Jump to content

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


Sports Guy

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

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.    

Yea that’s fine. I’m willing to take that chance.  I’d sign him and Henderson tomorrow.

As I have said a lot, I think these deals are very overrated by fans but I’d still do them, especially in cases where we can keep a guy on his prime years an extra 1-3 years. (Probably only 1 or 2)

I’m not as gung ho about getting Adley done for that reason but I do want to get these 2 done.  We won’t get much discount but getting them signed means we can keep them longer and that’s good enough for me.

Edited by Sports Guy
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jackson was the 1-1 draft pick and probably got a much larger bonus than Chourio did as an international free agent in Venezuela.  As Corn pointed out earlier, his father earned nearly $159 million over his career.  The Holliday's aren't hurting for money.  I doubt he would extend before hitting free agency, but I'm sure it would require a record breaking deal.  I like the Chourio framework, 8 years with options, but it would take a lot more money for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 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.

It’s funny to me that people can read the quote you listed that explicitly cites their goals and intentions, But then he makes the comment “a pitcher that would figure in to the top half of our rotation would be a wonderful addition” and folks think that means their primary goal is to trade away their elite  developed talent for someone else’s #1 SP, and if they don’t so that they are going against what they stated as a plan and are therefore failures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NCRaven said:

Jackson was the 1-1 draft pick and probably got a much larger bonus than Chourio did as an international free agent in Venezuela.  As Corn pointed out earlier, his father earned nearly $159 million over his career.  The Holliday's aren't hurting for money.  I doubt he would extend before hitting free agency, but I'm sure it would require a record breaking deal.  I like the Chourio framework, 8 years with options, but it would take a lot more money for sure.

His dads money has nothing to do with him.

If he signs the deal I said, he would be getting full money for his 7 years of service time and would be getting around 25-30M a year for his 2 FA years.

He may not be leaving any money on the table at all by doing that and even if he does, it’s minimal and this gives him the gtd amount.

This actually isn’t even a great deal for the Os. Normally in this deals, you want to save money. The Os really aren’t even doing that but it’s worth it to keep him here what could he 2-4 years longer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Yea that’s fine. I’m willing to take that chance.

Big of you.  😎  But would Elias?   

Since I mentioned Seager: he was worth 21.2 rWAR, 21.8 fWAR through his Arb years.   He’s been paid $95.5 mm through 8 years, and it will be $130 mm through 9 years.   So that’s about how good Holliday needs to be to justify the numbers you proposed.   

Now, one could argue that in the proposed deal, you are paying only for a player’s prime years, whereas the Swanson/Seager deals run to ages 35/37.  So maybe you’d pay a little more for the first 8/9 years to not be bogged down paying for some of the decline years.



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Frobby said:

Big of you.  😎  But would Elias?   

Since I mentioned Seager: he was worth 21.2 rWAR, 21.8 fWAR through his Arb years.   He’s been paid $95.5 mm through 8 years, and it will be $130 mm through 9 years.   So that’s about how good Holliday needs to be to justify the numbers you proposed.   

Now, one could argue that in the proposed deal, you are paying only for a player’s prime years, whereas the Swanson/Seager deals run to ages 35/37.  So maybe you’d pay a little more for the first 8/9 years to not be bogged down paying for some of the decline years.



 

You asked me, you didn’t ask Elias. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

His dads money has nothing to do with him.

If he signs the deal I said, he would be getting full money for his 7 years of service time and would be getting around 25-30M a year for his 2 FA years.

He may not be leaving any money on the table at all by doing that and even if he does, it’s minimal and this gives him the gtd amount.

This actually isn’t even a great deal for the Os. Normally in this deals, you want to save money. The Os really aren’t even doing that but it’s worth it to keep him here what could he 2-4 years longer.

I agree this is a better deal for Holliday than it is for the Orioles, at this stage (no established level of major league performance).   I don’t agree his dad’s money is irrelevant.  At a mimimum, he doesn’t need to worry about supporting any member of his family other than himself.   

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

The O’s equivalent to the Chourio deal is Bassalo. Not Holliday. How many here would give Bassalo 8/80 a year from now?

Let’s see if Basallo is the no. 2 prospect in baseball a year from now, and if he’s major league ready. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

lol…don’t offend the overly sensitive.

There was nothing wrong with what you said. Facts are what they are. 

I had no problem with what Frobby said before I saw this.   Now …….…. I got a bad feeling about it.  🤫

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holliday commanding $8mm not $2mm I think is in part a byproduct of not being able to affiliate until age 18.    I'm confident Elias could have got him for less in 10th grade with different acquisition rules.

12.4.2003 J. Holliday is 320/449/490 in 671 PA

3.11.2004 J. Chourio is 286/347/490 in 1211 PA

8.13.2004 S. Basallo is 291/378/497 in 817 PA

Higher degree of difficulty to Chourio, who was so precocious he made AA out of camp last spring at ~19.1 years old, basically same as Basallo was when he got his Baysox cup of coffee.

 

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...