Offseason moves?

[skippy1999]

yep, peak value for guys you can't afford to re-sign is seems to be when they've got 2 years left on arbitration.  Only wrote this morning that the Braves should think about trading Kimbrel for that reason.

I guess that's the Rays model but it makes me sad
Also shouldn't Baltimore have as much money as we do?  I mean they're not Tampa, I don't get why they have to automatically trade good young players instead of trying to sign them. 

[Slateman]

FWIW, Bowden was saying yesterday on XM that it's likely the Orioles will trade both Chris Davis and Michael Wieters rather than extending them.

Chris Davis would fit pretty nicely into our lineup.

I think Davis overplayed himself last year. He really tailed off in the second half. I'm fine with him being a .810-.850 OPS first baseman, but I think him OPS over 1.000 is unsustainable.

As for Weiters, I'd trade for him in a heartbeat.  Move Ramos to first and play Weiters at catcher for the majority of the games. Whenever he needs a break, we put Ramos behind the plate and play Zimmerman at first, shift Rendon over to third, and play Espinosa/Kobernus/Walters.

We can trade Laroche for a decent backup catcher too.

[NJ Ave]

yep, peak value for guys you can't afford to re-sign is seems to be when they've got 2 years left on arbitration.  Only wrote this morning that the Braves should think about trading Kimbrel for that reason.

It does seem like teams get a ton of value on 2-year guys. Considering the arbitration model is "supposed" to be valuing those players at 60% and 80% of their open market value, that means a really good $15 million player is only giving you like $9 million of excess value over those two arbitration years (assuming they're paid $9 and $12 million).

I feel like they're routinely bringing back a ton more than that in prospect value. It doesn't mean it's a good idea, since the cost is a lot higher if you trade away the player that makes a difference between your team making the playoffs or not (higher on the win value curve) but it's a no brainer in a lot of situations. If the Orioles aren't going to try to make the playoffs in any way, shape or form they might as well trade these guys for potentially younger, cheaper talent in greater quantities that WILL give them a chance at the playoffs.

[Ray D]

 

$15 million or more, a ridiculous price to pay a closer,

Far less ridiculous to pay Kimbrall 15m  than what we're paying for Soriano.

[varoadking]

  Far less ridiculous to pay Kimbrall 15m  than what we're paying for Soriano.

QFT

[HalfSmokes]

It does seem like teams get a ton of value on 2-year guys. Considering the arbitration model is "supposed" to be valuing those players at 60% and 80% of their open market value, that means a really good $15 million player is only giving you like $9 million of excess value over those two arbitration years (assuming they're paid $9 and $12 million).

I feel like they're routinely bringing back a ton more than that in prospect value. It doesn't mean it's a good idea, since the cost is a lot higher if you trade away the player that makes a difference between your team making the playoffs or not (higher on the win value curve) but it's a no brainer in a lot of situations. If the Orioles aren't going to try to make the playoffs in any way, shape or form they might as well trade these guys for potentially younger, cheaper talent in greater quantities that WILL give them a chance at the playoffs.

You need to figure in the value of not having to make a long term commitment to the player- Davis for two years averaging 70% of market value (with the second year not guaranteed) is worth far more than Davis for six years with every year guarenteed

[sph274]

matt wieters has played 130, 139, 144, and 148 games in the past four seasons.  he has been played into the ground and will not be worth the package of giolito/cole/whatever it will take to get him. they are looking to trade him now because he will be worth nothing after the age of 30(once his knees go out) and is not a particularly good hitter. wouldnt want to sign him long term either, trade him while you can. would rather just keep ramos.

[PC]

It's my favorite distro.

Really?

[nobleisthyname]

Really?

It was my first one ever so I'm probably biased, but I really like pacman and the Archwiki. I also really like running a minimalist system which Arch lets me do for the most part.

[NJ Ave]

You need to figure in the value of not having to make a long term commitment to the player- Davis for two years averaging 70% of market value (with the second year not guaranteed) is worth far more than Davis for six years with every year guarenteed

This is a hard sell, especially because teams are making regular long-term commitments that do the exact opposite - guarantee 6 or 7 or 10 years of guaranteed money to players whom they still control for multiple seasons at less than market value.

So no, I can't say at any price an MLB team would prefer Chris Davis for 2 years over Chris Davis for 6 years. If Chris Davis was willing to sign a 6/$80 million contract with salaries of $8, $12, and $15 X 4, I bet you 25 teams in the league would take that over the 2 years.

[NJ Ave]

But if you're saying that in general there's less risk in fewer years, I agree with you. I'd probably rather have Cliff Lee for 3 years/$75 million than Cole Hamels for 6/$141 if I'm trading with the Phillies.

[zimm_da_kid]

Zimmermann for Davis next off season seems like a great deal for both clubs.

[HalfSmokes]

This is a hard sell, especially because teams are making regular long-term commitments that do the exact opposite - guarantee 6 or 7 or 10 years of guaranteed money to players whom they still control for multiple seasons at less than market value.

So no, I can't say at any price an MLB team would prefer Chris Davis for 2 years over Chris Davis for 6 years. If Chris Davis was willing to sign a 6/$80 million contract with salaries of $8, $12, and $15 X 4, I bet you 25 teams in the league would take that over the 2 years.

if your choice is Chris Davis for two year at near to below market vs. Chris Davis for six years at what ever the market will bear for a guy coming off a 6.8 WAR season, I'm guessing most teams will choose the two years. I don't think your 6 for 80 is realistic, and to the extent that it is, it gives Davis incentive to not sign and build his value higher. As far as the value in getting an established star without the commitment that they would require with only two years of Arb left, there is tremendous value there because far more teams can afford those two years of arbitration than can afford the long term deal. A team like the Rays  can pay players in arbitration that they have no hope of extending, the same plays out to lesser extents across the league

[sph274]

davis would never sign that deal. if he is not a PED user, then 50 HR power is elite, he will not just be some "flash in the pan" and will get a $100 million deal from someone. prince fielder just got a 9 year/$214 mil deal and Davis has none of the body type issues Fielder has. If he can string together two more good years(in the prime of his career I imagine he does) he is getting a fat contract.

[NJ Ave]

Jose Bautista anyone?

No offense, but a guy who (a) strikes out 170+ times a season, (b) just had his first season with more than 2 WAR, and (c) just had his first season with a > 7% BB rate has hardly proven he's "not a flash in the pan" nor is he anywhere near a sure bet to "string together two more good years." Body issues aside, he barely plays 1B better than Fielder, who's one of the worst in the game, and will be two years older heading into his contract (and likely out of the peak of his prime).

But again, Jose Bautista was literally the exact same player, only he walked a lot more and and struck out a lot less, when he signed a 5/$65 million contract with the Blue Jays.

[sph274]

im not saying trade the farm for the guy, im saying no way in a hell a 27 year old coming off a season where he hit 53 HRs(his second with reliable playing time outside the year 23 season) is gonna sign a deal worth less than $100 million. 6 for 80 is absurd. Chris Davis is also 2 years younger than Bautista was and crushed in the minor leagues. the amount of players that hit 50 hrs and then go on to suck the season after are pretty small, especially as they are entering their primes. the guy has insane power and has always had it. a 50 HR season is a big deal.

[Ray D]

a 50 HR season is a big deal.

Yeah, ask Brady Anderson.

[HalfSmokes]

Jose Bautista anyone?

No offense, but a guy who (a) strikes out 170+ times a season, (b) just had his first season with more than 2 WAR, and (c) just had his first season with a > 7% BB rate has hardly proven he's "not a flash in the pan" nor is he anywhere near a sure bet to "string together two more good years." Body issues aside, he barely plays 1B better than Fielder, who's one of the worst in the game, and will be two years older heading into his contract (and likely out of the peak of his prime).

But again, Jose Bautista was literally the exact same player, only he walked a lot more and and struck out a lot less, when he signed a 5/$65 million contract with the Blue Jays.

what do you think he'd get if he hit the open market today? I'm guessing the 7/125 range since all it takes is one team to think last year was legitimate. jose batista signed an incredibly team friendly deal, I'm not sure he's a great comp for fair market.

[NJ Ave]

He's not hitting the open market. His choices today are to repeat his previous season twice more (or close to it) when he's never done it before and then get a big payday, or to sign an extension now with a single team bidding for his services.

Also, reactions were incredibly mixed when Bautista signed that deal. Half the people bought into him and thought it was team friendly, half couldn't believe the Jays were signing a one-hit wonder to a huge deal entering his 30s. Sabermetric types are the ones who'd be most in favor, and this was Dave Cameron's take: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/jose-bautista-cashes-in/.

"That is a lot of money for a guy who has had one good year, no doubt, and there will be a lot of discussion over whether it is wise to invest significant cash in a player coming off a year that could have been a fluke. That said, I think this deal actually does make some sense."

Furthermore, we're talking about a guy who never was CLOSE to this before, who in the second half of the season (65 games) batted .245/.339/.515. So let's not pretend that any other teams in baseball, or even Chris Davis himself, are taking it for granted that he's going to repeat the last season for the next two years.

[HalfSmokes]

So the Os can't afford 6/80?

[Slateman]

So the Os can't afford 6/80?

LAC


Oh wait

[NJ Ave]

Adam Jones was the largest in team history at $85.5 million. They haven't signed Matt Weiters. I think it's very possible they haven't offered him that contract. They let Mussina walk for pete's sake.

[blue911]

Matt Wieters and Chris Davis are Scott Boras clients

[Mr Clean]

Rays inf Tim Beckham out for most of '14 with torn ACL. They may come calling now.

[blue911]

Rays inf Tim Beckham out for most of '14 with torn ACL. They may come calling now.

Escobar is signed through 2014 with an affordable club option for 2015