This Doesn't Even Make Sense (Pt. 2)

by R.J. Anderson on Dec 11, 2008 3:22 PM EST

[Ed: The salary for Ramirez didn't come out until after this post, it's 1.8 mil for Ramirez. Ugh, why?)

Today's adventures in Kansas City involves three reliever signing.

The cheap, and potentially good signing

Doug Waecther.

The awful and unacceptable signings:

Kyle Farnsworth

---

How can a team that understands the usage of cheap bullpen parts give Farnsworth two years and more than 4 million annually? Marcels has his FIP at 4.8. That's below replacement level for relievers. He should be paying the Royals to pitch in the 60 or so innings he gets.

Update:

Originally I had Horacio as a "cheap, and potentially good signing" there's some question as to why. Here's the short list:

- Cheap (note: this obviously changed...) even if he did suck, they could ditch him with little lost costs.

- Win curve: the Royals are probably around 75-80 wins, plugging Ramirez into some non-high leverage innings probably doesn't make too much of a difference whether he's the "good" Ramirez or the "bad" Ramirez.

- Trade: last season Ramirez found success with the Royals and they dumped him for a minor leaguer. On the off chance that Ramirez has another mildly attractive first half, perhaps they can ditch him for another minor leaguer. He's unlikely to fetch anything of value, but you never know.

Tweet Comment 31 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Read More: why, Kyle Farnsworth (P - TAM)

Comments

horacio ramirez is below replacement level, too.

not sure how that qualifies as “potentially good”. maybe “potentially less bad”.

willy taveras free?

by larry on Dec 11, 2008 3:41 PM EST reply actions

Marcels has Horacio at 4.4 FIP?

by R.J. Anderson on Dec 11, 2008 3:45 PM EST up reply actions

i'd forgotten how Marcels is the end all, be all.

my bad. i’ll bow down to it accordingly in the future.

seriously, it’s okay to use your head sometimes and think about this stuff instead of running over to fangraphs and quoting a single projection system. if your entire argument for justifying that signing as “potentially good” is FIP from marcels, it’s sorely lacking. i’m guessing you have more. so let’s hear it.

willy taveras free?

by larry on Dec 11, 2008 3:58 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Why don't you offer up your counter argument?

And That Happened: Sports with a Hint of Sarcasm

by philkid3 on Dec 11, 2008 4:01 PM EST up reply actions

i'll simply offer up his career history

continually declining K rate, unsustainably low HR and BB rates last year helping rouge up his performance. and if the royals really do plan to put him in their rotation, they’ll get exactly what seattle got two years ago. i would have thought it’s rather obvious that one could find someone to do exactly what ramirez will do next year for 1/4 of the cost. but marcels says no so what do i know? the guy with the lifetime FIP of 4.95 is going to pull it together next year! ignore all other information and go with the rote projection system.

willy taveras free?

by larry on Dec 11, 2008 4:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Someone's having a bad day.

by R.J. Anderson on Dec 11, 2008 5:41 PM EST up reply actions

or someone who was previously chastised that this site was meant for serious, in depth baseball discussion finds a thin post like this rather silly.

willy taveras free?

by larry on Dec 11, 2008 5:58 PM EST up reply actions

I apologize for not going further in depth.

I should’ve talked about the win curve, the cost involved, and the Ramirez having more “acceptable” seasons within recent years than Farnsworth.

by R.J. Anderson on Dec 11, 2008 6:10 PM EST up reply actions

now you're cooking.

willy taveras free?

by larry on Dec 11, 2008 6:12 PM EST up reply actions

Ramirez isn't a great pitcher by any means.

Two of the past three season’s he’s been better than replacement level. One as a starter and the last as a reliever. If the Royals put him in the rotation, then they’re idiots, but as a reliever he does have a few things going for him that make him a “potentially good” signing versus Farnsworth with the main point being his price. He’s cheap, he’s being paid what he should be, that’s not good in this case, but he’s not overpaid. You can ditch him without much in lost costs, not so much on Farny.

Plus, if he flukes through the first half you can trade him for Paul Orlando or something.

by R.J. Anderson on Dec 11, 2008 5:54 PM EST up reply actions