Jump to content

If you are going to move Villar to save money you might as well release Davis


atomic

Recommended Posts

I don’t think there’s any relation between the two. They’d still be paying Davis whether he’s on the team or not. That’s obviously not at all the same conditions with Villar. Apples and oranges as the saying goes...

 

Though, I think they should release Davis. So we agree on that much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What does Davis have to do with Villar?  Trading Villar means saving about $10M. 

Releasing Davis doesn't do anything besides keeping people from talking about him.  You'll still owe him over $60M.  It's all style over substance.

Saving $10 million takes the sting out having to pay $60 million in dead money.

Logically, there is no relationship between the two. Psychologically and emotionally, there can be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sportsfan8703 said:

We probably should find out what DJ Stewart and Dwight Smith can do before we get rid of them.  

Sure, why not?  In Spring Training, Mancini should be playing first full time at ST, and the outfield competition should be between Hays, Santander, Stewart (injured), Mountcastle, Diaz, Mullins, McKenna and Smith. Benching Davis clears a spot in our most talent-rich part of the upper minors - the outfield. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

O's came very close to losing out on a ~6 win season from Steve Pearce because of roster constraints, so theoretically the impact of Davis taking up a slot could be significant.

Yes, let's use wild, off-the-wall, once in a generation outliers as justification for moves.  The O's came very close to losing out on a six-win season from Steve Pearce, but luckily 29 other teams let him pass through waivers multiple times because they didn't see it coming, either.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DrungoHazewood said:

Yes, let's use wild, off-the-wall, once in a generation outliers as justification for moves.  The O's came very close to losing out on a six-win season from Steve Pearce, but luckily 29 other teams let him pass through waivers multiple times because they didn't see it coming, either.

If it gets Davis off the 40 man I sure will.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DrungoHazewood said:

Yes, let's use wild, off-the-wall, once in a generation outliers as justification for moves.  The O's came very close to losing out on a six-win season from Steve Pearce, but luckily 29 other teams let him pass through waivers multiple times because they didn't see it coming, either.

I'd rather have a lottery ticket round 3 Rule V pick than Chris Davis. I don't care if he gets better. He's not part of the future here and everyone knows it.

If you get rid of Villar, you should get rid of Davis. They're not related except in the rationale for the roster move. An organization that's focused on the future should turn over every available rock to prepare for that future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LookinUp said:

I'd rather have a lottery ticket round 3 Rule V pick than Chris Davis. I don't care if he gets better. He's not part of the future here and everyone knows it.

If you get rid of Villar, you should get rid of Davis. They're not related except in the rationale for the roster move. An organization that's focused on the future should turn over every available rock to prepare for that future.

I'd like to see Davis released, too.  I'm a little surprised he's still here.  But the impact of having him here, at least until opening day, is minimal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DrungoHazewood said:

I'd like to see Davis released, too.  I'm a little surprised he's still here.  But the impact of having him here, at least until opening day, is minimal.

Agree. Like I said, I'd rather have the lottery ticket (e.g., minimal value) to Chris Davis, who has no value. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, oriole said:

I don’t think there’s any relation between the two. They’d still be paying Davis whether he’s on the team or not. That’s obviously not at all the same conditions with Villar. Apples and oranges as the saying goes...

 

Though, I think they should release Davis. So we agree on that much. 

Keeping Davis on the team over replacing him is only costing you the league minimum.  He is providing nothing to the team positive.  Fans don't want to see him play.  We are in a total rebuild.  We saved $10 million on releasing Villar why not give us a new outlook by removing Davis and  paying someone $500k to take his place.  

We aren't competing. Even if Davis by some miracle became a good player again it wouldn't help us compete and no one would trade for him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, atomic said:

Keeping Davis on the team over replacing him is only costing you the league minimum.  He is providing nothing to the team positive.  Fans don't want to see him play.  We are in a total rebuild. 

I want CD gone more than most so I agree with your post, especially the new look without him. However, in the 4 games I went to last year, each time CD came to the plate, he got a nice round of applause, not a round of boos. That is too small a sample size to be meaningful, but maybe the causal fan that still attends applauds because they recognize him. Maybe that's worth something to the front office so they want to make every effort to save him before cutting him. I know if I go to any games in 2020 there will be a LH starter to minimize my viewing displeasure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What does Davis have to do with Villar?  Trading Villar means saving about $10M. 

Releasing Davis doesn't do anything besides keeping people from talking about him.  You'll still owe him over $60M.  It's all style over substance.

Well, Elias said everything is all about their "strategic objectives, which prioritize the future right now." 

How does keeping Chris Davis address that? We all get he's a sunk cost, but what strategic objective includes keeping around the biggest albatross contract in baseball. The one that hopes he gets hurt and they can recoup some money through insurance? The one that hopes Davis will tire of being a laughing stock and retire? 

You're right, releasing Villar saves them money while keeping Davis does not, but keeping Davis also doesn't focus on strategic objectives, which prioritize the future right now!

  • Upvote 1
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

    • 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.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...