The Final Straw? Elias to Trade Mancini

[DrungoHazewood]

14 hours ago, yark14 said:

I see no reason why not to sign him to a nice 4 year contract (perhaps $60mm total?).  We likely won't be spending any money for another 2 years anyways.

I know Mancini is a nice guy, but he's 30 and has been worth 8 wins over his career.  Yes, he has some mitigating factors with health.  But I'm very reluctant to sign someone likely to be an average performer to a multi-year deal into his decline.  

It's reasonable to assume half a win a year decline for anyone over 28.  Even assuming a 2-3 win 2020, Mancini has a 2-win established level.  I'd assume his value over the next four years will be 5-6 wins.  So 4/40 might be defensible, but why are you signing him at all since he'll likely be below average by the time the Orioles can expect to compete? Heck, he was below average last year.

When I said they might as well keep him, I meant through 2022, not forever.

[DrungoHazewood]

19 minutes ago, Ruzious said:

That's a very high risk/very low reward idea.  Usually, you want to go the opposite way - low risk/high reward.  

Mancini's top four through-age-29 comps on bb-ref are Yoenis Cespedes, Kevin Mench, Jason Kubel, and Jay Gibbons.  All had essentially zero value after age 30.  The rest of his top 10 combined for about one above average season after 30. Mancini could be an exception, but 1B/DH types with 110 OPS+es tend to age very poorly.

[Sports Guy]

13 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I know Mancini is a nice guy, but he's 30 and has been worth 8 wins over his career.  Yes, he has some mitigating factors with health.  But I'm very reluctant to sign someone likely to be an average performer to a multi-year deal into his decline.  

It's reasonable to assume half a win a year decline for anyone over 28.  Even assuming a 2-3 win 2020, Mancini has a 2-win established level.  I'd assume his value over the next four years will be 5-6 wins.  So 4/40 might be defensible, but why are you signing him at all since he'll likely be below average by the time the Orioles can expect to compete? Heck, he was below average last year.

When I said they might as well keep him, I meant through 2022, not forever.

You sign him because it’s not our money!  Duh!

[LookinUp]

3 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Mancini's top four through-age-29 comps on bb-ref are Yoenis Cespedes, Kevin Mench, Jason Kubel, and Jay Gibbons.  All had essentially zero value after age 30.  The rest of his top 10 combined for about one above average season after 30. Mancini could be an exception, but 1B/DH types with 110 OPS+es tend to age very poorly.

I'm admittedly being stupid, but Mancini still passes my eye test. That doesn't invalidate anything you've said, but maybe it mitigates what I personally expect relative to his decline.

Oh, and two of your comps were very likely steroid users, so I don't really like them on that list.

[NCRaven]

14 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I would rather see then buy a yacht than give Mancini that contract and block a future roster spot.

There may be some Russian oligarchs trying to offload a few cheap.

[waroriole]

22 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You sign him because it’s not our money!  Duh!

Can we sign better players since it’s not our money?

[Ohfan67]

45 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I'm admittedly being stupid, but Mancini still passes my eye test. That doesn't invalidate anything you've said, but maybe it mitigates what I personally expect relative to his decline.

Oh, and two of your comps were very likely steroid users, so I don't really like them on that list.

Those guys probably would have declined even earlier and had lower peaks. They highlight why the Orioles should don't sign Mancini. 

[LookinUp]

4 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

Those guys probably would have declined even earlier and had lower peaks. They highlight why the Orioles should don't sign Mancini. 

IMO, those guys probably never become comps for Mancini in the first place without the steroids.

Add in Covid and cancer and I think it's very hard to use a computer algorithm to determine a comp for Mancini unless you do so through 2019.

[Ohfan67]

2 hours ago, LookinUp said:

IMO, those guys probably never become comps for Mancini in the first place without the steroids.

Add in Covid and cancer and I think it's very hard to use a computer algorithm to determine a comp for Mancini unless you do so through 2019.

Again, I think that's a very good reason NOT to sign Mancini to an extension. The data we do have suggests that he will be average to slightly below average in the near future. But Mancini's cancer makes it even harder to accurately predict his future. 

[DrungoHazewood]

6 hours ago, LookinUp said:

I'm admittedly being stupid, but Mancini still passes my eye test. That doesn't invalidate anything you've said, but maybe it mitigates what I personally expect relative to his decline.

Oh, and two of your comps were very likely steroid users, so I don't really like them on that list.

They were on PEDs and still were worth essentially nothing in their 30s!  As much as I like Mancini, it'll be an upset if he's still a productive major league player in 4-5 years.

[DrungoHazewood]

5 hours ago, LookinUp said:

IMO, those guys probably never become comps for Mancini in the first place without the steroids.

Add in Covid and cancer and I think it's very hard to use a computer algorithm to determine a comp for Mancini unless you do so through 2019.

How about instead of a computer algorithm you just kind of eyeball decent-fielding first basemen with OPSes just a bit better than league average?  That's not going to turn out much better.

[BohKnowsBmore]

I would be disappointed if we trade him in the next week for a AAAA bullpen arm and would think that was a bit foolish on the part of the FO.

However, if Mancini is tearing the cover off the ball through midseason and there's a contender who needs RH power and/or a 1B/DH and is willing to send a top-10-ish prospect from their org, a young arm, and a sub-20 LATAM prospect or two, then I wouldn't be upset. Would represent a return of some value and give Mancini a chance to play for a contender. 

[Just Regular]

Comparing Mancini, I like looking at contemporaries along with the history bin.   He is Jesus Aguilar is CJ Cron...those are like the Ripken and Murray of them.    Jorge Soler was Eloy before Eloy - he never panned out but has had flashes, and those flashes and pedigree helped him to do substantially better in NL DH world than I think Mancini will.   

Among LH bats, Corey DIckerson is the one whose career platoon split is 150 points of OPS, and Joc Pederson is a Lowenstein-ian 225.   Mancini/Aguilar/Cron have been right-handed bats good enough for mostly everyday use, but won't have the luxury of frequent platoon advantage as their overall level starts to go down.

We'll see this year if Santander and Stowers can present themselves as bottom of order sluggers you wouldn't feel awful about starting - if both can, it maybe gets tricky to see anything Mancini can do for the 2023 Orioles as a decent player deserving a decent wage.   If either fails, one gets RF, DH is open and how does 1-year, $7M sound?    

From here I'd hope Rutschman-Mountcastle-Urias (Prieto?)-Henderson-Westburg-Hays-Mullins-Santander-Stowers are the nine 400 PA guys for the 2023 team until Cowser and Mayo start pushing them, assuming most $$$ goes to pitchers.

Now if Trey could add middle infield instead of outfield to his positional versatility...