Comparison Fun
You know I think the free agent market is nuts. You know I support acquiring talent via trade instead of paying these prices. You may not know that there really are good deals to be found, even in this sea of insanity. For instance, look at this comparison of left-fielders:
Player A: .287/.358/.457, 601 PA, 79 runs created, 32 years old, well above average defensively
Player B: .300/.355/.540, 624 PA, 113 runs created, 30 years old, terrible defensively
Player A is more of a line-drive gap hitter with athleticism. His defense is probably worth +5 to +10 runs a year, and even more on a team with a spacious outfield and a flyball pitching staff.
Player B is a classic slugger with power who doesn’t walk enough to be a superstar, but has enough juice in his bat to be a very effective player. His defense is a detriment, but the bat more than makes up for it.
When factoring in total value, Player B is probably 15 to 20 runs better, assuming neither undergoes drastic decline. Player B should make more money, and since he’s two years younger, should get a longer contract, but the differences shouldn’t be monumental. A few million more and an extra year, maybe two, for Player B. Given their worth relative to the ease of finding a left fielder who can hit, I’d say Player A is worth something like 2 years, $10 million and Player B is worth 3 years, $24 million. Or something like that.
Player A is Emil Brown, who the Royals can’t give away, because he’s arbitration eligible for the first time and is probably going to be awarded a salary of $3 to $4 million for 2007.
Player B is Carlos Lee, who has half the teams in baseball fighting to give him a 5 year, $75 million contract.
Major League GMs are willing to pay an extra $11 million a year for “power”, which optimistically translates to a 15-20 run advantage for Lee, and guarantee Lee all-star money through the rest of the decade. Meanwhile, Dayton Moore can’t find anyone interested in Emil Brown, who he’d like to move to create a spot for uberprospect Alex Gordon.
That doesn’t make any sense. Carlos Lee is a better player than Emil Brown, but the difference isn’t huge. The difference certainly isn’t worth an extra $11 million in 2007, much less the commitment from 2008-2011. So please, please, please stop telling us that these contracts are “market value”. They’re free agent value, but the baseball player talent industry is a much larger market than that segment of the population.
No problem disagreeing about the value of a player. I’m certainly no expert on every player (let alone any!). But I haven’t seen any discussion of what the baseline for meh to enh should be. Without it, meh to enh is a number just hanging in the air. If Brown only created 60 runs a year, then Lee would be “infinitely” more valuable even if he were only 20 runs better. Mathematically speaking, of course.
Runs have actual, tangible value. I don’t agree that the proper way to define salary is “four times as many runs above baseline = four times as much money”. I’ve never seen anything to suggest that to be true.
If the difference was 8 runs above replacement and two runs above replacement in favor of Lee, would you still be arguing that Lee is worth four times as much? Obviously not.
Sure I would. That’s exactly what all player valuation systems do.
Okay, so if the market establishes that a replacement level corner outfielder is worth $3 million a year (because, let’s be honest, the market sucks at correctly compensating replacement level players), and the market is paying $4 million per win, that makes a 1 win corner outfielder worth $7 million. So a 4 win corner outfielder is, in your opinion, worth $28 million?
You can’t believe that.
Getting back to Brown and Lee for a second…
Brown has never had 80 runs created in his career and he’s 32, right?
THT has him at 92 in 2005 and 79 in 2006. So, no, not quite right.
Depending on which version you use, Lee has had over 100 each of the past four years, I think, and he’s only 30.
This would paint his performances as much more consistent than they actually have been.
2003: .291/.331/.499
2004: .305/.366/.525
2005: .265/.324/.487
2006: .300/.355/.540
’04 and ’06 are fringe all-star years. ’03 and ’05 are clearly a step back. However, since he missed 10 games in ’04, his RC cumulative stats fall. On an RC/G basis, the inconsistency of his star performance is clear.
I believe assuming 110 for Lee vs. 75 for Brown next year is a decent assumption.
Lee’s RC the last three years top out at 109. Why is it fair to assume he’s going to not only stave off decline, but improve? I can’t think of a projection system in the world that looks at a 30-year-old 250 lb guy and says “he’s going to get better”. So I’d put it at 100 vs 75, or something like that.
And, as someone said, there is increasing value to top-tier players. The difference between the 90th run and the 100th run is worth more than the difference between the 90th run and the 80th run. There are good economic reasons for this, and the free agent market bears it out.
I agree with all of this. I just think its pretty obvious that Carlos Lee bares little resemblance to a top tier player.
I wrote an entire article about this this week. First, your math would make it $19 million, and I disagree that the market “sucks” at compensating replacement level players. I’d say a free agent replacement level player typically gets about $1 million, which would make the math come out to $17 million.
In actuality, the average free agent who contributed 15-20 WSAB last year made $13 million last year, so my math would be over by $4 million. That’s primarily due to injuries and other weird salary distribution issues.
But I didn’t say any of those things in this thread. I said that Lee is worth about four times as much as Brown. If you think Brown is worth $4 million (and you seemed to feel good about that figure for him) than I argued that Lee would be worth four times as much. I don’t think Brown is worth $4 million, and I don’t think Lee is worth $16 million. But I do think Lee is worth three-to-four times as much as whatever Brown is worth.
I can’t think of a projection system in the world that looks at a 30-year-old 250 lb guy and says “he’s going to get betterâ€. So I’d put it at 100 vs 75, or something like that.
Well, the Handbook did, but that’s okay. My bad about Brown’s 2005. I don’t even know my own website! Still, I think 100 vs. 75 is fine.
I wrote an entire article about this this week.
I read it, enjoyed it, and disagreed with most of it.
I’d say a free agent replacement level player typically gets about $1 million, which would make the math come out to $17 million.
Really? Watch what Cliff Floyd and Luis Gonzalez get in the next few weeks. Hell, look at what Carl Everett got last winter. I strongly disagree that major league GMs are good at recognizing when formerly good players are no longer good.
In actuality, the average free agent who contributed 15-20 WSAB last year made $13 million last year, so my math would be over by $4 million. That’s primarily due to injuries and other weird salary distribution issues.
You know I love THT, but I would love it even more if you guys got away from win shares. The defensive calculations just have too many problems and there are several components with no predictive value included in the formula. For this kind of analysis, I don’t think win shares is the right tool.
But I didn’t say any of those things in this thread. I said that Lee is worth about four times as much as Brown. If you think Brown is worth $4 million (and you seemed to feel good about that figure for him) than I argued that Lee would be worth four times as much. I don’t think Brown is worth $4 million, and I don’t think Lee is worth $16 million. But I do think Lee is worth three-to-four times as much as whatever Brown is worth.
I think looking at things in terms of percentage better than = salary greater than skews the fact that we’re dealing with absolute value of runs. The difference in a projected 8 run player vs a projected 2 run player is only six runs. You don’t pay a 400% premium for a projected six run increase, especially when the error bars on projection systems swallow most of that difference.
You pay four times as much for a guy when the difference is 60 runs vs 15 runs or 80 runs vs 20 runs. Absolutely. I’ll be on your side arguing that Johan Santana’s real value is something like $30 million a year and that A-Rod’s not overpaid (well, assuming he remembers how to play defense, anyways).
But I just can’t get on board with paying massive premiums for marginal run increases. And Carlos Lee is only slightly better than a marginal run increase over Emil Brown.
Frank Thomas 2/$18.12M + $9.12M
Wes Helms 2/$5.45M + $500,000
Alex Gonzalez 3/$15M
Alex Cora 2/$4M
Damion Easley 1/$850,000
The Alex Gonzalez signing is a rumor. And one that, if you’re a Cincinnati Reds fan, you should be praying isn’t true.
The Alex Gonzalez signing is a rumor. And one that, if you’re a Cincinnati Reds fan, you should be praying isn’t true.
Yeah, they’ve got Juan Castro on board, so there’s clearly no need for a defense-first SS. (ducks)
Saying ‘screw it’ and paying Alex Gonzales 2.5 for a year of cruddy hitting with a little HR power and sterling defense was one of the best moves Boston made last year. A classic example of why not to overpay for too many years for a mid-tier free agent. You can often fill a hole for a year with something tolerable for much much less and wait for an authentic opportunity to arrive.
Excellent debates on many things.
I don’t like Lee or Mathews as ideas for acquisition(at present “market value”.)
The numbers I’m seeing seem to make Lee worth aprox. 2-3 times as much (if I were offering, making that Wishhiker Market Value.) I feel that, for my money, I should be getting more than Lee at 13.5-16 million a year that would be 4 times what Brown will likely get in arbitration. But then I’m watching Sexson and Beltre in that range, so what do I know?
I like the idea of going after a player for the OF at 1yr/1+option. Emil Brown has 3 years MLB service and isn’t a 1/1+option. After making $1.775 million in 06 he’s probably in line to get the $3.5-4 million that’s been suggested. That figure will also likely increase in 08 and 09 before he’s FA eligible. With Ichiro hopefully inked this offseason, Doyle hopefully healthy to stay and Jones hopefully developing enough to stay up by the end of ’08 I don’t see the need for a longterm corner OF fix via FA. That is, of course, unless the FO decides to trade Ibanez while his market’s high and Doyle can DH…Ibanez is only signed through 2008 and could be traded at the point that Jones seems ready. Maybe that could be an option, but the position I’d rather see ingenuity filling this offseason is SP where there’s not much here or on the horizon. Unless something worked out on the Manny front…Not holding my breath.
I’m very afraid that if Bavasi truly is on the hot seat to bring the playoffs to Seattle in ’07, this fanbase will be very dissapointed for the foreseeable future. Because it’s hardly possible to even improve this team that much given the present situation without trading Jones, Clement, Morrow and whoever else might bring back some value, there’s no way I see to fix the rotation enough and bring in a power bat (preferably LH.) The fact that the FO might give Bavasi one year to do so in the present market (with such a meager FA class) makes me fear for this teams chances as long as ownership remains the same. If I knew that he had through next year and could get the last couple pieces out of the next FA class, I wouldn’t be so cynical.
I want to point out my belief that if Sexson is to be traded in such a market it will probaly be after the losers have lost out on other mediocrities…
Time to move on, but let me react to a couple of things:
I strongly disagree that major league GMs are good at recognizing when formerly good players are no longer good.
That may be, but few people are. But that’s not the issue you raised. You asked about replacement-level players. Picking a few examples of guys who are aging and actually don’t play well is cherry-picking.
Over 25% of all free agents (112 in all) were paid less than $1 million. Most of those guys I would label “replacement level” were in that group. Just because there were some bad bets on older players doesn’t mean GMs don’t generally recognize what a player is worth.
You know I love THT, but I would love it even more if you guys got away from win shares. The defensive calculations just have too many problems and there are several components with no predictive value included in the formula. For this kind of analysis, I don’t think win shares is the right tool.
Again, you’re misrepresenting what I did. I didn’t predict anybody’s WSAB: I just took the run totals and runs created figures that you yourself introduced. I compared them to last year’s WSAB figures to put them in perspective, not to predict anything. I could have used any system that has an established win/dollar ratio.
I think looking at things in terms of percentage better than = salary greater than skews the fact that we’re dealing with absolute value of runs. The difference in a projected 8 run player vs a projected 2 run player is only six runs. You don’t pay a 400% premium for a projected six run increase, especially when the error bars on projection systems swallow most of that difference.
If one player is two runs above replacement, he “should” get maybe $500K above the minimum, and the other “should” get around $2M more. If you have several years worth of data properly regressed and know nothing else about the players, I don’t see how this is inappropriate or why it conflicts with the “absolute value of runs.” It’s totally in line with the absolute value of runs.
#60– sorry– meant to asterisk it.
Only want to add about the fielding of Lee and Brown. The Fielding Bible has both around even at a bit below average. The Fans’ have them as the worst fielders on their respective teams, and both in whispering distance of the worst LF in the league:
http://www.tangotiger.net/scouting/pos2006_LF.html
***
Hitting-wise, looking at it quickly, they are about a win or 1.5 wins apart, and even on fielding. That’s 2-3 million apart in reality, or 4-6 million on the FA market.
If Lee gets anything more than 4/48, the FA market is even crazier than crazy. I’d do a 3/24 deal.
This was one of the most enjoyable threads I’ve read in a while. There’s nothing like two sabersavants goin at it.
I would like to cast my vote for “I don’t want either of these bums on my team”.
david
i do not understand your complaining about how much money the FA are gonna be getting. you sayin they are not “worth” it.
BUT the teams got a HUGE amount of dough rolling in so WHY shouldn’t the players get a good chunk of it?
you can’t SERIOUSLY think the owners would not keep it all to their own self, do you? you can’t SERIOUSLY really believe they would do something like lower ticket prices, cmon. that’s tooth fairy stuff.
they are not just suddenly gonna decide to give all their young players and minor leaguers, coaches or managers a raise you know.
so exactly WHAT do you think they should do with that extra 20 or more mill they pullin in?
lisa
– oh yeah – yes i do want to add my light to the “glowing firmament” of discussion. you must got stock in dictionary.com or be an english teacher in your spare time. and by the way, it is not real too sensible to ask a grrrl not to get up set if some man essentially tell her to shut up/censors her when she is sharing her deepest feelings (ask your wife you disbelieve me) so i am sorry but i just can’t lie and make no promise i KNOW i can’t keep. but i WILL do my very very best to stay in the comment guidelines.
– wait, there’s more. stop worryin bout carlos lee because that fat tub o lard gonna be an astro at 15 mill a year for the next 5 years clogging up the LF anyhow.
i forgot
i looked at tango’s fans scouting reports and agree completely with the fielding report on carlos lee. in 2 years he’ll be adam dunn
uh, wow.
Lisa,
Not to put words into Dave’s mouth, but I don’t think he’s saying that they shouldn’t spend the money. I believe he’s saying that since teams set payroll budgets, they should be spending their money wisely. Right now, you’d have to sacrifice a large fraction of the budget on an only slightly above average player.
I think also that Dave is complaining about the mediocrity of the FA pool this year and how that ultimately drives prices up for players that wouldn’t normally be earning such high wages. Carlos Lee would not be entertaining the same offers were he in some FA pools of the past.
What pdb said.
but i WILL do my very very best to stay in the comment guidelines.
I guess you mean after this post. And the next one.
Enter Strawman
Doug Pappas isn’t around anymore, but what is the value of a world series run to a franchise, in terms of increased ticket sales, broadcast revenue, etc? Will the Tigers earn $10m, $50m, $100m more over the long term because of this world series run? If it’s the higher of that figure, doesn’t a blockbuster contract make alot more sense?
Doug Pappas isn’t around anymore, but what is the value of a world series run to a franchise, in terms of increased ticket sales, broadcast revenue, etc? Will the Tigers earn $10m, $50m, $100m more over the long term because of this world series run? If it’s the higher of that figure, doesn’t a blockbuster contract make alot more sense?
If it’s on a player worth a blockbuster contract, and if you really believe said boost will help you into the playoffs and to succeed there. Then, why not?
If your team’s going to be pathetic anyway, you really don’t have cheap talent that you expect to breakout and you have no realistic shot at the postseason even with adding the contract, why do it? It will be wasted money at the very best, that plus lowered draft picks, less flexibility in the future, etc. at the worst.
By looking at it too simply, it’s a matter of “sign this guy and we’ll make a WS run and earn $xx million!” Obviously, that can’t be true. Even if by some chance there are 30 truly top free agents and each team signs one, only two of those teams will make it to the WS and only one will win.
If there were one or two top free agents, adding one to a good-to-great team would be a priority, since it would make the team better in the area of already being a contender. That would given the team an added advantage, especially since other teams wouldn’t be able to find said talent (and would probably pay oodles for something half as valuable thus hamstringing the budget).
Since there are no top free agents right now, but a lot of middle tier players, none of them really will be that much of a bonus to any team. The only case where it might make any sense at all is if a team had a huge glaring hole that needed to be upgraded, and for one reason or another there was no reasonable talent for cheaper, nothing available in trades, etc. That’s probably never the case, though.
In the end, why pay 75-90% of top star money to someone who is only half as valuable as a true star, especially when said player won’t even be enough of an upgrade to really further playoff hopes?
Which is exactly why I say don’t spend this year, instead focus on 2007’s FA class”
Especially if you’re trying to build a contending rotation…
#78: Tantalizing, although I wonder how many actually make it to free agency. I don’t see teams like the Cubs and Cardinals letting guys like Zambrano and Carpenter get away.
How about we just save up and buy Venezuela?
RE: #67. Like lisa gray was saying in #70, I browsed through tangotiger’s scouting reports, too.
I checked the SS listings for our maligned SS Yuni Betancourt — look where he’s listed!
….and Richie Sexson is listed higher than either Eduardo Perez or Ben Broussard…
What’s it all MEAN??? 🙂
ok yall,
i’m looking at it like this –
whatever your payroll was last year minus anyone who left and plus anyone in arb, add 20 mill to that.
every single team out there got that much more to spend than they did last year.
2 things can happen with that EXTRA 20 MILL (added to whatever you have left over from last years payroll)
1 – the owners can put it ALL in their pocket. you can’t be telling me with any kind of straight face they just gonna keep it then spend it the next year.
2 – the owner can go out and buy whatever IS out there – FA or cash with a trade.
so which one do yall want?
what is the use of complaining how expensive the FA are who would sell for less money in some year before? the past is over and done with and the agents KNOW the teams got all them extra mill and they think the players should get a good chunk of it. a player is worth whatever a team will pay for him right NOW.
so suppose your owner decides to keep all that extra dough for himself, not spend on FA, come out and say the team is “rebuilding” and wait for the 07 FA class. so you are gambling that you won’t lose fans/money in a rebuilding year and that the media don’t notice that you kept all that 20 mill for your own self, AND that FA are not even MORE expensive next year. FA salaries are going up by, what, 10% a year, something like that?
so yall say why pay 90% of star money for someone who is not a star?
– answers
1 – because even if he is overpaid in your opinion, he is STILL bettern what you already got and the owner is spending money on the players instead of putting it in his pocket (this is assuming they are not doing the signing jim thome for 6 years instead of signing someone for 1 year when you got ryan howard who is ready to come up in a year)
2 – after having a lousy “rebuilding” team where all the agents and FA see you are getting emil brown type guys instead of FA, how much bonus money you think you gonna have to pay to top FA to come there? it’s gonna be like ivan rodroguez and detroit. no WAY is ivan rodriguez worth 10 mill a year for 4 years at his age. (and before yall think i am “happy” just remember that we are most likely gonna sign carlos “slug” lee for probably as much as lance berkman makes and yes i know that lee is worth maybe 60% of berkman on a good day and we are gonna hafta eat a lot of that when he can’t even waddle out there in left and we trade him to the AL so as he can DH – he’s gonna end up being manny money for the 2, maybe 3 years we’ll have him.)
so when you talk about future “flexibility” after the owner has lowered payroll and the attendence has gone down and the fans are losing interest, you think they won’t start talking about how they losing money and don’t have it to spend that next year?
3 – the owners kinda got to sign some name FA because if they do not sign some big FA to “show they serious about winning” they gonna lose a LOT of fans (like in houston especially since roger and andy are not coming back.)
yours truly,
um, WOW
p.s. i understand how yall mariners fans not real too happy after seeing how “good” beltre and sexon turned out to be. so i understand yall kinda snakebit about FA these days…
I’ve never seen somebody type with an accent, but damn if you didn’t do it.
#83. whatever your payroll was last year minus anyone who left and plus anyone in arb, add 20 mill to that.
every single team out there got that much more to spend than they did last year.
That point (which I mostly disagree with) is completely irrelevant to the argument at hand.
You are correct to say that there is no benefit to the team or its fans for the owners to pocket the excess profits. What Dave is counseling, however, is not a scheme to make M’s owners more cash. Instead, he’s suggesting that instead of paying, say, Carlos Lee the going “market” rate of the inflated market (whatever it happens to be), a savvy GM should instead focus on the strategy of paying inflated FA money ONLY for those elite talents who are worth overpaying. (In large part because of the effects on the roster in 2008, 2009, etc.)
In Seattle, we have not been blessed with a savvy GM, uh…ever. Pat Gillick? No. Woody Woodward? Please. So this entire discussion is a pipe dream. I’m more or less convinced that Bill Bavasi will, for the reasons that you suggest, go out and sign the wrong players (because they’re “bettern what you already got,” but not suitable for a contending team) to the wrong deals, preventing the useful pieces of the current team from being turned into a contender for several additional seasons.
But maybe that’s just me being a curmudgeon.
Incidentally, Lisa, I like the Astros as about my fourth-favorite team, residue of when I lived in Austin just as the beloved “Disastros” were rebuilding…it was 1990, and they had just traded Larry Andersen for Jeff Bagwell. Brilliant.
83- your post reminds me of that Seinfeld episode, when the Astros scouts visit with George, “YOU TELL THEM YANKEES NO DAMN ASTRO WILL OVER COME TO NEW YORK!!”…or something like that.
#83:
1) Of course they shouldn’t pocket the money (unless there is a clear plan to add it to the following years’ payrolls). But with such inflated prices, they should overpay for either elite talent(which is unavailable) or overpay for just one or two year contracts. It is stupid to tie up money in a long term deal paying mediocre players exhorbitant salaries when there will be better uses for that money in the future. If there is one roster spot, and 10 million left in the payroll, and the owners have a policy of not saving money from one year and adding it to their payroll the next year, go ahead and pay 10 million for a utility guy who will get 150 at bats (Ha! Imagine that! A Mariners utility guy who only gets 150 at bats! In our dreams!). Just do it on a one year deal. (Or, better yet, make a trade to get better talent for your remaining 10 mil).
2) As Dave has pointed out many times, there are expensive players who could be traded for who are better than the guys on the free agent market. There is no problem paying for huge contracts, but free agency is not the only way to exhaust your payroll.
3) Beltre has worked out fine. Washburn is the real doozy.
Thank you deltwelve…To Expand and Expound:
I wasn’t saying to bank the money because I don’t think any FO is willing to work like Cingular. What I was saying is not to spend money in 06 on guys who aren’t worth looking at for the money or time they’ll be given because:
A: The FA class looks horrible in comparison to next years potential class (even if you take out the top LH and RH name at every position from next years list) and is a joke in comparison to 2008’s potential FA’s.
B: The players you’re talking about signing to $10 million plus money are going to be yours for 4+ years (hamstringing your ability to acquire GOOD talent in upcoming free agent years)
C: I’d rather see a lower overall payroll than twice the money spent on the wrong people.
I have previously said that I advocate acquiring Manny Ramirez via trade if a couple other moves can be pulled off to make it work. If the M’s wouldn’t need to move payroll at that point then so be it, but the belief I’m going on is they’d haveto trade Sexson (without paying a dime) and bring in a 1B. This would be spending that “$20 million” in a way likely to be positive.
I have also advocated in previous posts acquiring Bonds in a 1+option deal this offseason as a smokescreen to keep the fans occupied and beleiving in the product being put on the field, while potentially freeing up that money after the season to sign someone in thier prime who’s worth a premium (regardless what that premium may be). If Zambrano and Carpenter were both signed to extensions, you don’t like any of the other options for SP (highly unlikely IMO) and you miss out on the 2-5 (depending on your opinion) Good FA LH power hitters of 07 you could resign Bonds, save face and shuffle a few things…08 doesn’t look quite as promising as 07 SP wise, but potential FA bats are like a steakhouse menu. The All-Stars missing from this years Free Agents come up after 2007 and 2008, don’t spend those years budgets on a longterm smokescreen!
I did not mean that the team shouldn’t spend it, just that it shouldn’t spend it longterm on these FA’s. There are many possible trade scenarios that could be beneficial.
I don’t think the free agents available are worth chasing and locking into your payroll for 3,4,5 years. If the 2 SP slots are both filled via FA this offseason for 3+ years and the M’s also bring in a FA fielder signed for 3+ years out of this class, I will truly beleive that the present FO has no foresight. That belief could be changed in the future by performance of said players, but with these names I doubt it.
#83
2 things can happen with that EXTRA 20 MILL (added to whatever you have left over from last years payroll)
1 – the owners can put it ALL in their pocket. you can’t be telling me with any kind of straight face they just gonna keep it then spend it the next year.
2 – the owner can go out and buy whatever IS out there – FA or cash with a trade.
so which one do yall want?
I’d rather they spend it on JD Drew, or Matsuzaka. Honestly, if the choice was between the owner pocketing $20M and commiting that money every year for the next half decade on Carlos Lee, more power to ownerdom.
what is the use of complaining how expensive the FA are who would sell for less money in some year before? the past is over and done with and the agents KNOW the teams got all them extra mill and they think the players should get a good chunk of it. a player is worth whatever a team will pay for him right NOW.
Because they suck, and they’re not worth it. Free agency is not a vacuum, and some years are more talented than others. You’re going to have to be dealing with mistakes (hello Mr. Washburn) for years to come, which leaves you with less money to sign the actual stars when they appear. Spending money on mediocrity is why bad teams are bad.
so suppose your owner decides to keep all that extra dough for himself, not spend on FA, come out and say the team is “rebuilding†and wait for the 07 FA class. so you are gambling that you won’t lose fans/money in a rebuilding year and that the media don’t notice that you kept all that 20 mill for your own self, AND that FA are not even MORE expensive next year. FA salaries are going up by, what, 10% a year, something like that?
FA salary fluctuates. This market will crash when everyone realises that the best players are playing for major league minimums while they’re paying $9M/year for Gil Meche, and the teams that have been developing home grown talent will be laughing for at least a few dozen years. I’d also say that being consistantly bad is a better way to lose fans and such than actually making an effort to compete in the near future.
1 – because even if he is overpaid in your opinion, he is STILL bettern what you already got and the owner is spending money on the players instead of putting it in his pocket (this is assuming they are not doing the signing jim thome for 6 years instead of signing someone for 1 year when you got ryan howard who is ready to come up in a year)
No. This is a silly argument. Even if you somehow convinced me that, say, Lee > Snelling & Ibanez, you aren’t going to be able to tell me that he’s worth spending ridiculous amounts of money on for a marginal upgrade. That cash would be better off not being spent at all, or at least deployed somewhere you can do something useful with it. Free agent salaries should not be linear with actual run value, they should be based on the amount of comparable talent to that player is floating around the league. This is why A-Rod’s crazy deal wasn’t so bad at all, and why Adam Eaton’s will have me swearing for days. You pay millions to the elite and I won’t bat an eyelid. The only such player on this market is JD Drew.
Ah, and the Ryan Howard thing… people really need to give it a rest. For every Hafner there are 5 AJ Zapps.
2 – after having a lousy “rebuilding†team where all the agents and FA see you are getting emil brown type guys instead of FA, how much bonus money you think you gonna have to pay to top FA to come there? it’s gonna be like ivan rodroguez and detroit. no WAY is ivan rodriguez worth 10 mill a year for 4 years at his age. (and before yall think i am “happy†just remember that we are most likely gonna sign carlos “slug†lee for probably as much as lance berkman makes and yes i know that lee is worth maybe 60% of berkman on a good day and we are gonna hafta eat a lot of that when he can’t even waddle out there in left and we trade him to the AL so as he can DH – he’s gonna end up being manny money for the 2, maybe 3 years we’ll have him.)
We didn’t have a problem with this in 2004, when we were close to the worst team in baseball, why should the M’s (with a roster core at about .500 assuming you just throw out replacement level talent in whatever holes are on the team) be worried now?
3 – the owners kinda got to sign some name FA because if they do not sign some big FA to “show they serious about winning†they gonna lose a LOT of fans (like in houston especially since roger and andy are not coming back.)
Names just aren’t worth that kind of money and years. Sorry.
p.s. i understand how yall mariners fans not real too happy after seeing how “good†beltre and sexon turned out to be. so i understand yall kinda snakebit about FA these days…
What the heck are you talking about? If I was a GM, I sign that Beltre deal every time it comes to the table, and Sexson’s had a grand total of two bad months as a Mariner. They aren’t the problems with the franchise.
So, can we get an offseason plan? What would your response be to signing Schmidt at 4/11per of 4/12 per?
Isn’t there a clear added benefit in doing the best that you possibly can for the following year rather than holding off. So obviously you don’t want to cripple yourself for the future, but might it not be to the teams benefit to overpay a large ammount on a player if they think that the difference that player makes will put them over the hump into playoff contention and if there aren’t any other players out there who can provide the same improvement at that price?
So, if i’ve got a team that is 3-4 wins from contention and I have a huge hole in my rotation, I might pay a starting pitcher much more than they are worth if they are the best available option. Now, I know the Mariners aren’t any of these things and that the have several holes, and so of course it’s in their interest to not overpay in filling any one of them. That said, why isn’t it appropriate to think that the value of players could vary fairly substantially between teams based upon how much disposable cash a team has and how close they are to the playoffs?
Um, it is. And people’ve written a lot about this – Nate Silver at Baseball Prospectus could compile a book on the stuff he’s done on how the value of player to a team depends on the team’s position.
Heck, Dave did a post discussing the implications of that for the Mariners a couple days ago.
Nate Silver at Baseball Prospectus could compile a book on the stuff he’s done on how the value of player to a team depends on the team’s position.
so what would the value of Soriano as a 39-year old outfielder be to the Cubs? Fox & ESPN are reporting a possible 8/$135M deal in place …
Shame they have enough of a budget to eat something like this, but wow.
You’re not supposed to say that. The Mariners still have to make their similar mistake for 3x the cash.
Clearly, ‘cuz he’s so good, everyone just has to have him.
Meh.
I am a huge lisa gray fan, enough that I asked her to do the Adam Everett write-up: http://www.tangotiger.net/scouting/scout2006_winners.html
(The only thing I changed was her upper/lower casing.)
She has a definite and distinct personality, respectful of others (whether that comes through or not); a welcome addition to any board.