Players and prospects most likely to get dealt this winter and why

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, Jagwar said:

I'm torn on Tate. I know he could get expensive but he's a solid reliever. I think I'd rather add bullpen pieces and keep the core we have. 

My concern would be that Mountcastle would fail to improve and his value next year would be 25 cents on the dollar

I don’t care about the cost for Tate, I care about the performance.  He wasn’t that good before 2022.  Will he repeat that success?  If so, he’s very valuable.  
 

I’m very skeptical though.  Would rather trade him although I do admit I’m not interested in dealing him for another Vavra/Nevin package either.
 

He would probably have to be part of a bigger deal or you keep him and hope.

Edited October 7, 2022 by Sports Guy

[Jagwar]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I don’t care about the cost for Tate, I care about the performance.  He wasn’t that good before 2022.  Will he repeat that success?  If so, he’s very valuable.  
 

I’m very skeptical though.  Would rather trade him although I do admit I’m not interested in dealing him for another Vavra/Nevin package either.
 

He would probably have to be part of a bigger deal or you keep him and hope.

I think you nailed it. What's more valuable... his potential performance/contribution in the 2023 Baltimore bullpen, or the return he could bring in a trade (either standalone or in a package)?

Personally I'd rather keep the bullpen core intact and add 1-2 more arms.   

[wildcard]

54 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

It’s not so much that they are expensive, it’s more like can you get the same production for less money and do you believe in their talents as they get into those more expensive arb years.

Think of it another way, do you want to pay Hays and Tate 6-10M in 2024?

So  they don't need to be traded this off season.

[Sports Guy]

24 minutes ago, wildcard said:

So  they don't need to be traded this off season.

No they don’t.  But trading a year too early vs a year too late is a good thing and since so many of you just feel Elias has a magic wand and can make mediocre players good, the production these guys give us should be able to be replaced.

[Moose Milligan]

It's actually nice to be able to read a conversation about being able to trade from a surplus of guys that other teams might *actually* want instead of overrating whatever mid-tier guys we've had in the past and thinking we can get something of value in return.

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Show us evidence if you think it’s bs.

This has been discussed millions of times, especially by Drungo.   There might be a very rare player who can up his game a bit in clutch situations, but in most cases, over the course of a career, there will be very little difference in a player’s stats in RISP and non-RISP situations.  Players will hit great in RISP situations one year and poorly the next, or vice versa.   

Cedric Mullins the last two years is a great example.  Last year he had an .878 OPS overall but only .644 with RISP.   This year his overall OPS was way down to .721 but he was way up in RISP situations, to .786.   Did he suddenly learn how to hit with runners in scoring position?   Highly doubtful.   It’s random fluctuation.

So in short, if Westburg has a 10-year major league career and hits significantly better in RISP situations than otherwise, maybe I’ll think he had some special knack for hitting with runners on base.   Until then, I’m not buying it.  

One small caveat to what I’ve said: in general, RISP numbers tend to be a little better than non-RISP.   For example, this year MLB hitters had a .741 OPS with RISP, .707 in non-RISP.   I think this has more to do with the pitchers than the hitters.   The very fact that there are runners in scoring position tells you that the pitcher may be faltering.  
 

[btdart20]

6 minutes ago, Frobby said:

One small caveat to what I’ve said: in general, RISP numbers tend to be a little better than non-RISP.   For example, this year MLB hitters had a .741 OPS with RISP, .707 in non-RISP.   I think this has more to do with the pitchers than the hitters.   The very fact that there are runners in scoring position tells you that the pitcher may be faltering.  

+1. some pitch from the stretch vs. wind-up +2. players holding runners +3. not wanting to face the next batter with more baserunners on.  Stack enough reasons on top of each other and it makes a difference.

[ScGO's]

14 hours ago, Jim'sKid26 said:

I live in Asheville. Norby played travel ball for Scott Bankhead at NC Baseball Academy prior to going the ECU. Scott is a former MLB pitcher, Olympian and USA National Team coach. There are a lot of guys in Greensboro who believe Norby is going to be a very good MLB hitter no matter what position he plays. The consensus there is that the O's have a very good player in Norby. 

I personally hope they keep him as he could be our 2b, 1b,dh, or corner outfield . Plus he has oppo pop which is great for Camden yards 

[SCJeff]

I have been posting on Bleacher Report that, while I may not like it, I still believe Westburg is the one traded this off-season. I think that's why he never got a call up to the majors. Not sure why they would move him because I really like his potential, but I think he is the headliner of a multi prospect deal. 

[Tony-OH]

15 hours ago, connja said:

My bet is on Westburg as the big prospect name to go.  He's a big time prospect that could bring back a big time established player, and we can easily fill the infield without him. 

I also think naming him the Orioles minor league player of the year may also be a clue that they may trade him. They may think that designator will help his value. In my mind both Henderson and Norby to a lesser extent could have laid claim to MiLB O's MVP.

[Tony-OH]

11 minutes ago, SCJeff said:

I have been posting on Bleacher Report that, while I may not like it, I still believe Westburg is the one traded this off-season. I think that's why he never got a call up to the majors. Not sure why they would move him because I really like his potential, but I think he is the headliner of a multi prospect deal. 

He very well may be traded, and I think he's got a good chance of being a marquee prospect that brings some good value, but he wasn't added to the 40-man roster because he doesn't need to be protected this year on the 40-man. Then again, when they are adding guys like Bemboom to the roster, who knows what they are thinking?

[ShoelesJoe]

I’d rather not trade Santander unless we’re getting a fat return on him as he was, bar none, the only power bat we had in our lineup all year. If he played for another team he’s the exact kind of guy we’d be targeting to acquire in a trade. Nine months from now if he’s superfluous then deal him at the deadline. But going into 2023 I want him penciled in to the 3rd or 4th spot in the order from day one. 

[DrungoHazewood]

11 hours ago, wildcard said:

I call BS on this.   Some hitters have the skill of shortening their swing and going for a hit that drives in a run.  I think Westburg has that.  After watching a  season of some  O's hitters swinging from their heels to hit fly ball outs to the outfield it would be refreshing to add a player that actually knows how to work a count, hit a line drive and drive in a run.

I agree with your 2nd point though none of the four guys you mention were at the same club as Westburg all season long.  And getting 106 RBI is an all season long effort.

Clutch hitting does exist but:

a) The impact is very small
b) So small that a league average clutch hitter is almost never preferable to a little better non-clutch hitter
c) All the stuff Frobby said in his post replying to you
d) All the stuff in btdart20's post following up on his
e) Tthe distribution of clutch hitting across the population of MLB hitters is indistinguishable from a random distribution centered on overall production - so it's almost impossible to tell clutch from noise in the data.  In other words, Eddie was great in the clutch but in a universe with no clutch hitters at all there would still be players with Eddie's observed performance in the clutch just from random variation.
f) You have no idea whatsoever how Westburg will perform in high leverage or RISP situations, aside from his overall equivalent production based on his minor league numbers
g) This past year Westburg's performance with two outs and RISP in the minors was very similar to his overall numbers. Actually just a tad better, which is exactly what you'd expect if he had no special skills, like essentially everyone else.

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

This has been discussed millions of times, especially by Drungo.   There might be a very rare player who can up his game a bit in clutch situations, but in most cases, over the course of a career, there will be very little difference in a player’s stats in RISP and non-RISP situations.  Players will hit great in RISP situations one year and poorly the next, or vice versa.   

Cedric Mullins the last two years is a great example.  Last year he had an .878 OPS overall but only .644 with RISP.   This year his overall OPS was way down to .721 but he was way up in RISP situations, to .786.   Did he suddenly learn how to hit with runners in scoring position?   Highly doubtful.   It’s random fluctuation.

So in short, if Westburg has a 10-year major league career and hits significantly better in RISP situations than otherwise, maybe I’ll think he had some special knack for hitting with runners on base.   Until then, I’m not buying it.  

One small caveat to what I’ve said: in general, RISP numbers tend to be a little better than non-RISP.   For example, this year MLB hitters had a .741 OPS with RISP, .707 in non-RISP.   I think this has more to do with the pitchers than the hitters.   The very fact that there are runners in scoring position tells you that the pitcher may be faltering.  
 

I agree with everything you are saying here but that last statement. While it could be true, I know when I played, and grant it this what not at a professional level, I know my focus was always extra sharp in key situations or close in games late. Now, perhaps that evens out as a professional in thousands of PAs, but I do think they bare down in crutial situations more. 

Now, does that mean they are all better in these situations, no? I'm sure the pitcher is baring down as well in these situations, but as you pointed out, the pitcher probably feels more pressure with the runners in scoring position then the hitter does with one out or less.

[Tony-OH]

3 minutes ago, ShoelesJoe said:

I’d rather not trade Santander unless we’re getting a fat return on him as he was, bar none, the only power bat we had in our lineup all year. If he played for another team he’s the exact kind of guy we’d be targeting to acquire in a trade. Nine months from now if he’s superfluous then deal him at the deadline. But going into 2023 I want him penciled in to the 3rd or 4th spot in the order from day one. 

Santander should be on the block, but only as part of a deal that brings an impact starting pitcher or left-handed hitting 1B back.