Orioles looking to trade Means?

[Frobby]

55 minutes ago, now said:

And what about bat speed? On the other hand, pitch recognition should improve with age. I would love to see charted the various key skills and how they fare over the course of an average player's twenties and thirties. (Probably "proprietary information"... hopefully in the clutches of our O's brain trust, at least!)

Here’s a great article on it.  Bottom line, almost all raw physical skills start declining from the early 20’s, but the benefit of experience overcomes it for a while.  
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/23916211/major-league-baseball-aging-cycle-how-mike-trout-becomes-albert-pujols

[Sports Guy]

I already question just how good Mullins is in CF.  The question just grows in a few years and I don’t believe his arm, nor his bat, will be good enough for a CO spot in 2-3 years, not to mention the idea that we have all these COers that are hopefully part of the picture in the next 1-2 years.

If they were going to do the right thing and push to be a lot better in 2022 and really go after in 2023, I would be more inclined to keep Him but that’s not the case.

[now]

41 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Here’s a great article on it.  Bottom line, almost all raw physical skills start declining from the early 20’s, but the benefit of experience overcomes it for a while.  
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/23916211/major-league-baseball-aging-cycle-how-mike-trout-becomes-albert-pujols

Awesome, thanks for that. Another study linked from there, by Tom Tango, gives the following more numerical results (slightly different depending on method): 

Quote

The players hit their peak, on average, at age 28, followed closely by age 31. Their 3 worst years were at age 30, 32, 33.
A player's peak age is around age 27, with the age group 23 - 32 being a hitter's 10 best years. 

Obviously, it's not an exact science. But if you bet on the odds, when looking at players on the cusp of these peak years or beyond, I'd go with "younger is better."

[foxfield]

 

On 11/23/2021 at 11:25 AM, Sports Guy said:

Yes, you add in those guys, make a few trades and spend some money you can have a 70-80 win team in 2022.  Notice, I’m not saying a contender.  I’m talking about a serviceable/respectable on field product and then you take the leap in 2023.

Im not talking about running the payroll to 120+M for 2022.  
 

I’m saying have a payroll similar to what the team had in the 2009-2011 area.  
 

None of this asking too much From them.

I think this could be a really exciting team in 2022, even if they only win 45% of their games.  But the Angelos family won’t let that happen.

No basis for this.  Especially since the 2009-2011 era was exactly what you say the same ownership won't do today.

On 11/23/2021 at 11:44 AM, Sports Guy said:

None of this answers my question.

First of all, the idea that he came in here behind the 8 ball has nothing to do with pissing away a season 4 years later.

Secondly, he can build internationally without throwing seasons.

You still can’t articulate to me what they are accomplishing by continuing this rebuild that they can’t if they were trying to win.

They can try to win without doing what you say.  You advocate for essentially the same "effort" that provided for the dismal 14 year era of darkness.  There were certainly years of more excitement, but they have clearly stated they are trying to build a better mousetrap here.  I do not expect 115 losses, but I don't expect 75 wins either...

On 11/23/2021 at 12:01 PM, Sports Guy said:

I think it’s fairly easy to build a team with a sub 75ishM payroll that can win 70-80 games in 2022.

From 2000-2010, when we sucked, they won 70 or more games 6 times and 3 times they won between 67-69 games.

So, yes I think it’s fairly easy to just get back to mediocre as opposed to pathetic.

 

Yes, but being mediocre without being successful for a decade plus is its own level of pathetic...at least in the opinion of fans...such as yourself...during the 2000-2010 era.

On 11/23/2021 at 2:10 PM, sportsfan8703 said:

The 4 teams above us in our division won 91 games or more. I don’t think we had a choice. We were playing for high draft picks whether we spent $50 million or not. It was going to happen. Instead of 5th we’re picking #1. 

This is true, but losses inflate these totals...More Oriole wins closes the gap...

 

 

This has been a great thread by the way.  I love the discussion and points on all sides.  I love the opportunities that are available to the O's as the talent rises.  I do not know what the immediate future holds.  I think '22 will be frustrating because we want to see winning baseball.  I think we are a long way off...but I also think some of our pitching failures this year could have been from the covid crush of 2019.  Maybe, we could have an uptick this year and help close the gap.

Trade Means?  Mullins?  I just want a better team with sustained success.  But I expect both of them to be Orioles to start the season...if it starts.

 

 

[Sports Guy]

1 hour ago, foxfield said:

 

No basis for this.  Especially since the 2009-2011 era was exactly what you say the same ownership won't do today.

They can try to win without doing what you say.  You advocate for essentially the same "effort" that provided for the dismal 14 year era of darkness.  There were certainly years of more excitement, but they have clearly stated they are trying to build a better mousetrap here.  I do not expect 115 losses, but I don't expect 75 wins either...

Yes, but being mediocre without being successful for a decade plus is its own level of pathetic...at least in the opinion of fans...such as yourself...during the 2000-2010 era.

This is true, but losses inflate these totals...More Oriole wins closes the gap...

 

 

This has been a great thread by the way.  I love the discussion and points on all sides.  I love the opportunities that are available to the O's as the talent rises.  I do not know what the immediate future holds.  I think '22 will be frustrating because we want to see winning baseball.  I think we are a long way off...but I also think some of our pitching failures this year could have been from the covid crush of 2019.  Maybe, we could have an uptick this year and help close the gap.

Trade Means?  Mullins?  I just want a better team with sustained success.  But I expect both of them to be Orioles to start the season...if it starts.

 

 

1). It’s not the same ownership.  It’s the same family but not the same ownership and there are different motivating factors on what they want to do with the franchise.  

2) The idea that you think im Advocating for them to do the same thing they did before is idiotic.  First of all, the team has already done what I called for years ago.  They rebuilt.  They have a strong MiL foundation to grow from.  They never had that before.  They aren’t going to do the same thing simply because of that.  
 

Secondly, I’m advocating for, outside of Stroman, small moves while we wait for the next wave.  Bringing in guys who have zero long term payroll impact and guys who can help the young kids now, both in terms of leadership and in terms of winning games.

I know you don’t think so but the rebuilding is over.  We are now in the stage of bringing guys up, evaluating and we should start to care about winning.  At this point, they can continue the path they are on in terms of building the minors and win games. The ONLY reason to keep losing, outside of saving money, is to get a high pick.  That’s ridiculous to be doing at this stage of things.  We should not be throwing seasons for a high pick.  All of these years into it, it’s astounding to me that people are still ok with the team doing this.

3). Again, you are being mediocre with a foundation for long term growth.  They never had that in the 2000s. I mean, this shouldn’t have to be said.  Everyone on this site should be smart enough to understand the difference between what is happening now and what happened then.  A history lesson isn’t needed.  Stop acting like they are the same and trying to draw imaginary parallels to that decade.  It’s not close.  

This would be a concern if I was calling for us to trade a bunch of our guys for aging, expensive vets.  This would be a concern if I was trying to hand out a lot of bad contracts (and let’s face it, even if I were advocating that, with how long the payroll is now and later, it wouldn’t really hurt things).

All I want to do is supplement around what we have and what is coming.  What I’m not willing to do is assume player X, who has been good in AA, is definitely up soon and will be ready to be good immediately at a position we don’t know if they can handle yet.  If they prove that, great..then we have a good problem to have.

 

[Sports Guy]

Thinking about things, unless there is an unexpected trade out there, I would much rather keep Means and trade Mullins.

The way people are discussing the idea of Mullins makes me think he is valued highly and that the Os can get a good deal for him.  I’m skeptical they can for Means.

Now, we can question how Means can be without spidertack but overall, I like  chances of success past 30 vs Mullins.

Plus, we need pitching.  
 

[Just Regular]

https://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/32708130/with-matz-agent-attack-new-york-mets-owner-steve-cohen-keeps-getting-own-way

This Olney piece is a few days old, before the Mets Friday wins of Escobar, Canha and Marte, when then Olney's take was...

At the moment, the Mets' rotation is a mess. They don't know what they're going to get out of Jacob deGrom or Carlos Carrasco because of those pitchers' respective injury histories. Noah Syndergaard has already left the organization, to sign with the Angels, and Marcus Stroman is a free agent and listening to other teams.

The Friday hitters they did win carry Cot's estimation of NYM's 2022 40-man CBT to almost $225 million.  Cohen might be willing to go tens of millions past whatever it becomes, or hoping that it goes away, and if so he could still buy Scherzer, Ray, etc without burning taxed dollars, but a piece like Means is perhaps looking better to them now than when the offseason opened.

Since their Lindor long-term retention, I've wondered what will become of their Ronny Mauricio, now MLB.com's #53 prospect, a fielder who has been 100% shortstop in his defensive deployment.   

Is a Top 50 prospect alone fair return for our Means?

 

[Sports Guy]

Depends on who the prospect is but sure, a 1 for 1 can absolutely work.

[Frobby]

8 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Depends on who the prospect is but sure, a 1 for 1 can absolutely work.

But I would not say the no. 53 prospect would be enough to acquire an established, inexpensive pitcher like Means.   

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, Frobby said:

But I would not say the no. 53 prospect would be enough to acquire an established, inexpensive pitcher like Means.   

Why get hung up on the player ranking?  It’s a meaningless number.  

[Ruzious]

10 minutes ago, Frobby said:

But I would not say the no. 53 prospect would be enough to acquire an established, inexpensive pitcher like Means.   

Not even close to enough, and in our case with Means, considering we need pitching, it'd be lunacy, imo.  

[Just Regular]

Near and above Mauricio on today's list, and excluding off the top of my head teams I don't feel are interested in selling future wins for present wins (and "outfielders" for the sake of the board's sanity, at least as long as we still have Mullins), Means matches around one solid blue chip might be...

59 - Guardians IF Tyler Freeman

58 - Yankees SS Oswald Peraza   (like the Giants Luis Matos, another old Oriole name repeat)

55 - Jays SS/3B Jordan Groshans

53 - Mets SS Ronny Mauricio

48 - Rangers 3B Josh Jung

45 - Mets 3B Brett Baty     (like Mauricio, pretty well blocked now by Alonso/Cano/Lindor/McNeil/Escobar/Davis group)

44 - Jays SS/3B Orelvis Martinez    (boy do the AL East teams like their "SS/3B" hybrids - sure guys, they are all shortstops...wink wink)

34 - Mariners P Emerson Hancock

33 - Mariners P George Kirby

The next Buying Team/position fit above those Mariners pitchers gets to the Cardinals Top 25 Nolan Gorman, and him and all those guys above at first blush seem too good to be true as Means centerpieces, so these perhaps are the basket of guys if Elias isn't looking for four quarters for his dollar.

Jays infielders-wise, Cavan Biggio feels to me at a Buy Low point in his career arc, and I'm sure our regime appreciates his Swing decisions.

 

 

[waroriole]

27 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Why get hung up on the player ranking?  It’s a meaningless number.  

However you want to rank him, a guy with a .302 OBP in his minor league career doesn’t make me wanna move Means. 

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, waroriole said:

However you want to rank him, a guy with a .302 OBP in his minor league career doesn’t make me wanna move Means. 

That’s fine…that’s why I said it depends on the prospect. I’m just saying the number doesn’t mean much.  As you allude to here, this ranking could be bs whereas a player like Gunnar Henderson could be undervalued.  (Just using him as an example)

I would deal Means for Henderson before Mauricio

[Frobby]

53 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Why get hung up on the player ranking?  It’s a meaningless number.  

I’m using it as a proxy for the level of talent and odds of success the player has.   Obviously, opinions can vary.   In fact, BA ranks him lower than that.    For a guy like Means I’d expect either a better prospect or more pieces, or both.