MLB Offseason Moves/Rumor Thread

[Roll Tide]

18 minutes ago, foxfield said:

You sound like you are worried about the ranking of prospects.  I don't care about perceived value.   I care about the talent on the field and in the system.  And I care about how successfully they manage the coming transactions and to that...perceived value does of course have importance.

But if Santander has little trade value...or Mountcastle...or anyone else who is going to be gone in a short amount of time, then they will need to be replaced with someone as good or better in order to remain competitive.  You know that.  I know that.

What I don't believe is that there is a sell by date on any of the specific people currently on the roster or in the minor leagues today.  Letting all of the current roster folks just leave would not be ideal, but I am also not going to waste time criticizing something that hasn't happened yet.  IF Adley or Gunnar do not sign long term deals, at some point they will have a sell by date.  Not today and not next year.

As to the prospects, I think the outcome is much more complex than you and others make it.  There are more bodies than we can play today.  Everyone sees that.  But that is what happens when an organization amasses a strong pipeline of talent.  These problems...as you see them will be solved by action or ultimately in a worst case scenario, by inaction.  But that assumes that no moves are ever made.  

I just do not see that as being the most likely path forward. And because of that I am not afraid that this issue wasn't solved yesterday.

 

A 23 year old prospect is more valuable than a 26 year old getting his 1st year in the bigs. Do 27 year old players still show up on prospect list They certainly have a shelf life. It doesn’t make sense to keep a guy that mastered AAA down any longer than is necessary. When they are 25 & 26 of you don’t have room get maximum in value by replacing them with prospects that will be ready later. 

[Sports Guy]

17 minutes ago, foxfield said:

You sound like you are worried about the ranking of prospects.  I don't care about perceived value.   I care about the talent on the field and in the system.  And I care about how successfully they manage the coming transactions and to that...perceived value does of course have importance.

But if Santander has little trade value...or Mountcastle...or anyone else who is going to be gone in a short amount of time, then they will need to be replaced with someone as good or better in order to remain competitive.  You know that.  I know that.

What I don't believe is that there is a sell by date on any of the specific people currently on the roster or in the minor leagues today.  Letting all of the current roster folks just leave would not be ideal, but I am also not going to waste time criticizing something that hasn't happened yet.  IF Adley or Gunnar do not sign long term deals, at some point they will have a sell by date.  Not today and not next year.

As to the prospects, I think the outcome is much more complex than you and others make it.  There are more bodies than we can play today.  Everyone sees that.  But that is what happens when an organization amasses a strong pipeline of talent.  These problems...as you see them will be solved by action or ultimately in a worst case scenario, by inaction.  But that assumes that no moves are ever made.  

I just do not see that as being the most likely path forward. And because of that I am not afraid that this issue wasn't solved yesterday.

 

It has zero to do with the ranking of them. But the facts are when you hold guys and they become “old” and they don’t have experience at the Ml level, their value will decline. And that’s before talking about any further exposure to make them worse or injuries..not to mention they just run out of options and you don’t have anything else to Do with them.

The Os have plenty of players to replace guys. They are also about to get what is essentially 3 first round picks. The Intl market is starting to give us hope and the team drafts and develops very well.  In other words, the last thing we should be worried about is replacing talent that we trade. This organization has proven that it can do that.

What the focus should be on, and solely on, is winning a title. That’s it. That’s why you play. Worrying about losing 3 of 4 of your top 12 prospect isn’t something we should be concerned about, provided that they are moved in a deal that makes the ML team obviously better.  That is the focus.  The focus shouldn’t be, let’s make sure we have good depth in 2-3 years. That depth is going to be there and if you worry about that, that tells me you are questioning Elias and his program.

 

[LTO's]

4 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

Instead I'd rather trade out of this needlessly deep depth and either get multiple pieces that are further away or an upgrade to the ML OD roster.

First of all, there is no such thing as "needlessly deep" depth. It would be nice if they were able to get an upgrade to the ML roster but there has to be a partner. I think people are massively overestimating how many teams are out there begging to have Cowser, Norby and Ortiz. So you're either giving up that depth for peanuts or trading them for lower level prospects which makes no sense and is never going to happen.  

[RZNJ]

Michael Busch repeated AAA at age 25, improved his ranking on most outlets a d was traded for a high upside LHP in Jackson Ferris a few weeks ago.  Busch is now 26.   It's all a out other teams perceptions.  Is anyone dumb enough to think Joey Ortiz is less talented if he's 6 months older.  

[deward]

2 hours ago, emmett16 said:

There are a lot of injustices in the world, and that sure as hell ain’t one of them. 

Injustice is a strong word, but it would be fair for some of the players (I'm thinking here particularly of Stowers and Ortiz) to feel a little frustrated with their current lot in life. If you or I feel like we're being underpaid or not given the opportunities we desire at our current job, we always have the option of trying our luck elsewhere. Those guys can't (yet). It's easy for us to sit in our armchairs and debate the wisdom of allowing them to lose trade value as they age out of the "prospect" phase of their careers, but what they're actually losing is time and earnings that they can't get back (assuming they spend 2024 in Norfolk). I know it isn't Elias' job to worry about that, but there's no reason not to acknowledge the human impact of these decisions. 

[Otter]

3 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Michael Busch repeated AAA at age 25, improved his ranking on most outlets a d was traded for a high upside LHP in Jackson Ferris a few weeks ago.  Busch is now 26.   It's all a out other teams perceptions.  Is anyone dumb enough to think Joey Ortiz is less talented if he's 6 months older.  

Yes, that's true.  However, professional athletes have a small window of peak physical ability and they know they need to maximize those peak years for the benefit of their career and money making opportunities.  If we hold onto a prospect until he's 27-28 and then eventually release him or leave him unprotected in the Rule V, his value is greatly diminished and he will be less likely to get a legit shot with another team than if he was 24-25.  You pointed out one good exception, but a few exceptions don't disprove the general rule that age is a factor in how teams look at prospects and their value.

[Sports Guy]

6 minutes ago, Otter said:

Yes, that's true.  However, professional athletes have a small window of peak physical ability and they know they need to maximize those peak years for the benefit of their career and money making opportunities.  If we hold onto a prospect until he's 27-28 and then eventually release him or leave him unprotected in the Rule V, his value is greatly diminished and he will be less likely to get a legit shot with another team than if he was 24-25.  You pointed out one good exception, but a few exceptions don't disprove the general rule that age is a factor in how teams look at prospects and their value.

And not only that but the reverse can happen. Yea it worked for Busch. What if Ortiz isn’t traded and has a subpar 2024?  
 

Not all guys develop at the same time. Some guys peak earlier, some peak later. Maybe Ortiz has a shoulder or arm injury that ends up making him move to second and now the SS aspect of his game is gone..further dropping his value. 
 

We have talked about how hanging on to Cease doesn’t make a lot of sense because of injury and regression potential but yet many of those same people don’t want to talk about the same thing happening to our prospects.

[RZNJ]

Ortiz could lose value, retain value, or get called up to replace an injured Henderson or Westburg, play well and greatly increase his value.  It could go lots of different ways.  Why just assume he's going to lose value.  If he's in Norfolk,  which I doubt. he's providing value to the Orioles.

[interloper]

5 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Ortiz could lose value, retain value, or get called up to replace an injured Henderson or Westburg, play well and greatly increase his value.  It could go lots of different ways.  Why just assume he's going to lose value.  If he's in Norfolk,  which I doubt. he's providing value to the Orioles.

Agreed overall, although I think it's slightly too early to say it's doubtful he'll be in AAA. It would take a trade or injury to Urias, Mateo, Henderson, or Westburg. Right now, as the roster stands, Ortiz is slated for AAA. There are no obvious DFA'able guys with Mateo being owed close to $3 million. 

[sportsfan8703]

We can’t say “needlessly deep” farm system when we don’t spend FA money, haven’t given any extensions out, have a MLB OF to replace, will be drafting at the end of the rd 1, haven’t drafted pitching yet, and just now appear to be average in int’l signings. 

Stowers - Santa is a FA. We probably have to trade Mullins and Hays this offseason. 

Ortiz - he replaces Mateo and Urias on the MLB roster. That’s salary savings at worst. 

Norby - a RH bat to pair with all of our LH bats at various positions. 

[sportsfan8703]

If Wells is in the rotation then I worry about our RH relief options. I guess Adam Ottavino at 4.5 million was too expensive of a security blanket. We’re putting a lot of trust in Webb, Baumann, Tate, ans Baker. 

[foxfield]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

It has zero to do with the ranking of them. But the facts are when you hold guys and they become “old” and they don’t have experience at the Ml level, their value will decline. And that’s before talking about any further exposure to make them worse or injuries..not to mention they just run out of options and you don’t have anything else to Do with them.

The Os have plenty of players to replace guys. They are also about to get what is essentially 3 first round picks. The Intl market is starting to give us hope and the team drafts and develops very well.  In other words, the last thing we should be worried about is replacing talent that we trade. This organization has proven that it can do that.

What the focus should be on, and solely on, is winning a title. That’s it. That’s why you play. Worrying about losing 3 of 4 of your top 12 prospect isn’t something we should be concerned about, provided that they are moved in a deal that makes the ML team obviously better.  That is the focus.  The focus shouldn’t be, let’s make sure we have good depth in 2-3 years. That depth is going to be there and if you worry about that, that tells me you are questioning Elias and his program.

 

Again, if the Orioles are playing a 27 year old Ortiz in two years and he does the job, I could care less about his age.  I am not worried about replacing talent.  On the field or via a trade.  I am worried about putting the best team on the field.  If the Orioles are stockpiling 30 year old "career" prospects with no ML experience, then I will be worried.  What you are calling an immediate problem, is the everyday life of the GM of the Dodgers.  

Talent isn't a wad of cash in the pocket you either spend or lose.  You can deploy assets to get what you want on the field just as easily as you can spend them in a trade.  I am not advocating for holding on to everyone.  I am simply saying the handwringing over this as an immediate problem today is poorly focused worry.

If Elias trades 6 guys tomorrow....I will assume he has found assets he has decided are worth the risk...and I will be ok with that too.  These are ongoing challenges, and they are challenges that come with the acquisition of deep talent.  The result of which affords him the luxury of patience.  In spite of the higher stakes.  If no moves are made today...then my presumption is there was no deal worthy of making.

The Ravens made many plays yesterday.  But the execution was not as sharp as the Chiefs.   I am less concerned with making plays....and more concerned with good execution.  

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, foxfield said:

Again, if the Orioles are playing a 27 year old Ortiz in two years and he does the job, I could care less about his age.  I am not worried about replacing talent.  On the field or via a trade.  I am worried about putting the best team on the field.  If the Orioles are stockpiling 30 year old "career" prospects with no ML experience, then I will be worried.  What you are calling an immediate problem, is the everyday life of the GM of the Dodgers.  

Talent isn't a wad of cash in the pocket you either spend or lose.  You can deploy assets to get what you want on the field just as easily as you can spend them in a trade.  I am not advocating for holding on to everyone.  I am simply saying the handwringing over this as an immediate problem today is poorly focused worry.

If Elias trades 6 guys tomorrow....I will assume he has found assets he has decided are worth the risk...and I will be ok with that too.  These are ongoing challenges, and they are challenges that come with the acquisition of deep talent.  The result of which affords him the luxury of patience.  In spite of the higher stakes.  If no moves are made today...then my presumption is there was no deal worthy of making.

The Ravens made many plays yesterday.  But the execution was not as sharp as the Chiefs.   I am less concerned with making plays....and more concerned with good execution.  

The problem with your thinking is you only want to look at the positive side of things. You can’t do that.  Sure, they may play for us or they may increase their value but you have to look at things right now and say, what are the odds?

Right now, the Os have a clear and obvious need…a need Elias has said is a need and one that has said he is trying to fill through trades. 
 

Knowing that and knowing you have real options, you have to attack these things with the thought that the 24-26 year old prospects are going to lose luster.  If you assume they are better, you continue to be afraid to lose them. You have to have the mindset that if we lose them, so be it..we will replace them. Have the mindset of we can’t play everyone. Have the mindset of, we don’t draft pitching and we need it now, so use what you have to get what you need.

[waroriole]

2 hours ago, Otter said:

It's just as silly for you to cite incredibly small sample sizes of Stowers and Ortiz hitting poorly.  Yes, the logjam will work itself out somehow, but the question is will it work out in a way that maximizes our assets (either by giving them legit major league opportunities or trading them while they still have value).  None of us know the answer to that question right now, but I do think Elias needs to do something about this good problem this offseason or by the trade deadline.

Stowers has 131 PAs and has put up a .597 OPS for his career. Ideally, he’d get more time to show what he can do in MLB but not when a team is trying to win. It may not be “fair”, but it’s hardly an injustice that teams want to see you hit right away when called up. 

[RZNJ]

1 hour ago, interloper said:

Agreed overall, although I think it's slightly too early to say it's doubtful he'll be in AAA. It would take a trade or injury to Urias, Mateo, Henderson, or Westburg. Right now, as the roster stands, Ortiz is slated for AAA. There are no obvious DFA'able guys with Mateo being owed close to $3 million. 

I doubt he’ll be in AAA.  Meaning, I think either he’s traded (50%),  Mateo or Urias is traded (25%), or he starts the year at Norfolk (25%).