Jump to content

Duquette says signing Davis a priority.


33rdst

Recommended Posts

Since he'll be only 30 next season, I don't think it will be tough for Chris to get five or six years. It's years seven and eight that will have teams like the O's squirming, and with good reason.

Going five is a stretch I think. Although the O's may take the risk. Six or seven would be dumb. The bigger question for me is can the devote 17% of their budget to one player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 296
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Maybe Trout will be available because he hasn't won ding-dong in LA.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If Trout ever became avaialble I highly doubt the Orioles would provide a winning offer.

Lets look at Nelson Cruz this season 324/392/612 182 OPS+.

No one could have predicted that slash line, right? THat no matter what he does this year, Cruz wasn't worth it over the long run. THe Mariners are not winning with him. Orioles made a smart decision not to re-sign him.. I expect that calculus will be employed for Chris Davis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the correct answer is one...but as your snark clearly misses, with all three in the line up the Orioles have been the best team in the AL. You could look it up but it's much easier to miss the parade I guess. Cleaning up after that great 13 year run no doubt. :rolleyes:

Don't mean to be snarky, but what year did the Orioles win a pennant with Jones, Manny and Chris? Last pennant I can remember was 1983.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was the one who asked this question, which Steve Melewski summarizes below.

http://m.masn.mobi/steve-melewski/2015/08/os-game-blog-duquette-and-showalter-speak-at-state-of-the-orioles-address.html

"The duo was asked about the club's philosophy in signing free agents and asked if the Orioles were willing to overpay for a player to not leave holes on the team."

The full question I asked was, it was certainly debatable in a vacuum whether, case by case, to sign Cruz and Markakis to the contracts they eventually received. But since so many holes were left that the team struggled to fill, do you feel it is reasonable to overpay for one of them, and how does that impact your approach to this coming offseason?

So let me say first off, Buck was shooting daggers at me the entire time Duquette was answering. Guess he didn't like my take that there's "so many holes" on this team, lol.

Duquette responded to my question using the example of Cruz. He said he liked Cruz at 8 million last year, even perhaps at more than that for resigning him, but did not want to pay the fourth year. Which in my mind didn't show that Duquette understood what the premium was. It wasn't the year one dollar amount. The premium (or as I more explicitly stated it, the "overpay") in Cruz's case was the fourth year.

Buck responded to a later question w.r.t. Cruz and Markakis by saying, how do you think Urrutia and Daniel Alvarez view the opening that was left. In other words, in Buck's mind, he thinks there's a chance one of them can replace Nelson Cruz.

So like it or not, that really is the answer to whether re-signing Davis is a priority. It's not whether Duquette and Buck *want* that to happen, it's are you willing to "overpay" for your priority - with the consequence that not overpaying will result in one too many holes on the team. Which from my interpretation of Duquette's answer, he is not, and will evaluate Chris Davis based on his case-by-case assessment of what is "overpaying", without the context of whether it is reasonable to have too many slots filled by AAAA shots-in-the-dark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without Davis, the Orioles' power would be pretty right-handed. So are Walker and Mancini. It doesn't make a lot of sense to build a team for Camden Yards without some serious LH power.

This is another way of saying that over the life of a long-term contract Davis would be likely to add more value to the Orioles (or the NYY) than he would to a lot of other teams, including the Rod Sox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without Davis, the Orioles' power would be pretty right-handed. So are Walker and Mancini. It doesn't make a lot of sense to build a team for Camden Yards without some serious LH power.

This is another way of saying that over the life of a long-term contract Davis would be likely to add more value to the Orioles (or the NYY) than he would to a lot of other teams, including the Rod Sox.

Very good point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Davis numbers with the Orioles are very similar to the numbers Ryan Howard were putting up before he signed his 5 years, $125 million contract with the Phillies.

Chris Davis (2011-2015) - 598 games, 151 HRs, 402 RBIs, .255/.334/.518, 130 OPS+

Ryan Howard (2007-2011) - 617 games, 157 HRs, 511 RBIs, .265/.349/.529, 130 OPS+

Of course, a lot of people thought it was a mistake at the time but the market has definitely gone up for premium power bats as well. Davis is also three years younger than Howard when he received that big contract. I believe Davis is going to get a contract worth around 5 years, $110-115 million. I don't think he's worth that kind of investment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's got the TUE, I don't see it being a factor.

Remember if he gets suspended his team doesn't have to pay him for games missed.

Yes, but the decline should a new CBA with more stringent tests and less exemptions could easily destroy years 2 through 7. And you do have to pay for poor performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but the decline should a new CBA with more stringent tests and less exemptions could easily destroy years 2 through 7. And you do have to pay for poor performance.

If Davis gets a 6th or 7th year, you'll never hear/see a word from me, wish him well and move on. Davis FA will be very interesting, just a few months ago many were questioning whether he should get a QO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but the decline should a new CBA with more stringent tests and less exemptions could easily destroy years 2 through 7. And you do have to pay for poor performance.

Now you are speaking in hypotheticals.

I don't think his failed tests will have an impact on his next contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...