Jump to content

Don't know about you...but I want Cespedes

Todd-O

By Todd-O
in Orioles Talk

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 291
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Beef Supreme Hangout Veteran Council

Beef Supreme

Posted
Posted
I dont see him walking away from the ball??? He turned and started to go after it and the LF looked like he was going full out... I dunno

Yeah, it looks like both players are surprised and are avoiding collision. It's a sloppy, freaky play. A very well-publicized play that gets rehashed endlessly on MLB network and the like. I wouldn't want to make all judgments based on one bad play on the field. It would probably have been a triple, regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beef Supreme Hangout Veteran Council

Beef Supreme

Posted
Posted
I don't think that means much. They committed $66 mm to Markakis in 2009, and $85 mm to Jones in 2012. Prices have inflated since then. A player as valuable as Markakis or Jones (based on their age and historical performance at the time they were signed) would cost $100 mm at today's prices.

Yep $85MM (2012) ~ $100MM (2016). I understand they probably won't commit $200MM for six or seven years of a pitcher, but I would be in no way surprised to see $100ishMM for what they consider to be the "right player."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Number5 Hangout Grand Counsel

Number5

Posted
Posted

I'm surprised at the pro-optout comments I am reading. I have to agree with the Orioles and DD. Offering optouts like we are seeing seems incredibly stupid to me. A team takes on all the risk and gives up all of the upside potential of a contract. Only the richest of teams can afford to consider this, and they are the ones doing it. Missing badly on an expensive contact can irreparably hamstring a small- or mid-market team for years. Large market teams can take advantage of this and land players thru the use of optouts, since they can better absorb the pain of losing on the gamble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
backwardsk Hangout Grand Counsel

backwardsk

Posted
Posted
I'm surprised at the pro-optout comments I am reading. I have to agree with the Orioles and DD. Offering optouts like we are seeing seems incredibly stupid to me. A team takes on all the risk and gives up all of the upside potential of a contract. Only the richest of teams can afford to consider this, and they are the ones doing it. Missing badly on an expensive contact can irreparably hamstring a small- or mid-market team for years. Large market teams can take advantage of this and land players thru the use of optouts, since they can better absorb the pain of losing on the gamble.

Use the Kazmir contract as an example. Do you think that would have been a bad contract for the Orioles to offer? For fun, let's assume he'd pick the Orioles over LA with all things being equal.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Number5 Hangout Grand Counsel

Number5

Posted
Posted
Use the Kazmir contract as an example. Do you think that would have been a bad contract for the Orioles to offer? For fun, let's assume he'd pick the Orioles over LA with all things being equal.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Teams were talking 3/$39 with Kazmir. The Dodgers blew that away. Prior to this signing, indications were that 4/$48 would likely get it done. Nobody seemed to want to go the 4th year. The Dodgers gave the 4-year money without the 4th year. Yes, I absolutely think that would have been a bad deal for the Orioles - opt out or not. Certainly not as horrific as other opt out deals we have seen, but bad nonetheless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrOrange82 Hangout Grand Counsel

MrOrange82

Posted
Posted
I'm surprised at the pro-optout comments I am reading. I have to agree with the Orioles and DD. Offering optouts like we are seeing seems incredibly stupid to me. A team takes on all the risk and gives up all of the upside potential of a contract. Only the richest of teams can afford to consider this, and they are the ones doing it. Missing badly on an expensive contact can irreparably hamstring a small- or mid-market team for years. Large market teams can take advantage of this and land players thru the use of optouts, since they can better absorb the pain of losing on the gamble.

Yeah, the only ways I'd be OK with opt outs (from a FO perspective) would be if the cash for the post-out years was heavily incentivized and/or deferred. Otherwise, those deals can only end bad-ish for the teams handing them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Babypowder Hangout Veteran Council

Babypowder

Posted
Posted
I'm surprised at the pro-optout comments I am reading. I have to agree with the Orioles and DD. Offering optouts like we are seeing seems incredibly stupid to me. A team takes on all the risk and gives up all of the upside potential of a contract. Only the richest of teams can afford to consider this, and they are the ones doing it. Missing badly on an expensive contact can irreparably hamstring a small- or mid-market team for years. Large market teams can take advantage of this and land players thru the use of optouts, since they can better absorb the pain of losing on the gamble.

There is potential upside for the team as I see it. Using Davis as an example maybe you are comfortable that he remains a very good player for the next 3 years but aren't very sure about the 4 years after that. You can sign him to a 7 year deal with an opt out after 3, he plays well for 3 years and opts out. Then signs elsewhere and declines on his next deal. That contract works out pretty great for the Orioles. You end up with a short term deal for a productive player, which is what every team really wants but cannot get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Number5 Hangout Grand Counsel

Number5

Posted
Posted
There is potential upside for the team as I see it. Using Davis as an example maybe you are comfortable that he remains a very good player for the next 3 years but aren't very sure about the 4 years after that. You can sign him to a 7 year deal with an opt out after 3, he plays well for 3 years and opts out. Then signs elsewhere and declines on his next deal. That contract works out pretty great for the Orioles. You end up with a short term deal for a productive player, which is what every team really wants but cannot get.

The sole choice in voiding the contract belongs to Davis. The Orioles have no say in the matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chavez Ravine Hangout Grand Counsel

Chavez Ravine

Posted
Posted
There is potential upside for the team as I see it. Using Davis as an example maybe you are comfortable that he remains a very good player for the next 3 years but aren't very sure about the 4 years after that. You can sign him to a 7 year deal with an opt out after 3, he plays well for 3 years and opts out. Then signs elsewhere and declines on his next deal. That contract works out pretty great for the Orioles. You end up with a short term deal for a productive player, which is what every team really wants but cannot get.

Yeah, I assume that you can structure things so that the team gets value out of good years early in the contract and hope that an even bigger sucker comes along to bail you out of those Bobby Bonilla years. It just seems that opt outs inherently push the odds in the player's favor. Kazmir basically has a one year deal with an annuity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Number5 Hangout Grand Counsel

Number5

Posted
Posted
Yes, but they all opt out if they play reasonably well. If the O's think Davis can play well enough to opt out, him opting out is a good thing if you ask me.

Why risk the hideous outcome of paying milions upon millions for a worthless player when the high-end possibility of receiving many years of positive value is not there? Man, I can't possibly disagree with you more on this. DD is clearly right, IMO. Now, if the Orioles had millions to burn like the Dodgers, Red Sox, or Yankees, maybe, but they don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
El Gordo Hangout Grand Counsel

El Gordo

Posted
Posted
Yes, but they all opt out if they play reasonably well. If the O's think Davis can play well enough to opt out, him opting out is a good thing if you ask me.
If you give him an incentive to opt out by front loading the contract before the opt out and have the years after have an AAV of less, it could work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Number5 Hangout Grand Counsel

Number5

Posted
Posted
If you give him an incentive to opt out by front loading the contract before the opt out and have the years after have an AAV of less, it could work.

Why would we want to overpay in the early years? I'm sorry, but I agree with DD that opt-outs make zero sense for a team like the Orioles. The very few super-rich teams can afford such folly. No one else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
El Gordo Hangout Grand Counsel

El Gordo

Posted
Posted
Why would we want to overpay in the early years? I'm sorry, but I agree with DD that opt-outs make zero sense for a team like the Orioles. The very few super-rich teams can afford such folly. No one else.
I didn't say over pay. I said pay more. If Davis is a good bet to be worth 8-12 WAR in the first 3 years of his contract then pay him 60-80 M. After that pay him a less for the net 4. He's more likely to opt out before he becomes an albatross.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Bemorewins
      How far do you go to try to save this?

      By Bemorewins · Posted

      Pitching injuries are happening to a crazy degree all over the sport. We still have our #1 starter who is the best starter that we have had in decades and a very talented #2/3. All is not lost.
    • Bahama O's Fan
      Umpire Scorecard Thread

      By Bahama O's Fan · Posted

      Just another argument for roboumps
    • Bemorewins
      How far do you go to try to save this?

      By Bemorewins · Posted

      There will be FAs (none admittedly as good as Burnes) that we can sign. We have a ridiculously low payroll and aren't paying anyone.  We are not going to maintain excellence long term by only using the draft and trades to meaningfully add talent. We are going to have to use the free agent market (wisely) too.
    • andymax
      We’re tied with the Yankees in the Loss Column.

      By andymax · Posted

      Bigger game for them than it is for us imo. We already won a home series against them, they need to answer back in NY. Going to be pretty deflating for them if they drop the series after winning game one, especially after their series vs LA and Boston recently.
    • Bemorewins
      How far do you go to try to save this?

      By Bemorewins · Posted

      That's a good proposition IMO. Will STL sell? They kind of half sold last year and they are actually a bit better this year (2nd place currently around .500).
    • Rbiggs2525
      Umpire Scorecard Thread

      By Rbiggs2525 · Posted

      I tend to think sometimes certain pitchers looks more presentable to an umpire. Last night both teams had more than 5 pitchers enter the game and we never got the calls the Yankees were getting. The catcher framing stuff does not make sense because the umpire is supposed to make the call where it crossed the plate. Jose Trevino is a “great” framer but that’s just because last night umpire was horrible.
    • Bemorewins
      How far do you go to try to save this?

      By Bemorewins · Posted

      As am sure that you are well aware, we are tied for the least amount of losses in all of MLB (3rd best record due to game played). IMO this is the COMPLETELY wrong way to approach things. We are 1 to 2 pieces away from being the best team hands down in all of baseball and are VERY LEGIT World Series contenders. We should approach every season with this kind of record and superstar talent the SAME.... You try to win the World Series! Unlike some, I do not take for granted these kind of chances/opportunities. Because I know that they won't be here forever.  What is the alternative to adding in a meaningful way? Waiting until next year, when the same injury rash could happen, Burnes could be gone, and Gunnar and Adley are that much closer to free agency? Is that the plan? There is no guarantee that ANY future season will be any better than this one. We are not "saving" or salvaging anything. I'm not even sure how that applies to a team this good? NO! What we are doing is trying to start a run of chasing championships.

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...