338 replies to this topic

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Stowers back in the lineup tonight

[DuffMan]

If/when we see Stowers where does he fit in the lineup and field?  DH, 1st, and RF are all occupied.  I guess if we wind up dealing Santander that would open up RF for him, but is that something the O's want to do?

[BobPhelan]

If/when we see Stowers where does he fit in the lineup and field? DH, 1st, and RF are all occupied. I guess if we wind up dealing Santander that would open up RF for him, but is that something the O's want to do?

He’s at least a major league average corner outfielder and can play CF in a pinch so it would have to be with an injury or trade of Hays or more likely Santander. But yeah I think the plan is to trade Santander before the deadline to open up a spot for Stowers.

[DuffMan]

He’s at least a major league average corner outfielder and can play CF in a pinch so it would have to be with an injury or trade of Hays or more likely Santander. But yeah I think the plan is to trade Santander before the deadline to open up a spot for Stowers.

Santander is playing well but all I've been thinking so far is trade him before he gets hurt again.

[BSLChrisStoner]

How about trading Mancini, and Santander can DH?

[Mackus]

If/when we see Stowers where does he fit in the lineup and field?  DH, 1st, and RF are all occupied.  I guess if we wind up dealing Santander that would open up RF for him, but is that something the O's want to do?

 

LF if Hays is hurt or demoted.  RF if Santander is hurt or traded.  RF is Mancini is traded.

 

Hays and Santander get hurt a lot, so that's the quickest route for Stowers.  Without an injury, he's likely waiting until July.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Balt Sun: As Kyle Stowers pushes for a debut with the Orioles, the path into Baltimore’s talented outfield is tough to find

[BSLRoseKatz]

Got his first hit last night and it was a 106.3 mph double 

 

https://twitter.com/...526517714427905

[Mike B]

Got his first hit last night and it was a 106.3 mph double 

 

https://twitter.com/...526517714427905

Also his first career RBI.

It must be cool for the family to be there.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Thought it was really cool that his first hit brought in his fellow MiL Co-Player of the year to score.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Balt Sun: Kyle Stowers’ stint with the Orioles might be temporary, but he’s learned how to make a good impression

[makoman]

We kinda forget about this guy I think, or maybe take him for granted, talking about Gunnar and Westburg and the trade deadline and whatnot (no posts in more than a month!). But he still has a .253/.351/.530 .881 OPS with a 129 wRC+ at AAA. And that's an .894 OPS and 131 wRC+ since June 1st so just as good lately as the rest of the year. 17 HR and 43 extra base hits in 77 games (yes age, but Gunnar for example has 16 HR and 40 XBH in 84 games). I'm happy for him to come up whenever something happens with Santander/Mancini.

[TwentyThirtyFive]

Better defensively than Santander too. Santander can go away ASAP

[BSLRoseKatz]

I feel like a common argument for trading away Santander or Mancini is that you need to make room for Stowers but I feel like you can also just rotate a day off for the two DHs/3 OFs to keep everyone and give yourself a pretty solid bench option to pinch-hit

 

[Mackus]

Then you're losing Rutschman whenever he doesn't catch.  And one off-day a week is too much for Mullins and Hays, IMO.

[mweb08]

Then you're losing Rutschman whenever he doesn't catch.  And one off-day a week is too much for Mullins and Hays, IMO.

 

Agreed.

 

I think there is one other player that I'd consider parting with to create room other than Santander and Mancini: Ryan Mountcastle. 

 

This is more likely an offseason type of move and ideally his numbers improve this year to improve his trade value. 

 

I'd consider this because he should have the most trade value by a fair amount out of the group due to his cost, age, and perceived potential so he could be used in a deal for a starting pitcher or for a masher that a team is parting with in favor of cheaper talent. Additionally, I think he and Mancini are likely to be pretty close in production over the next 3 seasons and while Trey will be more expensive, that does not really matter much given the payroll outlook over that time. That payroll flexibility should be taken advantage of and one way to do that is by leveraging the value that low-cost team-controlled players have and replacing them with comparable and better more expensive players.

 

Now I suspect most won't like this idea, which is fine. If you are a big Mountcastle believer, then this idea doesn't make sense. If you think he's more or less what he's been to date (114 career OPS+) or even a little better than that, then I think this idea has merit. I myself am not even sure where I fall in the Mountcastle believer spectrum. 

[BSLChrisStoner]

It's not an idea without merit; and I do think Mancini will provide production over the next 3 years... but I do think Mountcastle will be better.  How much better is a reasonable question.   




 

[BSLSteveBirrer]

Over the next 3 years Mountcastle will cost much less than Mancini. While they certainly can afford to have both around if its one or the other then keep Mountcastle and put that money toward a good SP.

[BSLChrisStoner]

Over the next 3 years Mountcastle will cost much less than Mancini. While they certainly can afford to have both around if its one or the other then keep Mountcastle and put that money toward a good SP.

I agree with this.  

If the decision is keeping either Mountcastle or Mancini... and the thought process is trading Mountcastle because he'd bring a larger return...  and that you can afford whatever Mancini would get salary wise....  I'd just assume keep Mountcastle who I think will be better, and use the salary difference to help sign a better pitcher. 

[mweb08]

Over the next 3 years Mountcastle will cost much less than Mancini. While they certainly can afford to have both around if its one or the other then keep Mountcastle and put that money toward a good SP.

 

Yes he will cost much less, but I don't see how that's going to matter from a team building perspective if the faucet is going to be turned on like it should be and like many on here are saying it will be. 

 

The amount of money available toward payroll over the next 3 years should be astronomical, to the point where the difference in salaries between Mancini and Mountcastle is highly unlikely to matter other than lining ownership's pockets, meaning that difference should not prevent anything else from being accomplished. 

 

So again, leverage this incredible ability to take on payroll. It doesn't have to be with this specific move, but it should be done in various ways. They gain nothing in terms of building a contender by valuing cheaper players over the next few years.