O's Dilemma with Villar

[Hallas]

27 minutes ago, Philip said:

When Toney made that comment, I think he was emphasizing that Villar does well( ie Speed) declines first. He’s not going to get 40 stolen bases next year, although he probably will have a few additional tootblans.

Villar is 29 in May, and the only other season he had more than 2.0 WAR(And he only had that once) the next season he collapsed to a -.4 WAR. This was his career year and you don’t extend a guy on one year, a sad lesson of which Chris Davis is the exemplar.

I just checked his defense, too, and he is a negative defender everywhere, Although I was surprised that he’s best at short, and worst at second, where he was worth -11 DRS. whew...

So no, Don’t extend him, and based on what I just read, I’m not sure you can count on trading him either. But that’s OK, he’s a perfect player for a bad team.

Chris Davis had 2 fantastic years and 1 pretty good year, so I'm not sure he belongs in the discussion of one-season wonders.  As a general rule though, my understanding was that TTO players like Davis age the worst, and players whose games are built around athletic ability age the best.

 

I do believe that aging curves from 20 years ago aren't really the same as they are today for a variety of reasons (pharmaceuticals, teams' reluctance to let 30-something players hang on for a few more years at FA prices...) However, I don't think there's a lot of data supporting the idea that 28 is the new 32.

[mdbdotcom]

45 minutes ago, weams said:

Seriously. That got corrected when the US got serious about identities getting visas. 

Was that around the same time they got all the ballplayers to stop using PEDs?

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

Was that around the same time they got all the ballplayers to stop using PEDs?

Couple years before.

[weams]

17 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

Was that around the same time they got all the ballplayers to stop using PEDs?

Homeland Security is slightly more effective than MLB Executive Offices.

[OrioleDog]

I do think some of the dynamic about the tender choice is odd because he may have played too well for his own good.

Would he still be a happy effective bridge player next year after hearing the club's case if it got to arbitration?  I guess he could be a test case of Elias's barometer in the area of file and trial vs. ongoing negotiations.

A modest trade would be a nice outcome for all.  I guess there's a pretty strong case for his surplus value being there in the market of the last few years, but how radically has the deflation that savaged Adam Jones, etc. rendered the benchmarks arbitrators probably still look at a pot that 2020 clubs don't want to go anywhere near?

I think I want $8M in R&D more than I want Villar on next year's team.  I half think it is a no-brainer in Elias/Sig's mind and that while proprieties will be observed in public statements, some thought is already being given to how a non-tender could be justified to the fanbase.

[spiritof66]

Villar added significant value to the Orioles this year and would be likely to add value next year, albeit maybe less value and at a higher cost. Villar can play 2B or SS, two positions where the Orioles are, to put it mildly, thin. I think it's in the team's interest to have Richie Martin at AAA for most or all of 2010. If the Orioles agree, and if Villar isn't tendered, we'll need a SS and, without an upgrade, will probably stick with Ruiz and/or Nunez (it hurts to type his name in this context) at 3B next year. I don't especially like Villar at SS, but anybody I would like at SS will probably cost more than the ML minimum and be a non-contributor at the bottom of the lineup.

The gap in talent and productivity between Villar and the Orioles' other options at SS/2B this year was large, and that's likely to be the case again in 2020. It's too speculative to forecast either what Villar will do or what the alternatives will be beyond 2021, and I wouldn't extend him now. But I suspect he would be expected to be more valuable (that is, provide an upgrade over the alternatives) to the Orioles next year than he would be expected to be to virtually every other ML teams. I know there are plenty of fans who don't care about optimizing the performance of next year's team, or think that would be counter-productive because of the potential effect on the Orioles' position in the 2021 amateur draft. I don't see it that way: I'd like to see the 2020 team shoot for 65 wins (a .400 winning percentage), or at least a lead after 7 innings in 65 games before the bullpen screws things up. Villar would help the team win more games in pursuit of a goal like that. 

[sportsfan8703]

25 minutes ago, spiritof66 said:

I'd like to see the 2020 team shoot for 65 wins (a .400 winning percentage), or at least a lead after 7 innings in 65 games before the bullpen screws things up. Villar would help the team win more games in pursuit of a goal like that. 

All that does is drop our draft position out of the top 5. That just hurts our chances to compete in 2023. 

55 ain’t so bad. 

[mdbdotcom]

1 hour ago, weams said:

Homeland Security is slightly more effective than MLB Executive Offices.

Maybe. They just want different things.

[Sessh]

I agree with the sentiment that if we don't bring Villar back next season, our defense and production up the middle is likely to be atrocious. Someone said he's the best 2B on the market, so anything else we do is almost certainly going to be a downgrade and we have no depth at the position he plays really. Maybe he'll be traded, but I don't buy this stuff about how it would be based on one year. As a starter, Villar has put up the following WAR totals:

• 2016: 3.9
• 2017: 0.1
• 2018: 2.7
• 2019: 4.0

In no way would it be based on one year. He had a very similar year in 2016 and he has managed to replicate that success this year, so he has had two seasons like this one so far in the last four. Only one bad year there. No way this would be based on "one year" nor is it even a career year since he basically just equaled his breakout year if WAR is what we're measuring him with. Anyway, if we do deal him, I know Elias will be getting something he feels is of equal value and I'd be ok with that, but are we going to put Martin at SS full time or put some other similar player in there? He'll be only 29 and could certainly steal 40 bags a few more times before he's done. I'd start worrying about the beginning of decline at 33-34, not 31.

[Roll Tide]

4 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

Villar is 28 years old and has a skill set that tends to age pretty well. If the right deal is there then you deal him, but there's no reason Villar can't still be a good player in 2021-22 when it will start to matter. I'm not saying you build around him, but I think it's a no-brainer that he will be tendered and on the team next year if they don't get a great trade offer this offseason.

 

I agree and there would be nothing wrong with a 3 year deal worth $18 million. I think he'd sign for that and he would be good value for a 2 WAR plus player.

[Aristotelian]

3 hours ago, Philip said:

When Toney made that comment, I think he was emphasizing that Villar does well( ie Speed) declines first. He’s not going to get 40 stolen bases next year, although he probably will have a few additional tootblans.

Villar is 29 in May, and the only other season he had more than 2.0 WAR(And he only had that once) the next season he collapsed to a -.4 WAR. This was his career year and you don’t extend a guy on one year, a sad lesson of which Chris Davis is the exemplar.

I just checked his defense, too, and he is a negative defender everywhere, Although I was surprised that he’s best at short, and worst at second, where he was worth -11 DRS. whew...

So no, Don’t extend him, and based on what I just read, I’m not sure you can count on trading him either. But that’s OK, he’s a perfect player for a bad team.

I think you are missing that he put up 2.6 WAR split between the O's and Brewers last year. The -.4 WAR year is by far the outlier. He is a bargain even if he is a 2 WAR player. I don't think anyone is talking about extending him. Plan A is to trade him now. Plan B is tender him and hope that his value continues to increase.

[BohKnowsBmore]

4 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

If the O's really non-tender a 4 WAR guy over $9M, they really could justly be accused of tanking. Jim Johnson is not a good comparison as he was coming off 1.3 WAR and career high of 2.6 WAR.

I think the most likely outcome is trading him before the arb deadline. Tender and hope to trade later is risky but with some potential upside if he continues to build value. I don't see any way we let him walk with nothing back.

As you mention, Not really a good comparison. Johnson was (1) more expensive in nominal dollars, (2) over five years ago (so even more in real dollars), (3) for an older player (30 in his last season with Os before trade), (4) that was coming off a significantly less valuable/worse season than Villar. 

[Yossarian]

They should keep him around to teach the young up-and-comers how to run the bases.

[connja]

2nd base seems to are the only position they haven't tried out Mountcastle, which surprises me a bit since the word is that it's his arm that doesn't play at 3rd and SS.  Why haven't they tried him at 2nd, which would help to ease the corner OF/1B/DH log jam.

[DrungoHazewood]

4 hours ago, Hallas said:

Is there any evidence that modern aging curves are accelerated to the point where a player is starting their decline at 28 instead of 30-31?  I always thought that the -0.5 wins a year aging applied more to players that are 31+, not 28 year olds.

That was more of a vague approximation.  But I don't really like the idea of signing a pretty good player into his early-to-mid 30s at free agent rates.  Maybe it's Brian Roberts.