The Shortstop Market

[Just Regular]

Setting Profar aside, teams have Semien, Didi, Andrelton and Galvis as 2021 possibilities.

I think 25 teams have fairly straightforward incumbents, treating the Phillies Segura generously (and a unit with Bohm/Kingery/Hoskins), and guessing the Yankees keep LeMahieu in the end sticking themselves with Gleyber one more time.

The 5 starting SS seats for that foursome to fill, with current placeholders are:

CIN/Garcia - perhaps very poorly off financially given strange Raisel move, Bradley non-tender and Castillo/Gray trade rumors

BAL/Martin

OAK/Pinder

DET/Goodrum

PIT/E. Gonzalez 

I imagine the Freddy Galvis floor there for a long while, but the Cincinnati situation has me wondering if even a Bronze Medal (Andrelton?) could be in play late.   Just as with Villar 2019, we can sell a run at 650 PA to Andrelton or Profar (or even Villar again...haha).   Where does Andrelton go if Semien just stays and the Tigers grow with Didi?   We're more attractive than the Pirates, right?  The Giants could I guess just dump Crawford, but then he rivals Galvis for meh.

I want Trout to get his October or two before I really start wanting them for us, and maybe the Angels needed the cost certainty to afford Raisel (and also pitching in general), but I'm still iffy on if locking in Iglesias early was a good move for them.   I think we'll end up fine in this year's appetizer as a nice batch of shortstops move through Arb3/Arb4/FA.

 

[Camden_yardbird]

I dont know why Gonzalez is listed at SS for the Pirates.  Two years ago Newman put up a .308/.353/.446 line.  He was a slow starter in 2019 and I would imagine that has a lot to do with a disappointing 2020 in 120 ABs.

That and the Pirates are cheaper than the Orioles.

I would eliminate them from contention for any FA.

[jamalshw]

I ultimately think we end up with Galvis, but I could see a scenario where we get Simmons. His defense would be welcome and I think his bat would play at OPACY. That may be the selling point for him, or even Semien if the floor falls out of the SS market. The Orioles offer plenty of opportunity and a good hitting environment to regain value. In the end, I still think Galvis is the best we end up with, but there's at least a sliver of hope for someone like Simmons.

[jabba72]

I want Simmons too. That would be an clear upgrade in talent and I hope Elias is enamored with him as I am. 

[wildcard]

18 minutes ago, jamalshw said:

I ultimately think we end up with Galvis, but I could see a scenario where we get Simmons. His defense would be welcome and I think his bat would play at OPACY. That may be the selling point for him, or even Semien if the floor falls out of the SS market. The Orioles offer plenty of opportunity and a good hitting environment to regain value. In the end, I still think Galvis is the best we end up with, but there's at least a sliver of hope for someone like Simmons.

I don't see Simmons or Semien signing for 3M which is as high as I think Elias will go.   It may be late Jan or early Feb before Galvis  would accept a 3m offer.   I just can't see Elias paying higher in a year that he has already said he does not think the O's will be a winning team.

[Just Regular]

Last year Elias did not super slow play the SS vacancy, locking in Iglesias in early January.   Galvis is the only one I could see expecting the level of contract we are probably at at that timeframe, so I guess I'm hoping for a little bit more of a game of chicken with the player pool this time.

I expect a glowing Richie Martin report at some point if the opening stays as ST nears.

[wildcard]

20 minutes ago, OrioleDog said:

Last year Elias did not super slow play the SS vacancy, locking in Iglesias in early January.   Galvis is the only one I could see expecting the level of contract we are probably at at that timeframe, so I guess I'm hoping for a little bit more of a game of chicken with the player pool this time.

I expect a glowing Richie Martin report at some point if the opening stays as ST nears.

I don't expect ST will start before April 1st because of Covid.    Iglesias was difference because he was paid 2.5m in 2019.  Iglesias sign on Feb 23rd.   His salary had already dropped when the  O's signed him ifor the 2020 season. Galvis salary before prorating was 5.5m which may make him hold out longer.

[DrinkinWithFermi]

I don't really think we would have traded Iglesias at a very reasonable $3.5 million (iirc) for 2 C+ pitching prospects just to sign another SS for a similar pricetag (or more, which I would expect to be the case with at least Simmons, Semien, and Didi). Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like the point of that move was almost purely just to cut payroll, which leaves me expecting them to snag an all-glove scrap heap type of guy that will sign for ~$1 million or less.

[Frobby]

55 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

I don't really think we would have traded Iglesias at a very reasonable $3.5 million (iirc) for 2 C+ pitching prospects just to sign another SS for a similar pricetag (or more, which I would expect to be the case with at least Simmons, Semien, and Didi). Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like the point of that move was almost purely just to cut payroll, which leaves me expecting them to snag an all-glove scrap heap type of guy that will sign for ~$1 million or less.

I think Elias likes these prospects better than you do.  

[DrinkinWithFermi]

27 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I think Elias likes these prospects better than you do.  

I don't dislike them, it was a more than acceptable return for a guy with Iglesias's overall track record and pricetag, but you're almost certainly correct that he likes them more than I do, although some of that may be a product of the previous scouting work his FO did during the Bundy negotiations and the lack of fresh scouting data due to how 2020 worked out. Referring to them as C+ prospects wasn't necessarily meant as a dig at them either, just that neither is likely to develop into a core building block for the next good Orioles team. One or both could conceivably turn into something useful for us though.

Either way, I see no reason to think that paring back payroll was not part of the equation based on our other offseason moves thus far (which I am actually okay with under the circumstances of 2020), which makes the idea of Iglesias's replacement costing as much or more than he did seem unlikely to me. I don't really care either way though as long as our regular SS in 2021 plays the position well for our young pitchers.

[wildcard]

20 minutes ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

I don't dislike them, it was a more than acceptable return for a guy with Iglesias's overall track record and pricetag, but you're almost certainly correct that he likes them more than I do, although some of that may be a product of the previous scouting work his FO did during the Bundy negotiations and the lack of fresh scouting data due to how 2020 worked out. Referring to them as C+ prospects wasn't necessarily meant as a dig at them either, just that neither is likely to develop into a core building block for the next good Orioles team. One or both could conceivably turn into something useful for us though.

Either way, I see no reason to think that paring back payroll was not part of the equation based on our other offseason moves thus far (which I am actually okay with under the circumstances of 2020), which makes the idea of Iglesias's replacement costing as much or more than he did seem unlikely to me. I don't really care either way though as long as our regular SS in 2021 plays the position well for our young pitchers.

Elias said he scouted Stallings and considers him one of the best pitchers in the SEC that year, plus they got video on him in the instructs this past season.  His comments are at the 3.00 point of this video.

https://www.masnsports.com/videos/2020/12/mike-elias-on-trading-jose-iglesias-non-tendering-hanser-alberto.html

Signing Iglesias and trading him appears to be a method of acquiring young talent that Elias feels in good for the team.   He could try to sign  a similar talent and spent 2.5-3m to do the same thing again.  Its apparently what he does.

[DrinkinWithFermi]

37 minutes ago, wildcard said:

He could try to sign  a similar talent and spent 2.5-3m to do the same thing again.  Its apparently what he does.

In a normal offseason, that is what I would expect, but we've already unloaded several fairly cheap players that seemed to hold some amount of usefulness to us who I probably would have expected to be retained in a normal offseason (which, again, I am fine with under the current circumstances). Ultimately, my only real concern is that whoever keeps the SS position warm for us in 2021 plays good defense behind our still-developing pitching staff, regardless of whether it's for a $900K paycheck or a $3.5M paycheck or a $7.25M paycheck.

[hoosiers]

4 hours ago, DrinkinWithFermi said:

I don't really think we would have traded Iglesias at a very reasonable $3.5 million (iirc) for 2 C+ pitching prospects just to sign another SS for a similar pricetag (or more, which I would expect to be the case with at least Simmons, Semien, and Didi). Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like the point of that move was almost purely just to cut payroll, which leaves me expecting them to snag an all-glove scrap heap type of guy that will sign for ~$1 million or less.

Why wouldn't we do what we just did?  Forget Iglesias production and price tag, he wasn't a long term asset and he was attractive to another team.  Why not deal him for some C-C+ prospects and repeat process when the SS carousel has more candidates than open seats?

I don't get the criticism or why folks think it was a payroll-based move. 

Elias is creating prospects for us from thin air - almost last SS available guys.  Elias, like what he watched develop in Houston, is laser focused on gathering as many prospects as he can at the cost of wins on the major league roster - until he decides it is time to make the major league team competitive.

[Just Regular]

Gammons tweeted tonight about Red Sox liking Semien for 2B - that's certainly one possibility to thin the field.  I'm sure Didi will have some clubs probing if he's good taking his tired old legs over to 2B.   Galvis has 1000 games under his belt with no October runs; a risk factor for his Baltimore second division opportunity could be if he's just ready to take a UT role on a better team - like Iglesias, he's fringe for the Best 30 SS on planet this year club.

For if this game gets serious next year, I've already glommed on to Correa's youth relative to Story/Lindor/Baez atop his Elias history in parsing that quartet, and SS ageism is maybe something I haven't always fully appreciated.   If Correa ends up $5-$10M less than Lindor AAV, it could mean something else shinier on Player B/C if next Christmas comes with anything like a Tejada/Javy/Palmeiro push.   I do look for the 2021 Orioles to lay more of a foundation to be built upon than the 2003 Orioles had.

[Sports Guy]

8 hours ago, hoosiers said:

Why wouldn't we do what we just did?  Forget Iglesias production and price tag, he wasn't a long term asset and he was attractive to another team.  Why not deal him for some C-C+ prospects and repeat process when the SS carousel has more candidates than open seats?

I don't get the criticism or why folks think it was a payroll-based move. 

Elias is creating prospects for us from thin air - almost last SS available guys.  Elias, like what he watched develop in Houston, is laser focused on gathering as many prospects as he can at the cost of wins on the major league roster - until he decides it is time to make the major league team competitive.

Money was clearly a reason they made this move.  That much is obvious.  Doesn’t mean it was the sole reason but it was definitely a factor.