Is A Deal For Billy Butler Still Possible?

[CaptainRedbeard]

I don't know how a feel about a world that values a Valencia/Betemit platoon over an $8MM Billy Butler on a roster...

I don't think this is really the debate, it comes down to whether or not (Butler DH + Betemit BN + Britton/Matusz/Arrieta/whoever SP5) is better than (Betemit LH DH +Pearce/Valencia RH DH + Tillman +8MM).

Personally, I would trade Tillman straight up for Butler, no question. But that's because I have questions about Tillman and am not as high on him as others around here. But if you like Tillman, it's not a reach to prefer the second group to the first group.

[Can_of_corn]

I got "Moneyballed" on here a couple months ago by Bill James' grandson (just kidding, but I don't remember the poster's name) with all kinds of numbers about how giving up Tillman for Butler doesn't make sense. I confess I don't even understand some of the acronyms he threw out (liberal arts major, C math student, lol). HOWEVER, I do understand a little bit about baseball and I wanted to chime in on the exchanges going on between SKANAR/DrinkinWithTermi/JohnnyK27/TRYPTAMINE . While I certainly respect SKANAR's mathematical knowledge, I agree A LOT with with Johnnyk27 and TRYPTAMINE's points.

- All of Butler's stats are based off of a career where he has had virtually ZERO protection in the KC lineup

- He plays 81 games in a horrendous park. OPACY and CLE are his two favorite stadiums to hit in

- You can't factor in the impact Butler would have on his teammates. We have too many "free swingers" in the heart of our order. He would offer some "protection" for hitters around him. More fastballs.

- Adam Jones knows he is a bit of "showboat" out there & that's okay. Swagger is his game. However, Billy watches TONS of video and knows a lot about hitting. He would bag on Adam for all this sliders he chases that are closer the pretzel guy than home plate. Adam and Chris Davis could both learn a bit more plate discipline from him

- Butler could very well be improving

- If Hardy and Wieters hit a bit more, how big of a loss is Tillman?

First off can we agree to call it "Sabered" instead of "Moneyballed"? Not only does it sound cooler but it is a lot more accurate.

As to your points.

-Protection is an illusion. Not much in the way of credible evidence to prove it exists.

-Sample size for OPACY is iffy at best. I would like to see how he performs at home against Oriole and Indian pitching before giving the credit to the ballpark. LOTS of non-Oriole hitters hit well at OPACY, it has to do with the O's having crappy pitching for a long time.

-Once again, protection doesn't exist. You find me some proof I will throw you some rep.

-If a hitting coach can't teach Jones to identify and lay off sliders out of the zone, I don't think Butler mocking him is going to do it.

-He might be at his peak now and about to decline

-If Hammel and Chen get hurt how badly will they need Tillman?

[CaptainRedbeard]

Yep:rolleyes: .... Until the platoon is a abysmal failure or the Orioles are struck again by limited maneuvering due to carrying three or four poor fielding DH/Types.

The A's are okay as one example...but moneyball only works occasionally.

How does adding Billy Butler limit maneuverability due to carrying more DH types? He's only a DH type! Strictly speaking, adding Butler would push Betemit to the bench, which pushes somebody like Pearce or Valencia off the ML roster - two players who actually can play in the field.

[weams]

Setting aside coachability, which I don't feel comfortable commenting on, Matusz is the more valuable asset. That's who I'd want if I were targeting a MLB-ready Orioles arm.

There may be coachablility issues with both Arrieta and Matusz. Britton's coach seems to be named Boras. I do think that Brian Matusz has formed a great relationship with the number two man in the front office and he seems to follow his instructions. I appreciate that you don't wish to discuss this.

[weams]

which pushes somebody like Pearce or Valencia off the ML roster - two players who actually can play in the field.

At positions that Betemit pays at less than average and Butler plays not at all.

[CaptainRedbeard]

You make good points on that front. Still, I think parsing platoons can be problematic (as you point out), particularly due to sample size issues. An upgrade to Butler probably doesn't make sense if you believe the Orioles are an 80-win team. If you think they are a playoff contender, the potential for, say, two added wins is a pretty big deal. Not to mention Butler's contract is team friendly for its duration. Of course, the thin nature of the system makes a larger package difficult to put together for a player of Butler's value.

Note, "Butler" is a construct in this discussion. He's obviously unlikely to be on the table at this point. But the idea is still worth discussing, as it's a matter of determining appropriate use of assets in building as complete a team as possible. My hope is that the work the FO is doing in constructing potential platoons is fairly advanced. That approach shouldn't be required of a team capable of a $90-100MM payroll. If it is, there are contracts that 1) should not have been handed out, or 2) should have been moved. Obviously, the org needs to build a farm system in a bad way...

EDIT -- Regarding injury risk, Butler isn't playing the field (you stated Betemit and Valencia would be). Further, you have a freed up roster spot if Butler is full timing, so your "alternate option" if Butler is injured isn't limited to a piece of a platoon. In any event, I think the platoon is a fine approach in general terms, but isn't really a strong play for a number of reasons. If you are not forced to piece together production due to cash constraints, you are almost always going to be better off with the better player, rather than trying the Franken-slash approach.

I agree with this 100%. But even the best teams have a less-than-ideal solution at least one position because they run out of resources. The best way to patch together a solution with limited resources is a platoon, and the easiest postion to do that at is DH. Doing what the A's did, where every single one of their bench players was part of a platoon, is generally not advisable and not necessary if you have resources to have full time players. The Orioles don't have to be doing that.

But I would argue that having exactly one platoon is the most optimal way to utilize your full 25 man roster, in almost all circumstances. A four man bench generally has a backup catcher, backup infielder (usually MI type), and fourth OF (that can play CF). The last bench player is kinda miscellaneous, is there for their bat, and on teams without platoons gets very under-utilized. Extra props if they play CI, but those spots can also be covered by whoever is DHing if you don't have a full-time DH, or the backup IF.

Take the Orioles. We have Teagarden and Casilla (assuming Roberts/Flaherty are starters). McLouth is our emergency CF, with Avery as backup in the event of DL-worth injury to Jones, so Reimold can be the 4th OF. Reimold is not a platoon hitter (actually hits RHP better) so he is a valuable piece to have in case of injury because he can be a full-time player, if healthy. If we get a full time DH like Butler, Betemit is that last spot. He is going to be very underutilized, basically only spot starting or there as insurance in case of injury. Using Betemit as LH DH, and somebody like Pearce/Valencia/Jackson as the RH DH, actually utilizes that last bench spot much more efficiently.

It's basically just surplus value to be gained. Every team has 13 position players. 9 starters, 3 bench guys to backup the important defensive positions. The last bench guy, the "bat" guy, is better utilized actually getting at-bats rather than sitting around as insurance. When you start pushing the 3 bench guys to be platoon players, you run into more issues with over-exposing weak players in the event of injury, but every team should be able to carry one platoon with that last bench spot without fear of that happening.

[Roll Tide]

How does adding Billy Butler limit maneuverability due to carrying more DH types? He's only a DH type! Strictly speaking, adding Butler would push Betemit to the bench, which pushes somebody like Pearce or Valencia off the ML roster - two players who actually can play in the field.

I didn't say Butler did...I said working scrap heap platoon of AAAA players and a fringe MLB player would.

Betemit is basically 1/2 of Butler because of his offensive splits and poor defense. Then carrying Pearce, Valencia, and Conor Jackson none of whom has produced diddle in MLB value for at least 2 years.

[Roll Tide]

And you take offense to that statement, why? You have never presented a post that well organized and informative. It is nothing against you, but the post was clear and concise.

And your responses have been full of opinion with no substantiate information.

You are right that platoons don't always work out the way they are designed, but they usually fall apart for injury reasons.

How did I take offense? What better info can I provide ? The 4 players mentioned C Jackson/Valencia/Pearce and Betemit have been worth what a combined 5 war? Two of the players values are at a negative and even worse if you subtract a good season in 2010.

Your Buck... Who do you want Billy Butler or the gaggle of crap mentioned above? If your a MLB manager you want Butler period! If you answer any other way your kidding yourself.

[CaptainRedbeard]

I didn't say Butler did...I said working scrap heap platoon of AAAA players and a fringe MLB player would.

Betemit is basically 1/2 of Butler because of his offensive splits and poor defense. Then carrying Pearce, Valencia, and Conor Jackson none of whom has produced diddle in MLB value for at least 2 years.

Sorry, I made a mistake. It should read "How does adding Butler improve the limited maneuverability from carrying multiple DH types." Butler has less positional mobility than any of the players discussed as the RH component of a DH platoon with Betemit, and pretty much any player playing professional baseball. Adding him explicitly limits maneuverability, because it makes it more likely that Betemit ends up playing in the field, and he's also worse defensively than those other guys we would have on our bench.

[weams]

How did I take offense? What better info can I provide ? The 4 players mentioned C Jackson/Valencia/Pearce and Betemit have been worth what a combined 5 war? Two of the players values are at a negative and even worse if you subtract a good season in 2010.

Your Buck... Who do you want Billy Butler or the gaggle of crap mentioned above? If your a MLB manager you want Butler period! If you answer any other way your kidding yourself.

If I am a real manager, qualified for my job, I would not consider my team improved without Chris Tillman and Jon Schoop and replacing Betemit with Butler. The difference of that one side of the plate is not near enough. Certainly, I require that gaggle to be winnowed down to two candidates at some point. Or find another bat for that portion.

[Stotle]

I agree with this 100%. But even the best teams have a less-than-ideal solution at least one position because they run out of resources. The best way to patch together a solution with limited resources is a platoon, and the easiest postion to do that at is DH. Doing what the A's did, where every single one of their bench players was part of a platoon, is generally not advisable and not necessary if you have resources to have full time players. The Orioles don't have to be doing that.

But I would argue that having exactly one platoon is the most optimal way to utilize your full 25 man roster, in almost all circumstances. A four man bench generally has a backup catcher, backup infielder (usually MI type), and fourth OF (that can play CF). The last bench player is kinda miscellaneous, is there for their bat, and on teams without platoons gets very under-utilized. Extra props if they play CI, but those spots can also be covered by whoever is DHing if you don't have a full-time DH, or the backup IF.

Take the Orioles. We have Teagarden and Casilla (assuming Roberts/Flaherty are starters). McLouth is our emergency CF, with Avery as backup in the event of DL-worth injury to Jones, so Reimold can be the 4th OF. Reimold is not a platoon hitter (actually hits RHP better) so he is a valuable piece to have in case of injury because he can be a full-time player, if healthy. If we get a full time DH like Butler, Betemit is that last spot. He is going to be very underutilized, basically only spot starting or there as insurance in case of injury. Using Betemit as LH DH, and somebody like Pearce/Valencia/Jackson as the RH DH, actually utilizes that last bench spot much more efficiently.

It's basically just surplus value to be gained. Every team has 13 position players. 9 starters, 3 bench guys to backup the important defensive positions. The last bench guy, the "bat" guy, is better utilized actually getting at-bats rather than sitting around as insurance. When you start pushing the 3 bench guys to be platoon players, you run into more issues with over-exposing weak players in the event of injury, but every team should be able to carry one platoon with that last bench spot without fear of that happening.

Certain organizations at looking at more specialized contributors on the bench, which necessitates a re-examination of what is today "traditional" bullpen construction. While I have yet to see teams implement these changes, they are most certainly being discussed. The essential point being there is no "right" way to construct and utilize the bench. I follow where you are coming from, and see little issue with that approach if it is what fits best for a team's situation (financially and based on internal options available for trade and MLB roster implementation).

What does all of that mean? Nothing concrete. But ultimately the more production you can get from one roster spot, the more flexibility you have in implementing the remainder of your available assets. It would take a fairly in-depth examination of various potential roster constructs to reach a firm conclusion as to the hypothetical of Butler vs. a platoon. I think Butler is certainly the safer approach, and given question marks in other aspects of the team's production, I'd probably opt for safety if at all possible. That said, if a platoon can offer comparable value while offering up the opportunity for improvement in another area, maybe that's the route the FO is/should be taking.

My best guess is that Butler was never a real option unless Baltimore was willing to part with Bundy. That said, it would be nice to think that if the platoon is indeed not Option 1, that the team will take the resources that would have gone towards getting someone like Butler and use them to substantively better the team in another area. Regardless of what everyone thinks of Toronto's specific moves this off-season, it's hard not to envy the selective aggression during a perceived "down" time in the division -- that aggression made possible by banking funds (which I strongly advocated back when I posted around these parts, and which some high volume posters shrugged off as nonsensical) and building up tradable assets.

Unfortunately (and I promise this ramble is soon to conclude) I fear the team has painted itself into limited financial flexibility at this point, and unless Bundy/Machado/Gausman/Schoop produce significantly right away, it might be tough for Baltimore to realize enough on-field production to keep pace with the division on a $100MM budget. Of course, this can all change with a few moves -- should be interesting to watch.

[Roll Tide]

Sorry, I made a mistake. It should read "How does adding Butler improve the limited maneuverability from carrying multiple DH types." Butler has less positional mobility than any of the players discussed as the RH component of a DH platoon with Betemit, and pretty much any player playing professional baseball. Adding him explicitly limits maneuverability, because it makes it more likely that Betemit ends up playing in the field, and he's also worse defensively than those other guys we would have on our bench.

If I added Butler ... I'd release three of he guys in the conversation. The 4th I would try to trade...perhaps in the deal with KC. He may e appealing as he's cheap $3 million. Otherwise if he can't be dealt I'd use him to spell Davis or Butler against a tough lefty.

[Can_of_corn]

High volume posters, I like that. Nice turn of phrase.

I will say that I am impressed by the Jays going for it.

[CaptainRedbeard]

How did I take offense? What better info can I provide ? The 4 players mentioned C Jackson/Valencia/Pearce and Betemit have been worth what a combined 5 war? Two of the players values are at a negative and even worse if you subtract a good season in 2010.

Your Buck... Who do you want Billy Butler or the gaggle of crap mentioned above? If your a MLB manager you want Butler period! If you answer any other way your kidding yourself.

This is not the question being debated at all in this thread. As I posted above, under a hypothetical Tillman for Butler straight swap, it's deciding between:

1. Butler DH + Betemit BN + Britton/Matusz/Arrieta/whoever SP5

2. Betemit LH DH +Pearce/Valencia RH DH + Tillman +8MM (difference between Butler and Tillman's salary).

Nobody in their right mind thinks a Betemit platoon is as good as Butler. There are a lot of ways of looking at it where you could get them close when you account for stuff like baserunning, but in the end, Butler is a way better option that a Betemit platoon. You seem hung up on the idea that people think Butler is not good, or overrated, and don't want him. That's not the case at all - there are just a lot of other factors to consider than just "is Butler better than Betemit."

[Roll Tide]

If I am a real manager, qualified for my job, I would not consider my team improved without Chris Tillman and Jon Schoop and replacing Betemit with Butler. The difference of that one side of the plate is not near enough. Certainly, I require that gaggle to be winnowed down to two candidates at some point. Or find another bat for that portion.

They don't have a good platoon. Betemit is a good half...I don't think either of the other guys is worth much. I think they will add a better solution ...I hope