Saturday, February 26, 2011

Go Jump off a Cliff (Lee)

A couple whacky things about his contract. Yes, it's 1-2 years less than what the Rangers and Yanks offered, and yes its less total in gauranteed money. HOWEVER, many people are failing to emphasize that the 6th year vests under pretty ordinary circumstances (either 200 IP in 2015 or 400 between 2014 and 2015). Furthermore, that 6th year is....27.5 Million (million) dollars (dollars). That's a $#!% ton! Even more impressive, if that option does not vest, the buy-out is...12.5 Million (million) dollars (dollars). That is a #$!% ton of money, just to walk away! I've read this in just about any article mentioning the contract details, so just check ESPN for one of them. I can't believe he's a Phillie, but hopefully this contract (plus Ryan Howard's absurd contract and Halladay's $20M/year) cripples the Phillies financially. They'll have these 4 guys this year, but Oswalt is gone after 2011 and Halladay is FA after 2012. So it's not like they'll have this rotation for as long as Lee is here. I do, however, have a feeling that 2011 is gonna be the year of the Phillie. phrack.
-Natron (12/15/10)

Response 1:

I read this email the other day (very briefly - briefly enough that I thought I didn't have a response). But there isn't actually much to respond TO. I did share this contract detail with a coworker, though. Basically, he's making a boatload in 2016 unless he CANNOT pitch. In which case he'll still make at least $12.5M. Maybe the Phils'll be crippled. But then again, if they're not trading for people, they may also be cultivating a beautiful pharm...
-StanO (12/18/10)

JD Drew and Baseball Economics

Rob Neyer, whom I generally like, said the contract scares him. That's great, but he also said this about JD Drew:
"The Drew contract has worked out decently for them"
Are you f@#$ing kidding me? Over the past 4 seasons, JD Drew has gotten $14M per year to play right field in Fenway Park. Disregarding defense, cuz they got him for his bat, these are his seasonal averages with the sox (c/o baseballreference.com)

131 games (not great but given his health issues, pretty durable)
66 (!) RBI
79 R
119 (!) Hits per season

His OBP is a respectable .377 but his SLGis .476 and his BA was .270. I realize batting average isn't a very telling stat or whatever, but for $14 million, the guy's hitting, well, badly. The ops of .853 is nice in theory, but it's not resulting in many RBI, runs, or hits of any kind for that matter. I'd say that this contract was a bust, not "decent."

I was just talking to a friend about the free agent market. If it can be considerd a true market, where each contract is a commodity, I wonder if at some point there will be a crash! I mean, the value of the contract per player has been all sorts of whacky the past couple seasons. One guy gets low balled and we say it's a change in direction; then Jayson Werth and Carl Crawford get 2006 type money and no one knows how to treat the free agent market. I wonder if someone who knows more about economic theory could project how the market will go, seeing how the relative value of players has gone up and down and up and down over the past couple years. Surprisingly, it's not Scott Boras' fault!

I'm also interested to find out what the Sox offer Adrian Gonzalez as a contract extension. That could be a boatload of $$ as well.
-Natron (12/9/10)

Response 1:
Dang, dude. Well, I agree with you that his contract is mostly a bust. I'd say that the .377 obp and .476 slg are pretty good. What's wrong with those numbers IYO (in your opinion)?

I don't think the "contract market" is going to crash other than what seemed to be the downward trend and/or people getting low-balled since 2006 (until now). However, if there were a real serious economic depression in the US, I could see contracts crashing...
-StanO (12/9/10

Response 2:
.377 and .476 are pretty good. They're definitely above average. Are they worth $14M a year though? Also, he plays a lot of games at Fenway, which is certainly a hitter's park. Finally, you can say all you want about qualitative stats, what really matters is his actual production - and in this case its about 20 HR and 70 RBI a year. That's pitiful return for $14M. Ok maybe not pitiful, but I wouldn't call that decent. Would u?

It would be interesting, not in a good way just like in an experiment gone wrong kinda way, to see what would happen if teams started going bankrupt. I dont think its likely cuz I'm pretty sure MLB still makes billions of dollars a year, but if teams' ownership did start to default, would the contracts deflect back to MLB itself? It wouldn't be good that's for sure.
-Natron (12/10/10)

Response 3:

The .377 and .476 are worth $14M. IF they have the actual production that you're referring to (HR, RBI, R). It's a poor return.

For everyone to default? "Everyone" being the owners. That's crazy. And would be depressing (no pun intended). Just remember, the Steinbrenners are not (at least George hadn't been) the richest owners in the league (or the top for that matter). That had way too many parentheses...
-StanO (12/13/10)

-Natron (2/26/11)

Jeter Contract Talks

This article could not be more moronic:

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/mlb/columns/story?columnist=matthews_wallace&id=5896517

Of course Jeter has a right to be angry, especially because his anger was directed at the way the Yankees went so public with some of their statements regarding the negotiations. I thought that was unprofessional and out of character with the front office. Basically this guy is saying because some dipship past owner of the Yankees basically blackmailed Mickey Mantle during negotiations, that Jeter should be glad his only went the way it did. Really, really stupid. I can't believe people get paid to write this.
-Ronjaya (12/8/10)

Response 1:

I don't have the same affinity for Jeter that Yankee fans have. Heck, there's even something wrong with me where I don't even respect him as much as a baseball player as I probably should as a baseball fan. However, I agree with much of what Wallace Matthews wrote. And, remember, Jeter's agent opened up the "public negotiations" with: Jeter's value to the Yankees "cannot be overstated." Sounds like he was asking for the big buckos. Anyway, I did disagree with Matthews writing:

So when Jeter says he is angry that some of the details of his negotiation with the Yankees went public -- a negotiation, by the way, that he won even bigger than the Patriots beat the Jets on Monday night -- all you can do is scratch your head.

Jeter did not win the negotiations "bigger than the Patriots." That part is bull. He got slightly more than the Yankees initially offered him. I did agree with this, though, and think it makes a good point:

These are not criticisms of Jeter or insults aimed at his ability. They are merely cold-eyed observations of the natural progression of the human body attempting to perform incredibly difficult athletic feats at an advanced age.

There were several occasions in which Matthews praised Jeter and his career. I don't think Jeter will hit .270 this season. I'd venture to guess .290+
-Stan0 (12/8/10)

Response 2:

I agree with RonJaya that this article was crap. I don't even know what the point of it was. As Sam's first quote demonstrated, this guy's similes are more stretched out than (wait for it) the taffy president wilson used to pull on his ol' farm ranch in Virginia. Where the hell is he going with this quote:

Thankfully, the robber barons who owned and ran baseball teams until Marvin Miller -- and tell me again why he isn't in the Hall of Fame? -- tore down the reserve clause the way liberated Germans tore down the Berlin Wall can no longer treat ballplayers like chattel. The balance of power has shifted, thankfully, from the old, rich guys in the office to the young guys in the uniforms, the ones we all pay to see.

Miller might deserve to be in the HOF, but Matthews uses "robber barons," "liberated Germans" and "chattel" (not to mention the Berlin Wall) in a statement about...owners not having the same power they used to?

What he described about Mantle's negotiation process was interesting, but it has as much to do with the Cold War as Jeter's relationship with Brian Cashman and today's Yankees.

Maybe Jeter should be angry. RonJaya's points about why he should be angry is way more intelligible than Matthews's nonsense. In fact, rather than quote Matthews I'm gonna use one of RonJaya's lines: "I can't believe people get paid to write this. "

If you want my opinion of the situation, Jeter was saying that the negotiations shouldn't have gone public, not that he had "disturbing conversations with the Yankees." I tried finding an actual quote from Jeter in the article. He quotes that Weiss character but not a single quote from Jeter. That's cuz all Jeter ever said he was angry about was the way it got publicized. For all we know Jeter agrees with the final contract - in fact, his signature means he agrees with it - but it was the publicizing of the contract he minded. Weiss never went public with the blackmail against Mantle - here's the kicker - cuz that's what makes it blackmail. Maybe you could say Mantle would only wish he could've had Jeter's problems, as they were much less severe than his own. But you can't say Jeter's situation is at all related to Mantle's! Matthews entire argument is irrelevant to the current events.

Jeter's getting old, but I don't think his bat is all of a sudden done. He's always had an old-man's, inside-out swing, so I'd actually be surprised if he were. But he should probably switch from SS even before this short contract ends. Other positives can be made about Jeter's ability/likelihood to bounce back. Moreover, the fact that the Yanks give everyone else so many years and money, not just in the past but i mean recently too (CC, AJ, ARod, possibly Lee) they coulda at least signed him til his age 40 season.

But forget the contract details. The argument Matthews is trying to debate, I think, is whether Jeter is right that the negotiations should have stayed private. And on that point, Matthews is incoherent, while I think that yea, of course Jeter should be angry that the process went so public.

PS This is exactly what I mean:

"Jeter is coming off the antithesis of Mantle's transcendent 1956 season...Yet The Captain still walked off with a deal that keeps him the highest-paid middle infielder in the game with the potential to earn as much as $65 million over the next four years."

Jeter hasn't said he was angry about the money or years, just the publicizing!
-Natron (12/8/10)

Response 3:

Sam, actually it was Hal Steinbrenner who started the public words for this negotiation by saying that things could get ugly. I'm pretty sure Cashman even chimed in before Jeter's agent said anything.


Nate, I can't find a link but in the same press conference Jeter said he was kind of angry about how public the negotiations got, he did say that he was happy with the contract itself just not how public the Yankees made certain parts of the dealings.

Also as an aside, Paul Molitor hit .270 at 36 years old as well...same as Jeter. The following year he hit .341 and led baseball with 225 hits. Not saying Jeter's gonna do that, but I would bet he hits above .300 next year.
-RonJaya (12/9/10)

Response 4:

Good points, y'all. And - I think, no, pretty sure - it was Boomer and Carton who said that Casey Close started with the "overstated" comment. If that is not the correct sequence, then I am disappointed in how Boomer and Carton presented their info. That was my "source" for saying that Jeter's agent started it all...
-StanO (12/9/10)

Response 5:

Well whoever "started it," we can all agree that Jeter never once griped about it during the process. Only after all was signed and done did he say he was angry about it going public.
-Natron (12/10/10)

Response 6:

On a side note: is it just me or does Lebron James go farther and farther off the deep end every day?

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/LeBron-James-bashes-Trent-Dilfer-on-Twitter?urn=nfl-293762
-RonJaya (12/10/10)

Response 7:

Dude, if a player plays poorly (especially one with superstar ability), it warrants mention. Especially when it's coming from a commentator of the sport! I'd have a hard time railing Manning overall, but he deserves it for his recent play (8 picks; 3 games? Blech!). What is LeBron's problem? It's the freakin' NFL - has nothing to do with LeBron's profession.

Ronjaya, I had actually read that article, too. I thought some of it was well-written and some of it not-so-much. But apparently it was good enough to spark debate :)
-StanO (12/10/10)

Mark Reynolds

He just got sent to Baltimore. This guy has such weird numbers. Last year, thanks to a .198 avg over about 500 AB's, he had 99 hits - and 85 RBI!
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=28772
I wonder what the most RBI without getting 100 hits in a season is...I bet 85 is right up there and might just be the most. I checked Bonds, the highest total he got for RBI with under 100 hits was a "lowly" 77.
-Natron (12/6/10)

Response 1:

Those numbers are bonkers. 32 HR. 85 RBI. His ISO power was STILL over .200.


How about Big Mac in 1995?


http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=1738


87 H
39 HR
90 RBI


And his 2000-2001 numbers (72H/32HR/73RBI, 56H/29HR/64RBI).
-StanO (12/6/10)

Response 2:

Holy s#!%. 87 H and 39 were home runs. I literally just laughed out loud when i saw his ISO power that year. Omg you're never gonna guess.

.411

I almost just sharted!

Oh, I just outdid it...the follwing year ie 1996 his ISO was .418

but here's the topper: in 2001, Bonds' ISO was a smooth (drum roll please)
five hundred and
thirty and
five

.535. Isolated Power. Not slugging percentage. Slugging MINUS bavg. Dear God man.

Even Babe Ruth had the decency to have a hi enough avg to stay below .500 in any given season.

PS Sosa had a .409 ISO in 2001. And I'm done searching for more.
-Natron (12/7/10)

Response 3:

That ISO power is nuts-o. Hey, remember when we started looking at ISO power to explore the power that some guys hit with, even if their averages weren't so great? Now it's becoming more popular as a "very legitimate" statistic (even sabermetric-like).


How can one iso power .535? That's insane. No, wait a minute, that's juice. I guess there are some sick ISO's out there!
-StanO (12/8/10)

Response 4:

Have you actually seen ISO power used? I don't know what the actual math would be, since theyre calculating different stuff, aren't they?

Batting Average: Singles/AB
Slugging Percentage: (singles+doubles*2+triples*3+hr*4)/AB

ISO Power: [(singles+doubles*2+triples*3+hr*4)-singles]/AB

I guess it kind of is like a percentage of extra bases per AB? Or is it the ratio of having one of your hits be an extra base hit? OR the number of extra base hits more than singles?

This is why I Can't Do Math.
-Natron (12/8/10)

Response 5:

It looks at how much more you are doing than hitting singles when you are hitting. If the batter hit singles exclusively, his ISO would be .000
-StanO (12/9/10)

Response 6:

So what does each number stand for? Like does .100 mean you're hitting an extra base than someone who hits all singles? How does it actually compute? I know in practice that we've found .200 means youre a power hitter.
-Natron (12/10/10)

Response 7:

Yeah, Nate (wow, I shouldn't be responding to this right now...), .100 is like getting an extra base. It "weights" the type of hits you're getting. For example: see Ichiro's ISO power versus (your boy) JD Drew's ISO power... Despite having a career avg. 50 points higher than Drew's, his career slg is LOWER. So, do you want the guy who's "constantly" hitting singles in your lineup, or do you want the guy who can bash a couple in (like Drew) despite the lower likelihood of actually getting a hit? It tells you about the type of hitter he is. Then again, Ichiro can get himself to 2nd base on a steal. So, really ISO power gives you more info about the hitter.


Take Reynolds and his sub-.200 avg... His slugging was STILL higher than Ichiro's and there was over a 100-point difference in their averages. Reynolds might knock himself (or 4 total) in with one swing. The chances are much lower that Ichiro would do the same.


Did that help?
-StanO (12/10/10)

Response 8:
That does help. It also might implicate why Ichiro has supposedly been knocked as a guy who would rather slap an infield single than try to get a solid hit and drive a guy in from second. I think Ichiro has said (or certainly demonstrated) that he could drive the ball if he wanted to, albeit with a lower overall success rate. If he could trade 50 points of batting average for 50 points of slugging, should he? His ISO would be all the same. But the guy with the higher slugging percentage and lower average probably gets more RBI than the higher average singles hitter.
-Natron (2/26/11)

Reyes vs. Crawford - Response

Their numbers are very similar, good catch (hahahaha). I mean, your contract points are well-taken. If Reyes can prove healthy, he does deserve the type of contract you suggest. I like your "stepped methodology," too. I don't know if Reyes would accept 87 for 6 if Crawford just got 7 at 142... Though Reyes is coming of an unspectacular season...

Same with Wright. That's right, can't forget the other "young" one.
-StanO (12/9/10)

Reyes vs. Crawford

OK, I'm looking at Crawford's career stats minus last year because Reyes and he both started at 20 and Reyes is a year younger than Crawford. So essentially I'm comparing their careers through each one's age 27 season.

Reyes' OPS is only 3 points lower than Crawford's through his age 27 season (even including last year, Crawford's only beating him by 12 OPS points). Crawford had 30 more stolen bases, but he also had way more k's and fewer walks. Their OPS+ at equivalent ages were 101 and 103, Jose and Carl ,respectively.

If you can't tell, what I'm aiming at is that Crawford and Reyes are very similar offensively, while Reyes plays SS and Carl is out in left. Thus, I would say they're pretty damn even Steven - notwithstanding "intangibles" and, possibly, health issues. But especially if Reyes maintains his health, which I do believe he will as an overall rule, he could very reasonably demand a contract approaching the 7 years for 20 per season Crawford got. Which scares me. Especially considering the Yankees might be in need of a new SS soon.

We need to sign Reyes and Wright to long-term deals prontissimo, especially since each one has had relative lulls the past season or two. Discount much? I know we signed him for this year at 11, I say we give him like 5 years or even 6 starting at 12M and going up 1M per year, so like 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, maybe up to 17 which comes out to 70 mill over 5 years OR 87 over 6. I would do that, honestly, right now. but then again I'm not the guy in charge.
-Natron (12/9/10)

Lance Berkman - Part 7

Almost as much as the Ollie deal. Both cases are Vinsanity... Wait, where is Vince Carter these days? He's in Orlando these days... Top 50 scorer of all time.
-StanO (12/9/10)

Lance Berkman - Part 6

That salary stat I threw out there, based on last year's payroll because I don't know what either team's payroll will end up being this year:

Berkman, St Louis: 8MM/93MM = 8.6%
Ollie, NYM: 12MM/136MM = 8.8%

boo ya
-Natron (12/8/10)

Lance Berkman - Part 5

That sounds about right. But guess how many Major League games Holliday has played in RF. None. Zip. "Only" 8M is nonsense. What you wrote about the Ollie/Berkman percentages makes sense.

Yeah, how is the Mexican Pacific League in the same sentence as the MLB? Nonsense (again). Those walks are abominable. Agreed. Yeesh.
-StanO (12/8/10)

Lance Berkman - Part 4

LOL I think the plan for now is to put him in LF... and Matt "I drop important line drives" Holliday in RF? It makes no sense, and there was an article I read calling it a good deal because it's "only" $8M. UMMM WTF!? That's probably close to 10% of their payroll! I'd wager it's equal to or more than the percent of the Cards' payroll vs Ollie's salary and the Mets' payroll. Did that make sense?

Speaking of Ollie and not making sense, read this quote from http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5863996 "New York Mets left-hander Oliver Perez is still as wild as ever, but somehow he's getting better results in the Mexican Pacific League than he did in the past two seasons in the major leagues." (You can read the article for some stats...)
He's somehow doing better? SOMEHOW? PROBABLY BECAUSE IT'S THE #$%^&^$ MEXICAN PACIFIC LEAGUE!!!!! The opposing bats will be much worse... but the strike zone is the same - that 9 bb/15IP is all I care about - not k's (which could be due to poor contact ability on their part) and I give two %$#^& about ERA. But $%#&, man, 9 walks in 15 innings?! That's like 6 per 9. I guess this is from espndeportes so I should say AYE DIOS MIO!
-Natron (12/7/10)

Lance Berkman - Part 3

It's pretty unreal. Maybe he'll make his grand return to right field? There was a time when he played there (with a weak arm - and last played in 2007). He's listed as the St. Louis Cardinals DH, which is funny given the roster spots available to DH's on NL teams. Hmm...
-StanO (12/6/10)

Lance Berkman - Part 2

I have no understanding of Berkman's contract. Forth the money he's owed, where on earth are the Cards gonna play him?! You got Pujols at first and Holliday in left. Honestly, where are they gonna play him?!
-Natron (12/5/10)

Lance Berkman - Part 1

Given that Berkman's numbers have declined in two consecutive years, how does he STILL get an $8 million deal for one year? I could see $8 million for two...

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=4118
-StanO (12/5/10)

What is he Werth, again?

Natron said it. The Nats messed up the whole market. Just when player contracts were moving in a "more reasonable direction," Werth signs an ABSURD contract. My goodness. Too long. Too much money. Both the years and per annum pay are way too elevated.
-StanO (12/6/10)

What is he Werth? Guest Time!

It's a good thing the Yanks aren't in the market for Crawford. Looks like they have Jeter signed and Rivera. Now if we can secure Lee we're pretty set in the free agent market.

Unless that rumor of us trading for Greinke is true...
-Ronjaya (12/6/10)

What is he Werth? Continued...

My best understanding with this is that the only way Werth could agree to play for the lowly Nats is if they overpaid and over-yeared him. I don't think any team would have given that to anyone on the market, even Crawford was unlikely to get that money... Now, though, how does Crawford accept anything less than this??
Even the Nats GM said they went overboard with the years so that JW would sign. It's all preposterous.
-Natron (12/5/10)

What is he Werth?

Boras and the Nats effed it all up!

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Whoa-Jayson-Werth-signs-with-Nationals-for-7-ye?urn=mlb-292024


http://twitter.com/Buster_ESPN/statuses/11546416442769408
-StanO (12/5/10)

Managers - The End (for now)

Agreed. maybe the Mets masses are wrong on this one... (me included) -StanO (12/5/10)

Managers 3

I'm guessing Bobby is looking for either a lotta years or a lot of authority in decision making. I have no basis for thinking that but it's only idea I have. -Natron (12/5/10)

Managers Response

Nicely done. How is Bobby V getting weeded out like that? And yet Mets fans love him... -StanO (12/5/10)

Managers

On the deal for the new manager for the brewers: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=5871665
The Brewers pruned an initial list of about 20 candidates down to eight, and Roenicke outlasted Bobby Valentine, Bob Melvin, Eric Wedge and Joey Cora, among others, to land a two-year deal with a club option for 2013.

Holy crap this is the goldmine!
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/

Let's look at this together tonight I'm not gonna go through it all right now. But hooray!
-Natron (12/2/10)

Thursday, February 10, 2011

I'd say most definitely yes. Excellent batting average, power, run production. Remember when he was a feared RF? How does Abreu have more GG's?!
-StanO (11/19/10)
How about Vlad? What if he finishes with 500 hrs, 500 doubles, 1500 rbis, 2500 hits, something around .315-.320, an MVP, 9 All-Star games, 8 Silver Sluggers, and ZERO GOLD GLOVES?
-Natron (11/19/10)