FanGraphs Baseball

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. He has averaged 2.1 wins per season since 2009

    Typo. You probably meant 2007

    Comment by Anonymous Coward — December 29, 2009 @ 4:33 pm

  2. This has little to do with Fernando Martinez or veteran presence. If Bay signed for Boston at 4/60, is that a significant overpay? So an extra 1.5 makes it one of the more significant overpays?

    Is it really pertinent to talk about old player skills when the guy is 31?

    Comment by fire jerry manuel — December 29, 2009 @ 4:36 pm

  3. I believe that would’ve also been a significant overpay, and since the contract runs through age 35/36, it does seem pertinent to discuss old player skills to me. Decline phase could start soon.

    Comment by Jack Moore — December 29, 2009 @ 4:39 pm

  4. I know Bill James originated the “old player skills age faster” theory. Although I’m pretty sure he wasn’t including defense into his argument, rather defining it as a player with poor average, good patience, good power.

    I was trying to find any sort of study confirming or disproving this theory and was terribly unsuccessful. Anecdotally, it seems to make sense but I’d like to see some proof. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

    Comment by Max — December 29, 2009 @ 4:39 pm

  5. yes, they’ll prob take it on the chin with him in the last year of his deal. That doesn’t mean it’s not alarmist to suggest that a decline is likely/more than possible. He went to the tougher league, in the toughest division, and did better. Not much of a decline.

    Comment by fire jerry manuel — December 29, 2009 @ 4:42 pm

  6. The option seems pretty bad, but the rest of the contract doesn’t seem a significant overpay. Perhaps slightly, but significant? I can’t agree with that.

    Comment by Justin — December 29, 2009 @ 4:49 pm

  7. I’d have loved to have Bay back in the 4 year / $50 mil range tops, but this just seems like too much.

    Still want to see who the Red Sox end up going with in CF. I know they want to develop Ellsbury (has the tools, needs the instincts), but I think letting him watch and learn from one of the better ones in our generation will be better for him, and the Red Sox, than learning on the job. I’ve been critical of Ellsbury for having all the skills that in 1999 would have made him one of the most overrated players in MLB, but that being said, a speedy, .350-.360 OBP hitter + good defender (which he can become) plays out well in MLB. Either way, we threw the big money at the right guy, and played the value game at the position the free agent market dictated we could.

    Comment by Joe R — December 29, 2009 @ 4:59 pm

  8. FWIW the old player skills claim seems counter-intuitive to me (I would also be interested to read whatever the latest study is)….because a guy with great plate discipline should be able to retain that offensive value as his bat speed declines, and very good raw power gives the player a better “margin for error” if you will during his decline, where if he regresses from plus power to average power coupled with good plate discipline he should remain servicable offensively even with some physical/talent regression

    Compare to a player with poor secondary skills, they are not only more vulnerable to the effects of BABIP swings in overall offensive value/ability to reach base, but if they rely on speed to create infield hits as well that doesn’t seem like something that would age well (compared to plate discipline), and if they had little power to begin with a loss of bat speed to handle say, the inner half of the plate, compared to a lack of walk rate would render them pretty much worthless offensively

    Power I guess I could be convinced about “falling off a cliff with age” at a comparable rate as speed, but it seems to me plate discipline will always help a guy’s aging vs a player who lacks it but may have other younger skills like speed

    Comment by AB — December 29, 2009 @ 5:02 pm

  9. I think if the old player skills are combined with someone being a lard-ass, then true. That type of player breaks down. See Mo Vaughn. But Bay doesn’t have old player skills caused by being overweight to begin with. He is a decent runner if not blazing with speed. Fielding isn’t his thing and isn’t likely to cause too much more of a problem near term then it already does. His power isn’t going to disappear (other than by virtue of citifield, but that has little effect on his actual value-he will hit fewer home runs, but not relative to the ballpark).

    Bay had his knee scoped before 2007 season. I think that effected him, although he didn’t go on the DL. His fielding numbers that year were worse than in 2006 and 2005. And I do think there is something to a Green Monster effect on lf numbers. And frankly I am far more confident in saying he is a good hitter than in saying he will cost you a ton of runs in left. At least at the beginning of the contract I think he will be worth it.

    Comment by wobatus — December 29, 2009 @ 5:03 pm

  10. Wasn’t Mike Cameron signed to play CF with Ellsbury switching to LF?

    Comment by Brad C. — December 29, 2009 @ 5:04 pm

  11. The argument is: Once the power goes, the patience is useless, and pitchers figure that out.

    Comment by JR — December 29, 2009 @ 5:08 pm

  12. When someone is past their prime…meaning their prime isn’t coming back…and they’ve posted 2.9 and 3.5 WAR in the last two seasons, how in the world do you pay for a 4.5 WAR player??? I think “significant” overpay is being pretty generous.

    I’d be willing to bet a lot of money that Bay doesn’t average even 3.5 over the next four years. Forget ‘old guy skills’, he doesn’t have to decline at all to make this insane.

    Comment by Jimbo — December 29, 2009 @ 5:08 pm

  13. See intuitively, I feel the opposite. If a player has power and patience and the power goes, the patience should suffer as well. For every Luis Castillo who can somehow magically will the pitchers to walk him, there are armies of punchless players whom pitchers refuse to pitch around.

    But I was recently having this exact argument with someone and I realized I was just parrotting a widely held sabermetic belief without having seen anything concrete about it. That’s why I’m curious.

    Comment by Max — December 29, 2009 @ 5:10 pm

  14. Seems like a pretty bad contract to me. He’s a bad fit for their ballpark and he wasn’t even worth what he’s now being paid in the much-friendlier confines of Fenway.

    As a Houston fan, this contract reminds me of Carlos Lee’s, except likely without the first couple of good years. It’s an overpay right now, and will only get worse as Bay ages.

    Comment by OremLK — December 29, 2009 @ 5:11 pm

  15. According to Terry Francona, that is as yet undecided.

    Switching Ellsbury would, for the reasons Joe R mentioned, be a good idea though.

    Agree with everything you said Joe R.

    Comment by TsB — December 29, 2009 @ 5:17 pm

  16. This is admittedly not related directly to the Jason Bay signing (although I suppose one could apply it), but as long as we’re assessing value:
    As you noted, the value of adding a win changes based on where you are on the win curve. What seems often not to be considered when assessing whether players have been over or underpaid is the fact that a single 6 WAR player is certainly more valuable than three 2 WAR players, or two 3 WAR players (due to increased roster flexibility, etc). So theoretically while teams are paying about $3.5 million/WAR at the moment, it really should be more of a sliding scale. I wouldn’t begin to attempt those calculations myself, but it seems to me like something worth considering and studying further.

    Comment by Preston — December 29, 2009 @ 5:17 pm

  17. By the way, isn’t there an argument that Bay never exhibited true “old player skills” at all because he had too many SBs?

    Comment by JR — December 29, 2009 @ 5:18 pm

  18. I wonder what Mr. Matt Holliday’s agent is thinking…

    Removes one of the few remaining big spenders, but also takes Bay out of the equation as Plan B for St. Louis.

    Comment by Jimbo — December 29, 2009 @ 5:22 pm

  19. Has the “old player” skills ever been proven or is that just a theory? If possible, I’d like to be pointed to a study done on this.

    Comment by Scottwood — December 29, 2009 @ 5:25 pm

  20. Can someone explain to me why there is a fan projection system now here at Fangraphs?

    Comment by Joe — December 29, 2009 @ 5:27 pm

  21. Cameron was signed for the fact that he provides more bang for the buck than Bay. The Red Sox want Ellsbury to be the CF going forward, but it will be nice to have Cameron available to switch in, just in case Ellsbury continues to take his fielding classes from the Juan Pierre school of route-running.

    I’ll back whatever decision Francona ends up making, each has the pros and cons. Ellsbury’s talented, no reason to believe, in my opinion, he lays up another clunker of a season in terms of UZR.

    Comment by Joe R — December 29, 2009 @ 5:30 pm

  22. Here’s what Dave Cameron had to say about it.

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-dollar-value-of-a-win/#comment-111413

    Comment by Baseball Fan — December 29, 2009 @ 5:30 pm

  23. Clearly Bay’s bat will play. On the other hand I am a big Pirates fan and Bay was not the same after he injured his knee. Either in the field, or on the basepaths he simply lacked the ability to make quick turns rounding the bases, or make quick jumps on the ball in the field. Now, between Beltran’s knees, and Bays knees, and the size of that outfield, how exactly is this going to work going forward?

    The Met’s should have overpaid for Holliday if they were going to overpay.

    Comment by Edwincnelson — December 29, 2009 @ 5:31 pm

  24. Not just that but the Mets …

    [1] are a very talented team.
    [2] are in THE major market
    [3] are a team where each additional win is more important

    They aren;t the nationals signing a name to finish 20 games out instead of 24 … they’re the Mets who are a really good team (forget the injury-plagued 09 season), who should compete with PHL for the division title, and whoever else in the wild card.

    In short, they can overpay a little for WARs, without it being the travesty.

    Now, I do have a question …

    Fangraphs basically says EVERY single signing is “over-paid”, and it is by using the 4.5M/WAR figure. But, by definition, shouldn’t the value of a WAR change based on what teams are paying for them? If every signing is “over-paying”, then maybe WAR is not correctly assigned the proper “going rate” for wins?

    Comment by CircleChange11 — December 29, 2009 @ 5:32 pm

  25. Check this out…

    http://books.google.com/books?id=mUzTJ4-8N0EC&pg=RA2-PT709&lpg=RA2-PT709&dq=baseball+old+player+skills+bill+james&source=bl&ots=UEnf3Pn8Nz&sig=9S7PFmBTgDx3vX7pngryqXyzRRk&hl=en&ei=voM6S7S2D4_SM5ivlf0I&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBIQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=&f=false

    Comment by JR — December 29, 2009 @ 5:36 pm

  26. Right, you should apply some adjustment for Bay’s season beyond a simple park adjustment (which actually hurts him). Playing in the AL East can’t be good for you offense.

    Comment by vivaelpujols — December 29, 2009 @ 5:36 pm

  27. FUCK YEAH

    Comment by vivaelpujols — December 29, 2009 @ 5:38 pm

  28. “and it could also severely hamper the development of Fernando Martinez”

    Why?

    Comment by Ryan — December 29, 2009 @ 5:41 pm

  29. To see if our “collective brains can pinpoint things that computer systems don’t.”

    Good discussion of it on this post:

    http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-2010-fan-projections

    Comment by Jimbo — December 29, 2009 @ 5:43 pm

  30. “Fangraphs basically says EVERY single signing is “over-paid””

    Really? I’m not going to look, but there have been plenty of articles saying the opposite. It’s usually the big ones, like Bay, that get more attention, and these are the guys that are usually overpaid.

    Also, they didn’t just make up the 3.5 mil/WAR mark. That’s what it’s been at this year so far. In years past, it’s been closer to 4.5. The Bay signing will raise that 3.5 some, but it’s still a pretty remarkable overpay compared to other contracts signed this season.

    Comment by Steven Ellingson — December 29, 2009 @ 5:47 pm

  31. I think its pretty obvious that the development of Martinez will be HELPED by the signing of Bay. It was evident to everyone watching Martinez play last year that he wasn’t ready for the big leagues. Now, he gets to go to down to AAA and get another developing, and then replace Franceour in 2011.

    If Beltran’s knees do significantly reduce his range, Martinez can play CF with Beltran shifting over to RF.

    Franceour is just a place holder – someone to hold the position until Martinez is ready.

    Comment by hernandezhof — December 29, 2009 @ 5:48 pm

  32. i’d give ells a smooch on the cheek if he could provide a .360 obp consistently.

    Comment by ericinboston — December 29, 2009 @ 5:50 pm

  33. Yeah, that seems like BS. Fernando is raw and young, another year in the minors probably wouldn’t effect his development at all.

    Comment by vivaelpujols — December 29, 2009 @ 5:50 pm

  34. Fire Jerry Manuel,

    I don’t take Dave to be saying Bay is in the midst of decline right now. I take him to be saying that the general type of player that Bay is tend to have earlier and more precipitous declines than the median player. Given the length of the contract, this is quite relevant.

    Even if you believe his defense is actually moderately above average in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, this signing would still be a modest overpay.

    Comment by djw — December 29, 2009 @ 5:59 pm

  35. Is there any evidence that playing on a better team elevates an individuals level of play?

    But did Bay actually “do better” with Boston? He posted wOBAs of .378, .413, .394 and then .326 with the Pirates. In the year he split between Pitt and Boston his wOBA was .387, then .397 in his only full year with Boston. That’s pretty much in line with his career average, 2007 excluded.

    Comment by willl — December 29, 2009 @ 6:04 pm

  36. Interesting read. Thanks.

    Comment by Scottwood — December 29, 2009 @ 6:07 pm

  37. Hey, would this be better at all if they switched Bay to 1b where they could theoretically hide his bad defense (assuming he’s average at first) and then sign maybe someone like Endy Chavez or someone who is a league average bat with +OF defense?

    Comment by Paul — December 29, 2009 @ 6:13 pm

  38. Your best bet is to read about the science of sports training to better understand what an athlete’s body is expected to undergo in their given sport relative to their sport’s particular training methods. Unfortunately baseball is in many ways still in the Dark Ages. Basic physiology in particular the central nervous system is a good primer. Try reading stuff by T. Bompa or by the trainers who publish with Stadion Press.

    Comment by pounded clown — December 29, 2009 @ 6:14 pm

  39. don’t forget that if bay’s defense goes (further?) downhill, boston could have hidden him at DH and kept decent value from him. NY does not have that luxury.

    i wonder if bay’s D + martinez pushing up from the farm puts bay at 1b?

    Comment by tom s. — December 29, 2009 @ 6:15 pm

  40. People take WAR way too literally. Nyjer Morgan was worth 50% more WAR than Bay last year. Reallly? Did all that ground he cover really way more than make up the difference of 29 homers, 14 doubles, 54 walks? Exactly how many more homers and doubles do we think he is taking away? I know there is also a position adjustment, but I always suspect there is a little something screwy with UZR and the WAR’s and dollar values resulting. I’m not the guy to do it math-wise, but I think eventually we’ll find some thing is being missed here. Probably by me. :)

    Comment by wobatus — December 29, 2009 @ 6:18 pm

  41. I will really enjoy it if Bay has a UZR akin to his 2005-2006 in Pittsburgh next couple of years. Unlikely by far, but I’d enjoy it. Same as I enjoyed Brian Giles absolutely stinking up the joint this past year.

    Comment by wobatus — December 29, 2009 @ 6:22 pm

  42. This is something I heard. He was an ok fielder prior to the knee in 2007. Is it possible 2008 and 9 were a bit of a Fenway thing? Speed isn’t everything for SBs, but I asume with 13 SBs he isn’t Bengie Molina out there.

    Comment by wobatus — December 29, 2009 @ 6:25 pm

  43. Someone like Endy Chavez? Can’t give Putz back for him.

    Comment by wobatus — December 29, 2009 @ 6:27 pm

  44. I feel that, one way or another, Chipper Jones is a walking case study. Never had a ton of power, and his primary skill is pitch recognition. He’s aged exceptionally well, up until last year. His power took a sudden dip, and he was still above average.

    Either the bottom is about to fall out, or perhaps old people skills don’t necessarily decline rapidly.

    Comment by Bronnt — December 29, 2009 @ 6:36 pm

  45. Single season WAR is subject to small sample size variations with UZR. Projected WAR doesn’t really suffer from that.

    Comment by vivaelpujols — December 29, 2009 @ 6:48 pm

  46. Same thing applies to Todd Helton, way below average slugging, amazing batting eye.

    Comment by Gary — December 29, 2009 @ 7:09 pm

  47. Those guys (Jones and Helton) always had high batting averages. Thus, they are not examples of “old player skills.”

    Comment by JR — December 29, 2009 @ 7:13 pm

  48. In what world is Todd Helton’s SLG% “way below average”?

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/heltoto01-bat.shtml#batting_advanced

    Last year, he was 12% better than LA, and that’s adjusted for Coors Field.

    Comment by Kevin S. — December 29, 2009 @ 7:15 pm

  49. Chone Figgins, big contract, fangraphs agreed is a good deal.

    I think people generally agree that this free agent class is pretty flawed. Lackey, Wolf, Pineiro, and Bay are all walking land mines. Holliday however, with his superior defense and patience, will probably be a much better deal even with the bigger contract.

    Comment by Gary — December 29, 2009 @ 7:17 pm

  50. that’s not such a bad idea

    Comment by pounded clown — December 29, 2009 @ 7:21 pm

  51. I’m going to bet the house that Bay will have a better WAR than Cameron the next two seasons. People forget that Cameron was suspended for amphetamines 2 seasons ago and at his age and moving to the tougher league, he won’t have that added boost. I have nothing against Cameron, I just think his career will come to a halt real soon. He saw a drop off in his ability to hit the fastball last season, he’s moving to a league with better pitching, and he’s old.

    Comment by West — December 29, 2009 @ 7:44 pm

  52. Interesting – thanks, I’d missed that.

    Comment by Preston — December 29, 2009 @ 8:48 pm

  53. That seems unlikely to me. With the positional adjustment, Cameron starts out 1 win ahead of Bay. Based on their recent defense, he could easily lead Bay by 3 marginal wins before offense is even considered. Cameron is usually good for 10 batting runs, or 1 win, so Bay would have to produce 4 marginal wins with his offense to catch Cameron, and Bay has done that only once (and he came close a second time). Bay is moving away from a RH-pull-hitter’s park, and Cameron is moving TO that park.

    The only effect of Cameron’s suspension on his value was that it reduced his playing time and cost him some WAR points. He may be older but he has been consistent for a long time.

    Sure, Cameron could see his foot and bat speed continue to decline, and Bay could turn his defensive numbers turn around a bit, but I wouldn’t *bet* on Cameron’s falling more in the next 2 years than Bay.

    Comment by MBD — December 29, 2009 @ 9:13 pm

  54. Interesting suggestion……

    Comment by NBH — December 29, 2009 @ 11:09 pm

  55. My point exactly. Figgins seems to be the “only” one where a team is going to “get what it paid for” (strictly in terms of WAR).

    That’s likely due to much of his WAR being defense and positional adjustment.

    If the vast majority of his WAR was offense, he’d have received much more money per year. Defense is an undervalued commodity … and THAT’s assumming we measure it correctly (i.e., in terms of runs saved or fielding runs or whatever).

    There aren’t many Figgins types, so naturally most players aren’t going to get contracts that fit into the “WAR/4=good value” methodology.

    That’s why I stated perhaps we need to look at the 4M/y for a “win” number, because lots of players are getting more per “win”.

    If I understand correctly the 4M/win number comes from the market, so perhaps the market has shifted?

    Beltre may get a “good contract” (in terms of WAR/4M), because much of his value is in defense.

    Comment by CircleChange11 — December 30, 2009 @ 1:25 am

  56. “The argument is: Once the power goes, the patience is useless, and pitchers figure that out.”

    [1] I thought power was one of the last things to go (provided it wasn’t PED-enhanced)
    [2] I would imagine most hitters would like to be challenged “in the zone”. That would seemingly help them, rather than hurt. (Again, provided their bat speed is still “MLB quality”)

    Comment by CircleChange11 — December 30, 2009 @ 1:27 am

  57. Good point.

    I don;t see any reason why Bay couldn’t play 1B if he demonstrates he cannot handle the OF, or if there is better overall replacement/shift for the team.

    ala, Lance Berkman.

    Comment by CircleChange11 — December 30, 2009 @ 1:32 am

  58. Chavez is a free agent. But with his leg injury, I wouldn’t be counting on him playing the field better than Bay at the start of the season.

    Comment by joser — December 30, 2009 @ 1:41 am

  59. Kevin S, I think he means below average for his position.

    Comment by R M — December 30, 2009 @ 2:43 am

  60. Gary, how will Holliday, who is looking for a contract similar to Teixiera’s that would bring him through his age 38 season, be a better signing than any of the other overpays this offseason? He may be good now, but who knows how a player is going to age that late into his career? It’s a complete gamble.

    Comment by R M — December 30, 2009 @ 2:49 am

  61. “This is without even considering the effect that playing in Citi Field could have on his offensive value”

    What effect? Is the park specifically bad for Jason Bay’s power? I guess it’s possible, but doesn’t seem likely.

    Comment by R M — December 30, 2009 @ 2:54 am

  62. But in terms of getting a guy to respect your power enough for you to draw a walk, the positional adjustment is irrelevant.

    Comment by Kevin S. — December 30, 2009 @ 8:14 am

  63. Yeah, IIRC it is particularly bad for a right-handed pull power hitter.

    Comment by Rob in CT — December 30, 2009 @ 8:25 am

  64. Will their be a positional adjustment? Is Ellsbury moving to lf?

    Comment by wobatus — December 30, 2009 @ 8:38 am

  65. I just want to say that I do not agree with the Red Sox’s strategy of signing Cameron, and all of these people’s beliefs that Cameron is a great defender. I really don’t care what the UZR says – for instance, it rates Cameron as a better defender in CF than Beltran. I watched Beltran and Cameron both in Met games – let me tell you this: Beltran is head and shoulders, a far, far better defensive outfielder than Cameron. Like I said, I can see this is plain as day with my own eyes and I don’t need UZR to tell me otherwise. Beltran has much better range, he’s much more athletic, etc, etc. I actually think Cameron is one of the most overrated defensive players in baseball. You may disagree, but please don’t try to persuade me otherwise because I watched Cameron play for 1-2 seasons with the Mets. As for his offense, he strikes out way too much, and he doesn’t hit for average. And I like guys who can hit for some kind of average. Maybe by now you can tell that I really don’t like Cameron at all.

    I would bet that Ellsbury is much better than Cameron defensively also.

    That said, the Mets definitely overpaid for Bay, especially because he doesn’t address their most glaring need: starting pitching. I’d much rather have seen them pay $16M/year to a top flight starting pitcher than to Bay.

    However Bay is a good player and there isn’t a team in the majors that wouldn’t like to have them in their lineup. Again I watched Bay play outfield and he didn’t seem as bad as people make him out to be. I think he’s about average; I wouldn’t say he’s below average, or that far below average. I mean, the UZR for Manny Ramirez the last 3 years is: -28, -3, -15; while for Bay, it’s -11, -18, -11; -46 compared to -39; this is hogwash, again I have seen Bay play the outfield and he is day and night compared to Manny Ramirez.

    Comment by MC — December 30, 2009 @ 8:57 am

  66. UZR for Cameron in NY: 4.7
    UZR, Beltran, 06-08: 15.3 (~5.1 UZR/150)

    BP rates Cameron at +7.5 runs / 150 in CF. Fangraphs has him at +5.7. B-r has him at +7.6 per 1250 innings.

    But you saw him for a year. I’m on board.

    Comment by Joe R — December 30, 2009 @ 9:20 am

  67. Joe R, can’t you read?

    I said, in my original post, “You may disagree, but please don’t try to persuade me otherwise because I watched Cameron play for 1-2 seasons with the Mets.”

    No body even knows how UZR is calculated, and frankly, IMO, you don’t need it. You can tell how good a player is defensively from just watching them, baseball is not rocket science and I don’t really identify with people who think it is. Case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YKxf3OkpJc

    Comment by MC — December 30, 2009 @ 9:43 am

  68. Not a bad idea to shift Bay to 1B, but doesn’t that also block prospect 1B Ike Davis as well?

    What are the scouting reports saying about Davis? Likely future stud or league average regular? If Bay is a better bet to put at 1B then a young Davis, then I guess Davis could be traded to acquire pitching, too.

    Comment by Jim — December 30, 2009 @ 10:05 am

  69. No, you can’t “just watch it”. “Just watching” is why Derek Jeter has so many gold gloves. “Just watching” is why Torii Hunter won a GG in 2009 while 90% of baseball fans don’t know who Franklin Gutierrez is. And by “just watching”, you’re probably only “watching” one guy, per position, in all of MLB closely. That’s asking for bias.

    Obviously one’s eyes can detect a good defensive player, but they can also be very, very wrong. And when you say things like “My opinion is set and I don’t care what yours is, or the evidence behind it”, well, that’s just close-minded and bullish. Every defensive metric under the sun (included the less popular, but still useful ones) cite both Beltran AND Cameron as plus defenders in center field. And frankly, “I saw him play” doesn’t cut it anymore. Could you tell the difference between a .250 and .300 hitter without looking at data, for example? That’s one extra hit per week.

    Besides, even if you think Beltran is a better fielder than Cameron (their CF rate differences are pretty small), you’re not exactly putting Cameron into the Dunn’s of the world. Also, Mike Cameron routinely delivers wRC+’s in the 110’s, despite his meh BA and his strikeouts, and now will play in a park tailor made for his swing.

    So really, outside of some weird bias against him, what’s the issue?

    Comment by Joe R — December 30, 2009 @ 10:18 am

  70. Bay’s home run totals will definitely come down. The height of the fence in the LF power alley is going to hurt him just like it hurt Wright.

    Comment by Edwincnelson — December 30, 2009 @ 10:22 am

  71. Hmm, rotographs says (I think per James) Citi is a 99 home run park for righty hitters; it suppresses lefties more power wise. Fenway is worse for righties home run wise, a 91 I think it was. Fenway inflates doubles.

    I thought Wright was effected because he has power to the power alleys side to side, but I could be wrong. But I don’t think you can take one player’s struggles in one year and say Citi is death to righty power hitters. Wright didn’t hit many homers anywhere in 2009. And I also read the Mets had tracked his home run paths and most of homers would have been homers at Citi.

    Comment by wobatus — December 30, 2009 @ 10:47 am

  72. not a real fan of fangraphs logic of calculating player values via WAR alone. Do these guys realize that teams know that they overpay when they sign high-end FA’s??? Mets have been derided in local media for last 2-3 yrs and need to sign a big FA to create a buzz, their attendance will be drastically down next yr if they don’t compete, as they also lose the new ballpark factor. If Bay helps sell even 50k more tickets next yr that is 5mn in additional revenue. That too is factored in while team makes the decision. Mets had an opening day payroll of 150mill last yr and they had money to spend. Players are worth more to NY teams as additional seats they help sell bring in more revenue.

    Comment by rohit — December 30, 2009 @ 10:55 am

  73. Oh man, I wish you’d just let me say my side of it and left it at that.

    Well, my first issue is you’re putting your faith in a number that you haven’t demonstrated any kind of understanding of. A person who makes a decision solely on the basis of a statistic is no more right, in my mind, than a person who makes a decision solely on the basis of how something looks.

    For example, anyone who decides to hire someone solely based on GPA is not someone I would respect very much. Conversely, anyone who decides to hire someone solely on the basis of whether they “like” that person, or because they think that person is “cool” I would respect very little also. I hope I am making myself clear.

    You, and many people like you, are making a decision based on whether to hire a baseball player based on a statistic that you do not understand; or at least, of which you have not demonstrated a thorough, clear, and nuanced understanding. Even if you tell me how UZR is calculated, with any statistic there is experience required to accurately understand the layers of meaning (and misinformation) inherent in ANY statistic, even a relatively simple statistic such as batting average, let alone a more complex (and perhaps bad) statistic like UZR. There is a very wise, IMO, expression about statistics that I can only paraphrase because it’s in another language: a statistic is like a feeding trough; you pour something in, and where you turn it determines where that thing comes out.

    I think, over the course of the season, you can definitely, absolutely, without a doubt, in most cases, tell the difference between a .300 and .250 hitter. Just like, although I have not been able to watch him for a long period, one can most times tell the difference between a .300 and .350 hitter like Ichiro, or a .200 and .250 hitter.

    The Derek Jeter and Torii Hunter examples are red herrings, or at least have the chance of so being. Who are the people who “watched” these players? ESPN guys who need to get ratings? Adolescent teenage girls who like Derek Jeter? Or professional scouts? Even among professional scouts, who do this for a living, there will probably be a difference of opinion.

    Evaluating players is an art, not a science, and a statistic is just 1 component in that artform, just like a color of paint is just 1 ingredient in making a painting.

    As for my watching Mike Cameron, why is my opinion not valid just because I am NOT a computer? WTF? You believe a computer, but you don’t believe me? Again WTF??!!! YES I watched Mike Cameron. NO I think he’s a crap player. I DON’T LIKE MIKE CAMERON and I am entitled to my f*cking opinion for f*cks sake.

    Comment by MC — December 30, 2009 @ 11:03 am

  74. I misposted this, it’s supposed to be a reply to the 12/30 Joe R post

    Comment by MC — December 30, 2009 @ 11:04 am

  75. RAGIN’ GUYZ

    UZR is a proprietary figure, of course I don’t know the inner workings. I do know it takes into consideration all the defensive elements (range, errors, arm, double play turning, etc) and puts them into a metric. And from these, and other defensive ratings, and from what I’ve seen aesthetically, I can very safely say that Cameron is a plus fielder.

    And of course you’re entitled to your opinion. However, when your opinion is pretty much the opposite of almost everyone else’s, well, be prepared to defend it better than stating you saw him play for a year, taking a dig at a statistic that’s not in accordance with your thought, and all caps.

    Comment by Joe R — December 30, 2009 @ 11:16 am

  76. Actually, there’s been little to no evidence of teams overpaying players to generate fan revenue.

    http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2009/12/wins_above_repl.php

    Comment by Joe R — December 30, 2009 @ 11:18 am

  77. A troll this brilliant shines anywhere.

    Comment by Bill — December 30, 2009 @ 11:30 am

  78. MC sounds like the kind of person who would go to an auction, make a bid on a painting, and then say “no one should try to outbid me because I colored with crayons for years and almost never went outside the lines. Didn’t you hear me? Don’t try to outbid me. How dare you make bids at this public auction!”

    Comment by MBD — December 30, 2009 @ 11:42 am

  79. MC, you do realize that our eyes and mind plays tricks on us and our memory is really not that good, right? That is fine if you want to use your own observations with rating a defensive player. But, imo, you should use your own observations and then balance them with UZR and the other fielding metrics. To completely ignore the fielding metrics would put you on par with Dayton Moore and that is never a good thing.

    Comment by Scottwood — December 30, 2009 @ 11:47 am

  80. I feel certain from watching him that “MC” IS Mike Cameron.

    Comment by MBD — December 30, 2009 @ 12:10 pm

  81. I don’t think the signing of Bay hampers F-Mart’s development. Easy. Jeff Francoeur should NOT be a starting OFer. I don’t think the Mets will let Angel Pagan block F!.

    If not, F-Mart will be traded for the pitching the Mets desperately need.

    Comment by BX — December 30, 2009 @ 12:16 pm

  82. I am trying to comment on the MC thread. First, UZR did suggest Beltran was slightly better as cf than Cameron. So it sort of agreed with your eyes. Cameron had more problems in rf as a Met than cf.

    Cameron also has been better in Milwaukee last 2 years than he was his 2 years in SD or his year as cf with the Mets.

    Baseball_reference has Cameron having an Rtot of -1.8 as Mets cf. He was -6.4 with SD 3 years ago, +7.5 and +5.5 with Milwaukee last 2 years. UZR also has him worse in SD and then better in Milwaukee 9although it gave him a +8.9 in SD in 206).

    I think Cameron is pretty good in CF. Beltran is better (watching them that certainly seems to be the case, even if you can’t trust your eyes, but the advanced metrics seem to back that up, at least until a year or so ago). And yes, watching him play for the Mets, I didn’t see the great fielding he had evidently exhibited in Seattle, and this is borne out by UZR, rTOT, not sure what Dewan says but would be curious.

    Comment by wobatus — December 30, 2009 @ 12:21 pm

  83. ‘Old player skills’ may be a science studied by guys who are pros in the field. As such, I wouldn’t be qualified to critique the concept. In practice, the term is used and abused quite a bit by the neo-analytical crowd. When used to bolster arguments over expected aging traits, all that I’ve seen that has been consistent is simply that better athletes last longer. I wouldn’t think that to be particularly ground-breaking.

    The abuse component enters where said analyst either doesn’t understand nuances of the idea, or hasn’t the ability to apply it accurately. One of the main authors in here has been burned for most of this decade claiming that a player exhibited ‘old-player skills’ and thus should be dumped post haste. So to me either the concept hasn’t been fully researched, or its application shouldn’t be practiced (and used as primary reasoning for decisions) by laymen.

    Comment by CaR — December 30, 2009 @ 12:22 pm

  84. MC is pretty much making the reverse point of anyone who defends Ellsbury’s 2009 UZR, that he watched him play constantly and made a judgment.

    1) Eye check is deceiving sometimes.
    2) Saying you watch player X play every day means you don’t watch player Y, Z, A, B, C, D, etc every day. Ellsbury looked great defensively via spectacular plays and speed, but guys like Nyjer Morgan made those plays effortlessly.
    3) He’s using Beltran as a point of reference and one year of Cameron in CF. Fair? Probably not.

    But I agree, we should always trust scouts, at least on a player’s actual ability, what do they say about his defense?
    http://www2.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/players/Mike_Cameron/

    Oh, oops.
    Even though he walks plenty, discipline isn’t Cameron’s problem, it’s contact.
    I digress, usually claiming enlightenment on a position you and only you hold, isn’t the way to argue said position.

    Comment by Joe R — December 30, 2009 @ 12:26 pm

  85. Even if Bay does outperform Cameron: 4 years, $66 mil vs. 2 years, $15.5 mil.

    Red Sox didn’t sign Cameron to be better than Bay. If Cameron is better than Bay, or even equal, then the Red Sox have registered a huge FA market win.

    Comment by Joe R — December 30, 2009 @ 12:36 pm

  86. Sam Page at amazinavenue.com had an interesting article that addresses the same issue with the 2007 knee injury in Pitt and the Fenway effect, and he does it more thoroughly than I could.

    http://www.amazinavenue.com/2009/12/30/1224941/on-jason-bay#comments

    He also points out that Dewan has him rated as closer to average than UZR does last year. FWIW, Bay’s Rtot last year was +7.9 per baseball_reference (Carl Crawford was 12.2+ I think) . Second most lf put-outs with 310, 15 assists, zero errors (Crawford had 327 putouts, 6 assists, 4 errors), he isn’t a complete slow-poke. I know that is old-fashioned bare bones analysis, but i find it hard to believe he cost the Sox oodles of runs allowed last year. UZR has Crawford and Bay as about 30 runs difference. I’d think it is slightly less than that, although not nearly as close as Rtot suggests. Not sure how many runs saved Dewan has for Crawford (just using Crawford as a great fielding lf example).

    Bay may be sligthly below average (he was SO steady last year that I don’t think he could possibly have been much below average) but he isn’t Dunn-esque. I think his partially UZR-derived WAR in Fenway and dollar values are slightly deflating his “actual” value.

    Comment by wobatus — December 30, 2009 @ 12:37 pm

  87. JowR, I know the eyes can’t be completely trusted. But MC wasn’t completely off-base. UZR suggests cameron was not a great rf with the Mets, and was good in cf, but not the fielding god he was in Seattle before and Milwaukee recently. UZR also said he was sub-par 2 years in a row in SD. It fluctuates, and a year is a small sample. Cameron is not so bad as MC thinks, but UZR suggests he can have some tough stretches. Having also watched him with the Mets, I gotta say he didn’t look like a fielding god, and it is nice to think stats seem to back that up. He was not Franklin Gutierrez or Nyjer Morgan the year he played mostly cf with the Mets, or Beltran. Of course, those are some great fielders.

    Comment by wobatus — December 30, 2009 @ 12:59 pm

  88. Oh I agree, I never went after him for saying Beltran is better, or even that Cameron wasn’t as advertised in NY.

    What I went after was the claim that Cameron is “overrated” and Ellsbury is better, having nothing but anedoctal evidence and an anti-nerd statement to back it up. That’s weak.

    Comment by Joe R — December 30, 2009 @ 1:27 pm

  89. Sure, it’s possible that Ellsbury will stay in CF, and he may do a nice job there. But I don’t see why the Sox would announce that there will be a meeting with Ellsbury and Cameron if they’re just going with the status quo. It seems like a good way to get Ellsbury and the fans used to the idea of Cameron in center in stages.

    As Joe R notes, Cameron doesn’t have to surpass Bay’s WAR to be a great value. Cameron is making less than half as much per season. Does anyone think Bay will contribute more than TWICE as much as Cameron? Their track records predict that Cameron will at least equal Bay, and I don’t believe that Bay has hidden potential at this point.

    Comment by MBD — December 30, 2009 @ 3:21 pm

  90. I guess the real question is why didn’t the Mets fork over the extra $5-6MM and sign Holliday? Seems like the Mets made Bay their ‘A’ plan when it should have been Holliday.

    Comment by recca — December 30, 2009 @ 3:29 pm

  91. I’ve also been looking for any compelling studies on the same issue, and I have yet to see them or have anybody point me to any. It seems like everybody espouses the theory that a player with “old player skills” declines more rapidly than other players, but where’s the evidence for it?

    Comment by Nathaniel Dawson — December 30, 2009 @ 4:46 pm

  92. That study is so poorly done and flawed that you should just throw it out. There’s very little reason to think that it is telling us anything.

    Comment by Nathaniel Dawson — December 30, 2009 @ 4:56 pm

  93. This might be of interest to you, as well as the following discussions over at The Book.

    http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2009/12/wins_above_repl.php
    http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/sky_take_2_on_dollar_values_of_free_agent_wins/

    Comment by Nathaniel Dawson — December 30, 2009 @ 5:07 pm

  94. If Cameron plays left or even right I see him having a negative WAR, I really see him putting up an OPS under .730. He posted a .600 OPS in interleague play last season, AL pitching will murder his aging bat.

    Comment by West — December 30, 2009 @ 8:26 pm

  95. What happens if we look at State income taxes and cost of living in comparing a Boston/New York deal?

    If we can look at backloading and total value, I would imagine this can also be calculated. I don’t know the answer, but I am curious the effect.

    Finally, personal preference comes into play. I am not saying that Bay prefers Boston over NY, I am just saying his living preference may have some value to him as a person. This cannot really be calulated. Maybe he likes NY more than Boston, or maybe he likes Boston more than NY. I am just saying that may have value to Bay.

    To put it in some level of perspective, just ask yourself would you move yourself and your family for a 10% bump?

    Comment by BIll — December 30, 2009 @ 8:31 pm

  96. That’s 60 PAs. You can’t tell anything from that. I’m starting to think I should take your money.

    Comment by MBD — December 30, 2009 @ 10:06 pm

  97. if you have one, please check the article written by hittracker people in 2009 hardball times.
    if Bay hits around 30 HRs in RS uniform, he is supposed to hit around 25 in Mets uniform in 2009.
    I think they used the data of the trajectories in 2008.
    another thing is he is kind of lucky on HR/FB in 2009.

    Comment by 080808 — December 30, 2009 @ 10:50 pm

  98. http://www.back2college.com/gpa.htm

    That link may be able to help you understand how to calculate GPA. I hope to have helped.

    Comment by Sandy Kazmir — December 31, 2009 @ 12:52 pm

  99. All these fancy pants stats you give and I LOVE how his HR and RBI production isn’t mentioned. You know….the reason he was signed. The Mets leader in HR’s last year had what? 12? RBI leader had what? 80? The Mets drastically needed another POWER bat in their lineup and Bay is a power bat. He is a dead pull hitter who hits high flyball moonshot HR’s, so his production shouldn’t be hampered by Citifield much. Enough of the overanalyziation. The Mets needed more power and they got it.

    Comment by Luca — December 31, 2009 @ 5:53 pm

  100. I don’t know who have created this painkiller but it is a rescue for everybody suffering from pain. That’s what i want to say here.

    Comment by reipSKemappab — February 2, 2011 @ 11:23 am

  101. Sounds to me like the entire Mets offense needs to go back to school.

    Comment by Griffo — June 2, 2011 @ 10:52 am

  102. lmmAhd For me this can be a greatest lesbian porn web page via the internet (nevertheless realsquirt is certainly close). All which is a downer in my situation is the females certainly not Communicate with one. As expected, because so many are and also the and don’t speak out English language, that may be easy to undestand, however, with all the women who Will be able to speak out plus talk with The english language, it could be pleasant to listen for these talk to one another rather, particularly on the beginnings on the scenes http://lesbian-porn-star-photo.blogspot.com lesbian porn star photo,

    Comment by jonn2 — June 15, 2011 @ 6:49 am

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


Close this window.

0.312 Powered by WordPress