Seems like the Indians use a replacement level close to average if they're getting $9M/win.

Our analysts can put a value on what it costs in free agency to sign a player and what that means in Wins Above Replacement and what those players end up costing in free agency and that changes every year. They measure all the players signed in free agency and what their history has been and what they offer going forward and they place a value. The challenge in free agency is you’re often paying for that in the first year of a contract, and in the out years of a contract the players WAR usually goes down because he’s usually past his prime. So it becomes a less efficient contract over time. That’s why free agency is never the best way to build. It’s a good way to supplement but not build.

Really. So if you paid big money for Adam Dunn or Jason Werth or Carl Crawford or Barry Zito or whoever, the analysts can figure out what kind of first years he will have and then compute the wins he will add to your team totals in the year to follow. Can they also figure out how many wins your team is going to get the next year?

I am all in favor of statistical study but when these guys think it is a science, I worry. There is still a great deal of variance in players' abilities, year to year, to predict such things . Signing free agents is a gamble, as Shapiro does point out. Consider the successes of the Baltimore and Oakland franchises and the lack of success of high spenders Boston, NY and LA.

Seems like the Indians use a replacement level close to average

Similarly, it seems like the average Indian used is close to replacement level.

Hmmm... the marginal investment in "analysts" when b-r is giving away 95% of that value for free.

Seems like the Indians use a replacement level close to average if they're getting $9M/win.

I was wondering about that. Or maybe they're only looking at "big money" FAs and not including (for example) RA Dickey lottery tickets.