The Davis/Elias meeting

[mdbdotcom]

Maybe Davis just made up the whole meeting with Elias, just like he made up that he had worked with the hitting coach during the off-season a few years ago. We already know he's a liar, we just can't be sure when he's lying.

[wildcard]

19 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Dude, I think we all know that Davis will be back next year, most of us, as you've shown by the poll you've posted, have relegated ourselves to the idea that he will be back.  

But you're the only one here making arguments as to why he should be back.  Which again, is a really weird hill to die on.  

Its factual. Not emotional.

[mdbdotcom]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

Its factual. Not emotional.

It's your opinion, which is just as valuable as mine.

[wildcard]

12 minutes ago, 24fps said:

If Chris Davis were merely a bench player, we wouldn't be having this conversation.  

Oh but he will be a bench player.  Mountcastle pretty much assures that there is not a starting spot for Davis if there is no one injured after April 10th.

[mdbdotcom]

1 minute ago, wildcard said:

Oh but he will be a bench player.  Mountcastle pretty much assures that there is not a starting spot for Davis if there is no one injured after April 10th.

I don't expect to see Mountcastle up until the second half of 2020, if at all.

[wildcard]

5 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

It's your opinion, which is just as valuable as mine.

True

[wildcard]

1 minute ago, mdbdotcom said:

I don't expect to see Mountcastle up until the second half of 2020, if at all.

Wow.  Why?

[mdbdotcom]

Just now, wildcard said:

Wow.  Why?

Because he worked on two new positions this year, and I would expect Elias would want him to have more time at them before bringing him up. And because I think they will want him to start taking some walks before bringing him up. He'll only be 23 next season, no reason to rush him, and the team isn't going to win, anyway.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, mdbdotcom said:

Because he worked on two new positions this year, and I would expect Elias would want him to have more time at them before bringing him up. And because I think they will want him to start taking some walks before bringing him up. He'll only be 23 next season, no reason to rush him, and the team isn't going to win, anyway.

Promoting him next season is not rushing him.

There is nothing about his game that can not be worked on at the ML level instead of AAA.

[24fps]

6 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Yeah, we would.  Because having a bench player at that salary rate is stupid.

And even if Davis were somehow making the league minimum and still not producing at his rate, it'd be stupid.  You could have had Little Yaz here instead of Davis, maybe.  Or could have kept Drew Jackson AND Wilkerson.  

Even next year with 26 men you could have two super utility types that can play multiple positions that will almost certainly produce more offense than Davis. 

Davis on the bench just doesn't make sense at any rate, no matter how the roster is constructed, no matter how many open spots there are because you can give that spot to someone who's a better glove man at multiple positions AND produce more offense, even if that offense isn't that great because...well, Davis.  If the MLB roster expanded to, like, 30 players, MAYBE you could make a small argument to keep Davis.  But even then, wouldn't you rather have another backup outfielder?  Or another bullpen arm?  

A contract the size of Davis' creates its own gravity.  It is the sole reason he is still on the team now and likely for next season.  I agree with Wildcard that Elias won't move to cut him until he's clearly blocking someone.  I strongly disagree with characterizing him as a "bench player".  Calling him a bench player is like calling a sucking chest wound a "respiratory problem".

If it were up to me, Davis wouldn't have made it out of spring training this year regardless of money owed.   But I don't think you can fault the people on the hook for that amount of money for wanting to be completely sure that it's irrevocably lost.  I don't think the team has reached that point yet even if all of us here have.

[wildcard]

8 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

Because he worked on two new positions this year, and I would expect Elias would want him to have more time at them before bringing him up. And because I think they will want him to start taking some walks before bringing him up. He'll only be 23 next season, no reason to rush him, and the team isn't going to win, anyway.

I don't have enough information to be sure on this one.   For all I know Mountcastle is as good a defensive outfielder as Stewart.  

[wildcard]

2 minutes ago, 24fps said:

A contract the size of Davis' creates its own gravity.  It is the sole reason he is still on the team now and likely for next season.  I agree with Wildcard that Elias won't move to cut him until he's clearly blocking someone.  I strongly disagree with characterizing him as a "bench player".  Calling him a bench player is like calling a sucking chest wound a "respiratory problem".

If it were up to me, Davis wouldn't have made it out of spring training this year regardless of money owed.   But I don't think you can fault the people on the hook for that amount of money for wanting to be completely sure that it's irrevocably lost.  I don't think the team has reached that point yet even if all of us here have.

A bench player is someone who fills in for a regular when the regular needs a break or is injured.  That is what Davis' role is at this point.

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, 24fps said:

A contract the size of Davis' creates its own gravity.  It is the sole reason he is still on the team now and likely for next season.  I agree with Wildcard that Elias won't move to cut him until he's clearly blocking someone.  I strongly disagree with characterizing him as a "bench player".  Calling him a bench player is like calling a sucking chest wound a "respiratory problem".

If it were up to me, Davis wouldn't have made it out of spring training this year regardless of money owed.   But I don't think you can fault the people on the hook for that amount of money for wanting to be completely sure that it's irrevocably lost.  I don't think the team has reached that point yet even if all of us here have.

I can, because we had enough data to know that they were not going to recoup any of the money.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, wildcard said:

A bench player is someone who fills in for a regular when the regular needs a break or is injured.  That is what Davis' role is at this point.

Can you name a team that has a "bench player" who can only play first and DH (and isn't good there)?

[Tony-OH]

It's is completely illogical for anyone to make excuses for why it's ok to have Chris Davis back on this roster. If he's back, it will only show that the Angelos brothers are refusing to accept their father's mistake and are not the leaders we thoughts they could be.

The only way Elias wants Davis back is because he was told he's coming back. No MLB GM wants Chris Davis on their roster at any price.