A different kind of Trade Deadline Strategy

[Aristotelian]

10 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Again, not all the prospects are meant for the ML team.  You also don't sit around and wait until they lose value.  I would bet there are 100s of names of prospects that have been suggested over the years on this site that have never materialized, whether it was Os prospects or another team.

Sometimes, you just have to strike while the iron is hot and use the assets for better players and guys who are more of a sure thing.

The idea that you just sit around for everyone to develop and that your team will have 26 home grown players is just wrong.  

 

And I never said anything about contending in 2022.  I think we should be a 500ish team next year and contending in 2023.  If that's not the case, Elias has failed.

The iron is not hot. We are 34-64 right now. 

I don't deny that our prospects may fail. Again, that is all the more argument for waiting to see which ones fail and which ones succeed. It is definitely not an argument for trading prospects while we are still rebuilding. 

Look, you are on an island here. Maybe you are the only sane person and the whole world is insane, but I doubt it. 

[Bmorebirds24]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

Except those players could easily fizzle out.

What we need are good players.  We don’t know if they are yet.

We know Ramirez is.

I’m assuming you have no confidence in this rebuild and the players coming up in the system that you want to trade for guys that cost money now and won’t be around in the years when we are legit contenders?

[Sports Guy]

30 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

The iron is not hot. We are 34-64 right now. 

I don't deny that our prospects may fail. Again, that is all the more argument for waiting to see which ones fail and which ones succeed. It is definitely not an argument for trading prospects while we are still rebuilding. 

Look, you are on an island here. Maybe you are the only sane person and the whole world is insane, but I doubt it. 

So, your plan is to wait for prospects to fail, so they in turn have zero value to the organization?  

[Sports Guy]

27 minutes ago, Bmorebirds24 said:

I’m assuming you have no confidence in this rebuild and the players coming up in the system that you want to trade for guys that cost money now and won’t be around in the years when we are legit contenders?

I have a ton of confidence in the guys we have…it’s why I think a team that this year will be lucky to win 60 games can be 500 next year and in the playoffs the following year.

I also have confidence in Elias that he can make the needed moves to get there. 
 

[Aristotelian]

15 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

So, your plan is to wait for prospects to fail, so they in turn have zero value to the organization?  

Come on dude, are you even reading what I wrote? I will just cut and paste from previous post. 

I don't deny that our prospects may fail. Again, that is all the more argument for waiting to see which ones fail and which ones succeed. 

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Aristotelian said:

Come on dude, are you even reading what I wrote? I will just cut and paste from previous post. 

I don't deny that our prospects may fail. Again, that is all the more argument for waiting to see which ones fail and which ones succeed. 

Right..you want to wait and see who fails and who succeeds.  That’s a recipe for disaster imo.

You are never going to always be right.  You will have swings and missed on these types of decisions.  
 

What are people saying about Elias and this draft or any other draft?  They are happy that he has a plan.  That he seems to have a model that he follows and trusts.  This is the same thing.  You identify the profiles of guys and determine who you think should get to their ceiling and those who you don’t think will.  The history of this sport is littered with top 100 prospects who never did anything but their fan base wouldnt have dealt them for Babe Ruth in his prime.    
 

I wanted to deal Sisco years back.  I doubted he could stay at C and questioned his power elsewhere.  I was right about that.  I preferred GRod to Hall when everyone was saying it’s Hall.  I also wanted Kotchman (and many others) and he failed.  It’s just going to happen.
 

The point is, I’m (as well as anyone who cares) is looking at the player as a whole and determining his profile, can he make it, how old is he, where is the team, etc…You can’t sit around and wait for your assets to turn to zeroes.  You have to get something out of them.  This is when the phrase “you can’t have enough depth” is total bs.  You absolutely can have too much depth because guys get lost in shuffle, exposed for nothing, etc…

For me, the 2 guys that I feel could bring back something significant that I would move are Hall and Mountcastle. I worry about Hall’s long term health and if he will stick as a starter and I worry that Mountcastle  will be nothing more than a glorified DH with poor plate discipline and a lot of power.  In today’s game, that’s not a difficult player to find.  
 

Now, I may trade them and they blow up and the guy I get sucks.  Again, that will happen but it still, again going back to the draft, follows a lot plan that values certain things about a player more than others.

[Frobby]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Right..you want to wait and see who fails and who succeeds.  That’s a recipe for disaster imo.

You are never going to always be right.  You will have swings and missed on these types of decisions.  
 

What are people saying about Elias and this draft or any other draft?  They are happy that he has a plan.  That he seems to have a model that he follows and trusts.  This is the same thing.  You identify the profiles of guys and determine who you think should get to their ceiling and those who you don’t think will.  The history of this sport is littered with top 100 prospects who never did anything but their fan base wouldnt have dealt them for Babe Ruth in his prime.    
 

I wanted to deal Sisco years back.  I doubted he could stay at C and questioned his power elsewhere.  I was right about that.  I preferred GRod to Hall when everyone was saying it’s Hall.  I also wanted Kotchman (and many others) and he failed.  It’s just going to happen.
 

The point is, I’m (as well as anyone who cares) is looking at the player as a whole and determining his profile, can he make it, how old is he, where is the team, etc…You can’t sit around and wait for your assets to turn to zeroes.  You have to get something out of them.  This is when the phrase “you can’t have enough depth” is total bs.  You absolutely can have too much depth because guys get lost in shuffle, exposed for nothing, etc…

For me, the 2 guys that I feel could bring back something significant that I would move are Hall and Mountcastle. I worry about Hall’s long term health and if he will stick as a starter and I worry that Mountcastle  will be nothing more than a glorified DH with poor plate discipline and a lot of power.  In today’s game, that’s not a difficult player to find.  
 

Now, I may trade them and they blow up and the guy I get sucks.  Again, that will happen but it still, again going back to the draft, follows a lot plan that values certain things about a player more than others.

Seems to me you can win or lose either way.   You keep guys until they succeed or fail, some of them will fail.   You trade guys before they succeed or fail, some of those you trade will succeed and the other team will win the trade.   Other times they’ll fail and you’ll win the trade.  

I think the real key is, don’t get overly attached to the talent on your own team.   View everyone objectively same as you would if they were another team’s prospect.   As a fan, I find it really hard to do.   But a GM needs to do that.    
 

 

[Ruzious]

So with San Diego improving their already ridiculously good infield by adding Frazier, is there any chance the O's could trade for CJ Abrams?  Unfortunately, I think it'd take young top-level pitching to get him - with SD pretty much loaded throughout their lineup.  He's not dominating in AA, but he's 20 and OPSing .782.  I'd hate to give up Hall for him. but Abrams is the 8th rated prospect in baseball, while Hall is 53rd - according to MLB.com.  So, we'd have to add something to the package.  Abrams could be ready for the bigs sometime next year - at either SS or 2B.    

In the offseason, we pay real money to get a starting pitcher.    

[7Mo]

2 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

So with San Diego improving their already ridiculously good infield by adding Frazier, is there any chance the O's could trade for CJ Abrams?  Unfortunately, I think it'd take young top-level pitching to get him - with SD pretty much loaded throughout their lineup.  He's not dominating in AA, but he's 20 and OPSing .782.  I'd hate to give up Hall for him. but Abrams is the 8th rated prospect in baseball, while Hall is 53rd - according to MLB.com.  So, we'd have to add something to the package.  Abrams could be ready for the bigs sometime next year - at either SS or 2B.    

In the offseason, we pay real money to get a starting pitcher.    

I don't think anyone can get Abrams without taking Hosmer as well. And then it'd still take a good piece going their way.

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

So with San Diego improving their already ridiculously good infield by adding Frazier, is there any chance the O's could trade for CJ Abrams?  Unfortunately, I think it'd take young top-level pitching to get him - with SD pretty much loaded throughout their lineup.  He's not dominating in AA, but he's 20 and OPSing .782.  I'd hate to give up Hall for him. but Abrams is the 8th rated prospect in baseball, while Hall is 53rd - according to MLB.com.  So, we'd have to add something to the package.  Abrams could be ready for the bigs sometime next year - at either SS or 2B.    

In the offseason, we pay real money to get a starting pitcher.    

Shame Means didn't stay healthy and keep pitching at a high level.  Means for Abrams could have been possible IMO.  I don't think it is now.

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Seems to me you can win or lose either way.   You keep guys until they succeed or fail, some of them will fail.   You trade guys before they succeed or fail, some of those you trade will succeed and the other team will win the trade.   Other times they’ll fail and you’ll win the trade.  

I think the real key is, don’t get overly attached to the talent on your own team.   View everyone objectively same as you would if they were another team’s prospect.   As a fan, I find it really hard to do.   But a GM needs to do that.    
 

 

Of course. The difference is that a prospect who flames out and never becomes anything is worthless.  A player like Ramirez could have a bad year and still get you something back in trade or can bounce back and give you better production, like he has after his down year a few years ago.   And even in a down year, he still gave his team something.

[Ruzious]

4 minutes ago, 7Mo said:

I don't think anyone can get Abrams without taking Hosmer as well. And then it'd still take a good piece going their way.

If we could basically buy Abrams by taking on Hosmer - and not have to give up Hall... just give a lesser pitching prospect and an OFer - I'd be fine with that.  If we trade Mancini elsewhere (or even in that trade), we can afford it.  Granted, Hosmer gets paid 22 mil in 2022, but then it goes down to an affordable 13 mil a year - still a bad contract but not a killer.    

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Of course. The difference is that a prospect who flames out and never becomes anything is worthless.  A player like Ramirez could have a bad year and still get you something back in trade or can bounce back and give you better production, like he has after his down year a few years ago.   And even in a down year, he still gave his team something.

I’d still say, it’s all a matter of playing the odds in a given situation given your evaluation of the player.   We can all think of trades where the prospects turned out to be worth many multiples of the veteran player and the team that traded for the vet got absolutely fleeced.   And then again, we can remember trades where the prospects never did anything and the veteran had a lot of value.   And some teams/GMs are really good at knowing when to hold and when to fold.  It’s not an easy task.   It’s probably a little easier if you have a really deep system and can trade away good prospects because you’ve got someone equally good at the same position in the system.  

[Sports Guy]

 I would try for Myers first....He is owed 41M he next 2 years.

[RZNJ]

Did someone say they trusted Elias to make the moves?  I'm guessing we won't say him make a move like this.  Not yet.