Dombrowski: SP likely from FA. Which should we sign?

Your preference?

  • Cueto

  • Chen

  • Gallardo

  • Greinke

  • Iwakuma

  • Price

  • Samardzija

  • Zimmermann

  • Other...

  • None


Results are only viewable after voting.

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,371
Can someone explain to me why DD and Farrell have announced that they are going to sign a FA ace? I realize the price will be sky high regardless, but I don't know why you would ever declare anything publicly other than "we are going to do what's best for the team" (Belichick style)

I have this hopefully irrational fear that the Sox, having stated their intention to the fans, will pay through the nose for whoever is left, e.g., Cueto.
The only reason I can think of is to use the press to put pressure on possible trade targets to lower their demands. "Hey (Rick Hahn, Billy Beane) we don't have to pay your price. Remember, we have money too."

This is another reason why I continue to assert that the ownership and Front office of the Red Sox are going to go the extra mile to supplement this young core that has emerged. From their perspective here are just too many resources, financially and talent-wise, to squander on another last place season for the major league club. And let me be clear: This is not the strategy I am advocating. I hate losing, but besides the FA contracts for Hanley and Panda, and the "why-the-hell-are-we-giving-him-this-contract-now?" contract to Rick Porcello, I was a huge advocate of Ben Cherington's patient approach to building an organization. I dreamt of rooting for the mostly homegrown next great Red Sox team. However, I think that ownership feels pressure, financially and from the fan base, to use these resources to better the major league club NOW. Which means that no matter what they do, I think we will think it is an overpay.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
“@jonmorosi: David Price won’t return to Toronto. #BlueJays announce their longest-term rotation investment of winter: J.A. Happ, three years, $36M.”
 

Clears Cleaver

Lil' Bill
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
11,370
Wow. I mean Happ is 32, doesn't throw hard and has exactly one good year in nine and gets $36M. He has a career WAR of 9.4 and 25% of that came last year when he had career lows in BB/9 and near career low in HR/9.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,818
Honolulu HI
In Scott Lauber's latest article in the Herald he makes the following sobering observation:
"Of the 10 pitchers who got at least one vote for the Cy Young Award six years ago, four (Chris Carpenter, Javier Vazquez, Roy Halladay and Dan Haren) are now retired, two (Adam Wainwright and CC Sabathia) missed substantial time due to injury, and Tim Lincecum has regressed to a 4.68 ERA since 2012. Only Zack Greinke, Felix Hernandez and Justin Verlander could be labeled elite over the six-year period — and for most of that time, they were still in their 20s."
In other words, none of the elite pitchers in the same age range (Vazquez, Halladay, Carpenter etc) as the pitchers who are currently free agents are still in the league, and only three of the elite pitchers from six years ago are still elite (Greinke, Wainwright and Hernandez - I would not call Verlander that anymore). Of these, only one of them (Wainwright) was anywhere near 30 (he was 28) six years ago -and he's missed a substantial amount of time due to injuries. This highlights the danger of signing any of these pitchers and the substantial chance that the majority (if not all) of these contracts -either sooner or later- are going to be albatrosses.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,105
In Scott Lauber's latest article in the Herald he makes the following sobering observation:
"Of the 10 pitchers who got at least one vote for the Cy Young Award six years ago, four (Chris Carpenter, Javier Vazquez, Roy Halladay and Dan Haren) are now retired, two (Adam Wainwright and CC Sabathia) missed substantial time due to injury, and Tim Lincecum has regressed to a 4.68 ERA since 2012. Only Zack Greinke, Felix Hernandez and Justin Verlander could be labeled elite over the six-year period — and for most of that time, they were still in their 20s."
In other words, none of the elite pitchers in the same age range (Vazquez, Halladay, Carpenter etc) as the pitchers who are currently free agents are still in the league, and only three of the elite pitchers from six years ago are still elite (Greinke, Wainwright and Hernandez - I would not call Verlander that anymore). Of these, only one of them (Wainwright) was anywhere near 30 (he was 28) six years ago -and he's missed a substantial amount of time due to injuries. This highlights the danger of signing any of these pitchers and the substantial chance that the majority (if not all) of these contracts -either sooner or later- are going to be albatrosses.

What's the significance of six years ago? Sounds to me like he cherry picked a year that fit his narrative.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,887
Whatever miracle Ray Searage pulled off to straighten out Edison Volquez translated to Kansas City, so the Jays must be hoping for the same with Happ.

Now he has his toughest test with Allen Webster.

Back on topic, I don't know if this changes anything with Price. Despite his statement about wanting to stay in Toronto, I don't think anyone thought it was going to happen.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
12,408
If you look at the 8 best pitchers under age 24, six years ago, what has been their career trajectory?
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,818
Honolulu HI
What's the significance of six years ago? Sounds to me like he cherry picked a year that fit his narrative.
I assume six years ago was chosen because it's going to take at least a six year contract to sign any of the top free agent starters.
If you want to go back 7 years (the presumed length of a David Price contract) the list of starters that got at least one Cy Young vote (Cliff Lee, Roy Halladay, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Mike Mussina, Ervin Santana, Tim Lincecum, Brandon Webb, Johan Santana, CC Sabathia and Ryan Dempster) is even more troubling.
 
Last edited:

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,510
Rogers Park
If you look at the 8 best pitchers under age 24, six years ago, what has been their career trajectory?
I've got a minute to poke around fangraphs. Using fWAR as a shorthand both for selecting the top eight and assessing their performance since, those guys are:

Felix Hernandez. He's thrown at least 200 IP of high-quality baseball every year since 2009. 31.2 WAR.
Clayton Kershaw. He's thrown at least 198 IP of high-quality baseball every year since 2009. 48.8 WAR.
Jair Jurrjens. He spent 2015 pitching for the Rockies' AAA affiliate. 1.7 WAR.
Brett Anderson. Good to great when he's on the mound, Anderson has thrown fewer than 50 IP in 3 of 6 seasons since 2009. 7.3 WAR.
Matt Cain. Cain was a 200 IP horse through 2012, but has had some struggles with injuries and performance since. 13.7 WAR.
Chad Billingsley. Decent for several years, then elbow troubles and a declined option brought him to the vaunted Phillies' rotation. 9.4 WAR.
Max Scherzer. Acquired by the Tigers, and was good for a few years and then great for a few more. 28 WAR.
Yovani Gallardo. Reliably good. 17.5 WAR.
 

FredCDobbs

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 5, 2004
563
Austin
We're not trading for an Ace. Everyone here freaked out over what it took to get a damn reliever. I wonder if they'll try and force Grienke to say no to a huge offer. That would be my favorite signing. I know everyone hears West Coast and NL on him, but I can see him aging very well with his mix of pitches, he's in his absolute prime right now, and I can see him thriving in Boston. And can LA really pay two pitchers $500 million? That seems crazy with all the holes they have. I would bet he signs with SF.
 

FredCDobbs

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 5, 2004
563
Austin
I also want to avoid anything like 5/$120 for Cueto. I feel like he managed to red-line it through a couple of great post-season starts but would be Hanley and Pablo Vol. 3 where we immediately regret the contract from the moment it's signed and dream of dumping him.
 

Rasputin

Will outlive SeanBerry
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 4, 2001
29,423
Not here
I also want to avoid anything like 5/$120 for Cueto. I feel like he managed to red-line it through a couple of great post-season starts but would be Hanley and Pablo Vol. 3 where we immediately regret the contract from the moment it's signed and dream of dumping him.
Cueto isn't my choice either, but if you're going to overreact to the first season of a new contract, there's a good chance you won't like anyone ever.
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 3, 2001
44,855
Mtigawi
If you paid me a million billion dollars I would have never guess that Javier Vazquez got a Cy Young vote.

1. I'm getting old
2. That's a dumb list
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,818
Honolulu HI
If you paid me a million billion dollars I would have never guess that Javier Vazquez got a Cy Young vote.

1. I'm getting old
2. That's a dumb list
Javier Vazquez had a higher WAR in 2009 than David Price had in 2015.
If he had been a free agent that offseason, some team would have signed him to a long lucrative contract and he would have subsequently ended up one of the great free agent busts of all time (he was a disaster in 2010 and retired by 2012).
 

Buzzkill Pauley

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 30, 2006
10,569
I assume six years ago was chosen because it's going to take at least a six year contract to sign any of the top free agent starters.
If you want to go back 7 years (the presumed length of a David Price contract) the list of starters that got at least one Cy Young vote (Cliff Lee, Roy Halladay, Daisuke Matsuzaka, Mike Mussina, Ervin Santana, Tim Lincecum, Brandon Webb, Johan Santana, CC Sabathia and Ryan Dempster) is even more troubling.
Yeah, Lauber's list might have been cherry-picking, but the same point is made even with a slightly different tree.

Because the list 5 years out is better, but not really so much better as all that: Felix Hernandez, David Price, CC Sabathia, Jon Lester, Jered Weaver, Clay Buchholz, Cliff Lee, Trevo Cahill, Francisco Liriano, Justin Verlander, Roy Halladay, Adam Wainwright, Ubaldo Jimenez, Tim Hudson, Josh Johnson, Roy Oswalt, Mat Latos, Tim Lincecum, and Brett Myers.

Still there's some merit there. David Price has gotten Cy Young votes in two of the last three years. So if we were to take each list of Cy Young SP candidates from 2008-2010 (5-7 years ago), those pitchers who have appeared on at least two include, with their 2010 age and 2015 WAR:
  • Roy Halladay (3 of 3) Age 33, DNP
  • Tim Lincecum (3 of 3), Age 26, 0.3 bWAR
  • CC Sabathia (3 of 3) Age 29, 1.0 bWAR
  • Cliff Lee (2 of 3) Age 31, DNP
  • Felix Hernandez (2 of 3) Age 24, 4.4 bWAR
  • Justin Verlander (2 of 3) Age 27, 2.2 bWAR
  • Adam Wainwright (2 of 3) Age 28, 0.9 bWAR
These were the "aces" of their day. They were all the really top-notch pitchers back in 2010. And David Price is a really top-notch pitcher now. But except for young King Felix, none of those guys are still top-notch pitchers, nor do any of them look like bounce-back candidates for 2016.

The absolute best case scenario for Price would seem to be a mirror of Roy Halladay's age 30-36 seasons over the next seven years (four great years, one good year, one mediocre year, and only one lost year at the end). However, Halladay had pitched 168 2/3 fewer innings through age 29 (19730 pitches thrown, per bbref), and never once threw in the postseason during his twenties.

Price has ~ 4000 more pitches thrown against MLB competition through a similar point (22724, plus an additional 263 batters faced in postseason play). That extra wear and tear, and especially the lack of rest during October, makes me think Price isn't particularly likely to match Halladay's early-30s production.

The absolute best case scenario IMO would be giving Price a contract like Sabathia's first MFY one, but letting him walk at the opt-out.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,105
I think the point that Price is unlikely to be an elite pitcher in 2020 is valid. But you can say that about any big time free agent. And big time free agency is the only way to really take advantage of high revenues. There's got to be some formula where if a team has a payroll of 180 million, they can expect 30 mil or so to be dead money. All you can really do is hope that you 4 good years on a 6 year deal instead of 2.
 

PrometheusWakefield

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2009
10,441
Boston, MA
In the long run we're all dead. So what?

Cliff Lee signed a 5 year contract worth $120 million after 2010. In the three years following that contract, he put up 17.3 WAR. In the last 2 years of the contract he put up 1.9 WAR, including a big fat zero last year. Add it up and it's 19.2 WAR for $120 million, or about $6.2m/WAR. In other words, a pretty good contract.

Roy Halladay signed a 3 year extension (basically a 4 year deal) for $75m when he got traded to the Phillies after the 2009 season. He sucked in 2013. So what? In 2011 alone he was worth $63 million. At $7m per win, Halladay was worth $114 million over the life of his contract.

Adam Wainwright signed a 5 year extension worth $97m at the beginning of the 2013 season. Since that time he's put up 12.3 WAR at $60m, for a terrific rate of 4.8 $/WAR. I don't see the Cardinals shopping him to get out of the final 3 years of his contract, and I doubt they consider him an albatross, but he only needs 2 more WAR for the remainder of his contract to have proven average value over the lifetime of the deal.

How about Sabathia? His contract was originally $180m over 8 years, which was reportedly $60m more than anyone else was willing to pay. Since signing that deal, he put up 26 WAR. At $7m per win that's $182 in value, for which he was paid ~$150m. So he has already earned his original contract. He'll have trouble living up to the extension the Yankees gave him in 2011, and the Sabathia opt-out extension is the first contract signing that I have down as a probable mistake.

Verlander will be an interesting case, but even here he has been basically even to the Tigers relative to the $7m/WAR baseline: 10.6 WAR is $74.2 in value against a little over $25m AAV over the past 3 years. Obviously, that's not great for the Tigers because the whole point of these contracts is to accumulate excess value in the early years of the contract which makes up for the albatross at the end. On the other hand, Verlander was pretty fucking good last year so the story is far from over on him

Lincecum is a tough case, and it's true that had he been a free agent after the 2009 season (after putting up 7.1 and 7.7 WAR in 2008/9) or his declining but still solid 2011 season (4.3 and 4 WAR in 2010/11) he would have gotten a contract that would have been immediately brutal as he pretty much fell off a cliff after that (3.2 WAR in 4 seasons since).

But he's the only one - the rest of those guys all look like solid value to me. Fangraphs has King Felix at $260m in value since 2009 and $110m in value since his signed his 7 year, $175m deal before 2013. So he only needs another 6 or 7 WAR over the next 4 years to provide average value for Seattle.

Fangraphs has David Price worth over $90m over the past 2 years. 90! I don't know what the $/WAR is going to look like over the next few years, but with the money flooding in to this sport it sure isn't going down. At $8m/WAR he needs to reach 26 WAR to be worth that contract. I'd say $9m/WAR is more realistic, which puts him at 23.3 WAR. That's about equal to his performance over the past 4 seasons.

So we're basically betting on Price accumulating the same degree of value over the next 7 years that he already accumulated over the previous four. He can do that by having four great years and then falling off a cliff, or a couple of great years followed by a more gradual decline, or by being decent throughout, or whatever. The chances of him being worth his average salary by year 7 are low, but then the chances of him being worth more than his average salary in year 1 of the deal are very high.

I'd say the big picture thought I have about this whole exercise after having done it all is that it's much more important to avoid a complete collapse like Lincecum than getting too concerned about the total dollar figure for a Price or a Greinke. Obviously Lincecum had major red flags right from the beginning, as does, say, Cueto.
 
Last edited:

nvalvo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
21,510
Rogers Park
Lincecum is a strange case. He was only available to the Giants in the draft because of concerns about durability given his size. Those concerns proved founded, but he was able to hold it together long enough to help the franchise transition from its late- and post-Bonds wasteland into a perennial contender.

I guess I'm saying no one really expected him to pitch at a high level into his 30s; in fact, it was widely anticipated he would not be able to. He's a weird comp for someone like Price.
 

IpswichSox

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
2,792
Suburbs of Washington, DC
So how come our numbers-oriented owner apparently established a bias against long-term deals to pitchers older than 30 because those deals fail in the latter years but when measured against value provided during the totality of the deal (PromentheusWakefield's post above), they appear to return average or better value?
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,635
So how come our numbers-oriented owner apparently established a bias against long-term deals to pitchers older than 30 because those deals fail in the latter years but when measured against value provided during the totality of the deal (PromentheusWakefield's post above), they appear to return average or better value?
Because being numbers oriented doesn't mean drawing conclusions from a couple of relevant examples.
 

PrometheusWakefield

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2009
10,441
Boston, MA
Yes, and I think the Red Sox position against signing FA starters past 30 is a bit exaggerated; we did offer Jon Lester 6 years at $135 million for example.

Of course, the $7m/WAR baseline and the Fangraphs Dollars numbers that I was using are based on average performance by an open market free agent signing. It's not surprising (in fact it's downright tautological) that big free agent SP contracts would produce, on average, something close to average value. Obviously to get to a 95 win team you need to have a core that can produce wins for less than FA-market rates.
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
In the long run we're all dead. So what?

Cliff Lee signed a 5 year contract worth $120 million after 2010. In the three years following that contract, he put up 17.3 WAR. In the last 2 years of the contract he put up 1.9 WAR, including a big fat zero last year. Add it up and it's 19.2 WAR for $120 million, or about $6.2m/WAR. In other words, a pretty good contract.

Roy Halladay signed a 3 year extension (basically a 4 year deal) for $75m when he got traded to the Phillies after the 2009 season. He sucked in 2013. So what? In 2011 alone he was worth $63 million. At $7m per win, Halladay was worth $114 million over the life of his contract.

Adam Wainwright signed a 5 year extension worth $97m at the beginning of the 2013 season. Since that time he's put up 12.3 WAR at $60m, for a terrific rate of 4.8 $/WAR. I don't see the Cardinals shopping him to get out of the final 3 years of his contract, and I doubt they consider him an albatross, but he only needs 2 more WAR for the remainder of his contract to have proven average value over the lifetime of the deal.

How about Sabathia? His contract was originally $180m over 8 years, which was reportedly $60m more than anyone else was willing to pay. Since signing that deal, he put up 26 WAR. At $7m per win that's $182 in value, for which he was paid ~$150m. So he has already earned his original contract. He'll have trouble living up to the extension the Yankees gave him in 2011, and the Sabathia opt-out extension is the first contract signing that I have down as a probable mistake.

Verlander will be an interesting case, but even here he has been basically even to the Tigers relative to the $7m/WAR baseline: 10.6 WAR is $74.2 in value against a little over $25m AAV over the past 3 years. Obviously, that's not great for the Tigers because the whole point of these contracts is to accumulate excess value in the early years of the contract which makes up for the albatross at the end. On the other hand, Verlander was pretty fucking good last year so the story is far from over on him

But he's the only one - the rest of those guys all look like solid value to me. Fangraphs has King Felix at $260m in value since 2009 and $110m in value since his signed his 7 year, $175m deal before 2013. So he only needs another 6 or 7 WAR over the next 4 years to provide average value for Seattle.

Fangraphs has David Price worth over $90m over the past 2 years. 90! I don't know what the $/WAR is going to look like over the next few years, but with the money flooding in to this sport it sure isn't going down. At $8m/WAR he needs to reach 26 WAR to be worth that contract. I'd say $9m/WAR is more realistic, which puts him at 23.3 WAR. That's about equal to his performance over the past 4 seasons.

So we're basically betting on Price accumulating the same degree of value over the next 7 years that he already accumulated over the previous four. He can do that by having four great years and then falling off a cliff, or a couple of great years followed by a more gradual decline, or by being decent throughout, or whatever. The chances of him being worth his average salary by year 7 are low, but then the chances of him being worth more than his average salary in year 1 of the deal are very high.

I'd say the big picture thought I have about this whole exercise after having done it all is that it's much more important to avoid a complete collapse like Lincecum than getting too concerned about the total dollar figure for a Price or a Greinke. Obviously Lincecum had major red flags right from the beginning, as does, say, Cueto.
This was an excellent run down.

I would say if you asked Red Sox FO people before 2013, Lester ace level dominance muti year run, who was going to break JH's bank for an astronomical Next Big Pitching Contract I'd say Felix, Price, Greinke, Cueto( who apart from his KC time has been as consistent an anyone) maybe Zimm ,before this last poor year, would all have been considered ,younger, more upside pitchers than Lester prior to him breaking out.

There were an brief whisper of interest in Scherzer last year before the Nationals jerry rigged a contract that a lot of FO's didn't like. http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2015/02/10/baseball-executives-dont-like-max-scherzers-deferred-money-deal/

David Price is going to get the biggest pitching contract ever and Per Pete Abe the Sox are already at 200 mill. It''s been generously leaked that the Sox are going to overbid the field by 20-30 mill. IMHO Price is going to get an opt out and maybe 230-240 mill is a winning bid based on Kershaw 215 ( not a free agent ) and Cano/Pujols 240 ( FA but position player. Not as many suitors.) I'd think the Giants and STL would be the stiffest competition with the Cubs a dark horse.

Now the interesting negotiation is between Geinke and the Dodgers. Theoretically, their job gets harder with Greinke the longer they hassle. The Giants are said to be focused on Greinke as well with STL beginning their TV money revenue explosion this year or next they could easily use Price in an injured rotation and/or Heyward to keep steady in the OF
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
Dombrowski is keeping talks with free agents close to the vest, but his counterparts are convinced Dombrowski is acting aggressively. We’ll likely hear soon of the courting process, with Dombrowski and Red Sox owners John Henry, Tom Werner, and Mike Gordon visiting Price.

When asked about a possible offer to Price, Dombrowski texted, “No, I would not disclose that.”
The bidding should reach the seven-year, $210 million range and likely include the Blue Jays, Cardinals, Cubs, Giants, and Dodgers. But other teams on the periphery could become engaged, such as the Nationals, Angels, Rangers, and Astros.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/11/29/red-sox-seen-favorites-land-free-agent-david-price/8zOlzgpkvW6PvCaHt62dKP/story.html
 

jasvlm

New Member
Nov 28, 2014
177
I have to agree that Price will fetch 7/200, and that is likely a floor. Are the Sox best served with that contract, or would they be happier mitigating risk and spreading that contract out in 2 different arms: Iwakuma for 3/42 and Kazmir for 4/80? They'd spend less overall, get 2 pitchers to improve a rotation that is a weak spot at the moment, but most importantly, they stay away from long term commitments that could end up being crippling on the back end of the deal. Kazmir has no QO, though Iwakuma does. That probably matters, but the point is that Kazmir and Iwakuma together probably outproduce Price in 2016, and they'd do so for around the same net cost per season(14/season for Iwakuma, 20/season for Kazmir). The Sox get pitching talent, but no long term commitment, and no huge outlay of $ to someone in their late 30s...
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
I have to agree that Price will fetch 7/200, and that is likely a floor. Are the Sox best served with that contract, or would they be happier mitigating risk and spreading that contract out in 2 different arms: Iwakuma for 3/42 and Kazmir for 4/80? They'd spend less overall, get 2 pitchers to improve a rotation that is a weak spot at the moment, but most importantly, they stay away from long term commitments that could end up being crippling on the back end of the deal. Kazmir has no QO, though Iwakuma does. That probably matters, but the point is that Kazmir and Iwakuma together probably outproduce Price in 2016, and they'd do so for around the same net cost per season(14/season for Iwakuma, 20/season for Kazmir). The Sox get pitching talent, but no long term commitment, and no huge outlay of $ to someone in their late 30s...
The problem with this approach is that it doesn't address a real need. We have a plethora of pretty-good SP depth already, and it's cheap. Iwakuma at 3/42 to replace Kelly or bump him to the pen I can more or less see, but who does Kazmir at 4/80 replace? Rodriguez? I'm not sure I even want to make that swap, and I certainly don't want to pay $80M to make it.

This is a go-big-or-go-home situation. There's an obvious point to adding a #1, though I think the necessity of doing so is being overstated. But there's no discernible point in spending resources to add #2s or #3s. Those, we've got.
 

HangingW/ScottCooper

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,493
Scituate, MA
I have to agree that Price will fetch 7/200, and that is likely a floor. Are the Sox best served with that contract, or would they be happier mitigating risk and spreading that contract out in 2 different arms: Iwakuma for 3/42 and Kazmir for 4/80? They'd spend less overall, get 2 pitchers to improve a rotation that is a weak spot at the moment, but most importantly, they stay away from long term commitments that could end up being crippling on the back end of the deal. Kazmir has no QO, though Iwakuma does. That probably matters, but the point is that Kazmir and Iwakuma together probably outproduce Price in 2016, and they'd do so for around the same net cost per season(14/season for Iwakuma, 20/season for Kazmir). The Sox get pitching talent, but no long term commitment, and no huge outlay of $ to someone in their late 30s...
Kazmir and Iwakuma would be better values, but they're not what we need at all. We need an ace. This is the type of stuff on SoSH that gets grating, it's still easy to find value in baseball, but if you want elite players, generally you need to overpay. You also typically need elite players to succeed.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,407
The problem with this approach is that it doesn't address a real need. We have a plethora of pretty-good SP depth already, and it's cheap. Iwakuma at 3/42 to replace Kelly or bump him to the pen I can more or less see, but who does Kazmir at 4/80 replace? Rodriguez? I'm not sure I even want to make that swap, and I certainly don't want to pay $80M to make it.

This is a go-big-or-go-home situation. There's an obvious point to adding a #1, though I think the necessity of doing so is being overstated. But there's no discernible point in spending resources to add #2s or #3s. Those, we've got.
I think there's an argument to be made in favor of getting a tier-two guy in addition to one of the quote-unquote "aces" if the price is right, but it would mean that one of the current top five guys is either traded (plausible, but to what end, exactly?) or injured worse than they're letting on (possible, but we've got no reason to assume it at this point). There's a "really deep depth" argument also, I guess, but given that money and roster spaces are finite, it seems very unlikely.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,678
Maine
If true, I'm surprised he signed for that little *before* Price and Greinke.
There's no real way of knowing if that contract is "little" until those other guys sign their deals. Could be that Zimmermann had no interest in maximizing his income and prioritized the where more than the how much. There have long been rumors he favored a move closer to his midwest roots. This certainly fits with those rumors.
 

Fireball Fred

New Member
Jul 29, 2005
172
NoCa Mass.
$22m/year still seems to me like a lot for Zimmermann -- but it really isn't, of course. Price and Greinke are going to be very expensive indeed, but they're in a whole other class.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
That has been a prevalent belief in DC for a couple of years at least. Grew up in Wisconsin; wanted to land in mid-west. It's not cheap, but compared to Porcello's contract, it appears to be a good value. But if the destination preference is that strong, there is really nothing you can do.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
If true, I'm surprised he signed for that little *before* Price and Greinke.
Yup. DD and his peers must be dancing a happy dance right now. If Zimmermann is only a 5/110 guy, then Cueto probably isn't more than a 5/120 guy. His upside is obviously better than Zimmerman's, but he gets docked for consistency and health concerns. And this would also presumably put at least a small dent in Greinke's chances of getting six years.

Incidentally, this makes Ben's extension of Porcello look even more like an unnecessary overpay. Granted he'd get a bump for being 2+ years younger, it's hard to see him commanding an AAV within $1M of Zimmermann's on the open market this winter, even if he had had a more career-normal year last year.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
That has been a prevalent belief in DC for a couple of years at least. Grew up in Wisconsin; wanted to land in mid-west. It's not cheap, but compared to Porcello's contract, it appears to be a good value. But if the destination preference is that strong, there is really nothing you can do.
He likes the Midwest and is from Wisconsin. Having been around the guy in the NYPL for a short season I'm not shocked by the move. Really good get for the Tigers. I would be concerned about the K/9 however that should be cancelled out by pitching in Comerica.
 

MikeM

Member
SoSH Member
May 27, 2010
3,051
Florida
Yup. DD and his peers must be dancing a happy dance right now. If Zimmermann is only a 5/110 guy, then Cueto probably isn't more than a 5/120 guy. His upside is obviously better than Zimmerman's, but he gets docked for consistency and health concerns. And this would also presumably put at least a small dent in Greinke's chances of getting six years.
Ehh, I really don't see any happy dances coming out of this. But I also had Zimmerman as both one of the more likely and least painful upgrades on the table, which could essentially provide an "out" in the likely event the bidding got stupid on the other Big 3.

If anything this just ups the potential of DD making a very controversial overpay. Plus a probable need to constantly remind people that you can't just simply go back and slap Zimmerman's exact contract in a Boston uniform once the second guess "value" comparisons begin.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Ehh, I really don't see any happy dances coming out of this.
Put it this way: there have been several posts here noting that the bigger contracts tend to play out 10 to 20 percent higher than Fangraphs' crowdsourced estimates. Well, this one is basically right in line with Zimmerman's crowdsourcing; slightly higher AAV, slightly shorter term, slightly lower overall value.

So the big-ticket FA pitching season has started on a non-inflationary note. That seems like good news for pitching buyers.
 

The Boomer

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2000
2,232
Charlottesville, Virginia
Put it this way: there have been several posts here noting that the bigger contracts tend to play out 10 to 20 percent higher than Fangraphs' crowdsourced estimates. Well, this one is basically right in line with Zimmerman's crowdsourcing; slightly higher AAV, slightly shorter term, slightly lower overall value.

So the big-ticket FA pitching season has started on a non-inflationary note. That seems like good news for pitching buyers.
The cost of starting pitching, even if it is relatively stagnant, is ridiculous. Inflated AAV is bad enough but the length in years for predictably declining performance is wasteful. Better to take a chance on younger Kent Maeda (age 27) for the 4-5 years it might take at a deflated AAV for foreign free agents. This involves a different kind of gamble in terms of how his game translates in the USA. However, this seems like less of a gamble during his prime years of production but for less money than the better known major league free agent pitchers who carry their own separate risks. Maeda's control, at least, will likely carry over to the USA:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.cgi?id=maeda-001ken&utm_campaign=Linker&utm_source=direct&utm_medium=linker-
 

glennhoffmania

meat puppet
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
8,411,599
NY
I find it hard to believe that Price will require double the guaranteed money that Zimmermann received. He may very well get it but it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Price is better, no doubt. But Zimmermann has been a very solid pitcher over the last few years. Even last year in his "down" year his numbers were pretty consistent with his career marks, except for his HR/FB rate, which could certainly be flukey. And he's a year younger than Price.

Maybe the conclusion will be that Price deserves $200m+ and that Zimmermann will end up being a good bargain. If Boston signed Zimmermann to that deal I'd be pretty happy.
 

curly2

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2003
4,887
Not saying it won't carry over, or that signing Maeda is a bad idea, or that all Japanese pitchers are the same, but, Daisuke Matsuzaka's walks per 9 in Japan, starting with his age 21 season, were 1.8, 2.9, 2.6, 2.1 and finally 1.6, in 186 innings the year before he came to the U.S. That spiked to 3.5 in his first year with the Sox, and that was his best year in terms of control in the U.S.
 

Manramsclan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
3,371
Zimmerman fastball velocity dropped significantly last year. I consider this a bullet dodged.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Jordan Zimmermann&#10;Pitches clocked 95.0 MPH/faster&#10;&#10;2012 236&#10;2013 272&#10;2014 159&#10;2015 31&#10;&#10;94.0/faster&#10;2012 883&#10;2013 987&#10;2014 928&#10;2015 296</p>&mdash; Mark Simon (@msimonespn) <a href="">November 29, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

PrometheusWakefield

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2009
10,441
Boston, MA
The cost of starting pitching, even if it is relatively stagnant, is ridiculous.
Ridiculous relative to what? Relative to what pitchers cost 10 years ago? Relative to what a public school teacher earns? Or how about relative to the massive increases we've seen in MLB media contracts the past few years?

Remarkable how concerned baseball fans have all become with JWH's account ledgers!

When you look at charts like this one and this one you can see the close relationship between total MLB revenues and the cost per win of free agents.

In 1997, league revenues were about $2.1 billion and 1 WAR in free agency cost about $1.6 million.
In 2003, league revenues were about $3.9 billion and 1 WAR in free agency cost about $3.2 million.
In 2008, league revenues were about $6.5 billion and 1 WAR in free agency cost about $6.4 million.

MLB revenues were $9 billion in 2014 - more than four times the size of the sport in 1997! - but player salaries actually are starting to fall, as last offseason the average was more like $7m per win (Boo, luxury tax). The rumor is they could surpass $10b in 2015.

If anything, FA salaries are lower today than in the recent past!
 

PrometheusWakefield

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2009
10,441
Boston, MA
Not saying it won't carry over, or that signing Maeda is a bad idea, or that all Japanese pitchers are the same, but, Daisuke Matsuzaka's walks per 9 in Japan, starting with his age 21 season, were 1.8, 2.9, 2.6, 2.1 and finally 1.6, in 186 innings the year before he came to the U.S. That spiked to 3.5 in his first year with the Sox, and that was his best year in terms of control in the U.S.
It's a lot easier to throw lots of strikes when you are only giving up 5 HR in 206 innings.

Matsuzaka never could adjust to how much more power there is in MLB.

I will be surprised if Maeda is anything better than a decent #3 starter next year.
 

PrometheusWakefield

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2009
10,441
Boston, MA
If you take this Dave Cameron analysis, which (a) assumes a 0.5 decline in WAR every year from Zimmerman beginning with his Steamer prediction for 2016, along with (b) a $/WAR estimate that starts at $8m/WAR in 2016 and adds 5% salary inflation per year, you get a near-perfect prediction of Zimmerman's actual contract from the Tigers.

Repeat the process with Price, and these are the numbers you get:

2016 5.3 WAR, 8 $/WAR, $42.4 value
2017 4.8 WAR 8.4 $/WAR, $40.3 value
2018 4.3 WAR 8.8 $/WAR $37.9 value
2019 3.8 WAR 9.3 $/WAR $35.2 value
2020 3.3 WAR 9.7 $/WAR $32.1 value
2021 2.8 WAR 10.2 $/WAR $28.6 value
2022 2.3 WAR 10.7 $/WAR $24.7 value

That's a total predicted contract value of 7 years, $241.2 million.

Edit: and here is Greinke:

2016 4.0 WAR, 8 $/WAR, $32 value
2017 3.5 WAR 8.4 $/WAR, $29.4 value
2018 3 WAR 8.8 $/WAR $26.5 value
2019 2.5 WAR 9.3 $/WAR $23.2 value
2020 2 WAR 9.7 $/WAR $19.4 value
2021 1.5 WAR 10.2 $/WAR $15.3

For a total of 16.5 WAR and 6 years / $145.

Interesting that while the Price estimate is almost $50 million above the Fangraphs crowdsource estimate (7/$196), Greinke is about $10m below (6/$156). Fangraph readers think these two pitchers are close, but Steamer does not agree. Steamer's estimate for Cueto is exactly the same as Zimmerman, so his predicted contract would be the same 5 years / $110m.
 
Last edited:

Hank Scorpio

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 1, 2013
6,923
Salem, NH
.

MLB revenues were $9 billion in 2014 - more than four times the size of the sport in 1997! - but player salaries actually are starting to fall, as last offseason the average was more like $7m per win (Boo, luxury tax). The rumor is they could surpass $10b in 2015.

If anything, FA salaries are lower today than in the recent past!
My thoughts on Boomer's comments are that I agree it's ridiculous when taking into account:

1) Luxury tax.
2) Injury risk.
3) Decline risk, especially as pitchers progress into their 30s.

The luxury tax is the absolute biggest factor, at least in my eyes. When big time FA signings bust, I view them more as "boo, that's $20M+ in dead money preventing us from signing X, Y, or Z" rather than "boo, you suck, ya bum".

Not sure how much of a luxury tax threshold bump we might see at the next CBA, but I have mixed feelings on it getting bumped by a crazy amount. I'd hate to see the Yankees be able to get back into "we're gonna sign Trout, and Harper, and Bogaerts, and Betts, and..." mode.

But I agree the current threshold is too low. Mike Trout has averaged ~9 WAR over the past four seasons. If he was to hit free agency today, in what world does he get the $60-80M per he's valued at. Based on current valuations of a win, a 8/$480 contract would be a relative lowball, but salaries seem to be topping out around $30M per, or ~1/6th of the LT threshold. I can't see Mike Trout getting much more than $35M/yr in this current environment, unless the stars align right and a team with low payroll and high talent level (i.e current day Astros or Pirates) decide to go all in and blow everyone else away. But generally, there are too many roster spots and too many under-cap dollars to go throwing so much money at one player, not matter how good.

I guess the question becomes, "what's a reasonable adjustment to the LT threshold, while still maintaining competitive balance (because if the Yankees are going to go back to their free-spending ways, I want it to continue to bite them in the ass)?
 

The Boomer

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2000
2,232
Charlottesville, Virginia
My thoughts on Boomer's comments are that I agree it's ridiculous when taking into account:

1) Luxury tax.
2) Injury risk.
3) Decline risk, especially as pitchers progress into their 30s.

The luxury tax is the absolute biggest factor, at least in my eyes. When big time FA signings bust, I view them more as "boo, that's $20M+ in dead money preventing us from signing X, Y, or Z" rather than "boo, you suck, ya bum".

Not sure how much of a luxury tax threshold bump we might see at the next CBA, but I have mixed feelings on it getting bumped by a crazy amount. I'd hate to see the Yankees be able to get back into "we're gonna sign Trout, and Harper, and Bogaerts, and Betts, and..." mode.

But I agree the current threshold is too low. Mike Trout has averaged ~9 WAR over the past four seasons. If he was to hit free agency today, in what world does he get the $60-80M per he's valued at. Based on current valuations of a win, a 8/$480 contract would be a relative lowball, but salaries seem to be topping out around $30M per, or ~1/6th of the LT threshold. I can't see Mike Trout getting much more than $35M/yr in this current environment, unless the stars align right and a team with low payroll and high talent level (i.e current day Astros or Pirates) decide to go all in and blow everyone else away. But generally, there are too many roster spots and too many under-cap dollars to go throwing so much money at one player, not matter how good.

I guess the question becomes, "what's a reasonable adjustment to the LT threshold, while still maintaining competitive balance (because if the Yankees are going to go back to their free-spending ways, I want it to continue to bite them in the ass)?
I totally agree with this. Spending like the Yankees rarely if ever works for them anymore. It mostly fails when contenders seek the final piece to a championship puzzle. The encouraging performance at the end of last season notwithstanding, big spending on free agents never works for a last place team like the Red Sox - even for theoretically safer position players like Crawford, Sandoval and Ramirez.

Thanks for noticing that my issue with free agent pitchers was more about the wasteful length of contracts than paying a premium for short term AAV:

"The cost of starting pitching, even if it is relatively stagnant, is ridiculous. Inflated AAV is bad enough but the length in years for predictably declining performance is wasteful."

The change in philosophy from Cherington to Dombrowlki, if any, doesn't necessarily signal that management will pay the going rate for pitching in decline.
 
Last edited: