Red Sox sign David Price

[chrisfont9]

Bisbee on the presence of pre-arb stars making Price easy to afford, one of my favorite angles of this story.
http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2015/12/2/9835094/david-price-red-sox

Another one of my favorite angles is that Price's opt-out happens right about when the next wave of Greenville Kids should be hitting Boston (unless they arrive sooner).

 

[Hank Scorpio]

If that's true then sure. It's also insane even by Dodgers standards. But I can't believe they would go that nuts.

At the same time, they must be getting desperate, and Greinke + Kershaw seems like it would be an excellent game plan in a playoff series. Kind of surprising it hasn't worked out for them at all yet.

Here's a hypothetical. You're sitting at home and see a flash of light and David Price's agent Bo McKinnis appears in front of you. He explains that he is from the year 2018 and David Price is deciding whether or not to exercise his option and will defer to your opinion. He explains that Price has pitched the past three seasons with a FIP of 3.19 (his career average prior to signing with the Sox). Do you tell Price to opt out?

I would guess that everyone, including the "options only help the player, not the team" crowd says yes. So something is missing. Do players irrationally overvalue themselves? The winner's curse? Something else?

Depends. If the luxury tax threshold is still at $189M in 2018, I don't see how player salaries will be much higher, and there's a decent chance we can spend the ~$32M/yr better on someone younger or in other areas. If the cap is up around $250M or so, then I'd rather have Price stay, as he'd probably be a decent shot at being a #1 for bargain money, and a better shot at being a #2 for market money.

 

[chrisfont9]

Here's a hypothetical. You're sitting at home and see a flash of light and David Price's agent Bo McKinnis appears in front of you. He explains that he is from the year 2018 and David Price is deciding whether or not to exercise his option and will defer to your opinion. He explains that Price has pitched the past three seasons with a FIP of 3.19 (his career average prior to signing with the Sox). Do you tell Price to opt out?

I would guess that everyone, including the "options only help the player, not the team" crowd says yes. So something is missing. Do players irrationally overvalue themselves? The winner's curse? Something else?

Depends on some additional real-world factors. Is Kershaw on the market? Has Harvey hinted about an interest in Boston? Fernandez? If you can get younger at the top of the rotation, you definitely consider saying bye to Price. But if he's still the same guy as ever, that lowers the risk of the out-year regrets on the seven-year deal.

 

[Rasputin]

Here's a hypothetical. You're sitting at home and see a flash of light and David Price's agent Bo McKinnis appears in front of you. He explains that he is from the year 2018 and David Price is deciding whether or not to exercise his option and will defer to your opinion. He explains that Price has pitched the past three seasons with a FIP of 3.19 (his career average prior to signing with the Sox). Do you tell Price to opt out?

I would guess that everyone, including the "options only help the player, not the team" crowd says yes. So something is missing. Do players irrationally overvalue themselves? The winner's curse? Something else?

If a player's agent comes to me to make a decision about a player, I'm sure as shit not making that decision based on what's good for the player, I'm making that decision based on what's good for me. If he has pitched to a career average FIP, what's good for me is probably for him to stay. When you consider that if there's a luxury tax, it's going to be higher, and that there's three years of inflation involved, it's pretty unlikely that you're going to get a pitcher of that caliber for those dollars.

Of course, I'm also going to want to know how Rodriguez, Kelly, and Porcello do.

 

[koufax37]

Here's the obligatory response to anyone who says we shouldn't care how much the contract is. Note, it doesn't talk about opt-outs.

Definitely agree with this response to anyone who says we shouldn't care how much.

However an important and more subtle distinction is "how much we should care about potential future overpaying". I'm arbitrarily declaring that we are not overpaying in the first three years of this contract, and there was no way to allocate 3/90 better than David Price over the next three seasons. A debatable point, but I think most would think it was somewhat reasonable.

I think there is more reasonable discussion on years 4 and 5, but we are probably looking pretty smooth there if he doesn't opt out, and the point is moot if he does.

So rather than an oversimplified "who cares about John Henry's checkbook" which I don't think many are saying and nobody should be saying without getting your linked response in their face, we have a much more subtle and debatable question:

"How many of John Henry's dollars are we risking wasting on a decline/overpay in the back end of this contract that we will wish we could allocate more efficiently come 2021-2022 when we deal with some budget constraints as XB and Mookie and Blake get expensive".

I think it is fairly likely that Price remains a useful player through the entire contract absent a major arm surgery (which is always possible in year 2 or year 7). I think a reasonable guess of career arc and revenue inflation we are wondering how many of the team's future dollars is it reasonable to gamble or overpay to get Price at excellent value at the expensive but dominating start.

In a vacuum this deal probably isn't very good allocation of our 2021 or 2022 limited resources, and could range somewhere from not-as-bad-as-we-thought to Sabathia-dead-weight to irrelevant-after-he-opted-out.

I don't think there is a good argument that we are wasting money in 2016, 2017, 2018. So the real argument is if the back end uncertain premium we might pay to buy the next few seasons is excessive, and if the potential short term benefits outweigh the long term risks.

 

[Ananti]

The opt out is not in the Red Sox favor. But it's mostly so that it limits the Red Sox's upside on this deal, the downside remains the same. But I'm not sure the upside (Price being underpaid at $33/YR from year 4-7 of the contract), is really all that likely anyway. The key is that when the 3 year is up and Price (hopefully) have performed well enough to opt out, the Red Sox aren't dumb enough to sign him to another 7 year deal

 

[leetinsley38]

Bisbee on the presence of pre-arb stars making Price easy to afford, one of my favorite angles of this story.
http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2015/12/2/9835094/david-price-red-sox

Another one of my favorite angles is that Price's opt-out happens right about when the next wave of Greenville Kids should be hitting Boston (unless they arrive sooner).

We're also out from Hanley's deal in 2019 (Price's opt-out year).
Like the Price deal but 2018 gives me a bit more of a shudder overall:
Price $30M
Hanley $22.75M
Porcello $21.25M
Pablo $18.6M
Total for those 4: $92.6M
Plus Pedroia ($16.1M) and Rusney ($11.7M): $120.4M

 

[nvalvo]

The opt out is not in the Red Sox favor. But it's mostly so that it limits the Red Sox's upside on this deal, the downside remains the same. But I'm not sure the upside (Price being underpaid at $33/YR from year 4-7 of the contract), is really all that likely anyway. The key is that when the 3 year is up and Price (hopefully) have performed well enough to opt out, the Red Sox aren't dumb enough to sign him to another 7 year deal

A ton of it comes down to how much we trust Dombrowski to make those calls correctly. He's signed some dubious extensions in Detroit, but massive caveats apply to how much he had to do with those decisions.

 

[soxhop411]

“@redsoxstats: JDMartinez tells MLBNR that this spring running joke w Price was going to BOS, ”He would love to play there, didn’t think they would offer.“”

“@redsoxstats: More Martinez ”Texting Price, he is really happy… talking to Rusney today I told him he is the best, the best teammate.“”

 

[PC Drunken Friar]

I don't like David Price. I understand he's one of the best pitchers in baseball and so great add for my favorite team and all, but I don't like him ever since he beaned Papi in 2014. I don't mind beaning a player and I understand it's all part of the game and all that. How can a guy love Pedro and not understand that? But to me the difference is that Pedro would move you off the plate or outright hit you (usually in the ass) because you were crowding the plate, whereas Price beaned Papi simply because Papi looked at his 2nd HR in the playoff game a bit too long for Price's liking, so he beaned him the next time he saw him six months later.

I'll obviously root for the Sox when Price is pitching, and I'll give him the chance to change my opinion that he's a big overly-sensitive baby, but as a fan I really don't like him.

I'm, Pedro did this ALL the time.

 

[InsideTheParker]

Any comment yet from David Ortiz? I don't frequent the twitters, etc., so wouldn't know.

 

[Darnell's Son]

http://www.masslive.com/redsox/index.ssf/2015/12/david_ortiz_on_david_price_sig.html

"We need pitching and David Price is a great pitcher and has showed that for years," Ortiz told 102.5 FM in the Dominican Republic today, according to ESPN.com."I hope he will help us. It's a marquee pitcher, and that's what we need."

Ortiz also added about his heated history with Price, "No problems. All that's in the past. Now he is my partner. When a person joins your cause, you must leave the past in the past."

 

[Van Everyman]

I get that we are not talking about outcomes and that players and their agents are pushing for these clauses, not clubs. But my problem with this whole "Who does the opt-out really benefit?" argument is that the biggest two that come to mind for me are ARod in 2007 and Sabathia a few years back -- and in both cases, the NYY would very likely have been better off letting the guy go.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Any comment yet from David Ortiz? I don't frequent the twitters, etc., so wouldn't know.

ESPN has an article up about it. They didn't ask Ortiz if he would get a slice of pizza with Price. That was disappointing.

 

[Ananti]

A ton of it comes down to how much we trust Dombrowski to make those calls correctly. He's signed some dubious extensions in Detroit, but massive caveats apply to how much he had to do with those decisions.

He also got Texas to take one of those horrible extensions off his hands.

We don't even know DD will be here in 3 years. I think we should evaluate this transaction without worrying about what that Red Sox GM might do in 3 years. I'm more worried about the potential downside than I am about the unlikely upside.

To me, this contract is basically: we will pay you 93M/3 years, with a player option to extend for another 4 year/124 million. Don't think of it as an opt out, think of it as an opt in.

The concern is with Price' ability to force us to pay him another 4/124 should he lose his elite pitcher ability in the next 3 years, not with the fact that the contract could be over in 3 years.

 

[glennhoffmania]

I get that we are not talking about outcomes and that players and their agents are pushing for these clauses, not clubs. But my problem with this whole "Who does the opt-out really benefit?" argument is that the biggest two that come to mind for me are ARod in 2007 and Sabathia a few years back -- and in both cases, the NYY would very likely have been better off letting the guy go.

ARod's original deal went through 2010. Putting aside the TX subsidy, which was significant but because of the trade it's not typical, NY would've owed him 81m for 2008-2010. In those three seasons he put up a combined 13.7 fWAR, and per Fangraph's he was worth 85.4m. Letting him go after he opted out would've been smarter, but saying they would've been better off without him from 2008-2010 doesn't make sense to me.

Edit- had his salary wrong.

 

[pokey_reese]

“@redsoxstats: JDMartinez tells MLBNR that this spring running joke w Price was going to BOS, ”He would love to play there, didn’t think they would offer.“”

“@redsoxstats: More Martinez ”Texting Price, he is really happy… talking to Rusney today I told him he is the best, the best teammate.“”

Rusney talks to JD Martinez?

 

[nvalvo]

Rusney talks to JD Martinez?

Martinez is Cuban-American, right?

 

[Lowrielicious]

Rusney talks to JD Martinez?

Hopefully while rebuilding Rusneys swing over the offseason the way JD rebuilt his own.

 

[SumnerH]

Hurst, Tudor and Ojeda?

May 2005: Halama, Dinardo, Wells
Jun/July 2012: Doubront, Morales, Lester

 

[terrisus]

May 2005: Halama, Dinardo, Wells

All 1 start of DiNardo

EDIT: And that start came in September, not May.

 

[SumnerH]

All 1 start of DiNardo

EDIT: And that start came in September, not May.

I thought I looked at his game logs and it was in May, but I was wrong.

2012 Jun/July Doubront/Morales/Lester is more legit (Morales missed one start during that period, the others made them all, so 5 out of 6 consecutive times through the rotation had all 3 lefties).

 

[sackamano]

May 2005: Halama, Dinardo, Wells
Jun/July 2012: Doubront, Morales, Lester

Owens, Miley And Rodriquez ... how soon they forget to remember.

 

[The Boomer]

Bisbee on the presence of pre-arb stars making Price easy to afford, one of my favorite angles of this story.
http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2015/12/2/9835094/david-price-red-sox

Another one of my favorite angles is that Price's opt-out happens right about when the next wave of Greenville Kids should be hitting Boston (unless they arrive sooner).

They will need those bargain priced Greenville Kids to emerge. The Sox might be hoping for Price to opt out after 3 seasons because they might want his salary off the books to extend Ed Rod, Mookie, Bogaerts (Boras permitting), Swihart and whoever else deserves to be locked up for multiple years through their primes to postpone their free agency for at least a season or two. This works especially well if, by then, Ed Rod proves that he will be their next Ace. It works even better if Anderson Espinoza is as good as hoped and is breaking in with the rest of those Greenville Kids.

 

[Yo La Tengo]

I prefer signing Price over the other riskier/older free agent pitchers available, assuming the cost of those pitchers is roughly proportionate to Price's price-tag. And, I'm glad the Sox didn't trade Bogaerts, Betts and/or Swihart plus prospects to get Fernandez or Sale etc., assuming those players are even available in a trade. In the end, I think the Sox had to do something significant to improve upon last year's team (and rotation in particular), and signing Price is the least unattractive option.

 

[RedOctober3829]

 

[Hank Scorpio]

I get not wanting to lose out, but I wonder why the Red Sox had to outbid themselves by 17M, and the competition by 27M?

More of a "let's just end this now" move, or did Price need extra convincing to come here?

 

[Hank Scorpio]

I get not wanting to lose out, but I wonder why the Red Sox had to outbid themselves by 17M, and the competition by 27M?

More of a "let's just end this now" move, or did Price need extra convincing to come here?

 

[RedOctober3829]

It's like extending your eBay bid up at the last minute.

 

[terrisus]

More of a "let's just end this now" move

That's what I'm thinking.

Didn't want to spend the next month+ being bounced around between Price and Greinke.
So instead just put up a sum that got it taken care of without all the wasted time and possible to-dos along the way.

 

[rundugrun]

Here's a hypothetical. You're sitting at home and see a flash of light and David Price's agent Bo McKinnis appears in front of you. He explains that he is from the year 2018 and David Price is deciding whether or not to exercise his option and will defer to your opinion. He explains that Price has pitched the past three seasons with a FIP of 3.19 (his career average prior to signing with the Sox). Do you tell Price to opt out?

I would guess that everyone, including the "options only help the player, not the team" crowd says yes. So something is missing. Do players irrationally overvalue themselves? The winner's curse? Something else?

If the going rate in 2018 for starting pitchers with a FIP of 3.19 has risen to $40 or $45MM per year, then I don't say "yes" to the hypothetical question. I'd want Price to stay with the Sox at $32MM per year.

 

[mwonow]

The whole opt-out thing is a serious red herring in this discussion. Negotiations happen across a bunch of dimensions, and both parties optimize the mix to suit their own agendas.

So...Price wanted an opt-out after three years. I'm confident - no, certain - that this had a ripple effect on other aspects of the agreement. Total dollars? Total years? Willingness to sign in Boston? Something else? I don't know, and neither do the many folks in this thread decrying the opt-out.

(Parenthetically, I had a guy today insist on a somewhat different title, which meant something to him, but less to me than an adjusted expectation of allowable expenses or a change in the definition of commissionable revenue. So the deal gets struck, and everyone lives with their basket of money/terms/etc.)

Back on track - forget whinging about the opt-out. The important thing here is that we have a guy who has been a top-end pitcher, who was great when dropped into an AL East pennant race against the MFYs a few months ago. Is he here for 3/90 or 7/218? I don't know, don't really care. For the foreseeable future, we've got a horse we can count on.

 

[DeadlySplitter]

If other rumors are to believed, Price was set to accept 7/190 from Cardinals despite our 7/200, so we needed to chip in the 17mil and potentially opt out

We'll never know for sure though

 

[Corleone]

We got an Ace baby!

Shelby Miller rumored to be available?

 

[glennhoffmania]

Yeah I'd be curious to know why he was willing to take $10m less to go to STL, but somehow that extra 17m was enough of a premium to change his mind.

 

[sackamano]

Perhaps it was and extra 17M, and some last minute diplomacy, but we may never know.

 

[Apisith]

Was the Cardinals rumoured offer 7/190 or 6/190? It'd make sense if we gave him a similar AAV and got him because of the one extra year we were willing to give.

 

[soxhop411]

Jon Morosi ‏@jonmorosi 1m1 minute ago
Sources: Alex Anthopoulos planned to offer David Price a contract. Ultimately, #BlueJays did not. Story: http://www.foxsports.com/mlb/story/toronto-blue-jays-david-price-alex-anthopoulos-lose-gm-cost-team-resign-ace-offer-contract-120215… @FOXSports

Would the Toronto Blue Jays have signed David Price if Alex Anthopoulos were still making the team’s baseball decisions?

We can’t say it’s terribly likely, because it’s difficult to imagine the Jays matching Boston’s winning bid of $217 million over seven years.

But this much is known: Toronto would have offered Price a contract.

Sources say Anthopoulos began laying the groundwork to do so in August, before Mark Shapiro was named the team’s new president and CEO. And Price, sources say, had genuine interest in returning to Toronto.


Ultimately, Anthopoulos rejected a five-year offer to remain the team’s general manager once it became clear he would no longer have the decision-making authority he enjoyed under former club president Paul Beeston.
Subsequently, Shapiro opted not to offer Price a contract. Shapiro determined that the team’s rotation dollars should be spread among multiple starters (Marco Estrada, J.A. Happ, and Jesse Chavez) rather than a single ace. Price’s average annual value of $31 million is roughly equivalent to what Estrada, Happ, and Chavez will earn in 2016.

more at the link

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

That's what I'm thinking.

Didn't want to spend the next month+ being bounced around between Price and Greinke.
So instead just put up a sum that got it taken care of without all the wasted time and possible to-dos along the way.

Right. Just because the Sox' offer was X number of dollars more than any that Price had on the table at the time, that doesn't necessarily mean it was X dollars more than what Price would ultimately have signed for. It was still fairly early in the process.

 

[Rasputin]

Yeah I'd be curious to know why he was willing to take $10m less to go to STL, but somehow that extra 17m was enough of a premium to change his mind.

Maybe it was the opt-out clause that made the difference. Being able to change your mind relatively soon if you move to a place and just can't stand it would be a pretty big thing even if you don't count the money at all.

 

[geoduck no quahog]

Just for yuks, let's take a look at some long-term contracts for pitchers:

8 years
Hampton (2001)

7 years
Price (2016)
Kershaw (2014)
Scherzer (2015)
Verlander (2013)
Hernandez (2013)
Sabathia (2009)
Tanaka (2014)
Zito (2007)

6 years
Lester (2015)
Greinke (2013)
Hamels (2013)
Lee (2011)
Santana (2008)
Cain (2012)
Pedro (1998)

Does this mean anything to anyone? I figure their ages should be included (I can do that), and then some sort of sabremetric keystone that indicates whether or not these were smart deals.

 

[jimbobim]

Thought this was a pretty fascinating article. This has already been mentioned, but if Price can help Ed Rod more quickly realize his prodigious ceiling with his "experimenting" (cited in article) and mentoring skills the Sox will be in business.

Hell Ed Rod is the most talented, but if Price could similarly help the approaches of Owens and Johnson the Sox will be over the moon. In fact, while unlikely, a rotation of Price Ed Rod Porcello Owens Johnson in 2017 could be relatively cheap, high upside, and youngish.

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/how-david-price-honed-his-changeup/

Whether these two pitches are intrinsically linked or not, this is the pitcher the Red Sox paid for: a starter who continues to evolve, continues to experiment, and continues to get better. We’ve seen how great of a pitcher Price has been for the past few years, and the market proved it. With a varied, veterans repertoire that now includes a top-15 changeup among starters, Price has set himself up to be successful for many years to come.

 

[iayork]

If the going rate in 2018 for starting pitchers with a FIP of 3.19 has risen to $40 or $45MM per year, then I don't say "yes" to the hypothetical question. I'd want Price to stay with the Sox at $32MM per year.

If the going price for elite pitchers has risen to 40M/year in three years, then it means that revenues for teams have risen by 30% in three years as well. Players aren't just getting more money because they're holding their breathe til they turn blue; teams are giving them more money because they believe that it's a money-making proposition to pay them that much.

So if revenues have increased so much that the price of elite pitching has gone up, it's more or less a wash. Pay the guy more because he's making you more money. Fans will wring their hands, but it's more or less in balance.

 

[Apisith]

If the going price for elite pitchers has risen to 40M/year in three years, then it means that revenues for teams have risen by 30% in three years as well. Players aren't just getting more money because they're holding their breathe til they turn blue; teams are giving them more money because they believe that it's a money-making proposition to pay them that much.

So if revenues have increased so much that the price of elite pitching has gone up, it's more or less a wash. Pay the guy more because he's making you more money. Fans will wring their hands, but it's more or less in balance.

Funnily enough the share of revenue going to the players has steadily declined over the last 20 years. It may be wise to lock in some long term deals today if ownership realises that the new CBA will directly or indirectly force teams to spend more money. If the share of revenue to players will rise in the CBA, which it should since baseball now pays out the least of the major sports, then it's a certainty that salaries will inflate even more.

Edit: this holds even if revenue doesn't rise.

Let's say baseball pays out 46% instead of the 42% they're paying out these days, that's basically a 10% rise in payrolls across the board. I'd assume the best players' salaries would be inflated by even more than 10%.

 

[iayork]

Let's say baseball pays out 46% instead of the 42% they're paying out these days, that's basically a 10% rise in payrolls across the board. I'd assume the best players' salaries would be inflated by even more than 10%.

Off topic in this thread, but this goes back to what many of us were saying about Porcello's contract. Because he was signed for a long-term contract, he is not actually being paid as an ace; already, he is being paid as a mid-tier pitcher, and by the end of his contract, his annual salary will be at the level that scrubs and filler get. If he does turn out to be as good as he was after he returned from the DL last summer, it will be a spectacular bargain; if he is as bad as he was at the beginning of the year, it will be an average contract.

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

Off topic in this thread, but this goes back to what many of us were saying about Porcello's contract. Because he was signed for a long-term contract, he is not actually being paid as an ace; already, he is being paid as a mid-tier pitcher, and by the end of his contract, his annual salary will be at the level that scrubs and filler get.

Whoa there. If Chris Young's contract is a fair yardstick for what "scrubs and filler" get in 2016, then you're predicting >300% inflation over four years. Really?

 

[Leather]

The whole opt-out thing is a serious red herring in this discussion. Negotiations happen across a bunch of dimensions, and both parties optimize the mix to suit their own agendas.

So...Price wanted an opt-out after three years. I'm confident - no, certain - that this had a ripple effect on other aspects of the agreement. Total dollars? Total years? Willingness to sign in Boston? Something else? I don't know, and neither do the many folks in this thread decrying the opt-out.

This is baloney. The discussion regarding the opt-out has always been in regards to how it might impact the Red Sox moving forward. That it was a necessary condition of Price signing is so obvious that it doesn't warrant mentioning more than once.

By your logic, any comments about the length of the contract, or the total dollars, are also "red herrings" because anyone questioning those terms don't realize that they may have been a factor in Price signing in Boston. How profound.

The Red Sox needed an ace. They got one. That was priority one. But beyond that, the money paid to Price, both in the next three years and (possibly) the following four, will have a *cough* "ripple effect" on other aspects of their team construction. That's why the opt-out is important. Because if Price is really good for three years, the Sox will have to figure out a way to pony up more cash or get a replacement for him in 2018. If his arm falls off next year, well, they're going to have to figure out how to construct a team with that deadweight for most of the next decade. Those are the two extremes that frame the parameters of how we will look back on the Price signing in seven years, and the opt out is very much relevant to how they might play out.

Maybe that is all getting ahead of ourselves. Fine. But just saying "Yay, we got an ace!" without taking into consideration what the team gave up to sign him is just an exercise in torpor.

 

[nvalvo]

Whoa there. If Chris Young's contract is a fair yardstick for what "scrubs and filler" get in 2016, then you're predicting >300% inflation over four years. Really?

People are predicting that Mike Leake will get 4/$60, if that clarifies anything.

 

[drbretto]

I get not wanting to lose out, but I wonder why the Red Sox had to outbid themselves by 17M, and the competition by 27M?

More of a "let's just end this now" move, or did Price need extra convincing to come here?

Only way it makes sense to me is the former. I imagine that both the 190 and 200 figures were steps in the negotiations. The Sox were always planning to cap out around 217, give or take, but wanted to get it done, so they said ok, here's the real offer, take it or we're moving on to Greinke.

I don't think anyone smart enough to get a high profile major league GM position is dumb enough to Bugs Bunny themselves into paying more for something they've already won. If you want to use the eBay example upthread, I see it more like 190 and 200 as being under the reserve, and the 217 is the buy it now price.

 

[PrometheusWakefield]

I get not wanting to lose out, but I wonder why the Red Sox had to outbid themselves by 17M, and the competition by 27M?

More of a "let's just end this now" move, or did Price need extra convincing to come here?

Hard to blame him if he did. Pitching is simply easier in the National League. It's not just a matter of relatively easy to recalibrate things like lower ERAs and more strikeouts, although those are nice and HOF voters and the general public probably don't fully incorporate the difference between the leagues. It's also more high stress innings and difficult pitches against professional hitters instead of easy innings and pitches against non-professional hitters. We may have to get used to the idea that as an American League team (and in an offensive ballpark and in a tough division) we need to pay an additional premium to attract SP free agents.