Jump to content
Greg Pappas

Jonathan Villar- Our new 2B?

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Maybe the trade deadline was affecting him?  He’s been on fire since he knew he was staying put. 

The ship has sailed, but I think we should’ve claimed Galvis off waivers. He mashes against the Orioles.

Right now we’re looking at Ruiz/Peterson, Villar, Alberto in the IF next year. 

He's been a solid 2 WAR guy all season. He's gotten hot enough to maybe hit 3 WAR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/22/2019 at 12:52 PM, wildcard said:

 Hanser's arm is not strong at 3B.  Its better used at 2B.    He can backup a 3B but I don't think it should be where he gets most of his playing time.

From what I have read his shoulder surgery in 2017 cost him some arm strength.

Alberto’s defense is bad everywhere. He’s only playable if he continues to hit like he has been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

He's been a solid 2 WAR guy all season. He's gotten hot enough to maybe hit 3 WAR.

Considering he’s at 2.8 rWAR right now, I’d say 3 WAR is more likely than not.    He just needs to avoid a deep slump.    He’s on pace for 3.5.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Considering he’s at 2.8 rWAR right now, I’d say 3 WAR is more likely than not.    He just needs to avoid a deep slump.    He’s on pace for 3.5.   

And yet no one wanted him at the deadline. That’s a genuine conundrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Philip said:

And yet no one wanted him at the deadline. That’s a genuine conundrum.

We don’t know that nobody wanted him.   We know nobody offered something that Elias wanted to take.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Frobby said:

We don’t know that nobody wanted him.   We know nobody offered something that Elias wanted to take.   

Yes I suppose that’s my basic point, but I also think it is probable that Mike did not over value him. I don’t think he put an unreasonably high value on him, and what he was wanting in return was reasonable. I don’t know what reasonable is, but I think it is more likely that no one was interested rather than people were interested and the price was too high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Philip said:

Yes I suppose that’s my basic point, but I also think it is probable that Mike did not over value him. I don’t think he put an unreasonably high value on him, and what he was wanting in return was reasonable. I don’t know what reasonable is, but I think it is more likely that no one was interested rather than people were interested and the price was too high.

I would think what Mike wanted for Villar was someone that with a decent chance of helping the O's when they are contenders and to assume the rest of Villar contract for this season.   A decent prospect.  And I don't think he was offered that or he would have made the deal IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I would think what Mike wanted for Villar was someone that with a decent chance of helping the O's when they are contenders and to assume the rest of Villar contract for this season.   A decent prospect.  And I don't think he was offered that or he would have made the deal IMO.

Yes I think that’s entirely likely. That’s reasonable and nobody was interested.

villar drives me nuts but he is still a solid player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Villar now has been worth almost twice as much WAR as Mancini this year. Despite the weaknesses, he’s really been the Orioles best position player this year. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wildcard said:

I would think what Mike wanted for Villar was someone that with a decent chance of helping the O's when they are contenders and to assume the rest of Villar contract for this season.   A decent prospect.  And I don't think he was offered that or he would have made the deal IMO.

Sounds about right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Philip said:

And yet no one wanted him at the deadline. That’s a genuine conundrum.

None of the contending teams wanted him. Unfortunately at least one of the best fits for him (Texas) collapsed just before the deadline.  I think we could see some interest in the off-season. I would be surprised if he is non tendered. Can anyone think of comparable 3+ WAR players to get non tendered?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

None of the contending teams wanted him. Unfortunately at least one of the best fits for him (Texas) collapsed just before the deadline.  I think we could see some interest in the off-season. I would be surprised if he is non tendered. Can anyone think of comparable 3+ WAR players to get non tendered?

He was never getting nontendered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

None of the contending teams wanted him. Unfortunately at least one of the best fits for him (Texas) collapsed just before the deadline.  I think we could see some interest in the off-season. I would be surprised if he is non tendered. Can anyone think of comparable 3+ WAR players to get non tendered?

Earlier in the summer, I did not think he would be tender to contract, but now I think he will be. I’m not sure anybody wants him. He will certainly The more expensive once he is tendered because then the new team would be responsible for his arbitration raise. So it’s pretty likely that he’ll stay with us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







  • Posts

    • Just don't give away tomatoes to the fans. 
    • I use cbd on occasion. It does seem to help me fall asleep, but doesn’t help with waking up wide awake a few hours later. 
    • I voted Mancini but I could have gone with Villar as well. I think Villar's lack of effort occasionally and base paths blunders is what shaded me towards Mancini for MVO. Saying that, if Villar did receive it I would not be upset as he clearly has the best WAR despite being forced to play out of position at SS a lot this year.
    • I think when he team is ready to win again if Davis is not preforming in a helpful manner then he  needs to go.   I don't see the O's being at that point yet.   Maybe in another year.    Players get hurt all the time.  As a bench player Davis can step in for them.   Also there are a lot of unproven players that the league may adjust to and they will may be sent down.  (see Mullins, not for Davis but because he is a example of an unproven player that needed to go down)    Davis may find playing time for those players also.   The 26th man makes it easier to keep Davis on the 26 man roster.
    • I have a lot of disconnected, disorganized thoughts on this subject.  I like Tony's suggestions, or at least the acknowledgment of the idea that there are alternate ways of developing players that might be more efficient or at least more cost-effective. A few points: - I've never thought that the current setup was optimal, but rather formed by a series of events more related to economics than player development.  In the beginning all minor league teams were just like major league teams except in small cities.  Only in the 1920s, and then accelerating in the 30s because of the Depression, did the majors start buying up the minors and turning them into development squads instead of teams trying to draw fans and win their pennant.  For 50+ years MLB teams didn't have any full-time affiliates.  That was probably less successful at wringing out all the talent, but MLB got along just fine.  The majors wanted to own the minors to keeps costs down.  They got tired of having to pay $100k for Lefty Grove after a protracted negotiation with Oriole owner Jack Dunn.  Much easier if they just owned Jack Dunn and all the rest of the Orioles. - I think one reason for the sprawling system we have today is MLB contracts, options, and related issues.  I think most good prospects would do just fine as part-time major league players at 20 or 22.  They spend that time in the minors because nobody wants to burn service time.  We've convinced ourselves that prospects would stall if they were utility infielders or relievers at 18 or 20.  But we don't know that, in fact we know many successful MLB players did just that in the pre-draft era, and some even became MLB stars as teenagers.  If service time wasn't a thing (for example, if everyone became a free agent at 28), I think lots of players would shoot through the minors in record time.  And there would be much less need for eight levels of affiliates. - Japan has one level of minors.  I don't know that this is seen as any kind of impediment to development.  Ichiro was in the NPB as a teenager.  They do have more teenagers in the NBP than we see in the US.  But they also don't get to free agency until something like eight or nine years in, so they don't care as much about service time. - Mexico, Korea, Taiwan, the rest of the world... no minors at all.  At least in any cases I know of.  Of course they top out at the equivalent of A or AA levels, so not quite the same.  But nobody else has the resources to have huge, sprawling development systems.  Maybe not optimal, but the world doesn't end when you regularly have 18-year-olds playing alongside 36-year-olds.
    • Obviously we are all hyper sensitive to any kind of soreness with Harvey. I do think this thing is bothering him still an the team wants to be ultra careful with him. At 75.2 IP, he is at twice the amount of innings that he threw in 2018 so he may be near the limit that they wanted to get him this year as well.  Honestly, I wouldn't be upset if they just came out and said they were going to shut him down this year. I have him penciled in as the closer next year and only an injury would get in the way of him having success in that role.
    • One, it's against board rules to call people including players and coaches idiots, so consider this your warning. Secondly, you do know that Harvey was a starter at the beginning of the year and had 10 games with 40 or more pitches. After converting to a reliever, he had two minor league innings where he threw 33 pitches in an inning and one in an inning and a third. Harvey is almost 25-years old. While I don't think anyone, including Hyde preferred that he stayed out there that long in one inning, I don't think Hyde was reckless or an idiot for doing so. If he's incapable of throwing a 30 pitch inning when things aren't going great, what is he then? I think your dislike for Hyde is clouding your judgement here. While you are certainly entitled to your opinion of not liking Hyde, you are not entitled to call him an idiot while doing so here on the Hangout.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...