Will the O’s trade away a position player before Opening Day?

[interloper]

3 hours ago, waroriole said:

I said no, but I wonder if we see Mateo moved. He didn’t play CF at all last week, despite Mullins being out. There’s not many starts available for him at SS. Only if they wanted to sit Gunnar against a tough LH (5-10 times per year). Unless they move Gunnar around to 3B, there’s nowhere for Mateo to play. It’s nice to have depth, but if the #1 prospect also plays SS we should have it covered. 

This is kind of the #1 curiosity of the spring for me. So much was said about Mateo getting OF time and they just have completely backtracked on that for some reason. Either they don't like what they see from him out there in practices, or they know exactly what they're doing with the outfield, or... I don't know, really! It's odd. 

[Aristotelian]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

And so can Westburg or Urias if needed. May not be great options but in an injury during the game or a start or 2 situation, you will be fine.

Mateo only makes sense to be on the roster if Holliday isn’t and you plan on playing Mateo vs lefties. (Which he doesn’t hit well either)

If Mateo backs up CF as well as SS, that eliminates the need for a McKenna type 5th OF. That would allow us to carry an extra bat like Mayo or Kjerstad. 

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Aristotelian said:

If Mateo backs up CF as well as SS, that eliminates the need for a McKenna type 5th OF. That would allow us to carry an extra bat like Mayo or Kjerstad. 

Explain to me why we need Mateo to be a back up CFer if Hays and Cowser are on the team?

[foxfield]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Explain to me why we need Mateo to be a back up CFer if Hays and Cowser are on the team?

We don’t. But we might if Mullins starts the season on Injured list…

[interloper]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Explain to me why we need Mateo to be a back up CFer if Hays and Cowser are on the team?

We don't, but why did they talk such a big game about giving Mateo time in the OF, only to not? What's he got out there, like 1 or 2 games at most this spring? 

[DirtyBird]

Just now, interloper said:

We don't, but why did they talk such a big game about giving Mateo time in the OF, only to not? What's he got out there, like 1 or 2 games at most this spring? 

Because they want him on the team for his baserunning in late game situations. And. they were most likely looking for another role he could fill defensively, since his infield spots are pretty well occupied. 

"They" didn't talk that big of a game about it. The board just made a big deal about it.

[forphase1]

4 minutes ago, interloper said:

We don't, but why did they talk such a big game about giving Mateo time in the OF, only to not? What's he got out there, like 1 or 2 games at most this spring? 

For some unknown reason they LOVE Mateo, and were stretching for any justification to keep him on the roster.  With the infield getting more and more crowed with Holliday and Mayo needing spots. having him back up Mullins in CF was partly their reasoning behind keeping/tendering Mateo.  Why they have apparently gotten away from that, I'm not sure.  It never made much sense to me in the first place, other than the possible roster spot savings by not having another possible CF on the roster.  I'd rather have Cowser be the backup for Mullins if needed.  

[Aristotelian]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Explain to me why we need Mateo to be a back up CFer if Hays and Cowser are on the team?

True, we don't really. But I think it's good to have one defensive sub guy with only nine hitting spots. Plus the running game. I think he would have more uses than Urias and would be better at them. But if there were more interest in Mateo I also wouldn't hesitate to trade him. 

[interloper]

3 minutes ago, DirtyBird said:

Because they want him on the team for his baserunning in late game situations. And. they were most likely looking for another role he could fill defensively, since his infield spots are pretty well occupied. 

"They" didn't talk that big of a game about it. The board just made a big deal about it.

I mean there are quotes from Hyde about playing him out there. Maybe the media ran with the super utility thing a bit too much. Just seems like Hyde said he was going to play him out there, and then just hasn't. It's fine, I'd rather they not honestly. Just kind of odd is all. 

[DirtyBird]

17 minutes ago, forphase1 said:

For some unknown reason they LOVE Mateo, and were stretching for any justification to keep him on the roster.  With the infield getting more and more crowed with Holliday and Mayo needing spots. having him back up Mullins in CF was partly their reasoning behind keeping/tendering Mateo.  Why they have apparently gotten away from that, I'm not sure.  It never made much sense to me in the first place, other than the possible roster spot savings by not having another possible CF on the roster.  I'd rather have Cowser be the backup for Mullins if needed.  

It’s not an unknown reason. He can impact late inning situations in a way that could win you at least 3 extra games in a season.

Does his lack of hitting on the roster vs another potential bench option cost you that many games?

[D&B]

With the Dodgers playing Betts at SS we should be shopping Mateo to them for any minor league prospect 

[Sports Guy]

29 minutes ago, foxfield said:

We don’t. But we might if Mullins starts the season on Injured list…

He’s playing this week.

[Sports Guy]

28 minutes ago, interloper said:

We don't, but why did they talk such a big game about giving Mateo time in the OF, only to not? What's he got out there, like 1 or 2 games at most this spring? 

Well, I’m not sure they talked a big game..they wanted to try him out there but square peg round hole stuff doesn’t make sense. 
 

As I said the other day, they are doing everything they can to keep a 600 OPs guy on the team. It just makes no sense.

[Sports Guy]

22 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

True, we don't really. But I think it's good to have one defensive sub guy with only nine hitting spots. Plus the running game. I think he would have more uses than Urias and would be better at them. But if there were more interest in Mateo I also wouldn't hesitate to trade him. 

You have a 4 man bench. That role for Mateo is a complete waste of a bench spot.

[DirtyBird]

10 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

You have a 4 man bench. That role for Mateo is a complete waste of a bench spot.

Not as much of a waste as a roster with Kjerstad AND O’Hearn