Roch is obsessed with trading Santander

[Redskins Rick]

Wildcat, I think you went off the deep end, when you complain about Roch in this thread.

He is reporting what he hears, which is what they pay him to do. 

Like Frobby said, its only been a couple of posts.

For you to jump to that particular conclusion with no evidence, if it was anybody else, I would call that being a troll, but I know that you arent'.

[SteveA]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

You don’t know why the focus is on him?

Well, you believe that he is really good.  His numbers suggest he may be good although we need to see more of him to know how good.

Either way, he represents the highest trade upside of any player that is likely to be traded right now (except maybe Means although I don’t know that they would deal him for a little while).

Thats why the focus is on him.

And he's already in his arb years, making more than the minimum, and this team pinches pennies until Abe Lincoln screams out in pain.

[spiritof66]

3 hours ago, Ripken said:

It makes sense considering the O's have lots of OF prospects... or, at least, that's what I'm told.  Meanwhile, Santander, Hays, Stewart, and Diaz risk injury every time they sneeze, Mountcastle is likely to spend lots of time at 1B/DH, and we've never actually seen Kjerstad near a baseball field.  

I wouldn't have guessed that Mullins would be the sturdy one in the group, as he's been so far. Maybe the injury pattern is just random, but it doesn't look that way from close up.

[LookinUp]

51 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

If you were using the players in our system, what is a package you would take?

I'd have to get Baumann or Lowther as a starting point (assuming Hall is too rich). I see Lowther as a Davies type (value wise). Baumann's injury would scare me even though I personally rate a healthy Baumann VERY high. After the headliner, I'd probably want two more guys with legit upside. Maybe Baumler and Stowers. Those are guys whose rankings in our system could really jump once they start playing again.

I'd have to give it some thought whether guys like Vavra or Kevin Smith would fit that depth angle. Maybe Adam Hall, depending on what you think about him. But a package of 3 like that.

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I'd have to get Baumann or Lowther as a starting point (assuming Hall is too rich). I see Lowther as a Davies type (value wise). Baumann's injury would scare me even though I personally rate a healthy Baumann VERY high. After the headliner, I'd probably want two more guys with legit upside. Maybe Baumler and Stowers. Those are guys whose rankings in our system could really jump once they start playing again.

I'd have to give it some thought whether guys like Vavra or Kevin Smith would fit that depth angle. Maybe Adam Hall, depending on what you think about him. But a package of 3 like that.

I think they can get at least that deal.  I would call that a pretty good deal..not blaming you away but fair.

[Philip]

More:

WC can be thanked for stirring the pot a bit, but I agree with the crowd that this is non-news.

HOWEVER: Santander is our best player. We’ve no one to replace him. If he goes, the resulting OF alignment is weaker in every way. We have Diaz, yay, but ummmmm we also have the incredibly fragile Hays, the almost as fragile Mullins, who hasn’t shown he can hit long term, the questionably competent Stewart, and the should-be-at -DH Mountcastle. And who else? Approximately nobody? Maybe D Smith Jr is available somewhere?

Unless Elias wants to actively regress this season(and he might, we are waiting to see what he does this season) only an unreasonable return would be justified for Santander, and because teams are more highly valuing prospects now, that is unlikely.

Mancini has no trade value. Nobody does among our position players. Ruiz might accrue some if he starts to hit and continues to play good D, but ummmm nobody else.

[scOtt]

Just now, wildcard said:

He is not likely to be traded right now.   Also Santander 2020 season ended on the IL because of an oblique injury.  And he had the same injury in ST.   Can't think that any team would overpay in trade for someone that may have an injury problem.

And yet he still finished 3rd in GG voting and won MVO. He had a heluva year.

[LookinUp]

34 minutes ago, Philip said:

Mancini has no trade value. 

If Mancini is a middle of the order bat, he has trade value. That's why the deadline is July 31. Teams regularly over pay for the stretch run. I'd love to have Mancini in my lineup if I was a contender.

Not all need him, but at least one will if (big if) he's hitting like a middle of the order bat.

[Philip]

Just now, LookinUp said:

If Mancini is a middle of the order bat, he has trade value. That's why the deadline is July 31. Teams regularly over pay for the stretch run. I'd love to have Mancini in my lineup if I was a contender.

Not all need him, but at least one will if (big if) he's hitting like a middle of the order bat.

The problem is that he just got over cancer. Nobody is going to risk a lot on a guy because of the danger, however small, that the cancer will return. Nobody’s gonna say it, but that’s in the back of everybody’s minds and that’s why I don’t think anybody’s gonna offer anything meaningful for him.

Mancini is going to remain an Oriole.

[LookinUp]

Just now, Philip said:

The problem is that he just got over cancer. Nobody is going to risk a lot on a guy because of the danger, however small, that the cancer will return. Nobody’s gonna say it, but that’s in the back of everybody’s minds and that’s why I don’t think anybody’s gonna offer anything meaningful for him.

Mancini is going to remain an Oriole.

You might be right. Personally, I'm not concerned with the cancer coming back soon, but that might be a poor assumption by me. Not all cancers are alike. My impression is that Mancini's was able to be removed and that there's no reason to think more is in his body. I know that's easy for me to say, but I think the odds are low.

[Philip]

3 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

You might be right. Personally, I'm not concerned with the cancer coming back soon, but that might be a poor assumption by me. Not all cancers are alike. My impression is that Mancini's was able to be removed and that there's no reason to think more is in his body. I know that's easy for me to say, but I think the odds are low.

Oh I agree with you completely, 100%, but it will be a consideration in any kind of negotiation, and I think it would be enough of a consideration that any trade talks wouldn’t result in much return.

[Scalious]

As i've touched in the Hays/Mullins thread. If you believe Santander can sustain success, might as well just wait 2 years to trade him. The caliber prospect you get now vs the 2023 wont be much different unless he flops.

Sounds like Koch is worried he is a flash in the pan or they are more obessed with saving money over talent returns.  You want him to build more track record if he's going to keep being good.

If Mancini and Santander both mash this year. Teams will want Santander first, but it's more profitable to trade Mancini because you also trade Santander down the road. Where Mancini's window for value is closing fast.  

Unless the Santander offer is getting you that can't miss prospect and I highly doubt they want to pay that for a corner bat without major pedigree.

 

 

[foxfield]

1 hour ago, LookinUp said:

We've gone back and forth and have a little bit of a disagreement, but to me you keep Santander and even consider re-signing him unless one of these two things are true:

1. We strongly believe in the ability to replace him. That's most likely our prospects.

2. We get a very strong return.

I don't need a very strong return if 1 is true, but if 1 isn't true, I'd just assume keep the guy without some kind of excess value in the trade.

In general, I agree with this post.  One thing we do is we see individuals and I think in general, Elias or any GM doing his job is more about seeing players as commodities.  

The Orioles are improving and I think rightly so, Elias would trade anyone for the right value.  Elias has been clear that he is still collecting talent from all sources and that he is not focused on winning this year.  

Talent that is emerging early or is going to be slightly older when the "core" window for the Orioles opens is exactly the kind of talent that we may trade early for additional assets.  

The above, and the fact that Santander is the best everyday player on the Orioles roster today make him an obvious candidate to move and the perfect position to be in.  He is young enough and valuable enough that you can move him or keep him.  For the Orioles this is a good position to be in.  

As the system gets deeper and deeper in talent, these types of decisions will be critical to our success.  Keeping a "pretty good" player and trading a "pretty good" player can be good for both teams.  But picking which ones hit upside and which ones stay at their floor can be the difference between being champions and being merely competitive.

Back to Santander.  I have enjoyed watching him, and personally hope he stays, but I root for the Uniform.  If Elias feels we are better moving him.  I'll wish him good luck and happily follow his career.

[oriole]

50 minutes ago, Philip said:

HOWEVER: Santander is our best player. We’ve no one to replace him. If he goes, the resulting OF alignment is weaker in every way. We have Diaz, yay, but ummmmm we also have the incredibly fragile Hays, the almost as fragile Mullins, who hasn’t shown he can hit long term, the questionably competent Stewart, and the should-be-at -DH Mountcastle. And who else? Approximately nobody? Maybe D Smith Jr is available somewhere?

I’m gonna be honest...I’ve wanted to see Santander traded since the beginning of last off season. I thought with such a crowded OF and a couple more years before real competitiveness to develop whatever talent we’d get in return for Santander it just made sense to cash in considering no one really thought he’d be a middle of the order bat with a great glove. 
 

I’ve since changed my mind and what you said here is exactly why. You can’t count on Hays whatsoever, Mullins seems to be a fourth OF playing over his head right now (I still have high hopes for him personally), Diaz isn’t really a game changing type of prospect, Stewart straight up sucks, and Mountcastle is a DH. I know I’m just repeating what you said but for whatever reason after Hays got hurt yesterday it dawned on me that any depth I thought there was is actually very weak. I’m neutral about a potential Santander trade now. It’s nice having the extra depth even if is another injury prone player. Though if he was traded I wouldn’t be terribly upset. 

[Moose Milligan]

11 minutes ago, oriole said:

I’m gonna be honest...I’ve wanted to see Santander traded since the beginning of last off season. I thought with such a crowded OF and a couple more years before real competitiveness to develop whatever talent we’d get in return for Santander it just made sense to cash in considering no one really thought he’d be a middle of the order bat with a great glove. 
 

I’ve since changed my mind and what you said here is exactly why. You can’t count on Hays whatsoever, Mullins seems to be a fourth OF playing over his head right now (I still have high hopes for him personally), Diaz isn’t really a game changing type of prospect, Stewart straight up sucks, and Mountcastle is a DH. I know I’m just repeating what you said but for whatever reason after Hays got hurt yesterday it dawned on me that any depth I thought there was is actually very weak. I’m neutral about a potential Santander trade now. It’s nice having the extra depth even if is another injury prone player. Though if he was traded I wouldn’t be terribly upset. 

I agree on most of these takes, though Stewart doesn't straight up suck...his OBP tool is actually really good.  He can't stay healthy, either, though.  And Moutcastle was decent in the outfield last year although ideally he's a 1B/DH type.  You have to leave room for Mullins to come around a bit as a LH only bat.

It's a lot of outfielders to wade through to see who sticks.  I don't think Diaz is a guy but you have to get a look at him to see if he can prove otherwise.  Hays is making it easy to count him out which is unfortunate because he's got a good skill set.