The 10 Worst Transactions Of The Winter
Major League teams are getting smarter. In prior years, we would have had easy pickings like the Barry Zito contract, the Carlos Lee signing, and even last year’s Vernon Wells acquisition. This year, there were some guys who got too much money, but there weren’t many instances of teams just paying through the nose for guys who just aren’t very good. I considered cutting this list down to just five transactions, honestly, as a few of the back-end ones have a decent chance of turning out okay for their respective teams, or the costs just are small enough that they aren’t really going to negatively effect the franchises in a big way. There were only a few deals this winter that I’d say teams are really going to regret long term. But, I said we’d do 10 of each, so here we go.
Like yesterday, the criteria is expected on field production, cost to acquire, and the impact the move will make in both the short run and long run for the franchise. These moves represent transactions where the team gave up something of legitimate value and, in my estimation, aren’t likely to get enough back in return to justify their investment.
#10 – Twins Sign Matt Capps for 1/4.75M
It’s a one year deal, so there’s no long term cost to the franchise. $5 million spent on another player wouldn’t have changed the Twins fortunes one way or another. But, still, it’s hard to understand why the Twins thought they needed to give Capps this kind of contract. He was a below replacement level reliever last year, watched his strikeout rate drop from 19.3% to 12.4%, and gave up home runs in a park where no one gives up home runs. And yet, only six relievers got larger contracts than Capps this winter. Darren Oliver got less. Francisco Cordero got less. LaTroy Hawkins got less. If the Twins wanted to spend $5 million on their bullpen, they could have gotten two or three decent arms for that. Instead, they got one mediocre arm who will continue to remind them that they could have still had Wilson Ramos instead.
#9 – Royals Sign Bruce Chen For 2/9M
Bruce Chen is 35-years-old and has been a below average pitcher for nearly his entire career, and he showed no real signs of improvement last year – his low ERA was essentially just about preventing hits with men on base. There’s no reason to think that Chen has turned a corner at this point in his career, and he’s still just a generic #5 starter nearing the end of his career. Better pitchers than Chen had to settle for minor league contracts. Meanwhile, the Royals decided to throw money at the type of pitcher that the rest of baseball has learned isn’t worth any kind of guarantee. For a team with a limited budget, efficiency is mandatory, and this isn’t a very good way to spend 10% of their overall budget.
#8 – Rangers Sign Joe Nathan For 2/14M
During his prime, Nathan was one of the best relievers in baseball. Then he had Tommy John surgery, spent a year on the DL, and was essentially a replacement level arm during his first year back on the mound in 2011. The velocity was still there and he still got a decent amount of strikeouts, but his extreme fly ball ways turned into a home run problem, and going to Texas probably isn’t going to alleviate that issue. Nathan’s a decent enough bounce back candidate, but that’s why they invented one year deals with incentives. At 2/14, the Rangers should have gotten a sure thing, but Nathan is a high-risk arm who hasn’t been a good pitcher since 2009. If Texas would have shown a bit more patience, they probably could have ended up with Ryan Madson instead.
#7 – Brewers Sign Aramis Ramirez For 3/36M
The Brewers knew they were losing Prince Fielder, and they wanted to sign a good hitter to defray some of the cost of having him walk away. Ramirez posted a 133 wRC+ last year, and at just $12 million per year, he fit into the Brewers budget. However, he’s a lousy defender who is headed for his age 34 season, was basically replacement level in 2010, and blocked off third base from Taylor Green, who probably could have provided some value at the hot corner for the league minimum and allowed the Brewers to spend their money upgrading at shortstop or at first base. Ramirez will probably be worth the money in 2012, but they’ve locked themselves into declining performance at the position for the next several years. There were better ways to spend $36 million this winter than by giving it to Ramirez.
#6 – Marlins Sign Mark Buehrle for 4/58M
The Marlins wanted to make a big splash this winter, and set their sights on most of the big name free agents on the market. Unfortunately for them, C.J. Wilson wanted to stay on the west coast, so they ended up with money burning a hole in their pocket and Mark Buehrle as the most willing recipient of that cash. Buehrle has been a durable pitcher with a long track record of success, but he turns 33 in March and has racked up a lot of miles on his left arm. Committing $14.5 million per year to sign a guy who relies on beating his peripherals is a bit scary to begin with – when you factor in his advancing age, this looks like a deal that could end poorly for the Marlins.
#5 – Nationals Acquire Gio Gonzalez For Brad Peacock, Derek Norris, A.J. Cole, and Tom Milone
If you think Gio Gonzalez’s ERA the last two seasons are more indicative of what we should expect going forward, then the Nationals made a nice trade and this will work out well for them. I’m more of the mind that he’s due for a pretty significant step backwards, though, which makes him more of a good pitcher than any kind of ace, and the command problems offer enough risk of collapse to be a real concern. And, for me, the cost of acquiring that kind of high risk arm was too high, especially when you factor in Gonzalez’s Super-Two status, which necessitated a 5 year, $42 million extension to buy out his arbitration years. It’s one thing to give up three good prospects and a potential back-end starter for a guy who provides a lot of value at a low cost, but Gonzalez is no longer all that cheap. The Nationals could have spent $40 million in free agency and walked away with a +3 win player while maintaining depth on the farm. Unless Gonzalez takes a big leap forward, this looks like an overpay to me.
#4 – Rockies Sign Michael Cuddyer For 3/31M
Cuddyer gets a lot of bonus points in the game for his versatility and his leadership. Unfortunately, he just plays a lot of positions poorly, and his character doesn’t make up for the fact that the Rockies spent $30 million to tread water in the outfield. Cuddyer is a marginal upgrade at best over Seth Smith, who was shipped out for some magic beans after losing his job when Cuddyer was signed to play right field. He’s an okay but not great hitter who will be 33 when the season begins, and he’s never shown much value with the glove. The Rockies needed to make some real improvements this winter, but instead, their primary acquisition was just a more expensive, older version of what they already had. They could have simply kept Smith, gotten a real platoon partner for him, and then spent the remaining money upgrading third base or the rotation. As it is, they’ve locked themselves into a mediocre player headed into his decline phase.
#3 – Marlins Sign Heath Bell for 3/27M
This deal doesn’t really make sense from a baseball perspective, as Bell’s declining strikeout rates, advancing age, and need to sustain low HR/FB rates while leaving Petco Park make him a guy with numerous red flags. In fact, the only argument I’ve seen in favor of this deal were that Bell was brought in as a lure to show other free agents that the team was serious about winning. Even on that criteria, though, the deal didn’t work – Wilson and Albert Pujols both went to Anaheim instead, and the Marlins certainly didn’t get a discount on signing Buehrle because Bell was going to be his teammate. The Marlins didn’t need to give Bell three years to land a quality reliever, and there’s a good chance they’ll regret this contract sooner than later.
#2 – Tigers Sign Prince Fielder for 9/214M
Prince Fielder is a good player, but this is three years and about $70 million too much for what he brings to the table. Yes, the Tigers are in win-now mode, and yes, Fielder makes them better in the short term, but the reality is that if the Tigers had this kind of payroll flexibility, they should have simply been far more active earlier in the off-season, as they could have improved their roster significantly more by spreading the cash around to bring in multiple players and fill a number of holes. Instead, the team overreacted to the Victor Martinez injury and compromised the long term health of the organization for a short term gain in the standings. The fact that Mike Illitch might not be around to see the end of the contract doesn’t make the deal any less damaging to the Tigers franchise – it just means that the current owner is borrowing from the next owner’s pockets in order to achieve his own personal goal. Of all the moves made this winter, this is the one that has the potential to really cripple a franchise – they need it to pay off in 2012, because the long term costs of this deal are going to be extremely harmful to the organization.
#1 – Phillies Sign Jonathan Papelbon for 4/50M.
The Tigers overpaid and got a star. The Phillies overpaid and got a reliever, then had salt rubbed in the wound when the reliever they were replacing ended up signing with another NL contender for 17% of the guaranteed money they gave Papelbon. The list of big contracts for free agent relievers that have turned out well is extremely short, and while Papelbon has been a very good reliever thus far in his career, he’s not without his own set of risks. For a team that had other holes to fill, this just wasn’t a good use of resources, especially with the glut of relievers on the market. By exercising a little more patience, the Phillies could have walked away with a good closer, a real answer in left field, upgraded their bench, and had enough left over to convince Roy Oswalt to return. Instead, they decided to go all-in on a ninth inning upgrade that might not even turn out to be a big upgrade.
42
ilitch’s own personal goal is to win the world series. that’s every team’s goal. the goal isn’t to have the best $/WAR ratio. the criticism that this money should have been available since the beginning of free agency so that they could have made other moves is valid, but who knows what ilitch was willing to do? it makes him a bad owner to use his money to go above budget to sign a premier bat?
i’m sure if the tigers win the world series in the next few years they’ll really be upset that ilitch did such horrible damage to the franchise.
It’s going to be an albatross of a contract from 2015-2020 no matter what. The only way it’s justified is if they win in the next few years. Everyone knows Illitch is trying to win before he dies… that’s great for him – it’s just a horrible way to run a franchise.
Me? I’ll take the opposite front office strategy ala Tampa Bay.
yea, i love tampa! never spending any money, despite the clear need of it in certain situations. a strategy for every franchise to emulate!
Mike Illitch is 82 years old…he doesnt give a damn about 2015-2020. He just wants to win a WS before he dies.
Well, he’s getting the money that went to Ordonez and Guillen last year to sit on the DL. The Tigers can afford it, hell it’s less than 43 million Hot ‘n Ready Pizzas!
This. Gotta respect an owner willing to do what Ilitch did, especially in the city he is in.
…seriously? He basically shit all over the city and said: “I don’t give a fuck what happens after I die, you guys can lose 100 games and get moved to New Jersey for all I care, I just want to win while I’m still alive. PS – being a billionaire is awesome, you guys can suck it”
are you really so stupid as to say that an owner spending hundreds of millions of his own money is saying fuck you to a city?
i mean honestly, how dumb can you be?
You must not understand the meta-game that baseball front offices play. That’s ok. Keep reading Fangraphs and other great baseball sites. There’s a lot of good info out there. Start with the glossary here.
Shouldn’t there have been more respect for a guy had he gone out and attempted to fill several holes early in the offseason without crippling the team’s chances of competing long after he’s around to bear the brunt of the city’s frustration?
@Slartibartfast, wow. If you’re not careful, Ilitch is going to choke to death from all those words you’re putting in his mouth.
I hope at some point someone points out that the Fielder contract is does not really “compromise the long term health of the franchise”. It’s hyperbole, backed by no evidence whatsoever. The Giants won the world series with Barry Zito’s contract. The Red Sox payed Carl Crawford a lot of money to be a replacement level player last year.
Yes, if Fielder ages poorly, it could be a contract that makes things difficult five years from now. It’s not determined to be franchise crippler.
Spending money inefficiently is a franchise crippler in high quantities. Is one contract alone enough to sink a franchise? Of course not. But it’s still damaging in the long run. Can you overcome that damage? Yes. Is it still bad and avoidable? Yes.
Slart’s last comment is right on.
And Crawford’s deal, while it should look better with some regression in performance, is a bad deal that IS crippling Boston. Without Crawford’s deal, they’d have Jackson or Oswalt right now. Or Reyes. Or anyone else who could help them more.
Of course, the contract that has really hurt Boston is Lackey’s, one that was a clear mistake at the time and is really biting them on the ass now.
@ The Real Neal: Yes, the Giants won with Zito, but in general having a huge contract on the books will limit your ability to spend elsewhere. While the Giants show that it may not “cripple” you, it sure doesn’t help. Lots of other teams with those large contract (eg. Cubs with Soriano) don’t do well.
@fjmanuel:
It’s not Ilitch’s money, it’s the team’s money. It’s money the team will need in 2015-2020, but they won’t have it because their former owner gave it away.
Tigers fans are going to have to suffer through several years of that albatross contract just to grant Ilitch’s dying wish.
I’m looking forward the end of the fad in which people simply write “this” and think it amounts to intelligent commentary.
Let’s just say that I find it extremely amusing that everyone is 100% sure that Fielder will be a league average hitter only capable of playing DH in 3 years.
You’ve got to learn to take Dave’s opinion with a grain of salt. Dave was sure that Matt Garza and Aaron Harang were the same pitchers last off-season. He is sure that UZR correctly values players defensive skills (which is a large part of his anti-Fielder rhetoric and pro-Reyes crusade and the same belief that was the downfall of his beloved Mariners 2 years ago). He belittled Dempster’s 2004 contract, which by his own calculations yielded about $20 million in surplus value.
He thinks the Phillies could sign Oswalt, an established closer, a starting left fielder and a useful bench player for $12.5 million. Someone give me the names of those three other players.
If you’re just going to regurgetate Fangraph WAR values, like the be all end all, you’re not really adding anything to the conversation. We can all look those up.
Ilitch has given back a lot to his economically devasted city, and it’s not unreasonable to assume that his interest in winning a World Series is as much about sharing it with the citizens of Detroit and being able to enjoy that much-needed victory with them. It’s not just about one rich man’s ego trip. Sure, it makes bad baseball sense in the long run, but the people of Detroit won’t savor a championship any less because of what might happen four or five years from now. Maybe the city will be in better shape then, and they won’t need the emotional lift of a championship as much as they could use it now. I’m not going to bash the guy for wanting to see his city share some joy.
@ The Real Neal: Yes, Dave and other sabremetricists have been wrong before. We expect that to happen because we know forecasts by definition are wrong. However, that doesn’t mean we should ignore the data that can lead us to making educated guesses. Aging curves for players of Prince’s physique don’t shine an optimistic light on his future. And he already can’t play 1B well, so he’s basically a DH right now. I just don’t think you can make a reasonable claim that Fielder will live up to the contract,
@Slartibartfast
You have every right to criticize the move from a baseball/financial perspective. But you have no right to say that Ilitch doesn’t care about the city.
I’m guessing you’re probably from somewhere halfway across the country. If you were born and raised in Michigan, especially southeast Michigan, you would know how critically important Ilitch has been to this community. A lot of businesses have cut and run from Michigan, and Ilitch has always stayed and pumped money, and via the Red Wings and Tigers, good vibes into the community.
It might sound silly to you, but it means a whole hell of a lot to those of us that have grown up Red Wings and Tigers fans, and more importantly, even if he never bought those clubs, those of us that grew up and live in the area, and see all the other things he does with his cash around our towns.
If I were a philanthropist with $214M lying around, I think I could find more beneficial ways to use it than giving it to a ballplayer.
Spending money doesn’t make it a bad contract – spending money inefficiently does. Detroit could have signed Reyes (a better fit for that team) for half the money, used the excess to fill other holes in a very thin roster and came away significantly better than they are now.
maybe ilitch didn’t make the money available at that point, but after seeing how martinez’s injury may have significantly harmed the tigers chances of winning, he decided he’d make more money available.
If all of this money became available when Martinez got hurt, some of it should have been available before, when Reyes was available for half the price.
@ fjmanuel — that’s exactly the point. If the $ was there, he should have made it available early. If it wasn’t there, why did he loot the vault to throw it at a guy who won’t be valuable at all in 4-5 years?
The Fielder signing was an overreaction to Martinez’s injury. That’s a poor decision. He panicked when his DH got hurt and threw $200 M + at the problem.
“maybe ilitch didn’t make the money available at that point, but after seeing how martinez’s injury may have significantly harmed the tigers chances of winning, he decided he’d make more money available.”
That is not at all consistent with the theory that Ilitch is in “win-now” mode due to his age. Before Martinez got hurt, Detroit was not anywhere close to World Series favorites. If Ilitch truly wanted a World Series win before he died, he could have ponied up the money for Pujols AND Reyes.
Maybe Detroit wants players who actually, you know play the game, instead of sitting on the bench during the playoffs because of injured legs.
In response to those who think Ilitch just pulled $$ out of his pocket when Martinez went down, sometimes teams have insurance policies that they can cash in on when a player gets injured. I’m not saying they did, but if they did, maybe that’s where the extra dough came from.
Nate, everyone reported that insurance was picking up somewhere between half and 100% of Martinez’s 2012 salary. That’s a nice chunk of change to put towards picking up a player, but it’s not denting $214 million.
I can see your points on Fielder, but how can you put his deal on there and ignore Pujols’ deal? Almost 70% of ESPN’s readers thought the Fielder deal was better than the Pujols deal. Obviously I’m one of them. Sure the Fielder deal is an albatross, but since he’s at least 4 years younger than Pujols its actually much more reasonable.
espn? heh
I agree. 9 years for a 27 year old is much better than 10 years for a 32 year old, even considering Fielder’s more husky frame.
Guy on the internet probably knows better than the billionaire entrepreneur and sports mogul.
Surprised Jose Reyes didn’t make the list. I look forward to the Marlins struggling and Ozzie Guillen whining to the media.
Reyes was on the top 10 best list :)
You can argue all day about whether or not he’s injury prone, and that would likely decide whether he’s on the “best” or “worst” lists….
Uh, no. You *can’t* argue all day whether Reye is injury prone. He played 295 games over the last 3 seasons. He missed 5 weeks in both 2010 and 2011, and those were his *good* years.
He’s injury prone.
Jack, you make it seem worse than it is by counting a season in which he missed most of the year. Put it this way, he’s had 530+ At Bats in 6 out of his 7 real MLB years. He may be missing 30 something games, but its only 30 ABs less than MVP Ryan Braun, who is a lot of things, but not much of an injury problem.
With that said it would be idiotic to say Reyes is not injury prone, he’s obviously had a history of hamstring and other injuries, but it hasn’t been much of a problem. If he has 3,263 ABs over the next six years has he’s had in the last six years, including a season he basically missed all off, (Comes out to 544 ABs/season), im sure the Marlins will be happy with it.
The Reyes contract was a great one considering the $ given to Pujols and Fielder.
Reyes is a much better baseball player at much less cost. Reyes has a higher WAR the last 4 years than Fielder even w/ his 36 games played in 2009.
And the Tigers and Brewers who disregard the “value” of UZR were in the playoffs last year, while the Mets watched from home.
Yes, the Mets didn’t make the playoffs last year because they overvalue UZR. That’s some great fucking insight.
How exactly would the Phillies have afforded to get “good closer, a real answer in left field, upgraded their bench, and had enough left over to convince Roy Oswalt to return” For 12.5 Million dollars? I’m dying to know.
Believe me I know why the Papelbon deal is killed, but I’m wondering the same thing. Analysts preemptively steamrolled Amaro for even speaking to Michael Cuddyer.
Also, isn’t there a legitimate possibility that John Mayberry Jr. IS the answer? Even assuming regression with the bat (and he made legitimate, visible adjustments), his defense alone makes him much more an “answer” than Raul Ibanez, who was sub-replacement last year.
Dave writes about it as if its a 1-year/50 million dollar deal which is more than disingenuous.
I’d say for a reliever, the total overlay is a hell of a lot more important than the annual salary. I actually don’t think any multiyear contract for a reliever not named ‘Rivera’ has ever worked out well.
And it’s stupid to pay any reliever $12.5M/year, even if its on a one-year deal.
“I actually don’t think any multiyear contract for a reliever not named ‘Rivera’ has ever worked out well.”
Really no contract longer than one year to a reliever has ever worked out well?
RAJ once again adds to his legacy if overpaying players in terms of years,$ and timing of the deals
Ibanez
Polanco
Papelbon
Baez
Contreras
Howard
Nix
Each one of these deals was way over what a reasonable GM would have paid each guy.
Not to mention the Papelbon deal cost him a 1st rounder when if he waited a week for the CBA to get signed he woukdnt have list the pick
One year, $13MM for Oswalt.
Two years, $30MM for Beltran.
You’ve just improved your team for less total outlay than Papelbon.
The only argument against this approach would be that it increases the payroll by $15MM for this season. But it goes back to the same level the year after, and then proceeds to save you $12.5MM a year the following two years. All while making you signficantly better.
Alternately, they could’ve signed Reyes instead of Rollins. Would’ve probably taken more like $60NM-$70MM more, as opposed to Papelbon’s $50MM, but the upgrade would’ve been significant.
Alternately alternately, they could have re-signed Bell for, say, 2/$20MM, and then had $30MM to spend on Beltran or Jackson or Oswalt or whoever.
The Phillies are up against the Cap, there is no room for that 15 million. And what about paying for a closer for this and future years? Or a team set on competiting should trot out a 2nd year guy like Bastardo or get a scrub in free agence for a few million bucks?
there’s no indication that the phillies are at all concerned about the luxury tax. in fact, quite the opposite; amaro seems determined to match the yankees in a couple years’ time
it’s perfectly reasonable to dislike 4 year deals for relievers. it’s reasonable (i guess) to dislike papelbon vis a vis madson–although papelbon is younger, has a better K-rate, has (3) 3-WAR seasons (compared to (0) 2 WAR seasons for madson, and is the closest thing to rivera since he broke into the league…all while in the AL east…but ok WAR overrates him and he’s really not that good. fine.
but luxury tax worry or not, 26 MM > 12.5 MM. even facetiously, one wouldn’t suggest the tigers spend 214 MM this upcoming season (or spread out over the next 4) to improve the team…so why is ok to rationally say it here?
…madson)*
Both RAJ and David Montgomery have told reporters that they do not want to break the luxury tax threshold. (Strong indications indeed) This doesn’t mean they won’t or haven’t already. But it means that they are concerned and are approaching improvements to the roster with the threshold in mind.
“there’s no indication that the phillies are at all concerned about the luxury tax.”
You don’t pay attention to the Phillies too often do you?
“You don’t pay attention to the Phillies too often do you?”
Ryan Howard extension. boom, roasted.
Lots of different iterations of Twins in there.
Glad there’s only one signing on the club’s behalf. Wouldn’t be surprised if Kubel and Willingham were both close to making the cut, even though I like the Willingham deal.
I don’t think any contract for less than $5M/year should be on a worst contract list. Signing Matt Capps and Brue Chen isn’t the smartest thing in the world, but there’s just not enough money involved to actually hurt the franchise.
I think I’d probably replace those two with Willingham and the Matt Kemp extension. Kubel is a good nomination too. The John Danks extension was also an overpay and a puzzling move. And I don’t like the Pujols signing, but obviously smart people can disagree there.
Danks definitely belongs here.
Did you notice that three 2011 Twins were on the list? In a sense, they dodged two big bullets here.
That’s what I was thinking. 3 bullets dodged if you throw Kubel in there. Overpaid for 1 sentimental favorite (Capps), let three walk. Not a perfect record, but I’ll take it.
Except, how is Capps a sentimental favorite? Of the four, he is the least of a home town favorite.
Pujols?
The machine would laugh at that comment… but he is not programmed for humor.
Clearly, though, if you think the Fielder deal was irresponsible, you shouldn’t like the Pujols deal. Pujols is the better player now, but Fielder will be Pujols’ present age at the end of his contract.
And Pujols’ “down” year is better than Fielder’s average year over the last few years. Yeah, he’s older, but he’s also a HOF talent instead of merely an occasional star.
Agreed. I’d say the Pujols deal is at least 60-70% as bad as the Fielder deal.
Fielder will be 36 at the end of his contract and Pujols is 32 until proven differently.
There’s lots of proof about Pujols’ real age. I’ll put this nugget in fangraph-ese for you though: His career trajectory is exactly that of a person who is 2-3 years older than he says he is. It explains his “early” metoric rise as well as his decline the last three years. There’s no way he’s going to admit and there’s no court that requires players to admit their ages so its unlikely we’ll ever know. However, baseball people believe he’s 2-3 years older and they have good reason to, IMHO.
That’s lazy reasoning. Pujols has struggled through injury, which could have caused him to decline somewhat faster than expected. Ryan Howard declined quickly in his late 20s when statistically (based on the average production curve), he should have had more sustainability. Is Howard lying too?
Also, Pujols went to high school around Independence, Missouri. Obviously, that doesn’t mean he didn’t lie, but it’s not like the Cards originally found some “16″ year old phenom with a beard and a 30 year old wife from the Dominican.
I agree that if Fielder’s contract makes this list then Pujols contract should make this it as well. Fielder is a poor fit for the Tigers franchise, but Pujols is not a good fit for Anaheim either. Many experts, including KLaw, had Fielder ranked ahead of Pujols as a free agent, and Fielder got a shorter contract for less money (though the structure of the contracts bring their effective AAV very close).
As far as how heavy a burden these players will put on their franchise in their less productive years, I would say it is highly probable that Fielder will out-WAR Pujols in the 2017-2020 seasons, and by that time, Pujols will be costing Anaheim 6m more per season than Fielder will be costing the Tigers.
What gives?
I would also add that wins now are more valuable than wins later, and that the wins Fielder provides to the Tigers are more likely to be high leverage wins as their playoff odds over the next 3 seasons is affected more by the Fielder signing than the Angels’ odds with the Pujols signing. LAA has to beat a superior team with outstanding depth and young talent while Detroit has to deal with franchises that are wandering in the wilderness (unless KC makes some shrewd moves to buffet their young talent)
WHAT? Wasn’t DET going to win the division and make the playoffs regardless of Fielder?
LAA on the other hand, leap-frogged (projections) their division rival by signing Pujols 6-7 WAR and by taking CJW from TEX. In one off-season, LAA went from 2nd place projection to 1st place projection.
I think the situation is just the opposite, Pujols’ signing provides more probability for higher revenue or more important wins for LAA than PF in DET, especially given the wide open LA market.
Signing Pujols pretty much made LAA the favorite to win their division. DET was already the division favorite with or without PF.
How they would have done i the playoffs is largely conjecture, but I think we could agree that a 6 WAR player is better than a 4 WAR player.
Might want to look at those projections again CC, with the signing of Darvish the rangers are back on top of the division, projection wise.
Given that Detroit projected more like an 85 win team without Fielder, their playoff odds could not be very strong, and their odds in any given playoff series would be low, especially as situational baseball becomes more important in a short series and M. Cabrera could more easily be dealt with. So no, I would not say Detroit had huge playoff odds before the signing and this definitely improves their odds in the postseason.
I also disagree that Fielder is a 4 WAR player. His logical range of WAR is 4.5-6 for the next few years, and even though he will begin declining himself, he will probably begin to out-WAR Pujols at that time
@wilsonm24
Fair point.
The overall sentiment remains. LAA made up some serious ground in regards to making the playoffs, whether it’s division title or wild card. DET was already the division favorite. LAA’s signing of Pujols increased their playoff % more than DET’s signing of Fielder.
I don’t think at this point we can look at any player’s impact on a potential playoff series or advancing to the division round, or LCS, or WS.
——————————–
@ Vagemitch …
What are the projections for the ALC? I find it difficult to believe that any team is within 5 wins of DET. DET was essentially a lock for the division title.
What was their playoff % projection before signing Fielder? After? How does that compare to LAA and Pujols?
As I said above, I don;t we can quantify what affect Fielder/Pujols has on a team’s chances of advancing past the WC round or whatever.
The 5/3/1 projection for Fielder is 4.9, so he probably is a 5 WAR player, not 4.
IMO, Fielder is peaked now, he’s not getting better. He may maintain for a few years, but he may never put up 6 WAR again. Earlier in his career he sandwiched a 5 WAR season with a 1.2 and 1.7 WAR (over full seasons). That potential is there also.
Prince is prime and soon declining from 5-6 WAR. Pujols is declining from 9 WAR. Pujols can be “half the man he used to be” and still be as valuable as slightly past peak Prince. That’s key.
Going forward, IMO, they will put up similar value. I think Prince will eventually put up more WAR over the next 9-10 seasons, but only because I don’t see AP5 playing the full 10 years.
I think without Pujols, LAA doesn’t make the playoffs. Without Fielder, DET still makes the playoffs.
For some reason I used 5/3/1 weighting instead of 5/4/3 (duh).
Fielder projects as a 5 WAR player in 2012.
Pujols projects as a 6.8 WAR player in 2012.
Pujols is going to have to decline significantly over the next few years, while Fielder maintains or improves in order for them to produce equal value. For example, in 2010 Pujols produced a full WAR more than Fielder’s best season.
It’s really a question of whether Pujols age counterbalances his higher talent level. The big question in that regard (aside from Pujols age suspicions) is how Fielder will age, and I’m not sure any of us have a good grasp on that.
I think a decent argument could be made that Fielder outperforms Pujols over the next 9-10 years, but I think a decent argument could be made vice-versa as well.
It seems possible to me that Pujols at 37 is as productive as Fielder at 33 ( both guys putting up 3-4 WAR seasons) given that Pujols talent is much greater than Fielders, possibly enough to offset the difference in age.
CC – the point being made by many of the comments is that Pujols v. Fielder over the length of their contracts will probably be close – there are many reasonable arguments that Fielder, at least four years younger, will be superior to Pujols in the 2nd half of the contract…while there are also the arguments that you have put forth – Pujols is one of the greatest hitters ever. The fact that it’s reasonable to compare/contrast the two hitters and come to a virtual draw, means that it’s unreasonable to have Fielder’s contract as one of the worst, while Pujols gets a complete non-mention. A lot of Tigers fans feel that Cameron constantly hates on the team (I am not one of them), and this is one more bullet for their gun.
[1] Point Taken.
[2] I’m not a Tigers fan, but I’ve continually pointed out that FG seemingly hates the Tigers. And when i say “hates” I mean represents them in a negatively-slanted light on most issues.
I don;t think it’s as drastic as “hate”, but I do think there is a bias that they are a dumb organization and everything they do must start out with the idea that it’s dumb until proven otherwise by an overwhelming amount of evidence/data.
FWIW, I feel the same way about the Cubs.
Yes, I do appreciate your level-headed approach when discussing these issues, and I’ve seen you defending decisions by the Tigers a number of times. Difficult to argue with Dombrowski’s efforts – so long as he’s not handing out extensions after an unexpected run to the World Series, or trading talented young pitching for aging Shortstops, he’s been pretty much spot-on with his moves (outside of the 2008 drafting of every available college reliever – if not for Avila, that’s an embarrassment of a draft).
While you can never predict with certainty, Pujols is very likely to be paid less than his WAR value for the first few of his contract (He’s a 6 or 7 win player that’s paid about 5-10m less than what that’s worth). That’s the way long term contracts work.
Fielder, on the other hand, looks like a 4 WAR player, so he probably gets paid what he produces the first few years, then he is over paid.
The former is what you have to do to sign a “win now” big name free agent. The latter is what you have to do to sign a Boras client.
Can the Ryan Howard contract (which starts this year) just count on this list so that Amaro can have #1 and #1a?
That contract STARTS this year….. I almost forgot!
Hoooooo boy. That is highlarious.
That was the interesting part of the achilles injury … the 27M/y contract starts …. NOW.
Hsrd to imagine that RAJ gave Howard a deal like that 2 years before he had to and didn’t get any discount
He is completely overmatched
I’m suprised the Kubel acquisition isn’t in the top 10, or at least mentioned as a (dis)honorable mention.
he’s a 29 year old OF “upgrading” gerald parra for roughly the market rate, and someone who provides a very decent chance of providing surplus value. he’s moving from a park that, per statcorner, has a HR effect of 91 (below average) to 114 (above average). blame the injury, the poor OF defense, etc…but target field was not helpful to his overall line.
as for the OF defense worries…those are obviously founded. however, as the team brings in more GB pitchers (smart IMO) this downside is perhaps mitigated and explains the team’s willingness to focus more on offense at the expense of LF defense.
TF’s park factor still hasn’t settled. The Twins haven’t fielded a single legitimate power bat, with the exception of 2010 Jim Thome who hit something like 45% of the teams home HR’s.
edit: 29%. Still…
The lack of a twins power bat has more to do with no power bats being on the roster than target field
HR factor doesn’t just help Kubel, that factor helps anyone who plays in that park.
Kubel is a DH, not a fielder, so the DBacks paid well over market. And did it to replace a guy who is likely to be more valuable, just in far different ways, and who costs a fraction as much. They could have found a decent fielding platoon partner for Parra, and got far more value for a fraction of the outlay.
IMO that’s not a strong critique of my point. it’s true that TF’s park factor has not settled (in that more ABs=”better”), but there would seem to be a generous overlap between the effect on LHB as seen with one’s eyes and what statcorner is telling us, right? the other half of that equation is that we *know* (as much as we can) that Chase Field does help LHBs. So it’s more than reasonable to accept my original point–he benefits from a move to Arizona based on park factors.
additionally, remember that it’s not only twins ABs that factor into this. there are 162 games of visitor ABs that figure into the calculation of statcorner park factors…right? i admit, i actually don’t know…just assume so.
All I’m saying is I don’t think its reasonable to expect such a jump in Kubel’s line based on the difference in park factors. A better comparison would be to the Metrodome’s park factor. After all, the dimensions in TF are identical; I think Kubel’s decline is unrelated to the change in parks.
Rabble, rabble, rabble! Rabble!!!
Not only did the Twins significantly over pay Capps, they surrendered a comp pick for signing him. He was more expensive to the Twins than any other team for that reason yet they still out bid the market by a ton. Utterly indefensible.
If they offered him arbitration and he accepted it, they would still have to pay him, and likely as much or more than they did… or do you like the F-Rod contract?
Shocking. Cameron doesn’t like the Fielder deal, but the Pujols deal isn’t on here. One trick pony, hates Detroit for anything they do. Really didn’t see that one coming.
I’ve seen him perform plenty of tricks, fella.
Also:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/its-time-we-stop-underrating-doug-fister/
media bias is generally measured by taking all the articles (or broadcasts or whatever) about a subject, scoring them for positive or negative spin, and then adding up those scores. sometimes, society expects bias to even out (ie MSM presidental race coverage) and other times it expects it to be not equal (say, if a candidate announces that he converses with miss cleo re: monetary policy…or the phillies sign ryan howard to a 5 year contract extension 2 years before he hits FA).
either way, whether bias exists on this site is certainly not disproven by one article supporting a tiger player (or likewise dumping on the fielder deal while leaving the pujols deal off).
Brandon – not helping the argument by finding one positive article, and it deals with a very-recently-ex-Mariner.
Seriously, guy. Why on earth do you think anyone cares enough about the Tigers to hate them? That’s insane. That’s literally insane behavior.
“That’s literally insane behavior.”
Hahaha… agreed.
Here is a list of Dave Cameron biases:
Loves:
The Mariners
Hates:
Mass media who ignore stats in favor of narratives
You forgot one –
Hates:
Cancer
Seriously, he just posted about punching cancer in the face. He’s the most anti-cancer baseball writer at this site.
It fits right in with all the Phillies’ fans who think he hates them and all the Giants’ fans who think he hates them. If you add up all the nonsensical behavior on this site, Dave has a tremendous bias against every team in baseball except the Mariners.
Oh yeah, almost forgot…#6 ORG! (Ha! Ha! Ha!)
To be fair, I think pretty much everyone doesn’t like the Fielder deal.
The Pujols deal is more split between those that like it and don’t. At least during Pujols aging years he may be chasing milestones, DHing, and/or retire if performance significantly decreases.
Fielder is going to play the duration of his contract no matter what (given his age) and prior earnings.
Pujols is also more of an upgrade over his replacement than Fielder is.
Re: Fielder, who are you comparing him to in your last comment? Are you suggesting Fielder is not a HUGE upgrade over the likes of Inge, Dirks, Raburn, etc????
Get back to us when the Angels put Pujols at RF and DH Abreu and Hunter.
Trumbo is a 2 WAR 1B. Pujols is a 6 WAR 1B. By himself, AP5 is a 4 WAR upgrade.
Last year it appears that DET got 1.0 WAR out of 3B. Assuming Cabrera’s batting run increase at 3B balance out the drop in fielding runs at 3B May not be an accurate assumption), Fielder at 4 WAR represents 3 WAR upgrade over what they had last year. Still, not as much as Pujols … and that assumes that DET would have given Inge 100 games of replacement level performance at 3B, and I’m not willing to make that assumption.
IMO, Pujols provides that LAA with ~2 WAR more than Fielder upgrades the Tigers. Fielder “upgrades” a 95 Win team that won their division by 15 games. Pujols is a 4 WAR upgrade on a team that missed the playoffs by 5 games.
You guys brought up marginal wins. I’m just showing that [1] Pujols provided more of an upgrade than Fielder and [2] the wins are more important for the LAA.
Circle,
Assuming that UZR is correct for first basemen, are 29 year olds and 33(?) year olds both equally as likely to maintain their skills from year to year? Not to mention Trumbo’s ability to improve.
You have to consider age + talent.
I think right now a 32yo Pujols is similar quality fielder as 20yo Prince.
Is a few months going to change that drastically? Another season? Another 2 seasons?
Yes, Pujols will decline more due to age, but he’s also starting at a much higher talent level.
It’s like comparing their baserunning value. Who has more baserunning value, the 33yo or the 29yo? Age alone doesn;t tell the whole story.
As a Cradinal fan, I’m glad StL didn;t sign him for the money LAA gave him. But I still have difficulty predicting significant decline to one of the most talented players in MLB history.
In strict terms of fielding and baserunning, my guess is Albert ages better than Prince, even with the headstart on age.
A curious aspect to AP% is how much his BB% fell in2011 combined with by far his lowest BABIP. makes one wonder if he was “pressing” in a contract year. For God sakes, his OBP started with a 3 for the first time in his career and his wRC+ was below 150 (148, Yikes!). AP% could reasonalby “regress” to carer norms and even when factoring with age still put up a 7+ WAR season.
I think we’re jumping the gun on Albert’s decline. Let’s not forget that Edgar Martinez was a lesser talented player than AP5. There’s no reason AP5 cannot put up 4-6 WAR seasons as an aging DH. Edgar did it up until age 37, and was still above league average during his age 38 and 39 seasons, when he was no longer a .300+ BA hitter.
Sorry to ramble on, I just think we;re jumping the gun on the timing and/or severity of Pujols decline or upcoming drastic decline. Meanwhile, I think Prince is as good as ever going to be , which is not an insult … he’s a damn good hitter.
sorry, 29yo Prince.
I love it when someone uses one cherry-picked player, usually among the greatest of all time, to prove whatever point he is making about another player.
I feel like I read somewhere that the aging process starts early with fielding. Certain hitting skills deteriorate as early as 25, though the whole package not until 30 ish, but fielding can be even sooner. If that’s true, then both of these guys (Pujols and Prince) are getting worse, and Prince is fat. Both will likely be DH’s sooner rather than later, then it’s going to come down to who can hit.
Though maybe this doesn’t apply to first basemen in the same way.
Yes, Pujols is a better player, he’s likely to decline more slowly, and he’s a much better fielder who won’t need to DH until the tail end of his career if ever (although that’s not a big advantage with two AL teams here), but he’s also going to be making a lot more money in those declining years (don’t forget the Pujols deal is significantly backloaded), and the age gap is just too much. Even the best players are no longer stars past the big 4-0 (with the exception of cheaters like Bonds and Clemens). I’d count on a 35 year old Fielder to significantly outproduce Pujols when he’s 40 and 41.
I was hoping the Padres signing Mark Kotsay when they already had Kyle Blanks, Chris Denorfia, Will Venable, Cameron Maybin, and Aaron Cunningham on the roster would make the list, if only because it furthers Moorad conspiracy theories: Kotsay was a Moorad client.
Still, when the other half of your offseason signings — Micah Owings — hits better than the 1/2 that is supposed to play the field, it’s bad.
Poo holes
Wow, if these are the “worst” signing then overall I’d say front offices are getting “better”.
The 9th worst signing is to a guy that will probably earn his money, as is the 7th worst, the 6th worst signing will come close to earning the total money.
Teams overpaying for closers still seem to be a big problem, either that or closers don;t fit our traditional analysis mold.
I would not consider Papelbon a bad contract given the shutdown v. meltdowns metrics that is displayed at FG. A lot of the “alternatives” listed to Papbelbon are far worse in the meltdown rate, which is important for closers.
I’d rather pay Papelbon extra 3.5mil/year for one extra year than Heath Bell, that’s for sure.
I’d rather not pay any one closer anything close to 10 mil a year, and instead have a committee of solid specialists that I can mix and max. But baseball is slow to change. The “closer” paradigm is the next inefficiency to fall.
I think the pendulum has swung back too far, and the ‘anyone can close’ mentality is overblown.
Sure, I definitely don’t adhere to the “anyone can close” mentality. But the idea of top loading your bullpen resources for a guy who only pitches in “save situations” is so obviously not the optimal situation, it’s laughable.
I suspect it is not so easy to juggle juggle just 7 relievers on a 6 games/week schedule. Giving each guy a “job” may not square with our analysis but it seems to fit with the prevailing corporate model.
@ Nik –
There’s no such thing, at least not in the sabermetric community, as an “anyone can close mentality.” You must be good. But relievers can’t be easily counted on to remain healthy and good. There are, however, plenty of really good relievers who can close but instead are placed into high leverage situations earlier in the game. There is, therefore, no reason to pay someone $12.5 M per year to close, nor is there any reason to give a closer a 4 year contract.
The anyone can close mentality is not supported by data, if we use shutdown/meltdown type results. If we look at rate stats, then it’s much more similar.
Once should then ask why the rate stats don’t translate to more similar meltdown/shutdown stats. The assumption shouldn’t start off by being “luck”, “luck” should be the last resort, and even then only applied with great caution.
Any team that’s suffered through a bad closer (Ryan Franklin in StL for example) understands that not everyone can close with a high level of success. I will say almost anyone can save 30 games. But, that’s not the same as being a highly effective closer.We might as well say “Lots of guys can hit 20 home runs, almost anyone can be a good hitter”.
The thing about closing is that 10 blown saves does not result in 2 WAR difference in the standings, but more likely 10 actual losses. The closer performance may translate to much lower WAR than actual L in the standings
We need to define what we mean by “close”? Can almost any reliever get 30 saves? Yes. Can a Jon Axford come out of nowhere and have a good season? Yes. Can any reliever perform at a high level of success for multiple years in a row? NO. And there’s the difference.I
Being “ab;e to close” and “getting 30 saves” are two different things. We should stop treating them similarly.
Teams that are paying relievers big money to close are looking for better than average performance. If we look at things like shutdown/meltdown stats, there are guys that are much better than the “setup men that could close”.
@ CircleChange11
You do realize that your example of a bad closer (Ryan Franklin) went 38-45 in save opportunities in 2009 right? He was also really good that season.
Also, blowing saves doesn’t equal a loss. In 2009 the Cardinals went 2-3 in Franklin’s blown saves while last season, the Angels went 4-6 in Walden’s 10 blown saves. I would doubt that teams are much under .500 in games where their closer blows a save.
By using Ryan Franklin, you’re making my point for me. I already stated that a reliever can have a “really good year”, but that’s not the same as being a very good closer.
Ryan Franklin Shutdowns (SD)/Meltdowns(MD)
2006: 16/16
2007: 25/10
2008: 31/11
2009: 27/6
2010: 29/4
2011: 1/7
TOT: 129/54 (70.4%)
Just for fun let’s compare with Papelbon: 191/40 (82.7%)
Both players have pitched for 6 seasons. Ryan Franklin as a closer over 4 seasons has -0.4 WAR.
For you guys that are fine with just anyone closing, admitting that they will have a good year here and there, I say “Have fun with the Ryan Franklins of the world”. I WILL pay more to have Papelbon and more certainty and better performance.
If I am a team that has money, it’s worth it for me as a GM not to have to try and find the guy that’s going to have a fluke year as a reliever, and then try and repeat that every season or two.
Certainly relievers are more volatile and susceptible to small sample variance, but we shouldn’t act like one good season of closing by any ol reliever is the same thing or the same value as being a legitimate elite closer.
The Phillies aren’t in a situation where they want to “take a chance” on a closer. They want to be certain over the next 3-4 years.
Slartibartfast — Top loading your bullpen *is* actually the optimal strategy if you are a good team. Why would you want your team’s skill distributed among 6 decent guys when you can have one excellent guy who will see a ton of high leverage action on a team competing for a championship?
You’re right about closers. Teams treat it as if it’s an actual position, similare to, say, shortstop.
“We don’t have anybody who has played closer before. We need to get one at any cost.”
From the two lists, we can assume that fangraphs considers the Cashner -> Rizzo deal a near-even transaction?
For a site that regularly blasts signing relief pitchers to lucrative deals, it seems weird that giving up six seasons of Anthony Rizzo for a relief pitcher, with a shoulder problem, isn’t on this list.
If you’re going to make the case that the Padres had a logjam at 1B, hence reducing what they could expect in a trade for Rizzo, then the negative value of creating that logjam by acquiring Alonso in the Latos deal should be reflected in the value of the Latos deal.
As it is, though, it appears that fangraphs is stating that it’s a near-even deal.
The real downside to the Prince signing (aside from launching 1,000 articles about Tigers’ infield defense in 2013 and beyond) is that we have no real concept of what the next-best contract offer was. The years and dollars look like an overbid, an emotional overreaction to losing Martinez for 2012, but so much of an overbid that we have no concept of what else was on the table. Prince was the lone elite free agent for quite a while in a snail-pace-developing market, then was signed in a hurry. The ideal compromise would’ve been to offer something silly like 3y/$85MM – enough to convince Prince to go short-term, or include an opt-out after year 3. Having both Cabrera and Prince locked in, in decline, and nowhere to put one of them is cover-your-eyes frightening.
Except, Miguel Cabrera is 30 years old, only locked up for 3 (or is it 4?) more years, and has shown no signs what-so-ever of decline. Plus Martinez is only under contract for 3 more years (at least one of which he definitely won’t play) which provides space for Prince to fill the DH spot post Martinez if his body starts to break down from playing the field (remarkably like Pujols will be able to do the same)
Not denying the overbid, but the rest of your comment is pretty much crap.
well crap, Cabrera is actually going into his age 29 season, sorry.
there was the dodgers offer with an opt-out after 4 years
Contracts are never all that frightening as long as the Yankees are around to eat them. Fielder will be a Yankee five years from now.
You are so right though. You can always rely on DD to outwit Brian Cashman in a trade. After all, Cashman did trade Alfonso Soriano for A-Rod’s massive contract, right? What a lopsided trade that was.
Dave,
I don’t completely understand how you can love the Beltran deal (which I agree with), greatly dislike the Prince deal (which I also agree with), but not even rank the Pujols deal in the Top 10. This contract has a decent chance of becoming an A-Rod like albatross.
It sure does, Pujols is very likely to be overpaid by something like 100 million relative to the value that he will actually provide. But yeah, a 1-year 4.5 million dollar deal is worse than that.
It’s pretty hard to see Pujols being worth only about $140MM over the next 10 years. That’s a 3-win player.
Your point about lost value is a different way of looking at it than Cameron is, I think. Cameron is probably looking at things in a more proportionate than absolute way, I’d guess. If you sign a guy for $5MM and he gives you $1MM in value, you’ve only gotten 20% on your dollar. If you sign a guy for $240MM and he gives you $200MM in value, you’ve lost a lot more money than the first deal, so I can understand ranking it below. But you’ve also gotten 80% value for your dollar.
I’d say a proportionate look at it is more valuable, but your perspective is certainly valid.
that’s an interesting point about the scalability of return on contracts. it’s tempting to both agree and disagree with your proportionality conclusion, but i do feel at some level this is scouting (our objective/subjective feelings about pujols, capps, juan pierre) masquerading as baseball economics.
in general, premium talent isn’t fungible, which is why i’m not sure i can buy the proportional argument. you can’t build a replacement level roster and expect to win. but then overpaying (relative to $/WAR figures) for true premium talent should theoretically be acceptable for large market teams because, as you ascend up the WAR ladder, the $/WAR figure should rise, dare I say…non-linearly. so yeah, i think i agree with your conclusion, just not how you got there…”overpaying” guys like fielder/pujols/crawford is probably better than paying for crap relievers, but it’s a product not of how much you lose in a contract, but how much you gain from their performance.
@ari collins
if cameron was looking at it proportionally then prince should not have been on the list.
I think he should have made up his mind weather he was looking at “total money lost” or “percentage of money lost”
LOL
No pujols?
Cameron, you creep!
The Brewers feel they are in a position to win now, so why not potentially overspend a bit to ensure themselves a solid 3B. They won the central by 6 games last year. Fielder was worth 2 more wins than Ramirez. Braun’s suspension will cost them another 2-3. They are still strong contenders with the team they have now.
I agree with you Kevin. In regards to the article: I mostly agree with what was written, but I contest the notion that the Brewers could have gotten a better shortstop. Who? Rollins wasn’t going to sign here, we made him an offer. I don’t think Furcal would have been an all around better choice. We had no chance to get Reyes. Alex Gonzalez is still a pretty decent defender, certainly better than Yuni. Even if Ramirez isn’t a good defender, he’s still better than McGehee and his production helps make up for what’s lost from Fielder. Mat Gamel at first base is a better option than Taylor Green at third. So yeah, Green is left to flounder in the minors or back-up in the majors, but I think it was the right way to go for the team.
Your also forgetting the Twins gave up a sandwich pick by signing Capps which should move the debacle into the top 5.
Only if they offered him arbitration, he passed on it, and then another team decided to sign him. But can arbitration lower a salary that quickly?
You’re forgetting that Free Agency types were different this offseason. The Twins didn’t have to offer Capps anything. If he would have signed with any other team, they would have received a draft pick.
B. Chen is an ace, dude.
All the Royals have to do is sell a million hot dogs per year to pay for his contract.
B. Chen for 2 Million Hot Dogs, Over Two Years doesn’t look as bad.
When B. Chen wins 20 games, I’m going to tattoo his face on my face.
Having Fielder at #2 and leaving Pujols completely off the list is something I can’t really understand.
1. Pujols is a better hitter
2. Pujols is a better fielder
3. The Angels are not moving their best player to another position to accomodate Pujols
Those are reasons why Fielder’s contract is worse than Pujols’s. They don’t explain why Pujols’s contract was completely left off the list. That contract is at the very least worse than Capp’s 1y/$4.5M deal.
Albert is also about 4 and a half years older which is probably a bigger factor than the 3 you listed.
Pujols is 3-4 years older than Fielder, but he’s also like twice as good at baseball. Plus he’s not morbidly obese.
John Danks – 5 years/$65M (2012-16). This was paying for the pitcher the CWS hope Danks becomes. Not paying for the pitcher that he is, and has been. Pretty terrible deal.
$13m a year for a 3-4 WAR pitcher is really a pretty good price. 5 years is a bit long, but Danks is also a young pitcher who, as far as I know, has never shown signs of ill health. You could easily argue that Danks would deserve ~$17m/year on a 3-4 year contract, so I think the length really pays him his due and stretches it out an extra year. From his persepective, this probably doesn’t matter much, but the CWS probably see it as a good way to allow more short term payroll flexibility.
In a vacuum, the Danks deal isn’t horrible. But compared to deals Lester, Buchholz, Billingsley and W. Rodriguez signed, it sure looks like an overpay. More importantly, the White Sox are attempting to rebuild. Danks is still young enough to be considered part of that rebuilding process – turns 27 on 4/15 – but he could have brought back multiple pieces to a team devoid of useful farm-system players. See Latos, Mat.
Lester, Buchholz, Billingsley, and Wandy signed deals when they were far further away from free agency than Danks.
Danks’ deal buys out 3 free agent years; most of those other deals buy out one, if any.
Like apples and oranges.
I agree that the deal may have been bad timing though, but in a vacuum, its a good deal.
I’m surprised Sizemore isn’t on the list
This is laughable. I see bias in both the list and the comments.
How dare Cameron have an opinion in an opinion piece!
I guess how you view the Gio trade depends on how you evaluate Gio–most commentators evaluate him more positively than you do. What I’m really wondering is what +3 player you think the Nats could have walked away with? The Nats’ most urgent needs were starting pitching and center field. I assume you don’t consider Coco Crisp a +3, so we are talking about trying to outbid the Angels for Wilson or the Marlins for Buerhle. I’m not sure that the Nats could have done either, not without the risk of ending up in a Zito/Pavano/Hampton situation.
Edwin Jackson or Roy Oswalt
Edwin Jackson is the +3
Man, if only the Nats had signed him.
While I do agree Pujols should have been at the list (8-10 range), I don’t think its comparable to the Fielder deal. Fielder’s deal is pushing Miggy to 3B where his defense is quite likely to hurt the team. Fielder also presently has negative defensive and baserunning value. These deals aren’t evaluated in a vacuum.
and pujols was signed to a team with TWO 1b. we all know that either prince or miggy are going to end up DHing, but the angels have a bit more of a positional problem on their hand.
Except neither Morales nor Trumbo makes anything near what Miggy does. Additionally, while Trumbo has value, he’s not exactly a star and who knows what they can realistically expect from Morales. Finally, either Trumbo or Morales is tradeable
Yes, but Morales has only been even a 3-win player once, and that was before getting hurt, while Trumbo has never been a 3-win player. That’s not really a logjam, right there. Not compared to having two 5-win players at the same position, and another 3-win 1B around the following year.
You’re not comparing Trumbo and Morales to Miguel Cabrera, right?
Morales hasn’t played in 2 years. Who knows what he will be capable of doing. If he comes back and hits, he’ll make a nice trade chit.
Trumbo is not a guy that factors into a decision to get Albert Pujols, he’s just not that good.
The Angels’ 3 1B/DH aren’t guaranteed just shy of 350MM.
Abreu is off the books after 2012 (or they can release him to make him go away).
Trumbo and Morales can very, very easily be traded.
pujols’s deal is a longer contract for money for an older player than prince’s deal. i don’t want to sound like any of the insane tiger fans above, but i do think it’s a little weird how much backlash there was against the prince deal compared to the pujols deal.
i’m also shocked that nothing Ned Colletti did is on this list.
Fielder just isn’t the same caliber of player though. He’s varried a lot from season to season, but his average WAR over the last three years is 4.25. Pujols’ is almost double that. 17 WAR is Brandon Phillips/ David Wright territory. You wouldn’t imagine paying those guys $200m.
the angels aren’t paying for how Albert Pujols performed over the last 10 seasons, they’re paying for how he’ll perform over the next 10 seasons. as the poster below notes, Fielder is in his prime and could very easily put up better numbers over the course of his contract than Pujols does over the course of his.
I’m curious as to how Fielder can put up better numbers than he has?
He’d basically need to set career highs in everything. That’s possible, but we shouldn’t discuss it as it has good chance of happening.
Last year Pujols had BY FAR his worst season at .385 wOBA (45 points less than his career average). It was 6 points less than Fielders career average. Half of Fielder’s seasons are worse than Albert’s worst season.
Prince is an “early peaker”, he’s not going to get much better even though he’s in “average prime years”. He’s not an average peaker.
For his career, Pujols has been an ~8.5 WAR player, Fielder’s been around 4.5. We REALLY need to stop acting like they are or have been comparable players. What we should say is that when Fielder has a great year and Pujols has a bad year (for him), they have comparable value. If it requires two extreme situations to appear simlar, then the two items are not all that similar.
FWIW, I like both players and I think both guys are going to help their teams be successful right off the bat and for multiple years. I think Prince is going to age better than most give him credit for, and I think Albert will continue to be productive and when he starts to slip dramatically, he’ll walk away from the game and the contract. AP5 isn’t going to play multiple years at a 1.5 WAR performance level. Elite level players like Pujols and Schmidt tend not to go through “accumulating years” as they find it embarrassing.
I never said Fielder was going to put up better numbers than he has. I just said that it’s very possible that he puts up better numbers than Pujols over the course of their contracts.
You were very clear in what you said. I misread it. I apologize.
Detroit overpaid for sure, but at least Fielder is in his prime. The Pujols deal is a disaster. Like the Angels needed more guys in their 30s with huge contracts. Forget prime Pujols, he is gone, look at his #s. They’ve signed a 32(?)ish star well into the beginning of his production slide.
The Miami franchise might go bankrupt. That team is saddled with huge debt in the latter years of those contracts.
Not sure about your Nathan assumptions. Nathan clearly got better, as most TJ arms do, as the year went in. His post All Star break #s are pretty damn good. You would think a Fangraph article might point something like that out.
Pujols make the Angels better than Prince the Tigers. Pujols plays solid defense, has been through a playoff run and plays “playoff” friendly baseball (clutch, defensively sound etc).
Do the Tigers even get to one WS with Prince? Meh
I am not at all convinced Albert Pujols has begun his decline phase. If he were ever to have a couple of months of bad hitting, the first couple of months of his big mega contract year seem like the right place. That’s all he did last year-his OPS was ~.750 for April and May. After that, he simply became Albert again:
.318/.378/.613/.991
Other than a slightly lower walk rate, everything else is still the same, and certainly last year’s postseason performance does nothing but reinforce this.
Pujols is declining? At least offensively, not yet.
See Rodriguez, Alex – even the greats can start to fall apart at age 32. Pujols’ contract is just as likely to be an albatross as Fielder’s.
You can compare Henry Aaron and Willie Mays to Albert Pujols if you want, but not A-Rod. I’m personally a fan of Alex Rodriguez, but he and Pujols belong in a different category.
You forgot that the Phillies gave up their first-round pick for Papelbon. Not only does that lower the value of the deal even more, but had they waited a week, they wouldn’t have had to give up a draft pick.
The did get back 2 draft picks for not-resigning Madson, so if bringing back Madson was the alternative, this is kind of moot.
No, they only get one pick because of the changes in the CBA, while the Red Sox get the same pick PLUS the pick for Papelbon. The Phillies no longer have a first rounder
Incorrect, the Phillies get 2 draft picks for Madson. A comp-round pick not much later than the 30th pick they gave up PLUS a 2nd round pick.
Bringing back Madson didn’t have to be the alternative though.
+1 Surprised no one mentioned this, it’s a real deal ruiner
sometimes I wonder if the Phillies are getting into Yankee territory….overpaying isn’t a detriment when you have unlimited funds
Yankees and Red Sox have constrainted themselves to get under the luxury tax ceiling. With the Phillies right there already, they are absolutely like the Yankees these days.
I don;t think they’re quite in the NYY territory, but I think PHL has much more resources than other NL teams. In that regard, maybe they are in NYY territory.
I think people are going to continue to predict the demise of the Phillies, and eventually they’ll be right … but, it’ll probably be after 3-4 more playoff appearances. But, they’ll eventually be right … eventually the Phillies will be older and miss the playoffs. It’ll probably happen sometime.
I wonder how much their franchise value has increased since 2008? In that regard every dollar spent has probably been well worth it.
Philly didn’t have much attendance when they sucked though. It’s really only been since they won the world series and reinvested that money to make splashes.
Personally, I can see the Phillies missing the playoffs this year. They’re really old and pitchers can fall off a cliff at any moment. Hamels will get a big raise, Howard is a black hole, pretty much their entire 1-8 is over 27. I don’t expect them to win the division in 2013 at all. I don’t think it’ll be “3-4″ more playoff appearances, I honestly think this is their last shot at a title.
They look a lot like the late 2000s Cubs to me. Guys were all having great years at once, but one by one, they’re all declining. Howard and Rollins are already there. Utley can’t stay healthy and is 33. It looks to me like if either Halladay or Lee become mortal, they’ll miss the playoffs.
I also look at their competition. Atlanta is pretty stacked with young talent. Washington has a deep rotation and a solid core of young players on offense. Maybe in a weaker division Philly hangs on, but I just think they’re too old. Then again, I didn’t think they’d win 102 games last year.
Is Philly the only team that’s forced to play the next 3-4 seasons with the 2012 roster?
We understand that Halladay and Lee are not homegrown products, right?
Don’t most really good teams have more players over 27 than under?
Philly had a really good run because they had an “Oakland A’s” type draft over a few years, where they drafted 4-5 would be all-stars in short time period. Unlike the A’s, they were able to sign some major free agents to go along with them.
I think Utley, Victorino, Halladay, Hamels, and Lee are still really good for the next 3 years. I also imagine Philly adding other good players to the team over that time period.
I think the Braves are their only real competition. I think the Nationals have the potential to become a force, but I’m still in the “I’ll believe it when I see it” camp.
With 4-5 playoff births available each season, I think PHL does have 3-4 more postseason appearances left before the Halladay-Lee-Hamels-Utley-Victorino-Polanco-Howard core gets passed by Team X.
Antonio, the Phillies led the NL in scoring for the second half of the season, with career lows for two of their top hitters. They had the best pitching staff while missing Oswalt and Blanton for most of the season. They’ve, literally, gotten better five years in a row.
They might crash this year, but it’s a very long shot. Much more likely, they win the division again.
All of the things Antonio mentioned (Rollins and Howard in notable decline; Utley hurt) happened last year. Roy Oswalt was just good, not an ace. Blanton was MIA for the season, and Kyle Kendrick (lol, amirite?) got lots of IP. Recipe for disaster, right?
No, they set the team record for wins in a season, en route to the best record in baseball (again). How does this keep happening?!?! They’re so ****ing old!!!!
@ antonio
“It’s really only been since they won the world series [that attendance increased]“. that’s only partially correct. without the new stadium, this kind of sustained payroll was simply not possible. even still, the demographic at the bank is completely different now than it was in 04/05, when it opened. this is, no doubt, in part a result of them being dominatingly good… but david montgomery touts a string of excellent marketing decisions they’ve made as well that have contributed to this. the ballpark is much more of an “experience” these days for young adults and families…and the build-a-bear phanatic doll, the beer, etc…it’s all extra. and not cheap. hardcore fans may long for the “good old days”, but they should be actually be thanking the idiot 21 year olds who pay the 25 dollar standing room cover for the priviledge to buy 8 dollar beers in ashburn alley every warm night of the year.
@ brian. you forgot ibanez. he was worth -1.7 WAR last year. just removing him from left field and replacing him with more mayberry (2.5 WAR in 300 ABs) should be a 4-5 WAR swing.
Gonna happen much sooner than that. I love how Phils fans assume Hamels is staying. He might. But he’s watched Amaro overpay Lee, Howard and Papelbon. He’s going to want at least 20M per for at least 7 years. I dont see Philly ponying up the money, I really don’t. Philly is an old team with great pitching and a subpar offense. They will probably win the East this year, and then its Washington’s division.
i don’t get the lee sentiment. lee provided 7.4 WAR (6.7 pitching + 0.7 hitting) last year and was paid 11 MM. that’s a net of >20 MM in surplus “value” for the phillies. seems like backloading a star’s contract so they can maximize the window of opportunity to win should be something we celebrate, not scorn.
A drop off can happen abruptly, in 2008 the Cubs won 97 games, had over 3M in attendance, and had the core of this group locked up for a long time.
Obviously, the Cubs and Phillies are in different positions because Ryan Dempster and Carlos Zambrano aren’t Halladay and Lee. However, the Cubs, much like the Phillies, don’t/didn’t have much of a farm system.
A collective decline from your roster along with the possibility of one or both of your best players (Halladay/Lee) getting hurt/becoming mortal is a big reason sudden dropoffs happen. It might not happen this year (although as an admitted bias Braves fan I REALLY hope everyone sucks except Hamels who then gets a 6 year 150M deal), but I really think it will happen. Age catches up to everyone and it’s already started to pick some of the Phillies off.
I understand that the Red Sox had luxury tax issues, but I’m still surprised that the Scutaro trade isn’t on this list. Surely he was worth more than $6m this year, meaning the Red Sox should have been able to get a better return.
I’m surprised too. A team trades it’s starting shortstop, who happened to be one of their best hitters down the stretch, for a soft-tossing righty reliever.
I’m THE list.
*i’m* the effing game, pal.
It takes some doing for a 4 year deal – to one of the league’s highest revenue teams, even – to make number one. Especially when absurd 8 and 9 year deals are sitting there like fat cows.
People think the Phillies are a house of cards and “this spending can’t last”
You forgot the real #1:
Red Sox trade in a savvy, mostly successful GM for a proven failure who wouldn’t know what a linear regression was if it him him in the face
How is Cherington a proven failure? Why do you imagine he isn’t SABRmetrically inclined? Or did you mean “manager” and are you referring to Bobby V?
Pujols 10-year deal didn’t make the list??? I can’t believe that anyone thinks that Pujols will be a better value at $30 million when he’s 40 than Fielder for $24 million when he’s 36. And that’s assuming that Pujols is as old as he says he is – we have a pretty good idea of exactly when and where Prince Fielder was born.
I think it’s far more likely Pujols is still in the league at 40, than Prince will be at 36. Fat doesn’t age well, Prince’s dad was done at what, 33?
Pujols is a better hitter and a much better defender. although I guess they could just use Fielder as an expensive DH later on.
I’m not too surprised to see Bruce Chen on a list discussing “worsts.” However, I think you missed the biggest cost. He’s the only re-sign on the list and even though he’s a magnet for criticism (actually, it’s mostly just mockery), Chen was Type B eligible. I’m not saying A/B/none status is all-important, but this should probably come into consideration if you’re going to classify a 2/9 contract as a budget-limiter for the Royals.
I believe – this is assuming I recall my Royal blog reading correctly – that the Royals would have gotten a compensation draft pick for Bruce Chen, had they not signed him themselves. If I’m right, his re-signing was basically a trade: #40 draft pick for a non-discount price on the aging remnants of Bruce Chen. It should rank higher than it does.
For Fielder (and similarly for Pujols and other contract like Werth and A-Rod) is that there’s a good chance that by the end of the contract you will paying 20mil or more for a player who’s heavily declined and may barely be an average player or even a replacement level player.
One thing we know about front offices is that they don’t take these as sunk costs and get rid if the player or even just bench them. If you’re on big money there’s an expectation that they’re put in the lineup. GMs and mangers seem to do this so you can imagine if a 34 year-old Fielder or 41 y.o. Pujols has become useless they will be hurting their team since they’l always be in the lineup.
So wait, Brewers lose offense, sign a 33 year old third basemen with some durability issues and is on an obvious decline but had a pretty good year last year to 3/36 with an option
Phillies aren’t really losing anything, they’re old as shit, resign a 33 year old shortstop who isn’t as much of an injury risk, but has obviously been declining to a 3/33.
I realize that Philly has more resources than Milwaukee, so a 13ish M salary isn’t the same to the two teams. Just kinda seems like essentially the same thing to me. Old guys declining.
Interesting article Dave, but I would have put the Bell signing at #1 given market value and the Fielder signing at #2 for the disgusting amount of risk involved on a player who’s below replacement at 1B REGARDLESS that they’re in win-now mode
Prince is below replacement???
stop being rational
I think he was saying that Prince’s 1B defense is below replacement level. I’m not quite sure what that would mean, as the concept of ‘replacement level’ isn’t particular to any particular contribution, but rather to overall value.
Though if a first basemen were average for his position at every other skill, but an awful defender, he’d need to be -20 fielding runs a year in order to be replacement level. And Prince Fielder is not nearly that bad. So no matter what the poster meant, it’s simply not true
In the chat Dave said Prince would have around 25 WAR over the next 9 years. Where does this come from? Tango projected 31. Where does 25 come from?
Dave’s dislike for fat people….
Trading a middle infielder at a below market value salary who’s accumulated over 10WAR over the last 3 years for a non-prospect is not on the list?
Of course the Red Sox made that move, and we all know their front office is too good to make bad moves…..
I think that Luke Scott belongs on there. He was out wOBA(ed) by Johnny Damon 3 of the last 4 seasons. I personally believe that TB is currently the best run franchise in baseball, but this move was weird to me.
Which reminds me… how in the world does Luke Scott get $6M and Carlos Pena only gets $7.25M. Pena is a better hitter AND a better defender.
Fully agree that Michael Cuddyer was given too big a contract to sign with Colorado but the Rockies decided he was an upgrade at that price and decided to overpay.
That said, the Rockies didn’t sign him for his defense. They wanted leadership and more power and production and they feel they will get more from Cuddyer than Smith. Smith might have a career year in him coming but who he is has been seen and Cuddyer is better.
Rockies’ Analyst
and
Colorado Rockies’ Prospects Report
Being that Cameron is wrong most of the time, this list will probably end up being the top 10 best acquisitions.
The real reason Tigers fans are so angry is they know Dave is usually right and it scares them.
No. That’s not it.
Pujols got 10 years / $240 Million.
CC Sabathia got extended by 2 years. He’ll get $25M in 2016, and has a $25M vesting option for 2017. His current contract may run 9 years / $207 Million.
Those deals have the potential to be just as bad as Fielder’s, but they don’t make this worst 10 list somehow.
He’s also ignoring the fact that Prince and Cecil Fielder have been fan favorites in Detroit for the past 20 years. This signing has almost already boosted the season ticket sales into record numbers. This signing may pay for itself in 3 or 4 years due the increase of ticket sales alone. When it comes time for a new TV contract, they’ll be getting hundreds of millions of dollars more also. You have to spend money to make money.
Signing Reyes and Wilson wouldn’t have made the team any better or draw more ticket sales. The Tigers already have an All-Star shortstop and have a strong pitching rotation. What they needed was another big bat and they got one.
Sorry Theo… Fielder’s deal is worse than Pujols. I dont think that’s close. I personally think that Fielder’s deal isnt as bad as Dave has implied, but to compare the two gets is wrong.
This is just a ridiculous claim, even in a best-case scenario. Last year, the Tigers averaged 32,617 per game, just 8,638 short of a sellout. If the Tigers sell 8,638 extra season ticket packages, at ~$1500 a pop, that’s an added ~$12.9M a season. And that’s just revenue, not pure profit. It’s a drop in the bucket compared to the $214M cost of the contract.
Plus, there’s never been any evidence that big name signings generate long-term economic benefits for a franchise. While there may be some intial uptick in ticket sales, it quickly declines. And by the end of the contract, when the player’s contract is an albatross and the team sucks, it hurts ticket sales.
One key variable in analyzing the Pujols deal (that we may never know) is the impact on the Angels new multi-billion dollar cable deal in a key Hispanic market. Maybe enough of s difference to pay his salary in my opinion
Indeed. I also think people underestimate the long term impact having one of the greatest players in baseball does for a team.
50 years from now, they’ll be able to trot out Albert. Will people drive 300 miles to see a statue of Skip Schumacher? No, but they would to see one of Albert.
In my experience, Mexican- Americans ( the majority of Latinos in LA) don’t feel much cultural kinship with spanish-speaking Carribean players. Fernando Valenzuela was HUGE because he was (A) great and (B) Mexican. Plus, in most of Mexico, it’s all about Soccer. Baseball is big only in certain areas.
The Madson signing definitely made “Philly look silly.” But if money isn’t an issue for them they upgraded closers and that’s it. But I find it hard to believe the Pap signing isn’t going to leave less money to spend for a more pressing need.
Where would you rank the Red Sox offering David Ortiz arbitration? I am curious what FG’s take is on Ortiz value as a DH.
Offering Ortiz arbitration meant they had to trade their starting SS in a salary dump and pass on Edwin Jackson. It also led to them trading Lowrie, Reddick, Weiland and 2 prospects for low cost 2 RP’ers to avoid going the FA route and so Bard could be free to start.
So instead of having Bard closing, Lowrie/Aviles at 3B, Scutaro at SS, Reddick in RF, Youk at DH and Edwin Jackson in the rotation and an tested set up guy acquired as a FA. Now they have a closer with a balky elbow, broken down Youk at 3B, Aviles/Punto at SS, Ross in RF, a disgruntled Papi (if he loses his arbitration casee) at DH and a set up guy in Melancon who may find the AL East a challenge .
Ruben Amaro is an idiot that has been fortunate enough to reap the rewards of Pat Gillick’s work. Its going to come crashing down on him in two years or so.
I agree that the papelbon signing was horrendous, but c’mon, the prince fielder contract will go down as one of the worst in the history of baseball. Ignoring the fact that he is out of shape, he will not be worth 20+mil a year when he 33, 34, 35, and so on. Heck, i wouldnt be suprised if he is not worth 23 million this upcoming year. The tigers really dug themselves a hole with contract. Look at the phillies. They will be paying ryan howard 25 million this season. Could you imagine how scary the phillies could be if they didnt have howard, and instead had an extra 25 million dollars laying around at ruben amaro’s disposal?
At Amaro’s disposal? Not that scary, really.
At a competent GM’s disposal, perhaps.
I believe you forgot part of the Gonzalez trade.Washington also got RHP Robert Gilliam back whom Jim Callis said to quote him ” is more than just a throw in”. So if you are going to call it one of the worst at least be accurate about the players involved in the deal.Gilliam projects as a possible 4 or 5 starter or reliever which would make the trade slightly more palatable.
as a Cardinals fan, I gotta throw in the signings of Skip Schumaker, Kyle McClellan, and JC Romero. they didn’t need any of those replacement level players. and it’s arguable they would have signed Oswalt by now if they didn’t sign those guys.
I absolutely can’t stand the “Ilitch wants to win a World Series” type of talk. Replace his name with any GM or Owner, it’s a pointless thing to say. “Bob *really* wants to make money by investing in the stock market.” Obviously.
Have you heard of the Astros?
The Royals mostly are a money making operation for the owner, not a real team.
Some of the comments in here show a pure lack of understanding of baseball economics by baseball fans. The Fielder signing was awful, mainly because it doesn’t accomplish anything. He doesn’t fill a team positional need for any year but 2012, and they could have just paid Carlos Pena for one year to hit righties and do the same thing. And it cripples the organization long term into making terrible budget constraints because they wanted to overpay one player. It was an awful decision, and for owner mike to try to win before he dies very well could cost the organization long term success. Fielder doesn’t make sense for the tigers other than that he is a good player going to a good team, which is only one of five of the necessary criteria to signing the right free agent. It was a stupid signing, no question.
Also, the Rays do do it right, efficiency and win curve model. That is how all MLB teams should be ran
If every team was ran like the Rays, baseball would go bankrupt due to lack of fan support.
Also, if anyone here loves the Rays efficiency model so much, then they should be buying Ray’s season tickets to support them. Otherwise, they are hypocrites and should shut their pie holes.
That doesnt make any sense Theo.
You do realize the Rays are a consistent 90 win playoff team, right?
After a decade of obscurity and stock piling #1 draft picks. Yes, now they are a 90 win team, but that isn’t sustainable. Their minor league system is tapped out and in a few years their top players be Free Agents. Obscurity is just around the corner.
Name their first overall picks on the team.
Price.
Great. David Price.
The team is not great because of years of high draft picks, that’s an awful myth that is easy to prove incorrect. The core of the team (the Zobrit’s, the Joyce’s Matt Moore, Demond Jennings, Carl Crawford, James Shields, etc. These guys were not top draft picks, Price, Longoria, and Niemman were, and Niemman is probably their worst starting pitching option.
Where did this influx of stupid posting come from that exists in these comments on fangraphs in this blog post? We did not have these posters a few weeks ago.
Surprised the Cahill trade didn’t make the list, Parker is basically as good as Cahill already.
Otherwise I agree with your list all the way, good job.
Can we please stop using WAR as though it’s gospel? The UZR portion is unreliable, especially for 1st baseman.
Secondly, WAR in and of itself undervalues hitting because it doesn’t factor in a star hitters influence on the hitters around him. The performance of the hitter before him who sees more fastballs, and the hitter behind him who sees better pitches due to the star hitter being on base on front of him. The entire lineup hitting with less pressure on them. The pitchers pitching more confidently and aggressively knowing the offense is more explosive.
Being someone who has played this game, I can tell you from personal experience that arum saved is definitely NOT as good as a run scored.
World series are not won by the team with the greatest payroll efficiency. They are won by the team that plays the best on the field. You don’t get bonus runs spending less money.
Finally, no one had mentioned the cost of NOT signing guys like Fielder. If you are a contender, and you overspend for him, you remove him as a possibility for your rival. If you don’t sign him, not only do you not get the gain in Wins, but your rival could get the gain instead of you. With limited opportunities to sign these types of players, overpaying for them doesn’t begin the crack my top ten of bad deals.
First before the onslaught! (unless this comment came too late to provoke an onslaught, which would make me sad)
What a fantastic collection of fallacies and anecdotes.
Hitters don’t influence the pitches to the other hitters in the count. It’s a stupid myth. As a pitcher, you are trying to get the guy out at the plate, period. There is no evidence in baseball history of additional hittable fastballs to a guy because a Pujols type hitter is behind them.
i honestly don’t know which stupid thing you said to reply to first
Cute, but it doesn’t exist, I dare you to prove otherwise.
I also questioned why this money was not available earlier in the offseason, however, after further thinking about it, I realized that most of those players (besides Pujols, who I think received a less team-friendly deal than Fielder) I really wouldn’t want for that price or for multiple years. Jose Reyes? If he pulls a hammy he gives you zero production. Mark Buerhle? Sucks. CJ Wilson? Still don’t trust him for that kind of cash. Aramis Ramirez? Fills a need, but demands too much.
Prince Fielder is durable and he is a star. I won’t argue with the risk involved, but at least they didn’t give up prospects for him.
I think the Gio deal will pay off. They gave up too much and extended him too early, but they had the surplus of prospects to trade, need to put butts in the seats, and now have a solid pitching staff of players in or entering their prime-they only need Gio to be a #2 since Strasburg should easily be a #1. The ranking is reasonable considering the prospects and contract, but will ultimately pay off.
I agree with the Papelbon and Bell signings, though Papelbon at least makes sense from the perspective that the Phillies are a contender. Cuddyer is a nice fit for the Rockies even though they overpaid because they may end up needing him at another position.
Sure, the Fielder deal wasn’t great but the Tigers are spending less this year than last, having offloaded guillen and maggs. Those deals didn’t cripple them so much as to prevent them from winning the division.
As to Pujols, it’s all very well saying fielder is younger but age is only relevant if players are in similar condition. I’d rather have a 35 yr old Albert than Prince simply on conditioning.
Incorrect on the Tigers’ payroll. It is going to be 20-25 million higher this year than last. Many of their players got significant raises from ’11 to ’12.
It’s easy to find back of the rotation arms and very hard to get reasonably priced #3s locked up for reasonable money for many years. Gio doesn’t even have to be the #2 on this team, while 2 of those traded are meh pitchers, 1 a meh hitter, and one is too young to know. This was a win, not a loss. Don’t like the ranking at all.
Your comment on Chen: “his low ERA was essentially just about preventing hits with men on base.” Umm….yeah, that is pretty much what you are supposed to do as a pitcher; pevent hits to limit runs with men on. Chen has been consistent and stable and pitched deep in games for a team that needs his attitude in a young clubhouse and a young rotation. Do you even follow baseball outside of the lEast cost?
Aramis isn’t a terrible fielder, he is just a below average one. The first year of that deal is fine, the following 2 years are probably an overpay but I find it hard to consider it one of the 10 worst of the off season. Pujols is almost certainly going to miss value more than this will and it has a lot more potential for disaster since it is so long.
Yes Madson signed for a 1 year deal for a lot less than Papelbon. If you remember, the origianl line on Ryan was $44MM for 4 yrs. Then Mr Boras pissed-off RAJ. Wrong thing to do. I’m sure Ryan’s price came down a lot seeing how long it took to find a home. If RM has a good year in 2012, then he can ask high again. If not and JP does, whi’s the fool now?
Hmm, all this chatter and not a peep about the dismissive predictions for Joe Nathan. I’m not saying 37 year old relievers aren’t risky, but to write off such a dominating reliever’s future because of his ’10-11 seasons seems unwise to me.
Tommy John guys fit a relatively predictable pattern – the first year back on the field is basically live-fire rehab. It’s not til the second year they set their new standards, often right in line with their pre-injury career arc. Yes, he’s aging – but also had the hidden benefit of his lost season: allowing all his non-elbow body parts to rest and recover for 16 months from the wear and tear of a MLB pitching career.
He might not be the best possible investment of $7MMx2, but he’s certainly a wiser risk than Chen or Capps who have no upside at all.
I’m surprised that you put Papelbon’s signing as the worst transaction of the offseason and somehow didn’t mention that, days after he signed, the new collective bargaining agreement was announced, leaving Papelbon as a Type-A free agent, but removing that label from the other free agent RPs.
As a Red Sox fan who enjoyed Papelbon’s time in Boston, I’m sad to see him go, but happy to not have that contract and benefit from the draft pick compensation. But man, that’s rough for the Phillies…
Fielder WPA/LI: 5.99 Reyes: 3.00 Wilson: 1.78
Fielder age: 27 Reyes: 28 Wilson: 31
Nothing wrong with taking the best hitter and letting the hard to quantify stuff like fielding and positional adjustments fester amongst themselves.
Also, Reyes/Wilson were not a fit with the long-term plans. The rotation is already basically set for as long as they want it to be, with an ace and young, somewhat established pitching on arbitration contracts, with most of our top prospects being starting pitchers. At shortstop we have an all-star who became an all-star again when he got moved back to shortstop (a move I’m sure was widely criticized pre-season), is signed cheaply for 2012 and has a cheap option for 2013.
First of all to say that Papalbon is the worst signing is ridiculous when he hasn’t thrown one pitch for the Phillies. They did upgrade their bench if you look at their transactions. Roy Oswalt has a balky back and want to be close to his home or he would have signed somewhere already. It has definitely limited his suitors. Were the Phils supposed to offer him arbitration and risk him getting close to last year’s salary of 15 million? Ryan Madson was not going to take a one year deal to come back to the Phils and if rumors were true about a 4 year 44 million deal, GOOD RIDDANCE!! If I had my choice between the 2 for a few more million, Papalbon is the safe bet. Madson closed for one year and always has a deer in headlights look to him. The Reds stadium is worse that the Phillies regarding the ball flying out of it, so we will see. The left-field remark you say is also wrong. Mayberry was awesome last year and you need to give him a look. Dom Brown has been working out all winter and looks like a beast right now. See the photo of him on CROSSINGBROAD.COM w/ Hunter Pence. Plus, they picked up the under-rated Laynce Nix for cheap, who is another monster in size. He may get 10 home runs by just looking at the right field fence. They just singed Juan Pierre to be another veteran to push Mayberry. Another thing I am excited about is they don’t have a Rule 5 guy on their roster this year. Polanco had surgery early and I predict he will have a huge comback year. Utley will do the same and Howard will be ready by May. Oh, and don’t forget the 3 WISEMEN we have in the rotation. EFFFFF, the FOUR ACES. That was set up to fail from the beginning. PHILLIES WILL BE WORLD SERIES CHAMPS IN 2012!!!!!!!!!!
The Pujols and Fielder deals wasted tens of millions of dollars that could have been used better. They are the clearcut worst deals, in whatever order you choose.
I’m sure there are others that wasted a great deal of money, also.
I don’t know what a $4.75M deal is doing on this list.
I remember when the Red Sox signed Manny Ramirez away from Cleveland for $168M over, I believe, 7 years. Shocking at first until it was made known that the last 2 years were “option’ years. The same may hold true for both Pujols and Fielder. Their contracts may include escape clauses that neither the Tigers or Angels chose to make the public aware of. Who knows? As for which deal is better? Pujols will make money for the Angels management, long term, on the field and off, because of who he is. Fielder won’t, unless his presence significantly improves Detroit’s performance in the W/L column. When taking into account, the player he will replace at first base one has to wonder how much more he can do. Miguel Cabrera hit .344/30/105 last year and now he is without a regular position on the field to play, now that Prince is on the roster. It is really a mystery to me what benefit there is in replacing an all-star with another all-star at the same position. But, I only make pizza at home, so what do I know?
I’d argue that Cuddyer is the worst of the bunch. The Fielder deal will look awful by the time it’s done, but he at least provides return on the investment for the first few years.
Papelbon’s contract looks especially foolish considering how the relief market played out, but he at least provides partial value to a win-now team. He’s not worth the contract, but not completely worthless and replacable either.
The Rockies essentially lit $30m on fire. They signed an aging mediocre defending ok player causing them to trade the left handed hitter, better defender, younger, cheaper Seth Smith for nothing. That is much worse than overpaying a good player.
Also the Jason Kubel signing is along these same lines (although less years so better) and deserves a top 5 slot.
I just want to thank you for censoring my post and it didn’t include anything offensive, or negative to the author of the site nor another commenter.
It’s kind of my running joke about society, I get banned on every single site I post on and that’s after dampening the content down to make the grandmothers of this world happy.
No problem, my opinion isn’t good enough for you, OK. All I posted was my opinion that I think Brad Peacock and Anthony Rizzo are good players. Yes, that needs to be stamped out. (This was posted at around 3:00 AM CST in response. When I pasted it again later after I saw it was disallowed, it said ‘duplicate post.’ Yeah, so it was either a glitch or it’s that you are a joke.
If you are getting banned at every site you go to, maybe that says something about you as a human-being rather than the mods at these various sites.
Clearly a legitimate attempt to silence your provocative opinions and not just some glitch.
That short term gain in the standings for the tigers will be worth it if they win the World Series just once in the next two or three seasons. Forget the fact that MC will have some real back up, and going from right to left in the middle of the lineup will drive AL managers up the wall trying to do pitching matchups. This is all win for the Tigers… as a left handed power bat behind their best hitter will make the middle of the lineup one of the most fearsome in the entire AL.
If you worry about where your team will be in 9 years, you’ll never win a World Series! Who’s to say which players will be injured, which prospects will turn into superstars etc… Anyone who thinks that ilitch made a bad move is a moron. It’s puts the Tigers in a dominant position in their division right now and for at least the next few years. And in 9 years do you really think $23 million a year for any big name player is going to be unheard of??? Anyone that doesn’t like this move is either jealous of the Tigers, or a socialist that hates ilitch for creating an empire from nothing and spending his money how he wants.
lol @ this list. how can a 1 year deal make the list?
also its funny you have fielder at #2 worst but don’t even have pujols (who is what 3 years older, so his 10 year deal should be worse?).
the fact that you attribute to the wall street journal is a shame when i know an abundance of people with more knowledge than you get absolutely no attention from having a job like yours.
oh and the gio for prospects deal too. i think its too early to say thats a bad deal. everybody thought trading miller and maybin for cabrera was way too much but look how amazing that deal looks.
gio is only going to improve, he is an all star calibur MLB pitcher which cannot be said about any of those prospects as of right now. sure things can change but i wish the tigers would’ve traded prospects for him!
Pretty big “oops” to say Chen’s “low ERA was essentially just about preventing hits with men on base” and your lead NEGATIVE comment about his performance. But no goofier than saying “he showed no real signs of improvement last year” to seasib the simply incorrect assertion that he “has been a below average pitcher for nearly his entire career.”
He didn’t really need to improve much in 2011 — he’s pitched nearly 300 innings the past two seasons and followed 2010′s 12-7/4.17 with 12-8/3.77.
He hasn’t been throwing hard, granted, but he hasn’t needed to. Of all the dudes who have been in-aptly compared to glory-days fave Larry Gura over the last 30-plus years, Chen’s shaping up as the best. No reason to think he doesn’t have one or two more of those years in him, and the spendthrift Royals can certainly afford to find out.
There’s a good chance that seven months from now you may recast this as one of the best signings of the winter.
(sic and sic) … AS (not ‘and’) your lead NEGATIVE comment about his performance. But no goofier than saying “he showed no real signs of improvement last year” to SEASON (not “seasib”) …
Gotta quit giving that proofreader Saturdays off!
Wost (upcoming) move of the offseason? Any team that signs ManRam. How does anyone think this guy can still contribute, let alone not be a negative distraction. Dont do it Orioles!!! He’s not worth the extra 5 fans in the seats every game. Just retire Manny. Coming back for 2/3s of the season to hit 1.80 with 9 HRs isnt going to make people forget that you cheated. Maybe the Red Sox will sign him again for a swan song season. They seem to invite disfunction into their club house anyway.
http://www.monster4sale.com
Monster4sale,Monster Headphones,Beats By Dre,Beats By Dr.Dre,New Beats By Dre,Beats By Dre Online,Beats By Dr.Dre Outlet
Water park maintenance helps ensure that all of the slides and other water-based activities offered by a water park are safe for the people that wish to use them. Many people do not realize that there is a lot that goes into taking care of one of these parks. Amusement parks are not the only places that require constant upkeep and maintenance, parks that cater to water activities require a lot of care also.