Jump to content

Per the Sun, O's looking at Izturis


LAOSfan

Recommended Posts

I doubt if Andy signs him he stops his search for a younger and better SS.
This is the key right here, great point.

Izturis is a fine stopgap option. He'll play good defense and, even though he's bad hitter, will be an upgrade offensively to what we had last year. But he is by no means a long term solution. As long as MacPhail is still searching for potential long term solutions, then getting Izturis is ok as a stop gap for a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 202
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I would be very happy with signing Izturis and Punto to split the utility and SS role over one of the big 3 SS free agent options. Do not forget Punto can also sub for Mora at 3B on occasion. This gives us some injury insurance as well.
I like Punto as a util guy but wouldn't hand him the starting job. Only way I'd want both is if only one (or neither) is guaranteed money beyond 2009. Once we find a real SS, there will only be room for one of these guys on the roster.

I like Punto over Izturis as a utility guy, but Izturis over Punto as a starting SS for 2009 only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Izturis is the best FA option considering contract. He's obviously one of the better defensive SS in all of baseball and, believe it or not, his 630 career OPS would be quite an upgrade to what we had last year (although still pretty bad).

We don't need help in the offense from SS. We scored a lot of runs last year and should score more this year. Cesar is a upgrade at shortstop. He gives us a strong glove up the middle. With Wieters, Iztruis, Roberts and Jones up the middle I can live with that.

Now lets get a pair a SP and Tex, then we will be on track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't need help in the offense from SS. We scored a lot of runs last year and should score more this year. Cesar is a upgrade at shortstop. He gives us a strong glove up the middle. With Wieters, Iztruis, Roberts and Jones up the middle I can live with that.

Now lets get a pair a SP and Tex, then we will be on track.

Nonsense. I think a lot of people are missing how much potential we have to improve by obtaining even an average offensive SS. Going from a 600 to an 800 OPS at shortstop could gain us more wins than upgrading from Millar to Teixeira at first.

I'm not saying that defense isn't very important at SS but we need to give up the idea that our offense will be fine going forward and start realizing how much room we have to gain at that position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta love Rotoworld's take on the O's turning down the Olson-Greene deal. :rolleyes:

The Padres are pretty serious about moving Greene if Olson is all they wanted. Maybe the Orioles were right not to jump -- Greene is under control for just one year and the team isn't going to contend next season -- but Olson has been a real disappointment and hardly seems like a high price to pay.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're trying to build a contender, who would you rather have in your organization?

Choice A A 25-year-old pitcher who has proven himself at 'AAA' with a 3.1 ERA after 29 starts, but who hasn't done very well in the majors after one full season. He still has an option year, so you can send him to 'AAA' if you want. You have to pay him maybe $350,000 for 2009. Depending on how much time he spends in the minors, the organization has him locked up cheap through 2013 or 2014.

Choice B A 29-year-old SS who hit .213 with a .260 obp last year. People say he'll play better away from his current home stadium, but he hit .212 with a .225 obp away from home last year. The 'season long slump' was so bad that he punched a storage chest at his home stadium on July 31st. The attack on the innocent storage chest fractured his hand and ended his miserable season prematurely. His current team has filed a grievance to try to recoup $1.5m from him due to the self-infliction of his injury.

EDIT: You're saying you've watched Olson and you're ready to give up on him. His upside is easily replaceable. While I think you might be right (but I still hope not), I'd argue that if you had watched Greene and were a Padres fan, you might be arguing that they should trade him for a bag of balls. (Perhaps not since the rumors are that Padres management may be betraying the fans and dumping salary left and right.)

If he rebounds to his best year (2007), that's still an obp below .300 (.322 away from home), but you really have no idea whether he'll rebound anyway. If he doesn't, he's locked into your active 25-man roster, or you can eat his salary. You'll have to pay him $6.5m, and he becomes a free agent after this season. So you may be looking for another SS at that point, anyway. And now you don't have the pitcher from 'Choice A' either.

No, ladies and gentlemen. Regardless of whether you believe Garrett Olson will make it in the majors, Khalil Greene is not worth Garrett Olson to this organization. He's worth a flyer if San Diego wants to dump his salary. He's worth guys whom you'd classify as minor league filler. What you're really giving San Diego is an offer to take his salary off their hands. He's not worth any real prospects.

This is exhibit A of why baseball fans, even dedicated, smart ones, pay too much attention to statistics and prospect "hype" and too little attention to what they see right in front of them. Garret Olson is not a high-ceiling guy. You can point to his minor league numbers all you want. There are a zillion guys in baseball history who could dominate AAA even more than Olson has but can't cut it at the ML level. Olson doesn't have dominating, or even very good, stuff. IF he can improve his control and IF he can get his head straightened out he might become a decent swingman or lefty out of the bullpen. That's it. That's his ceiling. Comparing him to Guthrie is laughable. Olson does not miss bats. He doesn't have a go-to pitch. His control has been very bad. And he clearly has a bad mental approach.

Last year at this time I was in the minority who said that Loewen was not going to make it in the Os starting rotation. In fact, I predicted he would be out of baseball in 3 years. I was probably wrong, but only because he will stick around as a hitter. He had terrible control but slightly better velocity than Olson, a much better curveball, and he was bigger and more athletic. We fall into the trap of paying too much attention to draft rounds and minor league success, and not to the tools that can achieve major league success. I'll go on record as predicting Cabrera, Liz, and maybe even Penn will have better major league careers than Olson.

I recognize Greene is not a great player. He is pretty talented and has contributed offensively even playing in the worst hitting ballpark in modern baseball history. Even for a year, I'd take my chances. My concern about Olson becoming the next Maine and having to regret the trade for years to come is zero. Rather my concern is that we will regret not making this trade.

The post you linked (my post above), says that no matter what you think of Olson, he's more than I'd trade for Greene. Your post says that there's a very small chance Olson can become a contributor in a minor role. I'm saying that's too much for Greene. So with all due respect, your post didn't counter mine. I don't know what Olson will do in the future. I don't have particularly high expectations. I hold out hope. And whether I'm gladly willing to trade Olson for value or not, Greene isn't the right move.

I have to add this so maybe you understand where I'm coming from. Because we aren't where we need to be with the starting rotation, I don't expect to compete in 2009. So Greene's upside for 2009 doesn't really hold a lot of importance to me. That said, I can show you several posts from this week or last where I argued that we should absolutely be interested in Greene if he is a true salary dump. It just so happens that I'm now arguing that we should absolutely not be interested in Greene for more than the return in a pure salary dump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I argued that we should absolutely be interested in Greene if he is a true salary dump. It just so happens that I'm now arguing that we should absolutely not be interested in Greene for more than the return in a pure salary dump.

Indeed, this is my stance as well. To me, Olson has solid value, and right now that is more than i would want to give up for Greene.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Izturis is the best FA option considering contract. He's obviously one of the better defensive SS in all of baseball and, believe it or not, his 630 career OPS would be quite an upgrade to what we had last year (although still pretty bad).

"Izturis = terrific defense" has come to be something of a foregone conclusion.

I can tell you that in the 80 or 100 games we had the guy in Chicago, he was decidedly underwhelming in the field, and lots of our fans were shrugging their shoulders wondering what all the hoopla was about -- plus range, average at best arm; most of the time his hands seemed good, but nevertheless he made a number of routine errors. Altogether, nothing special at all.

It'd be great if someone would do the legwork to piece together a few years worth of defensive data on the guy, using one or more of the advanced PBP-based systems (UZR, Fielding bible, etc). I'd be curious what his stats looked like during his time with the Cubs, and how they measure up to these subjective observations (and how much better or worse the numbers were before and after CHI).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nonsense. I think a lot of people are missing how much potential we have to improve by obtaining even an average offensive SS. Going from a 600 to an 800 OPS at shortstop could gain us more wins than upgrading from Millar to Teixeira at first.
800 OPS isn't an average offensive SS, its a phenomenal offensive SS.

SS averaged about a .700 OPS last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can tell you that in the 80 or 100 games we had the guy in Chicago, he was decidedly underwhelming in the field, and lots of our fans were shrugging their shoulders wondering what all the hoopla was about -- plus range, average at best arm; most of the time his hands seemed good, but nevertheless he made a number of routine errors. Altogether, nothing special at all.

I remember that as well, and I saw it quite a bit as I watch a lot of Cubs games. I, along with many others was a little puzzled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember that as well, and I saw it quite a bit as I watch a lot of Cubs games. I, along with many others was a little puzzled.

Defense, just like offense, can fluctuate for any number of reasons. It seems like fans have a tendency to take good defense from a player with a good defensive reputation/history as more of a given than good offense from a player who has hit well in the past for some reason, but there are plenty of cases of very good defensive players who either have a terrible year in the field or permanently fall apart defensively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defense, just like offense, can fluctuate for any number of reasons. It seems like fans have a tendency to take good defense from a player with a good defensive reputation/history as more of a given than good offense from a player who has hit well in the past for some reason, but there are plenty of cases of very good defensive players who either have a terrible year in the field or permanently fall apart defensively.

Edgar Renteria?

That is how I would describe how Izturis was playing with the Cubs. It was just like he was not completely mentally there. Just making some simple mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason to go get Greene is if his price is low. Olson is not a low price. Someone in our 10-15 prospects range would be the right price. If Olson was still a prospect, he'd probably still be top 10, and definitely would be based on his minor league numbers.

He's not gonna be a front rotation starter, obviously, but even a guy who is a decent #5 is more valuable than one year of Greene.

Olson for Greene would have been a very stupid trade, IMO, and I honestly don't understand how anybody could think differently.

Mackus and TakeBackOPACY:

I see your arguments, and I respect your opinions. However, where we seem to fundamentally disagree is the bolded concepts above. Basically, on the value of Olson. I'm saying his value to the Orioles is slim to almost nothing. We don't need starting pitchers because we didn't have a Garret Olson last year, we need starting pitchers because we WERE starting Garret Olson last year. You are valuing Olson based on his minor league numbers and his "hype" as a prospect. Because of those factors, you assume final product Garret Olson is much better than what we saw last year. Based on my own observations about his stuff, his mental approach, and his command, I don't think finished product Olson is much better than what we have seen, at least not major league starting rotation material. And I don't put much credence into minor league success in and of itself.

Now also the market sets players' values. And if MacPhail doesn't want to trade Olson because he thinks there is a market for him out there and can get something better for him, I'm fine with that. But even one year of Greene gives you the possibility of:

1) extending him, or

2) he has a great first half and can be traded to a contender at the deadline for a good return, or at the very least

3) he puts some fans in the seats and improves you from having to trot Cesar Izturis out there every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mackus and TakeBackOPACY:

I see your arguments, and I respect your opinions. However, where we seem to fundamentally disagree is the bolded concepts above. Basically, on the value of Olson. I'm saying his value to the Orioles is slim to almost nothing. We don't need starting pitchers because we didn't have a Garret Olson last year, we need starting pitchers because we WERE starting Garret Olson last year. You are valuing Olson based on his minor league numbers and his "hype" as a prospect. Because of those factors, you assume final product Garret Olson is much better than what we saw last year. Based on my own observations about his stuff, his mental approach, and his command, I don't think finished product Olson is much better than what we have seen, at least not major league starting rotation material. And I don't put much credence into minor league success in and of itself.

Now also the market sets players' values. And if MacPhail doesn't want to trade Olson because he thinks there is a market for him out there and can get something better for him, I'm fine with that. But even one year of Greene gives you the possibility of:

1) extending him, or

2) he has a great first half and can be traded to a contender at the deadline for a good return, or at the very least

3) he puts some fans in the seats and improves you from having to trot Cesar Izturis out there every day.

The only people Khalil Greene is bringing to the ballpark are friends and relatives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...