Roch: "I don't expect Villar back with the O's in 2020."

[Il BuonO]

20 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Angelos isn't in charge anymore.

I also think not wanting to pay Villar doesn't mean the team is going into full tank mode.

Pretty sure there are two of the Angelos family in charge. And has the elder Angelos passed? Haven’t you questioned the significance of Elias’ tenure in regards to Davis not being released (in whatever form that may take place)? I tend to agree that particular problem doesn’t give me the feeling it’s by his own choice. And that question will linger until Davis is gone.

Nah, I’m not comforted by the fact that two guys who are the sons of the current owner are in charge, so called.

Agree regarding a non-tender of Villar.

 

 

[weams]

17 hours ago, SteveA said:

Once the offseason starts it's very hard to trade someone when it's common knowledge he will be non-tendered.   We were able to trade Jason Johnson rather than non-tender him... we got Jemile Weeks.

Jim Johnson. 

[Philip]

9 hours ago, Sessh said:

No, I don't want Wilkerson DFA'd now at all. I'm just saying I would prefer not to put all my eggs in that basket and not at least try to bring back Villar on a 2-3M one year deal. If he finishes strong, I might go to four, but not much higher. Wilkerson has a place on this team. I just don't view him as a 2B/SS option to the extent that I would be ok letting Villar go. I'm not sure Wilkerson is an everyday player, but he's fine in the role he's in right now.

No problem at all with Stevie being on the team and if we have some disaster, it's nice to know he can play 2B/SS if we needed him to. I would still rather have Villar, Alberto or Martin at those positions. I think if we have Wilkerson playing the IF, then something has gone horribly wrong. I'm even ok with Nunez at third. I would rather have the same IF options going into next season because we don't have much going on depth wise there.

Ok I don’t have any disagreement with that, except that Wilk was an infielder and he didn’t magically forget how, so he could easily go back to 2B/utility if Villar left, and Villar is such a maddening player I don’t want to pay too much for him. He’s obviously with us for the year but I think he will be non-tendered because his production is less important than his pay.

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Il BuonO said:

Pretty sure there are two of the Angelos family in charge. And has the elder Angelos passed? Haven’t you questioned the significance of Elias’ tenure in regards to Davis not being released (in whatever form that may take place)? I tend to agree that particular problem doesn’t give me the feeling it’s by his own choice. And that question will linger until Davis is gone.

Nah, I’m not comforted by the fact that two guys who are the sons of the current owner are in charge, so called.

Agree regarding a non-tender of Villar.

 

 

The singular form being used, combined with the context, led me to believe they were talking about Peter and not the sons.  Everything we have heard indicates that Peter is no longer making decisions on the team.  

[Il BuonO]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

The singular form being used, combined with the context, led me to believe they were talking about Peter and not the sons.  Everything we have heard indicates that Peter is no longer making decisions on the team.  

So, again, why your doubt as to Elias and his position in regards to Davis? If PA really no longer has any voice in the day to day ops, then do you believe the sons have given Elias a mandate regarding CD? And if so, does it really matter that they are ‘running’ things instead of the old man?

I’m not selling an Orioles conspiracy, but I’m also not in the group of people who want Davis gone without understanding the current construction of this team.

 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Il BuonO said:

So, again, why your doubt as to Elias and his position in regards to Davis? If PA really no longer has any voice in the day to day ops, then do you believe the sons have given Elias a mandate regarding CD? And if so, does it really matter that they are ‘running’ things instead of the old man?

I’m not selling an Orioles conspiracy, but I’m also not in the group of people who want Davis gone without understanding the current construction of this team.

 

I think the sons don't want to eat the contract.

I don't think that just because the sons won't budge on Davis means that they will act the same as Peter in other manners.  We have already seen some differences.

[Il BuonO]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

I think the sons don't want to eat the contract.

I don't think that just because the sons won't budge on Davis means that they will act the same as Peter in other manners.  We have already seen some differences.

I’ll agree. However, saying they have apparently some of the same tendencies as their infamous meddling father doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzies. It also doesn’t mean Elias doesn’t have full control of day to day ops, the Davis debacle notwithstanding.

I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and credit him, not them for the changes he’s already made structurally. He’ll get some time to address the bad things inherited from the previous FO.

[wildcard]

3 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

The Orioles are not going to tender Villar. They also aren't going to sign him to a 3/15 contract.  You haven't been paying attention if you think that.  Elias just couldn't get any salary relief or anything of value in return at the deadline.  He gone.

What about non tendering and then offering him 1/3?

[Philip]

24 minutes ago, Il BuonO said:

So, again, why your doubt as to Elias and his position in regards to Davis? If PA really no longer has any voice in the day to day ops, then do you believe the sons have given Elias a mandate regarding CD? And if so, does it really matter that they are ‘running’ things instead of the old man?

I’m not selling an Orioles conspiracy, but I’m also not in the group of people who want Davis gone without understanding the current construction of this team.

 

The one and only reason Davis is on the roster is the hope that he will return to form. Most of us have already determined that he’s not going to return to form and would just as soon let him go.

The money is spent either way, so I guess the only reason they’re keeping him is because they want to get some value, and right now  they don’t consider his roster spot to be an impediment to that desire. 

If Mike went to the bosses and insisted that he needed the roster spot for player development or a valuation I bet they would let him release Davis, but hasn’t gotten to that point yet.

[Philip]

3 minutes ago, wildcard said:

What about non tendering and then offering him 1/3?

It’s conceivable that they could nontender him and bring him back, but that would only be after he looked long and hard for anything better because he doesn’t want to deal with the insult of having to come back at minimum wage.

[Moose Milligan]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

Angelos isn't in charge anymore.

I also think not wanting to pay Villar doesn't mean the team is going into full tank mode.

Let's amend that.  Angelos isn't in charge anymore, until it's all things Chris Davis related.  Then Angelos comes swooping in.

[Il BuonO]

8 minutes ago, Philip said:

The one and only reason Davis is on the roster is the hope that he will return to form. Most of us have already determined that he’s not going to return to form and would just as soon let him go.

The money is spent either way, so I guess the only reason they’re keeping him is because they want to get some value, and right now  they don’t consider his roster spot to be an impediment to that desire. 

If Mike went to the bosses and insisted that he needed the roster spot for player development or a valuation I bet they would let him release Davis, but hasn’t gotten to that point yet.

Yes. Exactly what I’ve been saying.

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, Philip said:

The one and only reason Davis is on the roster is the hope that he will return to form. Most of us have already determined that he’s not going to return to form and would just as soon let him go.

The money is spent either way, so I guess the only reason they’re keeping him is because they want to get some value, and right now  they don’t consider his roster spot to be an impediment to that desire. 

If Mike went to the bosses and insisted that he needed the roster spot for player development or a valuation I bet they would let him release Davis, but hasn’t gotten to that point yet.

I disagree.  I think the one and only reason Davis is on the roster is that ownership refuses to eat the contract.

I will agree that I don't think Elias has had a face to face trying to convince them to release him, I think he knew the situation when he agreed to join the organization.

[ThomasTomasz]

55 minutes ago, Il BuonO said:

Pretty sure there are two of the Angelos family in charge. And has the elder Angelos passed? Haven’t you questioned the significance of Elias’ tenure in regards to Davis not being released (in whatever form that may take place)? I tend to agree that particular problem doesn’t give me the feeling it’s by his own choice. And that question will linger until Davis is gone.

Nah, I’m not comforted by the fact that two guys who are the sons of the current owner are in charge, so called.

Agree regarding a non-tender of Villar.

 

 

See, the whole Billy Joel concert thing gives a lot of insight into what role, if any, Peter has at this point.  Up and down, he swore for years that the stadium was for baseball only.  The only thing that he bent on that was a visit from the Pope.  He kept turning down offers for concerts over the years.  

So, not even a year after the sons appeared in public after hiring Mike Elias, we have our first concert at OPACY.  I've heard from multiple people that it was so successful, it's happening again, and that they are trying to get at least one, maybe two, scheduled before it gets too cold.  

If the sons decided that they were going to go against dad's wishes on this, they will surely make their own decision about Chris Davis. 

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, ThomasTomasz said:

See, the whole Billy Joel concert thing gives a lot of insight into what role, if any, Peter has at this point.  Up and down, he swore for years that the stadium was for baseball only.  The only thing that he bent on that was a visit from the Pope.  He kept turning down offers for concerts over the years.  

So, not even a year after the sons appeared in public after hiring Mike Elias, we have our first concert at OPACY.  I've heard from multiple people that it was so successful, it's happening again, and that they are trying to get at least one, maybe two, scheduled before it gets too cold.  

If the sons decided that they were going to go against dad's wishes on this, they will surely make their own decision about Chris Davis. 

But it is possible that their decision will mirror that of their father.