Dodgers are getting desperate at SS

[btdart20]

5 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

I'm not betting too much on Mateo's sustainability. It is very improbable that he maintains this MVP type level.

Sorry, I left out a game changer word!

 

Prospect risk is real.  So is Mateo's sustainability risk.

[Bahama O's Fan]

How bout Mateo plus for Stone and/or Miller?

[bluedog]

First off - we need to extend Adley instead of being held to a "4 year window". The sooner the better.

Second - Cano could go off the rails any minute. Just because he's lights out now, doesn't mean he will be tomorrow. The guy has a track record shorter than a goldfish's memory. So if you can swap him for what you consider to be a better return than keeping him, I think you do it.

One thing with Elias - he's proven he's not afraid to be unconventional. If he thinks a move will improve the club, he'll do it even if its unpopular (Lopez, Mancini) and even if the O's are in contention for a playoff spot and people believe it will hurt their chances of competing (last year).

[Aristotelian]

17 minutes ago, bluedog said:

I think we are vastly overrating Mateo if we think he's more valuable than pitchers the Dodgers have determined are ready for their big league rotation right now. I like Mateo, but Pepiot & company are also quality ML players.

In any case, I trust Elias to make the right determination. He'll be able to determine if Ortiz is ready to replace Mateo (see Bautista v. Lopez last year) and he'll know whether or not Mateo's hot start is seen as sustainable by his coaches. 

To put it in perspective, Trade Simulator has Mateo in the 2-3 range, Urias/Westburg/Ortiz in the 15-19 range. They have Stone 22, May 36, Gonsolin 45. Trade Simulator may not be up to date but the Dodgers probably aren't going to trade a top prospect based on 3 weeks of stats. 

[Can_of_corn]

6 minutes ago, bluedog said:

First off - we need to extend Adley instead of being held to a "4 year window". The sooner the better.

 

Go ahead and start a Go Fund Me to extend him.

[bluedog]

3 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

To put it in perspective, Trade Simulator has Mateo in the 2-3 range, Urias/Westburg/Ortiz in the 15-19 range. They have Stone 22, May 36, Gonsolin 45. Trade Simulator may not be up to date but the Dodgers probably aren't going to trade a top prospect based on 3 weeks of stats. 

TS is super fun to play around with, but it also has Vavra as more valuable than Mateo, which doesn't pass the sniff test for me. Not sure what metric values Vavra over a 3.0+ WAR gold glove caliber SS who led the league in SBs.

TS thinks that Stowers is 3X more valuable than Mateo as well. 

TS would swap Hayes for Stone straight up. I'd do that deal in a heartbeat.

[btdart20]

16 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

You make some really good points!

I'm not betting too much on Mateo's sustainability. It is very improbable that he maintains this MVP type level. However, he would have to fall pretty far from where he is now to the point that I don't trust him to be a placeholder for Jackson Holiday.

When it comes to Joey Ortiz, I think it would be a mismanagement of the asset that he is to use him in said fashion (place holder for Holiday). With the infield prospect depth that we have, combined with what is already on the Major League roster; IMO pieces like him should be used as part of a package to get us the starting pitching that we need.

If we are not willing to pay the cost to sign impact starting pitchers in FA and we don't want to assume the risk of trading for them (in terms of giving up prospects), where are they going to come from besides our hope in Grayson's talents and Means' injury not impacting him too bad (which to me is a big unknown)?

DL Hall has not been effective in AAA nor figured out how to go deep into games as of yet and he will be 25 this season. I don't think the odds of that happening are fairly high. We can hope that Bradish is the pitcher that he was in the 2nd half of last season. But he could as easily be the one that he was in the first half or the one that he was the season before, or a combination of the both. 

We are going to need to increase the current starting pitching talent on our roster in order to give us a greater chance at postseason success whether that is this season at the deadline or in the offseason. I would prefer us to shoot much higher going forward than the Gibsons or Irvins of the world (who are pitches who do nothing for us to help add to our favor against the leagues best). Gibson couldn't make the Phillies rotation in the post season last year.

It sounds like you don't think LAD is a reasonable match for the O's unless they are willing to trade one of their current ML rotation guys (usual trade caveats, etc.).  Outside of something really creative, I don't see it either.

[Aristotelian]

6 minutes ago, bluedog said:

TS is super fun to play around with, but it also has Vavra as more valuable than Mateo, which doesn't pass the sniff test for me. Not sure what metric values Vavra over a 3.0+ WAR gold glove caliber SS who led the league in SBs.

TS thinks that Stowers is 3X more valuable than Mateo as well. 

TS would swap Hayes for Stone straight up. I'd do that deal in a heartbeat.

Yeah, that thing absolutely hates Mateo and always has! 

[HakunaSakata]

Guys, the Orioles are NOT trading Mateo [And, Scene].

[bluedog]

5 minutes ago, HakunaSakata said:

Guys, the Orioles are NOT trading Mateo [And, Scene].

Have you met Mike Elias?

I think he'd trade his grandmother if he got a better player back in return.

[interloper]

9 minutes ago, HakunaSakata said:

Guys, the Orioles are NOT trading Mateo [And, Scene].

It's certainly many, many, many times more likely that they don't than they do. It's even unlikelier still that the team we trade him to is the team we think it will be, in this case the Dodgers. Trade speculation is one of the single most futile and pointless things to engage in when talking baseball. All we can do is say "I hope they trade this guy" or "I hope they don't trade this guy". Anything beyond that just seems frustrating. We'll see what happens when it happens or doesn't happen. 

Edited April 19, 2023 by interloper

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, bluedog said:

Have you met Mike Elias?

I think he'd trade his grandmother if he got a better player back in return.

I haven't met Mike Elias but evidently someone introduced you to Jerry Dipoto and told you it was Mike.

[bluedog]

1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:

I haven't met Mike Elias but evidently someone introduced you to Jerry Dipoto and told you it was Mike.

Elias traded our starting closer and our most popular player last year for what, at the time, was a questionable return.

Given that behavior, I'm not sure why anyone would think he's 100% certain not to deal Mateo.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, bluedog said:

Elias traded our starting closer and our most popular player last year for what, at the time, was a questionable return.

Given that behavior, I'm not sure why anyone would think he's 100% certain not to deal Mateo.

This is from last December.

Quote

Dipoto has traded 246 players in 139 trades. Of those 246 players, 37 players traded more than once.

Elias is not trade happy.

He traded extra pieces last summer.

[bluedog]

5 minutes ago, interloper said:

It's certainly many, many, many times more likely that they don't than they do. It's even unlikelier still that the team we trade him to is the team we think it will be, in this case the Dodgers. Trade speculation is one of the single most futile and pointless things to engage in when talking baseball. All we can do is say "I hope they trade this guy" or "I hope they don't trade this guy". Anything beyond that just seems frustrating. We'll see what happens when it happens or doesn't happen. 

It depends on the goal of the trade speculation whether or not its futile and pointless.

I think most of us do it because its fun.