The First Silly Contract of the Off-Season; Cardinals Re-Sign Kyle Lohse

by R.J. Anderson on Sep 30, 2008 8:00 AM EDT Comment 18 comments

When the St. Louis Cardinals signed Kyle Lohse to a one year, four million and some change deal this past spring it was a smart and thrifty move. Yet when they re-signed Lohse to a four years, 41 million dollar extension (with a full no-trade clause) it leaves some, including me, wondering what exactly they see.

Lohse's 3.89 FIP is solid, his 4.95 tRA, not so much. A low .300's BABIP seems a tad bit unsustainable for someone who gives up 22.1% liners. Assuming that regressed north slightly to .322, the midway point between .303 and .341 expected, Lohse would have given up an additional 18 hits this season. That's a bit concerning and unpredictable, however to Lohse's credit he doesn't walk too many and has been a groundball pitcher this season.

The issues with this signing are as follows:
A. Lohse has been a consistently below average pitcher (tRAs since 2004: 93, 93, 81, 112, 98, 87, 94.) You know who else has a tRA between 93 and 95? Guys like Livan Hernandez, Kevin Milwood, Garrett Olson, and Dave Bush.

B. Lohse had one of the worst strike swinging percentages of his career, tying 2005 at 6%. Greg Maddux gets 6.2%, Jarrod Washburn gets 6%, only pitchers like Jeff Suppan, Paul Byrd, Mark Hendrickson, Jeremy Sowers, Joe Blanton, the potentially non-tendered Daniel Cabrera, Scott Feldman, and Aaron Cook get between 5-6%. That is not very good company.

C. The Cardinals are paying him 41 million over four years.

D. Let me repeat that: the Cardinals are paying him 41 million over four years.

E. See points C and D.

Lohse is nearing 30 as well, so his prime is likely gone. The Cardinals are stuck with this guy for the next four years when they could've found someone just like him next spring for far less money. I don't know, maybe the Cardinals know something we don't, I sincerely hope so, otherwise this contact has the potential to look foolish very quickly.

Reference:

FanGraphs

StatCorner

STL Dispatch

0 recs | Comment 18 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Lots of discussion

over at VEB on this yesterday. I think most everyone is in agreement on three parts:

1. Pitching, even average pitching, cost way too much money (see Suppan, Jeff; Millwood, Kevin; Washburn, Jarrod; and Silva, Carlos who all received comparable or more money)
2. The no-trade is probably the worst part of the deal.
3. Since the salary is escalating, it leaves money for this offseason and in year 3 of the deal they cardinals loose some other albatross contracts (and pitching may cost even more, no-one knows).

by JBrew on Sep 30, 2008 9:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

It's that no trade clause that is killer

Why did they think they had to give him a no-trade? $41 mil over 4 years wasn’t enough?

by Peter Bendix on Sep 30, 2008 10:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah I have no clue,

But as the cardinals saw this past offseason, with LaRussa around there are ways to get around a no-trade clause (Rolen, Scott).

by JBrew on Sep 30, 2008 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The point about average pitching costing too much is somewhat true.

However the Cardinals have done perhaps the best job in the league at getting average pitchers off the scrap heap. It just seems to me that they would’ve found another Todd Wellemyer/Lohse this off-season rather than spending big money on retaining their types.

I don’t really understand the no-trade clause either. I shudder to think it was placed so Lohse would take less money.

by R.J. Anderson on Sep 30, 2008 10:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I somewhat disagree about average pitching costing too much

It certainly matters what you mean by “too much”, but $10MM per year is the going rate on the free agent market these days for a 2 WAR player. Sure, all free agent contracts could be considered overpaying, but a league-average pitcher is worth only a touch less than a league-average position player.

To me, teams seem to be confused as to which pitchers are actually league-average, using things like ERA and W-L record instead of FIP, xFIP, tRA, whatever, and overreacting to one good season when their track record might also include three poor ones.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Sep 30, 2008 11:05 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Exactly.

The problem isn’t teams overpaying for average pitching, it’s teams overpaying for mediocre and below-average pitching. Average pitchers may be somewhat overpaid, but they are helping your team win games. An ERA+ of 100 over 180-200 innings is quite valuable. It’s when you’re paying $10+ mil for guys who have ERA+s of 80-90 that you run into a problem.

It’s somewhat difficult to find truly average pitchers. It’s very easy to find mediocre pitchers.

by Peter Bendix on Sep 30, 2008 11:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Funny enough.

And I’m well aware that nobody else will find this funny. The guys who have 100 tRA+: Andrew Miller, Jason Marquis, John Maine, Kyle Davis, and Jeremy Guthrie. Note that each of them has changed teams within the last few seasons. Obviously a coincidence.

by R.J. Anderson on Sep 30, 2008 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you're right.

not funny. ; )

If anything, some teams don’t value average pitching enough, at least when it comes to the bottom of the rotation. Having two number ones, a three, and two fives is similar in value to all number threes, but all anyone talks about are the aces.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Sep 30, 2008 11:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Once again, I agree.

And not to belabor the point (more than I already have), but people seem to get upset when pitchers – especially prospects – are referred to as a #3/4 starter. That’s usually league average or better (think Jake Westbrook), and that’s quite valuable. It’s when you have guys like Lohse or Marquis masquerading as your 3 or 4 that you run into trouble, because they’re only a 3/4 when they get fairly lucky in a given season.

by Peter Bendix on Sep 30, 2008 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Aces bring star power and excitement.

You can’t sell Andrew Sonnanstine like you can sell Scott Kazmir (or James Shields) and I think that plays a small role into some of the thinking. Look at Seattle, they could’ve rolled with a rotation of Felix, Morrow, Washburn, Baek, and Feierabend or Smith, but how can you sell that compared to “Five aces”?

by R.J. Anderson on Sep 30, 2008 11:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

By winning more than 61 games?

J.K.L.

by acblue on Sep 30, 2008 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Touche.

Although I wasn’t thinking in baseball op terms, more along marketing.

by R.J. Anderson on Sep 30, 2008 11:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You sound like you're a perfect fit for the M's FO.

J.K.L.

by acblue on Oct 1, 2008 3:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, but I don't really believe that.

by R.J. Anderson on Oct 1, 2008 7:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes but you'd be so much better than Bavasi so you should fake it.

J.K.L.

by acblue on Oct 1, 2008 10:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The most compelling part of the argument on VEB for me,

was when they talked about the pitching on teams that are in the playoffs this year or were in the playoffs last year. They’re all stocked with young, cost-controlled pitchers. None of the teams overpaying on FA pitchers are in.

Space.

It's a problem we face.

So we never go anywhere.

We just stay in one place.

by hazel on Sep 30, 2008 11:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

how does the value from cost-controlled pitchers compare to value from cost-controlled hitters?

the other thing the Cards have going for them is one of the league’s better defenses, making all pitchers look better than they really are. the best plan in that situation is to sell high on overachieving starters (see the Athletics), but the Cards seems to have gone the other route and re-signed one of their own overrated starters.

Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.

by Sky Kalkman on Sep 30, 2008 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs