Correa opts out…should the Os pursue him?

[RZNJ]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

It is very rare for a player's defense to get better after they turn 28.

He played plenty of shortstop in the minors.

How about 27?  Is it rare to get better after 26?  27?   Cause it sure looked better this year than last year.

[jerios55]

55 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

The counter to that is that the Os have a lot of money to spend and no one is making real money for several years and he should still be really good for another 2-4 years, which could help you win now.

I don’t disagree with your point here but there are 2 sides of the coin.

If the team decides they have arbitration raises and a ~30 mill contract budgeted I'd rather go pitching.  In addition to things you and others have mentioned on what true contract cost. 

Verlander/Rodon and Mateo/ Henderson/ Ortiz as options

Bradish/Voth/Watkins as options and Correa.  

While I like some of these pitchers in part 2, I would be more excited about part 1. 

Who knows what the budget is though.   If they want to sign both Verlander and Correa, I could get excited about that too.  I just don't believe they do that.  And if still probably pick someone not Correa for an offensive upgrade. 

[Sports Guy]

31 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Those are two different things.   He drafted him 1:1 because he believe in his hitting and believes he's either going to stay at SS or stay on the dirt.   Even if he's sure (can't be 100%) that he's a SS long term does that mean he's going to be the SS in 3 years?   No.  Suppose Henderson or Ortiz become entrenched in the position and Holliday is not a clearly better defensive option 3 years from now?

Do I believe that Mike Elias is firmly committed to Holliday being his SS 3 years from now.  No.  Like a good GM, he's intelligent enough to wait and see what his best options are at the time.

Plans change.  Everyone recognizes that.  But you drafted a kid #1 and you stated that his ability to stay at SS was one of the main deciding factors.

So yes, the plan is for him to be the SS and soon, as it should be.

[Sports Guy]

21 minutes ago, Ceciltrav said:

Mateo has played one year in the majors.  He has played shortstop one year in the majors.  When he was with the Padres he never played short and his experience was a short sample size.  I honestly think he will get better.  I understand the options in the minors but I'm not sure we should just forget about Mateo.  

The major leagues aren’t the only years of evaluation he has had as a pro player.

[RZNJ]

10 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Plans change.  Everyone recognizes that.  But you drafted a kid #1 and you stated that his ability to stay at SS was one of the main deciding factors.

So yes, the plan is for him to be the SS and soon, as it should be.

I don't agree that's THE plan.   I think the plan is a little more flexible than that.   The plan is for him to play a lot of SS in the minors and hopefully progress as quickly as possible and then see what works best for the team when he's ready.

[DrungoHazewood]

24 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

How about 27?  Is it rare to get better after 26?  27?   Cause it sure looked better this year than last year.

Mateo is an outlier, he's a weird case.  The Padres were playing him in the outfield.  Last year the O's played him at second as much as anywhere else.  The Yanks and A's never so much as gave him a cup of coffee in the majors.  I don't think his scouting reports raved about his defense. It's not often someone with that resume is put at shortstop and is immediately a legitimate gold glove contender.

Mostly defense peaks early.  But it's not a hard-and-fast rule.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

If Correa is a -4 OAA player at 27 or 28 odds are that's not going to get a lot better as he ages.  I have some concern about his ability to stick at short into his 30s.

Pretty much every advanced defensive metric other than OAA has Correa ranked above average this year, and consistently so in the past.   I have little doubt that Correa can be a solid defensive SS for at least another five years.   

That said, I don’t think it makes sense for us to make big expenditures at SS considering our other options there.  I’d rather spend the money on pitching or even a power hitting 1B/OF/DH type.  
 

[jamalshw]

It all depends on what else is done. 

I do want to see an established hitter added, but we have flexibility in position and that probably leads to a better use of funds at a different position BUT if the Orioles use an infield prospect or two in a trade for someone (like Burnes), then it may make sense for someone like Correa. Correa's 140 OPS+ was impressive. He has a .357 career OBP which we could certainly use and provides some pop on top of that. 

I could get behind a Correa pursuit IF there's a deal that for instance sends Westburg as part of a package to Milwaukee or Miami for pitching. 

Any deal would probably need to be at least 7 years to get him to sign and much more than that, I'm probably out, but if his defense drops too much a few years down the road, we will likely have Holliday ready when that happens and can move him to a different position. 

[baltfan]

I like Correa but he isn't the kind of big bat that I feel like the Orioles need.  He is a good bat for a SS, but they need an intimidating middle of the order bat.  He doesn't really fit the bill.  Not sure there is really anyone out there that does other than Judge and that isn't happening.  Abreu intrigues me, but would have to move on from Mountcastle.  

[LookinUp]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Is there a scenario where you think going after Correa makes sense?

You of all people can come up with a creative scenario where signing Correa makes sense.

1. Move the LF wall back in some.

2. Trade Mateo, Westburg, Ortiz and Mayo for stud starting pitching.

3. Roll with Henderson, Correa and Norby as the infield. 

4. Roll with Rodriguez, young starters we traded for, Kremer, Bradish et al as starters.

It could happen, it just seems like hammering a square peg into a round hole. I assume we spend resources where we have current and future needs. Not where we already have cheap, controllable, very good or great players.

[Frobby]

59 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

How about 27?  Is it rare to get better after 26?  27?   Cause it sure looked better this year than last year.

I’ve thought about this a bit.  I think there are two reasons we didn’t get a good read on Mateo’s defense last year:

1.  Inconsistent reps.   He jumped back and forth between 2B and SS, playing each about half of his games with us, and never played SS more than four games in a row.

2.  Unfamiliar and changing DP partners. Mateo was new to the team and didn’t have much chance to get into rhythm with his 2B teammates, Ramon Urias and Jahmai Jones.  

I also heard that the O’s did a lot of work with Mateo to get him to throw from a consistent arm slot.  But I think that was a lesser factor. 
 

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Pretty much every advanced defensive metric other than OAA has Correa ranked above average this year, and consistently so in the past.   I have little doubt that Correa can be a solid defensive SS for at least another five years.   

That said, I don’t think it makes sense for us to make big expenditures at SS considering our other options there.  I’d rather spend the money on pitching or even a power hitting 1B/OF/DH type.  
 

If all the other metrics have him as a +5 and OAA has him as a -5, my instinct is to call him a lot closer to a -5 than a +5.  The other systems are all making compromises and approximations to get us the information OAA directly measures.

[Pickles]

1 hour ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Mateo is an outlier, he's a weird case.  The Padres were playing him in the outfield.  Last year the O's played him at second as much as anywhere else.  The Yanks and A's never so much as gave him a cup of coffee in the majors.  I don't think his scouting reports raved about his defense. It's not often someone with that resume is put at shortstop and is immediately a legitimate gold glove contender.

Mostly defense peaks early.  But it's not a hard-and-fast rule.

I haven't gone back and read a ton of scouting reports on Mateo as a prospect, but he was a top 100 prospect three consecutive years, and he never did anything with the bat.  I have to imagine people saw those tools and projected him to be a plus defensive shortstop.

[Il BuonO]

31 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

If all the other metrics have him as a +5 and OAA has him as a -5, my instinct is to call him a lot closer to a -5 than a +5.  The other systems are all making compromises and approximations to get us the information OAA directly measures.

OAA has him at -3, DRS 3 and UZR 1.

[jabba72]

Now that we have Ortiz/Westburg/Norby knocking on the door I wouldnt pursue Correa. Last offseason it seemed like a good idea. Now not so much.