Jump to content

Chourio to get 8/80..Os should do the same for Holliday


Sports Guy

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Frobby said:

This is going to be a little too much of a generalization, but I think Latino players are often more amenable to team-friendly early extensions than their American-born counterparts.   Chourio may well be the first guy in his family to not have to scrape out a living, and this sets him up for life and if he chooses he can support a lot of other people with that kind of cash.  Holliday on the other hand comes from a super-wealthy family and earned $7.7 mm before he ever played a game of pro ball.  (Note: Chourio did receive a very healthy $1.8 mm signing bonus, so it’s not like he’s hurting for cash in the short term.)

As to what it would take to sign Holliday, I have no idea.   Boras is his agent, and we know Boras doesn’t like early extensions.  Sure, he’ll do what his client tells him to do, but the client is looking to him for advice as well.   And in Holliday’s case, he can afford to “bet on himself” because he’s rich even in the worst case scenario.   

Now, would I do this deal if I was the Orioles?  Well, it’s doubtful Holliday would earn move than ($5mm/$12mm/$20 mm) in his Arb years even in the scenario where he’s a perennial all star.  Call it $40 mm through the Arb years.   So you’re talking  $60-70 mm for 2-3 years after Arb.  I’d like 3/$70 mm at lot more than 2/$60 mm for the FA years.  But overall, I think it’s too generous and risky.   Really, the only way it pans out is if Holliday is about a Seager-level player.   If he’s, say, Dansby Swanson, it’s a losing proposition, and if he’s Ahmed Rosario it’s a disaster (Rosario has been a 10 WAR player through his Arb years, so not bad at all, just not a guy who makes this kind of money).

 

I tend to agree with all of this.  I was going to post about how I felt like he could bet on himself due to family money and the fact he got such a huge bonus.  I'm not sure he'd accept a deal of 110M at this point.  Also will have Boras in his ear... I'd love to get him at that number, I just am not convinced he'd take it.  

Edited by Mooreisbetter27
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

This is just foolish. 
 

We aren’t talking about replacing talent. We are talking about replacing MVP level elite talent.

For you to think so little of Elias (ie, think he is that arrogant) that he believes he can just get MVP level talents on a whim is absurd.

Quote

As for the plan to transform Baltimore back into a contender, Elias was succinct. The goal is simple: to build an "elite pipeline" starting with the Orioles' Dominican Summer League all the way up to Triple-A. It will not be easy, and it will not be swift. Elias cautioned the packed room of media, club officials and other members of the organization that there are "no shortcuts" to building a sustainably competitive franchise.

The dude said it himself back in 2018, I'm not making it up. https://www.mlb.com/news/mike-elias-introduced-as-orioles-gm-c300896840

I'll now wait for your reply that says that he didn't really say that, that's not what he meant or somehow twist what he said to further your argument about how I "think so little of Elias" that he believes he can just get MVP level talents "on a whim."

Nowhere did I say that Elias thinks he can do it "on a whim."  Nowhere did I say that Elias thinks it's easy.  But Elias' goal since Day 1 has been crystal clear...and that is to have a continuous amount of elite talent flowing through the pipeline.  There are several obvious reasons as to why he'd want to do that, IMO one of them is to replace guys that Angelos doesn't want to pay to extend.  That's a roundabout way to beat the "Angelos is cheap" dead horse that everyone loves to continue to beat on.  Of course Angelos isn't going to pay 8/80 or something similar for Holliday, but at some point Elias is going to have to replace that talent with...well, more cheap, cost controlled young talent.  

If that makes it sound like Elias is arrogant, fine.  He should be, he's damn good at what he does.  But arrogance doesn't mean that he thinks what he does is easy, or that I think what he does is easy.  I can't help it if you confuse arrogance with people thinking their jobs are easy.

Edited by Moose Milligan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People need to realize that these deals are much more likely to be signed by people who are not financially secure.  No chance Holliday takes this kind of money.  It is completely in his interest to take his chances and play out the string.  Grady Sizemore is the only position player I can remember that strategy going horribly for.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there really people who believe Angelos is meeting with Elias and saying "hey, should we be locking up the young guys long term?" And Elias is replying "No thanks boss, I think I can find 5 more Ryan O'Hearns" ??

That is insane.

If he is given the resources to lock up Adley, Gunnar and Holliday, he will do it. If not, he won't. We'll see what happens.

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

11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

This is going to be a little too much of a generalization, but I think Latino players are often more amenable to team-friendly early extensions than their American-born counterparts.   Chourio may well be the first guy in his family to not have to scrape out a living, and this sets him up for life and if he chooses he can support a lot of other people with that kind of cash.  Holliday on the other hand comes from a super-wealthy family and earned $7.7 mm before he ever played a game of pro ball.  (Note: Chourio did receive a very healthy $1.8 mm signing bonus, so it’s not like he’s hurting for cash in the short term.)

As to what it would take to sign Holliday, I have no idea.   Boras is his agent, and we know Boras doesn’t like early extensions.  Sure, he’ll do what his client tells him to do, but the client is looking to him for advice as well.   And in Holliday’s case, he can afford to “bet on himself” because he’s rich even in the worst case scenario.   

Now, would I do this deal if I was the Orioles?  Well, it’s doubtful Holliday would earn move than ($5mm/$12mm/$20 mm) in his Arb years even in the scenario where he’s a perennial all star.  Call it $40 mm through the Arb years.   So you’re talking  $60-70 mm for 2-3 years after Arb.  I’d like 3/$70 mm at lot more than 2/$60 mm for the FA years.  But overall, I think it’s too generous and risky.   Really, the only way it pans out is if Holliday is about a Seager-level player.   If he’s, say, Dansby Swanson, it’s a losing proposition, and if he’s Ahmed Rosario it’s a disaster (Rosario has been a 10 WAR player through his Arb years, so not bad at all, just not a guy who makes this kind of money).

 

No doubt they seem more likely to take these deals..which is why I’m blowing the Chourio deal out of the water in terms of what I would offer Holliday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

The dude said it himself back in 2018, I'm not making it up. https://www.mlb.com/news/mike-elias-introduced-as-orioles-gm-c300896840

I'll now wait for your reply that says that he didn't really say that, that's not what he meant or somehow twist what he said to further your argument about how I "think so little of Elias" that he believes he can just get MVP level talents "on a whim."

Nowhere did I say that Elias thinks he can do it "on a whim."  Nowhere did I say that Elias thinks it's easy.  But Elias' goal since Day 1 has been crystal clear...and that is to have a continuous amount of elite talent flowing through the pipeline.  There are several obvious reasons as to why he'd want to do that, IMO one of them is to replace guys that Angelos doesn't want to pay to extend.  That's a roundabout way to beat the "Angelos is cheap" dead horse that everyone loves to continue to beat on.  Of course Angelos isn't going to pay 8/80 or something similar for Holliday, but at some point Elias is going to have to replace that talent with...well, more cheap, cost controlled young talent.  

If that makes it sound like Elias is arrogant, fine.  He should be, he's damn good at what he does.  But arrogance doesn't mean that he thinks what he does is easy, or that I think what he does is easy.  I can't help it if you confuse arrogance with people thinking their jobs are easy.

An elite pipeline is completely different than talking about 1 or 2 singular players that are elite level guys.

An elite pipeline is saying we can produce good to very good players and that causes us to not have to spend stupidly in free agency, hang onto vets too long because we don’t have other options and being able to keep the payroll down because we have a constant churn  of good players coming up through the system.

I stand by what I said..it’s an absurd and foolish thought process.  Zero chance Elias believes he can just get MVP level talent whenever he wants. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Frobby said:

This is going to be a little too much of a generalization, but I think Latino players are often more amenable to team-friendly early extensions than their American-born counterparts.   Chourio may well be the first guy in his family to not have to scrape out a living, and this sets him up for life and if he chooses he can support a lot of other people with that kind of cash.  Holliday on the other hand comes from a super-wealthy family and earned $7.7 mm before he ever played a game of pro ball.  (Note: Chourio did receive a very healthy $1.8 mm signing bonus, so it’s not like he’s hurting for cash in the short term.)

As to what it would take to sign Holliday, I have no idea.   Boras is his agent, and we know Boras doesn’t like early extensions.  Sure, he’ll do what his client tells him to do, but the client is looking to him for advice as well.   And in Holliday’s case, he can afford to “bet on himself” because he’s rich even in the worst case scenario.   

Now, would I do this deal if I was the Orioles?  Well, it’s doubtful Holliday would earn move than ($5mm/$12mm/$20 mm) in his Arb years even in the scenario where he’s a perennial all star.  Call it $40 mm through the Arb years.   So you’re talking  $60-70 mm for 2-3 years after Arb.  I’d like 3/$70 mm at lot more than 2/$60 mm for the FA years.  But overall, I think it’s too generous and risky.   Really, the only way it pans out is if Holliday is about a Seager-level player.   If he’s, say, Dansby Swanson, it’s a losing proposition, and if he’s Ahmed Rosario it’s a disaster (Rosario has been a 10 WAR player through his Arb years, so not bad at all, just not a guy who makes this kind of money).

 

I’d be careful with over generalizations.  Not all of them are dirt poor.  Same thing is happening down there that is here. 
 

https://instagram.com/enmanuel_beltre07

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

An elite pipeline is completely different than talking about 1 or 2 singular players that are elite level guys.

An elite pipeline is saying we can produce good to very good players and that causes us to not have to spend stupidly in free agency, hang onto vets too long because we don’t have other options and being able to keep the payroll down because we have a constant churn  of good players coming up through the system.

I stand by what I said..it’s an absurd and foolish thought process.  Zero chance Elias believes he can just get MVP level talent whenever he wants. 

Ok. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

No doubt they seem more likely to take these deals..which is why I’m blowing the Chourio deal out of the water in terms of what I would offer Holliday.

Do you agree he’d have to turn out better than Dansby Swanson in order to justify it?  And are you willing to bet $110 mm that he will be better than Swanson, before Holliday has played a major league game?   Swanson was a 1:1 pick, ranked the no. 3 prospect before his first full season in the majors, and was worth 14.7 rWAR/16.3 fWAR through his Arb years.  He signed a big FA contract, but even so he will only have earned $61 mm through 8 years of service, $89 mm through 9.    

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

    • The same thing was happening was MacDonald was the DC and when Wink was the DC, that makes me put most of the blame on Harbaugh 
    • 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.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...