Jump to content

Has Vavra played his way into a starting 2B job?


wildcard

Recommended Posts

Not for opening day.  That is symbolic.  Frazier gets OD.  

But is Vavra's bat too good for the bench?   I know there were concerns about his defense last fall.  But I have not heard that this spring.

If Vavra can get on base at a high rate does that put him ahead on Frazier and Urias?

Edited by wildcard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • wildcard changed the title to Has Vavra played his way into a starting 2B job?

Did we hear anything publicly about his defense last year?  I don't necessarily recall hearing anything, I think the proof was in the pudding that they didn't see him as a 2B with the way they kept running Odor out there until near the end.

I don't think they see him as an everyday 2B.  His value is probably as a high-OBP UTI. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's close. He would have to be better than Stowers, Santander, or Mouncastle. If he could sustain an .850 OPS in real games that might do it. Frazier is probably a better option at 2B although not $8M better. I'd like to see him play every day somewhere but these are the problems you have when you accumulate talent. As of opening day I think he is still a bench guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Flash- bd said:

I'm a big believer in Vavra and his OBP skills package. I think there's a player there, that will have a successful career. 

To be fair, I also thought the same about Ryan Flaherty. 😬

Interestingly Flaherty did have decent OBP in the minors, but not as good as Vavra in AAA. Now Flaherty did have 713 AAA PAs vs Vavra's 208. 

AAA Slash lines
Vavra - .324/.435/.451/.886
Flaherty - .261/.342/.443/.785

AA Slash Lines
Vavra - .248/.388/.430/.818
Flaherty - .293/.382/.492/.873

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We got to see a little bit of his defense this past week in Televised games. Unfortunately he missed a couple of plays and his arm seemed relatively weak. This is an extremely small sample size and a spring training game where both teams committed multiple defensive miscues, but it’s very believable that his defense is not good enough to be a starter. The Orioles seem to like second basemen who can turn the double play and fire the ball to first. It’s not clear if he can make those plays. Again, very small sample size, but his defense certainly didn’t shine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ohfan67 said:

We got to see a little bit of his defense this past week in Televised games. Unfortunately he missed a couple of plays and his arm seemed relatively weak. This is an extremely small sample size and a spring training game where both teams committed multiple defensive miscues, but it’s very believable that his defense is not good enough to be a starter. The Orioles seem to like second basemen who can turn the double play and fire the ball to first. It’s not clear if he can make those plays. Again, very small sample size, but his defense certainly didn’t shine. 

I watched every O's TV game this spring and somehow this did not stand out to me.   Sounds like I just missed it because his weak arm  is something I saw last year.  I thought he may have worked on improving it over the winter.    I appreciate you bringing it up.  If he can't turn the DP well it certainly should keep him from being an everyday 2B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I watched every O's TV game this spring and somehow this did not stand out to me.   Sounds like I just missed it because his weak arm  is something I saw last year.  I thought he may have worked on improving it over the winter.    I appreciate you bringing it up.  If he can't turn the DP well it certainly should keep him from being an everyday 2B.

The opposing teams' broadcasts don't make it easy to watch specific Orioles players, that's for sure. 

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

    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
    • What if they don’t want to be extended?
    • I don't want the O's to lose much, but I do want there to be a massive streaming deal with Amazon or some other company the O's are left out of.  This blackout nonsense is bullsh!t. 🤬
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...