Has Chris Carter set Pedro Alvarez's market price?

[Aristotelian]

I agree they probably didn't do this but isn't it possible it was considered if they were able to resign Davis and able to acquire another DH type (Cater, Alvarez) at a reasonable cost? I would think that a prudent move. If they missed out on Davis and perhaps other hitters they had interest in then at least they have set the floor by adding Trumbo a bit higher.

If they resign Davis, then Trumbo shifts to DH and then we target an OF. Worst case scenario, we trade Trumbo in a salary dump. In just about any scenario, we need Trumbo and are not going to DFA, even if that was allowed by a technicality in the CBA.

[Fan4Life]

If they resign Davis, then Trumbo shifts to DH and then we target an OF. Worst case scenario, we trade Trumbo in a salary dump. In just about any scenario, we need Trumbo and are not going to DFA, even if that was allowed by a technicality in the CBA.

The point of this thread was outlining the cost to add Alvarez being somewhat set by Carter's inexpensive deal and that it now would appear foolish if we are able to resign Davis to keep Trumbo as a DH for upwards of $8-9M if we can sign Alvarez for $4-6m. Use that savings to put toward pitching.

[Frobby]

Opinion. The club says otherwise. Now weams. Not Frobby. The Orioles.

The article wildcard found is interesting. It says that the union "almost always" files and wins a grievance if a player wins an arbitration and then is cut in spring training. That implies that this situation has arisen many times. I can't say I've ever heard of it. And it does make you wonder if the union has ever challenged a release that occurred prior to an arbitration hearing.

[Fan4Life]

The article wildcard found is interesting. It says that the union "almost always" files and wins a grievance if a player wins an arbitration and then is cut in spring training. That implies that this situation has arisen many times. I can't say I've ever heard of it. And it does make you wonder if the union has ever challenged a release that occurred prior to an arbitration hearing.

I would imagine that in almost all of the cases where the player was cut afterwards was when he won the arbitration hearing. So it wouldn't surprise if that is the case that the player came out on top. Also, does the team really have anything to lose? Is there a penalty applied if you lose the case?

[MDtransplant757]

The point of this thread was outlining the cost to add Alvarez being somewhat set by Carter's inexpensive deal and that it now would appear foolish if we are able to resign Davis to keep Trumbo as a DH for upwards of $8-9M if we can sign Alvarez for $4-6m. Use that savings to put toward pitching.

I agree. We should put it towards Cespedes and a pitcher

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wildcard]

The article wildcard found is interesting. It says that the union "almost always" files and wins a grievance if a player wins an arbitration and then is cut in spring training. That implies that this situation has arisen many times. I can't say I've ever heard of it. And it does make you wonder if the union has ever challenged a release that occurred prior to an arbitration hearing.

Here is a 2007 case for Todd Walker who won his arbitration hearing for 3.95m. He was released by the Padres in ST and the union filed a grievance. The grievance was resolved by the Padres paying Walker 2m not to play for them.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=mlb&id=2818207

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2008/sep/01/1s2padnotes205247-club-hopes-antonelli-stops-merry/

[weams]

Here is a 2007 case for Todd Walker who won his arbitration hearing for 3.95m. He was released by the Padres in ST and the union filed a grievance. The grievance was resolved by the Padres paying Walker 2m not to play for them.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=mlb&id=2818207

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2008/sep/01/1s2padnotes205247-club-hopes-antonelli-stops-merry/

It is not the current CBA. And it is post hearing. Not at all the example that I asked the club.

[wildcard]

It is not the current CBA. And it is post hearing. Not at all the example that I asked the club.

I agree. Its a different subject. But related.

I think that players with 5 years of service must to paid if that are DFA'd is a bigger issue with Trumbo.

[Frobby]

Trumbo (7.9 rWAR in 690 games) > Alvarez (5.2 rWAR in 742 games) > Carter (2.1 rWAR in 528 games). The fact that Trumbo has spent his career playing in pitcher-friendly parks weighs heavily with me. I think he'll hit 30+ bombs for us. That said, he fits better with Upton or Cespedes than he does with Davis.

As to Alvarez, I think it will take about $6 mm to sign him.

Arizona is not a pitcher friendly park. Chris Carter - career OPS+ 110. Mark Trumbo OPS + 110 - Pedro Alvarez OPS + 107 - John Jaso OPS + 116

Carter signed for 2.5M with an option

Jason signed for 2/8M

Trumbo figures to make at least 8M in arbitration if not more.

If Trumbo DH's, he's a bad value. It shouldn't take 6M to sign Alvarez but I don't doubt that the Orioles will pay that much.

$5.75 mm plus incentives. Close enough.

[Frobby]

J

Trumbo (7.9 rWAR in 690 games) > Alvarez (5.2 rWAR in 742 games) > Carter (2.1 rWAR in 528 games). The fact that Trumbo has spent his career playing in pitcher-friendly parks weighs heavily with me. I think he'll hit 30+ bombs for us. That said, he fits better with Upton or Cespedes than he does with Davis.

As to Alvarez, I think it will take about $6 mm to sign him.

Interesting thread to revisit. Trumbo has been the best of the three, but Carter has played every day and provided pretty good value for the money (22 HR, 52 RBI but only 0.7 rWAR). Alvarez signed for about what I thought, and has been a platoon player who has been reasonably productive as a bat-only guy).

[Bahama O's Fan]

Remind me again of what each of the three costs: Trumbo, Alvarez and Carter