Would you offer Hays or Mountcastle a long term deal now?

[Frobby]

On 12/28/2019 at 8:16 PM, Philip said:

But Anticipating needs is Mike’s job, and was one of the most frustrating things about Dan.  The reason we have such a lopsided roster right now is because of really bad planning, but Mike is all set to right the ship, and is setting up a very good foundation, so it is reasonable to expect that future moves will be made to anticipate needs, and our own improved analysis will produce better players than we have now.

* * *

And lastly, I haven’t checked, but I think only what, one person remains from our 2014 team? Davis? As bad as the team is now, I think it highly unlikely that even the best player we have now, or the best player we have coming up this season, will be around in five years.

I think these two paragraphs are related.    The reason we have nobody held over from 2014 (except Davis, who is only here due to his contract) is because Duquette built the team that way with very little regard for the future consequences.    I hope Elias will always have one eye on the long term.

It would be interesting to go around the league and see how many players with 5+ years of experience are still with their original team.   Looks like in 2014, 234 players debuted but only 96 of those were still in MLB in 2019.   Right there, that’s a lot of attrition of marginal/injured players, and I think those numbers are pretty typical.   I didn’t have time to look at all 96, but of the 42 who accrued 5+ rWAR, only 16 are with their original team.     I’d assume that the attrition rate on the other 54 is higher (i.e., they have played for more than one team more often).     

[Scalious]

On 12/28/2019 at 11:50 AM, Can_of_corn said:

I am thinking that the odds of anyone being on the same team they debuted on six years later is poor.

As in the total sum pool of MLB players to ever make a debut? Of course

The sum total that actually accrued at least 6 years of service time? Was looking at cots at the all the guys with 6+. Seems is looks more 50/50. With RP having the slant towards poorer odds.

Little survivor bias. Players who are good enough to still have MLB jobs after 6 years tend have their teams ensure they don't go anywhere until FA. Most of the bouncing around is from guys who were never good enough to last 6 season on an MLB roster.

Plenty examples of the other way, late bloomers, trading when arbs get to expensive etc etc...but that is why i suspect it's closer to 50/50 for non RP.

[Beef Supreme]

I think the Orioles would just be buying out the arb years of Hays and Mountcastle. That might not be wise since the team is far from guaranteed to be ready in 2023 to start benefiting from the strategy. Maybe Hays and Mountcastle or even Santander could survive the rebuilding to be on an Orioles' team capable of competing for a championship. Meanwhile, they will have locked another team that may be a potential trading partner into a higher salary paid to Hays or Mountcastle than otherwise would provide the Orioles their maximum return. Finally, it could take five years, or more, to get to be competitive for the post-season. I would not lock up those players at this point of rebuilding no matter how much I may like them personally or root for them.

I believe it is more likely that Rutschman and Hall and GROD are the players that the Orioles would be more likely to try to lock up early in their careers... as long as they believe that the team is ready to compete as playoff contenders for the next five years after those prospects start to come, that is. Maybe even Diaz. Since the lower minor leaguers are all probably about two years away, the Orioles might wait until then to start locking up a clutch of young Birds.

[sportsfan8703]

Here’s a good Mountcastle example, who would feel comfortable offering Mancini an extension right now?  

Start doing the math, it doesn’t look good for a 1B/DH.  Starts to look like Chris Davis 2.0.

 

[wildcard]

58 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Here’s a good Mountcastle example, who would feel comfortable offering Mancini an extension right now?  

Start doing the math, it doesn’t look good for a 1B/DH.  Starts to look like Chris Davis 2.0.

 

See what it looks like in a year.

I want to see what a lineup with  Hays, Mancini, Mountcastle, Santander and Nunez can do.

[Scalious]

2 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Here’s a good Mountcastle example, who would feel comfortable offering Mancini an extension right now?  

Start doing the math, it doesn’t look good for a 1B/DH.  Starts to look like Chris Davis 2.0.

 

Pre Arb deals are nothing like Post Arb and FA deals.  Pre-Arb deals are very trade-able unless they never show anything (Like Singleton). Gyroko and Craig Allen were traded. Key was they showed at least something in the majors.

Chris Davis is un-tradeble and it makes sense. Convince someone to "take a chance" on an over 30 dude making 20M per..or a mid-20's player making way less.

Better to wait a year when they are not an elite talent. If you see them as apart of the future. Lock them up before they hit arb 1.

Edited December 31, 2019 by Scalious

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, sportsfan8703 said:

Here’s a good Mountcastle example, who would feel comfortable offering Mancini an extension right now?  

Start doing the math, it doesn’t look good for a 1B/DH.  Starts to look like Chris Davis 2.0.

 

I don’t see how the math of a deal like I proposed looks like Davis 2.0.    You could sign 7 guys to 6/$24 mm contracts and barely exceed what we’re paying Davis.    

As to Mancini, if he could be signed right now for 3/$22.5 plus two $12 mm options, I’d think that was about fair.    But he will be older over that period than either Mountcastle or Hays in the comparable period.    

I voted that we should not sign these players to 6/$24 mm plus two options, but it’s not because I’m worried that they’ll only turn out to be on the level of Trey Mancini.     It’s because of the risk that they turn out to be not as good as Mancini.    

 

[Frobby]

11 hours ago, Scalious said:

As in the total sum pool of MLB players to ever make a debut? Of course

The sum total that actually accrued at least 6 years of service time? Was looking at cots at the all the guys with 6+. Seems is looks more 50/50. With RP having the slant towards poorer odds.

Little survivor bias. Players who are good enough to still have MLB jobs after 6 years tend have their teams ensure they don't go anywhere until FA. Most of the bouncing around is from guys who were never good enough to last 6 season on an MLB roster.

Plenty examples of the other way, late bloomers, trading when arbs get to expensive etc etc...but that is why i suspect it's closer to 50/50 for non RP.

I did a post a couple of years ago on the tenure of major league players.     Significantly less than half the players make it five years.    Of course, you’d like to think that you could guess pretty well who will last 5 years and who won’t.   I’m advising Stevie Wilkerson to rent, not buy.
 

 

[DirtyBird]

 

[Frobby]

Bump...my OP missed the fact that in November the Mariners had signed prospect Evan White to a 6/$24 mm deal with three club options that could take the deal to 9/$55.5 mm if exercised.    White hasn’t played in the majors, and in fact spent all of 2019 in AA and missed a bunch of time (he played in 92 games and had a slash line of .293/.350/.483 as a 23-year old).   He plays 1B and is considered a top defender there.   White is ranked 54 by BA, 56 by MLB.com, 62 by BP.    Seems like a pretty aggressive move by the Mariners when you consider he hasn’t played AAA except for a cup of coffee (4 games) in 2018.

[HowAboutThat]

Still no.

nononono.

[HowAboutThat]

On 1/2/2020 at 12:29 PM, DirtyBird said:

 

That is an amazingly team friendly deal.

If I had a superstar like him, I would probably be willing to make that deal. However Hays and Mountcastle are not super stars.

[DrungoHazewood]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

Bump...my OP missed the fact that in November the Mariners had signed prospect Evan White to a 6/$24 mm deal with three club options that could take the deal to 9/$55.5 mm if exercised.    White hasn’t played in the majors, and in fact spent all of 2019 in AA and missed a bunch of time (he played in 92 games and had a slash line of .293/.350/.483 as a 23-year old).   He plays 1B and is considered a top defender there.   White is ranked 54 by BA, 56 by MLB.com, 62 by BP.    Seems like a pretty aggressive move by the Mariners when you consider he hasn’t played AAA except for a cup of coffee (4 games) in 2018.

That seems very, very aggressive.  This is a guy who's about to turn 24, he's a first baseman, and he OPS'd .838 in AA following an .833 in high A the year before.  He put up Yusniel Diaz numbers in AA, but he's a year older than Diaz and plays an easier position.  Diaz was considered slightly disappointing.  White got $24M guaranteed.

This tells me that some teams are offering rather large extensions to what I'd call Grade B or B- prospects.  Are they that terrified of the new CBA's young player compensation provisions?

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

That is an amazingly team friendly deal.

If I had a superstar like him, I would probably be willing to make that deal. However Hays and Mountcastle are not super stars.

That makes much more sense than the Mariners' deal.  Robert had a 1.000 OPS topping out at AAA at the age of 21.  

[Just Regular]

13 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

he OPS'd .838 in AA

IIRC one of the analyses of the deal at the time it was struck highlighted the Mariners AA situation as one of the pitcher-friendliest in the entire minors, so some of the same stuff where Diaz's 2019 was closer to Mountcastle's than some might guess could be at play there.  I think both sides are valuing around full Overbay cromulence here.