Dodgers are getting desperate at SS

[Aristotelian]

I think it is a great idea. The question is who to trade and what are they offering. I would roughly value our guys from low to high something like Frazier, Urias, Mateo, Ortiz, Westburg. Trade Simulator is lower on Mateo, higher on Ortiz.

Pepiot-plus would seem to be a good target for one of those guys. Stone would be a reach target. 

[bluedog]

21 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Pepiot-plus would seem to be a good target for one of those guys. Stone would be a reach target. 

Agreed. Mateo for Pepiot then.

Who wants to reach out to Elias and tell him we've approved this trade?

[btdart20]

19 minutes ago, Bemorewins said:

I doubt that the Dodgers would see 2+ weeks of great play from Mateo given his previous performance and think, "yeah, that's worth one of our top pitching prospects". But if they did, I would be all ears if I'm the O's.

On the other hand, if we are in June/July and Mateo keeps this up, they made be willing to make a deal and if I'm the O's and we are poised for playoff position at that point I say no.

I would then rather package some of our prospects like Ortiz to get a serious starting Major League pitcher who can help us in the postseason. But that's just me.

As talented as Miller, Stone, and for that matter Grayson are, they are represent the risk of not having done it yet, maybe they never will?

At this point in the org's lifecycle, with what we have at both the Major League and Minor League levels; I would prefer trades that come with more surety in terms of starting pitchers who have some track record and having a greater degree of possibility of working out in terms of putting them in our postseason plans to be successful.

Agreed.  I did say LAD likely would not trade Miller or Stone.  But those would be the only potential TOR types in LA who "could" add value this year.  Beyond that, I have no interest in any of the other minor league options for Mateo.  The question is "How desperate is LA for an ML SS?" for them to be a match for the O's.  But at this point, if they want Mateo, those guys have to be discussed.  How many other ML-established SS with Mateo's ceiling right now has a 10+% chance of being traded?  That market niche has to be pretty small.  Meaning, we're crossing Trea, Bichette, Franco, Bogaerts, Manny, Tatis, Correa, Seager, Pena, Lindor, and quite a few others off the list of potential options.  

Non-Mateo guys can be discussed for that next tier down.  This is where Pepiot, Grove, Jackson, etc. would be discussed for someone like Ortiz.  But I like Ortiz's upside and floor over those back-end starters.  Nor would those guys really move the needle in our rotation IMO.  If you want surety, this tier isn't on your shopping list.  Especially with the magic LAD work with their SPs.  Not sure we can squeeze any more juice out these fruit than LAD has already.

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

[BohKnowsBmore]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Well, he was a 3.5 rWAR player last year despite his paltry offensive numbers, so it’s not like the Dodgers would be acquiring a player whose only value was derived from a three-week heater.  But obviously the return from the trade would partially depend on whether the Dodgers (and the Orioles) believe that Mateo’s offensive improvement is at least partially sustainable.

FWIW, before the season ZiPS pegged Mateo’s median projection at .670 OPS, 89 wRC+.   Now, ZiPS projects the rest of his season (not including the games already played) at .698 OPS, 97 wRC+.  So, ZiPS believes that at least some of the improvement is real, though not most of it.   With the 17 games already played, that would put Mateo’s full season numbers in the range of .738 OPS, 107 wRC+.   

Small nit, isn't it more accurate to say that ZiPS isn't yet convinced it's all real?

Put another way, the improved projection is based on some positive evidence over a relatively small sample, rather than it being convinced that majority of his performance is smoke and mirrors without much under the hood / underlying the performance.

[bluedog]

2 minutes ago, btdart20 said:

Non-Mateo guys can be discussed for that next tier down.  This is where Pepiot, Grove, Jackson, etc. would be discussed for someone like Ortiz.  But I like Ortiz's upside and floor over those back-end starters.  Nor would those guys really move the needle in our rotation IMO.  If you want surety, this tier isn't on your shopping list.  Especially with the magic LAD work with their SPs.  Not sure we can squeeze any more juice out these fruit than LAD has already.

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. 

[NCRaven]

3 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I would want Miller and Stone back for him, and I'd still be really scared we're trading away Alphonso Soriano.  

There's no way the Dodgers would give up both Miller and Stone for Mateo.  Pick one and add another prospect on our end then...maybe.

[RZNJ]

23 minutes ago, bluedog said:

Agreed. Mateo for Pepiot then.

Who wants to reach out to Elias and tell him we've approved this trade?

What am I missing?   Pepiot walked 27 in 36  innings last year with a 5.42 FIP and turns 26 this summer.  Mateo was a 3.5 WAR SS last year and looks to be on his way to beating that this year.   

[HakunaSakata]

2 hours ago, PeteCanes said:

You’d be happy with that package?  I’d be appalled 

I didn't dig into it too deep, but the BTV was pretty close. 

[MarCakes21]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Well, he was a 3.5 rWAR player last year despite his paltry offensive numbers, so it’s not like the Dodgers would be acquiring a player whose only value was derived from a three-week heater.  But obviously the return from the trade would partially depend on whether the Dodgers (and the Orioles) believe that Mateo’s offensive improvement is at least partially sustainable.

FWIW, before the season ZiPS pegged Mateo’s median projection at .670 OPS, 89 wRC+.   Now, ZiPS projects the rest of his season (not including the games already played) at .698 OPS, 97 wRC+.  So, ZiPS believes that at least some of the improvement is real, though not most of it.   With the 17 games already played, that would put Mateo’s full season numbers in the range of .738 OPS, 107 wRC+.   

Yes, but math says that if he played 140 more games at 89wRC+, it'd come out to a season long wRC+ of 99.  So really not much of an improvement.  Maybe they're now thinking he's a 90wRC+ player.

[maybenxtyr]

54 minutes ago, bluedog said:

Agreed.

In Ootp24, I had to package a quality prospect with Frazier to get any other team to consider taking his shitty contract off my hands. Unless he starts putting up a monster season, if we want to move Frazier (or McCann) we'll have to eat their salary and / or take back even crappier contracts to do it.

I think if Frazier or McCann were on any other team that was competing at the deadline the best case scenario 3eother would be DFA if they had better options to replace them. Neither of them have any value in a trade

[Bemorewins]

1 minute ago, btdart20 said:

Agreed.  I did say LAD likely would not trade Miller or Stone.  But those would be the only potential TOR types in LA who "could" add value this year.  Beyond that, I have no interest in any of the other minor league options for Mateo.  The question is "How desperate is LA for an ML SS?" for them to be a match for the O's.  But at this point, if they want Mateo, those guys have to be discussed.  How many other ML-established SS with Mateo's ceiling right now has a 10+% chance of being traded?  That market niche has to be pretty small.  Meaning, we're crossing Trea, Bichette, Franco, Bogaerts, Manny, Tatis, Correa, Seager, Pena, Lindor, and quite a few others off the list of potential options.  

Non-Mateo guys can be discussed for that next tier down.  This is where Pepiot, Grove, Jackson, etc. would be discussed for someone like Ortiz.  But I like Ortiz's upside and floor over those back-end starters.  Nor would those guys really move the needle in our rotation IMO.  If you want surety, this tier isn't on your shopping list.  Especially with the magic LAD work with their SPs.  Not sure we can squeeze any more juice out these fruit than LAD has already.

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

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.

[bluedog]

Just now, maybenxtyr said:

I think if Frazier or McCann were on any other team that was competing at the deadline the best case scenario 3eother would be DFA if they had better options to replace them. Neither of them have any value in a trade

I don't disagree with Elias often, but these two moves had me scratching my head. Feels like we didn't need either player and that the payroll flexibility of not signing them would have made it easier to swing more beneficial in season trades with folks like the Dodgers (to get us back on topic!)

[interloper]

I think we as O's fans are probably more desperate to trade someone than the Dodgers are about their SS situation. At any rate, trades won't really be a thing until at least July. 

[btdart20]

3 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. 

Maybe.  But Pepiot isn't a pearl of great cost either.  Stone and Miller are better (and healthy).

[Bemorewins]

9 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. 

Here's the thing with that Lopez trade, IMO that was the right move for us then, but would be the wrong move for us now. 

We were not trying to win then, now Adley is on the clock, after this only 4 more seasons of his incredible play.