Best Value Players At Each Position: 1992-2011, Part I
Last week, I wrote about what it would take for the Nationals to sign Ryan Zimmerman to a long-term contract, perhaps making him a National for life. Along the way, I looked at other long-term deals to see which, if any, made sense as a model for a new Nationals-Zimmerman agreement. One such contract was Evan Longoria‘s 6-year/$17.5 million deal with the Tampa Bay Rays. I quickly decided that Longoria’s contract — which covers all six of his pre-free agency years, with club options for the first three years of free agency — didn’t make sense as a model for Zimmerman, who’s in the midst of a 5-year/$45 million contract and will become a free agent in 2013.
But, oh, that Evan Longoria contract.
Seventeen-and-a-half million dollars for six years of the 2008 American League Rookie of the Year, perennial MVP candidate, three-time All-Star and two-time Gold Glove winner. I kept thinking and thinking and thinking about that Evan Longoria contract. Oh, that Evan Longoria contract. And I wondered, is that the best value contract in the last twenty years?
First, a definition. By “best value contract,” I mean a contract in which the player delivered (or is still delivering) the most value for the money. Not necessarily the longest-least expensive deal — there are plenty of those where the player simply didn’t produce any value at all — but the most team-friendly deal. Could be a deal for many, many millions of dollars where the player simply outperformed everyone around him at the time.
Second, a word about measuring value. The Wizards of FanGraphs (not to be confused with The Wizard of Oz or The Wizards of Waverly Place) have done some nifty dollars-per-WAR calculations dating back to the 2002 season. That is, the value in dollar terms for each WAR compiled by a particular player in a particular season. The numbers look something like this:
You’ll notice, however, that I’m looking at contracts over the last twenty years and the Wizards of FanGraphs haven’t performed their nifty calculations for the 1992-2001 seasons. So, when comparing contracts from the 1990′s to the ones in the 2000′s, we’re going to have to make some judgment calls. Well, I will make the judgment calls, and you will tell me why I’m right or wrong in the comments.
Third, instead of focusing just on the Best Value Contract or the Top 5 Best Value Contracts, I’ve selected the best value contract for each position over the last 20 years. Well, every fielding position. Because I’m a National League gal and don’t know much about the designated hitter. Okay, that’s not true. I do know something about the designated hitter, but it’s my post and I’m leaving it out. Take it up in the comments.
This is Part I of a two-part series. Part I will discuss the best value contract for pitcher, catcher, first baseman, and second baseman.
Part II, to be published next week, will discuss the best value contract for third baseman, shortstop and the three outfield positions.
Pitcher
Greg Maddux-Atlanta Braves: 5 years/$28 million (1993-1997)
This was Maddux’s first free-agent contract, when he signed with the Braves after six seasons with the Chicago Cubs. When the contract was inked, the $6.5 million AAV was the highest for any major league contract ever. Maddux had done some very good pitching for the Cubs, particularly in his final four seasons there, and had won the National League Cy Young Award in 1992. But that was nothing compared to his first five years with the Braves.
Over the course of that 5-year deal, Maddux posted a 3.38 BB%, a .948 WHIP, and a 2.08 ERA. He won three consecutive National League Cy Young Awards (1993-1995), five consecutive Gold Glove Awards and accumulated 39.1 WAR. Maddux’s five-year WAR total is not the highest in a five-year period between 1992-2011; Randy Johnson posted a 41.6 WAR and Pedro Martinez posted a 44.2 WAR, both in the 1999-2003 seasons.
But Johnson’s contract with the Arizona Diamondbacks over that time was for five years and $65.4 million. Martinez’s deal with the Red Sox was for six years and $75 million. Even accounting for inflation, Maddux’s 5-year/$28 million deal from 1993-1997 is a better value than either Johnson’s and Martinez’s contracts, despite their higher WAR totals.
Catcher
Mike Piazza-Los Angeles Dodgers: 3 years/$4.2 million + 2 years/$15 million (1994-1998)
This was a tough one, in part because it wasn’t that easy to track down salary information for Piazza during his Dodgers years and in part because it involves comparing players at either end of the 20-year period at issue.
1993-1998 cover the last five years of Piazza’s arbitration eligibility. After his spectacular rookie season, the Dodgers signed Piazza to what was then a record-breaking deal for a second-year player: 3 years/$4.2 million. When that contract expired, Piazza got a significant raise: a 2-year deal for $15 million. In total, 5 years for $19.2 million. And what did Piazza give the Dodgers in return (well, at least until the Dodgers traded Piazza just before he became a free agent)? A slash of .338/.402/.584, a 160.6 wRC+, and 164 home runs for a 32.8 in total WAR.
Joe Mauer‘s numbers for his second-through-sixth years in the majors look similar: .328/.409/.478, wRC+ 135, and 75 home runs for a 32.7 in total WAR. Piazza clearly had more power, as seen in the slugging and home run numbers. On the other hand, Mauer is considered the much better defender. Hence, the near exact WAR totals.
Mauer made the league minimum in his second year ($400,000) but then signed a 4-year/$33 million contract with the Twins to cover the final four years of his arbitration-eligibility. Using the FanGraphs $/WAR figures, Mauer was worth $122.4 million but paid only $33.4 million for a ration of 3.66-to-1.
But if you account for inflation, Piazza’s 1994 and 1997 deals, combined, would be worth $26.4 million in 2010 dollars. That’s $7 million less than Mauer made for essentially the same production. For that reason, I chose Piazza’s combined contracts covering 1994-1998 as the best deal for a catcher in the last 20 years.
First Base
If catcher was tough, first base is just the opposite. That’s because we’ve had the pleasure of watching one of the best first baseman of all time since 2001. Albert Pujols, of course. And while there is some question whether Pujols will be worth $240 million to the Los Angeles Angels over the next ten years, there is no question that he was worth much, much more than the 7-year/$100 million contract he signed with the St. Louis Cardinals before the 2004 season. That contract covered the last three years of Pujols’ arbitration eligibility and the first four years of free agency.
Over that seven year period, Pujols posted a godly slash of .330/.432/.630, a .437 wOBA, and a 171 wRC+. He also hit 294 home runs and compiled a total of 59 WAR. No other player — first baseman or otherwise — came close to Pujols’ production in those seven years or in any seven-year period between 1992-2011. FanGraphs’ $/WAR figures estimates that Pujols provided more than $230 million in value to the Cardinals over the life of the contract.
It’s worth noting, however, that Jeff Bagwell comes in a strong second for best value contract for a first baseman. The Houston Astros signed Bagwell to a 5-year/$27.5 million dollar deal before the 1995 season and extended him for an additional two years for $13 million, covering 2000-2001. That’s a total of $40.5 million for the seven years from 1995-2001. And while Bagwell didn’t post Pujols-like numbers, he wasn’t that far off: .300/.426/.573, a .424 wOBA, and a 158 wRC+. He hit 257 home runs and accumulated a total of 47.7 WAR. Close, but not quite as valuable as Pujols for the money.
Second Base
Chase Utley-Philadelphia Phillies: 7 years/$85 million (2007-2013)
This was a tough one for me, because I really want to go with Jeff Kent and his 4-year/$23.7 million deal with the Giants (1999-2002). Kent’s contract reminds me of the time when the Giants actually entered into team-friendly free-agent contracts. Those were the days.
Over that four-year period, Kent posted a slash of .309/.383/.546, a .394 wOBA, and a 139 wRC+. He hit 115 home runs and accumulated 24.1 WAR. He was the most productive second baseman in those years, outperforming Hall-of-Famer Roberto Alomar, who was paid nearly $10 million more over the same time period.
But Utley is special. From 2007-2011 — the first five years of his contract with the Phillies — Utley was the second-most valuable player in baseball, behind only Pujols. He posted a slash of .290/.386/.503, a .389 wOBA, and a 137 wRC+. He hit 113 home runs, stole 73 bases, and played excellent defense (as rated by UZR and DRS), all for a combined five-year total of 33.8 WAR. Using FanGraphs’ $/WAR calculation, Utley’s provided $146.2 million of value for the Phillies in the first five years of his contract. That’s nearly double the contract value, with two more years remaining. And remember that Utley missed nearly half the 2011 season with a knee injury, cutting into his WAR total for the season.
Even if Utley is only a 5 WAR player over the next two seasons — a conservative estimate — he’d end the contract having produced a total of 43.8 WAR, valued close to $190 million, more than double the $85 million he received.
* * * * * * * * * *
That concludes Part I. Next week I’ll tackle Part II, covering the best value contracts for shortstop, third base, and the three outfield positions.
1
Chase Utley is special.
Did anyone else see him say “Boo? F*** you!” to the Mets fans when the All Star game was in New York? That is my favorite Chase Utley memory. It was during introduction of the starting lineups and the camera was right in his face. Classic.
I saw it. It’s nothing new for Utley. He mouths cuss words quite a bit. Actually he says them and we just read his lips.
Alex Rios?
… we aren’t talking about worst value
“Dear Chase-
I feel like I can call you Chase because you and me are so much alike. I would love to meet you some day. It would be great to have a catch. I know I can’t throw as fast as you but I think you would be impressed with my speed. I love your hair. You run fast. Did you have a good relationship with your father? Me neither. These are all things we can talk about and more. I know you have not been getting my letters because I know you would write back if you did and I hope you write back this time and we get to be good friends. I’m sure our relationship would be a real home run.”
I love always sunny
+1000 if you did this from memory, or from your own letter to Chase (we all wrote one at some point, at least our girlfriend’s did)
sadly not from memory…but i did use it as an excuse to introduce my coworkers to the world series defense.
Your biggest fan,
Stan
Wait, Why did pujols win and not bagwell? Is there a really steep inflation from the 90′s to the 00′s? I’m guessing thats it (or the numbers just aren’t available, but, for 10 fewer WAR he cost 60 million less. Granted it was several years later, and less of it was guaranteed.
His five year contract generated 35 war and cost 27 million! I don’t care what kind of inflation their was, that’s a better deal.
It’s a close call. One additional reason to choose the Pujols contract is that it’s for 7 years v. 5 for Bagwell. Pujols sustained his crazy production for the full 7 years, when he would have commanded way way more on the open market. Often the 5 year deal will be more prudent for the team, but locking up Pujols for 7 yrs at $100 million was fantastic for the Cardinals.
“No other player — first baseman or otherwise — came close to Pujols’ production in those seven years or in any seven-year period between 1992-2011.”
Ummm…no.
Barry Bonds from 1997-2004:
.319/.496/.709
369 home runs
And his wOBA was about .485, and his wRC+ was about 200.
Other then that, fun article. I can’t wait to read part two.
Oops, I meant 1998-2004, and the homers should have been 329. Also, he had a war of 68, which is almost ten wins more then Pujols.
And I say again, I really wish we could edit posts.
Was just about to post BB’s outrageous WAR production from 98-2004 as well. If you count his WAR from 92-98 his it comes out at 61.2. Also higher than Pujols 7 years and it includes the strike shortened 94 season.
Yeah, that’s a fairly big mistake on my part, considering I’m a Giants fan and all. I’m going to leave the article as is, with the comments, instead of editing after the fact. Thanks for pointing it out.
“considering I’m a Giants fan”, I knew there was something about your writing I really liked.
And he’s a convicted felon because he of those years.
I thought she was referring to only 1B players with that bit, but I guess not.
Yeah, can we please leave the certain cheaters out of these discussions, please? No Bonds, no Clemens…they put up crazy production, but it was also partially fake…hence their unreal numbers.
the generally accepted pre roids era Bonds was probably better than Pujols too in all honesty. I live in Missouri and I’m 22, so most of my recent and prime baseball watching has been mostly Holes. Still, Bonds was incredible, steroids or not.
The pre-roids Bonds could steal a lot more bases and was a little better defensively, but Pujols is a much better contact hitter and is a little better at avoiding strikeouts.
How about that Dale Thayer deal? He is probably only worth around .1 WAR, but his salaray for the past two years has been 6 broken game-used bats and 3 free haircuts by James Shields.
I feel pretty safe in wagering that Chase Utley has no chance at producing 10 WAR over the next 2 years. Just sayin’. Looking forward to part deux.
I was going to say the same thing except that I checked and saw that Utley put up 4 WAR in only 103 games last year, coming back from major surgery. His defense hasn’t suffered and he is still an above average hitter.
5 WAR isn’t a conservative number but it seems very possible.
He means 5 WAR over the two years combined.
Or maybe not…either way, it’s not unreasonable
“Over that seven year period, Pujols posted a godly slash of .330/.432/.630, a .437 wOBA, and a 171 wRC+. He also hit 294 home runs and compiled a total of 59 WAR. No other player — first baseman or otherwise — came close to Pujols’ production in those seven years or in any seven-year period between 1992-2011.”
Barry Bonds from 1992-1998 and 1998-2004 says hello.
lul, beaten to it
Don’t all of these kind of make the Maddux deal the best as it was a pure FA deal against deals buying out arbitration? Arb deals typically include the discounts into them as the player isn’t going to be making market value, but a purely FA deal even being close to these seem to hold a clear advantage.
I cannot remember, but I assume that the Braves were not paying their players during the ’94 to ’95 strike, which means Maddux was an even better deal if you’re going by WAR.
Yep, Maddus posted 7.4 WAR in 25 appearances before the strike ended the 94 season. It was early August too, so another couple of WAR for him wouldn’t have been impossible. Makes that deal even better.
28 ÷ 5 = 5.6
Yes, this had me confused as well.
But great article!
Most of the contracts you chose are from earlier in the years you studied. It seems like you are using a straight inflation comparison to compare dollars across eras. That doesn’t really work in baseball since baseball salaries rise much faster than inflation during the time period you are looking at.
For example, and I’m not saying Maddux isn’t a good choice, but you mention that Maddux was the highest salary for a pitcher at the time. If you convert those dollars to today, it looks like a bargain, but it was the most expensive at the time of the deal. A straight inflation comparison doesn’t work.
This is a bit simplistic, but wouldn’t it make more sense to look at salary rankings by position (or percentage of the average at the position) compared to WAR rankings with an objective or subjective adjustment for the years on the contract?
I agree. I love Maddux, and his deal likely produced surplus value to Ted, however, he was the highest paid. So shouldn’t the comp salary-wise be today’s highest paid pitcher? Seems off.
Pedroia isn’t in the second base conversation? After his MVP year, he signed a six year, $40.5 mil contract. He’s already earned his entire contract and he’s only halfway through it. He’s put up a 16.2 WAR in 3 seasons, and 2010 he only played in 75 games. Pedroia’s AAV is a little over half of Utley’s with similar production.
Wendy,
Maddux’s AAV would have been $5.6M ($28M / 5 years = $5.6M), not $6.5M (if the AAV was $6.5M on a 5 year contract his deal would have been worth $32.5M) like you have in your post.
Great concept. Look forward to the next post!
the OF, by position (LF, CF, RF), or merely OFx3?
Why did you leave out Pujols’s option year (for a total of $116M over 8 years)? No, it wasn’t guarenteed when the deal was signed, but it still wound up as part of the contract just as much as the contract extensions you mentioned.
Wendy, this is an excellent article and I really appreciate your work because just my own little project here has taken an extensive amount of looking for contract details from the earlier half of this time period. Craig Biggio’s first FA contract was a 4yr deal for 22M spanning from 96-99. Now it appears that the deal was renegotiated and extended several times diluting the value for the Astros, but in the first 4 years the Astros paid for 13 Wins and received 26. Not as good as Utley’s but comprable to Kent’s.
Roberto Alomar is one of the most underrated players in the history of Sabremetrics, because UZR is so obviously flawed.
UZR is one of the least reliable components of the basic sabremetric tool kit, and yet it frequently gets treated as if it is a reliable metric. Fangraphs authors often rely heavily on UZR, even though they give an obligatory disclaimer about UZR being noisy, or taking a long time to stabilize, etc.
But UZR is not simply noisy, it is inaccurate. The R-squared that UZR has with preventing runs is not as robust as many of our other reliable metrics relating to runs or run prevention. Furthermore, UZR is far more predictive on the aggregate than it is for individuals. Therefore, most of UZR is geared towards general observations about team defense, not really geared towards measuring individual defensive greatness. Unlike batting and pitching, success in fielding is achieved by a unit of 9 players, instead of a single 1-on-1 interaction. For this reason, obviously, fielding metrics are geared towards aggregate success, rather than individual excellence.
Alomar’s dominance at 2B was game changing. His fielding percentage was record breaking, the best of all time. Scouts universally agreed that Alomar’s range at 2B was the best in the game, if not the best in history. Alomar got to balls down the first base line that went to the LEFT of John Olerud. Alomar basically invented the one-handed flip from the left of the bag to the SS covering second base. Alomar pretty much invented the glove-scoop-to-first play (made on slow rollers between first and second). My point is not that Alomar was fun to watch or innovative: instead, my point is that Alomar changed the game. UZR is basically the least accurate sabremetric, and like all metrics (especially those that are far more predictive on the aggregate), UZR does its worst when trying to analyze unique, game-changing players.
For example, many opposing teams purposefully hit away from Alomar during his prime. Almost certainly, this strategy happened so rarely that it would hardly impact the data set (although this strategy was likely used in high leverage situations). Still, when you consider that UZR absolutely brutalizes Alomar for his supposed lack of range, a detail like this is worth consideration. Are there other tactical reasons that Alomar appears to have a worse UZR range than Jeff-freaking-Kent? Any fielding metric that rates 1B Jeff Kent as a better second baseman than Alomar- during their primes- is clearly a laughably flawed metric. But UZR consistently rates Kent and other woefully bad fielders as better than Alomar. This consistency tells us that the metric is systemically inaccurate.
Also, UZR inaccuracy has lead to the deification of Chase Utley, who is merely a good but not great defender. Please let me clarify: I am NOT saying that the numbers lie, or that the eye ball test is superior to advanced statistics. Quite the contrary, I am saying that UZR is not up to par for a reliable, informative, consistent, and probing metric relevant to an individual players’s success. Fielding stats in baseball (being unit oriented) are much like DVOA and other advanced metrics in football: because of the lack of one-on-one discrete interactions, the unit based metrics tend to be overly obtuse and normative: unable to accurately rate unique players whose performance accomplishes success in a manner that differs from the league norms. Alomar was that player. The statistics know and show that Alomar was that player: it’s just UZR that is missing the boat.
Ok so UZR doesnt explain individual fielding efforts well. What does it better? If nothing does it better then I guess we will just use UZR