Jump to content

Orioles looking to trade Means?


Sports Guy

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Philip said:

The only pitching they have in their top 10 is far enough away that it wouldn’t help us this year, and if you’re trading means I want to trade him for pitchingThe only pitching they have in their top 10 is far enough away that it wouldn’t help us this year, and if you’re trading means I want to trade him for pitching

You trade him for the best offer.   You may a preference and if you view 2 packages similarly and want to take the pitchers, fine..but you don’t take a lesser deal just because pitchers are involved.  I don’t care if the best package is a first baseman and a COer, you make that deal and sort the rest out later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You trade him for the best offer.   You may a preference and if you view 2 packages similarly and want to take the pitchers, fine..but you don’t take a lesser deal just because pitchers are involved.  I don’t care if the best package is a first baseman and a COer, you make that deal and sort the rest out later.

That’s a valid point, and I’m not sure there are that many pitching now for pitching now trades anyway, They’ve got two outstanding position players in Rodriguez and Kirby I think and Means wouldn’t touch either one, I’m not sure who else they have we would want. Not Kelenic, I don’t think he’s going to amount to much.

I’m not sure which teams match up with us best, but if we trade Means I  guys who will help us right now rather than in a year or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, interloper said:

Sounds about right. Another case of a reporter hearing "listening" and writing "dangling". 

Maybe the other reporter heard something a little different than Connolly did.   In any event, I’m glad they are listening.  It would take a very strong offer to justify moving him.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Philip said:

I think I matter have to consider that deal in the article. Williamson, Macko/Phillips, 3rd piece. However, I’d like the 3rd piece to be a Pinto 2.0 piece and not a 20k Sr sign OF. 
 

What I like about that theorized trade is that we’re not getting guys that are top 100 prospects right now, but rather guys that will likely be top 100 one year from now. 2023/2024 ETA is what we’re looking for. Plus they’re top 10 guys from a very deep system. Would we trade Means for Gunnar and Kjerstad/Stowers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I think I matter have to consider that deal in the article. Williamson, Macko/Phillips, 3rd piece. However, I’d like the 3rd piece to be a Pinto 2.0 piece and not a 20k Sr sign OF. 
 

What I like about that theorized trade is that we’re not getting guys that are top 100 prospects right now, but rather guys that will likely be top 100 one year from now. 2023/2024 ETA is what we’re looking for. Plus they’re top 10 guys from a very deep system. Would we trade Means for Gunnar and Kjerstad/Stowers?

Williamson looks very solid. Great K numbers at AA but with pitchers I always want to see them before judging them positively. Macko and Phillips look to have serious control problems. This is not enough for me to want to move Means. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, waroriole said:

Williamson looks very solid. Great K numbers at AA but with pitchers I always want to see them before judging them positively. Macko and Phillips look to have serious control problems. This is not enough for me to want to move Means. 

Usually once SP reach AA and excel, you don’t see them traded. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve always assumed that when word leaks that a team is dangling a player, or gauging interest, there will be a qualifying statement like this one to follow. But the original leak is quite deliberate. However, in this day and age, why is this even necessary? Just send out a group text. Would a rival GM leak a text/email out of spite? Do GMs do everything by voice so they can preserve deniability? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, UMDTerrapins said:

I’ve always assumed that when word leaks that a team is dangling a player, or gauging interest, there will be a qualifying statement like this one to follow. But the original leak is quite deliberate. However, in this day and age, why is this even necessary? Just send out a group text. Would a rival GM leak a text/email out of spite? Do GMs do everything by voice so they can preserve deniability? 

I assume a GM told Buster that so he’s give the GM info that he wanted, either now or in the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, UMDTerrapins said:

I’ve always assumed that when word leaks that a team is dangling a player, or gauging interest, there will be a qualifying statement like this one to follow. But the original leak is quite deliberate. However, in this day and age, why is this even necessary? Just send out a group text. Would a rival GM leak a text/email out of spite? Do GMs do everything by voice so they can preserve deniability? 

Kevin Goldstein had some interesting insights on leaks in his chat this week:

1:21

Fart Barfunkel: Why do some FO folks leak? Is it just good relationships with certain media members, trying to drum up early excitement before things are official? What possesses somebody to text Jon Heyman they are close to a deal to acquire ___ from ____?

1:22

Kevin Goldstein: Fun question. Some people like to see it in the press and think it’s them. Some people just love talking baseball and don’t get to do it enough internally, and all sorts of other weird reasons.

1:25

Matthew: If someone in a FO leaks something to the media that they’re not supposed to and they get caught, does anything happen?

1:26

Kevin Goldstein: It has.

1:28

SJ: What percentage of leaks from front offices are authorized/known by the higher ups versus an employee doing so on their own?

1:28

Kevin Goldstein: 15/85 is my no real thought gut reaction. I think some teams use the media better than others, and many don’t try to, to be fair.

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/kevin-goldstein-fangraphs-chat-11-22-2021/

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trading Means? Disgusting. Particularly when it’s not even selling high. And question to the board (Elias cult defenders): point to some astute trades/signings/waiver claims that have impressed you. Tyler Wells is not evidence of greatness. Excuses and excuses. We haven’t had a stud reliever since Mussina and haven’t won a championship in nearly 40 years yet the board is clamoring for his departure? This isn’t a fan board, it’s an Elias personality cult. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NelsonCruuuuuz said:

Trading Means? Disgusting. Particularly when it’s not even selling high. And question to the board (Elias cult defenders): point to some astute trades/signings/waiver claims that have impressed you. Tyler Wells is not evidence of greatness. Excuses and excuses. We haven’t had a stud reliever since Mussina and haven’t won a championship in nearly 40 years yet the board is clamoring for his departure? This isn’t a fan board, it’s an Elias personality cult. 

Oh, get over yourself.   If Means actually gets traded and you don’t like the return, you can complain then.   Nobody’s clamoring for his departure.   Lots of people are in favor of knowing what the potential return would be, rather than refusing to find out.  

By the way, Mussina wasn’t a reliever, and we’ve definitely had stud relievers since he left.  
 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Great post.  I like your optimism, and I'll try to believe this team can turn things around just in the nick of time like some classic Hollywood baseball movie.
    • I think Elias has mostly done an excellent job with one exception -- he seems like he treats the bullpen like an afterthought.  I doubt that will happen again this coming offseason. I don't really blame him for the current offensive struggles overall.  Just too many injuries late in the season.  That said I don't understand how we went from dealing Austin Hays, Connor Norby and Ryan McKenna just so we could land the right handed bat of, gulp, Austin Slater.  
    • Man this team has no shot. Right now they may not even make it. 
    • Most of these guys are only playing because of injuries to starters.  But Austin Slater I'm guessing was brought in to replace the traded Austin Hays.  The problem is that Slater has shown little ability to hit lefties this year, after hitting them pretty well up to this season.  This must be why two teams dropped him before the O's picked him up.  I know he was let go much earlier in the season, but is Ryan McKenna actually worse than this guy?  I don't understand how the front office went from releasing McKenna to later trading Hays and Norby -- thinking their right handed bats could adequately be replaced by someone like Slater.  
    • I'm willing to give Elias some rope because of the strict limitations he was under with JA but he better not be so damn conservative again this year and let every serviceable FA out there sign with other teams while he's busy picking up reclamation projects again. Minus Burns of course.  
    • I agree completely that it’s irrelevant whether it worked.  But I don’t agree that bunting is clearly the right decision in either scenario, and I think that decision gets worse if it’s intended to be a straight sacrifice rather than a bunt for a hit. To be clear, the outcome you’re seeking in tonight’s situation, for example — sacrifice the runners over to 2nd/3rd — lowers both your run expectancy for the inning (from 1.44 to 1.39) and your win expectancy for the game (from 38.8% to 37.1%). It increases the likelihood of scoring one run, but it decreases the likelihood of scoring two runs (which you needed to tie) and certainly of scoring three or more runs (which you needed to take the lead).  And that’s if you succeed in getting them to 2nd/3rd. Research indicates that 15-30% of sacrifice bunt attempts fail, so you have to bake in a pretty significant percentage of the time that you’d just be giving up a free out (or even just two free strikes, as on Sunday). The bunt attempt in the 3rd inning on Sunday (which my gut hates more than if they’d done it today) actually is less damaging to the win probability — decreasing it only very slightly from 60.2% to 59.8%. More time left in the game to make up for giving up outs, I guess, and the scoreboard payoff is a bit better (in the sense that at least you’d have a better chance to take the lead).   At the bottom of it, these things mostly come down to gut and pure chance. The percentages are rarely overwhelming in either direction, and so sometimes even a “lower-percentage” play may work better under some circumstances. You would have bunted both times. I wouldn’t have bunted either time. Hyde bunted one time but not the other. I don’t know that anyone is an idiot (or even clearly “wrong”) for their preference. Either approach could have worked. Sadly, none of them actually did.
    • Wasn't Hyde always thought of more or less as a caretaker? I'm on the fence about him coming back. I totally get the injuries and that needs to be taking into consideration but man this collapse some heads have to roll who's I'm  mot sure 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...