Chris Davis 2019 and beyond

[Roll Tide]

2 minutes ago, Dark Helmet said:

And who's to blame for that? Not Davis. He had all the signs of a bad signing. Yet Angelos, Buck, and Brady didn't care.

This is why MLB needs to have opt out clauses when these superstar players fall below a certain production level.

Im not sure how to make it work but a mediocre season should be the minimum.

For Davis that would like something like

.240 30 homers and 80 RBI

or perhaps 80% of the production that the player did over his contract year and maybe averaged with the previous season.

for pitchers it could be tied to things that are in control of the pitcher such as era, strikeouts and walks etc ... avoiding wins and saves where the pitcher inherited another’s mess. 

[Yardball85]

1 minute ago, SteveA said:

So good that none of the 30 teams in baseball offered him a major league contract in the offseason.

I mean.. he's good at what he does... he mashes left handed pitching.  He's not good as in an all-star caliber player or even a regular starter.  But for what he is, he is good.

[SteveA]

2 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

This is why MLB needs to have opt out clauses when these superstar players fall below a certain production level.

Im not sure how to make it work but a mediocre season should be the minimum.

For Davis that would like something like

.240 30 homers and 80 RBI

or perhaps 80% of the production that the player did over his contract year and maybe averaged with the previous season.

for pitchers it could be tied to things that are in control of the pitcher such as era, strikeouts and walks etc ... avoiding wins and saves where the pitcher inherited another’s mess. 

Not gonna happen.

And remember, it was the ORIOLES that gave Davis the contract they gave him.   Even if those contracts you describe were allowed... if team A offered him a contract like that, the Orioles still would have offered him the $161milllion with no opt out.   Because they bid against NO ONE, they would certainly bid against an opt out.

 

[Roll Tide]

8 minutes ago, SteveA said:

Not gonna happen.

And remember, it was the ORIOLES that gave Davis the contract they gave him.   Even if those contracts you describe were allowed... if team A offered him a contract like that, the Orioles still would have offered him the $161milllion with no opt out.   Because they bid against NO ONE, they would certainly bid against an opt out.

 

It should be a performance based clause. The player should have to pay at or near the level that they played at to earn the contract. Escalators would protect the player from over performance. Or the player opt out after three years. 

Its something baseball will need to address in the era of 300 million dollar contracts

[Fuzzball22]

Kole Calhoun is having a worse year than Davis. Calhoun is batting .145 and has OPS of .376. Calhouns oWar is -1.9 compared to Davis at -1.6. I should probably have posted this in the Positive vibes only thread but it is buried several pages back and didnt want to bump it:)

[SteveA]

1 minute ago, Roll Tide said:

It should be a performance based clause. The player should have to pay at or near the level that they played at to earn the contract. Escalators would protect the player from over performance. Or the player opt out after three years. 

Its something baseball will need to address in the era of 300 million dollar contracts

But you are talking as if having such a contract available would have prevented the Davis signing.   It WOULD NOT have.   The Orioles bid against themselves and offered what they offered.   If another team had offered him this performance based contract you imagine, the Orioles still would have made the same offer they did because they obviously wanted Davis that badly.   So nothing would be different for us if such contracts did exist.

I don't know if such contracts are legal in the CBA (I suspect they aren't but I don't know).   But even if you make them legal, no player is going to take such an offer if there is as good or better a non-performance-based contract on the table.   So there would be no significant ch ange.

[Aristotelian]

7 minutes ago, thezeroes said:

This is why I stated in the earlier post that the Orioles need to go forward with the concept that the Active Roster is set at 24 PLUS CHRIS DAVIS and the winter 40 Man ROSTER is set at 39 Players plus Chris Davis.

Yeah, he is basically a Rule 5 player. I am just saying, Davis is a worse case than Belle because it will take longer to get rid of him.

[thezeroes]

1 minute ago, Aristotelian said:

Yeah, he is basically a Rule 5 player. I am just saying, Davis is a worse case than Belle because it will take longer to get rid of him.

This year plus FOUR more. 

Belle had two years active with three years inactive. 

Belle did not talk to reporters, Davis spews forth drivel

Belle could be put on the Sixty to free up a spot during the season, Davis eats up a roster spot 24/7/365

Belle was the worst contract ever signed by the Orioles, Davis will become that in time.

[jabba72]

2 hours ago, 25 Nuggets said:

So..... what I'm getting out of this is, Davis doesn't know what's wrong with him at the plate... and therefore he doesn't know how to fix it.

Or, he knows what's wrong, knows he can't fix it, and is lying to everybody to cover it up.

 

Personally I subscribe to this conspiracy - Chris Davis has lost vision of the ball.  He can't see it.  Like much of the rest of us when a 90+ mph ball is hurled at our vicinity, it's a blur to him.  Whatever medicine he's taking that is not adderall, is not doing its job from a business perspective.  And we are being fed lots of manure through the press.

But, the Orioles have begun tanking.  As such, why not bat your worst hitter fourth, especially when there is the perception that he should be hitting home runs?  Especially once they start trading pieces away, they can leave Davis in there to embarrass himself all season like when a manager leaves a pitcher in to "take one for the team" in a blowout loss.

His bat is noticeably slower too. Whatever supplements Markakis is taking, Davis needs to give him a call. 

[jabba72]

19 minutes ago, thezeroes said:

This year plus FOUR more. 

Belle had two years active with three years inactive. 

Belle did not talk to reporters, Davis spews forth drivel

Belle could be put on the Sixty to free up a spot during the season, Davis eats up a roster spot 24/7/365

Belle was the worst contract ever signed by the Orioles, Davis will become that in time.

Belles insurance covered 75% of that contract so it actually wasnt that costly to the O's. The O's played it as though it was devastating for a few years, though. 

[osfan83]

1 hour ago, SteveA said:

I think we've seen a bit of improvement, regardless of the stats.

He has CLEARLY been trying to hit tot he opposite field on this homestand, and I believe he has 3 opposite field hits.   He wasn't doing that earlier in the season.

At this point, just let him continue to try for a sample size longer than 6 or 7 games and see where it leads to stats wise.   (But I would much rather see him doing it from the lower third of the order).

And enough with the talk on unrealistic stuff that keeps popping up on these threads:

   -- "send him down" -- he can't be sent down without his permission, and the Players' Union would be extremely unhappy if he gave it

   -- "renegotiate the contract" or "negotiate a buyout" -- not gonna happen either

He will get every penny of the $161 million.    And we might as well keep him this year because it's a lost cause anyway.   So the earliest we are going to DFA him would be after the season.

Why would the players union care if he was sent down to gain his confidence back? He still gets paid, and hopefully he gets back to being a productive player. If I were Chris I might consider it. Would rather work hard at a lower lever to regain my confidence then look awful and risk this being the last year I play in the majors. Sure he will get paid, but I'm sure he loves the game and wants to play. If the O's DFA him after the season,  nobody is going to pick him up, he will get paid, but be out of baseball. 

[24fps]

57 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

This is why MLB needs to have opt out clauses when these superstar players fall below a certain production level.

Im not sure how to make it work but a mediocre season should be the minimum.

For Davis that would like something like

.240 30 homers and 80 RBI

or perhaps 80% of the production that the player did over his contract year and maybe averaged with the previous season.

for pitchers it could be tied to things that are in control of the pitcher such as era, strikeouts and walks etc ... avoiding wins and saves where the pitcher inherited another’s mess. 

Guaranteed contracts with highly restricted performance clauses is the bedrock foundation of the player's bargaining position.  Virtually every other point would be conceded before something like this would even reach the discussion stage - only to fail miserably in the end.  The Chris Davis contract isn't a reflection of some systemic problem in major league baseball.  At least not directly.  The Orioles have nobody to blame but themselves for this train wreck.

[Dark Helmet]

1 hour ago, Roll Tide said:

This is why MLB needs to have opt out clauses when these superstar players fall below a certain production level.

Im not sure how to make it work but a mediocre season should be the minimum.

For Davis that would like something like

.240 30 homers and 80 RBI

or perhaps 80% of the production that the player did over his contract year and maybe averaged with the previous season.

for pitchers it could be tied to things that are in control of the pitcher such as era, strikeouts and walks etc ... avoiding wins and saves where the pitcher inherited another’s mess. 

Teams should have an opt out clause. Make only signing bonuses guaranteed. Like the NFL does.

[SteveA]

3 minutes ago, Dark Helmet said:

Teams should have an opt out clause. Make only signing bonuses guaranteed. Like the NFL does.

So how many baseball seasons are you willing to cancel to get the players union to agree to that enormous concession?

Seems like it would be easier just NOT TO OFFER 7 YEAR CONTRACTS TO 30+ YEAR OLD PLAYERS.   That solves the whole problem without cancelling the World Series two years in a row.

[TouchemAll]

We just have to continue to grind.

You know what, if I hear this Buck'ism ONE MORE TIME I MAY PUKE.

it's old, and worn out, just like the entire team plays...

I got some news for ya Mr Davis the guy who's turning in one of the WORST seasons in MLB history is NOT THE CORE OR GUTS OF THIS TEAM.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP...