Jump to content

Correa (Update, signs with Twins)


Yardball85

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

So, everyone sharing their concerns with Correa are right.  There are red flags to be worried about.

That being said, go look at the next several FA lists.  Tell me who you want?  Tell me who makes sense?

And if your answer is, no one..that’s fine too.  But there is essentially a zero percent chance that the next contending Os team will be comprised of only home grown talent.  We absolutely must acquire outside the organization talent.  
 

Not sure about you guys but I would rather sign one Correa(and I hate the idea of a 10/350 deal btw) than 3 Ubaldo type deals.

I would have much preferred Seager if we were going to saddle ourselves with a crazy 10 year mega-deal, I think his bat keeps the floor on his value higher than Correa's as the aging process unfolds. Since that obviously is off the table now, I would prefer to simply wait a little longer for our prospects to develop to see where our needs actually exist than to take the plunge on Correa just be ause he's there. If free agency doesn't hold the answers to our needs at tgat point, our talent pipeline should allow us to address those needs, whatever they are, via trade.

7 minutes ago, Yardball85 said:

I think some people genuinely expect the next contending team, 1-9, to be all homegrown players.  Nice idea in theory, but no realistic. 

Anyone expecting that is as misguided and naive as those expecting Correa's $350 million dollar deal to work out as a win for the team, IMO. Trades/FA signings will absolutely be necessary, they just need to be more calculated and careful than this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, interloper said:

Absolutely wild. 

If true.  We don’t know that this guy has legit sources.  I have never heard his name before in connection with big stories (not that he hasn’t broken them but he’s not exactly known).  So, we have to take this with some grain of salt until more is known.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DrinkinWithFermi said:

I would have much preferred Seager if we were going to saddle ourselves with a crazy 10 year mega-deal, I think his bat keeps the floor on his value higher than Correa's as the aging process unfolds. Since that obviously is off the table now, I would prefer to simply wait a little longer for our prospects to develop to see where our needs actually exist than to take the plunge on Correa just be ause he's there. If free agency doesn't hold the answers to our needs at tgat point, our talent pipeline should allow us to address those needs, whatever they are, via trade.

Anyone expecting that is as misguided and naive as those expecting Correa's $350 million dollar deal to work out as a win for the team, IMO. Trades/FA signings will absolutely be necessary, they just need to be more calculated and careful than this.

Yea I don’t see how anyone would prefer Seager especially if you are concerned about durability.  
 

Seager is already showing signs he may have to move off SS.

  • Upvote 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If true, and even if they don't get him, it proves a willingness that JA and Elias will spend to improve the team when it makes sense to. Like they've said from Day 1. Everything they've said in that initial press conference has come to pass, none of it has been a lie so far. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

Yea I don’t see how anyone would prefer Seager especially if you are concerned about durability.  
 

Seager is already showing signs he may have to move off SS.

Because, like I said, I think his bat keeps his value floor higher over the long haul. If Correa has to move off SS at some point, which is entirely possible (if not probable) once he gets into the back half of his 10 year deal that runs into his late 30s, his value will likely be much more negatively affected than Seager's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, interloper said:

If true, and even if they don't get him, it proves a willingness that JA and Elias will spend to improve the team when it makes sense to. Like they've said from Day 1. Everything they've said in that initial press conference has come to pass, none of it has been a lie so far. 

C'mon, don't you know how things work around here?  Little Angelos and Elias are just making an offer like that to show us that they can make an offer like that and make us THINK that they can spend money but ultimately won't.  

It's called a "token offer."  And in 10 months from now when we're whining about the Orioles not spending money, someone will invariably bring up THE CORREA OFFER as evidence that they can spend money, at which point they'll be shouted down.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Hays isn’t getting you anything in trade.

3 WAR in a year he only started hitting in August? Trade Simulator has him at 19.4, obviously less than Mullins but I think you'd get a lot more than nothing back. For what it's worth you've convinced me that trading Mullins would be viable *if* the return is sufficient but I would at least explore Hays first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, interloper said:

I have to agree. Correa may not accept if a contender offers a similar deal, but that won't be the Orioles' fault. 

I mean it is their fault if they offer something that they know or don’t think he’ll sign. Not that they’re in the wrong for not going beyond 10/320, but they should know what the market will be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Yardball85 said:

With that said, the Lyles signing (which I did not like) was surprising and showed, perhaps, a willingness to spend.  It was bizarre, and I think you  could have gotten someone for much cheaper, but that was the largest FA contract this team has given out since... Gallardo?

What’s more surprising, Lyles getting a guaranteed $7 million or the Orioles being mentioned whatsoever with one of the top free agents? It’s been a strange off season for sure

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...