Santander drawing interest

[Sports Guy]

15 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

This is the crux of the argument I've been having with SG.

I don't believe it's easy to find a guy as valuable as Santander, and I think the argument that you can replace his production through the rest of the roster is a fallacy. If you can do that, why not keep him and still improve the rest of the roster?

I actually think we kind of agree about the type of player that Santander is. Somewhat less than Jammer's opinion of him, but a good guy who can be valuable even if he's not your Machado type of value. Eventually maybe not affordable at that level of production for a penny-pinching team.

The relevant question then about trading him is about whether you can replace him, because I don't want to trade him and create a hole in our lineup when we're on the cusp of being competitive (which I believe starts late this year and next).  

So all of that argues not to trade him now unless you get that Bleday-like deal. REAL value back. If not, I'm not moving him unless/until I have confidence in our other internal options.

Finally, I don't buy the cost argument for two reasons. First, he will be getting expensive when the rest of the roster is the cheapest it'll ever be. We should be able to cover arb prices. If they go really high, that means he's producing. Second, if we don't have that replacement internally that means to me that we'd have to pay free agent prices in hopes of replacing him. That's the most expensive route of player acquisition.

So we find a team that wants to win now and is willing to overpay for a cheap alternative, perhaps like the Marlins, or we wait until we know more in July and reassess. That's my take.

I just don’t get the idea of why you think he is so hard to replace unless you think he is going to be healthy and a lot better moving forward than he has been so far in his career.

[LookinUp]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

I just don’t get the idea of why you think he is so hard to replace unless you think he is going to be healthy and a lot better moving forward than he has been so far in his career.

And I don't get the idea that he's so easy to replace. I've seen this team run out enough stiffs in the outfield since Markakis left to not take that position for granted.

[Can_of_corn]

9 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

And I don't get the idea that he's so easy to replace. I've seen this team run out enough stiffs in the outfield since Markakis left to not take that position for granted.

Because the team drafted a college right fielder 1-2?

While he might bust I don't think it is faulty thinking to plan for Kjerstad to be the right fielder of the future.  Hopefully, as an advanced college bat, he'll be ready as early as 2022.

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

And I don't get the idea that he's so easy to replace. I've seen this team run out enough stiffs in the outfield since Markakis left to not take that position for granted.

He has been worth a total of 1.2 fWAR in his entire career.  His career wRC+ is 95.

He’s an average-ish defensive player.

His career OBp is 292, with the highest being 315 in any season.

His Ba is usually around 260.

He has never played more than 93 ML games.

His slugging is where his value lies.  In 2019, amongst players with 300 or more at bats, he was 101st in MLB in slugging.

Last year, his slugging was 21st amongst players with 150 or more at bats.  He played 38 games.  That’s not much a sample size going forward.

He isn’t likely to ever carry an OBP of higher than 330 and its more likely its closer to 300 than 330.  His slugging is where he can “make his money”.  Is he a 450-500 slugging guy or a 525+ guy?

My guess is he will be an 800ish OPs guy, give or take 20 points.   In 2019, there were 114 players who had an 800 or better OPs who had at least 300 at bats.  13 of those players  had an OPS between 801-820 and there were 26 others in the 780-799 range.

For him to not be relatively easy to replace, his OBP would have to creep up into the 320-330 range, his slugging 500 or higher and he would have to continue to be a better defensive OFer than his career has suggested.  Oh and he actually has to stay on the field and be healthy.

That is a lot to ask for a guy who is 26 and pretty close to being the player he is likely to be going forward.  Good news is that he has a few historically peak seasons (by age) left, so maybe there is room for him to get better.  But it’s a big ask imo.  Agree that it’s possible though.

 

[wildcard]

10 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I think most teams only have about 5 or so true core players...4+ WAR guys and/or dominant BP arms (WAR doesn’t properly rate relievers).

Legit AS level guys.  

 

That Nick Markakis was not a core player in the 2012=2014 years seems just silly to me.  He does not meet your definition.

[LookinUp]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Because the team drafted a college right fielder 1-2?

While he might bust I don't think it is faulty thinking to plan for Kjerstad to be the right fielder of the future.  Hopefully, as an advanced college bat, he'll be ready as early as 2022.

There's risk in any strategy. Let Santander play more and you risk he gets hurt or doesn't produce. Trade him now and you take for granted that your 1-2 pick is the stud you hope even though you saw him in relatively small sample sizes and he hasn't played in a year.

I prefer to wait and see. Confirm our guys are what we hope they are, to some extent. 

I do concede that Elias probably has a better idea of that already than I do, but I also know for a fact that top picks don't pan out in this sport quite frequently, so I don't want to take him for granted.

[LookinUp]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

My guess is he will be an 800ish OPs guy, give or take 20 points.   In 2019, there were 114 players who had an 800 or better OPs who had at least 300 at bats.  13 of those players  had an OPS between 801-820 and there were 26 others in the 780-799 range.

Your argument is about why he's not elite, but by the list above there are about 4 players/team with his range of OPS. So he's roughly a top 4 hitter on most teams who also plays good defense.

I get that he's not elite, but he has value.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, LookinUp said:

There's risk in any strategy. Let Santander play more and you risk he gets hurt or doesn't produce. Trade him now and you take for granted that your 1-2 pick is the stud you hope even though you saw him in relatively small sample sizes and he hasn't played in a year.

I prefer to wait and see. Confirm our guys are what we hope they are, to some extent. 

I do concede that Elias probably has a better idea of that already than I do, but I also know for a fact that top picks don't pan out in this sport quite frequently, so I don't want to take him for granted.

If the O's don't win a few gambles they are never going to beat out the rest of the division.  Keeping Santander is a losing proposition in their situation.

 

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

Your argument is about why he's not elite, but by the list above there are about 4 players/team with his range of OPS. So he's roughly a top 4 hitter on most teams who also plays good defense.

I get that he's not elite, but he has value.

Has anyone said he doesn’t have value?  Let’s not start with some bs strawman argument.  The discussion isn’t about value..it’s about how he can be replaced.  

[Can_of_corn]

5 minutes ago, wildcard said:

That Nick Markakis was not a core player in the 2012=2014 years seems just silly to me.  He does not meet your definition.

I think a lot of folks overvalue Markakis to some degree.

He had some very fine seasons early on but settled into being a pretty average (not discounting how impressive average is) player before he hit 30.  He peaked at 23-24.

[LookinUp]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

If the O's don't win a few gambles they are never going to beat out the rest of the division.  Keeping Santander is a losing proposition in their situation.

 

The best gamblers aren't about emotion. They're smarter than their competitors and maximize their odds.

[LookinUp]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Has anyone said he doesn’t have value?  Let’s not start with some bs strawman argument.  The discussion isn’t about value..it’s about how he can be replaced.  

Nope, but the discussion is about whether you can replace a top half of the roster player easily.

This kid would have value to the Orioles in 2022 and 2023 when the team in theory could be competitive. I'm not trading that away without having a good sense that I 1) have a replacement in house or 2) a better player is close to the majors. 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, LookinUp said:

The best gamblers aren't about emotion. They're smarter than their competitors and maximize their odds.

What are you talking about? 

What emotional reason would the O's have for trading Santander?

[wildcard]

19 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Because the team drafted a college right fielder 1-2?

While he might bust I don't think it is faulty thinking to plan for Kjerstad to be the right fielder of the future.  Hopefully, as an advanced college bat, he'll be ready as early as 2022.

When a team has two good right fielders, one can always become a leftfielder.

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, LookinUp said:

Nope, but the discussion is about whether you can replace a top half of the roster player easily.

This kid would have value to the Orioles in 2022 and 2023 when the team in theory could be competitive. I'm not trading that away without having a good sense that I 1) have a replacement in house or 2) a better player is close to the majors. 

We have a good sense.

That's why the O's gave him over 5M.

Betting on Kjerstad is a reasonable proposition.