The Athletic trade discussions- Mancini

[interloper]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

It’s ok to do that when you are trying to win.  It’s not ok when the team is garbage and could get something that could potentially help them later.

And btw, it’s doing Mancini a favor to get him off this team.

And I said as much. 

[Aristotelian]

15 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

It’s ok to do that when you are trying to win.  It’s not ok when the team is garbage and could get something that could potentially help them later.

And btw, it’s doing Mancini a favor to get him off this team.

That is the question. If nobody is offering anything now then there is also no urgency to trade him. We can't just assume that there are offers on the table and then say Elias is an idiot for not trading him.  

[Jammer7]

I don’t think it is likely he nets more at the deadline than in the preseason. Really, if they do trade him, It is to get at bats for guys that need them. It would enable Santander and Stewart to DH and get more looks. Of those names, Santander has the possibility of a decent or better return. He is also most likely likely to end up on the IL. Stowers, McKenna, perhaps Neustrom, Shed Long and Jahmai Jones benefit. The flexibility would certainly help break some guys in and evaluate what we have. 

[Yardball85]

To me, it's as simple as you have Mancini for one more non-competitive year, or you can get potential guys who may play some, albeit small, role on the team who would be under team control for a while.  We aren't winning this year, and there is no benefit whatsoever to Mancini being on the team.  Three guys with six years of control who could turn into something >>> one meaningless year of Mancini. 

[Just Regular]

Six years ago was the spring we did that thing with Miguel Gonzalez to save 80% of his salary, apparently it wasn't until 3/30.

https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/balitmore-orioles/orioles-surprisingly-release-miguel-gonzalez

Gonzalez I had forgotten ended up having a fine 2016 outcomes wise - 3.73 ERA and 23 starts for the White Sox, while the 2016 Orioles finished up their best AL record in a 5-year span giving 70-some starts to guys with ERA's around 5.50.

[Sports Guy]

3 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

That is the question. If nobody is offering anything now then there is also no urgency to trade him. We can't just assume that there are offers on the table and then say Elias is an idiot for not trading him.  

Well, no one is assuming that, so I’m not sure why you are mentioning it.

[Sports Guy]

49 minutes ago, Yardball85 said:

To me, it's as simple as you have Mancini for one more non-competitive year, or you can get potential guys who may play some, albeit small, role on the team who would be under team control for a while.  We aren't winning this year, and there is no benefit whatsoever to Mancini being on the team.  Three guys with six years of control who could turn into something >>> one meaningless year of Mancini. 

Yep.  It really is this simple.  Doesn’t need to be made any more difficult than that.

[OrangeTurtle]

3 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

It’s ok to do that when you are trying to win.  It’s not ok when the team is garbage and could get something that could potentially help them later.

And btw, it’s doing Mancini a favor to get him off this team.

I think you sometimes view things as either cleanly 'Black or White' too much. To say, without question, holding on to him and letting him walk is not ok under any circumstance is such a weird oversimplification of a variety of factors.

For one, what if the Orioles re-coup more in merch/admissions knowing he's still on the roster and that $X > the team's value of players acquired in a trade (I don't want to argue about where add. revenues actually go and whether they are being pocketed)?

How do you measure things like what he provides to younger players and their developments from a mentorship standpoint? Not quantifiable in any real way. Sure, we shouldn't need to have this happen, but who are you or I to say that it isn't impactful to a ton of players?

For the record, I'd move him if I were in charge as soon as possible, but again, there are a million opinions and reasons for why something happens or not and things can be right or wrong predicated on a million different factors. Not fun for a message board and we could go all day with hypotheticals, but the "NO, THIS IS WRONG 100%" stuff is hilarious to me.

 

[Sports Guy]

24 minutes ago, OrangeTurtle said:

I think you sometimes view things as either cleanly 'Black or White' too much. To say, without question, holding on to him and letting him walk is not ok under any circumstance is such a weird oversimplification of a variety of factors.

For one, what if the Orioles re-coup more in merch/admissions knowing he's still on the roster and that $X > the team's value of players acquired in a trade (I don't want to argue about where add. revenues actually go and whether they are being pocketed)?

How do you measure things like what he provides to younger players and their developments from a mentorship standpoint? Not quantifiable in any real way. Sure, we shouldn't need to have this happen, but who are you or I to say that it isn't impactful to a ton of players?

For the record, I'd move him if I were in charge as soon as possible, but again, there are a million opinions and reasons for why something happens or not and things can be right or wrong predicated on a million different factors. Not fun for a message board and we could go all day with hypotheticals, but the "NO, THIS IS WRONG 100%" stuff is hilarious to me.

 

People aren’t buying tickets to see Mancini.  Or, put a different way, people aren’t going to not buy tickets because he’s not there.  People aren’t buying tickets with him on the team.

There are always guys on the team that can mentor players.  
 

 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

People aren’t buying tickets to see Mancini.  Or, put a different way, people aren’t going to not buy tickets because he’s not there.  People aren’t buying tickets with him on the team.

There are always guys on the team that can mentor players.  
 

 

Like, I don't know, coaches.

[Roll Tide]

7 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I must have missed all the games the Os have won with Mancini.  If you think he’s stopping us from losing 100 games, you haven’t been paying attention.  Mancini isn’t any kind of lynch pin to a sub 100 loss season.

BtW, while I would trade Mancini, I would be making other moves to make the team better overall.

One player doesn’t make a team win or lose 100 games. Mancini could certainly be a contributor on a good team. Perhaps not a key component after the cancer issue. But, he should certainly bring a good prospect or two. 

[OrangeTurtle]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Like, I don't know, coaches.

Well I expect coaches to coach as well. The broader point is that there are lots of reasons for why it might make sense to the Orioles to let a guy like Mancini play out the year and then walk as opposed to HAVING TO trade him now, as if they only possible value he'd provide us is in other players.

I don't think things are that cut and dry all the time.

[Can_of_corn]

8 minutes ago, OrangeTurtle said:

Well I expect coaches to coach as well. The broader point is that there are lots of reasons for why it might make sense to the Orioles to let a guy like Mancini play out the year and then walk as opposed to HAVING TO trade him now, as if they only possible value he'd provide us is in other players.

I don't think things are that cut and dry all the time.

I think the mentoring aspect is overblown.  The teams have coaches, most of whom used to play.  Under Elias these guys aren't making the majors at 19 years old, they've been doing this a while.  Also not ever veteran player wants, or is talented at, mentoring younger players. 

[Sports Guy]

24 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Like, I don't know, coaches.

Yes but I can buy into the idea that learning from players is important.  What I don’t buy into is that it’s mutually exclusive to one or 2 players.
 

I mean, all we have heard about is how close all the minor leaguers are to each other, the leadership of Adley, etc..I think they will all be just fine.

[Jagwar]

Is it odd for me to think that NL teams are going to be thrilled about a universal DH, and it's not going to be that difficult for NL teams to find their own internal options for DH, and that they won't have any meaningful interest in someone like Mancini?