Taking Elias and Hyde’s comments at face value

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

I think not trading Santander and Tate is going to come back to bite them.  Of course, if they have no value, I wouldn’t move them but I doubt that to be the case.

I’ll withhold my judgement on keeping Mullins until I see what else this does. I still much prefer to trade Mullins vs a bunch of controllable prospects but I am also ok with keeping Mullins for another year because I think he should be a 3-4 WAR guy in 2023. It really just depends on what we do.

NOT trading Santander and Tate is not the type of move that comes back to bite you.  Signing a guy for 6 years and 180 million?  That can come back and bite you.  Trading away six years of a guy who goes on to put up 25 WAR in those years, that can come back to bite you.

Now, I won't argue that Santander and Tate might well be at peak value/coming off career best performances.  I think, particularly of Tate, that could be the case.  But missing out on the pretty minimal return- even if those guys both completely crater, which seems very unlikely- isn't going to hinder the ability to compete going forward.

 

[Pickles]

4 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

Even people like me who set out with fairly modest expectations are likely to end up disappointed.

If we end up with Gibson and Manaea as our rotation "upgrades," this offseason will be an abject failure and an embarrassment.

I'm not sure how modest your expectations were tbh.  If you expected the O's to be legit players on Rodon, Verlander, deGrom, then I think they were unrealistic.

[Aristotelian]

12 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

 

Eovaldi is the least likely SP target after Rodon, IMO. I do not think Elias wants to burn a high draft pick, and especially not within the division. Bassitt is similarly unlikely due to the pick, and his desire for at least 4 years.

If the multiyear offer claim is true, I think Syndergaard, Manaea, and Wacha are the most likely candidates. 

Mike hasn't said anything about the pick being a dealbreaker. I'd be more surprised by a multiyear deal to Wacha than Mike burning a #3 pick for Eovaldi. 

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Pickles said:

NOT trading Santander and Tate is not the type of move that comes back to bite you.  Signing a guy for 6 years and 180 million?  That can come back and bite you.  Trading away six years of a guy who goes on to put up 25 WAR in those years, that can come back to bite you.

Now, I won't argue that Santander and Tate might well be at peak value/coming off career best performances.  I think, particularly of Tate, that could be the case.  But missing out on the pretty minimal return- even if those guys both completely crater, which seems very unlikely- isn't going to hinder the ability to compete going forward.

 

Well we don’t know what the return could be. If it’s minimal, I agree.  If it can be a more impactful return, I disagree.

 

[tabletop]

The way I see it is they think last year was a fluke and want to see them do it again before taking it seriously.

What doesn't make sense to me is that he said he doesn't want to hurt the 2024, 2025, etc. teams by blocking prospects yet last year they had two guys who have a chance at becoming everyday major league players (Stowers and Vavra) sitting on the bench watching Rougned Odor and Jesus Aguilar play.

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, tabletop said:

The way I see it is they think last year was a fluke and want to see them do it again before taking it seriously.

What doesn't make sense to me is that he said he doesn't want to hurt the 2024, 2025, etc. teams by blocking prospects yet last year they had two guys who have a chance at becoming everyday major league players (Stowers and Vavra) sitting on the bench watching Rougned Odor and Jesus Aguilar play.

If they think 2022 was a fluke, that tells me they don’t believe in what they are doing.

I would hope that’s not what they think.

That said, it sure doesn’t seem like they are trying their best to capitalize on it either.

Edited December 8, 2022 by Sports Guy

[Aristotelian]

6 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

Even people like me who set out with fairly modest expectations are likely to end up disappointed.

If we end up with Gibson and Manaea as our rotation "upgrades," this offseason will be an abject failure and an embarrassment.

I agree with the second (maybe wouldn't phrase it so strongly) but not the first. Why would signing Gibson now mean that it is likely we won't sign anyone else?

I know you think Gibson is a bad signal because it precludes multiple better-than-Gibson pitchers, but which multiple better-than-Gibson (not named Rodon) pitchers did you expect that also don't cost draft picks??? I'm struggling to understand your big offseason plan... but you have refused to name any specifics so it's pretty clear you would have been upset with any realistic.

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Well we don’t know what the return could be. If it’s minimal, I agree.  If it can be a more impactful return, I disagree.

 

Well, what would your expectations be?

Could either of those guys alone snag a better pitcher than Lyles?  Tate can't.  Santander  might be able to, but then you've removed your best power hitter from the lineup, and are going to have to count on a rookie, or basically a rookie, Stowers to make up for a lot of offense he might not be capable of doing.

[tabletop]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

If they think 2022 was a fluke, that tells me they don’t believe in what they are doing.

I would hope that’s not what they think.

I'm not sure how it would mean they don't believe in what they are doing. If anything I would think it would enhance their belief. They keep saying they're ahead of schedule based on last year. I think it's pretty obvious that they didn't expect the team to be competing for a playoff spot into the last few weeks of the season like they did. Then, when the team was competing at the trade deadline, they traded off their closer and their #2/#3 hitter in the lineup and did nothing to help the team make the playoffs. I'm not saying those were the wrong moves but those aren't moves made by a team that thinks they're for real.

[DrinkinWithFermi]

1 minute ago, Pickles said:

I'm not sure how modest your expectations were tbh.  If you expected the O's to be legit players on Rodon, Verlander, deGrom, then I think they were unrealistic.

I did not even remotely expect that.

I thought 2 mid-rotation starters and a mid-tier hitter (plus necessary odds and ends like a backup C) was a pretty reasonable expectation based on the team's finish, needs, and payroll outlook.

7 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Mike hasn't said anything about the pick being a dealbreaker. I'd be more surprised by a multiyear deal to Wacha than Mike burning a #3 pick for Eovaldi. 

I am basing that assessment on Elias's actions, not his words. He is clearly focused on the long-term talent pipeline more than near-term contention, as evidenced by his behavior at the 2022 trade deadline. I would be pretty shocked if he sacrificed a top 75ish draft pick for a guy like Eovaldi, especially inside of the division.

 

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Well, what would your expectations be?

Could either of those guys alone snag a better pitcher than Lyles?  Tate can't.  Santander  might be able to, but then you've removed your best power hitter from the lineup, and are going to have to count on a rookie, or basically a rookie, Stowers to make up for a lot of offense he might not be capable of doing.

Tate would need to be part of a packaged deal, maybe even with Santander.

I am not sure Santander can bring back a meaningful ML player or not but I think he could bring back some controllable minor leaguers who could be helpful now or very soon.

It is possible he could be part of a deal to bring back pitching but I think most of the teams who would deal pitching are looking for cheaper contracts.

You can replace his offense. I’m not worried about that. My concern is about getting real value and trading him when his value is at its highest point, which it is right now.

Whatever you think of him as a player, the bottom line is that you can’t rely on him. Yes he stayed healthy in 2022 but he had never don’t that before. If he goes back to being a 90-110 games played guy and has a sub 310 OBP, he will definitely be non tendered next year, so then you have lost him for nothing.

And if he does stay healthy and does have another solid season, you then have to decide if you want to pay him 11-14M for 2024.  That may be more than they want to, so then they look to trade him with one year left and likely get less than they can get now.

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, tabletop said:

I'm not sure how it would mean they don't believe in what they are doing. If anything I would think it would enhance their belief. They keep saying they're ahead of schedule based on last year. I think it's pretty obvious that they didn't expect the team to be competing for a playoff spot into the last few weeks of the season like they did. Then, when the team was competing at the trade deadline, they traded off their closer and their #2/#3 hitter in the lineup and did nothing to help the team make the playoffs. I'm not saying those were the wrong moves but those aren't moves made by a team that thinks they're for real.

If you think 2022 is a fluke and that season happened largely because of your young talent, your program, etc..that means you are questioning what you are doing.

The thought process should be that 2022 was just the start and we expect to be better going forward. The word fluke shouldn’t be part of any conversation.

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Tate would need to be part of a packaged deal, maybe even with Santander.

I am not sure Santander can bring back a meaningful ML player or not but I think he could bring back some controllable minor leaguers who could be helpful now or very soon.

It is possible he could be part of a deal to bring back pitching but I think most of the teams who would deal pitching are looking for cheaper contracts.

You can replace his offense. I’m not worried about that. My concern is about getting real value and trading him when his value is at its highest point, which it is right now.

Whatever you think of him as a player, the bottom line is that you can’t rely on him. Yes he stayed healthy in 2022 but he had never don’t that before. If he goes back to being a 90-110 games played guy and has a sub 310 OBP, he will definitely be non tendered next year, so then you have lost him for nothing.

And if he does stay healthy and does have another solid season, you then have to decide if you want to pay him 11-14M for 2024.  That may be more than they want to, so then they look to trade him with one year left and likely get less than they can get now.

I mean even if I accept all the analysis, which I don't fully, you seem to acknowledge it would be extremely difficult to trade Santader and get back pieces which actually improve the 2023 team.   Which is kind of where I was a few months ago, and why I think it was pretty obvious what the O's plans were.

[Yardball85]

49 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

I'll say Brandon Belt on a 1 year deal and Sean Manaea on a 2 year deal with an option of some kind, with no notable trades prior to the start of the season. I think the Marlins will ultimately hook up with Arizona for one of their young CFs, which eliminates Lopez and Rogers as potential targets, and that Elias will not meet Seattle's asking price for a single season of Chris Flexen, and I also do not think Burnes, Woodruff, Bieber, or Gallen are available right now.

Ew lol.

You might be right though.  I am hoping for Bassitt or Eovaldi on a miracle short term deal and Conforto/Brantely on a 1 or 2 year deal. 

[Pickles]

4 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

I did not even remotely expect that.

I thought 2 mid-rotation starters and a mid-tier hitter (plus necessary odds and ends like a backup C) was a pretty reasonable expectation based on the team's finish, needs, and payroll outlook.

I am basing that assessment on Elias's actions, not his words. He is clearly focused on the long-term talent pipeline more than near-term contention, as evidenced by his behavior at the 2022 trade deadline. I would be pretty shocked if he sacrificed a top 75ish draft pick for a guy like Eovaldi, especially inside of the division.

 

Well, they've got one "mid-rotation" starter.  I guess you could quibble and call Gibson "back of the rotation" but they have upgraded their rotation, if you accept that Gibson is better than Lyles, which would be the industry consensus.