Tim Dierkes: Orioles should trade John Means

[wildcard]

47 minutes ago, waynebug said:

There's also the issue that if you extend him you're buying into his age 32 season.

Dierkes is the owner and creator of MLB Trade Rumors.  He gets 100s of thousands of views every day.

Today's Mailbag was for subscribers only.  I think I pay $3 a month.

"Quint" asked  would he trade Means and what could he expect to get in return.   He mentioned outfielder Robert Hassell of the Padres currently the #37 prospect in somebody's eyes. 

Sounds misguided.  Trading Means for an outfield prospect.  Dierkes must be a Padres fan.

 

[Pickles]

I said when the idea came up this spring:

If you even want to start the conversation its two top 50 global prospects.  Then we'll figure out the rest.

I'm not interested in a "reasonable" return.  A "fair" return.  If that's your offer, keep on walking.

If we trade Means- and I'm not saying I'm unwilling, see above- I don't see how it is possible we improve next year.

[Moose Milligan]

28 minutes ago, Pickles said:

I said when the idea came up this spring:

If you even want to start the conversation its two top 50 global prospects.  Then we'll figure out the rest.

I'm not interested in a "reasonable" return.  A "fair" return.  If that's your offer, keep on walking.

If we trade Means- and I'm not saying I'm unwilling, see above- I don't see how it is possible we improve next year.

That last sentence revolves around the notion that no other moves will be made for the staff.  While that's a distinct possibility, I don't believe they could trade Means and not find a decent replacement.  Now I doubt they sign someone like Robbie Ray, but if they traded Means and signed Ray, I'd be happy.

Means is a good pitcher, not a great one.  I suppose we can debate on what "reasonable" and "fair" means.  But I don't think any of us should get our hopes up and be "blown away" on a return for Means.  That's not likely to happen if he's traded.

The market, IMO, always wins.  We might like to think starting the conversation centers around two top 50 global prospects.  The market might tell us different.  

[jabba72]

If it was a Top 40 SP maybe I would consider looking into trading Means, but no other position. Maybe SS if one was near MLB ready. 

[sportsfan8703]

Gotta trade him. We’re definitely going to be terrible again next year. 2023 would be a 2012 type miracle. We need pieces for 2023+.  Keep stockpiling the system. It’ll pay off in a big way and not just an ALDS and WC win. 

[wildcard]

2 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Gotta trade him. We’re definitely going to be terrible again next year. 2023 would be a 2012 type miracle. We need pieces for 2023+.  Keep stockpiling the system. It’ll pay off in a big way and not just an ALDS and WC win. 

Ye of little faith.

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

Sounds misguided.  Trading Means for an outfield prospect.  Dierkes must be a Padres fan.

 

•  

Nothing misguided about it.  If you trade Means, you trade him for the best package you can get, OFer or not.

I agree you would prefer to target other areas though.

[sportsfan8703]

Covid, and our current crop or “starting pitching” prospects in the MLB, both pushed our window back. I’d trade Mullins and Means. Mancini is a given. Yes. We’ll be the worst team in baseball again.
 

2023 will be hopeful at MLB level and we will have an absolute stacked system that will be top 1-10 in MLB for years even with the graduation of top prospects. 
 

Should we try and get lucky in 2023?  Or should we be an absolute dynasty from 2024+?

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

In theory you could use Robert Hassell to play centerfield and then it would give the option to trade Mullins. 

I think at some point you have to hold onto your better players and Means might be a guy you want to keep.

If you get blown away by an offer for Means then consider trading him, but don’t trade him just to accumulate more prospects. 

[wildcard]

16 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Nothing misguided about it.  If you trade Means, you trade him for the best package you can get, OFer or not.

I agree you would prefer to target other areas though.

O's have no reason to trade Means unless it improves their pitching.  Trading him for an outfield prospect is misguided.

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, wildcard said:

O's have no reason to trade Means unless it improves their pitching.  Trading him for an outfield prospect is misguided.

You can always trade the OF prospects for pitching.  You don’t have to solve your problems with one move.

If the Os decide they want to trade Means, you trade him for the best package you can get. It would be irresponsible and dumb to do anything else.

[Pickles]

3 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

That last sentence revolves around the notion that no other moves will be made for the staff.  While that's a distinct possibility, I don't believe they could trade Means and not find a decent replacement.  Now I doubt they sign someone like Robbie Ray, but if they traded Means and signed Ray, I'd be happy.

Means is a good pitcher, not a great one.  I suppose we can debate on what "reasonable" and "fair" means.  But I don't think any of us should get our hopes up and be "blown away" on a return for Means.  That's not likely to happen if he's traded.

The market, IMO, always wins.  We might like to think starting the conversation centers around two top 50 global prospects.  The market might tell us different.  

It isn't impossible for them to trade Means and improve next year.  It's just highly unlikely.

When the market is unfavorable, you don't make the deal.  That's how you "beat" the market.

Means pitching like a top 10 pitcher in July gets you two top 50 prospects.  So you wait.

And if it never materializes, if he gets injured or regresses, what did you miss out on?  Josh Bell (The prospect we received from the LAD for George Sherrill)?

That won't kill your rebuild.  Trading your best pitcher, and one of your best developmental successes, for nothing will.

[NelsonCruuuuuz]

I love Means and don’t want to see him traded but let’s be honest, this team is unwatchable. Plus until Angelos passes, they aren’t ramping up spending significantly so he likely won’t be in the winning window. 2023-2024 at the earliest. 

[spiritof66]

4 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Gotta trade him. We’re definitely going to be terrible again next year. 2023 would be a 2012 type miracle. We need pieces for 2023+.  Keep stockpiling the system. It’ll pay off in a big way and not just an ALDS and WC win. 

So trade everyone with some possible trade value and more than two years of ML experience for prospects who may or may not become major leaguers? Or is it three years?

When does this "stink today and hope for tomorrow" stuff end?    

[Philip]

Yes we should, and quickly.

 

I checked Seattle’s top 30, they don’t have any left handers who are near, and they don’t have very many right handers who are near either. Seattle would love to have a guy like Means, And if they miss the playoffs in the next couple weeks it will only be by a game or two, and a meaningful pitcher Could’ve made the difference, although their offense is woof.