Orioles looking to trade Means?

[waroriole]

9 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Why does it have to be a 1-2 year deal for a middling player?  Why can’t they sign Stroman?  Why can’t they sign Bryant?  The money is definitely there to do it, both in the short and long term.

And yes, those players will come here if you pay them more than other teams.  It’s is Elias’ job to sell FA on coming here.  Show them why and put the money on the table and they will come.

I don’t even like the idea of doing this but this organization is going to have to.

Because signing big FA contracts is inefficient when you’re not going to be competitive for the first half of the contract, when the player will likely provide the most value. 

[jabba72]

1 minute ago, Bahama O's Fan said:

If you were trading Means, what would you accept in return?

If he's dangling Means it sounds like Elias has a plan for what he wants. But I have no idea what his spreadsheet is telling him. 

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Ripken said:

Not if you view them differently.  I think Mullins is legit.  Maybe not 5.7 legit but a guy who could be a really good player for 10 years.  Doesn't mean I wouldn't trade him but I'm happy to say we have CF covered and work on other positions.

Means worries me.  The guy is not an innings eater because his shoulder gets tired or whatever he calls it.  He looked different in the second half and, while we don't know for sure, that really makes me wonder if the sticky stuff played a role in his success.  I'm happy to keep him as our #2 behind Grayson and go from there if the FO projects sustained success from him.  I'm also willing to believe his out of nowhere story could disappear just as quickly and I'd welcome a strong prospect return in trade.

But it doesn’t matter how you view them.  What matters is where you think they are in 2024.

I mean, saying you think Mullins, after one good year, is now going to be good for the next 10 years is crazy to me.  If you believe that, sure I can see why you wouldn’t trade him. 
 

I just have no idea how anyone could think that.

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, 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.

1.  Saving money that can be spent more effectively later.

2. Getting better draft picks that can be turned into the type of premium players you build around.   

Let me ask you, how good do you think the O’s could have been the last three years if they were “trying to win?”   And how much would they have spent to achieve that level of “success?”
 

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, waroriole said:

Because signing big FA contracts is inefficient when you’re not going to be competitive for the first half of the contract, when the player will likely provide the most value. 

But they can be competitive.  That’s the point.  Signing a player 1 year too early is not a big deal.  Having him here to help the team win “just” 70-80 games in 2022 is ok.  

[Tony-OH]

41 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I don't like the starting staff led by a rookie in Grayson.    

 

39 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Grayson won’t be on the staff to start the year in any event.   

Grayson will not make the team out of spring training most likely, and he may not be great right off the bat as he's still working on command. That's why I'd like to see him get his feet wet in 2022 after maybe making 5-10 starts in AAA. Then he should be ready to go in 2023. 

Saying that, the Orioles are going to need more starting pitchers, especially if they move Means. 

If Means is not moved, the the 2022 rotation at some point could be:
Means
Lowther
Rodriguez 
Zimmermann
Bradish/Baumann/Kremer/Akin 

I'd like to add a veteran starter myself, but the free agent market only really has Stroman and Gausman as potential realistic options, but who wants to sign on to a rebuilding team and then have to pitch against AL East lineups and AL East ballparks?

They are going to have to trade for pitching until they close to competing then they may be able to convince a good SP to sign.

[Sessh]

Hey guys, long time no see. The site looks great. I always come back here every now and then hoping to see that progress has happened and talk is starting to shift towards winning, but now I see the Orioles are having another sell off and winning in 2022 isn't important... which I guess means winning in 2023 isn't either. I think that was the goal at the beginning of the Elias era, but it seems there's just been a lot of wheel spinning? I keep hoping I'll come back to check in and feel bad about having lost my fire for baseball and just end up disappointed. I just read that another strike seems likely, too.

It's hard to believe this team was actually a playoff team for a few years only to be back to this again. I feel for you guys and really hope the Orioles return to relevance again before another four decades pass by.

[waroriole]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

But they can be competitive.  That’s the point.  Signing a player 1 year too early is not a big deal.  Having him here to help the team win “just” 70-80 games in 2022 is ok.  

I don’t see Stroman or Bryant taking us to 70 wins next year, do you? Even adding AR and Grayson, I don’t see how the trio adds 18 wins. Also, I have no idea what you see in Bryant. That’s a contract to avoid at all costs. 

[UMDTerrapins]

I like what Elias is doing here.......advertising an openness to dealing Means. At this time, Means and Mullins are our most marketable players. And while a limited number of teams need a center fielder, a majority of teams could use John Means. So.....see what kind of response you get. I don't think this has to be a revealing clue about some larger plot. If Santander or Mancini establish trade value in the 1st half of 2022 we'll be hearing the same things about them at the deadline. I think we should be trying to win games, but that each player decision should be viewed individually because we are still at a point as a franchise where accumulating talent is the #1 priority. Once we have enough talent assembled, player decisions should be made both individually and in the context of the larger roster and payroll constraints. To me, it feels like that's what Elias is doing. My only caveat is that I don't see us looking at free agency for anything more than short term acquisitions, which is a unfortunate. We should have the financial means to try to add players with real value on long term deals, if they fit our needs. 

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

1.  Saving money that can be spent more effectively later.

2. Getting better draft picks that can be turned into the type of premium players you build around.   

Let me ask you, how good do you think the O’s could have been the last three years if they were “trying to win?”   And how much would they have spent to achieve that level of “success?”
 

1) Saving money?  Why do they need to keep saving it.  If you say they wre “keeping it for a rainy day”, they have had several years of building that up..plus Covid allowed them to not spend on salaries.  The revenue streams for these teams is tremendous and they get tons of cash from revenue sharing alone. 
 

2) Yes, a higher pick is the one advantage you have in losing.

To be clear, again, I’m ok with them tanking early on.  I was sort of ok with it for 2021, moreso because of covid. 

Not caring about winning in 2022 is a joke and the idea that anyone would be ok with it is even worse.  You can’t justify it.  Again, im Not calling for them to be contending for the division in 2022.  I’m asking them to field a team that, on paper, should win 43-50% of their games…not 30-40%.  

[Just Regular]

None of this seems new - Elias for me mostly gave the answer what 2022 is with such hits as Aberdeen Ironbird Grayson Rodriguez in the spring, and the summer choice to set Adley's 6.x years at 2022-2028 instead of 2021-2027.

The 2022 Orioles needed the first wave of pitchers to perform better to win consideration for the kind of investments the 2022 Tigers are now getting.   I think there are some multiverses in which Kremer/Akin/Baumann/Bradish/Rodriguez/Hall performed better as a group, Adley's calendar matched Wander's, we've got Eduardo and I'm posting about how $350M really isn't that bad for Correa.

2022 will still have the joy of seeing where on the Strasburg/Harper to Wieters/Tillman spectrum our two present cornerstones start to fall, and how meaningfully Hall/Kjerstad bounce back.   By reputation the 2023 draft is rich with all the Class of 2020 high schoolers a tick or two behind Coby Mayo/Carter Baumler-level talents and I'm sure, how did Elias phrase it...

the long-term health and the long-term playoff odds of the organization in mind and it was truly a bottom-up project

...those LONG-term odds will not be advantaged by clawing for 2022 marginal wins 60-70 in a year with effectively zero playoff chances.

 

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, waroriole said:

I don’t see Stroman or Bryant taking us to 70 wins next year, do you? Even adding AR and Grayson, I don’t see how the trio adds 18 wins. Also, I have no idea what you see in Bryant. That’s a contract to avoid at all costs. 

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.

 

[Pickles]

2 minutes ago, 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, by all means we should imitate our run from 2000-2010.  Those were the glory days!

Of course, I remember you criticizing the FO ad nauseam then as well for doing exactly what you are now criticizing the FO for not doing ad nauseam.  

Almost like there's a pattern.

[LookinUp]

Quote

But whenever that step is taken, I think as I said in terms of pursuing playoff odds, it will lead to a change in the way that we allocate our resources and try to leverage those playoff odds.

This is an Elias quote from that Meoli Baltimore Sun article.

He's telling you he's going to spend when ready. He's not going to spend just to get to 70 wins. He views that as a misallocation of resources. Like it or not, that's the philosophy. The playoff odds he's referring to will be driven by home-grown players or players that we acquire in trades. Only then will the free agents and taking on extra money come into play.

[Frobby]

7 minutes ago, 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.

If so, I’m in favor of doing it.   Just to be clear.   But I don’t think it’s that easy.  

Per BB-ref, our current payroll commitments are about $32 mm.  So, that means we can add $43 mm to get to $75 mm.   In free agency, the average yield is $8 mm per win.  So, that’s 5-6 extra wins on top of the 52 we won last year.   Are we going to get another 13-23 wins by internal improvement?

Now, you may feel we can do better than $8 mm/win with our money.   Maybe so, but that’s beating the odds.   

Now I don’t mean to say it’s impossible, just that we’d need to catch a lot of breaks.   Which sometimes happens.