Villar , Robertson , 2 Starters and let’s go to spring training

[ofan239]

In Roch’s column this morning he mentions a potential reunion with Johnathan Villar . I say sign Villar for 1 year 4 mm and Daniel Robertson 1 year 2-2.5 , get 2 starters ( major or minor league deals ) and let’s head to spring training . I actually like both Villar and Robertson and they would complement our lineup well . I also think Robertson could play everyday and do a decent job . 
 

good balance In this lineup :

3b Daniel Robertson

cf  Cedric Mullins 

SS Johnathan Villar 

dh Trey Mancini ( dh could be rotated between players 

RF Anthony Santander 

1b Ryan Mountcastle 

LF Austin Hays 

2b Yolmer Sanchez 

C Pedro Severino ( to be replaced maybe with Adley Rutschman later in year )

in my opinion this is a good lineup - speed at top , power in middle , pretty strong defensively .

[Can_of_corn]

If you are going to spend 4M on Villar why wouldn't you just spend 3.5M on Iglesias?  Are the O's that high on Stallings?

[Moose Milligan]

I don't see how Villar makes sense, even if it's for one year.  

[ofan239]

5 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If you are going to spend 4M on Villar why wouldn't you just spend 3.5M on Iglesias?  Are the O's that high on Stallings?

I am guessing that’s what it probably will take to sign Villar . I have no idea what his market is but I would think we could get him and Robertson for about 7 mm . No to galvis .

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, ofan239 said:

I am guessing that’s what it probably will take to sign Villar . I have no idea what his market is but I would think we could get him and Robertson for about 7 mm . No to galvis .

But why trade Iglesias if you turn around and sign Villar for more money?  Wouldn't you rather have Iglesias?

[jamalshw]

It's hard to know what any market is this year, particularly for the lower end guys. I expect with teams taking a more financial conservative approach (a couple teams exluded---looking at you, Mets), there will be a number of replacement level guys that will be available rather cheaply. I really don't think it matters who we sign to play SS as long as the glove is okay. It's a stop gap. We are not going to be getting anyone that will be here beyond 2021 (unless it's with a very affordable 2022 option or something).

That said, I don't think the Iglesias trade was really about the money. I think they do like Stallings. The 3.5M for Iglesias was probably right around market value. I think we sign someone in the 2-3M range to play the position.

[Tony-OH]

36 minutes ago, ofan239 said:

In Roch’s column this morning he mentions a potential reunion with Johnathan Villar . I say sign Villar for 1 year 4 mm and Daniel Robertson 1 year 2-2.5 , get 2 starters ( major or minor league deals ) and let’s head to spring training . I actually like both Villar and Robertson and they would complement our lineup well . I also think Robertson could play everyday and do a decent job . 
 

good balance In this lineup :

3b Daniel Robertson

cf  Cedric Mullins 

SS Johnathan Villar 

dh Trey Mancini ( dh could be rotated between players 

RF Anthony Santander 

1b Ryan Mountcastle 

LF Austin Hays 

2b Yolmer Sanchez 

C Pedro Severino ( to be replaced maybe with Adley Rutschman later in year )

in my opinion this is a good lineup - speed at top , power in middle , pretty strong defensively .

Villar OPS'd .593 last year and we know his defense at SS is below average and inconsistent. Plus, it seems as though the Orioles weren't willing to pay Iglesias $3.5 million so if Villar would cost $4 million, I doubt they'll go that route.

Now if you can get Villar on the cheap because of his down year, I'd be ok with bringing him back in some capacity because honestly, he'd make a great utility guy at worse.

[Just Regular]

 

[ofan239]

2 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Villar OPS'd .593 last year and we know his defense at SS is below average and inconsistent. Plus, it seems as though the Orioles weren't willing to pay Iglesias $3.5 million so if Villar would cost $4 million, I doubt they'll go that route.

Now if you can get Villar on the cheap because of his down year, I'd be ok with bringing him back in some capacity because honestly, he'd make a great utility guy at worse.

I’d buy low on Villar then . I like his game and agree he’s not the best defensively at short but your’re either picking that or signing someone like galvis who has a career obp under .300. I’d also like to see how Robertson could handle short . If he could maybe Villar at second and Sanchez at third . I think they could make some kind of combination work defensively with those three . No to Galvis 

[MurphDogg]

Why pay Daniel Robertson who has accrued -0.3 rWAR over the last two season  more than the MLB minimum salary to play third for a losing team when you can pay Rio Ruiz, who put up 0.7 rWAR in 54 games last year, the MLB minimum salary?

Seems like a poor allocation of resources.

 

[ofan239]

3 minutes ago, MurphDogg said:

Why pay Daniel Robertson who has accrued -0.3 rWAR over the last two season  more than the MLB minimum salary to play third for a losing team when you can pay Rio Ruiz, who put up 0.7 rWAR in 54 games last year, the MLB minimum salary?

Seems like a poor allocation of resources.

 

Because he can play multiple infield positions plus the outfield . I like his versatility and I like the career .342 obp.

[interloper]

Rather have Alberto for a few million and Yolmer playing SS than Yolmer playing 2B and Villar for a few million. 

[MurphDogg]

42 minutes ago, ofan239 said:

Because he can play multiple infield positions plus the outfield . I like his versatility and I like the career .342 obp.

It doesn't make sense for a team that isn't trying to win to pay more than the minimum for one utility player, which they are already doing with Valaika, let alone two utility players.

The Orioles currently have 8 players slated to make more than the minimum in the upcoming season. The only reason it makes sense to add another is if you think there is a chance that the guy you added can be traded, and/or to protect the development of a player currently in the system from struggling at the MLB level. 

Maybe a competent shortstop fits that criteria, to protect the young pitching, but there isn't really any other addition that makes sense to me.

I just don't see how Robertson moves the needle, likewise with adding any starting pitching that makes more than the minimum, there are enough AA/AAA guys that are ready for a shot.

[Roll Tide]

I looked at Roch’s column from this morning....can someone clue me in as I don’t see it.

[ofan239]

1 hour ago, MurphDogg said:

It doesn't make sense for a team that isn't trying to win to pay more than the minimum for one utility player, which they are already doing with Valaika, let alone two utility players.

The Orioles currently have 8 players slated to make more than the minimum in the upcoming season. The only reason it makes sense to add another is if you think there is a chance that the guy you added can be traded, and/or to protect the development of a player currently in the system from struggling at the MLB level. 

Maybe a competent shortstop fits that criteria, to protect the young pitching, but there isn't really any other addition that makes sense to me.

I just don't see how Robertson moves the needle, likewise with adding any starting pitching that makes more than the minimum, there are enough AA/AAA guys that are ready for a shot.

I’d like to see what Robertson could do everyday with 400-500 at bats. Maybe he is just a utility player or maybe he  could turn into something else. If we were contending I wouldn’t consider signing him .And if we aren’t signing someone like Andrelton Simmons or Gregorios why not give him the opportunity to see what he does with it . It’s not going to be a needle moving type of transaction . I am not expecting it to be. But he could turn out to have some value for us in an area (middle infield ) where we need it .

Edited January 8, 2021 by ofan239