Good post.

By the way, if Bryant has some “clubhouse flaw” as some seem to suspect, you’d think Hyde would know about it.    

The irony here (can’t wait for Can_of_corn’s reaction to this) is that the Cubs seemingly manipulated Bryant’s service time to gain an extra year, and now it turns out they don’t want it.   
 

Yea but because they did it, they have options to do something with him.

[ThomasTomasz]

Look, I used to think this back in the day with guys like Teixiera.  When I started viewing things in the lens of "what is the team going to do?" rather than "what should they do?" I accepted my fanhood more for the Orioles, as well as the Washington Football Team.  

So in the vein of "what is the team going to do?", what does this mean for Kris Bryant?  We have some models to follow, namely how the Cubs, Nationals, Astros and even the Padres have built themselves recently.  The Orioles are still in the "talent gathering" stage, meaning we won't be spending much money.  We are pairing down the payroll, to hopefully save some for the future, as well as invest it into other departments.  The goal is to teach and develop, not to win.  

At some point, we will need to spend money.  This comes in two forms- the first is retaining your own players.  I would love to see the Orioles in a few years start buying out arbitration years with long-term deals.  With younger prospects, this sets us up to retain them through their prime years, and not pay as much on the back-end of their careers.  

The second is the spend free agents.  For the Nationals, they signed Jayson Werth.  Werth gave them a veteran presence, and introduced to MLB that the Nationals were ready to compete.  For the Cubs, they went out and secured Jon Lester, a legitimate "top of the rotation" pitcher, since they invested heavily on the bats in their minor league system.  As a fan of this team, even though we have done much better with Chris Holt in developing our pitchers organizationally, we have only developed two legit TORP's over the past 30 years.  I would love to see us make a Lester-type signing when we are ready to begin our run.  

Going back to prospects here for a second........the pipeline needs to be secure, and have depth.  Not all of the prospects we have are going to play for us.  Some are used as trade chips.  All of the franchises I mentioned earlier used their farm systems to trade for players who added to their core to make their run.  I would rather wait an extra year or so and continue to build up that depth so we have a chance of extending our window as much as possible.  Ideally, I'd love to see us have the development chops of the Dodgers, but that might be a pipe dream.  

[ThomasTomasz]

And I can't edit my posts, so here is what we are going to do with Bryant.......nothing.  He does not fit what we want to do with the team currently.  We will need to add payroll and take away from prospect resources to make the addition.  It's not going to happen.