Jump to content
Frobby

Waiving/non-tendering Villar: pro or con?

Do you approve Elias’ move of waiving Villar?  

120 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Do you agree with putting Villar on waivers?

    • I’m in favor
    • I’m against
    • Don’t know, but I’ll defer to Elias’ judgment

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 11/29/2019 at 04:40

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:

Because if you give something up you get first crack at him. If you wait to free agency, anyone can sign him and someone might pay him more than $10M.

That argument becomes less and less true the more advanced statistics can make players fungible sets of stats.  If they don't get Villar they find other ways to get the same value of runs created.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

The Orioles can afford to pay Villar the $3 million extra! So your argument doesn't hold water. They are choosing not to as they are going to stink and want to pocket the money instead.

After this post, sadly for you every time I read one of your posts I am going to envision Joe Pesci saying it.

And i disagree.  Owners for the most part are rational investors.  While I think small market teams like the Orioles should keep a player like Villar for the chance of trading him for prospects or the draw at the gate, owners of small market teams that would take that path would be operating closer to the margins.  That is something they are unwilling to do and large market teams understand that - thus demand decreases and the market benefits the large market teams.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SteveA said:

It's a guiding principle of the rebuild, so you will keep hearing it for a while.

After 14 years of patching in Jay Paytons and Cesar Izturiss and Mike DeJeans and that ilk to try to turn 63 win teams into 71 win teams (and usually failing to get to 71 wins anyway) I'm still very much on board with this plan.   Build a great farm system from the ground up like Tampa and St Louis has, with great state of the art player development and teaching practices.  Once it's in place you stand a chance of having a winner for a LONG time like the Cardinals have and like the Astros appear to be on their way to having.

I voted no in this particular poll because I think we should be able to get some reasonable amount of return for Villar.   But I'm still on board with the philosophy.

I voted no and I'm completely on board with the philosophy as well, very pointed questions about what the Angelos brothers will actually do once all this sacrifice is finally over and done with notwithstanding .  When guiding principles become rigid doctrine that's when I step to the side and say "wait a minute."  I'm a sports fan (specifically a baseball and high school football fan) not a religious nut or a modern-day political wacko - I'm not on a quest for the One True Path so I'm quite open to alternatives to the scorched earth approach that Houston successfully used a few years back.

"So-and-so won't be here for the next competetive team" is mantra, I'm saying spare me the mantra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are my thoughts on what went down, and why we are at this point with Villar.  For the record I voted I don't know, but I trust Elias' judgment.  I think they slightly miscalculated both the interest he would have in this off season and how much money he would get in arb.  While there may have been deals over the summer for him, none were worth taking.  Elias probably felt that keeping him and hopefully trading him this winter was preferable to trading him over the summer for a 'bag of balls'.  However the market did not materialize over this off season like he'd hoped and now the decision had to be made how much to pay Villar since it didn't appear we could now unload him.  Yeah, maybe this is all a ploy to get those teams that are mildly interested to pony up, but I don't get that feeling.  We are not in a position where it makes sense to overpay for ANY player.  We have no choice but to overpay for Davis, cut him or not.  But we DO have the choice to overpay VIllar or cut ties with him.  Yeah, I know going by WAR even at 10M a year Villar has value.  But he isn't a key part of rebuild, so paying him 10M a year just doesn't make a ton of sense.  In hindsight perhaps we should have taken some marginal prospects over the summer, if that was really offered.  That would have been better than getting nothing or having to overpay (from the Orioles perspective) to keep Villar on the team.  So I think perhaps Elias goofed and misread what the situation would be this winter.  I can see us taking a rule 5 player or two, young ones, and give them the at bats Villar would have gotten.  While it's a roll of the dice, at least those rule 5ers have a chance to be a part of the next good Orioles team, whenever that happens.  Villar doesn't.  

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say we accept Villar doesn't fit into the current timeline and his talent is useless to us.  They still could've kept him and then waited for a decent deal.  If they never got a nice offer, then nothing lost except for some modest money to pay a good baseball player.  The risk is nothing and there's a potential for some return.  I have to think they're incompetent or just want to spend as little money as possible.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, blid said:

Say we accept Villar doesn't fit into the current timeline and his talent is useless to us.  They still could've kept him and then waited for a decent deal.  If they never got a nice offer, then nothing lost except for some modest money to pay a good baseball player.  The risk is nothing and there's a potential for some return.  I have to think they're incompetent or just want to spend as little money as possible.

Its more the latter IMO.   That don't want to spend on players that are not in the long term plan.   They did spend 8m on Rutschman that does not show up on the major league payroll.   They are spending on the future not the present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

The Orioles can afford to pay Villar the $3 million extra! So your argument doesn't hold water. They are choosing not to as they are going to stink and want to pocket the money instead.

It should be apparent that Elias is following the same long slow rebuild process that the Astros followed when Luhnow and company took over the Astros in December 2011.  If you study the Astros during the next few years, they spent spent virtually nothing on major league talent, especially that is not going to be around when their competitive window started in 2015. Once the Astros began their competitive window, they have proven very willing to spend big.

 From Astroball

Jeff Luhnow followed through on his promise to Jim Crane to rid the club of high- priced, underperforming veterans, in order to squirrel away the savings to spend in a future in which they could realistically  hope to compete.

I do have enough confidence in Elias to think that if he lets Villar go for free, it is because other teams are offering very little or nothing. 

There is a ruthlessness to this process that will make it very difficult to be a fan for the next few years.  However, it is more realistic than the the orioles plan for the decade of 2000s which usually involved building around mediocre players coming off of career years and over the hill stars looking for the fountain of youth.

The three most important priorities for the 2019 and 2020 Orioles are

1.  The draft.

2.  Improve and modernize player development 

3.  Develop an in international scouting presence.

At the major league level there may be young players (Hays, Mountcastle etc)  that have a chance to be around when the competitive window starts.  However, other than that, I don't think Elias cares too much about the major team at this point.

  • Upvote 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Enjoy Terror said:

Because if you give something up you get first crack at him. If you wait to free agency, anyone can sign him and someone might pay him more than $10M.

Exactly. I see fits on NL teams that would have to wait for Villar to clear the whole AL first. These teams should have an interest,

Reds - No SS at the moment. They are trying to spend, but haven’t found a FA to take their money. 

Cubs - They have a hole in the middle IF and they are about to possibly non tender Addison Russell. 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a reason that the national media is coming down hard on this move. The orioles have few major league assets and Villar is certainly one of them. The important point is what he is "worth" to a team in 2020. That value is different for a contending team than it is for a rebuilding team.

A contending team is looking for 2020 value on the field and salary matters. Maybe you take a $5 million dollar 2B instead and spend the saved money on other talent for 2020. There are a lot of options--the supply of middle infielders is very high right now.

A rebuilding team values young talent. Let's assume those who say Villar won't be part of the team when it is ready to win are correct. What then is Villar's value? It is not whether he puts up $10 million worth of production or helps a team win 58 games instead of 55. It's trade value. Villar has more value when the supply is lower--either late in the offseason after free agents have signed, or more likely at the deadline when teams become more desperate to improve. If Villar has a good first half, cash in. Worst case, he has a slump--even then a team might take him for baserunning skills. If they get nothing at the deadline, the team has lost roughly $6.5 million for the same return it likely gets by making this move.

If you think the money saved by jettsoning Villar will be re-allocated, I think you might be drinking the orange kool-aid. If this low payroll team needs the Villar money to make that kind of necessary commitment to minor league resources, then I question ownership's desire and ability to do just that. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, POR said:

It should be apparent that Elias is following the same long slow rebuild process that the Astros followed when Luhnow and company took over the Astros in December 2011.  If you study the Astros during the next few years, they spent spent virtually nothing on major league talent, especially that is not going to be around when their competitive window started in 2015. Once the Astros began their competitive window, they have proven very willing to spend big.

 From Astroball

Jeff Luhnow followed through on his promise to Jim Crane to rid the club of high- priced, underperforming veterans, in order to squirrel away the savings to spend in a future in which they could realistically  hope to compete.

I do have enough confidence in Elias to think that if he lets Villar go for free, it is because other teams are offering very little or nothing. 

There is a ruthlessness to this process that will make it very difficult to be a fan for the next few years.  However, it is more realistic than the the orioles plan for the decade of 2000s which usually involved building around mediocre players coming off of career years and over the hill stars looking for the fountain of youth.

The three most important priorities for the 2019 and 2020 Orioles are

1.  The draft.

2.  Improve and modernize player development 

3.  Develop an in international scouting presence.

At the major league level there may be young players (Hays, Mountcastle etc)  that have a chance to be around when the competitive window starts.  However, other than that, I don't think Elias cares too much about the major team at this point.

I appreciate the effort on your post. That doesn't change how I feel about jettisoning our best player for no return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

If the money we save from moving Villar - and any returns we get in terms of players - moves us one day closer to being a contender, I'm all for it.

Giving a talented play up for nothing does nothing to move He needle in that direction. Not one day!

As I mentioned earlier..... The still want the fans to relate to the team and buy tickets.

Its a paltry three million uptick and they could figure out a way to cut it elsewhere.

The potential advantage is that a market could develop due to poor performance, injury, or the desire to upgrade.

There was no real risk to buying more time except a few million and perhaps we might win a few more games

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

    • I could see Buck steering the ship for couple years while the Astros deal with the ramifications of this scandal. I think the last thing the Astros want to do here is go with an unknown quantity. 
    • I know it seems counterintuitive, since there are 27 outs in a game and only 4-5 runs scored on average, so that seems like more like .2 runs per out.    But have a look at this base-out matrix, which shows the expected number of runs scored in an inning depending on which bases are occupied and how many outs there are.   This matrix is based on actual game data, not theory.   https://www.google.com/amp/s/thebaseballscholar.com/2017/08/14/sabermetrics-101-re24/amp/ Let’s take the simplest example, the leadoff batter.    If he grounds out (so now it’s bases empty, one out), the expected runs in the inning are .243.    If he’s safe at first (so runner on first, nobody out), the expected runs are .831.    So, the increase in expected runs between making that play or not is .590.      There are other situations on the chart where the differential is higher or lower than that.    On the high side, let’s say you’ve got runners on 1st and 2nd and one out.    Make a play there to record an out and hold the runners, and the expected runs are only .343.    Fail to make that play and so it’s bases loaded and only one out, and the expected runs increase to 1.520. Anyway, someone did a weighted average of all these scenarios and came up with .6 for an average.    If I remember correctly.       
    • Connolly was and apparently still is literally Buck's PR man, so I'm not surprised by his thoughts on this matter. 
    • Dan Connolly has a good column in The Athletic about it.   He said that a few weeks ago, he would have thought the Astros were the LAST team that would ever consider hiring Buck for the reasons you give.   And that those reasons still exist.   But in terms of taking over leadership of a talented team in crisis, in terms of making sure no further cheating takes place and protecting the integrity moving forward, suddenly he MIGHT be the best guy they could bring in.   It's a good read.
    • I was single for a while in 2010.  4 different women made me watch "He's just not that into you" with them and 1 made me watch "Eat Pray Love".    And I even watched "Sex and the City 2" a couple of times.   Let me tell you Sex and City 2 is not a good movie by anyone's viewpoint.   If I could get through them a wife should be able to make it through a war movie here or there. 
    • I think there is one part of the comparison that is apt. The incident occurred in February, there was a minor penalty issued and no one thought that much more about it.   It wasn't until the VIDEO came out in September that public sentiment exploded and the NFL and the Ravens had to do more. What the Cowboy LB, and the Cincinnati RB when he played at Oklahoma, did was every bit as bad as what Rice did, but there hasn't been quite as much of a public outcry because there's no video of it.   That's not logical, that's emotional. And I think it seems similar with the buzzer thing.   I know a lot of people who were mildly upset when it was whistles and trash can banging, but see the buzzer as being somehow worse.   Logically it isn't any worse, it's basically the same thing, but it certainly seems to invoke a stronger emotional reaction. Human beings aren't always rational.
    • Want to see a really interesting documentary about scandal and cheating watch Icarus. The Russians are still trying to take out or get the Russian whistleblower back. The Russians just got banned again from the Olympics. It is on Netflix.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Popular Now

×
×
  • Create New...