Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
half hop

The Davis Line

Recommended Posts

The traditional futility for hitting is known as the Mendoza Line...200 BA. I suggest this needs to be updated in MLB lore to the Davis Line...167 BA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, UMDTerrapins said:

As an alternative, might I suggest the “Davis Clause”. Every contract should have a minimum performance standard. 

This is for more important, but it will sadly never happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, maybenxtyr said:

This is for more important, but it will sadly never happen.

Hard to imagine the players union ever conceding on this, but it is a pretty bizarre reality to me. You contract an individual on a personal services contract for their unique skill set, and then that player is not able to passably perform the services for which they were contracted. There should be a non-performance mechanism. Players often receive performance incentives, but owners never receive performance minimums. I imagine players could receive higher value contracts if owners didn’t have to solely carry the risk of total loss contracts. Anyhow, Davis has become the standard for disaster contracts. I wouldn’t much care except it adversely affects the ability of the team to remain competitive, which very much affects the fans of that team, and not just the owners. 

Share this post


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

 I wouldn’t much care except it adversely affects the ability of the team to remain competitive

Does it?

It *might* next year, but I doubt it.

It hasn't to date.

Share this post


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

Hard to imagine the players union ever conceding on this, but it is a pretty bizarre reality to me. You contract an individual on a personal services contract for their unique skill set, and then that player is not able to passably perform the services for which they were contracted. There should be a non-performance mechanism. Players often receive performance incentives, but owners never receive performance minimums. I imagine players could receive higher value contracts if owners didn’t have to solely carry the risk of total loss contracts. Anyhow, Davis has become the standard for disaster contracts. I wouldn’t much care except it adversely affects the ability of the team to remain competitive, which very much affects the fans of that team, and not just the owners. 

Owners have the choice not to offer contracts like Davis's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Beef Supreme said:

Owners have the choice not to offer contracts like Davis's.

As far as I have heard only the O's even made him an actual offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Does it?

It *might* next year, but I doubt it.

It hasn't to date.

Right now it seems the O’s wouldn’t be spending even if there was relief from his full contract, but I’m talking more generally. Unless you’re a big market team, having a disaster contract clearly does put you at a competitive disadvantage. Doesn’t mean you can’t still compete, but it makes it more difficult. What % of our payroll is currently going to one player, contracted for his ability to hit a thrown ball who is no longer able to hit a thrown ball? (I honestly don’t know what my point is). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, UMDTerrapins said:

Right now it seems the O’s wouldn’t be spending even if there was relief from his full contract, but I’m talking more generally. Unless you’re a big market team, having a disaster contract clearly does put you at a competitive disadvantage. Doesn’t mean you can’t still compete, but it makes it more difficult. What % of our payroll is currently going to one player, contracted for his ability to hit a thrown ball who is no longer able to hit a thrown ball? (I honestly don’t know what my point is). 

I mean I know what you are saying but git better noob?

Don't sign older players to huge contracts if it will torpedo your team if they don't perform.  Don't take the risk.

All the information was telling the O's to not sign Davis to that contract, they did it anyway.  I can't have sympathy for the owners. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

As far as I have heard only the O's even made him an actual offer.

Duquette had already traded for his Chris Davis replacement in Trumbo until Anglelos (and probably Buck) talked with Davis' agent. 

Share this post


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

As an alternative, might I suggest the “Davis Clause”. Every contract should have a minimum performance standard. 

This is actually a pretty good negotiation tool right there. Has this ever been done? Union would probably 86 it

 

Share this post


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

So 29 owners knew the right thing to do?

Heard from my Detroit Tigers friend that Mike Ilitch was getting ready to sign Chris Davis until getting overruled by his GM. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Beef Supreme said:

So 29 owners knew the right thing to do?

Word is that Boras was trying to talk Ilitch into Davis as an outfielder but his GM convinced him not to make an offer.

Other than that I never heard a word about any team having interest at the number he was asking for.

I'm sure if his number dropped low enough some team other than the Orioles would have been interested, but he would have cost a first round pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, UMDTerrapins said:

Right now it seems the O’s wouldn’t be spending even if there was relief from his full contract, but I’m talking more generally. Unless you’re a big market team, having a disaster contract clearly does put you at a competitive disadvantage. Doesn’t mean you can’t still compete, but it makes it more difficult. What % of our payroll is currently going to one player, contracted for his ability to hit a thrown ball who is no longer able to hit a thrown ball? (I honestly don’t know what my point is). 

MFYs have had numerous examples of big contracts gone bust (the "Fat Toad" comes to mind, LOL). No sweat; just move on to the next.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores
News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2021 Minor League Depth Chart

2021 Prospect Power Rankings

2020 Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2020 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats






×
×
  • Create New...