45 Worst Contracts in Baseball
Exactly what it purports to be. If anyone cares, I wrote a response to AJ Pierzynski being on the list - or, at the very least, being on the list over other White Sox players:
almost 3 years ago
larry
58 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I'll bring some more thoughts later, but, uh, there are some weird choices.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
tread carefully, sky. tim doesn't seem to like me using numbers. i don't know what he's going to think when someone who actually knows how to use numbers starts on him.
my advice: “be tactful”.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
You guys actually had a decent chat about numbers vs. no-numbers over at SSS.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
we're not all bad.
we can do the maths.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
Actually pretty solid.
I think he underrates the abilities of some players (catchers, middle infielders, and Bill Hall stick out), but it’s a good discussion piece.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
yeah, it's overall pretty good. and obviously no list - at least not with 45 on it - is going to be without its imperfections.
he does seem to be a bit behind in position adjustments and defensive valuation, that sort of thing.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
sure. but i was perhaps a bit surprised that he was a part of it. maybe that was me having the wrong impression.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
He's more of a reporter than an analyst
I give him credit for taking time out of his day to do something he doesn’t have to. I’m not talking about the list, but he does make an effort to analyze deals from a statistical perspective.
by Daniel Berlyn on Mar 3, 2009 9:46 PM EST up reply actions
I'm delighted that Adrian Beltre wasn't on this list.
Whenever I see a list like this, I check to see if Beltre is on the list, and if so mock the author in the comments. The fact that he isn’t is a nice surprise.
There are no good individual basketball statistics.
54!
if anyone wants to talk about catcher valuation
(invitation especially to sky and rj), please visit the fanpost posted by tim dierkes on southsidesox. we’d love to hear from smart number folks.
http://www.southsidesox.com/2009/3/3/779512/catcher-valuation
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
Where is Adrian Beltre?
Also I think that Ryan Howard’s will become pretty bad. He has declined in every way in each of last 2 seasons. I have a feeling that he will completely drop off of the table next year
vivaelbeñsheets
On a different list.
Probably called “45 above average contracts”
Space.
It's a problem we face.
So we never go anywhere.
We just stay in one place.
It wasn't
I was just wondering why he wasn’t mentioned in the article, as his name usually comes to the top of the list on these types of articles. See here.
However, while Beltre’s contract is certainly defensible by WAR, it might not have been that great of a contract. I don’t know a lot about the Mariner’s history, but looking at there records, they have generally been a bad team during the Beltre era. For a team that usually far out of the race, pay roughly market value per WAR isn’t good. Upgrading the team from 70 wins to 73-74 wins isn’t worth how much money Beltre has been making.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 3, 2009 11:30 PM EST up reply actions
Your "logic" is astoundingly confusing.
If I follow correctly, you seem to be implying that the quality of Beltre’s contract is somehow lessened by how bad the rest of the team was? Would it somehow have been a better contract if the Yankees had given it to him?
by Terminator X on Mar 4, 2009 12:29 AM EST up reply actions
And on top of that
Paying market value per WAR is equally defensible no matter what the record of the team is. You seem to be implying that bad teams can’t sign good contracts, because it’s just wasting money. By that logic, pretty much every contract on a bad team would have to be viewed as a bad contract. A 65 win team could sign a 5 WAR/year player for $10M and it would still be a bad deal by your logic, since the team still isn’t a contender.
Bottom line is he’s been worth $56.9M over the contract so far and has been paid $50.4M (numbers from fangraphs). That’s a fine deal on any team, regardless of record. Beltre has provided roughly 3.5 WAR/year, and has been paid at a slight bargain. That makes his contract a good contract.
by Terminator X on Mar 4, 2009 12:38 AM EST up reply actions
You are misunderstanding me
I was trying to say that while Beltre’s contract was a good deal, it wasn’t necessarily a smart one. Yes they got him for a slight bargain over the length of the contract so far, however they didn’t add anything significant to the outcome of the season. I’m not quite sure that I am explaining this very well, so I will use an example.
Last year the the Padres finished with a finished with a 63 and 99 record which is the exact same record that Mariners had in 2004 before they signed Beltre. If the Padres had signed Derek Lowe to a 5 year 80 million dollar deal would you be praising that? That deal would most likely be a bargain by WAR, however it still wouldn’t be a smart deal. It might add an additional 4 wins to the team next year, but that really wouldn’t help them as they would still be a very bad team with no realistic shot of making the playoffs. They could have instead used that money to sign draft picks, improve there scouting department, etc. so that they might be competitive in future years.
Lets look at another deal this offseason, the Indians signing of Kerry Wood to a 2 year 20 million dollar deal. Using his projected WAR this would be a slight overpayment, however it would still be a smart deal. The Indians were a .500 team last year battling injuries to a lot of there everyday starters. Adding Wood among other things, now makes them the division favorites, so even if they overpayed for him, it was still a good deal.
Context needs to be included when evaluating a deal. Wins are not created equal. The jump from a 90 win team on the cusp of the playoffs to a 94 win team is MUCH more valuable than the jump from a 63 win team in last place to a 67 win team that would still likely be in last place.
vivaelbeñsheets
The Mariners had a shit ton of money and they signed him to a five year deal.
The Beltre contract is one of the few good things Bavasi did. You can’t call it a bad idea on any level.
by Aaron Campeau on Mar 4, 2009 12:07 PM EST up reply actions
I wasn't a good one either
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 4, 2009 12:19 PM EST up reply actions
How was it not?
It’s below (slightly) market value. It’s not Beltre’s fault Bavasi was incompetent and unable to produce a winner.
by Aaron Campeau on Mar 4, 2009 2:38 PM EST up reply actions
maybe it's bavasi's fault for buying pearls for a pig?
when you’re incompetent and unable to produce a winner, even spending good money to win a couple more games isn’t exactly stellar.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
So he should have handed out a ridiculous contract to a bad player instead?
by Aaron Campeau on Mar 4, 2009 3:41 PM EST up reply actions
do you really not see the alternatives when you're putting words in peoples' mouths?
could always, you know, not spend the money. or not hand out a ridiculous contract. or any number of other variations on the theme.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
I didn't put words in your mouth, I asked a question. You're seriously being extra caustic today.
Your point as I understand it:
The Beltre contract wasn’t good because the team was bad.
My point:
A good contract is a good contract. Given that Beltre’s performance has been worth the money and the Mariners have a high payroll, it’s a good contract.
by Aaron Campeau on Mar 4, 2009 4:27 PM EST up reply actions
don't start with a "so", then, considering rather the point in using such a word to start a question is presupposing what i think.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
This has nothing to do with Beltre
I have already acknowledged that he has been worth his contract and more. However, my point is that is wasn’t a smart contract to give by Bavasi.
vivaelbeñsheets
Yeah, there are a few different ways to judge a contract, which we should all be aware of.
Even for guys with horrible contracts, they’re still often good baseball players. Carlos Lee, for example, is well above average even though he’s overpaid. That shouldn’t be a knock against him, just who signed him and the context.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
I understand that that is the point youre trying to make
but I’m not sure what your reasoning is. Paying good players what they’re worth (especially when you have a ton of money to spend) isn’t a problem.
by Aaron Campeau on Mar 4, 2009 3:40 PM EST up reply actions
his reasoning is that it's not really a particularly wise use of money to try to win 69 games instead of 66. or 78 instead of 74. or 88 instead of 85. or 61 instead of 57.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
I understand that, but you have to get good players somewhere.
Beltre wasn’t supposed to help the 2005 Mariners contend, he was supposed to help the 2006 or 2007 Mariners contend. If Bavasi knew how to build a team, he would have done so.
Seriously, do you think 4-win players just grow on trees? The Mariners can afford to spend and their farm wasn’t going to help them compete any time soon.
by Aaron Campeau on Mar 4, 2009 4:28 PM EST up reply actions
the point is what did that 3-4 win player get them?
was it worth it to the mariners? i’m not a mariners fan, so i can’t tell. their attendance has declined each year since he was there. maybe he prevented a steeper decline. maybe they sold a lot of t-shirts or something. they sure stunk in 3 of the 4 years and the year they were good they were quite lucky and still managed to finish, what, 7 games back?
you can put lipstick (beltre) on a pig (the mariners). but it’s still a pig.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
and i should have checked my attendance figures before posting.
they had a bump (like you would expect) in 2007, though still not anywhere near what it was before beltre arrived. but the trend has been down.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
Actually, most casual fans think he's a bust.
I just think that’s a terrible way to evaluate contracts. It’s similar to judging trades in hindsight. You could argue that the Freddy Garcia trade was terrible because Reed and Olivo turned out to be busts, but at the time most knowledgeable people thought it was good.
Same deal with claiming that Beltre’s contract was bad because the Mariners have been bad. He was more valuable than he got paid for. It was a good contract.
by Aaron Campeau on Mar 4, 2009 5:03 PM EST up reply actions
i don't agree with that.
hindsight is just as useful as an immediate evaluation. perhaps moreso. i agree that you shouldn’t do one without the other. but the result is of importance, just like the intention.
if you could (know this is likely impossible), you should hear what rick hahn, white sox assistant GM, has to say about jeremy reed. eye-opening about player (mis)evaluation. too long to go into, and i probably would be misrembering it all considering i talked to him last summer. but they knew they’d fucked up with the pick of jeremy reed (hahn was one of his biggest proponents at draft) and felt they got lucky dumping him when they did.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
That is a tasty little bit of info and it makes me hate Bill Bavasi even more.
I still think evaluating trades in hindsight is folly (assuming information like this doesn’t come to light,) and I think evaluating contracts on anything but a case-by-case basis is a bad idea as well.
My larger point with the Beltre contract is this; I might agree that it was a bad contract if the M’s were a low-payroll team that were unable to fill other holes because of his salary. That’s just simply not the case. They had money to sign Sexson, they had money to sign Silva, they had money to sign Washburn, etc etc etc. The Beltre contract didn’t hamstring anything, Bavasi was just woefully bad at talent evaluation and roster construction.
by Aaron Campeau on Mar 4, 2009 5:18 PM EST up reply actions
make plans to come to chicago in early august.
we do it every year with rick. you can also ask him about matt thornton and what they saw in the video of him.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
Chicago is actually the next city I want to visit.
Sadly it’s not in the cards this year. We do a similar thing here in Seattle, though.
Matt Thornton makes me cringe because he’s a great example of the fact that pretty much every aspect (save for the scouting department) of the organization during the Bavasi years was broken.
by Aaron Campeau on Mar 4, 2009 5:45 PM EST up reply actions
yeah. i'm sure you've read/heard about it.
it was frickin’ ridiculously simple what the adjustment was (though perhaps we shouldn’t discount the “change of scenery”/new pitching coach aspect completely). one of the “inefficiencies” that the white sox appear to be able to exploit is don cooper “fixing” pitchers.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
but think of the t-shirt sales!
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
also, what do you think is the current best work on positional adjustments, hopefully with an explanation a caveman could understand?
link or hard copy.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
Dave Cameron had a nice writeup on the adjustments over at FanGraphs. If I can find the link, I’ll share it. Try searching their blog section for: “win values” or “positional adjustments”
i want something more substantive than that, if possible.
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
Tango's links
There’s also a piece on lefties having difficulties at 2B/SS/3B, but I can’t seem to find that right now.
Search “positional adjustments” at insidethebook.com/ee
Those range from a 10 on the technical scale to a 4.
Cameron’s comment about picking players from a sandlot team is a good intro into why position-based adjustments are needed, too.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Cameron's commentt
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2008/12/17/695794/dave-cameron-on-positional#10810108
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
I think that the Yankees have to be excluded
They overspend for everyone, so there contracts should be measured on a different scale.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 3, 2009 10:56 PM EST up reply actions
I'm not sure they should be excluded.
If other teams are spending at $4.5MM per win, too, there’s no reason the Yanks should go above that, except maybe by just a bit for the big stars.
Also, in NY and especially with stars, players like Jeter earn back some of their salary by increased revenue. I mean, there are a few Jeter jerseys floating around, right? That should be measurable to some extent.
Beyond the Boxscore // Calling BJ Upton lazy is lazy.
Yes
but then we couldn’t bitch about them.
vivaelbeñsheets
by vivaelpujols on Mar 4, 2009 11:37 AM EST up reply actions
what's $20 million between friends?
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=826&position=SS
southsidesox.com - now the best place on the interwebs for chicago white sox analysis and discussion.
Never have been much of a Dierkes fan
His website is useful and I do visit it frequently, but I could do without his analysis.
"If Bowden was a general contractor, he'd build houses with nine bedrooms, six garages, no bathrooms, and half a roof."
Brandon Inge?
at 6m per for four years?
So far he’s been worth more than he’s been paid, and he fills a pretty useful roster role for the Tigers (because he can play all the corner spots and backup catcher). A very strange choice given he isn’t even on a particularly large, headline-attracting contract.
Bonderman’s a strange addition too – four years of a young, talented pitcher at $9.5m per? After his 6 win year in 06 it looked like a steal, but now he’s dropped off the radar a little it still doesn’t look too bad. He’s still been worth barely less than the contract’s paid him the last two years, even given his 08 injury (which can hardly be foreseen by the front office in 2006).
He seems to have a real downer on the Tigers, listing 6 of their contracts in succession. Some are probably fair enough (Sheffield, Willis) but it seems to me like he just got bored after he’d picked about 40 contracts and phoned in the end of the list.
Hall, Kearns (struggled in 08 but only being paid to be just over 1WAR and worth way more than that the three years previous, probably bounce-back candidate, looks like he’ll easily be worth the $ over the three years), Cuddyer (ignoring his injury-plagued 08 he’s been well worth 8m/yr the last few seasons, though I guess 4 years is a bit strong) & Pierzynski also jump out as strange choices. But generally, I don’t think it’s a bad list.
Because chicks dig the intentional base on balls.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Follow us on Twitter!
BTB: @BtBScore
Justin: @justinbopp
Satchel: @SatchelPrice
J-Doug: @RationalPastime
Daniel: @CamdenCrazies
Peter: @CapitolAvenue
Josh: @garik16
Julian: @splashinpumpkin
Matt: @devil_fingers
Bill: @BillPetti
JD: @JDSussman
Lucas: @DBITLefty
Jeff: @jeffwzimmerman
Lewis: @LewsOnFirst
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
