Jump to content

Any chance MacPhail becomes a buyer as prices drop?


Frobby

Recommended Posts

It's too bad the Willie Keeler, Lloyd Waner, Nellie Fox, Luke Sewell type of hitter went extinct, otherwise we'd have a good set of players to compare and contrast.

Guys like Keeler were legendary for their ability to avoid strikeouts. But they really didn't have any plate discipline - they'd just foul off anything that was within a half mile of the strike zone. They'd rarely walk because they'd rarely take anything close.

Guys like Dunn are the opposite. They know exactly what kind of pitch they can hit, and they're patient enough and good enough to just not swing until they get it. This leads to a lot of deep counts, and a lot of walks and strikeouts. That patience defines what plate discipline is all about.

In the deadball era, when gloves were tiny and errors much more common it made sense to never strike out. It was much easier to reach base on what is now a routine ground ball. But with teams making an error every two games and many more fast players with great range and more reachable fences it just doesn't make sense to trade an extra 20 or 30 homers for 100 more three-hoppers to the infield.

We have an old friend who comes close*:

Link.

*Not really, but it's interesting to look at his out-of-zone swings and contact rates. Which are remarkably good, even as his power declines. Still, no walks and no power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply
The number of days was strictly to show how long it's taking for AM do make one significant trade or free agent signing. We ended the season on a down note with numerous losses and I believe the second worst pitching staff in baseball. I think we were thinking about possible trades back in September. It's January! Does AM think he has to match his Tejada and Bedard deals of last year? I think other GM'S may be shying away from him knowing the success of those deals. This is the week the wheels are put in motion.

Its January. Worry in the third week of March.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is so untrue so as to call into question your knowledge of the definition of plate discipline. He doesn't swing at many pitches out-of-zone. He just has low contact rates.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=319&position=OF#platediscipline

He's got great patience and discipline.

You are right, plate discipline was the wrong statement and his inability to make contact is what I should have said. My bad. Regardless, I don't see him as a player that fits into AM's plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right, plate discipline was the wrong statement and his inability to make contact is what I should have said. My bad. Regardless, I don't see him as a player that fits into AM's plan.

I actually see him as exactly the kind of FA we may go after - if the time is right. Dunn's price will likely be lower than it should be for two reasons: defense (or the lack of versatility implicit in DHing him full time) and strikeouts.

One of those make some sense: defense. Obviously, the fact that he's a defensive liability diminishes his value.

The strikeouts should be a non-issue, and are exactly the kind-of irrationality that leads to undervaluing.

So, while it may be hard for us to bid against big-budget teams for "superstars" (i.e., "complete" players like Mark Teixeira) finding value in guys who have one-dimension and are very good at that one dimension is a pretty cagey way for us to go about FA purchases.

Thus, if we have a need for walks and power, then Dunn would be a good choice. As his price drops, he even becomes a better choice now, but I don't think it likely his $$$ will fall far enough to make it something we will - or should - pursue right now.

The reason for this is that we know Dunn's upside, and we've seen it. There's no room for improvement, and a lot of room for decline. While I think he's likely to be pretty good over the next two years, I'm not sure how he'll look in years 3-4 of a contract.

Thus, after 2010, if Dunn were 29 and a FA, he would be a great addition of high-octane offense to add to our (hopefully) competitive teams in 2011 and 2012. Instant offense, undervalued. And if he declines in 2013 and 2014, you simply write that off as the premium you pay the highly leveraged 2011 and 2012.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love that, not so much for the moves themselves, but for the large portions of crow that would be served up by the people implying or stating outright that he's a dawdling do-nothing pawn of the penny-pinching bossman who doesn't know diddly about baseball.

(you know, despite grandpa & daddy having plaques in the HOF)

Nevertheless, I doubt the O's jump into the market too tough. I just don't see this off-season as the right time with regards to their big picture plan.

I can't believe nobody has touched this.

By that logic, you father should excel at your grandfather's profession, and you should too. By that logic, we should be counting down the days until one of the Bush Girls becomes our next president. By that logic, the Angelos kids are the perfect choice to be our next owners, and Ripken's son is our next Iron Man.

That was an incredibly ignorant statement that not only assumed that something such as talent in a profession is automatically passed down through genetics, but it also took a shot at everyone who disagrees with you. I guess that is to be expected based off what I've seen from you recently.

Regardless, MacPhail should be jumping on deals that will better our franchise for the long term. Hell, if we can get a Dunn for a cheaper price than it would take to keep Markakis, we should be all over that. Bats like Dunn don't usually cost 10 million per in the world of baseball today. There is no excuse for MacPhail to not take advantage of the various steals, but he either won't do it or will move so slow that we'll be outbid. That is not good baseball management, no matter who your father and grandfather are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe nobody has touched this.

By that logic, you father should excel at your grandfather's profession, and you should too. By that logic, we should be counting down the days until one of the Bush Girls becomes our next president. By that logic, the Angelos kids are the perfect choice to be our next owners, and Ripken's son is our next Iron Man.

That was an incredibly ignorant statement that not only assumed that something such as talent in a profession is automatically passed down through genetics, but it also took a shot at everyone who disagrees with you. I guess that is to be expected based off what I've seen from you recently.

Regardless, MacPhail should be jumping on deals that will better our franchise for the long term. Hell, if we can get a Dunn for a cheaper price than it would take to keep Markakis, we should be all over that. Bats like Dunn don't usually cost 10 million per in the world of baseball today. There is no excuse for MacPhail to not take advantage of the various steals, but he either won't do it or will move so slow that we'll be outbid. That is not good baseball management, no matter who your father and grandfather are.

Agree with this wholeheartedly. Throw a 4/44 deal at Dunn right now. What's the worst that could happen? Dunn's bat in the middle of any batting order would be a good fit.

I do have a slight issue with the stuff above where I put the bold on the text. I do believe that MacPhail has actually put together good baseball teams over his tenures as GM. Now, I don't know how much that has to do with genetics, but I have the feeling that some of that is attributable to the teachings of the older MacPhails.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is Burrell able to get any money? You said no one has any.

Lowe was offered 3 - $36 million by the Mets and is holding out for $16 million/year. Manny turned down 2 - $45 million from the Dodgers. The Red Sox offer to Teixeira was second only to the Yankees. There's money out there alright, just not enough to some player's liking.

You just listed teams from the 3 largest markets in baseball - NY, LA and Boston. The most recent big name player to sign, Burrell, got nothing compared to the deals made by the Yankees for Sabathia, Burnett and Teixeira or the offers you mention to Lowe and Ramirez. Yes, the mega market teams have money to offer mega star players. But we are not a mega market team in a position to throw away money on pitchers that are a Twinkie away from 300 lbs or a pitch away from arm miseries. Just because we were willing to spend on one of the mega stars who presented a unique opportunity for this team doesn't mean that we should throw it away on players that the FO appears to have questions about.

I find it particularly interesting that Dunn seems to be having a hard time finding a home. His stats speak for themselves, so I can only guess that there is something else that's bothering GM's about Dunn or he's asking for too much money in this market. Either way, the number and quality of players available this late, and the value of Burrell's contract with the Ray's speaks volumes to me about the effect of current economic conditions on this year's free agent market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with this wholeheartedly. Throw a 4/44 deal at Dunn right now. What's the worst that could happen? Dunn's bat in the middle of any batting order would be a good fit.

I do have a slight issue with the stuff above where I put the bold on the text. I do believe that MacPhail has actually put together good baseball teams over his tenures as GM. Now, I don't know how much that has to do with genetics, but I have the feeling that some of that is attributable to the teachings of the older MacPhails.

The worst that could happen is we try to offer a competitive offer of 3/4, the Teixeira tactic. If he wants to play here, he'll take the money. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe nobody has touched this.

By that logic, you father should excel at your grandfather's profession, and you should too. By that logic, we should be counting down the days until one of the Bush Girls becomes our next president. By that logic, the Angelos kids are the perfect choice to be our next owners, and Ripken's son is our next Iron Man.

That was an incredibly ignorant statement that not only assumed that something such as talent in a profession is automatically passed down through genetics, but it also took a shot at everyone who disagrees with you. I guess that is to be expected based off what I've seen from you recently.

Regardless, MacPhail should be jumping on deals that will better our franchise for the long term. Hell, if we can get a Dunn for a cheaper price than it would take to keep Markakis, we should be all over that. Bats like Dunn don't usually cost 10 million per in the world of baseball today. There is no excuse for MacPhail to not take advantage of the various steals, but he either won't do it or will move so slow that we'll be outbid. That is not good baseball management, no matter who your father and grandfather are.

Take the son of a son of a GM...immerse him in the sport from birth, and--if he's interested and intelligent--he's likely going to be a pretty darned good GM.

Take the daughters of a diffident, n'er-do-well, alcoholic second son, immerse in booze and celebrity, and...well, you should at least get the picture...

:wedge:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe nobody has touched this.

By that logic, you father should excel at your grandfather's profession, and you should too. By that logic, we should be counting down the days until one of the Bush Girls becomes our next president. By that logic, the Angelos kids are the perfect choice to be our next owners, and Ripken's son is our next Iron Man.

That was an incredibly ignorant statement that not only assumed that something such as talent in a profession is automatically passed down through genetics, but it also took a shot at everyone who disagrees with you. I guess that is to be expected based off what I've seen from you recently.

Regardless, MacPhail should be jumping on deals that will better our franchise for the long term. Hell, if we can get a Dunn for a cheaper price than it would take to keep Markakis, we should be all over that. Bats like Dunn don't usually cost 10 million per in the world of baseball today. There is no excuse for MacPhail to not take advantage of the various steals, but he either won't do it or will move so slow that we'll be outbid. That is not good baseball management, no matter who your father and grandfather are.

There are a ton of reasons for MacPhail not to go heavily in this market. And most have been clearly laid out on this board. If a FA acquisition can help us long-term then, sure, we should kick the tires and see if there's a real undervaluation going on.

I'm not convinced that Dunn helps us much long-term, myself. His skill-set and already poor contact rates lead me to believe that there's a significant risk of imminent/precipitous decline. Some of that risk is mitigated by the fact that he won't cost us picks, and perhaps we can swing him for prospects down the line (in a year or so). But I don't know how likely I think it is that he's a type-A coming off of 2012, either.

That said, the fact that he wasn't offered arb makes him one of the very few FAs who is worth even thinking about.

Regardless, your point that Dunn at $10m is a great buy isn't particularly convincing. As this article at Fangraphs points out, Dunn is worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $11m a year. A 4/40m contract is a great deal for a win-now team. That $4m in savings isn't really enough to convince me the O's should move now, in the hope that he doesn't decline or that they can move him for prospects before that decline occurs.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/fair-for-dunn

Regardless, your rash assessment of MacPhail's "inexcusable" decisions turns out to be little more than "more of the same" baseless speculation and subjective valuation.

An argument can be made for looking at Dunn - just as an argument could be made for kicking the tires of Teixeira. Not signing Dunn, however, or determining that the risk outweighs the reward before wasting time and money (search, opportunity, information, transaction costs) in negotiating with him is hardly inexcusable.

I won't get into what's really inexcusable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a ton of reasons for MacPhail not to go heavily in this market. And most have been clearly laid out on this board. If a FA acquisition can help us long-term then, sure, we should kick the tires and see if there's a real undervaluation going on.

I'm not convinced that Dunn helps us much long-term, myself. His skill-set and already poor contact rates lead me to believe that there's a significant risk of imminent/precipitous decline. Some of that risk is mitigated by the fact that he won't cost us picks, and perhaps we can swing him for prospects down the line (in a year or so). But I don't know how likely I think it is that he's a type-A coming off of 2012, either.

That said, the fact that he wasn't offered arb makes him the only one of the very few FAs who is worth even thinking about.

Regardless, your point that Dunn at $10m is a great buy isn't particularly convincing. As this article at Fangraphs points out, Dunn is worth somewhere in the neighborhood of $11m a year. A 4/40m contract is a great deal for a win-now team. That $4m in savings isn't really enough to convince me the O's should move now, in the hope that he doesn't decline or that they can move him for prospects before that decline occurs.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/fair-for-dunn

Regardless, your rash assessment of MacPhail's "inexcusable" decisions turns out to be little more than "more of the same" baseless speculation and subjective valuation.

An argument can be made for looking at Dunn - just as an argument could be made for kicking the tires of Teixeira. Not signing Dunn, however, or determining that the risk outweighs the reward before wasting time and money (search, opportunity, information, transaction costs) in negotiating with him is hardly inexcusable.

I won't get into what's really inexcusable.

I don't see how Dunn can be a bad thing. A .900 ops, a guy with an obp in the .400's, a guy who hits 40 homeruns a year...and he's cheap compared to the contracts people who put up those lines normally get. How can you not be angry at MacPhail for not pursuing undervalued steals and taking advantage of the market. He'd finally be doing something concrete that shows a definitive effort towards winning, something that he hasn't done in awhile. There isn't much that could go wrong in my opinion. Its not like Dunn is 38 years old and is going to suddenly drop 150 points in obp and hit .180. He'll be worth his contract and won't be a financial burden at any point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take the son of a son of a GM...immerse him in the sport from birth, and--if he's interested and intelligent--he's likely going to be a pretty darned good GM.

Take the daughters of a diffident, n'er-do-well, alcoholic second son, immerse in booze and celebrity, and...well, you should at least get the picture...

:wedge:

Scary, isn't it. :laughlol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how Dunn can be a bad thing. A .900 ops, a guy with an obp in the .400's, a guy who hits 40 homeruns a year...and he's cheap compared to the contracts people who put up those lines normally get. How can you not be angry at MacPhail for not pursuing undervalued steals and taking advantage of the market. He'd finally be doing something concrete that shows a definitive effort towards winning, something that he hasn't done in awhile. There isn't much that could go wrong in my opinion. Its not like Dunn is 38 years old and is going to suddenly drop 150 points in obp and hit .180. He'll be worth his contract and won't be a financial burden at any point.

I just linked an article that details what his value is based on his win contributions.

1. He's not a .400s OBP guy: he's a .370-.390 OBP guy because of his low BA.

2. I just showed you that Dunn is - by objective calculation - a mild bargain for a win-now team at 4/40. He's - again, objectively - not a steal for a team that isn't going to win for two years.

3. You've got to be familiar with the skill-set/body comps for Dunn, no? He may not be 38, but there's is a substantial risk that, at 33, he'll hit like he is.

4. You're not factoring the issue of defense: he's either a huge liability or a DH. And you've got to subtract value if he's either.

I'm not angry at MacPhail because I just explained to you - via that Fangraphs article - that signing Dunn is not a "steal" and arguably would be taking advantage of the market at only a moderate benefit (peak productions that fails to coincide with the team's need for production in 2011 and 2012) and a great deal of risk.

Pointing out that similar players have gotten more money doesn't mean that Dunn is being undervalued by any great amount. It merely points out that similar players have been overvalued in the past. Willy Taveres isn't a bargain because of what Juan Pierre once got overpaid. Dunn is a mild bargain at 4/40m - and that's really if the team manages to avoid some steep decline.

I'll repeat: Willy Taveres isn't a bargain because of what Juan Pierre once got overpaid.

If the thoroughness of your reading comprehension matched the thoroughness of your reactionary undervaluation of MacPhail, we'd be getting somewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you imagine growing up like that?

When Dad came home and told Mom about his day, it was Oriole GM-talk at the kitchen table.

Listening to the stories of both his Dad and Granddad meant he was hearing two HOF GM's talk about building and running noteworthy ballclubs.

One thing I don't understand, especially from the folks who expected Tex to want to "come home to the O's", is how they don't recognize that very thing in AM.

Our GM came home to fulfill the kind of "from when I was a boy" Oriole dream-wish that we wish players had.

Well, the players might not have it, but our GM does. I can't believe people can't see this.

  • AM has repeatedly said that running the O's was his dream job. He said it to other GM's before he said it to fans.
  • He grew up watching his Dad do it.
  • When he was a kid, he named his dog "Brooks", for cryin' out loud.

When people claim AM's is some kind of hired hack who doesn't care about the O's being good, it makes me wonder how people can believe this.

Are people so cynical that they can't recognize it when they're watching a guy actually live out his "from when I was a kid" dream job?

It's right under their nose, but they can't see that?

I don't know if AM is gonna succeed or not, but I am completely sure that this is gonna be his signature job.

Whether he goes on to higher places, I have no idea. But this is the job where he puts his name on a franchise.

If you don't think so, then I think you're not seeing something important.

excellent :clap3: :clap3: :clap3:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...