Jump to content

Let’s Be Buyers


oriolefan1035

Recommended Posts

Unless the Mets give up one of their top pitching prospects, there is no reason to trade Mancini. He's the heart of this club. I don't mind trading Santander for a fair price since we likely have an equal replacement in Stowers.  However, there is the chance Santander might return close to the same trade value in the off-season as he does at the deadline.

I don't see any point in trading any relievers unless they are packaged with Mancini or Santander in order to get a much better return (such as a starting pitcher for the playoff run).  The coaching and scouting staff have done wonders building this bullpen....if other teams want the goods they need to pony up.

Edited by yark14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Three Run Homer said:

If we could trade Westburg or Henderson for a comparably ranked pitching prospect at AAA, should we do it?

If we could trade a package headlined by Coby Mayo and Kyle Stowers for Frankie Montas, should we do it?  

Westburg, maybe. I am not trading Henderson for anything right now. 

Edited by RVAOsFan
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, cnmilton said:

Read on MLB Rumors that Pablo Lopez might now be available from the Marlins for an offensive piece. What do you think the Os would have to give up to acquire him? Mullins? Hays?

They are looking for offensive help next year and would like a left handed bat according to the piece on MLBTR.   I love Cedric Mullins but I think I'd be willing to trade him for Pablo Lopez. 

Beyond the specifics of what the Marlins would want, I'd be willing to trade any position player aside from Adley Rutschman on the current major league roster to get a good young starting pitcher with a couple of years of team control remaining.   Alternatively, I'd be willing to trade any prospect other than Gunnar, GrayRod, Cowser and Holliday.      

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, RVAOsFan said:

Westburg, maybe. I am not trading Henderson for anything right now. 

The bust scenario for Henderson is something like Todd Frazier or Mike Moustakas or something.   Alright, maybe not bust, but he has the talent to be better than those guys.  Maybe a lot better. So 12-15 wins over his six years of team control at reduced prices with upside well beyond that.  I'm not trading that for almost any pitcher at any price.

When you're rebuilding your only goal is to acquire as many Gunnar Hendersons as you can.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, bpilktree said:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/skubata01.shtml?utm_campaign=Linker&utm_source=&utm_medium=referral

 

if Skubal is actually available we should be seeing what the cost is.  4+ years of service left on the cheap end right now for a starter with TOR upside.  I am sure he would cost a few of our top prospects though. 

A few years ago, DET in a rebuilding season didn't move their Matthew Boyd.    These Tigers are supposed to be better than those Tigers, but with the loads of years, I'd imagine Skubal leapfrogs Castillo and Montas as an appealing acquisition if a team wants a rotation regular more than 1.4 years.

Baseball Trade Values guesses surplus value on the Big 2, now maybe Big 3, at Montas $27mm, Castillo $41mm, Skubal $49mm.     They have Pablo Lopez basically even with Skubal.

Individual Orioles it guesses Grayson $52mm, Hall $30mm, Cowser $21mm, Mayo $17mm, Westburg $16mm, Stowers $8mm.

 

Edited by Just Regular
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tarik Skubal and Pablo Lopez are the two pitchers I would be targeting to buy because they're both under control for a bit. Lopez has proven more to date and will likely take more, but having a rotation of P.Lopez, G.Rodriguez, J.Means, T.Wells, and DL Hall for next season looks nice. You then have Kremer, Watkins and whoever else proves themselves as depth (and to fill-in until Means is back). If the Orioles would then be able to add one more mid-range FA starter, that would give us a very nice rotation to go with a bullpen that's shown very well this year and an offense with plenty of upside. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, WietersCorner said:

Do folks think a package of Mayo, Ortiz or Stowers could get us anything decent?

I don't understand why we're entertaining trading prospects right now.  This is a roughly .500 team with multiple highly valuable players still in the minors.  It's very easy to get into a situation where the player you trade for is not only much more expensive and under team control for less time, but also not as good as the players you sent away.  Also, the Orioles are still very much longshots to even get to the 2022 playoffs.  

Don't lose focus on the goal.  The goal isn't a '22 lottery ticket.  It's being contenders for a long time to come.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I don't understand why we're entertaining trading prospects right now.  This is a roughly .500 team with multiple highly valuable players still in the minors.  It's very easy to get into a situation where the player you trade for is not only much more expensive and under team control for less time, but also not as good as the players you sent away.  Also, the Orioles are still very much longshots to even get to the 2022 playoffs.  

Don't lose focus on the goal.  The goal isn't a '22 lottery ticket.  It's being contenders for a long time to come.

This.   👍 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I don't understand why we're entertaining trading prospects right now.  This is a roughly .500 team with multiple highly valuable players still in the minors.  It's very easy to get into a situation where the player you trade for is not only much more expensive and under team control for less time, but also not as good as the players you sent away.  Also, the Orioles are still very much longshots to even get to the 2022 playoffs.  

Don't lose focus on the goal.  The goal isn't a '22 lottery ticket.  It's being contenders for a long time to come.

I'm not entertaining trading any of our top ten or so prospects. 

Bu there is no reason we can't be buyers and sellers if it helps us now and in the future.  If a package of two or three prospects in the 11-20 range can get us a number three starter for the next two or three years, I think we should consider it.  

I'd still prefer to trade Mancini and some of the relievers first though with an eye on 2023 and beyond but also looking for ways to improve our playoff possibilities for this season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I don't understand why we're entertaining trading prospects right now.  This is a roughly .500 team with multiple highly valuable players still in the minors.  It's very easy to get into a situation where the player you trade for is not only much more expensive and under team control for less time, but also not as good as the players you sent away.  Also, the Orioles are still very much longshots to even get to the 2022 playoffs.  

Don't lose focus on the goal.  The goal isn't a '22 lottery ticket.  It's being contenders for a long time to come.

To be fair, I don’t think anyone here wants to trade prospects for rentals. Guys like Lopez and Skubal have some control left. Even Snell would be a great target with just one year of control left IMO. 
 

Plus, we’re beginning to see a potential logjam of prospects. Henderson, Westburg, Prieto, Norby, Mayo, and Urias can’t all be on the team in 2024. So maybe move a couple not named Henderson for some controllable pitching? Same goes with the outfield…moving guys like Stowers or Haskin or even Kjerstad isn’t going to make or break the future, especially if you’re receiving someone under control for 2-3 or more years that is proven at the major league level. It’s not there isn’t room to add payroll so that’s a non factor right now

Edited by oriole
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Just did a bit of a walk. Some decently large braches down, one segment of privacy fence missing and standing water on the property in a low spot.  
    • Just woke up and I don't hear any wind or rain.
    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...