Chris Davis, 2019

[wildbillhiccup]

On 11/9/2019 at 8:49 AM, DrungoHazewood said:

I don't know if Cal's tinkering (which was often rumored to be driven or aided by Cal Sr.) helped or hindered.  Cal wasn't the most consistent hitter (cue Drungo chiding people for citing (in)consistency without any definition or metrics or evidence) and I often thought that he'd be better off just picking a reasonable, balanced stance and sticking with it rather than completely altering his baseline hitting setup every 45 seconds.

Agreed, it's definitely debatable, but my main point was that he was a bonafide HOFer and still willing to try and make changes to better himself. Chris Davis, on the other hand, just keeps doing the same thing over and over again. He's like a government worker just sitting at his desk playing solitaire everyday until he hits his retirement date. And his stubbornness really has me questioning his work ethic. Wanting to be better isn't enough. You have have to make physical and/or psychological changes to your approach and he doesn't seem to be doing either. That's not the type of example you want to set for your younger players. I realize the team is still on the hook for huge amount of money, but I really think that cutting Davis would be addition by subtraction at this point.

[Frobby]

3 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

My point is / was Ripken , bonafide HOFer ,was willing to mix things up to try and get better whereas Chris Davis, a player coming off the worst two collective seasons ever in the modern era is not. And in terms of the quote does it really matter? Have you seem anything, over the last two years, that suggests Chris Davis is significantly trying to change his approach to hitting? I sure haven't. 

I’d rather just leave Ripken out of it.   He did what he thought worked best for him.    Lots of other players, including Hall of Famers, didn’t change their stance or swing much over their careers.    I don’t think doing it one way or the other is the right approach.    Different methods for different players.   
 

As to Davis specifically, he definitely should have an open mind on anything and everything.   I don’t know what Elias has him working on this winter, but apparently it’s something.    He’ll either come back next spring looking improved, or he won’t.   I really don’t care how he gets there.   

[wildbillhiccup]

10 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I’d rather just leave Ripken out of it.   He did what he thought worked best for him.    Lots of other players, including Hall of Famers, didn’t change their stance or swing much over their careers.    I don’t think doing it one way or the other is the right approach.    Different methods for different players.   
 

As to Davis specifically, he definitely should have an open mind on anything and everything.   I don’t know what Elias has him working on this winter, but apparently it’s something.    He’ll either come back next spring looking improved, or he won’t.   I really don’t care how he gets there.   

I think you're still missing my point. Chris Davis has been "good" for roughly 30% of his MLB career. That amounts to three seasons. When you're success rate is that low not making adjustments isn't an option. Or at least not one that the team paying you an exorbitant of money should tolerate. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, wildbillhiccup said:

I think you're still missing my point. Chris Davis has been "good" for roughly 30% of his MLB career. That amounts to three seasons. When you're success rate is that low not making adjustments isn't an option. Or at least not one that the team paying you an exorbitant of money should tolerate. 

What option do they have?

[wildbillhiccup]

11 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

What option do they have?

Cut him. It's addition by subtraction at this point. He brings nothing to the table and his stubbornness is a terrible example for the younger players. 

[Frobby]

10 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

I think you're still missing my point. Chris Davis has been "good" for roughly 30% of his MLB career. That amounts to three seasons. When you're success rate is that low not making adjustments isn't an option. Or at least not one that the team paying you an exorbitant of money should tolerate. 

I don’t accept that Davis is doing nothing to try to change his performance.    From the same article that references him deciding not to go to a hitting school:

In the final weeks of the season, both Davis and Elias have referenced a “routine-based” program with designs on getting Davis to be more like the player who hit 197 home runs from 2012 to 2016 than the one who hardly saw the field in September the past two seasons. Speaking Monday after the announcement that he and his wife, Jill, were making a record $3 million donation to the University of Maryland Children’s Hospital, Davis said he’s already seeing the returns.

“There’s just direction,” he said. “I felt like last offseason, I had all this motivation and really no direction, so I was really just like, ‘Well, I guess I’ll try this and see if it works.’ And I feel like now, we have a plan in place, and we actually know what we’re trying to accomplish.”

And from Elias:

“He’s working. Without going into details, we’ve got a lot of things that he’s working on this winter. I don’t necessarily expect for that to get him back to the best seasons he’s ever had in his career, but we do think he can be better than what he has been the last two or three years.

https://www.masnsports.com/school-of-roch/2019/11/more-from-mike-elias-on-hot-stove-show.html

So, show me.

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

Cut him. It's addition by subtraction at this point. He brings nothing to the table and his stubbornness is a terrible example for the younger players. 

Oh no, pay me all my money years early.  Force me to retire a multimillionaire at 34.

[Frobby]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Oh no, pay me all my money years early.  Force me to retire a multimillionaire at 34.

I don’t believe that cutting a player accelerated his payments.    But I agree with your point.    You don’t cut a player on a long term deal to teach him a lesson.    You do it because you think the player is a lost cause.    I reached that point with Davis a couple of months into last season, but if Elias thinks there’s still some shot at material improvement, let him go for it.   

[7Mo]

1 minute ago, Frobby said:

I don’t believe that cutting a player accelerated his payments.    But I agree with your point.    You don’t cut a player on a long term deal to teach him a lesson.    You do it because you think the player is a lost cause.    I reached that point with Davis a couple of months into last season, but if Elias thinks there’s still some shot at material improvement, let him go for it.   

The only thing I'd argue with is I'm not sure it's Elias that thinks there's a shot. He may just be doing the only thing he possibly can. 

[Can_of_corn]

8 minutes ago, John Welch said:

The only thing I'd argue with is I'm not sure it's Elias that thinks there's a shot. He may just be doing the only thing he possibly can. 

We all know I think it's ownership.

[7Mo]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

We all know I think it's ownership.

Have you had folks say you're as subtle as a sledgehammer?

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, John Welch said:

Have you had folks say you're as subtle as a sledgehammer?

Not in those exact terms.

I can do subtle, I just don't find it works well on online forums.  Most of the time part of your audience misses blatant sarcasm.

 

[Frobby]

40 minutes ago, John Welch said:

The only thing I'd argue with is I'm not sure it's Elias that thinks there's a shot. He may just be doing the only thing he possibly can. 

 

32 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

We all know I think it's ownership.

I don’t know.   It’s certainly a substantial possibility.    

[TheOtherRipken]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

We all know I think it's ownership.

I never thought I’d defend the Angelos’s but if I had that much invested in one player and was fielding a 50 win team I’d hold off as long as possible to see if I could recoup even $1 back off that bad investment.  

[Can_of_corn]

20 minutes ago, TheOtherRipken said:

I never thought I’d defend the Angelos’s but if I had that much invested in one player and was fielding a 50 win team I’d hold off as long as possible to see if I could recoup even $1 back off that bad investment.  

I thought that was a worthy gambit when he sounded all upset about his poor performance.  He seems resigned to it now.  I don't think we have any chance of him not collecting every dollar.