Orioles avoid arbitration with Mancini. Mutual option for 2023.

[wildcard]

Depending on how the option is written.  It could make Mancini more valuable in trade.  On July 15th  the O's could tell Mancini they want to pick up his option. Then he has to decide if he wants that or not.   If he does the acquiring team could get him with a contract through 2023 instead of just a rental for 2022.

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Depending on how the option is written.  It could make Mancini more valuable in trade.  On July 15th  the O's could tell Mancini they want to pick up his option. Then he has to decide if he wants that or not.   If he does the acquiring team could get him with a contract through 2023 instead of just a rental for 2022.

If it's a mutual option how would it make him more valuable?

[wildcard]

19 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If it's a mutual option how would it make him more valuable?

If the O's picked up the option in July then Mancini would have to agree or disagree before the trade deadline.   If he agrees to the 10m salary for 2023 that could make him more valuable because he would be under control from the end of July 2022 until the end of the season 2023.   Being under contract for two pennant races could make him more valuable than if he is just under contract through the 2022 season.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

If the O's picked up the option in July then Mancini would have to agree or disagree before the trade deadline.   If he agrees to the 10m salary for 2023 that could make him more valuable because he would be under control from the end of July 2022 until the end of the season 2023.   Being under contract for two pennant races could make him more valuable than if he is just under contract through the 2022 season.

Why would he have to?

[wildcard]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Why would he have to?

Like I said.  Depends on how the option is written.

[Jammer7]

24 minutes ago, wildcard said:

If the O's picked up the option in July then Mancini would have to agree or disagree before the trade deadline.   If he agrees to the 10m salary for 2023 that could make him more valuable because he would be under control from the end of July 2022 until the end of the season 2023.   Being under contract for two pennant races could make him more valuable than if he is just under contract through the 2022 season.

Very interesting scenario.

[Moose Milligan]

Wow this had me up at night. So glad this has been taken care of. 

[Frobby]

It strikes me as a pretty clever resolution.   If the O’s don’t exercise the option, they end up paying him $7.75 mm.   If they exercise it but Mancini rejects it, then it’s $7.5 mm.  And of course, they could both consent and keep him around in 2023 at $10 mm.  I like the whole deal.  Now let’s hope Trey goes out and has a great year.

And now let me ask: does anyone still think it’s terribly embarrassing that the O’s didn’t agree to pay Mancini $8 mm by the March 22 deadline for exchanging arbitration numbers?   Because this sure looks like a much better outcome for the team to me.

 

[interloper]

Once again the Os being file and trial proves to be a bit of a myth.

[Sports Guy]

Mancini definitely can have a year where You enter the offseason thinking he’s worth 10M in 2023 but it’s hard for me to envision a scenario where it makes a lot of sense to have him on the roster next year.

[Frobby]

25 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Mancini definitely can have a year where You enter the offseason thinking he’s worth 10M in 2023 but it’s hard for me to envision a scenario where it makes a lot of sense to have him on the roster next year.

I’m pretty much of the view that if he plays well enough, it makes sense to have him on the roster.   

Let’s say Mancini puts up numbers similar to 2019 this year.   Do you really think we couldn’t use an .850-.900 OPS 1B/DH/COF in 2023?   Obviously, it depends on how some of our prospects come along, and how some of our existing corner outfield types do, but I’m inclined to think there would be room for a player like that.   I guess it also depends on how often Rutschman is going to catch and whether the O’s will use him as a 1B/DH when he doesn’t.  

Anyway, there are a lot of permutations and I’ll worry about it if Mancini has a good year and is still on our roster when the season ends.  That’s a long way away.  

 

[wildcard]

9 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I’m pretty much of the view that if he plays well enough, it makes sense to have him on the roster.   

Let’s say Mancini puts up numbers similar to 2019 this year.   Do you really think we couldn’t use an .850-.900 OPS 1B/DH/COF in 2023?   Obviously, it depends on how some of our prospects come along, and how some of our existing corner outfield types do, but I’m inclined to think there would be room for a player like that.   I guess it also depends on how often Rutschman is going to catch and whether the O’s will use him as a 1B/DH when he doesn’t.  

Anyway, there are a lot of permutations and I’ll worry about it if Mancini has a good year and is still on our roster when the season ends.  That’s a long way away.  

 

Is that you wildcard?

[Sports Guy]

20 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I’m pretty much of the view that if he plays well enough, it makes sense to have him on the roster.   

Let’s say Mancini puts up numbers similar to 2019 this year.   Do you really think we couldn’t use an .850-.900 OPS 1B/DH/COF in 2023?   Obviously, it depends on how some of our prospects come along, and how some of our existing corner outfield types do, but I’m inclined to think there would be room for a player like that.   I guess it also depends on how often Rutschman is going to catch and whether the O’s will use him as a 1B/DH when he doesn’t.  

Anyway, there are a lot of permutations and I’ll worry about it if Mancini has a good year and is still on our roster when the season ends.  That’s a long way away.  

 

Well let me put it another way.  If he makes sense for the team, it means there has been failure by the prospects and that’s not good for us.

[Frobby]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Well let me put it another way.  If he makes sense for the team, it means there has been failure by the prospects and that’s not good for us.

Well, let’s play it out a little.  

Right now our starting OF is Mullins, Hays and Santander, and 1B Mountcastle.  Mancini is the DH.   Stewart and McKenna are the incumbent backups, and neither is really starter material.   

In AAA, we have Diaz, Stowers, Nevin and Neustrom.   None of those guys have shown me yet that they’re as good a hitter as Mancini, or will become that anytime soon.  I’m not saying it can’t happen, but it’s no certainty.   And even if one does, maybe it’s Santander or Hays whose job is jeopardized, depending how they do.   

In AA we really don’t have anyone yet, do we?   Unless you believe in JD Mundy.  We’re not sticking Henderson or Westburg at 1B/DH/COF.   

Below that we have Cowser, Kjerstad, Mayo and others, but those guys probably aren’t ready by the start of 2023 IMO.

So, I can see scenarios where another year of Mancini is a good option, if he’s hitting like peak Mancini.  I can see others where he’s redundant or doesn’t fit with a philosophy of spreading DH at bats around.  I can see scenarios where he doesn’t hit well enough this year to be worth keeping.   And of course, if he does hit well, he becomes trade bait in July.  We’ll just have to see how it plays out.   



 

[Tony-OH]

14 hours ago, Snutchy said:

 

Basically this means they settled on a $7.75K contract for this year which was about halfway.