Jump to content

Please Retire, Chris Davis


AceKing

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Il BuonO said:

Is it though? I mean if riding the bench is representative of that factor, then I’d say it sounds underwhelming.

I think guys are smart enough to know what’s going on. 

But actually its not.  The Os owed Cashner significant money, he was performing well and his reward was to be traded against his will.  

The message is and pretty much always has been that baseball players are assets and/or liabilities and FOs are going to do whatever they can to maximize the return both in terms of team performance and organizational cash flow.   There's no loyalty on either side now

I think the players understand the business of baseball at this stage of their careers.  They aren't naive 18 year olds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, GuidoSarducci said:

But actually its not.  The Os owed Cashner significant money, he was performing well and his reward was to be traded against his will.  

The message is and pretty much always has been that baseball players are assets and/or liabilities and FOs are going to do whatever they can to maximize the return both in terms of team performance and organizational cash flow.   There's no loyalty on either side now

I think the players understand the business of baseball at this stage of their careers.  They aren't naive 18 year olds. 

Actually it’s not underwhelming? I agree players are assets. So, then who cares if they don’t like how they’re used in that capacity? 

I don’t know how your example of Cashner is even remotely related to that of a player who’s so bad it’s accepted that he remains on a roster solely because of the money owed to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Il BuonO said:

Is it though? I mean if riding the bench is representative of that factor, then I’d say it sounds underwhelming.

I think guys are smart enough to know what’s going on. 

Yea, they know that Davis can't play anymore and he's bringing the rest of the team down because he's owed a lot of money.  Maybe they know that they got sent down because Davis is taking up a spot on the 25.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, drjohnnyfeva said:

Never said they had involvement in the decision to sign Davis - - -  altho to believe that Brady or Buck wasn't in one of the son's ears or their intermediaries politicking to talk to dad, I find that hard to imagine.  It was clearly all on Peter, tho, to sign him - no one is disputing that.  It has been well established and I agree it, among others is the reason, Buck and Brady and others are no longer here.  That's the good of the situation as it stands.  But the situation is in the sons' laps now.

If Peter is out, then the sons have inherited the problem despite not actually calling for the signing.  That's what I mean about laying it in Dad's lap.  It WAS his decision and whether they agree with it or not, by doing nothing, there it sits.   A reminder of those things you pointed out.  Maybe they don't want to upset him or feel like they would be insulting him or his decision, idk.  But CD on this team is a contradiction to what the sons talked about when hiring Elias.  He is the worst player on the team and, until recently, has gotten full playing time in the midst of auditions galore everywhere else.  Might Mancini have shown ability at 1B?  Anyone else?

It's a bad reminder of the bad old days.

Good response. Comprehensive. I understood it. Thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Il BuonO said:

Is it though? I mean if riding the bench is representative of that factor, then I’d say it sounds underwhelming.

I think guys are smart enough to know what’s going on. 

But is that healthy?  On a team who's payroll is nearly double his salary as its total?  It's just seems a very dark cloud that's hanging over the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, drjohnnyfeva said:

But is that healthy?  On a team who's payroll is nearly double his salary as its total?  It's just seems a very dark cloud that's hanging over the team.

No.

Here’s the thing: if I’m playing I realize that the only thing keeping him on the roster is the contract. Whether it’s a nod to the old man by his sons, or their decision that they won’t throw away money without Davis at least showing up. His being on the roster is specious reasoning at best, but seeing his butt on the bench is justified because he’s terrible.

The message is still, “You earn playing time by contributing.” And he ain’t.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Il BuonO said:

Actually it’s not underwhelming? I agree players are assets. So, then who cares if they don’t like how they’re used in that capacity? 

I don’t know how your example of Cashner is even remotely related to that of a player who’s so bad it’s accepted that he remains on a roster solely because of the money owed to him.

I meant to counter the can_of_corns statement "Money owed is the most important factor in if you are on the team" 

If Cashner hadn't played well, he couldn't have been traded and the Os probably just would have kept him until the year was over.  In a way,  he played himself out of Baltimore. 

If Davis was playing well, he would in all probably be gone too.  We would have had to eat substantial salary, but would have saved money in the long run. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, GuidoSarducci said:

I meant to counter the can_of_corns statement "Money owed is the most important factor in if you are on the team" 

If Cashner hadn't played well, he couldn't have been traded and the Os probably just would have kept him until the year was over.  In a way,  he played himself out of Baltimore. 

If Davis was playing well, he would in all probably be gone too.  We would have had to eat substantial salary, but would have saved money in the long run. 

I don't think any team is going to trade for Davis.  Davis also has full no trade protection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, interloper said:

My latest theory is that, based on Elias' latest comments, Davis gets the offseason (the first full one under Elias) to "make adjustments" aka do it Elias' way. And they test him out in Spring Training and make a call then. 

I agree with you. The tone from Hyde and Elias has definitely shifted.  Melewski was saying the other day they've placed some demands on adjustments they expect him to make. 

I think Mountcastle ultimately forces the issue. If Davis is doing the same thing in Spring Training, I could see them releasing him. Which would have totally shocked me if you asked me earlier this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, interloper said:

My latest theory is that, based on Elias' latest comments, Davis gets the offseason (the first full one under Elias) to "make adjustments" aka do it Elias' way. And they test him out in Spring Training and make a call then. 

Eh, it's not like Elias was hired in late January.  He didn't have a full offseason last year but IIRC, he was hired in mid-November.  I doubt there was much that could have been done to really turn Davis around that Elias missed out on between late September and mid-November.  

We'll see.  I dunno, it's the one thing that absolutely has to be addressed this offseason, IMO.  If they don't want to have some of the younger players like Mountcastle on the OD 2020 roster, fine, fine, whatever.  But if Davis is on the OD 2020 roster, it's a travashamockery. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, theocean said:

I agree with you. The tone from Hyde and Elias has definitely shifted.  Melewski was saying the other day they've placed some demands on adjustments they expect him to make. 

I think Mountcastle ultimately forces the issue. If Davis is doing the same thing in Spring Training, I could see them releasing him. Which would have totally shocked me if you asked me earlier this year.

Ownership has told Elias and Hyde that Davis gets one last chance. Even then would a good spring training convince anyone that Davis finally got his swing straightened out? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Interesting article …. Pretty surprising stat with all the guys that we lost to injury       https://www.masnsports.com/blog/orioles-made-it-through-rough-t
    • The same thing was happening was MacDonald was the DC and when Wink was the DC, that makes me put most of the blame on Harbaugh 
    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...