Waiving/non-tendering Villar: pro or con?

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, birdwatcher55 said:

What if he accepts the qualifying offer? You could spend in excess of $27 mil on this guy on a likely 100 loss team over a two year period. Pretty sure this is something the A's wouldn't do.

If he's actually a 4 win player he wouldn't accept it. 

[gtown]

41 minutes ago, Enjoy Terror said:

 

Its like going to the grocery store and finding out the last pint of ice cream is $11 and it should be like $5. So you say no thanks we have Oreos at home, despite the fact you make a six figure household income and can afford an $11 tub of ice cream. 

All the while you’ve got this dude named Roll Tide shouting from the bleachers that you’re a greedy son of a gun because you left the store without the $11 ice cream. 

The ice cream analogy only works if you're a contending team that wants to eat the ice cream now.  Perhaps there are better deals on other ice creams on the free agent market.

If you want to stick with the analogy, the Orioles are stockpiling ice cream or other goodies in their freezer for another season. The Orioles already own that overpriced Villar flavor. What they did was sell it for money that won't put anything into the freezer. A more prudent move would be to hold on to the ice cream, and when another team is desperate to win in July, trade the ice cream to help fill your freezer.

[Luke-OH]

11 minutes ago, Ripken said:

Why are we playing poker?  He could have gotten that return without the release.

This move was to try and get move value than was being offered for him previously. It might not work, but that's the whole point of this vs just non-tendering him. 

[mdbdotcom]

2 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

This move was to try and get move value than was being offered for him previously. It might not work, but that's the whole point of this vs just non-tendering him. 

It also serves as notice to teams that the O's intend to non-tender him and if they don't trade for him now they will have to try to acquire him as a free agent, which could turn into an auction and might require a multi-year deal. It's also a good indication that several teams are interested in him. 

[gtown]

2 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

This move was to try and get move value than was being offered for him previously. It might not work, but that's the whole point of this vs just non-tendering him. 

That is the best justification I've seen, but I still think it's the wrong move and here is why. 

Villar has more value at the deadline than in the offseason. In the offseason, contending teams are looking at their budget, and Villar's arbitration numbers might make him less of an option--there are other 2B that might be more affordable or better value for $$.

At the deadline,  especially for a team with an injured 2B, the money owed means a lot less when you want to win. Even as an expensive pinch runner, Villar has value at the deadline. If he has a strong first half of 2020, his value is even higher..

[mdbdotcom]

6 minutes ago, gtown said:

That is the best justification I've seen, but I still think it's the wrong move and here is why. 

Villar has more value at the deadline than in the offseason. In the offseason, contending teams are looking at their budget, and Villar's arbitration numbers might make him less of an option--there are other 2B that might be more affordable or better value for $$.

At the deadline,  especially for a team with an injured 2B, the money owed means a lot less when you want to win. Even as an expensive pinch runner, Villar has value at the deadline. If he has a strong first half of 2020, his value is even higher..

Unless his season is curtailed by injury or is just plain bad, in which case we remain stuck with his salary.

[Roll Tide]

2 minutes ago, mdbdotcom said:

Unless his season is curtailed by injury or is just plain bad, in which case we remain stuck with his salary.

Who cares! They won't spend the saved money later so its a moot point! Its a better isk than possibly losing him for nothing!

[Pushmonkey]

Man Roch is ramping up the Angelos propaganda. He is Saying saving 10 mil is a good thing and waiver is good because it saves money. However, if the dead zombie owner really cared about just cutting costs he would cut Davis. That’s a cost cutting move that everyone would support, this is just a dumb business move. 

[ThomasTomasz]

As much as this sucks to say it, this is asset management plain and simple.  We couldn't find a taker for Villar at the deadline, and the same could be said right now, likely due to the salary constraints that were set on him due to the estimated arbitration number.  

This probably speaks to the value of a guy who will be 29 next May, has a career .328 OBP, 97 wRC and whose biggest asset is speed and defense, which is probably least important right now (not to mention, they diminish with age, and defensive metrics were sour on Villar's performance at 2B last year.)  

So if we couldn't move him now with the $7-$10 million price tag, what are the chances of getting any sort of good return at the deadline for Villar?  At that point, this is where we talk about asset management.  Odds are high that we would still be paying most of his contract next year, and that the only pieces we would see in return constitute a lottery pick.  Is that lottery pick worth potentially $10 million?  

Personally, I dont think so.  I would rather invest that $10 million is the development coaches, expanding the analytics departments, international scouting departments, etc.  A lot goes into that, and not just coach salaries.  There are travel budgets (air fare, lodging), benefits (health insurance, vacation etc), and purchasing technology and upgrading facilities.  I think that $10 million could be used across the board for those things better than a player on the field, who might only bring back a lottery pick.  Plus, if we sign someone more defensively capable like Yolbert Sanchez, you improve the defense and hopefully that is a benefit to the pitchers on the mound.  

Again, that's just me.  One player doesn't get me that upset, especially when I realize the cost of doing business, and what the cost of adding and upgrading to the infrastructure that we have.  It sucks for Villar, because he became a fan favorite, did the right things and was a pleasure to chat with before games, but all of this is looking towards 2022 and beyond.  

[ThomasTomasz]

3 minutes ago, Pushmonkey said:

Man Roch is ramping up the Angelos propaganda. Saying saving 10 mil is a good thing and waiver is good saves money. However, if the dead zombie owner really cared about just cutting costs he would cut Davis. That’s a cost cutting move that everyone would support, this is just a dumb business move. 

There is no cutting costs with Davis.  He signed a guaranteed contract, so even if he is released, the Orioles owe him all of the money that they owe him today.  With Villar in arbitration, the Orioles don't owe him the money until they tender him a contract, which they won't be doing, which means they save the estimated amount of arbitration with him.  

[tntoriole]

13 hours ago, Philip said:

I’m a bit unclear on the motive. Ten million isn’t nothing, but the difference between what it and what the Orioles were willing to pay can’t any be any more than the guaranteed 3 mill they gave Chris Tillman to throw 30+ embarrassing innings.

On the other hand, it’s quite clear that no one else wanted him under the same financial constraints, so it’s obvious that the team is correct. Villar ISNT worth ten million. Else someone would give it to him. The waiver gamble, as I understand it, is that a team WILL give it to him, because claiming him off waivers means they claim the arbitration obligations too, right?(if that’s NOT right please LMK.)

So, Occam’s Razor says they are hoping to resign him at a much lower wage, because letting him go for nothing to save a couple mill is illogical. But they are willing to risk losing him completely and this move makes it clear to his agent how the wind blows.

I’m pretty sure Elias laid some ground rules when he took the job and being cheap just to be cheap is one of his dealbreakers.

So I’m willing to wait and see what happens.

BTW this probably guarantees an infielder Rule 5 pick 

If Villar gets 10 million in arb, I will eat my hat.  That number which is now out there as common wisdom is absurdly high.  He will be lucky to get 8 in arbitration imho. 

[Pushmonkey]

1 minute ago, ThomasTomasz said:

There is no cutting costs with Davis.  He signed a guaranteed contract, so even if he is released, the Orioles owe him all of the money that they owe him today.  With Villar in arbitration, the Orioles don't owe him the money until they tender him a contract, which they won't be doing, which means they save the estimated amount of arbitration with him.  

However, on the viewing from the average fan or even diehard fan this just doesn’t hold up. Saving oh we don’t want to pay 10 mil but the Os still have a 150 mil contract on the team looks dumb. A fan will say we have a player that looks like a 7year old learning how to swing a bat but will cut a at least passable Major League player on the team. Yeah but let’s cut the passable player but keep the 7 year old. Sure cost cutting

[7Mo]

12 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

We all know the Orioles are not going to compete next year, and if you can trade these guys for players that will help in the future than great,but to just give them away is almost fraudulent. 

 

Do you think a trade offer of guys who would help in the future has been turned down?

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

Come on Luke...... The $120 million per season number is $40 million more than they spent last season. Even of you don't believe they are getting, pocketing ,or whatever $60 million from MASN.

Thats not counting the money that businesses bury with expenses to avoid the tax man etc.

I’m not sure where you are getting the bolded number.    Per the Forbes article you cited, in 2018 the O’s had $251 mm in revenue, $161 mm in player expenses and had a $6.5 mm operating loss.    That implies they had non-player expenses of $96.5 mm or so.   I don’t know how that breaks down, but in the absence of any better source I have to accept it for discussion purposes.    You seem to be assuming major league payroll is the only expense a baseball team has, and that’s wrong.    And we don’t know how the non-major league team payroll expenses stacked up last year compared to 2018, but my bet would be they were substantially higher.    Do I expect the O’s still made a profit after their payroll cuts?    Yes, probably.    And hopefully that money gets spent on the team at the right time.    
 

 

[Roll Tide]

1 hour ago, Luke-OH said:

It's 100% true, the Dodgers and Red Sox for example (who spend a ton) had operating incomes of 95M and 84M respectively in 2018 (1st and 5th in MLB). The Orioles had negative 6.5M (28th). They had negative operating incomes in 2016 and 2017 as well. Yeah they spend more, but they make much more. 

 

Deleted