Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Explaining Jeremy Lin's Early, Surprising Success

Astros Sign Mike Hampton

It's a one year, 2 million dollar contract with the potential to grow into 4 million.

Before signing an oft-injured player, teams must ask themselves a line of questions.

Does player, when healthy, help our team?
    If yes, can we expect at least 50% playing time?
           If yes, will player still help our team?
           If no, pass.
               If yes, can we expect 75% playing time?
                   If yes, is the player's value equal to his asking price?
                   If no, is the player's value equal to his asking price?
                        If no, pass.

I would suspect the Astros went through this conversation, and they arrived at yes multiple times. Despite this, I'm not sure I agree with their thinking. Houston won 86 games last season despite being outscored and having 75.8 third order wins. Since they aren't in a position to win 90 games or honestly compete for a playoff spot, barring unforeseen miracles, they should be shielding themselves against overpaying for slight upgrades that will only push them to a fourth place finish.

Since 2003, when Hampton was traded to the Marlins and then the Braves, he's thrown 190, 172.3, 69.1, and 78 innings. Observant readers will note that two seasons worth of innings are missing those being 2006 and 2007, which Hampton missed in full. When Hampton has pitched lately, he hasn't been his usually self. Even in 2005, only 9.51% of Hampton's plate appearances resulted in strikeouts. That number was back up to pre-injury days in 2008, at 11.48%, but Hampton was still only generating 6.3% swinging strikes with his 87 miles per hour fastball.

While two million is hardly going to sink their budget, this is a team that had better options on hand. It's not that Hampton is overpaid or a poor risk, but rather a redundancy. At this point, the Astros have Roy Oswalt and Wandy Rodriguez who are clearly superior to Hampton, Brian Moehler and Chris Sampson who are arguably better, and Brandon Backe, who is special in his own "snowflake" sort of way. Will Hampton's contributions even make that much of a difference over Backe?

In order to project Hampton's value we have to make assumptions about things like his FIP and innings workload. Marcels has him at 4.77 and 99 innings pitched. If that's the case, Hampton is 10.78 non-leveraged runs saved. Backe projects for 146 innings of 5.39 FIP ball, or 5.84 non-leveraged runs saved. That's a difference of just over a half of a win. On a .500-at-best team, is that worth 2 million? Even more so, Claudio Vargas is a free agent who can likely be had for 800k. If Vargas simply pitched to his career 5.22 FIP for 160 innings, he would compile 9.42 NLRS. Almost equal to Hampton, and for 1.2 million less that could've went towards the draft or amateur signings.

The deal isn't bad, at least not in the sense that Houston will regret signing Hampton. Instead, it just seems like a questionable usage of resources for a team that apparently has some payroll cutting concerns.

Comment 17 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

more to the point i'm getting at,

why have you chosen to use the marcel IP projections for hampton and backe and not vargas.

JERRY OWENS

by larry on Dec 2, 2008 1:38 PM EST up reply actions  

Because Vargas hasn't been a starter since 2007.

Marcels has him at 82, despite going 130+ three straight years prior.

by R.J. Anderson on Dec 2, 2008 1:57 PM EST up reply actions  

Also, I ran the projection for Vargas:

10.11 NLRS based on 82 IP of 4.64 FIP. Essentially equal to Hampton.

by R.J. Anderson on Dec 2, 2008 2:03 PM EST up reply actions  

it's just that when i see guys who are shunted around and aren't given a full time role

without seeing them play, i don’t immediately jump to the conclusion that all of major league baseball is stupid (though that could well be it). which is why, at first blush, i consider 160 IP for a guy who has done that once in his career, presumably for somewhat good reasons, aggressive.

JERRY OWENS

by larry on Dec 2, 2008 2:14 PM EST up reply actions  

Vargas went 167 in 2006.

The only time he’s been given 25 or more starts. In the two seasons he got 23 he went 130+, although had a few relief stints sprinkled in.

160/30 is doable, even if you’re a bad pitcher. The Astros gave Backe 31/160, hence where I got the number from. Vargas is better than Backe. That’s where the comparisons and innings total comes from.

by R.J. Anderson on Dec 2, 2008 2:20 PM EST up reply actions  

Plus, check Vargas' minor league career:

http://minors.baseball-reference.com/players.cgi?pid=29527

He’s been a starter 97% of the time, and for his career averaged 5.4 IP/G. That’s about 30 starts for 160 innings.

by R.J. Anderson on Dec 2, 2008 2:24 PM EST up reply actions  

right.

i guess my point is, for what reason(s) hasn’t he been given 30 starts routinely at the major league level, such that i would either expect him to get them with the astros or that he should be given them with the astros? your point about backe speaks to this some.

JERRY OWENS

by larry on Dec 2, 2008 2:27 PM EST up reply actions  

Please, this is the Ed Wade.

Still, Hampton has the slight risk/reward factor, and it’s only 2 mil. There are going to be a lot worse moves made than this before the offseason is over. Besides, I don’t expect Backe to be paid much more than Vargas, if at all. Might as well go all out with the risk/reward types and go for Pavano and others…

by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 2, 2008 5:57 PM EST up reply actions  

I wasn't accusing you

still, it might look like a good deal if, right or wrong, Wade thought that Hampton had something in the tank from his pre-injury self.

by Daniel Berlyn on Dec 2, 2008 6:45 PM EST up reply actions  

Astros should stop acting as contenders

That ship has sailed… They will not luck their way into 86 wins next season anyway.

Mother---- him and John Wayne!

by MerryGoByeBye on Dec 2, 2008 7:03 PM EST reply actions  

Please..

Mike Hampton has been irrelevant since 2004 and he was extremely unimpressive then. A waste of 2 mil in my opinion..

by son of wes on Dec 3, 2008 1:25 AM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

We use numbers and stuff.
Community Guidelines
Why be a member?

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Img_3830_small
BtBS Fantasy League
Small
Context Neutral Run and RBI projections
Small
Free Agent Compensation
Img_0001_small
Value of Various Plate Approaches
Strike_three2_small
Effect of Foul Area on Strikeouts: AL 1954-68: Erratum
Small
Baseball on a stick
Small
Player Evaluating Statistic
Baseball_small
Rays Outfield: Cheap but Extremely Productive
Small
A new xBABIP
Small
Jack Morris "pitching to the score"

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Follow us on Facebook!

Follow us on Twitter!

SaberGraphics

MLB Daily Dish

Get the latest MLB Trade Rumors, Transactions, and News at MLB Daily Dish!


Managing Editor:

Jbopp-kc_small Justin Bopp

Columnists:

Adam_small adarowski

Dme_small Satchel Price

Closeup4_small J-Doug

Carlosicon_small Julian Levine

Billy_and_daddy_4th_of_july_small Bill Petti

Featuring:

Dayton_small Jeff Zimmerman

12475953_small Jacob Peterson

Picture-6_small Chris St. John

Btbpro_small Dave Gershman

229331_10150183361996591_674441590_6760167_6637860_n3_small Lewie Pollis

Img_3830_small David Fung