Should we Trade John Means?

[wildcard]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I agree with your point here.   I expect two things are true about the Angelos brothers:

1.  They hired Elias with the knowledge that this was a long term rebuild, not a quick fix.  

2.  Their patience isn’t, and shouldn’t be, infinite.   

I think three years of pretty terrible baseball, followed by significant progress, was probably a reasonable expectation.    See: Astros.   If there are no signs of significant progress next year, I think Elias could be in trouble with ownership.   

That said, I wouldn’t use MacPhail’s time in Baltimore as an example.   Angelos wanted him back; MacPhail chose to leave.   At least, that’s how it was portrayed in the media.  
 

 

Glad you agree with my main point.

I have a different memory on MacPhail.   Peter had great faith in MacPhial in 2007.   By 2010 Peter picked Buck as manager over MacPhail's choice.     Buck went around MacPhail to Peter whenever he wanted.   By the time Andy's contract was expiring at the end of 2011 his influences over Peter had diminished do much Andy did not want to work in that environment any more.

[Sports Guy]

21 minutes ago, wildcard said:

The Media includes national media which the O's do not control.

Ownership expects attendance to improve which comes with winning. When that does not happen owners beginning to question why?  The media and friends of the owners start being more influential than the GM.

Andy left because Ownership stopped listening to him. Losing will do that to a GM.

As I said Elias is not in this situation yet.   But he has to begin winning next season.  That is why trading Means  and Mancini for players that will help in 2024 may be too late for Elias.

 

The national media doesn’t care about the Orioles.

[Moose Milligan]

6 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Don't kid yourself.  Rosenthal and Law will raise the questions about when the O's will start winning.  How long will the rebuild be able to continue to lose.   And others will follow their lead.    As I said every GM only get so long to show progress before the questions of his approach come.

Rosenthal and Law are paid/judged based on the amount of clicks they generate.

No one is going to click on and read stories written about the Orioles outside of the fanbase, which is dwindling by the day.

Know why the Yankees get such coverage?  Because way many more people care about the Yankees than we do.  You go to Asia, Europe, people are wearing Yankees hats.

Can't say the same about us.  I know you're passionate about the Orioles but no one really cares about this franchise on a national level.

[connja]

I'm only trading John Means if I get one guy who is immediately our #2-3 prospect and another guy who will be in the top 10.  Otherwise we roll into 2023 with a rotation of Means, Bowman, GRod, DL and Matt Harvey (haha). and let it ride!

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

The national media doesn’t care about the Orioles.

And they really shouldn't.  

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Don't kid yourself.  Rosenthal and Law will raise the questions about when the O's will start winning.  How long will the rebuild be able to continue to lose.   And others will follow their lead.    As I said every GM only get so long to show progress before the questions of his approach come.

Rosenthal wrote that long piece about Brady a few years ago.  It got a lot of play locally but I don’t think I saw anyone talking about it nationally.

[wildcard]

5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think you are incorrect about how much anyone outside of Baltimore cares about the Orioles.

Might a guy do a short piece about the O's?  Sure.  But it's going to be a throwaway column on a slow news day.

After a while losing has its own negative momentum.

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, wildcard said:

After a while losing has its own negative momentum.

I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

Did you see a bunch of stories on the browns when they were bad?  The Clippers?  The Pirates?

 

[PeteCanes]

Right now, Trade everyone depending on the return.

 

I’d trade Means for a top 50 guy and call it a day

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

2 minutes ago, PeteCanes said:

Right now, Trade everyone depending on the return.

 

I’d trade Means for a top 50 guy and call it a day

Agreed if you can get a package of players that will help more towards future success then you make the trade. I don't think Means trade value is at it's peak right now due to being sidelined and not looking as sharp since his return from the IL.

But, maybe there's a team that covets Means enough and considers the past couple months as merely short term noise.

[7Mo]

53 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

But not every team is willing to take on the type of commitment, especially if he demands an extension.

Boras has said (and I understand things can change regardless of the public statement) that he won't require an extension but he wants to negotiate relocation expenses, tax differentials, etc. 

[Frobby]

15 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Glad you agree with my main point.

I have a different memory on MacPhail.   Peter had great faith in MacPhial in 2007.   By 2010 Peter picked Buck as manager over MacPhail's choice.     Buck went around MacPhail to Peter whenever he wanted.   By the time Andy's contract was expiring at the end of 2011 his influences over Peter had diminished do much Andy did not want to work in that environment any more.

Our memories aren’t that different.  There was some discussion that MacPhail left because he thought Buck had too much power, but that was mostly rumor and speculation and that’s not what MacPhail said at the time (not that I would have expected him to say that).    In any event though, it wasn’t a case of Angelos showing him the door because he ran out of patience.   

[HowAboutThat]

I agree that losing should be over. I continue to be perplexed that Mike is not playing guys might be part of the future, and his dad bringing in dumpster dudes like Plutko or Anderson or what Harvey has shown himself to be.

Means should only be traded for pieces that will help immediately and for years: ready-now prospects for a position of need, or guys who can reliably be ready next season.

However, he hasn’t been drafting Pitching, the Pitching he has been acquiring has been really bad, so our position of need will probably be pitching, so it doesn’t make sense to trade him.

[Sports Guy]

A lot of this has to do with how good do you think Means is?

People saying we have to trade him And get long term Pieces are ignoring one big thing..Means is/should/could be a long term piece and it’s not like we have much pitching to fall back on.

I think you trade Means, or really any player, if the return has a greater value than what he provides.  Of course, the evaluation of that is a projection because we don’t actually know what the players will give us at this level whereas we have a good idea about Means.  Right now, that value is pretty high.  
 

In a lot of ways, Means is a luxury for the Os because they suck.  But that should be changing and changing soon.  People ask, why bring up guys now and start their clocks?  Well this is why.  You have to start seeing what you have so that you can start to properly access things to make those long term decisions.  

[wildcard]

17 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Our memories aren’t that different.  There was some discussion that MacPhail left because he thought Buck had too much power, but that was mostly rumor and speculation and that’s not what MacPhail said at the time (not that I would have expected him to say that).    In any event though, it wasn’t a case of Angelos showing him the door because he ran out of patience.   

There are different ways to show someone the door. 1) They can be fired, which did not happen in this case.   2) You can promote they out of the job,  but MacPhail was already President and had no where to be promoted to.  3) You can stop listening to them knowing that will cause them to quit.  Well Andy did not quit.  He just decide to not return.  

I'd say Peter lost patience with Andy when he picked Buck over Andy's recommendation for manager.  I am sure Andy felt that picking a manager was the GMs job.    Then Buck met with Peter without Andy and Peter listened to Buck's advise.  Andy was not going to stay under those conditions and Peter knew it.  So everyone said nice things publicly and Andy was gone.