O's Ink Izturis

[clarence]

To say that AM would look at the signing of Itzuris as solving the shortstop problem is borderline insane. Dave, coming from someone as knowledgable as yourself makes it seem that you have an agenda that you just want to push.

Signing him to a two-year deal was very smart. We have no idea who the rest of the infield will be after next season, so why not gamble $3M on Itzuris and have one less problem if we haven't found someone else.

[Migrant Redbird]

Can everyone repeat "STOPGAP" after me?

STOPGAP

STOPGAP

STOPGAP

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with a stopgap solution, providing that a reasonable long term solution isn't available. The Cardinals exercised stopgap solutions very effectively for 2nd base in 2004 (Tony Womack) and 2005 (Mark Grudzielanek). That strategy failed in 2006 with Junior Spivey, but the Cards were able to acquire Rafeal Belliard as a secondary stopgap measure during the season and parlayed it into a world championship.

The Cardinals attempted to get past the stopgap scenario for 2nd base in 2007 by signing Adam Kennedy to a 3 year contract, and that deal blew up in their faces.

[PeteCanes]

Frankly, this is silly. The idea that the O's are content to "tread water" for two years instead of finding an long-term replacement is completely baseless. What difference does the second year make if they move him to a UTI role? Or trade him?

But even so, you seem to be switching gears, here. Now, suddenly, it's not the value that Izturis brings to the Orioles (as you defined it, his "suck") but what it says about the Orioles direction? Is there anything that the Orioles have done over the past year that suggests settling for short-term mediocrity at the expense of long-term gains?

How they've drafted and spent on the draft? Their movement of veteran players with expiring contracts? Their development of a global plan? Their infrastructure? Which of these points to treading water?

We know that AM is risk averse. And we know that he doesn't like to bargain from a position of weakness. Izturis is an insurance policy, that insures, going forward, that discussions for a long-term SS solution aren't affected by the fact that we're in urgen need of a SS right now.

Yes. If anything this acquisition gives AM a stonger foot to stand on while attempting to deal for young shortstops. Izturis fills a pressing need adequately, at an affordable price, and certainly does not preclude any deals for other shortstops for the duration of his contract.

[hoosiers]

Not a big fan of Izturis, but I have no issue with the signing since the player should be adequate and the $ is fine. We could have gone bigger $ or longer term, but we found a two year placeholder who should provide better defense and perhaps a bit more offense than is expected.

Many on this board have clamored for prospects like Wood, Cedeno, Hu, etc at SS and they seem significantly more like suspects at this point. Sure, it would be "fun" to put a decent, young, upside guy out there, but Izturis is clearly a "bird in the hand". If another team wants to pass along a SS prospect, we can finally say "no, we're good with our guy" and be truthful about it - reducing the perceived leverage of a situation where we have no good major league SS candidates.

Izturis is a clear talent upgrade to last year's SS production. If our FO comes across a better long term solution at the right price, that's great.

[bluedog]

...

If you are rebuilding, you build with the players that have the chance to be part of your future….. You know today, that Izturis does not fit that bill…….

Ahh well… Izturis is an Oriole, and he is an improvement over 2008…. We can all be thank-ful for that.

I generally agree with your opinions, but here I respectfully disagree. I think AM got exactly the man he was looking for in Izturis. I don't think he was a "secondary option", I think he was the #1 target on the O's list.

The O's wanted a relatively inexpensive shortstop who'd be willing to sign a 1 - 2 year contract.

They wanted to find this guy and get him on board as quickly and easily as possible so they can get back to their primary focus of building for 2011 / 2012.

They want a defensive standout, so that as we develop and promote young pitchers over the next 2 years, they are put into a situation where the have the best possible chance to succeed.

They want a guy who's both willing and well suited for moving to a backup role in the event that the O's do acquire their Shortstop of the future during the next two years.

They want a steady, reliable presence at short who will allow them to avoid the kinds of distractions and roster shuffling that the team dealt with all year long in 2008. AM and Trembley both have a lot more valuable things to do with their time than to continually have to address how to correct issues with players who aren't remotely close to being a part of our future plans.

Izturis fits these goals like a glove.

So by singing Izturis early, AM can focus his entire attention on Tex and other creative ways to improve this club for the future.

Now AM could have theoretically waited a couple of months to see if he could somehow acquire our shortstop of the future. But by doing so, he would have risked having Izturis sign elsewhere (Houston?) and opening this whole can of worms all over again.

The fact is, even if AM does acquire our shortstop of the future (I'm going to start referring to this theoretical player as "SStud" from now on) later this off-season, Izturis' presence gives AM the option to send that player back to the minors (if he's a prospect) or he provides a superior backup at short (if the new guy is ML ready).

It's not the sexiest move in the world, I know. For a fan base all geared up to see Tex or AJ or someone of similar caliber signed, this seems like a letdown.

But I'm pretty certain that AM is thrilled with this signing and that the whole front office is relieved that they can cross "Shortstop who can actually field his position" off their to do list and turn their focus back to finding a SStud for 2011 and beyond.

[bluedog]

Yes. If anything this acquisition gives AM a stonger foot to stand on while attempting to deal for young shortstops. Izturis fills a pressing need adequately, at an affordable price, and certainly does not preclude any deals for other shortstops for the duration of his contract.

Great point - it also strengthens the O's position when talking to other Free Agents whose #1 question about how the O's intend to improve from last year would almost certainly be "who's playing short for you?"

"Izturis and his sweet glove" sounds a lot better than "we have a lot of options in mind".

[bluedog]

Apologies if this point has already been made, but I don't have the time to wade through everything...

As Baltimoron has pointed out, if Izturis meets expectations that appear reasonable, he will likely be worth the 2/6 we're giving him. So, the main issue that anyone should have with him (and the issue crstoner appears to have) is that him being on the team will cause AM to say "Hey, we've got a SS for now, I don't have to try and get a long term answer anymore."

As many, especially Jim, have repeatedly pointed out, this is definitely not necessarily the case, nothing is stopping AM from keeping up the search for a long term answer.

Everyone should agree we have a darn good outfield setup with Jones Markakis and Scott, a good setup for several years. Yet, apparently that did not satisfy AM--we've been trying to get Pie.

This tells me AM is not satisfied with just having good OF options at the ML level for 2009-10. So similarly, I wouldn't think he'd be satisfied with simply having an adequate SS for the next two years. Just as he's willing to explore finding a younger talented option such as Pie, I would think he would also still be willing to explore finding a younger talented option at SS.

So IMO, the fear that AM will just say Izturis is good enough and not look for better options anymore, while not totally unfounded (esp. given the O's past), is not something I'm greatly worried about. He seems to recognize that if we can improve our talent, even at a position that we already have adequately filled, we should do so. Hopefully I'm right.

Rep to you. Very cogent arguments.

[AgentOrange]

I suspect every metric available would support my characterization of Izturis' play for the Cubs.

Hey don't get me wrong. I hope he does well for you guys. But like you said, I wouldn't immediately assume there's an upgrade in store -- he could suck for you guys like he did for the Cubs.

If that happens, at 3 million a year, he can afford to be on the bench.

[tropicos]

Old FO: Izturis = SS Problem Solved

AM: Izturis = 'Stopgap' 'Not Part of Future Plan' 'Problem Not Solved Just Yet'

I think that should settle all the discrepancies.

[byrdz]

Frankly, this is silly. The idea that the O's are content to "tread water" for two years instead of finding an long-term replacement is completely baseless. What difference does the second year make if they move him to a UTI role? Or trade him?

But even so, you seem to be switching gears, here. Now, suddenly, it's not the value that Izturis brings to the Orioles (as you defined it, his "suck") but what it says about the Orioles direction? Is there anything that the Orioles have done over the past year that suggests settling for short-term mediocrity at the expense of long-term gains?

How they've drafted and spent on the draft? Their movement of veteran players with expiring contracts? Their development of a global plan? Their infrastructure? Which of these points to treading water?

We know that AM is risk averse. And we know that he doesn't like to bargain from a position of weakness. Izturis is an insurance policy, that insures, going forward, that discussions for a long-term SS solution aren't affected by the fact that we're in urgen need of a SS right now.

Good post, you're on a roll today.

[NCRaven]

I think we can stop obsessing over filling every position on the diamond with the "future" as Migrant said, there's nothing wrong with having a short-term solution at some positions. As is, we've got a long-term answer in RF, CF, and C, and probably one SP with Guthrie. My only problem with our off season, so far, is that I think we need to address, at least, one more long-term answer, somewhere, anywhere. We added Markakis three seasons ago, Guthrie two seasons ago, Jones last season, and will very likely add Wieters this season. That, in and of itself, is not a fast enough pace of improvement to ever get us where we want to go.

Reimold could be one of those players at some point, or even at the start, of this season, but that's unsure. We could re-sign Roberts to a three-year extension, but that's not sure either. DH, I don't care about, you rarely develop a young player to fill that role, but if we were going to, Brandon Snyder may end up being tailor made for it as a RH Aubrey Huff. None of Tillman, Matusz or Arrieta are likely to arrive this season, at least not until September. Who knows if the forgotton man, Hayden Penn, can be a major part of the future, but few still believe he fits in at the same level as the Big 3. And, the position prospects behind Snyder, Reimold and possibly Turner, seem to be several seasons away.

So, my point is, we need to accelerate the pace of our improvement, if we're going to become a competitive team in the AL East any time soon. If it's not going to be at SS, how do we add another future impact piece of the puzzle this season. From my point of view, it has to come from a trade of Roberts or the signing of Teixeira. Adding one major player a year just won't get it done, at this point.

[davearm]

To those that think I'm "silly" or even "insane":

I'll offer an even-odds bet that in the next 12 months, the O's do not acquire another SS that could rightly be characterized as a long-term solution. (June amateur draft excluded... everyone drafts shortstops.)

I would also offer a second even-odds bet that barring injury, Izturis logs more innings at SS in 2010 than any other Oriole.

I could be wrong but I'm confident the odds of either happening are well below 50%.

Name the stakes and let's have some fun with it. If I'm so out to lunch on this one then go ahead and cash in.

[Enjoy Terror]

Nobody complained this much about Mark Belanger. In fact I think a lot of Orioles fan thought he was the best thing since sliced bread. Guy couldn't hit a baseball out of the infield but he could flash the leather with the best of them. I think that if Izturis' defense is all that they say it is, we could have a similar situation to what the Rays had with Bartlett.

[Ruzious]

To those that think I'm "silly" or even "insane":

I'll offer an even-odds bet that in the next 12 months, the O's do not acquire another SS that could rightly be characterized as a long-term solution. (June amateur draft excluded... everyone drafts shortstops.)

I would also offer a second even-odds bet that barring injury, Izturis logs more innings at SS in 2010 than any other Oriole.

I could be wrong but I'm confident the odds of either happening are well below 50%.

Name the stakes and let's have some fun with it. If I'm so out to lunch on this one then go ahead and cash in.

Done - if you allow the O's 1st round pick - if it's a college SS that is projected to stay at SS.

Stakes - You change your tagline for a month to Exposed O's Hater.

[DrungoHazewood]

Nobody complained this much about Mark Belanger. In fact I think a lot of Orioles fan thought he was the best thing since sliced bread. Guy couldn't hit a baseball out of the infield but he could flash the leather with the best of them. I think that if Izturis' defense is all that they say it is, we could have a similar situation to what the Rays had with Bartlett.

Fine, but don't get all crazy with the Belanger comps. Belanger was one of the best defensive shortstops who ever lived and he still had years where he was below average overall.

You can live with a really good field, no-hit shortstop. But let's not resurrect the loopy Luis Hernandez era proclamations that such a player is preferable to a more well-rounded solution. And let's not give our backing to the Tampa writers who anointed Bartlett the Rays' MVP.