Jonathan Villar- Our new 2B?

[wildbillhiccup]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Villar is part of the return in the trade.    Maybe not the most important piece in the deal, but important enough.   He’s a major league player who’s under control a year longer than Schoop.    That’s not trivial.   I agree we need to see how Ortiz and Carmona pan out before judging the result of this trade, and it would be disappointing if neither of them developed into anything.    

If Villar was anything more than a throw in then it was a bad trade. The team will be terrible the years he is under contract (with or without him). And yes I understand that they have to field a team for those years, but it could have been done without compromising the prospects they received in return. All that said,  I don't believe they could have gotten much more in return if Villar hadn't been included. I think the Brewers were anxious to get him off their roster. 

[wildbillhiccup]

5 hours ago, LA2 said:

I see your point and it typifies that of many here. Building for the future is, of course, top priority, but we also need undisgusting, even watchable, entertaining baseball in the meantime. "Respect the game!," as Miggy (the Tejada Miggy) used to say. Moreover, we need lots of new fans to keep the franchise and legacy going.

It seems that Villar could play a big role in the Orioles being able to provide that (although, of course, he would be just one of many, many factors). After all, the great future may never come! During the next 4-5 years, will we ever have a better chance than we did throughout most of 2014? Who's to say, but we definitely need to have fun in the meantime, right? Villar-type fun, not lugubrious, gloveless swatting of solo homers late in yet another boring, humiliating loss.

I work in marketing so I completely get this, but at the end of the day Villar isn't going to keep the team from finishing in last place again next season. If the Orioles were smart they'd base their 2019 marketing campaign on their young players. Air vignettes for a player at each position and make sure they were all extremely accessible to the fans. And come up with a catchy campaign slogans that embraces their youth. Off the top of my head working something around the word "kids" make sense. Come see the kids...the kids are alright...kids say the darndest things, etc. There' s plenty of potential in that word. 

[Aristotelian]

Just now, wildbillhiccup said:

If Villar was anything more than a throw in then it was a bad trade. The team will be terrible the years he is under contract (with or without him). And yes I understand that they have to field a team for those years, but it could have been done without compromising the prospects they received in return. All that said,  I don't believe they could have gotten much more in return if Villar hadn't been included. I think the Brewers were anxious to get him off their roster. 

Villar appears to be at least as good as Schoop with an extra year of control. Whether Villar was a throw in or not, he makes it a great trade. We basically got Ortiz, Carmona, and 2.5 years of a 2-WAR 2B for 1.5 years of a 2-WAR 2B. That is a fantastic deal.

If Villar performs to his norms, we should be able to trade him for the next package. Then the return on Schoop becomes Ortiz, Carmona, plus whatever we get for Villar.

I wanted Hiura like everyone else, but there was no indication the Brewers had him on the table.

[Frobby]

9 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

If Villar was anything more than a throw in then it was a bad trade. The team will be terrible the years he is under contract (with or without him). And yes I understand that they have to field a team for those years, but it could have been done without compromising the prospects they received in return. All that said,  I don't believe they could have gotten much more in return if Villar hadn't been included. I think the Brewers were anxious to get him off their roster. 

There wasn’t room for both Schoop and Villar.   But that doesn’t make Villar a terrible player.   They thought Schoop was a significant upgrade.   So far, he hasn’t been.    But that could change.  

[VaBird1]

5 hours ago, LA2 said:

Next year we might have three guys with more than 20!

Or one with 60 (The Villain), one with 30 (The Entertainer), and another with 20 (A Gentry/Andreoli/Peterson/Steward/Diaz type or combo)!

I love that it is even a possibility.

[wildbillhiccup]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

There wasn’t room for both Schoop and Villar.   But that doesn’t make Villar a terrible player.   They thought Schoop was a significant upgrade.   So far, he hasn’t been.    But that could change.  

I never said Villar was terrible. And I really think Schoop was a round peg the Brewers tried to squeeze in a square hole. He's not  a SS and I'm sure having to try and learn a new position has hurt his offensive game as well. I have a feeling he'll be a solid player for them next season. 

The point I'm making with Villar is that the team is going to be terrible for the years he's under contract (with or without him). That's just the reality of our situation and the nature of a rebuild. If he had any affect on the level of prospects they got in return then taking on his contract was a bad move, regardless of how he is performing. I think they would have been better  off signing someone like LeMahieu to a two year deal this off season if they felt like they needed a "good" player to bridge the gap to when they think they'll be able to start winning again. And I understand some of you are anticipating that we'll be able to trade Villar, but acquiring him really didn't seem like a buy low / sell high type of move by the team. Not to me at least. 

Again, it's impossible to judge the trade right now. There are too many unknowns and hypotheticals. We need to see how it plays out

[wildbillhiccup]

11 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

Villar appears to be at least as good as Schoop with an extra year of control. Whether Villar was a throw in or not, he makes it a great trade. We basically got Ortiz, Carmona, and 2.5 years of a 2-WAR 2B for 1.5 years of a 2-WAR 2B. That is a fantastic deal.

If Villar performs to his norms, we should be able to trade him for the next package. Then the return on Schoop becomes Ortiz, Carmona, plus whatever we get for Villar.

I wanted Hiura like everyone else, but there was no indication the Brewers had him on the table.

They're still going to finish last (or second to last) the next few years with Villar. His WAR is completely irrelevant. Schoop was one of the few trade chips that we had to try and improve our farm system. Maybe they did that with Oritz and Carmona. Time will tell...

[Aristotelian]

Just now, wildbillhiccup said:

They're still going to finish last (or second to last) the next few years with Villar. His WAR is completely irrelevant. Schoop was one of the few trade chips that we had to try and improve our farm system. Maybe they did that with Oritz and Carmona. Time will tell...

His WAR is relevant because he has just as much value as Schoop with the extra control. He can be flipped next year for just as much as you would hope to get for Schoop, except we will have already gotten Carmona and Ortiz. I would say the timeframe for the O's competing is irrelevant. All that matters is value. If we get value, it can be exchanged for more value. If Villar is not the perfect fit for the O's, Schoop (with a year less control) makes even less sense.

 

3 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

 

The point I'm making with Villar is that the team is going to be terrible for the years he's under contract (with or without him). That's just the reality of our situation and the nature of a rebuild. If he had any affect on the level of prospects they got in return then taking on his contract was a bad move, regardless of how he is performing. I think they would have been better  off signing someone like LeMahieu to a two year deal this off season if they felt like they needed a "good" player to bridge the gap to when they think they'll be able to start winning again. And I understand some of you are anticipating that we'll be able to trade Villar, but acquiring him really didn't seem like a buy low / sell high type of move by the team. Not to me at least. 

Agreed with the last point. It seems DD kind of lucked into Villar. That doesn't make it any less of a good trade.

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

I never said Villar was terrible. And I really think Schoop was a round peg the Brewers tried to squeeze in a square hole. He's not  a SS and I'm sure having to try and learn a new position has hurt his offensive game as well. I have a feeling he'll be a solid player for them next season. 

The point I'm making with Villar is that the team is going to be terrible for the years he's under contract (with or without him). That's just the reality of our situation and the nature of a rebuild. If he had any affect on the level of prospects they got in return then taking on his contract was a bad move, regardless of how he is performing. I think they would have been better  off signing someone like LeMahieu to a two year deal this off season if they felt like they needed a "good" player to bridge the gap to when they think they'll be able to start winning again. And I understand some of you are anticipating that we'll be able to trade Villar, but acquiring him really didn't seem like a buy low / sell high type of move by the team. Not to me at least. 

Again, it's impossible to judge the trade right now. There are too many unknowns and hypotheticals. We need to see how it plays out

Arguably, I’d say taking Villar enhanced the other value the Brewers gave for Schoop, because the Brewers didn’t want to pay for both and didn’t have room for both on the roster.    The deal probably wouldn’t have happened at all unless we took Villar.   But that doesn’t mean Villar has no value generally, or has no value to us in particular.    It’s just the circumstances of the trade.   I’m kind of agnostic about keeping Villar next year vs. trading him.   You’re right we’ll be a last place team either way, but I’d still like to see some halfway competent baseball, and it’s not like we’ve got the next Schoop, Manny or Hardy sitting in AAA or even AA ready to come up.

[wildbillhiccup]

3 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Arguably, I’d say taking Villar enhanced the other value the Brewers gave for Schoop, because the Brewers didn’t want to pay for both and didn’t have room for both on the roster.    The deal probably wouldn’t have happened at all unless we took Villar.   But that doesn’t mean Villar has no value generally, or has no value to us in particular.    It’s just the circumstances of the trade.   I’m kind of agnostic about keeping Villar next year vs. trading him.   You’re right we’ll be a last place team either way, but I’d still like to see some halfway competent baseball, and it’s not like we’ve got the next Schoop, Manny or Hardy sitting in AAA or even AA ready to come up.

I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say it "enhanced" the value, but on the service it doesn't seem like it hurt the return. Heck, I would have taken Domingo Santana from them too if it meant getting another prospect

[keithstone]

I read through a big chunk of this discussion and will add the Brewers fan perspective. Villar was unlikely to be kept beyond this year. Maybe we trade him in the offseason, but unlikely to be kept with Hiura coming. Villar had a very bad season of base running blunders and general gaffe's last year, which is part of why he hadn't recorded as many steals with us...I assume he got the red light a decent amount of the time. I'm generally not surprised by his success thusfar. He has a real chance to be a 260/350/400 type player that steals 40 bases and plays average defense at 2b. I think the Brewers were looking for a bit more power and a generally better hitter with Schoop, as we have Cain/Yelich cemented into the top 2 spots of our lineup. Looking for more of a #5/6 hitter to drive guys in. Schoop is that much moreso than Villar(as is Moustakas). I still don't like the trade, regardless of the results Schoop provides, but that's what I suspect their thought process was.

Schoop isn't exactly benched in Milwaukee, it's more of a playing time share as we are pretty stacked with infielders. I feel like he's starting maybe 4-5 times every 7 games and seeing the field in the other 2-3 games. I agree with a prior poster that said Schoop was fitting a round peg in a square hole type move, would have been better to wait and trade for Murphy(thus keeping him from the Cubs)...but hindsight is 20/20. 

Villar was primarily moved to SS because of Arcia. Someone like Villar can and will move to make room for the caliber of prospect Arcia was. He hasn't panned out(yet), but that was the reasoning. I am a bit baffled as to why they didn't move him back to SS when Arcia was demoted or play him at both spots. Villar graded poorly according to metrics in 2016, but he passed the eye test and I thought was a very serviceable SS. I'm not sure if Baltimore is playing him there, but it would be smart to do so if the hole exists. 

[Redskins Rick]

20 hours ago, Frobby said:

Arguably, I’d say taking Villar enhanced the other value the Brewers gave for Schoop, because the Brewers didn’t want to pay for both and didn’t have room for both on the roster.    The deal probably wouldn’t have happened at all unless we took Villar.   But that doesn’t mean Villar has no value generally, or has no value to us in particular.    It’s just the circumstances of the trade.   I’m kind of agnostic about keeping Villar next year vs. trading him.   You’re right we’ll be a last place team either way, but I’d still like to see some halfway competent baseball, and it’s not like we’ve got the next Schoop, Manny or Hardy sitting in AAA or even AA ready to come up.

Hardy says he is finally healed and able to still play.

Do we give him a MIL deal, with some incentives, and see if he can still play?

What the worse that can happen, he officially retires from the game?

[clapdiddy]

5 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

Hardy says he is finally healed and able to still play.

Do we give him a MIL deal, with some incentives, and see if he can still play?

What the worse that can happen, he officially retires from the game?

I think this would be a pretty decent idea if we were close to being a contender and we had enough offense to offset him.    I don't think he's the type of guy we should be looking at right now.

[Redskins Rick]

2 minutes ago, clapdiddy said:

I think this would be a pretty decent idea if we were close to being a contender and we had enough offense to offset him.    I don't think he's the type of guy we should be looking at right now.

Veteran leadership on a very young team.

But, I get your point.

 

[clapdiddy]

35 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

Veteran leadership on a very young team.

But, I get your point.

 

I could see this as well.   It would be nice to have a sure-handed shortstop to help the pitching and anchor the infield D.