Would you sign Hays to the Luis Robert deal?

[Scalious]

37 minutes ago, Frobby said:

This begs the question, who has actually earned $50 mm through his arbitration years?    Of the top of my head, Nolan Arenado did ($61 mm) as a Super-2 who had 4 Arb-eligible years.   Anthony s Rendon just missed ($49.7 mm), also as a Super-2.    Mookie Betts ($30 mm through Arb-2) certainly will.     Bryce Harper ($48.9 mm), a Super-2, fell short.    Ryan Howard, who broke the record for first-time arbitration as a Super-2, earned $64 mm through his 4 arb years. Mike Trout (not a Super-2) was several million short despite racking up about 25 WAR before he was even eligible for arbitration.    Acuna as a Super-2 will earn about $56 mm through his Arb years.

In other words, I think the White Sox are way out on a limb with Luis Robert.    Pretty far out there with Jimenez ($43 mm guarantee), too.
 

Chris Sale  5/32 + 2 Options (2013)

Jose Quintina  5/21 + 2 Options (2014)

Adam Eaton  6/23 + 2 Options (2015)

Tim Anderson  6/25 + 2 Options (2017)

Eloy Jimenez  6/43 + 2 Options (2019)

I'm not saying in a vaccum this is right idea, but getting 7-8 years of control for key players is a formula that has been working for them. The first 3 they traded away and got prospects spoils. Which i'm damn sure those tacked on year/years helped trade value.

Why are they giving away MORE money, now? Well the CBA is ending in 2021. Robert would not be hit that until afterwards. It probably didn't help that Robert and Eloy were highly rated prospects. Terms of leverage. (Though, so was Sale)

Edited January 3, 2020 by Scalious

[wildbillhiccup]

4 hours ago, Tony-OH said:

This is why I hate the internet sometimes.

I was not making the correlation between the players (We've beaten the Villar thing to death), just that I don't see Elias adding on unneeded expenses when he's giving away assets like Grandma gives away cookies because he's cutting payroll.

When you are cutting salary and are going to stink next year, you don't just give out early, risky deals.

 

I wasn't trying to rehash old news, but you alluded to another player. I understand they're cutting corners and pinching pennies now, but have they not spent on any players that might realistically be part of the rebuild (i.e., still good in 4-5 years)? That was the point I was making. The whole point of what the team is doing now is positioning themselves for the future. Hays might be part of the that future. And I wasn't advocating extending or not extending him. That's Elias decision and why he gets paid the big bucks. 

PS) The "this is why I hate the internet sometimes" really wasn't necessary. 

[Tony-OH]

41 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

I wasn't trying to rehash old news, but you alluded to another player. I understand they're cutting corners and pinching pennies now, but have they not spent on any players that might realistically be part of the rebuild (i.e., still good in 4-5 years)? That was the point I was making. The whole point of what the team is doing now is positioning themselves for the future. Hays might be part of the that future. And I wasn't advocating extending or not extending him. That's Elias decision and why he gets paid the big bucks. 

PS) The "this is why I hate the internet sometimes" really wasn't necessary. 

I meant just that connotation does not always come across, not that you did anything wrong.

[sportsfan8703]

I’ve said it in other threads, but I really don’t think we have a position player that is a likely extension candidate. 

Hays - Hurt too much. It is what it is. 

Mountcastle - little defensive value. He could just be a DH by the time we’d get into years 5-8. 

Diaz - He got like an $18 million signing bonus out of Cuba. I think he’s going to ride it out till FA. 

AR - He got #1 pick money, $8.1 million to sign. While not a lot, I think he’d have leverage to not extend and try and hit FA early. 

Edited January 3, 2020 by sportsfan8703

[Daddy-O's]

For me it's about age.  The Orioles are loading up their minor league system so they can replace players leaving their prime playing age and not have to extend them past it.  

[POR]

17 hours ago, Frobby said:

 

I think guaranteeing that much to Robert is a pretty big gamble.   

 

 

I just don't understand this line of thinking.  Maybe if Robert has a disappointing career, the White Sox would pay less for Robert especially in the early years.  However, in the scheme of things, the amount is small.  The amount they could be saving in year 7 and year 8 could be very significant.  I think the Dallas Keuchel contact was a much bigger gamble.

The two years of free agency that a team buys out, may put a player in a totally different position for his next contract. This does not apply so much to Robert because he is very young, but would apply more to a 24 to 25 year old that a team signs to an eight year contract. For example If Adam Jones was a free agent at 30, instead of 32. it may not  been as clear that he was on the downside of his career and he potentially could have gotten a big contract that would not have been good.

[wildbillhiccup]

5 minutes ago, POR said:

I just don't understand this line of thinking.  Maybe if Robert has a disappointing career, the White Sox would pay less for Robert especially in the early years.  However, in the scheme of things, the amount is small.  The amount they could be saving in year 7 and year 8 could be very significant.  I think the Dallas Keuchel contact was a much bigger gamble.

The two years of free agency that a team buys out, may put a player in a totally different position for his next contract. This does not apply so much to Robert because he is very young, but would apply more to a 24 to 25 year old that a team signs to an eight year contract. For example If Adam Jones was a free agent at 30, instead of 32. it may not  been as clear that he was on the downside of his career and he potentially could have gotten a big contract that would not have been good.

I'm with you. I see no problem in locking up younger players before they hit free agency. If the GM chooses his own people / talent evaluators (i.e., those he respects and trusts) then why not lock up a younger player/top tier prospect if you think he'll be a solid major leaguer? It seems a lot less riskier to me then signing aging free agents to bloated multi-year contracts. And I'm not specifically talking about Hays anymore, just about the general idea/concept. It really seems like a smart move for teams that don't have bottomless wallets. 

 

[Frobby]

24 minutes ago, POR said:

I just don't understand this line of thinking.  Maybe if Robert has a disappointing career, the White Sox would pay less for Robert especially in the early years.  However, in the scheme of things, the amount is small.  The amount they could be saving in year 7 and year 8 could be very significant.  I think the Dallas Keuchel contact was a much bigger gamble.

It basically comes down to what you think the odds are that Robert becomes a star player.     The club options are at $20 mm, not exactly cheap.    It’s only cheap if this guy is a multiple time all star level player.    Betting on any player to become that is very risky.     Yeah, if he turns out to be Mookie Betts, the White Sox will save a lot of money.    But the odds of that occurring aren’t that high.    

[Going Underground]

I would like to see him stay healthy and see what he hits. He was actually better in the majors then in the minors last year. Hit .248 with a .299 OBP in 2019 in the minors. 2018 in minors hit .235 with a .266 .OBP. Only walked 68 times in 1324 AB's in the minors. Robert stats in the minors last year were much better then Hays was.  .328 average  and a .376 .OBP  OPS of 1.001. 31 doubles, 11 triples ,32 homers and 92 RBI's.

[Frobby]

6 minutes ago, Going Underground said:

I would like to see him stay healthy and see what he hits. He was actually better in the majors then in the minors last year. Hit .248 with a .299 OBP in 2019 in the minors. 2018 in minors hit .235 with a .266 .OBP. Only walked 68 times in 1324 AB's in the minors. Robert stats in the minors last year were much better then Hays was.  .328 average  and a .376 .OBP  OPS of 1.001. 31 doubles, 11 triples ,32 homers and 92 RBI's.

Robert is a top 20 prospect on every list I’ve seen, and top 5 in several.     I’d rather have him than Hays.    That said, even players as highly ranked as Robert often disappoint.     

[weams]

Should the Ravens extend Lamar now or wait until after he wins the Super Bowl like Joe? 

Seriously, other than Rutchman, the Orioles should not consider anything like this until after the new CBA. Rules change. 

[hoosiers]

I understand extending players just fine, but I would not do it with Mountcastle or Hays.  I would rather see one year of quality production and then offer a longer term deal.  Especially with Hays given his age - it makes the urgency and the buying out of peak production years less urgent IMO.

[LA2]

21 hours ago, markeubanks said:

If Austin Hays somehow becomes uber-good and earns more than $50M through arbitration - - I’ll boil my own shoe, eat it, and post the video right here on the Hangout.

Is that leather or running shoes?

[wildbillhiccup]

1 hour ago, weams said:

Should the Ravens extend Lamar now or wait until after he wins the Super Bowl like Joe? 

Seriously, other than Rutchman, the Orioles should not consider anything like this until after the new CBA. Rules change. 

Then why are teams like the White Sox locking up young players? They don't seem to be intimidated by changes in the CBA. 

[Can_of_corn]

39 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

Then why are teams like the White Sox locking up young players? They don't seem to be intimidated by changes in the CBA. 

Potential changes in the CBA might be why they are locking up young players.