gtown
-
Posts
244 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by gtown
-
-
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:
But that costs five million or so.
Yeah, on a low payoll team. I guess I'm crazy to think the team might want to invest a bit in its own future, rather than putting more $$ in the owners' pockets.
-
6 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:
But significant value?
They got three players fro Schoop in down year. And any value is better than no value (current option).
-
Just now, Can_of_corn said:
At the time Schoop was struggling and the Brewers added Villar as a condition of the trade. The Brewers traded a second baseman/SS for a more expensive second baseman/SS who had a year less team control and was having a down year. They also traded two other players with him.
We have seen no recent evidence that teams covet Villar.
Coming off a 4-win season, it's not a stretch to think that Villar could be the best available 2B at the July deadline. Even if he falls short of that, we have seen contenders trade for much worse players just for their base running skills.
-
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:
They tried to trade him last July.
The Brewers tried to trade him.
The Brewers did trade him as part of a package to get Schoop. At the time, Villar was young talent. At the time, Schoop was coveted.
The Orioles got three players for Schoop. We don't know what the offers were for Villar in July '19, just that Elias wanted more. Villar's strong finish in '19 likely raises that value. And again, any value is better than no value.
-
1 minute ago, Can_of_corn said:
Considering the lack of interest this offseason and last year at the deadline I don't think it is likely that he will have significant value.
Offseason value when supply is high is very different from value in July. Any value in terms of prospects is better than giving him away.
-
1 hour ago, Frobby said:
I’m amazed at the number of people who assume this as if it’s a known fact. I can’t say one way or the other if/how/when the money that would have been spent on Villar will be spent. But at least it’s available.
Available?? The payroll is already low. Come on, don't tell me they can't afford to spend a bit to help the team in the furture.
-
1 hour ago, weams said:
Small market, rebuilding team. It's a formula. This direction was decided upon over a year and two thirds ago. It's just some folks are realizing what decision was made back then. And they would like to fire the owners for it. And that is their right.
How does this possibly fit that formula. Yes, I get it, small market, rebuild. I'm on board with that. What matters to such a team? Young MLB talent, prospects and tradeable assets.
How does putting $10 million in the owners' pockets fit that formula? You're giving away a tradeable asset, one who could reasonably have significant value to a contender in July.
-
Right--10.4M saved...in profit.
Seems worth the risk for a low payroll team. -
Just now, weams said:
Which deadline. Next year? What if he is bad or injured?
So the worst case scenario--getting nothing--is exactly the same as losing him for nothing now.
-
1
-
-
Just now, weams said:
The league evidently thinks he is not in his 10.4 million dollar prime.
Which is why you trade him at the deadline and not in the offseason when teams have other potential options at 2B.
-
4 hours ago, Enjoy Terror said:
Uh it’s profit. Why do they need to spend all the money they’ve saved?
I think that is my (and others') point. The money they would save on Villar is profit. It's not being re-allocated to help the team, nor will it be spent later when they are competitive.
I don't think it's too much to ask to get something in return for a quality player currently in his prime. -
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.-
1
-
1
-
-
36 minutes ago, ThomasTomasz said:
So if we couldn't move him now with the $7-$10 million price tag, what are the chances of getting any sort of good return at the deadline for Villar?
The chances at the deadline are way better. As I have stated, going into a season, teams look for good value for the price. At the deadline, when you're trying to fill a hole, the two months of salary are far less important. The selling team could also pay some of that contract for two months to get a better prospect.
-
2 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:
This move was to try and get move value than was being offered for him previously. It might not work, but that's the whole point of this vs just non-tendering him.
That is the best justification I've seen, but I still think it's the wrong move and here is why.
Villar has more value at the deadline than in the offseason. In the offseason, contending teams are looking at their budget, and Villar's arbitration numbers might make him less of an option--there are other 2B that might be more affordable or better value for $$.
At the deadline, especially for a team with an injured 2B, the money owed means a lot less when you want to win. Even as an expensive pinch runner, Villar has value at the deadline. If he has a strong first half of 2020, his value is even higher.. -
41 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:
Its like going to the grocery store and finding out the last pint of ice cream is $11 and it should be like $5. So you say no thanks we have Oreos at home, despite the fact you make a six figure household income and can afford an $11 tub of ice cream.
All the while you’ve got this dude named Roll Tide shouting from the bleachers that you’re a greedy son of a gun because you left the store without the $11 ice cream.
The ice cream analogy only works if you're a contending team that wants to eat the ice cream now. Perhaps there are better deals on other ice creams on the free agent market.
If you want to stick with the analogy, the Orioles are stockpiling ice cream or other goodies in their freezer for another season. The Orioles already own that overpriced Villar flavor. What they did was sell it for money that won't put anything into the freezer. A more prudent move would be to hold on to the ice cream, and when another team is desperate to win in July, trade the ice cream to help fill your freezer. -
49 minutes ago, wildcard said:
Here is the logic I have come up with for the DFAing Villar.
........
Remember this is he 2nd time that a team Elias worked for has let Villar go by trade or DFA.
To me this is a Jim Johnson move. Johnson was due 10m in arbitration and the O's traded him for basically nothing. And it was one season after he was an All-Star and he has back to back 50 save seasons. And the O's were contenders back then.
Wilkerson/Alberto/ Valaika can play as good a defensive 2B as Villar. Elias made it clear he did not want Villar at SS by saying he would acquire a veteran SS.
The O's are adding offensive players next season in Hays and Mountcastle. Elias may be thinking that its better for the team to be strong up the middle defensively. That could help the pitching.
What do you think of that argument?
This is very different from Jim Johnson. That team had a competitive payroll and was trying to win. Allocating resources properly can be crucial for contending teams. The money saved by letting Johnson go could be re-allocated to major league talent.
This is a rebuilding team with low payroll. Does it really matter is Villar is "worth" $10 million and not "worth" $7 million? That money saved will not be used to acquire talent, nor should it. For a rebuilding team, value is either young talent or players that could be traded for young talent. Villar has potential trade value. Less so now at his arbitration cost. However, just because teams don't want him at his current cost does not mean he has no value. Contending teams have traded for much weaker players at the deadline for speed alone (Dave Roberts, Billy Hamilton). If Villar has a strong start, he could absolutely bring prospects at the deadline.
The argument that the saved money will be re-allocated is weak to me as well. Again, this team will have a low payroll and can afford to spend the money on scouting and resources, with or without Villar. Are you telling me that when it's time to win and the payroll is $100 million higher that we will have to skimp on farm system? resources? -
2 minutes ago, jerios55 said:
There is a plan. One that many dont like. And it may not work. But we've had lots of years that was true. They aren't changing it just because people are upset.
But how does this fit into the plan? It's conceivable that Villar has a good first half and has value at the deadline. Isn't this about adding prospects? How does getting nothing for Villar help compile prospects?
The money saved? How does that help the farm system?-
1
-
-
Awful decision. The payroll is already low, someone please explain the point? Villar could easily have trade value at the deadline. If this were about prospects, how does getting nothing for him help?
I agree with Tony--this is a middle finger to the fans. -
I don't know how they calculate WPA, but my eyes tell me Severino won that game nearly single-handedly.
-
1
-
-
Ugliest win ever?
-
9 hours ago, tntoriole said:
Where is Felix Pie when we need him?
Catching helmets in the Mexican League.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:
The analysis also says his launch angle is down, wouldn't that be a better place to start.
It's simple
- Davis isn't a skilled bunter
- Davis is really slow and not likely to beat out a lot of bunts
- Sprinkling in a few bunt singles isn't going to make the shift go away
- The rest of his numbers are so bad that just getting rid of the shift isn't going to suddenly make him good or even average.
They could stop shifting today and a slow guy with a 40% K rate who hits a lot of ground balls is going to be a very poor hitter.
Fair enough, but sprinkling in a few bunt singles would make him a more productive hitter than he is now, even with his speed and bad contact.
I know, I get it--that's no long term answer. Might be nice to see once or twice though. Better than his ABs now.
-
The only way he gets minor league at bats is if the comes up with a phantom injury and is sent for rehab.
-
3 minutes ago, atomic said:
Dunn hit .159.
Dunn's .159 came with an OPS that is .100 higher than Davis.
Waiving/non-tendering Villar: pro or con?
in Orioles Talk
Posted
Well then, I guess I m stupid, along with the national media that is crushing the Orioles for this move.
And while you're at it, continue to ignore the premise that deadline value is far different than offseason value. And that they *wouldn't* (not couldn't) trade him last July. And that his post-July performance likely increased his value.