Comments on: Revisiting Eric Chavez’ Extension http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/ Daily baseball statistical analysis and commentary Sun, 12 Feb 2012 22:26:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Mat Gonzales http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/#comment-151547 Mat Gonzales Mon, 05 Apr 2010 07:22:20 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=5006#comment-151547 Gringo, do you and Joe Morgan hang out? Gringo, do you and Joe Morgan hang out?

]]> By: NBarnes http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/#comment-151357 NBarnes Sun, 04 Apr 2010 18:16:00 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=5006#comment-151357 How do you propose that you evaluate them? How do you propose that you evaluate them?

]]> By: NBarnes http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/#comment-151356 NBarnes Sun, 04 Apr 2010 18:06:08 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=5006#comment-151356 Do you have a link to where you wrote at the time that Beane was making a huge mistake? I'm always curious to see prescience in action. Do you have a link to where you wrote at the time that Beane was making a huge mistake? I’m always curious to see prescience in action.

]]> By: DL80 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/#comment-151326 DL80 Sun, 04 Apr 2010 15:12:39 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=5006#comment-151326 Just to throw some fuel on an already kindled fire, what are the odds that Chavez's career suffered because he didn't use steroids/HGH/etc.? I don't know anything about any possible rumors, but as a non-A's fan and a non-Chavez owner in my dynasty league, I can't recall him ever being thrown out there as a possible user. Basically, Tejada and Giambi's careers may have turned out better in hindsight because of the fact they DID use. Is Chavez an example of a guy who (probably) didn't use, but should have (in the context of the era, ignoring all the health ramifications)? Just to throw some fuel on an already kindled fire, what are the odds that Chavez’s career suffered because he didn’t use steroids/HGH/etc.? I don’t know anything about any possible rumors, but as a non-A’s fan and a non-Chavez owner in my dynasty league, I can’t recall him ever being thrown out there as a possible user. Basically, Tejada and Giambi’s careers may have turned out better in hindsight because of the fact they DID use. Is Chavez an example of a guy who (probably) didn’t use, but should have (in the context of the era, ignoring all the health ramifications)?

]]> By: Curtis http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/#comment-76945 Curtis Sat, 23 May 2009 03:53:06 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=5006#comment-76945 Yeah, I scribbled some stuff down the other day. Only the Yankees (~$1.15 billion payroll) and Braves (~$715 million) had more victories from 1999 to 2006 than the Athletics (~$355 million). Yeah, I scribbled some stuff down the other day. Only the Yankees (~$1.15 billion payroll) and Braves (~$715 million) had more victories from 1999 to 2006 than the Athletics (~$355 million).

]]> By: Andrew http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/#comment-76910 Andrew Fri, 22 May 2009 23:29:55 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=5006#comment-76910 All you Billy Beane haters out there, i got a stat for you, Oaklands average rank in terms of payroll in his first 11 years as gm(98-08) : 23.9. Oaklands average rank in terms of wins: 9.7 The last two years have been down ones in oakland and if you want to talk about his first 9 years those numbers become 24.2 and 7.7 respectively. Thats a playoff team with the 24th payroll in baseball. This guy has NEVER had a payroll in the top HALF of teams. yet they've had winning seasons in 8 of his eleven years and made the playoffs 5 times. Here's the list of teams who made the playoffs 5 times between 98-08 and their total salaries, NYY-1.621B, BOS-1.105B, ATL-965M, ANA-858M, STL-853M, HOU-764M, OAK-505M. Find me a GM with a record anywhere close to this. All you Billy Beane haters out there, i got a stat for you, Oaklands average rank in terms of payroll in his first 11 years as gm(98-08) : 23.9. Oaklands average rank in terms of wins: 9.7 The last two years have been down ones in oakland and if you want to talk about his first 9 years those numbers become 24.2 and 7.7 respectively. Thats a playoff team with the 24th payroll in baseball. This guy has NEVER had a payroll in the top HALF of teams. yet they’ve had winning seasons in 8 of his eleven years and made the playoffs 5 times. Here’s the list of teams who made the playoffs 5 times between 98-08 and their total salaries, NYY-1.621B, BOS-1.105B, ATL-965M, ANA-858M, STL-853M, HOU-764M, OAK-505M. Find me a GM with a record anywhere close to this.

]]> By: Wally http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/#comment-76712 Wally Thu, 21 May 2009 22:22:46 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=5006#comment-76712 That is just used as an example of how valuable Chavez was, and what an early decline would have looked like. Instead, thanks to injuries, it was: 4.3 3.6 1.2 .1 -.4 That isn't the typical age 27-31 career path for a player that had put up 3 4-6 WAR seasons before that, and probably two others in 2000 and 2001, with Chavez's skill set. The whole point was don't look at the end results to evaluate the signing, look at what was LIKELY to happen at the moment of the signing. And even 5 years later, after all the knowledge we've gain about the sport, the 2004 version of Eric Chavez looked like a great bet to continue being the player he had been for ~6 years. Think about it. Would you pay 66 million dollars (in 2005 dollars, or about 75M today) over 6 years to a 26 year old player that is coming off of maybe 5 4-6 WAR seasons? A current example of a player like that would be Jose Reyes, or very nearly Sizemore. Players like that are rare. And at 12.5M/season you get a great discount if the player can average 5 WAR, which is worth about 22 million according to this site. Heck they could average roughly career worsts, 4 WAR (16M/season), and still come out ahead. The Chavez signing was a very good deal. It just turned out badly thanks to injuries, which is just bad luck, nothing more. That is just used as an example of how valuable Chavez was, and what an early decline would have looked like. Instead, thanks to injuries, it was:

4.3
3.6
1.2
.1
-.4

That isn’t the typical age 27-31 career path for a player that had put up 3 4-6 WAR seasons before that, and probably two others in 2000 and 2001, with Chavez’s skill set.

The whole point was don’t look at the end results to evaluate the signing, look at what was LIKELY to happen at the moment of the signing. And even 5 years later, after all the knowledge we’ve gain about the sport, the 2004 version of Eric Chavez looked like a great bet to continue being the player he had been for ~6 years.

Think about it. Would you pay 66 million dollars (in 2005 dollars, or about 75M today) over 6 years to a 26 year old player that is coming off of maybe 5 4-6 WAR seasons? A current example of a player like that would be Jose Reyes, or very nearly Sizemore. Players like that are rare. And at 12.5M/season you get a great discount if the player can average 5 WAR, which is worth about 22 million according to this site. Heck they could average roughly career worsts, 4 WAR (16M/season), and still come out ahead.

The Chavez signing was a very good deal. It just turned out badly thanks to injuries, which is just bad luck, nothing more.

]]> By: Curtis http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/#comment-76711 Curtis Thu, 21 May 2009 22:11:23 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=5006#comment-76711 You're right. The signs that Chavez would break down before his 30th birthday were everywhere. Epic fail for Beane. You’re right. The signs that Chavez would break down before his 30th birthday were everywhere. Epic fail for Beane.

]]> By: elgringo79 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/#comment-76694 elgringo79 Thu, 21 May 2009 20:50:44 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=5006#comment-76694 Wally, here are your made up WARs. I quote: "If Chavez had lost only a half of a win every season since 2006 we would be talking about a career path lke this (extension years only): 2005 4.3 WAR ($3.4 m/win) 2006 3.6 WAR ($3.7 m/win) 2007 3.1 WAR ($4.1 m/win) 2008 2.6 WAR ($4.5 m/win) 2009 2.1 WAR (~$4.7 m/win)" You don't get to evaluate signings that way. You just don't. Wally, here are your made up WARs. I quote:

“If Chavez had lost only a half of a win every season since 2006 we would be talking about a career path lke this (extension years only):

2005 4.3 WAR ($3.4 m/win)
2006 3.6 WAR ($3.7 m/win)
2007 3.1 WAR ($4.1 m/win)
2008 2.6 WAR ($4.5 m/win)
2009 2.1 WAR (~$4.7 m/win)”

You don’t get to evaluate signings that way. You just don’t.

]]> By: R.J. Anderson http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/revisiting-eric-chavez-extension/#comment-76693 R.J. Anderson Thu, 21 May 2009 20:46:40 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/?p=5006#comment-76693 Stop being stupid, stop being stupid right now. Stop being stupid, stop being stupid right now.

]]>