Hays Interested in Extension

[wildbillhiccup]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

First of all, we did extend both Markakis and Jones, and let them walk only when they were older.   I agree Hays isn’t in the same league as those players.   

It’s kind of a waste of time to argue about whether we might want to extend Hays at some future date.  It seems everyone agrees we shouldn’t do it now.  We’ll see what the future brings.  I’d say the chances it would make sense are fairly remote, but we’ll see.  
 

Agreed and the only thing I'll add is that Markakis and Jones were much better and younger players when we intiially extended them (25 and 26). Hays will be turning 29 this summer. 

 

 

[24fps]

14 hours ago, brooooksy said:

I would like to see him at like 3/21 I think, can’t see any more barring a sudden break out 

 

but if you are outright dismissing this because of prospects, you need to be reminded that hays was a more highly rated prospect than Kjerstad is and around what cowser is. It’s a decent outcome and there’s no guarantee those guys will reach his level

If the extension is to also buy out his last two arb years, I’m guessing Hays is thinking more along the lines of 5/65 minimum, structure TBD. With any kind of decent year in 2024, he’d be looking at $9 million give or take in arb 3.

The O’s have the luxury of kicking this decision down the road and they should do exactly that IMO. 

[Frobby]

4 minutes ago, wildbillhiccup said:

Agreed and the only thing I'll add is that Markakis and Jones were much better and younger players when we intiially extended them (25 and 26). Hays will be turning 29 this summer. 

 

 

True, and even if Hays got an extension, it wouldn’t be for 6 years (Markakis) or 7 years (Jones).   It would be for maybe 2 years beyond FA.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, 24fps said:

If the extension is to also buy out his last two arb years, I’m guessing Hays is thinking more along the lines of 5/65 minimum, structure TBD. With any kind of decent year in 2024, he’d be looking at $9 million give or take in arb 3.

The O’s have the luxury of kicking this decision down the road and they should do exactly that IMO. 

Yeah what he has in mind might not lineup and that’s fine. He’s a guy I’d take on a team friendly deal but wouldn’t put tons of resources toward

[Orioles West]

2 hours ago, jabba72 said:

If he was putting up OPS in the .850 range my guess is he'd be wanting to test free agency. He'll get an offer from someone after 2025 unless his performance falls off a cliff., it’s not like he has no options. I just dont think Baltimore is the right place for Hays in 26.

I can understand a more cynical take, that he would go elsewhere with stronger stats — but I am sticking with the idea Hays is asking to stay with a team he likes to be on. And again, I agree with Frobby, I like Orioles who like to be Orioles.

Although, I can’t say for certain what his motivation is more than any of us, unless you’re his agent.

 

[Tony-OH]

Hays is a good player, but he's the exact guy who you keep giving one year contracts to especially with Cowser, Bradfield, Beavers, Horvath and maybe even Norby as possible replacements. 

[Roll Tide]

6 hours ago, Frobby said:

He obviously was not as highly rated at draft time.  But he kicked ass the following year, and was rated #21 by BA, #23 by MLB.com, which is higher than Kjerstad has ever been rated by any of the pundits.  He was a finalist for minor league player of the year, and was the first player in the 2016 draft to reach the major leagues.

All this just illustrates that there’s no guarantee that either Kjerstad or Cowser turns out to be better than Hays.  Some highly rated prospects turn into stars, some become solid major leaguers (that’s where I’d put Hays), some become journeymen, some barely get a cup of coffee, and some never do.  I’m not saying this to puff up Hays, just to temper expectations on the young guys.  Obviously, I’m hoping that Cowser is better than Hays and Kjerstad is better than Santander and in two years we’ve upgraded both corner spots.  But it may not turn out that way, especially in the short run.  

Thanks … I have high hopes for Kjerstad but I have reservations at this point about Cowser as I thought he looked poor on offense and defense. I know it was only 60 ABs but unlike Ortiz and Stowers he was playing regularly.

Btw, I agree Hays is a solid player I just hope we are moving on from the low OBP type guys.

[Frobby]

1 minute ago, Roll Tide said:

Thanks … I have high hopes for Kjerstad but I have reservations at this point about Cowser as I thought he looked poor on offense and defense. I know it was only 60 ABs but unlike Ortiz and Stowers he was playing regularly.

Btw, I agree Hays is a solid player I just hope we are moving on from the low OBP type guys.

I generally agree with that sentiment.  Cowser could be a .350+ OBP guy and that would be great.  I hope we’ll find out a lot this year   

 

 

[G54377]

It's tough for me to envision a scenario where none of our young outfielders make strides to where a Hays extension makes sense.

[Billy F-Face3]

9 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

This is the rosiest thing I've read on here all week.

Let's be clear here, you'd want to give Hays an extension because he seems loyal to the Orioles, despite having potentially better options waiting in the wings? 

 

Potential is nust a pie in the sky. It's hoping and wishing for something to happen that you don't know will happen, compared to what you already know you are getting in production for a 101 win team.  How many prospects in the history of MLB actually pan out and reach their "potential"?

[Moose Milligan]

Just now, Billy F-Face3 said:

Potential is nust a pie in the sky. It's hoping and wishing for something to happen that you don't know will happen, compared to what you already know you are getting in production for a 101 win team.  How many prospects in the history of MLB actually pan out and reach their "potential"?

So what are you saying?  That prospects have a potential to bust and not make it and they shouldn't be counted on?

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

So what are you saying?  That prospects have a potential to bust and not make it and they shouldn't be counted on?

On the other hand extending ML ballplayers into their 30's always works out.

[Moose Milligan]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

On the other hand extending ML ballplayers into their 30's always works out.

Especially mediocre ones, right?

[Billy F-Face3]

4 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

So what are you saying?  That prospects have a potential to bust and not make it and they shouldn't be counted on?

I'm saying you can never have too many good players, especially when you already know that a guy is above league average. It's safer to have a known producer on the team while you're waiting for a prospect to prove he can live up to his potential.  

Potential is nothing but fluff and hype for fans until the player actually produces for his team. 

[Moose Milligan]

6 minutes ago, Billy F-Face3 said:

  It's safer to have a known producer on the team while you're waiting for a prospect to prove he can live up to his potential.  

Potential is nothing but fluff and hype for fans until the player actually produces for his team. 

So would you be in favor of trading Jackson Holliday because we've got Urias and Westburg holding it down or is that not a good idea.