Salary Arbitration makes O's infield uncertain

[wildcard]

17 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

So I don’t pretend to know the Orioles plan. But, they have exposed some interesting players to the rule 5 draft. If they were going to nontender any combination of Alberto, Sanchez, Valaika, and or Armstrong it seems like they hold each protected another guy or two from the rule 5 by doing it for the protection date last week.

Elias was pretty clear on this.  When selecting the players to be protected he considered not only whether they would be picked but was it probable that they would stay on the other teams roster for a season.   He doesn't thinks  the ones that are unprotected will.   He said some may be picked but he thinks he will get them back.

I guess we are talking about Pop, Hanifee and Sedlock.   I don't know whether Elias is right but that is the way he addressed it in his video.

Of course if he is right and they are not pick or he gets them back the O's save an option year by not protecting them.

[Roll Tide]

22 minutes ago, wildcard said:

Elias was pretty clear on this.  When selecting the players to be protected he considered not only whether they would be picked but was it probable that they would stay on the other teams roster for a season.   He doesn't thinks  the ones that are unprotected will.   He said some may be picked but he thinks he will get them back.

I guess we are talking about Pop, Hanifee and Sedlock.   I don't know whether Elias is right but that is the way he addressed it in his video.

Of course if he is right and they are not pick or he gets them back the O's save an option year by not protecting them.

Well he was right about Sedlock and you'd assume that a year off didn't help his chances anyway. Pop is the one I'm more concerned about and I guess he's hoping the TJS will be a deterrent.

 

But my point is ....Why take the chance? I know they guys haven't been cut yet but if he's going to dump the expensive guys (I know...Expensive is a relative term) why not ensure the borderline guys are not taken.

[wildcard]

21 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Well he was right about Sedlock and you'd assume that a year off didn't help his chances anyway. Pop is the one I'm more concerned about and I guess he's hoping the TJS will be a deterrent.

 

But my point is ....Why take the chance? I know they guys haven't been cut yet but if he's going to dump the expensive guys (I know...Expensive is a relative term) why not ensure the borderline guys are not taken.

Elias as been a last minute negotiator.  He must feel that is when he gets the best deal.   If any of this guys are players that have to sign to stay then maybe Elias is holding out until Dec 2nd to close the signings.

[Sports Guy]

23 minutes ago, Roll Tide said:

Well he was right about Sedlock and you'd assume that a year off didn't help his chances anyway. Pop is the one I'm more concerned about and I guess he's hoping the TJS will be a deterrent.

 

But my point is ....Why take the chance? I know they guys haven't been cut yet but if he's going to dump the expensive guys (I know...Expensive is a relative term) why not ensure the borderline guys are not taken.

As was explained before, if you do protect them and make deals and have to drop them later, it’s far easier to lose them at that point than it is now.

If you take them off the 40 man in March, you pass them through waivers and then anyone can claim them and they don’t have to keep them on the ML roster like you do for the rule 5.  That’s why you do it this way.

Now, the question I would ask is, who or how many guys would you even have to acquire before you take a guy like Pop off the 40 man?  For me, I would have kept Pop because I think there are several guys to cut before you think about him but I do understand why they did it the way they did.

End of the day, the current 40 man roster is littered with players who could be dropped and it not matter one bit to the organization.

[wildcard]

2 hours ago, Roll Tide said:

So I don’t pretend to know the Orioles plan. But, they have exposed some interesting players to the rule 5 draft. If they were going to nontender any combination of Alberto, Sanchez, Valaika, and or Armstrong it seems like they hold each protected another guy or two from the rule 5 by doing it for the protection date last week.

I think you are right that Elias see a fit for all these players on the 2021 team.....at the right price.  The question is can he get the salary he wants.

[Roll Tide]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

As was explained before, if you do protect them and make deals and have to drop them later, it’s far easier to lose them at that point than it is now.

If you take them off the 40 man in March, you pass them through waivers and then anyone can claim them and they don’t have to keep them on the ML roster like you do for the rule 5.  That’s why you do it this way.

Now, the question I would ask is, who or how many guys would you even have to acquire before you take a guy like Pop off the 40 man?  For me, I would have kept Pop because I think there are several guys to cut before you think about him but I do understand why they did it the way they did.

End of the day, the current 40 man roster is littered with players who could be dropped and it not matter one bit to the organization.

Yeah .... I agree and think Pop could be within a 1/2 season of sticking. Hopefully the Tommy John and a year of inactivity are a deterrent. I just don’t see the point of taking the chance as the guys stuff is obviously plus and he might even throw harder.

I heard a podcast online a few years back where certain guys are plucked from other teams based on an unwritten gentleman’s agreement. As I remember, recovering from a serious injury was one of the reasons mentioned.

But, I have no idea if that info is accurate or if I was just misunderstanding the conversation.

 

[BohKnowsBmore]

5 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Yes, Santander is definitely the more valuable all around player.

The issue I have, which you pointed out here, is that there is very little offensive difference between the 2.  However, when reading posts on here, you have people who basically think Santander is an AS with the bat and that Nunez is a nothing with the bat.  That’s where I have an issue.

Obviously you wouldn’t trade Nunez for Santander..but that isn’t and never has been the discussion.

I think this is a strawman. I believe most are contextualizing their respective bats against their positions (or lack thereof). As one travels down the defensive spectrum, it takes a lot more to be considered a plus with the bat. An .800 OPS is a lot more valuable at catcher than it is at DH, for example.

If AS and RN's bats are similar, that's sort of the point. One plays a defensive position at an ML average, if not better, whereas the other doesn't have a defensive home, and thus has a much higher bar to clear to be plus value at DH. If Nunez could play a decent third, then he would be an easy arb offer IMO.

[Sports Guy]

22 minutes ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

I think this is a strawman. I believe most are contextualizing their respective bats against their positions (or lack thereof). As one travels down the defensive spectrum, it takes a lot more to be considered a plus with the bat. An .800 OPS is a lot more valuable at catcher than it is at DH, for example.

If AS and RN's bats are similar, that's sort of the point. One plays a defensive position at an ML average, if not better, whereas the other doesn't have a defensive home, and thus has a much higher bar to clear to be plus value at DH. If Nunez could play a decent third, then he would be an easy arb offer IMO.

It’s not a straw man.  There have been people on here who have completely downplayed Nunez’s bat.  Talked about how he doesn’t all a lot, low OBP.

But they don’t say the same things about the bat of Santander.  They ignore those things.

If you have missed that, that’s fine but it’s clearly been said by several people.

The DH doesn’t have to play a defensive position and regardless of position, an OPS driven by slugging that carries a poor OBP is the same when talking offensive production.

[foxfield]

6 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

As was explained before, if you do protect them and make deals and have to drop them later, it’s far easier to lose them at that point than it is now.

If you take them off the 40 man in March, you pass them through waivers and then anyone can claim them and they don’t have to keep them on the ML roster like you do for the rule 5.  That’s why you do it this way.

Now, the question I would ask is, who or how many guys would you even have to acquire before you take a guy like Pop off the 40 man?  For me, I would have kept Pop because I think there are several guys to cut before you think about him but I do understand why they did it the way they did.

End of the day, the current 40 man roster is littered with players who could be dropped and it not matter one bit to the organization.

Where the organization is right now....of course the above would be correct.  It would be correct if you had picked the 40 man roster or I did or Tony did....And it is perfectly reasonable to agree with both sides of an argument here.  I can see why you or Tony or anyone else would see value in Nunez...but I can also see why the Orioles would cast him aside...his lack of ability to play the field is why he is gone.  It's too bad the O's are not simply in the need for an avg DH with growth potential.  But as a DH only, unless his improvement continues exponentially...he is likely not missed.

[Sports Guy]

14 minutes ago, foxfield said:

Where the organization is right now....of course the above would be correct.  It would be correct if you had picked the 40 man roster or I did or Tony did....And it is perfectly reasonable to agree with both sides of an argument here.  I can see why you or Tony or anyone else would see value in Nunez...but I can also see why the Orioles would cast him aside...his lack of ability to play the field is why he is gone.  It's too bad the O's are not simply in the need for an avg DH with growth potential.  But as a DH only, unless his improvement continues exponentially...he is likely not missed.

They absolutely are in need of that.  
 

But what you quoted has zero to do with Nunez.

[BohKnowsBmore]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

It’s not a straw man.  There have been people on here who have completely downplayed Nunez’s bat.  Talked about how he doesn’t all a lot, low OBP.

But they don’t say the same things about the bat of Santander.  They ignore those things.

If you have missed that, that’s fine but it’s clearly been said by several people.

The DH doesn’t have to play a defensive position and regardless of position, an OPS driven by slugging that carries a poor OBP is the same when talking offensive production.

To the bolded, I can't speak for everyone obviously, but I think the context of where they play and the associated hurdle rate w/r/t offensive production is implied in those comments. JJ Hardy was a positive contributor with his bat during most of his O's tenure, for example. By contrast, I assume that the majority of the OH would be very down on him if he were an everyday DH. Same stick, different hurdle.

To the italicized, you're ignoring the alternative for each. The set of replacement bats that provide similar defense at COF to Santander are significantly poorer hitters than the set of replacement bats that can play DH (every single ML hitter, as there is no requirement to play defense). You actually make the point yourself when you say "The DH doesn’t have to play a defensive position." That is correct, so the offensive contribution necessary to provide value there is obviously higher, as there is no defensive consideration to worry about. 

[Sports Guy]

10 minutes ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

To the bolded, I can't speak for everyone obviously, but I think the context of where they play and the associated hurdle rate w/r/t offensive production is implied in those comments. JJ Hardy was a positive contributor with his bat during most of his O's tenure, for example. By contrast, I assume that the majority of the OH would be very down on him if he were an everyday DH. Same stick, different hurdle.

To the italicized, you're ignoring the alternative for each. The set of replacement bats that provide similar defense at COF to Santander are significantly poorer hitters than the set of replacement bats that can play DH (every single ML hitter, as there is no requirement to play defense). You actually make the point yourself when you say "The DH doesn’t have to play a defensive position." That is correct, so the offensive contribution necessary to provide value there is obviously higher, as there is no defensive consideration to worry about. 

 

12 minutes ago, BohKnowsBmore said:

To the bolded, I can't speak for everyone obviously, but I think the context of where they play and the associated hurdle rate w/r/t offensive production is implied in those comments. JJ Hardy was a positive contributor with his bat during most of his O's tenure, for example. By contrast, I assume that the majority of the OH would be very down on him if he were an everyday DH. Same stick, different hurdle.

To the italicized, you're ignoring the alternative for each. The set of replacement bats that provide similar defense at COF to Santander are significantly poorer hitters than the set of replacement bats that can play DH (every single ML hitter, as there is no requirement to play defense). You actually make the point yourself when you say "The DH doesn’t have to play a defensive position." That is correct, so the offensive contribution necessary to provide value there is obviously higher, as there is no defensive consideration to worry about. 

LF should have very good offensive production.  
 

Not sure the numbers but my guess is the average LFer is similar to the average everyday DH.

You are trying to bring defense into this.  That isn’t an argument being used or talked about.  I’m strictly talking about their offensive production and how others on been have discussed offensive production.  

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

 

LF should have very good offensive production.  
 

Not sure the numbers but my guess is the average LFer is similar to the average everyday DH.

It is interesting how these splits have varied over the years.   Instinctively, you expect that the more difficult the defensive position is, the less offense the league will have at that position.  But it isn’t always the case.   AL OPS by position last year:

1B .773

3B .761

CF .745

RF .734

LF .731 

SS .727

DH .719

C .708

2B .706

You’d think it would be easy to do better than .719 at DH, given that you don’t need to worry about defense there at all.   But a lot of guys don’t perform well at bat when they are not playing the field.    So if you have a guy who hits well at DH, there’s pretty good logic to using him there and resting your players completely when they are not in the field, rather than rotating them through the DH spot.  Nunez has shown himself to be pretty comfortable there    

 

[BohKnowsBmore]

56 minutes ago, Frobby said:

It is interesting how these splits have varied over the years.   Instinctively, you expect that the more difficult the defensive position is, the less offense the league will have at that position.  But it isn’t always the case.   AL OPS by position last year:

1B .773

3B .761

CF .745

RF .734

LF .731 

SS .727

DH .719

C .708

2B .706

You’d think it would be easy to do better than .719 at DH, given that you don’t need to worry about defense there at all.   But a lot of guys don’t perform well at bat when they are not playing the field.    So if you have a guy who hits well at DH, there’s pretty good logic to using him there and resting your players completely when they are not in the field, rather than rotating them through the DH spot.  Nunez has shown himself to be pretty comfortable there    

 

If you jump back to 2019, though, you see DH surpass other positions:

DH .786
RF .784
SS .783
LF .782
3B .781
1B .776
CF .753
2B .726
C .699

This is even more pronounced in 2018:

DH .778
RF .772
3B .756
SS .754
LF .748
1B .738
CF .720
2B .701
C .658

2017 is similar to 2020 for some reason, but 2016 has DH atop the list like 2018 and 2019.

Working theory would be with less off days and more double headers, more AL teams used the DH as a rotational spot in 2020, combined with some additional noise due to far fewer games being played. That doesn't explain 2017 at all, though. Regardless, the ability for any bat to play at DH regardless of defense intuitively raises the expected offensive floor of the position (i.e., replacement player), even if the league-wide OPS doesn't show it to be superior in results in certain years.

I will say, one way in which I agree with SG (albeit in somewhat of a different conversation) is that when talking about the future,  a guy like Anthony Santander wouldn't (or shouldn't) necessarily be pegged as a less valuable player just because some large number of his PAs came from the DH position in a given year, for whatever reason. To use simple numbers let's say he played half a season at RF and half at DH, putting up 3 full-season WAR (50% x 3 = 1.5) as a RF and 1 full-season WAR (50% x 1 = 0.5)as a DH, purely due to positional adjustments (let's say his batting line was the same at both positions). Looking forward, it would seem more appropriate to view him as a 3 WAR RF, rather than a 2 WAR player, when considering his "highest and best use." 

[Sports Guy]

All of those stats tell me one thing...it’s varies year to year but generally speaking, you should expect similar offensive production from your DH vs your LFer.

10-15 points here and there of OPS is a very small difference in the grand scheme of things.

Either way, Nunez outperformed all of those numbers.