Corey Hart’s Extension
Corey Hart, seemingly on the trading block until a last-minute wrist injury, has reportedly been resigned by the Brewers for $26.5 million dollars for 2011-2013. Assuming $4.5 million dollars for a marginal win next season, a moderate seven percent inflation on that amount per season, a typical half-win a season decline, and also taking into account that Hart had one year of team-controlled arbitration left (and thus would generally be expected to get about 80% of his open market value), the Brewers are paying Hart as if his true talent will be about 2.5 Wins Above Replacement (WAR) in 2011.
An evaluation of this deal obviously hinges a great deal on what one makes of the 28-year-old Hart’s career year at the plate in 2010 (.387 wOBA, .288/.346/.565) after being around league average at the plate in 2008 and 2009. Hart’s improvement in 2010 primarily rests on his home run explosion. His performance on balls in play hasn’t improved dramatically, and his walk rate is actually down from 2009 while his strikeouts are up. Neither is surprising given that his pre-2009 performance nor that fact that Hart is swinging at more pitches outside the zone than in 2009.
Are the home runs “for real?” Hart is hitting more fly balls than ever before, and more of them are going out of the park that ever before, too: Hart is sporting a 17.8% HR/FB rate after being under 10% in both 2008 and 2009. That in itself seems to indicate that he’s over his head in relation to his true talent, and more concrete evidence given by Greg Rybarczyk of HitTracker fame agrees. Of Hart’s 23 home runs so far this season, 10 are classified by Hit Tracker as “Just Enough.” The league-wide rate is usually a bit over 30 percent, and Hart is at about 43 percent, which Rybarczyk’s research shows generally means that the player is getting lucky and is due for regression. The projection systems agree that Hart will come back to earth, with ZiPS RoS projecting a .359 wOBA (.273/.332/.494) line, which would be about 20 runs above average over 700 PA in the current run environment. CHONE’s August update is roughly the same: .274/.332/.481.
UZR has not been impressed with Hart’s fielding lately, finding him 4.2 runs below average in 2008 and 5.7 below in 2009. Despite his career year at the plate in 2010, Hart’s 2010 is his worst season yet in the field according to UZR at -8.1 runs so far. However, Hart has had generally good speed scores and the Fans Scouting Report was impressed with him in the last couple of seasons, so we shouldn’t downgrade his defense too far — I have him at two or three runs below average over a full season. Combined with his position (-7.5 runs a season for corner outfielder), his overall defensive adjustment is about minus 10 runs a season.
Now to Hart’s likely value. We have him at +20 offense, -10 defense, with +20 NL replacement level. All that times 85% playing time equals about 2.5 Wins Above Replacement, which is about what I estimated the Brewers were paying for — a market value deal. Of course, the contract doesn’t start until 2011, so one could assume the typical decline and say the Brewers are overpaying him. Then again, it’s just half a win, and given the overall uncertainty in projections (particularly when using defensive metrics) that isn’t a big deal.
As has been said many times before, in isolation a market value deal isn’t good or bad, it’s average. When the Brewers’ organizational context is taken into account, however, this decision is a bit perplexing. A 2-2.5 WAR player like Hart may be around league average, which is useful, but he’s hardly a building block. It might indicate that the Brewers must think they are close to contending in the next couple of seasons, although given that they are more than 10 games out of first in the NL Central without much additional help coming soon that seems to be questionable. Moreover, any try for contention will require keeping both Prince Fielder and Rickie Weeks around. Fielder is due a massive arbitration award this winter (think $15 million at least), and Weeks will also be eligible for his last arbitration season (and hopefully for the Brewers they still have enough money left to give Weeks a reasonable extension if he is willing). The Brewers likely still can keep both for next season, but that will hinder other additions. Corey Hart, on the other hand, was a potential non-tender this past winter, was a trade candidate until the last minute last week, and is probably around a league average player. The Brewers will have to make some hard choices this winter when deciding how to spend their money either to rebuild (which would require them to trade Fielder sooner rather than later) or take a shot at contention in 2011. It is difficult to see how Hart’s extension, while reasonable in the abstract, fits in to either of those paths.
NB: Surely someone has made a joke about “Corey Hart” sounding like the name of a fictional 1980s teen icon, right? Yet I’ve never read a joke about it before. Did I miss it? In any case, I couldn’t figure out how to work it in here in a clever fashion. Feel free to make suggestions in the comments or Tweet them to me.
19
I blew it. I smacked her upside the head with a coffee pot. I blew it.
Fictional 80′s teen icon? Wasn’t Corey Hart an actual 80′s One-(or Two-) Hit Wonder (depending on how generous you want to be with “Sunglasses at Night” and “Never Surrender”)?
The first thing I wondered when I saw the blurb about Hart’s extension go through on RotoWorld was if Milwaukee isn’t trying to set up a waiver-wire trade.
No. I just chase mediocrity now. I was foolish thinking Yovani would replace CC and Parra would replace Sheets from our playoff run. Yovani has replaced Sheets, sure, but using patchwork to make a rotation isn’t a recipe for success. I scour for garbage pitchers like Suppan, Looper, Wolf and Davis, wasting valuable resources. I overvalued how good we were in our playoff run–we outperformed our Pythagorean win percentage by four wins–I undervalued CC’s impact–Whoops!–I undervalued Maddox as a pitching coach–Double Whoops!–…I just suck.
I should’ve punted 2009 after CC left. I should’ve made the Hart for Franklin Gutierrez trade Cleveland wanted. I should’ve moved Fielder for young pitching. I should’ve traded Cameron, or even not resigned him. But no. I sign Braden Looper. I take a team with an 86-win talent level, lop off a 7.5 WAR pitcher and a 4.4 WAR pitcher, and think Gallardo, Parra and Looper can make up that difference.
Wolfie wasn’t garbage when signed. Melvin had every reason to expect Wolf to be respectable.
His HR power is real, thanks to his secret weapon. I’ve got this pseudo-science to prove it.
http://www.jsonline.com/business/97244294.html
FG is here to give analysis. I get that. Yet, it seems FG is uncomfortable unless said analysis is hyperbolic in nature. The Brewers deal with C Hart does not lock them into any commitment any more than they were committed to him last week.
Since most agree the deal is spot on value, Hart retains his trade value and I would presume Hart would not be difficult to move if the Brewers wanted to. Nothing in this deal really changes anything for 2010-2011.
The NL Central is weak and it will remain weak for the foreseeable future. Esp after Pujols gets paid like Ruth for his decline years. The Brewers have chips (Prince, prospects) to deal for young MLB talent in 2011 if they choose. Done right, the Brewers can improve the pitching a enough to become the 2011 version of the 2010 Reds.
It’s so easy to say, “Done right, the Brewers can improve the pitching a [sic] enough to become the 2011 version of the 2010 Reds.” Yet there are now bigger financial hurdles to clear, a dearth of hitting prospects and an intelligent trade market that won’t overvalue Prince Fielder or Corey Hart.
So, no, the Brewers cannot improve the pitching a enough.
If Hart is “spot on value,” that means he’s getting paid “exactly” what he’s worth. Ergo, unless the Brewers eat some money, he has now surplus trade value.
I’m sorry you think this is hyperbolic — I have a lot of respect for Doug Melvin, and I thought I steered away from any outright “ripping” on him and the Brewer’s front office. I don’t think the deal makes sense for where the Brewers are now, and I said so.
The joke was run into the ground several years ago, which is probably why you haven’t read it recently.
Poppycock
How dare you
I like the thought process in this analysis. I have to disagree with the execution though.
1) If you are going to assume 700 PA for the offensive metrics, you can’t assume playing 85% of the time for the defensive ones.
2) If you are to assume a ridiculous 7% inflation for the 2011-2013 period, be consistent and use the same number for the 2010-2011 period. But using 4.5 as a starting point runs contrary to the process, simply use a constant inflation rate for the whole period so the numbers appear less arbitrary.
3) Why are you assuming inflation? The reality today is that the consumer is in worse shape than during the past couple of decades, and things are deteriorating, assuming outright deflation or at least stagnation in the cost of a marginal win.
4) With this year’s influx of young talent (Stanton, Heyworth, Santana, Posey, Bumgarner, Jackson, Strasburg, Matusz, Feliz, Davis, Garcia, Alvarez, Sanchez, Escobar, etc.) to the core of so many teams, having success. And with the renewed interest in player development by teams, prices (salaries) should stay on a leash as teams are obviously performing some sort of cost/benefit analysis.
Thanks for the comments. Short replies:
1) 700 PA/162 games is the “full-season starting point” for all the projections/adjustments used. I add them all together then get 85% of that. “All times 85% playing time” meant (20 – 10 + 20) * 0.85.
2) Agreed that I should have used 7% for 2010-2011 to be consistent — a silly oversight on my part that doesn’t effect the overall numbers enough to change the analysis, given the level of imprecision we’re working with.
3) I’m simply following other analysts in assuming, you’ll have to ask them. While there has been a slowdown the last two seasons in free agent spending, most of the people I’ve read who’ve noted that seem to thinit it will still go up. Prior to the 2008-2009 off-season, most seasons saw about a 10% inflation. That’s slowed down, which is why 7% is a bit of a compromise, I believe (I’m get the 7% from a comment of Tom Tango’s from this past offseason).
4) Maybe. There does seem to be more restraint in recent seasons, although the economic recovery (perceived or real) may also increase spending. I can’t give a full analysis myself, but I will say that there have been big influxes of young talent prior to the 08-09 season in which teams kept spending.
Thanks for the reply, given your answer to my first point I take back most of what I said, but I still believe that the initial value given to marginal wins determine how much does a team over or under paying for a player’s services. If the last data point is the price for 2010, and that price was 4 million, jumping all the way to 4.5 for next year for whatever reason doesn’t seem right. I understand that’s the consensus, but very often, consensus is wrong, especially with issues regarding valuations.
A 4, 4.28, or 4.5 starting point aside, the methodology is very useful.
Corey Hart will produce and continue to produce like he has for this season. There is nothing out of line in his stats suggesting he can’t continue to produce at or near the same rate for the rest of the season.
HR/FB of barely making it vs. not making is comparing the difference between HR vs Doubles. If his HR production goes down, his doubles production will increase. Discounting his 2009 season as the outlier, he is on pace to match his 2008 season in terms of extra base hits. I guess its hard explaining this kind of stuff to FanGraphs, same thing with Boesch and Colvin.
Yes! Swallow my bullshit!
I’m a Brewers fan, I watch Corey Hart swing, and he’s not good. He just isn’t. Not worth it for us. It just isn’t. Yuck.
It was reported than in last nights Cubs-Brewers game, the aforementioned Hart donned sunglasses and never looked back.
“UZR thinks he’s wearing his sunglasses at night…” to start your fourth paragraph?