2010 Negative Trade Value: #5 – #1
And now, for the five guys who would require a team to eat more of their salary in order to trade them than any of the other players in baseball.
#5 – Alfonso Soriano, OF, Chicago
Remaining Commitments: 4 years, $72 million
Soriano has enjoyed a bounceback season, with his power returning as he’s looked healthy and still able to contribute. A lot of teams would gladly take him, if only he wasn’t paid $18 million per year through his age 38 season. Even for next year, the money isn’t that far off what he’ll produce on the field, but those last few years are going to be brutal. I’d estimate that the Cubs would have to agree to pay about $30 million of his remaining salary in order to move Soriano.
#4 – Barry Zito, P, San Francisco
Remaining Commitment: 3 years, $65 million
While Zito is certainly pitching better than he did in his first few years in San Francisco, most of his supposed improvement is a mirage. His ERA is 1.27 runs lower than his xFIP, and while he’s a guy who will post lower than average BABIPs, even he can’t sustain these kinds of results with how he’s pitching. He’s been able to get back to being a middle of the rotation innings eater, but he’s paid like an ace. The Giants would probably have to pick up between $30 and $35 million of his remaining deal in order to give him away.
#3 – Ryan Howard, 1B, Philadelphia
Remaining Commitments: 6 years, $145 million (assuming buyout will be exercised)
Like Soriano, Howard isn’t a bad player. But oh, that contract. For the next couple of years, $20 million per year for the big slugging first baseman wasn’t totally out of line with what he could produce, but the extension that he was just given could easily go down as one of the worst in baseball history. He’s a nice player being paid like one of the game’s very best, and no other team in baseball would pony up that kind of money for a non-star first baseman heading into his decline years. If the Phillies were willing to swallow $40 million of the deal, they might get some takers, but of course, they’d never do that.
#2 – Vernon Wells, OF, Toronto
Remaining Commitments: 4 years, $84 million
A hot start to the season looked like Wells may try to redeem himself, but since April ended, he’s gone back to what he was the past three years – a below average player. His occasional home runs don’t offset the rest of the problems with his game, and it will only get worse as his power erodes in the age 32-35 seasons that the rest of his contract covers. His numbers and reputation would lead to some team being willing to take him if the Jays paid about $65 million of his remaining contract, but that’s a brutal pill to swallow.
#1 – Alex Rodriguez, 3B, New York
Remaining Commitment: 7 years, $174 million
When he was in Texas, Rodriguez was seen as having the biggest albatross of a contract in baseball, even though he was actually worth the money he was being paid. Now, though, he actually is the most overpaid player in the game. Age and injuries have taken him from an elite player to a merely good one, and yet he’s the game’s highest paid superstar. Worse, he turns 35 next Tuesday, and yet he’s signed for another seven years with a minimum of $174 million coming his way. In reality, it will be more than that, as he has $6 million bonuses to be paid out for hitting 660, 700, and 714 home runs, and another $6 million each if he ties and breaks the all-time HR record. If he stays relatively healthy and plays the full seven years, he could collect an additional $30 million on top of the already too-high salaries he’s due. It’s hard to think of any team that would give him $100 million for his 35-41 seasons, much less twice that. The Yankees would probably have to agree to eat something in the neighborhood of $110 to $120 million in order to move Rodriguez. Yikes, indeed.
Has anyone written an article/post on why exactly the Yankees gave A-Rod that extension? I remember thinking it was just so wildly off the reservation at the time. Was it George’s idea? Hal? Hank? A drunken intern?
It was Hank’s idea.
They expecte him to challenge Bonds for the All-Time homerun record, and for loads of revenue to be generated by it, in addition to the fact that they expect A Rod to be good for a long, long while.
Blame Costanza
What in the hell did you trade Buhner for?!?! He had over 30 home runs and over 100 RBI’s!!
He’s a good ball player, no doubt about that, but my people kept saying Ken Phelps this and Ken Phelps that…
He’s got a cannon for an arm!
How could you give 12 Million dollars to Hideki Irabu!
ARod didn’t even pop into my mind when I saw this posted. Good call
I get that Rodriguez has a ton of money committed to him, but it’s very premature to say that he’s “merely a good [player]“. He had a .405 wOBA last season, injuries and all; That is still a very, very good player. 2010 has been a down year for him so far, but he slugged. 523 in 2006 (a year before his monster 2007), and .512 in 2004 (before a big 2005 season), so I hardly think that one mediocre year (at least by Arod standards) in any signifies the end. His contact rates are at career highs, and the batted ball profiles look like every other season. Nothing in the peripherals indicates that his bat is losing anything, other than a depressed HR/FB% rate.
He’s 35 though, and he’s a relatively big guy with 2200 games at tough defensive positions under his belt. He’s bounced back from down seasons before but he’s not getting any younger and he’s likely to spend more time a little dinged up.
I kind of agree with you for next year, but 35-41 year old’s seasons historically (minus Bonds, Sosa, McGwire, Palmeiro, etc.) decline SHARPLY. If A-Rod is putting up a .400wOBA at age 40 or 41 (or even 38) it will be because he has found some kind of new undetectable steroid, or he is God. And I’d be willing to bet he’s not God…
Hank Aaron was putting up wOBA’s over or around .400 until he was 40. Same with Mays, Williams, Ruth, and lots of the other absolute best hitters ever. A-rod is in that kind of company. Its completely false to claim 35-41 year old decline so sharply. The absolute best of the best from 20-35, generally don’t decline sharply at all, unless they become injured. So we really have to just wait and see if A-rod can stay healthy. If so, I’d expect he have ~.400 wOBAs for several more years at least. Even Zips projects him to get back to a .386 wOBA for the rest of the season.
A-rod is pretty certainly not going to be a 8-9 WAR player again, but he may very well still have a couple 5-6 WAR seasons in him. Players like him don’t need steroids to be that good at 38-40.
“Hank Aaron was putting up wOBA’s over or around .400 until he was 40. Same with Mays, Williams, Ruth, and lots of the other absolute best hitters ever. A-rod is in that kind of company.”
Aaron, Mays,Williams and Ruth are the great exception to the general rule. It is simply not true that “lots” of the other absolute best hitters ever remained as productive (both in terms of quality and quantity) after the age of 35. And it remains to be seen whether A-Rod can join that company. Seeing how he needed steroids to assist his early career numbers, I wouldn’t count on him being able to achieve similar heights from here on in.
“Hank Aaron was putting up wOBA’s over or around .400 until he was 40. Same with Mays, Williams, Ruth, and lots of the other absolute best hitters ever. A-rod is in that kind of company.”
Indeed. Aaron and Mays admitted to taking performance-enhancing drugs throughout their careers. Not steroids, I’m guessing, but they were performance-enhancing nonetheless. Cheating is cheating.
I’m not sure how good the competition got for Ruth at that age, even though we know it was awful especially early on in his career, and the pitcher workloads were much higher than they are today.
Seeing how pitchers have taken steroids more often than batters, I’m not buying the “assist” to any of the latest generation of players’ career numbers, considering the level playing field.
I’ll give you Williams, but as far as “putting up numbers” late in their career, why don’t you check out Bud Selig who made BILLIONS OF DOLLARS at his ripe age, turning his cheek to PED use while not taking any heat for it, while the players have been practically crucified.
At least distribute the crucifying properly and equally and include all the members of the cheater’s club. Or, you all could drop the steroid discussion and wise-ass remarks completely, since they only take away from the game we all love.
Well put, Jah and Wally. Arod is an elite athlete; we’re not talking about a Lance Berkman or David Ortiz – this is a guy who was athletic enough for the bulk of his career to play the most physically demanding position possible; shortstop. There is no, repeat, NO way, that a player makes a 16-year career like Rodriguez has without possessing world-class talent. Did PEDs affect his career? I’m sure they did, but I wouldn’t have the first clue as to how to quantify it. Does taking PEDs simply make a player hit more home runs? I doubt it’s as simple as that; I’d guess that they go more towards enhancing recovery ability. As Jah said, pitchers were using PEDs, too; so how do we invalidate Rodriguez’ numbers if his opponents were “cheating”, as well? I don’t see how we can.
It’s easy for people to sit and type about how anybody associated with PEDs is a cheater, but I think it’s far, far too early to be able to say with any confidence the effect that they actually had on batters’ numbers.
“Indeed. Aaron and Mays admitted to taking performance-enhancing drugs throughout their careers. Not steroids, I’m guessing, but they were performance-enhancing nonetheless. Cheating is cheating.”
Nonsense. Neither has ever admitted to taking ILLEGAL PEDS. So neither cheated. Even within the realm of taking PEDs, steroids are the worst.
“Seeing how pitchers have taken steroids more often than batters”
BS. There is no indication of such. But one thing I have heard many experts say is that there is an indication that hitters benefited more from illegal PEDs than pitchers. They use as their reasoning the current dominance of pitching now that steroids testing has been in place for a good period of time.
No doubt A-Rod has been excellent player. But there is also no doubt in my mind his stats got a significant boost from steroids.
I think its rather pointless to try and go on some sort of PED tirade here. A-rod is one of the best players we have ever seen. And none of us know exactly how long he took steroids nor how much they really help in a game like baseball. And if we take him at his word, and assume the testing is thorough enough, he’s had two seasons since coming off the juice that were pretty much equally as good as his best on the juice. So, going forward, I’m not sure how much steroids really matters here. Sure maybe some, but for all we know he’ll start taking something they can’t test for when he’s 38 anyway.
“Aaron, Mays,Williams and Ruth are the great exception to the general rule. It is simply not true that “lots” of the other absolute best hitters ever remained as productive (both in terms of quality and quantity) after the age of 35.”
Players that have peaks like A-rod (and I mean being able to post 9+ WAR seasons at 21 as well as at 32, and plenty of ages in between), don’t tend to have steep loss of skill curves. They sometimes get hurt or get sick and loose their skills quickly, but assuming he stays healthy, there is little reason to think he’s going to fade very quickly.
LOL, just because I disagree with you about PEDs doesn’t mean this is a tirade. I’m simply expressing an opinion.
Just because we don’t know precisely how long he took it or how much it helped him doesn’t mean it isn’t logical to assume that it helped him a lot just like it helped Bonds, McGwire, and Sosa. And just because he’s had similarly good years since steroids testing doesn’t mean steroids didn’t help inflate his numbers significantly in his early career. Plus, one of those years was in 2005 when out-of-season testing hadn’t started. It was easier to get around the lenient testing rules than it is now.
Steroids matter here if you care about cheating. If you don’t care, that’s your choice. I’m glad there are still plenty of of HOF voters who care about it.
“Players that have peaks like A-rod (and I mean being able to post 9+ WAR seasons at 21 as well as at 32, and plenty of ages in between), don’t tend to have steep loss of skill curves. They sometimes get hurt or get sick and loose their skills quickly, but assuming he stays healthy, there is little reason to think he’s going to fade very quickly.”
Sorry that is simply not true. For the most part, players of all skill levels do tend to have steep loss of skill curves OR they get hurt or sick which significantly diminishes their production. EITHER WAY, after the age of 35 and especially close to 40 their performance level in terms of quality or quantity has diminished greatly so that if they are on a huge contract like A-Rod will be, he will be horrendously overpaid and totally absolutely untradeable. Again, Aaron and Mays are the rare exceptions. It’s not impossible that A-Rod can be that good as he ages, but I highly doubt it.
JK,
I was actually speaking more about jah’s little “cheating is cheating” type responce. When someone says that I see a little kid stomping his feet and plugging his ears because he didn’t get what he wanted.
Though I wasn’t exactly not talking to you either. This line, “Seeing how he needed steroids to assist his early career numbers, I wouldn’t count on him being able to achieve similar heights from here on in” is either based on knowledge the rest of us don’t have or you’re just making wild assumptions. We know A-rod tested positive for steroids once, and only have his word on the duration of his usage (2001-2003). So is that the early numbers you were talking about? A three season span? You know he was pretty damn good from 1996-2000 too right? This is what I mean about a tirade. You’re spouting off without stopping to check to see if the facts match your story.
“Just because we don’t know precisely how long he took it or how much it helped him doesn’t mean it isn’t logical to assume that it helped him a lot just like it helped Bonds, McGwire, and Sosa.”
So, it helped him a lot because 3 other guys that used it where good too? What of players that were aweful? I can look up at a clock twice a day and see that it is 10:46, that doesn’t mean it is always 10:46.
“Steroids matter here if you care about cheating. If you don’t care, that’s your choice. ”
This is another reason I said the red herring of PED was nothing more than tirade. Why does it matter if we know he’s been clean for a few years now and has still put up elite HOF type seasons?
“Sorry that is simply not true. For the most part, players of all skill levels do tend to have steep loss of skill curves OR they get hurt or sick which significantly diminishes their production. ”
Not really, players like A-rod loose skill in their late 30′s because they are hurt or sick, they don’t lose skill like the average guy that just ages out of being useful. A guy like A-rod has mastered an art. Look at Frank Thomas as another case example. When he was actually healthy late in his career he was still posting near .400 wOBAs.
I think this issue highlights one current issue with baseball-stat community right now, or at least with the average guy that reads this stuff. They take a result found in the whole set and apply it to everyone, forgetting we have more individual information about each player. You don’t take A-rod and put him on a normal aging curve with some sort of talent addition at every age. You need to make an entirely new curve for players of his calabur. I don’t want to find it now, but people have done this, and no, they don’t age like everyone else. Especially not in the last 20 years.
Bonds, Sosa, McGwire, and Palmeiro. Arod has something in common with these guys, but I just can’t seem to remember what it is.
Wally, keep in mind we are all (including you) making wild assumptions here when it comes to predicting a baseball player’s performance after the age of 35.
As for when A-Rod juiced, well he’s a known liar when it comes to his public statements, so why should we believe him when he says he only took it for a few years?
“This is what I mean about a tirade. You’re spouting off without stopping to check to see if the facts match your story.”
Huh? First off, it sounds like you are the one on a tirade, huffing and puffing to defend A-Rod. Second, what are you talking about? What did I state as fact that is not fact???
“So, it helped him a lot because 3 other guys that used it where good too?”
No. It helped him a lot because it’s immensely helped a ton of players including the 3 I mentioned.
“This is another reason I said the red herring of PED was nothing more than tirade. Why does it matter if we know he’s been clean for a few years now and has still put up elite HOF type seasons?”
Huh? Did you not read my comment?? They didn’t have out of season testing for the 2005 season, one of the years you’re referring to. So that leaves him with one single HOF-type season since then. Not a ringing endorsement for his supposed elite status.
“Not really, players like A-rod loose skill in their late 30?s because they are hurt or sick, they don’t lose skill like the average guy that just ages out of being useful.”
Not really. Players like A-Rod lose their skill in their late 30’s EITHER because of age decline OR because of injury/health issues. Either way, their production falls markedly at that age and a contract like A-Rod’s will turn into a total joke.
“You don’t take A-rod and put him on a normal aging curve with some sort of talent addition at every age. You need to make an entirely new curve for players of his calabur. I don’t want to find it now, but people have done this, and no, they don’t age like everyone else.”
Until you link to a study that proves what you just said and doesn’t include roiders like McGwire, Sosa and Bonds then your words are insignificant. Even if it’s true that elite non-roiders age more gracefully than the average joe baseball player, it doesn’t mean A-Rod will because as I said, some of his early numbers are bogus. So his past may not be as elite as you think.
JK said, “Nonsense. Neither has ever admitted to taking ILLEGAL PEDS. So neither cheated. Even within the realm of taking PEDs, steroids are the worst.”
Just to clarify – You can cheat without using illegal PED’s, obviously. Maybe he wanted to finish that sentence, “So neither cheated *in that way* or *by using those*.” /fixed/
And, steroids are “worst” I think because of all the heated rhetoric surrounding them over the past decade, and all the baggage that the term conjures up. I’m not sure any of us commenters have the scientific background to say designer drug A is any better/worse in its short-term or long-term effects than designer drugs B, C, or D.
Not arguing that there aren’t “degrees of wrongdoing” in baseball or in general, I’m just not sure we know enough to state that this illicit substance is any more harmful or more benign than that one. People just get all foaming-at-the-mouth enraged when the S-word enters the discussion.
Jason B,
Yes of course one can cheat without using illegal PEDs, but then who cares? I don’t think all forms of cheating are equally bad. Just like all forms of breaking the law are not equal. I can litter and I’ll be breaking the law. But that is a drop in the bucket compared to killing someone. So who cares if Mays or Aaron cheated in minor ways. Also, if someone claims they cheated they should at the very least be specific about the charge.
“And, steroids are “worst” I think because of all the heated rhetoric surrounding them over the past decade, and all the baggage that the term conjures up. I’m not sure any of us commenters have the scientific background to say designer drug A is any better/worse in its short-term or long-term effects than designer drugs B, C, or D.”
No, they are the worst because no other form of systemic cheating including HGH has ever resulted in the distortion of the record books the way steroids have. And what you pose is a strawman argument. No one is arguing that designer steroid A is any more or any less potent than designer steroid B. What I am saying is that steroids are much worse than other forms of cheating such as greenies. And scientists and WADA experts would agree with me that steroids are a much more powerful PED than greenies. Honestly, I can’t believe anyone in this day and age would say otherwise with a straight face after having witnessed the late career seasons of Bonds and McGwire.
(Changed my name to JK2 as I just noticed there is someone else on this site who posts as “JK”)
“No, they are the worst because no other form of systemic cheating including HGH has ever resulted in the distortion of the record books the way steroids have.”
They have had some impact on baseball’s hallowed records, no doubt. But too, they’re made worse by a 24/7/365 insatiable sports news cycle and the need to disect every angle ad nauseum. We didn’t have that, or the pompous sportswriting blowhards opining that A-Rod, Sosa, McGwire et al are worse than cannlibalistic pedorasts for their grave, grave sins against baseball and humanity.
Anytime the S-word comes in, all sense of proportion and perspective is totally gone from the discussion. You can see evidence of that here, in the, “A-fraud would suck without ‘em! He’s no good anymore since he got off the things!” type comments.
JK,
I’m starting to question your objectivity here.
For one, even HOFers don’t average 9+ WAR seasons, 6 WAR is still that of a HOFer. Particularly when accompanied by a 9 WAR season. Also, as for the inclussion of 2005, well there was SOME testing right, so we do at least know he wasn’t juicing in season. And would have had to come off about a month before the season, even spring training, to be clean for testing. So that gives him about 2 steroid cycles in 2004-2005 off season, he MIGHT have done. Excuse me while I YAWN at your evidence here. If you can’t prove he did steroids post-2003, I’m using those years as clean years. I will not assume someone cheated when lacking ANY evidence to prove so, lier or not. The same goes for pre-2001. Yes, he MIGHT have used steroids, but not you or anyone else can prove anything of the sort. And as much as you like to throw out this type of “lier can’t be trusted” type argument. Why did A-rod admit to using as far back at 2001? He could have taken the Andy Pettitte approach and said he tried it once while coming back from an injury or some other BS. So why make up that lie? Even if we know he lied once, it seems odd to assume he lied in this situation. So again, no I won’t take the evidence that he lied about steroids once to prove he took steroids outside the window he admitted to. You’re free to assume such things if you like, but you can’t expect anyone else to believe such assumption riden and judgemental argument.
Then to get back to judging the numbers, we know he posted a clean 9+ WAR season and a clean 6 WAR season at the ages of 32 and 33. Those are post-peak years, though ages where elite players like A-rod tend stay pretty close to peak. So, its seems like a stretch to assume A-rod NEEDED steroids to be that good at a younger age. He might have taken them, but no one, and I do mean NO ONE, knows how much they will help. Judging from his 2007 preformance, they likely didn’t help all that much. Then, steroids or not, how many players can come into the league at 21 and post a 9+ WAR season? Then at 23 post and 8.4 WAR season. Like it or not, the evidence that A-rod’s preformance is the product of steroids is weak at best.
Now as for the decline of elite hitters, take a look over at B-R for the most similar batters through A-rod’s age 33 season. Aaron is number 1. Not much explaination needed there. Mel Ott is pre-WWII and flamed out at 37, but was very good at 36. Foxx is next and is similar. Getting back to post-WWII Frank Robinson was posting near .400 wOBAs until he was 40. Then we get to Mantle and Griffey. I think we know their stories of how injuries accumulated. Next is Eddie Mathews who actually did have steep decline, through a torn ligaments in his shoulder and back issues likely played a large roll. Then we get to Mays and Hornsby, who I don’t need to explain, then to Sosa who did fall apart.
Now, we then should consider time frame. A-rod is going to benefit from much greater care than Foxx, Ott or even Mathews. So given that very few players of this calabure see their skills diminish very sharply simply because of age and not because of injury, I’d expect A-rod to do better than all of them as he ages. In 1960 his hip problems may have spelled the end of his career, or at least reduced him to something closer to average. But with today’s medicine, his talent is going to be allow to play for a longer peroid of time and with less lingering injuries to contend with.
The general rule we find here: Players this good that manage to stay healthy continue to hit at a very high level through their late 30′s. And A-rod is going to have much better medicine and training to help him stay healthy.
“Until you link to a study that proves what you just said and doesn’t include roiders like McGwire, Sosa and Bonds then your words are insignificant. ”
For one, roiders count. Like it or not, you can’t prove they actually do anything to make a baseball player better. And second, I could say the same thing about EVERYTHING you’ve said. Can you link me to evidence that A-rod used pre-2001 and post-2003? Much of your argument relies on those assumptions. Can you prove to me that elite players like A-rod have the same type of curve as the average player? Nope, haven’t seen that either.
Though he’s a rather quick and dirty approach. I found every player who had over 500 batting runs from age 21-33, then found their 34-retirement age batting runs. I then creating a weighting factor for how recent the data point is. I think we can agree that the likes of Bagwell and Ramirez teach us more about how A-rod will age than Eddie Collins or Tris Speaker. So what I did was just take the year they retired (or in the case of Rameriz and Thome 2010) and subtracted that from 1900 and divided by 110 (2010-1900) to normalize to a scale from 0-1. I then multiplied their age 34-retirment batting runs by this weighting factor and averaged. Notice this will under could Ramirez and Thome because they are still active, but I figured it was better to have them than not, since there are only 3 other players post-1976 on this list already. What I came up with is an averge of about 183 more batting runs. So lets say he hits 30 this year, as he’s roughly on pace to do, that’s 153 from age 35 on. Now its probably safe to say the majority of that comes in his current contract, so 7 years. That’s 21 batting runs/season, then lets say 20 from replacement, running, fielding, for each season as well. So he’s roughly a 4 WAR player going forward if assume history is any guide, which is all we can really do. Now, those WAR are likely to come more early than late, but that’s still a hefty amount of value left. It doesn’t make him worth his contract, I would agree with that. But I just don’t see how you can claim he’ll fall off quite so quickly, when hitters that are this good, tend to have quite a bit of value left from age 34 or 35 on ward. And this whole analysis even avoids looking for players that were athletic enough to play a position like SS or even 3rd base later in their careers.
JK2,
“No, they are the worst because no other form of systemic cheating including HGH has ever resulted in the distortion of the record books the way steroids have….What I am saying is that steroids are much worse than other forms of cheating such as greenies.”
Uh, you know Aaron broke a pretty big record too. So if breaking records while creating defines how bad that form of cheating is, I’d say Aaron and Mays aren’t too far behind here.
Wally I’m way ahead of you. I questioned your objectivity right from the beginning!
I never said HOFers average a 9+ WAR – and A-Rod certainly hasn’t averaged that in his career — so what does that have to do with anything?
“…2005, well there was SOME testing right, so we do at least know he wasn’t juicing in season.”
Not so. The procedures were still so lax in 2005. He could have been tested in late August or early September and then started juicing right away after that. Moreover, I’ve talked to some bodybuilders. They claim that while the chemical impact of steroids may wear off after a few months, the physical impact of the increased workouts enabled by the effects of steroids can last for years – (we’re talking about muscle and bulk here). Which is probably why it took a few years to see a significant drop in offense and rise in pitching that we’re seeing this year. So if A-Rod juiced and bulked up late in the 2004 season through part of the winter, then stopped the roids shortly before testing, he could effectively maintain a good portion of his bulked up muscles throughout the 2005 season and beyond (especially with the help of HGH).
“If you can’t prove he did steroids post-2003, I’m using those years as clean years.”
Fine. You do and think whatever you want. IMO, he’s lied so many times to so many people I can’t take his claims of limited use seriously. I believe his steroids use went well beyond those years. We will just have to agree to disagree on that point.
“Why did A-rod admit to using as far back at 2001?”
Because he figured correctly that no one would believe him if he said he used just in 2003. At least now he has a few gullible people and Yankee fans like you believing his fish story.
“You’re free to assume such things if you like, but you can’t expect anyone else to believe such assumption riden and judgemental argument.”
Wally, I would bet that the majority of the baseball loving public believe as I do when it comes to the period of time of A-Rod’s usage. And that your view is the minority one. So let me turn around your sentence and say you can’t expect anyone else to have the blind faith ridden with denial and ignorance that you demonstrate here.
“we know he posted a clean 9+ WAR season and a clean 6 WAR season at the ages of 32 and 33. Those are post-peak years”
Actually, he was 31 and 32 when he posted those seasons, still considered by some to be peak years or just off the peak. Funny how you got those ages wrong. See why I question your objectivity?
“…no one, and I do mean NO ONE, knows how much they will help.”
No one can quantify exactly how much it will help, but it’s pretty much agreed upon by the experts that steroids help A WHOLE LOT. The only assumption to make then is that it helped A-Rod a huge amount too. Or else why even continue to take them?
“Judging from his 2007 performance, they likely didn’t help all that much.”
Utter total nonsense. He was 31 – an age when some players actually do peak, and so that 2007 year could have represented the normal apex of his career (if clean). Or simply an outlier.
“Then, steroids or not, how many players can come into the league at 21 and post a 9+ WAR season? Then at 23 post and 8.4 WAR season. Like it or not, the evidence that A-rod’s performance is the product of steroids is weak at best.”
I would think that many players can break in with a bang if they are on steroids. We saw the type of impact they have on aging geezers like Bonds and McGwire … they could have just as profound an effect on younger players. I’m not saying that A-Rod isn’t a talented player … just that we have to question how much of his previous achievements were chemically aided. Maybe without roids, his 9+ WAR season is only a 7 WAR season or even just a 6. See what I mean?
I think the evidence that A-Rod’s career was impacted significantly by steroids is pretty strong. Just look at his decline since steroids testing got serious (after 2005). One good year in 2008 is the exception to the trend.
“Now as for the decline of elite hitters, take a look over at B-R for the most similar batters through A-rod’s age 33 season … ”
LOL, what kind of logic is that within this argument? We are talking about players after the age of 35. Not up to the age of 33. Moreover, the fact that A-Rod’s stats were built on steroids, puts into question the whole similarity equation for him. But let’s look at some of the names anyway. Robinson saw his productivity drop significantly after the age of 35. Mel Ott’s production nosedived at age 34. ‘Foxx’s career as an elite player was essentially over at the age of 33. Mantle at 32 … and Griffey at the age of 30. If A-Rod going forward produces like Griffey, Mantles, Foxx, and Robinson did after they turned 35, Yankee fans will howl and whine, and, certainly, A-Rod’s contract will be considered to be the worst ever in baseball history.
So THANK YOU VERY MUCH, Wally, for proving my point for me. It is indeed a very rare position player who can maintain excellence in terms of BOTH quality and quantity well past the age of 35. Mays and Aaron have been the rare exceptions in baseball history.
“But with today’s medicine, his talent is going to be allow to play for a longer peroid of time and with less lingering injuries to contend with.”
Wow, you really are in denial. Don’t you think his declining production the last two years is precisely because of his hip problems? C’mon, take your head out of the sand and look at the facts! Perhaps today’s medicine will allow him to play for the next 5-6 years but he will be a greatly diminished player (and certainly one not nearly approaching the value of his hefty contract).
“For one, roiders count. Like it or not, you can’t prove they actually do anything to make a baseball player better.”
Whoa. Now I’ve heard it all. Are you even serious? And you have the nerve to question my objectivity? Wow. Just wow. Only the most delusional fan would say roids don’t significantly help players inflate their stats and prolong their careers. I guarantee you that your illogical viewpoint is in the minority among baseball fans, most people who work in baseball including the players themselves, and the sports media.
Of course no one can “prove” they help in the scientific sense, because there has never been a scientifically controlled study on baseball players and steroids. But only the most delusional would deny they don’t help a lot.
“I think we can agree that the likes of Bagwell and Ramirez teach us more about how A-rod will age”
You think wrong.
Another joke, surely. You’re using two roiders to try to make a case that A-Rod will age gracefully? Wow, you do stretch credulity. First off, Bagwell’s last two productive years came at ages 35 and 36 in years before strict steroids testing. Second, Manny’s last productive year came at the age of 36 in 2008. And we know for a fact that he has continued to take steroids throughout his career, having been caught in the act just last year. So using either Bagwell or Manny for any study on aging players is a joke and totally bogus.
Again, my original contention in this thread still stands – it’s a very rare player who can maintain elite production well past the age of 35 in terms of both quality and quantity. Mays and Aaron are the rare exceptions to the rule, and it is highly doubtful A-Rod will reach the same lofty level of those two in his later years – especially considering his hip condition and reliance on steroids in the past.
Consider this: After the age of 35, Aaron put up an 8.1 and 7.6 WAR season. A-Rod hasn’t even come close the last two years. I bet that A-Rod doesn’t even sniff those levels ever again in his career. I will bet that A-Rod won’t even have another 6+ WAR season in the future, his last one coming in 2008 when he was just 32. That’s why A-Rod is no Hank Aaron.
Finally …
“Uh, you know Aaron broke a pretty big record too. So if breaking records while creating defines how bad that form of cheating is, I’d say Aaron and Mays aren’t too far behind here.”
Huh, pray tell us, how did Mays and Aaron cheat in such a way as to inflate their stats significantly. Be specific. I can’t wait to hear another joke from you.
JK2,
” So if A-Rod juiced and bulked up late in the 2004 season through part of the winter, then stopped the roids shortly before testing, he could effectively maintain a good portion of his bulked up muscles throughout the 2005 season and beyond (especially with the help of HGH). ”
1) I’d like to draw attention to that IF you have there. You entire argument basically comes down to assuming this IF is true.
2) HGH? Care to prove how that even increases strength much less helps someone play baseball?
“We will just have to agree to disagree on that point.”
By saying this you seem to be assuming that each point of view has equal evidence to support it. It does not. Your point of view relies on an shacky assumption, mine is using only the facts we KNOW to be true. The only evidence we have is that one failed test and A-rods word. Your belief that his word is weak does not constitute evidence. Sorry.
“At least now he has a few gullible people and Yankee fans like you believing his fish story. ”
Right, because assuming someone is lieing without any evidence to prove so makes me either gullible or a Yankee fan. Maybe it actually means I’m grounded in reality while you make up what ever BS pops into your head….
“Actually, he was 31 and 32 when he posted those seasons, still considered by some to be peak years or just off the peak. Funny how you got those ages wrong. See why I question your objectivity? ”
Did you look at his birthday? Gosh, I’m SOOO sorry I didn’t remember to use the “official” age cut off. That obviously means I’m totally lacking objectivity… I’m starting to see a pattern here, you make wild accusations without *any* evidence to support your claim. Also, 31 and 32 are not peak years as considered by anyone. They are close, particularly for someone at A-rod’s level, but are not in the peak at all. For A-rod’s level you could say would be likely to peak at 29, and that his age 31 and 32 (though given his B-day its damn close to 32 and 33) wouldn’t be much different. However, this point, that you want to argue over 1 year when someone has a birthday in July, just goes to show YOU have lost sight of the argument and are bogged down in the minutia trying to somehow, hopelessly, prove something regarding “objectivity.” Yet you seem to forget that throwing around terms like ignorant or gullable, you’re the one coming off as lacking objectivity.
“I would think that many players can break in with a bang if they are on steroids. We saw the type of impact they have on aging geezers like Bonds and McGwire ”
So now A-rod, Bonds and McGwire where all on steroids when they started their careers too….and you have what evidence for this….More baseless assumptions that, GASP, go to show you lack objectivity.
“Wow, you really are in denial. Don’t you think his declining production the last two years is precisely because of his hip problems? C’mon, take your head out of the sand and look at the facts! ”
Yes, I have to take my head out of the sand to see all these baseless assumptions you’re making. Sure thing there JK2…
“Now I’ve heard it all. Are you even serious? And you have the nerve to question my objectivity? Wow. Just wow. Only the most delusional fan would say roids don’t significantly help players inflate their stats and prolong their careers.”
Obviously you like to assume, I can’t stop you there. You can engage in what ever behavior, however illogical, you want. You can not however, tell me steroids SIGNIFICANTLY (which has a very specific scientific meaning) inflate their stats and prolonging their careers. You have ZERO evidence to prove that claim. You simply THINK it sounds like it should do those things. And its telling that the only defense for this assumption you are making is to ridicule me. If someone has evidnece to prove their claim, they dont say stuff like, those that disagree with me must be delusional to believe X. Sorry again, more evidence of you completely lack objectivity.
Final two things:
Its nice you ignore the most empirical evidence either of us has pressented….gosh, I’d say someone doing that lacked what? Oh by now you know.
“Huh, pray tell us, how did Mays and Aaron cheat in such a way as to inflate their stats significantly. Be specific. I can’t wait to hear another joke from you.”
“Huh, pray tell us, how did Mays and Aaron cheat in such a way as to inflate their stats significantly. Be specific. I can’t wait to hear another joke from you.”
You do know Aaron admitted to using greenies right? Now, there is some actual evidence for one of us being ignorant…. And boy, with your kind of standards, how do we ignore claims that Mays offered greenies to other players… You make wild assumptions, lacking all objectivity. We now have seen you’re ignorant of usage of other PEDs and if not, you’re entirely hypocritical. Good talking with you. Bye Bye now.
Wally, most of your arguments rely on the fact that “you can’t prove A-rod did any of this”. You certainly can’t, but it’s more likely that he lied about his PED use; that steroids do, in fact, make a player better; and that Rodriguez is more likely, in fact, to have a divine body and continue producing well into his 50s.
You consistently say “your argument hinges on him having juiced up during this period and having that sustaining and this and that as well” when in fact it doesn’t; however, your argument for A-rod’s continued success flies in the face of his numbers this year – ISO is down, OBP is down, line drive rate is down, and this is all in comparison to his previous year, when he was injured. Only very few players have sustained production well beyond 35 without PEDs, none recently; it seems far more likely that Rodriguez will not, and far less likely that he’s the next coming of Matt Wieters.
meant to say “and that Rodriguez is LESS likely, in fact”
“1) I’d like to draw attention to that IF you have there. You entire argument basically comes down to assuming this IF is true.”
Of course, we both are making assumptions here. Your entire argument basically comes down to assuming A-Rod was telling the truth and you don’t know that any more than I know whether or not he used beyond that time period.
My scenario that you were replying to was only to prove how A-Rod could have continued to benefit from steroids in 2004/2005 even with a limited steroids testing program in place. You had questioned that. So that was why I went through that scenario.
“2) HGH? Care to prove how that even increases strength much less helps someone play baseball?”
HGH helps with healing. It could help a bodybuilder recover more quickly from sessions so he can work out more.
““We will just have to agree to disagree on that point.” — By saying this you seem to be assuming that each point of view has equal evidence to support it. It does not. Your point of view relies on an shacky assumption, mine is using only the facts we KNOW to be true. The only evidence we have is that one failed test and A-rods word. Your belief that his word is weak does not constitute evidence. Sorry.”
Incorrect. In a court of law, A-Rod’s saying his usage was restricted to a certain period of time would only be considered fact if a jury found him to be truthful. But they could just as easily find his pattern of lying in the past to undermine all his statements and decide for themselves that he is a bunch of BS. What A-Rod says is not fact. It’s just his version of the truth and we already know him to be a liar.
You have no more evidence on your side than I do on mine.
“Right, because assuming someone is lieing without any evidence to prove so makes me either gullible or a Yankee fan. Maybe it actually means I’m grounded in reality while you make up what ever BS pops into your head….”
LOL, again, we have the pattern of lying from him. That undermines the man’s integrity and truthfulness. If you want to believe him, that’s your choice. But you’re the gullible one who isn’t grounded in reality.
“I’m SOOO sorry I didn’t remember to use the “official” age cut off. That obviously means I’m totally lacking objectivity…”
That’s OK. Just don’t do it again. And you nailed it right there.
“Also, 31 and 32 are not peak years as considered by anyone.”
Tsk-tsk. Reading comprehension!! I said “…still considered by some to be peak years OR just off the peak.” Do you enjoy making strawman arguments?
“So now A-rod, Bonds and McGwire where all on steroids when they started their careers too”
Wow, you really do have reading issues (or just enjoy creating strawman arguments). I never said Bonds and McGwire were on steroids when they STARTED their careers.
“You can not however, tell me steroids SIGNIFICANTLY (which has a very specific scientific meaning) inflate their stats and prolonging their careers. You have ZERO evidence to prove that claim.”
Yes, I can. And I will a million times over. It’s pointless debating with someone like you who holds such an illogical minority viewpoint. It’s like trying to debate with someone who claims the earth is flat. Wow. I don’t know what to say. Seriously, if you won’t even concede that steroids provide a BIG bump in performance, it’s totally pointless debating with you.
The evidence is called McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, Clemens, Gonzalez, etc etc (just add the names of dozens of others from the steroids era who inflated their stats and prolonged careers through roids).
“You do know Aaron admitted to using greenies right? Now, there is some actual evidence for one of us being ignorant…. And boy, with your kind of standards, how do we ignore claims that Mays offered greenies to other players”
Yes, I know Aaron admitted to using a substance that MAY have been amphetamines. But my question was how did they cheat in such a way to inflate their stats “significantly.” Tsk-tsk, there goes your reading comprehension again. Now prove that greenies inflate stats significantly. C’mon, put up or shut up.
Further, prove that Mays took greenies himself. Give a link. Again, put up or shut up.
You like to talk a lot, twist the facts, and make things up (strawman arguments). But you are woefully short of any facts yourself. That is the hallmark of a very delusional man.
“your argument for A-rod’s continued success flies in the face of his numbers this year – ISO is down, OBP is down, line drive rate is down, and this is all in comparison to his previous year, when he was injured. Only very few players have sustained production well beyond 35 without PEDs, none recently; it seems far more likely that Rodriguez will not”
Exactly, William. As I told Wally, A-Rod hasn’t had a 6+ WAR season since 2008 and he’s not on his way to one this year. Aaron had two 6+ WAR seasons after the age of 35. Aaron and Mays were very rare exceptions and I can’t see A-Rod walking in their lofty footsteps.
And while it’s an unpleasant subject to discuss, he was on steroids right before his decline. Bill James claims that the only certifiable effect of these drugs is to prevent atrophy associated with age. It’s hard not to feel like he’s got to be on the downward path. I’m not saying we should base all of our assessment of A-Rod on steroids, or even most of it, but it is a factor you have to weigh in your deliberations, and they don’t favor improved performance in the future.
Decline? Unless you have some info that he juiced longer than he claimed, he posted two 9-win seasons and two other 6-win seasons after leaving Texas.
I agree with Kid. It’s pretty stupid to say he’s merely good, although I guess different people have different interpretations of ‘good’. That seems like something a talk-radio host would say just to get people to call into his show.
Why are A-Rod and Ryan Howard even on this list? I expect that the Yankees and Phillies, respectively, have no interest in trading either of these guys. In my opinion, their trade values are zero, not negative. Both are superstars with huge contracts, yes, but if you’re going to put a list of players with “negative trade value” then at least do it for players that have actually might be traded within the next couple of years. Maybe in 5 years when A-Rod is 40 we can revisit this, but until then how about putting guys on this list who actually have a chance to be traded.
Because the entire point of this exercise is that that, even if their team wanted to trade them, they’re effectively untradeable. Go look through the most tradeable list again, do you really think guys like Pedroia, Longoria and Strasburg are getting traded anytime soon?
Really well put, Wally.
If I am the manager of a mid to high payroll team, I want A-Rod on my team for the sheer revenue he’ll bring in. Part of that contract pays for itself; and for that reason alone I don’t think it’s the worst contract at all.
Yes it pays for a good portion of itself now. But what about in 2017 when he’s due $20M at age 42 and is prolly a part time player. If it was a 4 year deal it wouldn’t make this list at all, but the fact that he’s getting paid at least $61M after he turns 40 is a very scary thought.
When he was with Texas, they saw no appreciable bump in attendance. And attendance has gone down in Yankee Stadium since they moved into their new digs. There is no evidence that A-Rod brings in extra revenue for a team.
But revenue is not just attendance. What about people watching TV games, merchandise (A-Rod is one of the top selling jerseys, top 10), the following he’ll get as he chases Bonds’ record? Think about how much revenue Bonds brought in for the Giants. That’s what you should be comparing too.
Also, obviously attendance has gone down in Yankee Stadium – 1. The stadium holds fewer people, and 2. the ticket prices are higher. That’s nothing to do with a-Rod.
This is the point that people fail to realize. A-Rod simply isn’t a big attraction. His mammoth talent aside, the guy is not inspiring young kids to be just like him. He’s a paid mercenary. There’s nothing wrong with that but he doesn’t have the hearts of NY like Jeter, Mo, Posada, and Pettitte.
And while Texas saw no increase in attendance with A-Rod playing out of his mind, I also have yet to see ANY revenue increase with him in the lineup. That’s a Boras myth … one that many people have bought.
Finally, as he chases the records it won’t be the same. We saw the beginning of this with Bonds. The interest level wasn’t even close to what we saw with McGwire and Sosa. Now, with the stain of steroids, the average viewer simply doesn’t care much any more about these “records”.
Andy S — all your scenarios are hypothetical. There is no evidence that A-Rod has ever boosted revenues for the teams he has played for. I even doubt his jersey is in the top 10 in terms of sales.
As for the new Yankee Stadium, yes it holds less, but they are not even selling out. Last year they only filled it to 86.7 capacity. This year is not much better — just 87.8%. So you can’t use lower capacity as an excuse. They are certainly not making money off of A-Rod in terms of attendance.
Attendance at Yankee stadium changed because the prices at the new Yankee stadium were obscene, putting the Yanks in an awkward position when the recession hit. That fact makes it hard to try and make any point about A Rod and attendance figures. And you can’t make assumptions about revenues based on attendance numbers in this case anyway, since the cost of visiting the Stadium changed so drastically from the prior year. The Yanks could have easily brought in less people but more money.
Then how can anyone other than Boras ever say A-Rod means extra revenue for teams? There is no way to prove it, especially since attendance at Yankee Stadium is down, whatever the reasons.
In fact, A-Rod is one of the more disliked players among Yankee fans. So I don’t know who would buy his stuff other than the real hardcore A-Rod fans.
(Changed my name to JK2 as I just noticed there is someone else here who posts as “JK”)
JK:
http://article-niche.com/launch/Best-Selling-Baseball-Jersey-Review.htm
I am not making up facts.
Andy,
This article claims that MLB doesn’t release that information. Further, at the start of 2009, A-Rod’s jersey was just the 6th best-selling. So he was top 10 but not as high as you would think. Maybe his jersey got a bump in sales by the end of the year because he did well in the postseason and his team won the WS. But if they don’t, do jersey sales make up for his huge salary? I doubt it, especially if sales from MLB licensed products are split among the teams, which is how I think it’s done.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-kyle/the-top-selling-baseball_b_202006.html
Also Andy, look at this survey of top sports marketing executives about the most marketable baseball players. A-Rod came in just 9th:
http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/article/2010-07-19/sbd-derek-jeter-named-most-marketable-baseball-player
A-Rod doesn’t even do any commercials because I think no advertiser will sign him. Not that doing commercials is important in any way, but it’s just an indication of his low marketability.
Come on out and and see A-Rod go for 700 as the 3rd place Yankees play out the string. Hopefully by then they will be able to collect everything that Sheppard said and announce this in his voice, Tupac-style.
Glad you realized how far off A-Fraud’s actual worth is from his contract. It just makes me smile wide thinking about how in 2015 the Stankees will be paying a 40 Year old A-Fraud, a 34 Year old Texeira and a 34 year old (300LB) CC Sabathia almost $80MM. And that’s not even including the possiblity of another $20MM for a 42 year old Derek Jeter…
youre a fucking idiot.
Yankees fan vs. Yankees hater: Tonight on Thursday night sabermetric smackdown!
Why in the world would anyone downvote this comment? Is there anything more annoying than people who post their little insulting nicknames on message boards?
A-Fraud!
Stankees!
Mutz!
Red Sux (or maybe you prefer PED Sox?)
Aren’t I clever?
Its because the Yankees are the ONLY reason, yes I repeat the ONLY reason why baseball has a competetive balance problem. Throw on top of that their uninformed, obnoxious, entitled little A-hole fans and it all adds up to the most hated franchise in sports.
This is a VERY good point. BOS spent like crazy b/c NYY did. When the team payrolls are much closer (even with NYY and BOS on top) to the median, then competitiveness is much higher (think: 1980s).
It’s not necessarily a “Yankee” thing as it is a “New York” thing. NYC has a region populous of 20M. twen-ty mill-i-on. Chicago supports 2 baseball teams with a regional pop of ~8M. That means, technically, that NY could support (reasonably well) around 5 MLB teams (you know what I mean).
There is just nothing any other team can do to replicate the market share that the NYY have.
As the expression goes, “Born on third base and thinks he hit a triple”, that’s pretty much the way I feel about NYY fans. It’s as if they think that no other teams thought CC, AJ, and Teix were good free agents … or … that no other organization wants to win as bad as they do. They fail to realize that the YES contract (that no other market can match) easily covers their payroll losses.
But, NYY is good at taking advantage of their advantage, but it’s also a Wilt Chamberlain case … “You’re so much bigger than everyone else, why don’t you win more often?”
I think I can still hear your echo from 5 years ago when you said:
“It just makes me smile wide thinking about how the 2010 Stankees will be paying a 40 year old Rivera $15mil, a 38 year old Posada $15 mil, a 35 year old A-Roid $32 Mil, and a 36 year old Jeter $21 Mil.”
I think you’ve gone senile, Pops. Now I’m gonna go get killed at a tollbooth.
That’s not a tollbooth, that’s a suicide booth!
The question is, will that contract continue to pay for itself if A-Rod continues to decline and starts posting average numbers?
I think calling Howard a “non-star” is a bit of an exaggeration.
He might not be worth his contract but he’s still a star player.
By WAR, he’s been the 10th-best first baseman in baseball over the past two and a half years. An above-average player, but not really a star (assuming we’re using “star” to refer to performance, not reputation).
The homers are great, but there are a lot of areas where Howard is merely decent (BB rate, defense, position value), and that brings his value back down into “good player” territory.
Good thing WAR is the be all, end all of player performance and rating.
What would you prefer I look at? RBIs? Smiles? I don’t see a lot of convincing evidence that Ryan Howard is an elite player.
Ryan Howard has an OPS ~140 points higher with runners on base over the course of his career thus far. If that’s a fluke, it’s a very large and persistent fluke.
If it’s a skill, he’s slightly more valuable than his WAR indicates. I don’t know how much.
For what it’s worth, everyone hits better with runners on base. The pitcher is in the stretch, infielders are out of position, etc. That probably doesn’t fully account for a 140 point difference in OPS, but I’m sure it had something to do with it.
Also, teams are more likely to intentionally walk or pitch around Howard with runners on base. I suspect that has a considerable impact on his OBP with runners on.
To don
Most ones here would probably say that it’s a fluke that with a large enough sample size would even out. Clutch skill isn’t something that many people in the sabermetric community believes in, I actually believes clutch skill exist but the impact it has is extremly small so it should not noticeable.
I could not find a site that showed OPS with runner on base I would be greatful if you or someone could post where I can find this stat.
@fullgatsu
Howard’s career OPS with men on base is 1.025. His overall career OPS is .954.
“Star” is a poor choice of words if it refers to performance and not rep.. Not that we have to quibble over words like that around here.
When teams started playing the shift on Howard, his BABIP went down drastically. His OPS with runners on base is not a fluke because teams cannot play the infielders anywhere they want with runners on (obviously) so they don’t steal bases standing up. That has a great deal to do with his increased OPS with runners on and it’s absolutely real.
@fullgatsu – baseballreference.com has all sorts of situational splits.
It is true that everyone hits better with men on base. In 2009 the MLB average was a .741 OPS with the bases empty and .763 with men on. Howard’s career averages are ~.880 and ~1.020 with 3000+ PA under his belt.
Most hit better with RISP…like that Adam Dunn guy that everyone here tries to say is as good as Howard:
Dunn Career Splits:
Bases Empty: .256 AVG, .362 OBP, .900 OPS
Men On: .246 AVG, .405 OPS, .909 OPS
RISP: .231 AVG, .414 OBP, .892 OPS
Wow…look at those great numbers with RISP. A .231 avg is a joke with RISP. So he takes a bunch of walks with RISP to raise his OPS, that’s not the job of a cleanup hitter. His job is to knock men in. He’s not doing that by taking the walk.
Howard’s Splits:
Bases Empty: .273 AVG, .343 OBP, .884 OPS
Men On: .292 AVG, .403 OBP, 1.025 OPS
RISP: .278 AVG, .411 OBP, .986 OPS
The higher OPS isn’t due to being pitched around or IBBed. His average is higher, his slugging is higher. He raises his OPS 141 points when he has men on and a good chunk of its from batting average and slugging, not taking walks as one poster stated. That’s the huge reason he always leads the league in RBIs.
We’re also beyond the sample size of saying its luck…he genuinely hits far better with men on. He also has great High Leverage splits (way better than his Low or Medium stats). He’s a clutch hitter and its not a fluke. At over 3500 career plate appearances, we’re beyond sample size.
Hate the guy if you will but he’s an elite slugger and he makes the most of his RBI chances (kinda the job of a #4 hitter and all)
“So he takes a bunch of walks with RISP to raise his OPS, that’s not the job of a cleanup hitter. His job is to knock men in. He’s not doing that by taking the walk.”
How dare he get on base!!! And conserve outs – baseball’s most precious resource! That base-clogging JERK! GET OUT YOUR HOMER STICK ALREADY AND DO YOUR %$#& JOB!!1!”
Warmest regards,
Dusty Baker
@Nepp
While I agree that Howard men on base splits is impressive but I’m not as sure as you are that it’s a repetable skill. The problem with clutch is the little evidence of it, Derek Jeter is known as a clutch player but actually tend to be slightly unclutch by the stats meanwhile A-Rod got the reputation of being unclutch while being slightly clutch by the stats. Now Howard have the stats that backup your claim of him being clutch but here comes my question about it, Why doesn’t he hit like all the time? is it the shift? pitching out of stretch? or is he just not trying when no one is on?
Also Youkilis have even better splits with men on and RISP. If you should make an argument for clutch you should probably look at him.
@Fullgatsu: I would typically agree with you but we’re looking at 3500+ PAs at this point. Its well beyond a sample size fluke. Howard hits better with RISP and Men On…much much better than most. It could be the Shift, it could be that he’s a clutch hitter. It could be both.
Getting on base and keeping innings alive is great…but Dunn’s job as a cleanup hitter is to drive in runs…not take the walk. Howard drives in runs. A basehit is much more valuable than a walk in that situation. That’s why Howard’s OPS is over 100 points higher than Dunn’s with Men on and with RISP. Its also why he far more valuable than Dunn.
In Howard’s case, it really looks like a genuine skill to hit with men on. I’d much rather have the guy that raises his OPS significantly in that scenario than the guy that has even splits or even takes a dip offensively like Dunn. How anyone can watch both Dunn and Howard play and think they are nearly equal is beyond me.
I agree on Youk…its a big part of why he’s such a great player. He rises to the occasion with Men on and with RISP. I’d love to have Youk on the Phillies.
I don’t think it’s so much “raising his game”.
My guess is that most of it is a combination of two things – one, the shift. The effect of bigger holes on the right side for a dead pull hitter like Howard is obvious. Two, Howard’s biggest weakness as a batter is swinging at unhittable breaking balls down and away. Pitchers are less comfortable throwing pitches that might bounce with runners on base because of the risk of the passed ball/wild pitch, so he’s less likely to get the kind of pitches that fool him the most.
Dunn’s BABIP with RISP: .271
Howard’s BABIP with RISP: .330
Well that depends on how you define “star player” marketing, image, performance?. Ryan Howard have the reputation off a “star player” but his performance don’t really scream “star player” to me. His WAR currently ranks around 65 in the MLB which is not to bad but if look at players of similar value like Polanco, Reynolds, Barton, Napoli they don’t really scream “star players” to me, they are good but not really “star players” in performance. Now if you define “star players” with image and reputation combined with performance then I would probably agree that Howard is a “star player”
Ryan Howard is slighty better than Adam Dunn. Slightly better.
But… but he hits dingers!
Clearly that makes him more valuable than Polanco, who the Phillies threw away a few years ago for basically nothing, right?
Saying Howard hits dingers is like saying Hugh Hefner hangs out with some pretty chicks once in a while.
Howard has historically great power numbers…he doesnt just “hit some dingers”. He’s not Dave Kingman.
The Cubs have three players in the top ten, and the Giants have two. It stuns me that Brian Sabean and Jim Hendry still have their jobs.
Cubs have just two as well, but your point is just as valid.
Silva, Soriano, Zambrano. Hendry didn’t give out the Silva contract, but he still enjoys the pleasure of paying it.
No backloaded, full NTC for you mister poopyface!
The Giants have been relatively competitive during Sabean’s tenure, despite the terrible deals (hell they just moved into the wild card spot). He certainly shouldn’t get a pass, but it’s not like he’s pulled a Bavasi on his team either.
Sabean drafts well. That’s why they are competive. If he was even half way competent when it came to signing free agents and making trades, the Giants would be the Yankees of the NL.
Howard is “not a bad player” and a “non-star”?
He’s an elite power hitter and definately a star.
I agree that his contract is an over-pay (duh) for future performance, but I’m also one of those that thinks teams pay, in part, for past performance. When, the Cards pony up for Pujols in 2011, they won’t just be paying him for his future performance, but all that he’s done to this point. That might not be smart, but seems to be the way it is.
Howard’s 48 HR per over the last 4.5 years would make him a force and a star in any league, in any era.
I agree that his contract makes him unreadable, but I don’t think that’s the point … They don’t want to trade him. They want him to play in Philly for the next so many years.
Anyway, really I was just commenting on him not being a bad player and a non-star. He’s in the discussion for best power hitter in the game.
The Phillies get more value out of Howard than any other team in baseball just by the marketing possibilities in keeping him around. If he pushes some milestones (like 500 HRs) during the length of the extension, they’ll make quite a bit of money just by marketing him.
Circle Change – “He’s an elite power hitter and definately [sic] a star.”
I totally agree. I think we have to separate the fact that he is overpaid, and not quite as valuable as some may think who are less steeped in SABR value metrics, from the fact that those vast, unwashed masses see his gaudy counting stats and consider him to be one of the top hitters in the game. He may be overvalued in our eyes, but to the majority of casual baseball fans (who dwarf our numbers) he’s among the most prolific and *gulp* consistent hitters in the game.
NEPP – “If he pushes some milestones (like 500 HRs) during the length of the extension, they’ll make quite a bit of money just by marketing him.”
As was discussed in the A-rod thread, I think the effects of a single player on revenues (outside of rare cases like Ichiro in his early days) are probably overstated. As Darth Vader said (roughly), put a winning team on the field, and they will come.
I think Philly is a bit different than NY in that case and I think Howard is a bit more marketable for the Phillies than Arod is for the Yankees. If Howard ends up with a bronze statue of himself outside CBP in 20 years, I think the Phillies will be okay with what they spent on him to make him a lifetime Phillie.
Well yeah, ARod is a man without a team, so to speak. He was a mariner, Ranger, and now a Yankee … or at least he’s ON the NYY roster … I’ll let the NYY fans tell all of us when he actually ‘becomes’ a “Yankee” *rolls eyes*
But, Howard is most definately a PHILLY. He won his ROY there, he won his MVP there, he represented them 3 times in the ASG. NYY has Jeter, who they vastly overpay for, namely due to popularity and past performance. PHL does the same with Howard.
When/If Howard approaches 600 bombs, the whole city will behind him … they’ll also be over the fact that Howard passed Schmidt.
ARod has hit 42% of his homers as a NYY. For comparison Bonds hit 77% of his HRs as a SFG.
“I’m also one of those that thinks teams pay, in part, for past performance.”
You’d be correct that (stupid) teams pay for past performance. Smart ones try to pay only for future performance. Imagine that!
Regarding the ARod debate, I do think it would great if there were some kind of metric that gets at how much a given player draws in at the ticket office. After Stephen Strasburg was drafted, I saw some pundits quoting individuals in the game who were putting figures on what he was worth at the box office, but I’m not sure if there was any analytic quantitative basis for it.
I could imagine some very enterprising smart statistician doing a multidimensional analysis that tries to model ticket sales from year to year based on roster makeup. It would undoubtedly be very difficult and noisy, but I wonder if anyone’s tried. Lots of extraneous variables to control for, obviously.
This is why the “A-Rod doesn’t fill Yankee Stadium” argument doesn’t hold water for me. The new Yankee Stadium has been here for two of the worst years since measurement started for consumer confidence. Sure, New Yorkers are more wealthy on average than the rest of the country, but they’re human, and consumers.
The appeal of baseball stats is discrete situations. You add in ~40,000 individuals and tickets, concessions, and souvenirs, and you have an economics dissertation, not a sabermetric analysis. But if Nate Silver can have the success he did in the 2008 elections, I’m sure someone can figure out stats for ticket sales in thirty stadia, or at least sell it like they have done so.
In the seasons in his career in which Howard had enough plate appearances to qualify (’06-’10, so far), here are his WAR ranks among MLB first basemen:
’06: 2nd
’07: 6th
’08: 13th
’09: 8th
’10: 12th (as of right now)
Even allowing that he played only 144 games in ’07 and thus probably would have passed Mark Teixeira for the 5th spot, he’s been a borderline top-10 1B for almost three years now. I hardly think that being in the top third of your position makes you a star.
I have only been saying that he is an “elite power hitter” (nothing more). I didn’t even say he was a great player.
An elite power hitter at the least most important defensive position carries clout. BTW, even as a Cards fan, I have to ask is Pujols really 30 FRuns better than Howard? Or does AP5 get more credit because he has to cover more ground b/c Schu is NOT Utley? I need my 1B to field the balls right at him, one step to the right, and cover some foul territory … but MOST importantly, pick the throws out of the dirt.
He stikes out A TON. I know that. It’s why I don’t say he’s a great hitter. He also doesn’t walk a bunch which is the big difference between he and the other guys (killed in OBP). My point he does what he is asked to do very well … hit bombs and score runners.
I also look at WAR in regards to ONLY 1B, and I have questions about [1] the defensive metrics (as mentioned), and [2] differences in counting stats between a 3 WAR 1B and a 4.5 WAR 1B? I ask that only because 1B’s generally hit in the middle of the lineup and expected to bring guys home, not necessarily to take a walk and let someone else do it. I know that’s “old school” and I don’t cling to it as life depended on it.
I said he’s a “star” because he is. Everyone knows who is, I’m guessing there’s a boatload of Howard jerseys and t’s Phils games, and when fans hear the word Phillies and “who they got?”, Howard is probably the first name that comes to mind (we all agree Utley is far under-rated). Halladay might be name now.
In 6 seasons, he has:
[1] ROY
[2] 3 AS
[3] MVP
[4] 4 Top 5 MVP (and probably another one this year)
How is that NOT a star?
If you’d prefer to take 1B defense out of the equation, you can look at his wOBA. And see that he’s still barely top ten at his position even discounting defense.
@circlechange11
If you use those criteria, then yes, Howard is absolutely a star. All those accomplishments require that human beings vote for you, for better or worse. He is a highly respected, highly regarded player in baseball. He’s the one with the marketing deals, and he’s the guy networks use to promote their upcoming games.
But Dave almost always uses “star” in the context of performance, not reputation, so that’s what I took it as in this case. We can talk semantics all day, but when Dave says Howard is a “non-star,” he means he’s not a star-level value. And I find it hard to disagree with that, as much as I respect Howard as a hitter.
Dave, no Oliver Perez? Just not enough guaranteed money left on the deal or what?
No. If anything Bay’s contract looks scarier. After the season:
Perez: 1/12
Bay: 3/50
re: Bay – It could end up bad, but, if you look at it from a 2009 offseason perspective, it might not have been that terrible (except the option year that was thrown in). If you buy into him being legit 5-win player last year and then take off .5 WAR each year for decline you get a total of 15 WAR over the next 4 years, which adds up $55.5M in value (using $3.7M per 1 WAR). Bay is being paid $54.5M over that time period.
Why would Perez’s deal be on here? He has 1 year/$12M left. Terrible, yes, but its [thankfully] over after next season. If he had another 2 or 3 years left on the deal after 2010, then he’d probably be on this list somewhere.
I have to say that “untradeable” as defined on this list means “sensibly untradeable,” not common-sense wise. Sure, Soriano’s a worse bet over the length of his career, but someone would take him in a trade–there are still weak GM’s out there. On the other hand, no one is touching Ollie Perez. No one. If he were non-tendered someone would give him a minor-league deal or something, maybe, but the Cubs wouldn’t do Zambrano for Perez straight-up. They wouldn’t do Soriano for Perez straight-up either. So “untradeable” is contextual.
Not if they were smart.
Just to get out from under Soriano’s contract I would easily trade him for Oliver Perez.
Then I would have roughly $60 million to fill my left fielder position over the next 4 years.
Kevin–That’s sort of what I meant….that “untradeable” as Dave’s tracing it here is not synonymous with “untradeable” in the MLB. Hendry would not make that move because he isn’t thinking about Soriano in two or three years, in much the same way that Cashman isn’t thinking about A-Rod in five or six years. How many of us would have thought Silva was tradeable? What I mean is that value as determined in these sabermetric circles–with the long view in mind–is simply not the exactly the same as it is in Hendry & Omar’s world. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t critique their logic. We should…hence the applause for the Theos of the world (though that Lackey deal….). Perez is, on the ground, more untradeable than A-Rod or Howard or any of the others because no one would take him. For a GM who thinks like the readers of this site do, Howard’s deal is a disaster. Would the Mets trade Perez and Ike Davis for Howard today? Absolutely. Would the Phillies? Absolutely not. This is sort of what I mean.
At what point is Barry Zito’s xFIP no longer relevant? He has outperformed it every year of his career and his career ERA is 0.92 points lower. 2100 major league innings should be a large enough sample size. Can you say he’s not quite as good as his results this year? Sure. Anything beyond that is a misrepresentation, however.
The contract is still an albatross, but it may be more of a 6-8 than a 3-5 with this consideration.
Wow. I had not realized how consistently he’s overperformed his xFIP. That’s a lot of years. It does seem way beyond the probability for this to happen by random chance. Do big breaking ball pitchers have lower BABIPs? Has anyone found anything on that?
He’s got a low HR/FB % over 2100+ innings. xFIP normalizes to league average, which just doesn’t seem relevant here. Some of that probably has to do with having been in pitchers parks, but it’s doubtful all of it does.
I’ve always wondered why xFIP doesn’t take into account park factors when it normalizes HR/FB.
Anyway, these lists are really great Dave. I was a reader here last year but for some reason I pretty much ignored the whole trade value lists. I’m definitely glad I took the time to read them this year and they have been great.
To all my haters,
Do not despair! I’ll will get all nice and ‘roided up well into my mid-40s. You will all be amazed at my lack of regression over the next 7 years, scratching your heads in wonderment.
Thank you,
Alex
Maybe once you break the record, people will leave me alone and leave me to be a sour-puss to only my friends and loved ones.
I endorse your chase. Allow me to buy you some bigger hats and smaller jock straps.
Smaller jock straps? I appreciate the offer, Mr. Bonds, I really do, but I really don’t need jock straps anymore. I’m past that point in my “chase.”
I’ll take all the bigger head-protectors I can get though.
Thank you,
Alex
Y’all don’t understand how great I am. Look at how many RBI’s I get. I’m the best player ever. I’m so clutch and sexy. Just look at me. My face alone is worth 25 million.
Did I mention how well I play the tuba? Even if I get a career ending injury, I could still really tear it up before the game by playing Baby Elephant Walk.
I mean, I got the bod to model for Subway. I ain’t fat! I’m just big boned, the way a man should be!
Howard actually isn’t fat at all if you’ve watched him play at all in the last couple seasons. He lost a ton of weight after 2008 and has kept it off.
Where does Jeter rank if he signs a 4yr/80mil extension after this year?
#3. I think he moves ahead of Howard.
Derek lowe has a much worse contract situation than Barry zito IMHO he’s 5 years older and is within 3 or 4 million dollars for much worse performance
I wouldn’t say that Lowe is that much worse than Zito. Not yet, anyway. Since the start of 2009, Lowe’s WAR is 4.0. Zito’s is 4.4.
Furthermore, Zito is getting $64.5 million over the final 3 years (assuming the Giants take the buyout for 2014). Lowe only has $30 million over 2 years remaining. That’s a pretty significant difference.
I think you’re wrong about this. ~Today Derek Lowe have ~37 millions left for 2.5 years while Barry Zito have ~70 millions left for 3.5 years. Now Zito have pitched better then Lowe by 0.5 WAR so far this season but I can’t believe Zito can pitch good enough to make his contract better value then Lowe. Maybe I missed something but I can’t agree with your statement based on what I’m seeing.
Um…you’re way off on his contract. He’s owed $40 million for the next 2.5 years. That’s not “within 4 or 5 million” of the remaining commitment to Zito…
Even ignoring the money, I’d rather have Lowe than Zito. Factor in the money and it’s a blowout.
no AJ Burnett? 16+ million for the next years for being a number 5 starter at best?
Not that that’s a good deal, but the *scale* of the blunder is much smaller than any of Dave’s Top 10.
Six straight seasons of 2.5+ WAR = fifth starter, at best. Got it.
Isn’t true that the average batter does better overall with men onbase since the pitcher must go from the strech and almost all pitchers are worse from the strech or else they’d always use the strech like m.Rivera
Oliver Perez is so bad he couldn’t even make this list
Zito is 32 and trending upwards with $65 million left on his contract; AJ Burnett is circling the drain at age 33 with $50 million to go.
I don’t get how Zito is #4 and Burnett is outside the top 10.
Because we don’t ignore everything beyond the first three months of the current season when attempting to determine a player’s true talent level.
2008 – 2009 – 2010
K Rate: 9.3 – 8.5 – 6.7
FIP: 3.5 – 4.3 – 4.9
xFIP: 3.6 – 4.3 – 4.8
Velocity: 94.3 – 94.2 – 93.2
It’s been going on a little longer than the last three months.
If Vernon Wells is worth less than 5 million per season to other teams, I’d eat my hat. Your own dollar values always have him worth much more than that even with UZR severely miscalculating his excellent D.
Interesting to hear people defend A-Rod. My favorite was when the guy used Williams, Aaron, and Ruth as comparables for A-Rod, and everyone completely ignored that all three of them played OF for the majority of their careers, which is a much less physically demanding position than either SS or 3B. Since WAR is the stat that everyone here is using for this particular debate, I’ll point you in the direction of Michael Jack Schmidt, who’s 108.3 career WAR is the highest among 3B. After his age 35 season, he posted a 13.3 WAR over 4 years – while this is not terrible, if A-Rod performs comparably, you can say this will be one of the worst investments in baseball. It’s tough to look at a guy who’s ISO and wOBA have decreased three years running and say he’s NOT in decline – and when you consider he has 7 years at nearly $200M left on his deal, I’m unclear on where an argument can be made for him NOT being the worst contract in baseball.
As for some of the other ridiculous claims – the idea that A-Rod brings the Yankees additional revenue is LUDICROUS. I’ve lived in NYC my entire 30 years on this Earth, and the Yankees have never had a problem at the gates. It certainly doesn’t change with A-Rod on the team. As for jersey sales? HAAAAAAAAAAAAAA. Most of that licensing revenue goes into a shared pool, for one thing, and for another, MLB jersey sales are miniscule. Jeter was the #2 selling jersey last year, and that barely sold over 200,000 units. To try and justify this terrible contract as paying for itself in revenue is to be ignorant of how MLB merchandise revenue is shared, as well of how little impact A-Rod’s presence has on the Yankee attendance. All you need to do is take a look at the crowd tonight at Yankee Stadium with A-Rod 2 (now 1) HR away from 600 to see how much impact his “milestone HR’s” will have on attendance.
You should take a look at the Yankees attendance figures over the past 30 years, they’ve had some shockingly low totals even fairly recently. They were just 7th in attendance in 1996 (2.25m), hovered from 5th to 7th 1993-1995, 11th in 1991 and 1992, bad in 1989 and 1990. If fact, until recently, the last time they were first in attendance was 1981.
If you;’re saying Alex Rodriguez is the least tradeable player in baseball, I’m with ya…I don’t think anyone, aside from the copious amount of idiots in the comments section, think that he’s a bad player…just extremely untradeable.
why is a-rod even on this? i don’t think his negative trade value really matters…the yankees aren’t about to trade him…
Nor could they. Which is why he’s on the list.
See, I am shocked that Eric Chavez isn’t on these lists.
Chavez is owed a boatload of money, is a DL fixture (and out for the rest of the season, despite what he thinks), and still has an option that has to be bought out after the year.
Thats $12 Million for 2010 + $3 for the 2011 Buyout. Prorate that being about half way through the season, and thats a bit less than $9 Million Dollars owed to a player that won’t play a game the rest of the season, and if he does, will be putrid and put up a negative value.
What would the A’s have to pay to trade that, is my question. And remember, he has 5/10 rights.
You don’t understand these sites then. They aren’t designed to reflect reality. Highlighting Chavez would be denigrating Beane, and that isn’t allowed according to the unwritten baseball blogosphere rules.
These sites pander to a community of baseball bloggers who are just smart enough to lie to themselves, and dumb enough to believe their manipulated perspective.
I think they would have to pay about $9.5 mill, or be willing to part with about $9.5 mill of legit prospect. The point of this exercise wasn’t to highlight the worst/most useless players in MLB. It’s to identify the contracts that have the most negative value; the contracts that would require the highest cost in cash and prospects to be able to trade. The remainder of Chavez’s contract is most certainly $9 mill out the window. But the Giants would be ecstatic to trade Zito for him straight up. That’s the point.
The list doesn’t factor in money owed for 2010, only 2011 and beyond. So Chavez is only owed 3MM in 2011.
ex. Zito’s 3/65 only includes 2011, 2012, 2013, and the buyout for 2014.
I mean, 3MM bad contracts can get moved pretty easily. Not an albatross at all.
When teams give guys big contracts, they likely aren’t thinking, “But what if we want to trade him after the 3rd year?”
They’re thinking “What will it take for him to play for us and not someone else?”
one thing I’ve liked about this site is how they’ve looked back at some “bad contracts” and revealed they either (1) weren’t all that bad, (2) the player actually earned his money despite not living up to fan/team expectations, or (3) some things went horribly wrong for the team and/or player, and even (4) the deal may have made sense at the time.
We’re also assuming that players will accept a contract that is “WAR fair” (get it? Warfare. Har Har). Usually the player has been underpaid during his best/prime years and is looking to be compensated during the future years.
Even during negotiations and media coverage we don’t hear a great deal about what they player will likely do during the later part of the contract. But we do hear about what they’ve done over the previous 3-5 years indicating to me that quite a few teams and players view the next contract as a reward for what they’ve already done and not necessarily as a “fair compensation” for what they will do over the years of the contract.
Imagine StL telling Albert, “Yes, we know you’ve been the best player in the decade and the face of our city, but you’re not going to perform better in the next 5 years than you did over the last 5 years … So we’re actually going to offer you less per year than we were previously paying you.”
He’d say, if you expect me to be about as good as the last five years then you can offer to pay roughly fair market value for the those years, not the nearly $100,000,000 less than fair market you ACTUALLY paid me.
Which is roughly what his agent will be saying. He doesn’t NEED to get a bonus for past performance for his next contract to be vastly better than his last one. His last one was negotiated while he was still under team control.
That was my point exactly.
Players want to be compensated (eh, over-paid) in the next contract because they were so underpaid for their previous one.
The teams don’t seem to find that much either, as they’ll point to past performance and accomplishments and illustrate what the player has meant to the team and the city.
AP5 over his 9 seasons has been worth 237M worth of production (according to FG). Ironically, given the content of this thread, that’s 26M per year. *grin*
I agree with you, if AP5 Gets a 5y/150M contract and only produces to the tune of 100M over those 5 years, the Cardinals still come way out ahead, even though it will be viewed here as a “bad contract”.
It seems to me, that players and teams both understand that the players are underpaid as young stars and overpaid as aging veterans, but that’s how the game seems to go.
You actually touch upon how it actually works. Unfortunately, you are posting your thoughts on a site that has decided that propaganda sells. Unfortunately for intelligent people, it does.
You sure have a lot of pent-up venom toward this site that you seem to read a lot, and commenting on, a lot. Those jerks and their free content – how dare they!
Sucks that people force you to read things with which you obviously disagree. And that you have everything figured out so convincingly in your own mind.
who has two thumbs and hates this guy?
http://espn.go.com/mlb/
Their boards are better for people of your ilk.
i think the problem with trying to judge the trade-ibility of the howard and arod contracts (or jeter) is that the teams wont trade them. why do you think they signed massive long term deals? its because the teams want to keep these players with them for the long haul. everyone says “oh no wants to pick up 200mil”. well of course they dont! no one signs a player to a contract for 200mil thinking to trade them. only teams like NY (either one) or some other really high payroll teams can ever afford to keep them even if they could hit 100homers in a year. if pujols signs say a 35mil/yr (i dont think he’ll make this much but w/e) for like 8 years, and he produced at or above his incredible career averages until the end of it, even he would be untradible to all but the richest teams. i think this article should be called worst contracts, not least tradible for that reason.
A-Rod will break the all-time home run record, but it will be as a steroid tainted player. I think the media will be sure to bring this up time and again while he is in the pursuit. And he will certainly seem overpaid by then when he is hitting 6th or 7th in the lineup
I can’t imagine this writer built his reputation on this flu…..stuff.
I bet you would be a pretty good writer if you didn’t have to pander to neanderthals.
Boy you put him in his place! He’ll never write an article that numerous people requested again! I think ol’ Dave will now see the error of his ways, and will run all post ideas past you for pre-approval.
You are just all twisted up with misplaced, petty rage. Take some low-dose aspirin and have a drink. =)
Btw, none of the guys mentioned are worth less than the following:
Aaron Rowand – $12 mil per year to be worthless. What makes it worse is he drove them to basically give away a better player, just entering his prime, who makes the league minimum.
John Lackey – Should be #1. Horrendous contract.
JD Drew – Theo loves too waste money.
Mike Lowell – Yep.
I can go on. This was supposed to be the site that goes beyond the fluff and actually educates people. The last thing the world needed was a site that panders to masses.
Would ANYONE take on Lackey’s contract right now? I mean, really could you see him traded without the BoSox picking up a huge chunk of that salary?
Lackey is owed $61MM over the next 4 years. Lackey has a great feature in his contract which gives the Sox protection if he misses significant time due to a preexisting elbow injury (an option for an extra year at MLB minimum). Basically, the difference between Zito and Lackey is that the Red Sox get one to two extra years for him to earn the same amount of money. If you have Lackey at 13 WAR (4 next year, then .5 decline per year), that’s 13 WAR, or about $4.7MM a win. That looks like too much given the past couple of years, but I don’t think it is a bad enough to put it in the least tradeable top 10.
It’s not how much they’re worth now, it’s how much theyre worth over the length of the contract. I hate the Red Sox, but J.D. Drew has been worth more than what he’s been paid since he signed, and he’s on pace for his 3rd straight 4+ WAR year.
Mike Lowell’s contract ends this year, so it’s not tying up their future resources.
Lackey looks bad.
Again, Rowand’s contract isn’t as long as the Ryan Howard and A-Rod’s, so it’s not as scary.
I’m not sure how you can say that bashing the Ryan Howard contract is pandering to the masses, most of the (stupid) mainstream media loved it because he gets lots of RBI’s.
J.D. Drew has definite positive trade value. Lowell also has positive trade value. Neither would be in the top 100 most untradeable. Totally agree on Rowand and Lackey, though. I was pretty sure Lackey was going to make the top 5.
I wonder if you misunderstood the article. This article point was to rank the top five with negative trade value.
Aaron Rowand was ranked 10 in negative trade value. His saving grace is that he only had 24 millions left while many on this list have much more owned to them and could possibly be moved for about 10 to 15 millions probably thus making him more easy to move then any other player on this list.
John Lackey could actually pitch to a similar value of his contract. Now I don’t like this contract but so far it hasn’t showed to be such a bad contract that it deserves to be among these.
JD Drew I believe have positive value or close too. He’s probably more among the lines of an asset.
Mike Lowell is gone after this season so he have about 6 millions left to be paid therefore and the Red Sox could probably easily find a taker if the paid 5 millions of his contract. Negative trade value sure but not enough to be placed among these.
Umm…Rowand was on the list. The rest of your list appears to be, “GOD I HATE THE SAWX! THEO IS SO STOOPID!! SAY CHOWDA!!!”
Your bias is showing…
Your penis is showing.
OK, here are the slugging % and OPS+ of the four Hall of Famers mentioned above by age:
Player Age SLG OPS+
Ruth 36 .700 218
Ruth 37 .661 201
Ruth 38 .582 176
Ruth 39 .537 161
Ruth 40 .431 118
Aaron 36 .574 148
Aaron 37 .669 194
Aaron 38 .514 147
Aaron 39 .643 177
Aaron 40 .491 128
Aaron 41 .355 95
Aaron 42 .369 102
Mays 36 .453 124
Mays 37 .488 156
Mays 38 .437 124
Mays 39 .506 139
Mays 40 .482 158
Mays 41 .400 131
Mays 42 .303 81
Williams 36 .703 208
Williams 37 .605 171
Williams 38 .731 233
Williams 39 .584 179
Williams 40 .419 114
Williams 41 .645 190
Interesting – Ted Williams had two seasons with more than 130 games after he turned 32 years old. Yes he could still hit at 41. Aaron, Ruth and Williams all had years where they led the league in slugging and OPS after turning 36. With the exception of Williams and his 300 at bats per year, all of them were cooked at 40. Also keep in mind, when you look at Ruth’s numbers, that his SLG reached the .800s in his prime and his OPS+ was regularly between 220-255.
So will A-Rod have two or three more good, even great years left? Sure, with the DH and HGH, he’s a good bet to. That said, I was surprised and very disappointed when the Yankees re-signed him when no one else was interested at the time. It will be fun watching him play out the string trying to catch Barry for the “all-time PED HR champion” title.
Ruth and Williams (partially) played in a time when antibiotics didn’t even exist. People literally died of things like strep throat and syphillis. Modern medicine was virtually non existent back then. Notions of weight training, advanced conditioning and nutrition, complex orthopedics, etc. were laughable as compared to today.
What was the average life span of a player in 1950 compared to 2010?
Steroids aside, can we all please acknowledge the basic scientific reality that age 40 today is not the same as age 40 of our grandparents’ generation. Average players will of course decline too much respective to their peers but elite players *can* chew the leather longer and will contribute enough – both on and off the field – to justify a roster spot and a handsome contract.
Man, you kinda forget about Arod’s deal when he has an amazing postseason. Ouch. I don’t think we saw a decline as much as hip trouble in the first half, but I guess health problems are part of the “decline” package. Shit, at least the Yankees can eat that contract. In a few years all you small market guys can laugh and think of it as another luxury tax.
You can eat money, you can’t eat a roster spot. Look at the nightmare the Sox have been in trying to balance Lowell’s presence on their roster. The Yanks are looking at potentially a few YEARS of that.
Well first of all, I don’t think it’s nearly as much of a problem for the Sox as it is for Lowell. Secondly, that team is in a unique position. You have Ortiz and Lowell having no business on the field, Varitek and Vmart who are terrible defensive catchers, plus the depth at 3rd. I don’t think the Yanks will have a season of that, and I don’t think Arod’s bat will be a minus even in his later years. Finally, you can always put the player on waivers, eat the salary and salvage the roster spot if it comes down to that.
depth at 1st and 3rd*
If the Yanks sign Jeter to more than three years and/or hang on to Montero, they most certainly will be in position to find themselves in the Sox’s present situation for at least one season, maybe more.
Both A-Rod and Jeter are already widely considered below average defenders at their current respective positions and it’s only going to get worse as the years go by, especially with A-Rod’s hip problems. If they hang on to Montero, they’ll pretty much have to cripple their left side defense or have Jeter and A-Rod be $50 million dollars worth of pinch hitters in another three or four years.
And I know the Yanks have deep pockets, but do you really expect them to eat the kind of salary A-Rod’s got? That is literally flushing, at minimum, about $30 MILLION dollars down the toilet and that’s not even touching the luxury tax amount they have to pay on his salary.
The Jeter thing does scare me, the only way I’d want him for more than a couple of year is if he agreed to move positions. But here’s how I’m looking at this, can a late 30′s Jeter and a late 30′s ARod tandem be worse than the typical Yankees’ 24th and 25th men? It would create a bind in terms of being able to carry good defensive subs, but I don’t think it’s insurmountable.
Since Lowell was brought up, if he wasn’t still on the DL I would think he’d either be getting significant playing time with the injuries or would be on another team, whether by way of trade or waiver.
Lots of comments here about Lowell that seem undeserved to me.
First he has just one year left on his contract, which is hardly an albatross; in fact the sox could release him if they need the roster spot.
Second, he was a throw-in for them to get what they really wanted – beckett – so he has to be measured along that gain axis as well.
Third, he actually was a solid performer and maybe even a major reason for sox success in the past.
All of which means he doesn’t deserve to be mentioned as a bad contract at all
In this convo he was only brought up in relation to roster issues the yankees may have in the future, nothing even hints at his contract.
Would any GM in the game trade Zito straight upfor Zambrano? Zito has been a 2-3 win player for about a year and a half now. His value doesn’t cover his contract, but it’s close. I’d rather have him, given the contracts, than Zambrano, Burnett and K-Rod.
Zito’s last 3 years are 1.4, 2.2, 2.2 for WAR.
Zambrano’s are 2.8, 2.8, 3.6.
I don’t think there’s any question that Zambrano is better than he is.
Zambrano is owed less money, and is a better player. Anyone who wants Zito over him is nuts.
As Rodriguez has been healthier than the average superstar through his early 30s, his chance of following the Aaron/Mays slow decline vs. the Foxx/Mathews fast decline is pretty good. I’d mark him up for an OPS+ of 128 for the rest of his career. On the other hand, his range will likely decline at a more alarming rate, and force a move to first base/DH before too long.
The point of the article is to measure trade value vs. contract. In Rodriguez’ case, value is not measured by trade value because the Yankees have no intention of trading him. He helps them win, and he helps them but bums in seats, and they can afford his contract.
Wells is a real liability. For equivalent money, the Blue Jays could have kept Roy Halliday, PLUS pay Jose Bautista, a comparably good hitter (though worse fielder).
That’s extremely painful to read and I’m not a Jays fan.
Why would they want to pay Jose Bautista? He’s the classic “use him while he’s cheap, non-tender him after his second arb year.”
Even as a Phillies fan that contract to Howard was a head scratcher. I understand that Amaro said he wanted to sign Howard before Fielder/Gonzalez/Pujols set the market for 1B but his (Amaro) execution was horrible. Why on earth give out an extension so far away from free agency without getting a huge discount. I think Amaro still thinks like a player (or doesn’t think at all) rather than a business person.
Well, I assume that Howard has photos of Rube disappearing a hooker or something. I mean, that contract was and is a real head scratcher. I mean, usually you want to either get a bargain on years or money when you extend that early…Rube got neither. At BEST, the Phillies break even on it and Howard is productive into his mid-30s. With his conditioning and work ethic, its a decent possibility. He’s definitely not Mo Vaughn. He’s in great shape and it shows. If he stays pretty productive, keeps his OPS around .900-.950 for the next 5-6 seasons, then it was a decent contract. If contracts continue to go up in cost, that $25 million per might not look too terrible in 5 years. But it was a ton of risk for the Phillies to take on.
And this is coming from a big Ryan Howard fan. It only really becomes an albatross if Howard collapses as a player. Otherwise, the Phillies have the revenue to pay him like this.
You would think that any list that has ARod as the most untradeable person in the league would lead the author to question its methodology. If the Yanks made him available for a trade (which they will not) every team in the league would ask about him regardless of the fact that he’s not having his typical MVP level year. Is the contract too much? Of course. But an overpriced contract doesn’t equal a lack of tradeability in real baseball.
This is all an academic exercise anyway, so you may want to say that his contract is the most overpriced compared w/ his expected return, but that doesn’t mean teams wouldn’t be interested in him.
And I’m not sure who the other guy posting as JK is, but I was using that name a long time on this site before anyone else. So get another name please.
No you get another name. I was here first!
Well of course in theory everyone in baseball is tradable in some regard..
I mean if the Yankees say A-Rod is on the trading block for peanuts, he could be traded. But realistically the Yankees won’t readily eat +$100 million to trade him.
Sure teams would be interested in ARod but I doubt teams would trade for him without recieving money as compensation. First of all many teams would have problem fitting his salary in their budget, I really doubt the Marlins would like to have ARod and his salary since that would almost cover the whole budget for the team in one player. So only big budget teams would look to aquire him without compensation but even then I doubt there be any takers.
ARod value as player is great but that contract basicly gives him negative value unless he can continue having season like 2005 and 2007. That doesn’t mean he’s a bad player far from it just not a sound investment of money which means other players could give similar production for less money.
Get OUT of my head!
Huh?
No team in baseball would ever, ever, EVER trade for Alex Rodriguez and assume the full value of his contract.
That doesn’t matter. Toronto had to pay $6 million to Philly last year to take Roy Halladay. Does that mean Halladay had a bad contract?
How about this … no team in baseball would ever trade for A-Rod unless the Yankees paid at least half his contract and then you might have to put a gun to the head of the GM to make him accept the trade. It’s not just the dollar amount that makes his contract so ugly, it’s the years remaining on it that are equally obscene.
@JK
That would have been true if Toronto didn’t receive the prospects Kyle Drabek, Travis D’Arnuad and Micheal Taylor. If Toronto hadn’t given 6 millions to Philly the deal maybe couldn’t be completed or one of those prospects would not be included in the deal.
Doesn’t matter? It’s the whole point of the article.
You could package ARod, his contract and $50 million and ask for a moldy cheeto in return and 29 other teams would laugh.
You could package Brandon Wood, his .411 ops and $50 million, ask for nothing in return and 29 teams would trample each other to get in first.
Therefore: Brandon Wood has more trade value than Alex Rodriguez.
As for the Roy Halladay thing, see Fullgatsu’s response.
I’m the “other guy posting as JK” as I’ve never seen your posts before. So I’ll take “JK2″ as my username.
As for A-Rod, there is no chance in hell that any ML team would take A-Rod in a trade today. And, yes, an overpriced contract absolutely does make some players untradeable. I agree with whoever put A-Rod #1 on the list for negative trade value.
Wait if you are the other guy posting as JK whom am I and who are those other guys? Why are there so many of us?
lol!
I love Howard, but cringed when I heard about the contract extension. For that money, the Phils could have made a play for Pujols!
A-rod is the most reconizable player in baseball and will continue to be. The revenue that he produces for the Yankees and every other team in baseball on attendance alone is worth his yearly salary. When he starts to come close to the homerun record , all eyes and television staions across america will be on him. When you look at the numbers he is predicted to post by the time his career is over, you realize what kind of player he really is. Baseball is entertainment , just like the movies. When you think about how much an actor makes for playing a role (sometimes 20 million a movie) , then the salary of a baseball player for a whole season is on par if not lower then what it should be.
And you say that despite the fact that there has never been any evidence that A-Rod pulls in extra revenue for the teams he plays for, and that many Yankee fans can’t stand him, and that a recent poll of marketing agents said he was just the 9th most marketable player in baseball????
Thanks for not putting me on this list. I’m totally trade-able and expect to be moved to a contender forthwith.
Sorry big boy, you came in at #6.
I’m surprised with all the stats and analysis that has been going on that no one has mentioned how the Yankees did not draw 4 million fans before Arod joined the team. They were winning championship after championship and never drew that many fans in the late 90′s. Getting Arod did spike attendance.
The reason attendance is lower in the new Stadium is a pricing issue. The Yankees drew 4 million fans again in 2008.
As for why they resigned him for that contract price, it was b/c of all the money he brings into the YES network. They calculated their ratings and decided he was.
Also, the amount of Arod hatred is kind of sad. It’s not that using PEDs isn’t a big deal, but it’s ignorant to think that greenies aren’t just as bad. Greenies are speed. Their whole point is to give you extra energy so you can stay on the field, instead of needing off days like a normal person (that’s how Rose broke the all-time hits record). What steroids did for Arod was allow him to stay on the field in Texas and not have to take games off (same as greenies). Did it help his performance? It should only made him stronger because he wasn’t using the designer stuff that Bonds was, which was specially designed to improve reflexes.
No one has to believe Arod when he says he only used for 3 years. But there should be some evidence that he used outside of that period. No one has offered any real evidence. All I have read is a bunch of speculation, name calling, and generally weak arguments. If someone can’t make a convincing argument, I usually ignore their opinion, and anyone who needs to say “A-fraud” in their post clearly is incapable of objectivity.
And if you’re going to be cry babies about the Yankees payrol, then just convert everyone into Mets fans. Go ahead and get off just lazy rear end and do it. That will solve your little problem.
So much for needing to commit 65 million to a Wells deal…
I’m now not sure where you’re getting your info, however great topic. I must spend a while finding out more or working out more. Thanks for great info I used to be looking for this info for my mission.