Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, January 13, 2012

Edwin Jackson too pricey after Hal Steinbrenner meets with agent Scott Boras

Lord, Lord, they cut…

A baseball official familiar with the Yankees’ thinking called Hal Steinbrenner’s Wednesday night meeting with agent Scott Boras “a courtesy,” but the Yankees’ aversion to Jackson relates only to the price, not the player. Boras was believed to be asking for a five-year deal at about $15 million per, but the request for a sit-down with Steinbrenner could signal a willingness to drop that.

Jackson appeals to the Yankees, but the team is engaged in a long-term effort to reduce payroll. This winter, GM Brian Cashman is balancing that need with his desire to improve the starting rotation.

Jackson, a 28-year-old righthander, would certainly improve the Yankees’ pitching, adding a reliable No. 2 starter with postseason experience behind CC Sabathia, and creating more depth in a group that includes Ivan Nova, A.J. Burnett, Freddy Garcia, Phil Hughes and Hector Noesi.

Repoz Posted: January 13, 2012 at 06:58 AM | 108 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: yankees

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. vagab0nd (no longer an outl13r) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:26 AM (#4035945)
a reliable No. 2 starter


When did that happen?
   2. The District Attorney Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:56 AM (#4035955)
Why not Kuroda, Oswalt, trade for Wandy? There are options that would give them a better pitcher for '12 without any long-term commitment.
   3. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:01 AM (#4035960)
a reliable No. 2 starter


When did that happen?


Over the last four years he's averaged 202 IP of 106 ERA+. Last year 51 pitchers qualified for the ERA title (162 IP) and had a 105 ERA+ or better.

He's a #2.
   4. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:02 AM (#4035963)
Why not Kuroda, Oswalt, trade for Wandy? There are options that would give them a better pitcher for '12 without any long-term commitment.

I'm sure they're looking at them all trying to get the best deal. Seems like a buyers' market right now.
   5. musial6 Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:22 AM (#4035975)
It depends on how you define #2 starter...

I think the Yankees idea of a #2 starter is a front of the rotation horse who would be the #1 on a lot of teams. They need someone who can beat other the playoff teams' #2 starters, not another consistently unspectacular innings muncher.

If you are paying $15M/5, you ought to get a #2 with some potential to transform into a #1...and Jackson has not shown that potential.

In reality, Jackson is a solid but not spectacular #3 who will give you a slightly above average 200 innings, and doesn't get rattled in the postseason.
   6. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:24 AM (#4035977)
Over the last four years he's averaged 202 IP of 106 ERA+. Last year 51 pitchers qualified for the ERA title (162 IP) and had a 105 ERA+ or better.

He's a #2.


In theory yes but that's not a good #2 for a contender. Just looking at the 2nd best starter on the 8 playoff teams plus the two chokers;

Red Sox - 122 (Lester)
Yankees - 122 (Garcia)
Rays - 126 (Hellickson)
Tigers - 92 (Scherzer)
Rangers - 131 (Harrison)
Phillies - 161 (Lee)
Braves - 118 (Hudson)
Brewers - 110 (Marcum)
Cardinals - 105 (Carpenter)
D-Backs - 113 (Hudson)

The Tigers are the most glaring exception and the Cards as well. Despite those exceptions I'm comfortable saying that targeting a 105 ERA+ from a #2 starter is unwise for a contender.

EDIT: For "second best starter" I simply grabbed whoever was second in ERA+ with 162+ innings pitched. It's a number, not a talent evaluation.
   7. Quaker Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:36 AM (#4035981)
Fister would probably be above Scherzer for the Tigers.
   8. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:37 AM (#4035984)
Yeah, but less than the 162 IP for the Tigers so I didn't include him.
   9. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:41 AM (#4035987)
Boras has made a lot of deals by circumventing GMs and going direct to ownership, who typically stink at negotiating. This is a common tactic among high-powered salespeople, attacking the C-suite as its termed as many here likely know, and I am surprised that baseball teams have been slow to recognize what Boras is doing. Namely, avoiding folks better qualified to assess the player/the contract as well as negotiate terms.

I wonder if there has not been some collective 'learning'. That more than some actual collusive effort would help make headway on slowing contract inflation. If you reduce the 'Boras effect' of dragging up salary levels due to large deals that outpace normal inflation associated with the baseball market that would help teams a fair amount.

Pujols can be termed an outlier for obvious reasons. If the Fielders and others don't get the coattail effect from albert that could make a difference.

Potentially interesting
   10. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:55 AM (#4036002)
It depends on how you define #2 starter...

I think the Yankees idea of a #2 starter is a front of the rotation horse who would be the #1 on a lot of teams. They need someone who can beat other the playoff teams' #2 starters, not another consistently unspectacular innings muncher.

If you are paying $15M/5, you ought to get a #2 with some potential to transform into a #1...and Jackson has not shown that potential.

In reality, Jackson is a solid but not spectacular #3 who will give you a slightly above average 200 innings, and doesn't get rattled in the postseason.


Well the Yankees aren't going to pay 5/75, they're probably hoping to get him for 3/36.

The Yankees are likely to have a well above average offense and bullpen, and good defense (esp. OF). They don't need their SPs to outduel the opposition in the post-season, they need to stay in the game. They also need to avoid missing the playoff b/c the back of the rotation turns into a horror-show.

I'd give Jackson 3/36, or Kuroda or Oswalt 1/12.
   11. DA Baracus Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:08 AM (#4036015)
Over the last four years he's averaged 202 IP of 106 ERA+.


That makes him a #3. His 214 inning, 126 ERA+ 2009 season is weighing that average a bit:

2008: 183 IP, 100 ERA+
2009: 214 IP, 126 ERA+
2010: 209 IP, 95 ERA+
2011: 200 IP, 106 ERA+

He's certainly turned himself into a good pitcher who can help a rotation. But not "reliable #2." Reliable #2s don't play for 5 teams in 4 years.
   12. Nasty Nate Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:21 AM (#4036032)
Why not Kuroda, Oswalt, trade for Wandy? There are options that would give them a better pitcher for '12 without any long-term commitment.


"long-term commitment" isn't necessarily a bad thing for the team...
   13. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:23 AM (#4036034)
Reliable #2s don't play for 5 teams in 4 years.

Cliff Lee has changed teams 4 times (5 stints on 4 different teams) in 3 years.
   14. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:28 AM (#4036040)
As I said in an earlier thread, Jackson could be the steal of the offseason. 200 innings of 100-110 ERA+ pitching is pretty valuable, and he's young enough to still have some upside. If a team can get him for 4/$48 or something they should jump at the opportunity.
   15. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:32 AM (#4036045)
If a team can get him for 4/$48 or something they should jump at the opportunity.

Concur.
   16. DA Baracus Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:34 AM (#4036047)
Cliff Lee has changed teams 4 times (5 stints on 4 different teams) in 3 years.


Yeah but #### that guy.
   17. The District Attorney Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:40 AM (#4036056)
As I said in an earlier thread, Jackson could be the steal of the offseason. 200 innings of 100-110 ERA+ pitching is pretty valuable, and he's young enough to still have some upside. If a team can get him for 4/$48 or something they should jump at the opportunity.
I don't disagree with that, but doing so probably makes more sense for an up-and-coming team like the Nats or Royals than for the Yankees, who generally (and I think correctly) prioritize risk aversion over upside when they make a big move.
   18. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:41 AM (#4036059)
I don't disagree with that, but doing so probably makes more sense for an up-and-coming team like the Nats or Royals than for the Yankees, who generally (and I think correctly) prioritize risk aversion over upside when they make a big move.

Except that's not a "big move" for the Yankees.
   19. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:44 AM (#4036065)
I don't disagree with that, but doing so probably makes more sense for an up-and-coming team like the Nats or Royals than for the Yankees, who generally (and I think correctly) prioritize risk aversion over upside in their big moves.


But isn't risk averse what signing Jackson is? No one is saying he's a Cy Young candidate if he pulls it together, he's just a steady and durable pitcher. Over the last four years his range of ERA+ has been 95-126 and even that 95 with 200 innings is pretty valuable. Plus, despite the fact that we've been hearing about him forever he is only 28 this year so, with pitcher caveats understood, it's not like you're signing a guy who is at an age where decline should be expected.
   20. valuearbitrageur Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:57 AM (#4036080)
Anyone solely using ERA+ to measure pitchers for #2 spots, doesn't know how to measure starters value. innings pitched is hugely valuable from a starter, and EJax gives you tons of innings and goes deep into games, which is important to keep your bullpen fresh.

E-Jax is a solid #2 and it ain't even close. he might be the best fit for the Yankees.
   21. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: January 13, 2012 at 12:04 PM (#4036095)
I agree he's a good fit for the Yankees (and I'd love him on the Red Sox for the same reasons). The fact is that most teams that are playoff/playoff contenders get more out of their #2 starter than 105/200 innings.
   22. valuearbitrageur Posted: January 13, 2012 at 12:07 PM (#4036100)
BTW: Jackson is 20th in fWar among pitchers the last three years, in part because he was 17th in IPs.
   23. Greg Maddux School of Reflexive Profanity Posted: January 13, 2012 at 12:41 PM (#4036144)
Jackson's average recent performance resembles that of the guy who ends up second on a team in innings pitched in a given year, but the guy who ends up second on a team in innings pitched in a given year isn't the number two starter; it's a blend of number two starters, number three starters in rotations where one of the top two got hurt, number four starters where two of the top three got hurt, etc.

If Jackson's second in your projected rotation, you've got problems. If he gets hurt, you've now got someone worse than Edwin Jackson in your top two. If your ace gets hurt, Jackson is now first in the pecking order, with Worse Than Jackson riding shotgun.
   24. valuearbitrageur Posted: January 13, 2012 at 01:43 PM (#4036206)
ackson's average recent performance resembles that of the guy who ends up second on a team in innings pitched in a given year, but the guy who ends up second on a team in innings pitched in a given year isn't the number two starter; it's a blend of number two starters, number three starters in rotations where one of the top two got hurt, number four starters where two of the top three got hurt, etc.


It actually resembles a stud who averages 6.5 innings per start no matter what, while outside of Sabathia the Yankees had a staff that averaged under 6 innings per start.

Only 6 teams in baseball had a better #2 by WAR than Edwin Jackson last year (7 if you count Fister). That makes him not only a solid #2, but one of the best #2 starters in all of baseball for 3 years running.

And two of those teams still missed the playoffs, and none won the World Series. Less than half (4) of the top 9 teams in starters WAR made the playoffs. You know what was more highly correlated with playoff teams? Offense. 7 out of the top 9 teams in offense went to the playoffs and the 8th team was still in the top half. Two of the top 4 offensive teams squared off in the World Series.

There are many ways to build a solid starting staff for a playoff team, and the Yankees, Brewers and World Champions did it without a #2 as good as Jackson this year.

Jackson would address such a huge hole for the Yankees that I'm praying they don't sign him.

If Jackson's second in the Yankee's projected rotation, they've made a big upgrade over 2011. If Sabathia gets hurt, they've got a guy who has produced like a #1 starter the last 3 years stepping in to save their bacon


Edwin has been 33rd, 32nd, and 27th in starters WAR the last 3 years.
   25. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: January 13, 2012 at 02:06 PM (#4036225)
Only 6 teams in baseball had a better #2 by WAR than Edwin Jackson last year (7 if you count Fister).


BB Ref shows 10 teams, not 6 with higher #2 WAR than Jackson and at least 162 IP.

There are many ways to build a solid starting staff for a playoff team, and the Yankees, Brewers and World Champions did it without a #2 as good as Jackson this year.


I'm not sure how you're defining that. The Yankees had two #2 guys better than Jackson by WAR (Garcia and Nova) and the Brewers #2 (Wolf by WAR) was just as good as Jackson.
   26. valuearbitrageur Posted: January 13, 2012 at 02:32 PM (#4036258)
I was using FanGraphs, which is probably more accurate (Colon had more WAR w/40 less innings, really), but should also be very likely to be more predictive of future performance.

But again, 10 teams makes him at worst, well above average for a #2.
   27. Srul Itza Posted: January 13, 2012 at 02:36 PM (#4036262)
There are two models of # 2 pitchers.

One is as the second banana in a truly great tandem -- Drysdale to Koufax; Glavine to Maddux; Schilling to Johnson; Lee to Halladay.

These are No. 2's who would be No. 1's on most teams. The Yankees are going to find that.

The other No. 2 is the good, innings-eater guy who doesn't set anyone's world on fire, but who everybody would want in their rotation. That is not normally how you build an uber-contender, but if you have enough other good pieces, it could still work.

A rotation of CC Sabathia, Ivan Nova, Edwin Jackson, Freddy Garcia, and Phil Hughes/AJ Burnett would get the job done.
   28. Srul Itza Posted: January 13, 2012 at 02:40 PM (#4036266)
I was using FanGraphs, which is probably more accurate (Colon had more WAR w/40 less innings, really), but should also be very likely to be more predictive of future performance a useless piece of crap.


FTFY

HTH

YMMV

LSMFT
   29. DA Baracus Posted: January 13, 2012 at 02:43 PM (#4036271)
Anyone solely using ERA+ to measure pitchers for #2 spots, doesn't know how to measure starters value.


Of course not. No one stat does.
   30. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: January 13, 2012 at 02:47 PM (#4036278)
But again, 10 teams makes him at worst, well above average for a #2.


I'll quibble a bit over "well above average." If you change the criteria to 2.5 WAR (BBRef again), 18 teams had at least two starters above that level and 11 teams had three.

Don't get me wrong, I like Jackson, I just think you're overrating him a bit. I think contending teams would prefer to have someone superior as their #2.
   31. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 13, 2012 at 02:56 PM (#4036290)
I know Doug Melvin has great faith in Shaun Marcum and while Marcum is a great guy I have doubts about his health. I think a rotation of Greinke, Gallardo and Jackson with the likes of Narveson, Marcum, and Wolf filling in as available or healthy would be fine and dandy with me.
   32. GuyM Posted: January 13, 2012 at 02:59 PM (#4036295)
You shouldn't look backwards at successful teams to determine how good a #2 starter "needs to be." Successful teams will nearly all have at least two starters who did very well -- that's one reason the team was successful! -- and so the 2nd highest ERA+ (or WAR, or anything) will look very good. This will overstate how good your #2 pitcher needs to be in terms of talent. In fact, several of the guys in #6 were arguably their team's #1 at the start of the season. It would be better to look at pre-season projections for good teams, and see how good their #2 starters were in terms of true talent.
   33. valuearbitrageur Posted: January 13, 2012 at 03:04 PM (#4036307)
Using BBRef WAR, Jackson was 48th in the MLB in 2011, 111th in 2010, and 20th in 2009. Can'tgenerate a multi-year ranking on BBREF, but but his 3 WAR per year average would rank between 40th and 51st the last 3 years. Since Oswalt is 20th with 13.6 WAR over those three years, my guess is that Jackson the three years my guess is Jackson is close to a top 30 most valuable starter by BBRef WAR over that span.

So even by BBRef measures, Jackson has been a solid #2.

BBRef's measure is very results oriented, while FanGraphs is really component based. The last 3 years FanGraphs sees him as a 3.6, 3.8, 3.8 WAR pitcher, while BBRef sees him as a 4.3, 1.7, 3.1 WAR pitcher.

Assuming BABIP Isn't a repeatable skill, the fWAR is smoothing out his actual results with what they estimate he should have produced given his K, BB, and HR rates. To me that's a more trustworthy approach than taking the runs he surrendered, estimating what a replacement level pitcher would have given up against the same teams (not lineups, teams) in the same parks, with the same defense, which is a ton of adjustments and what BBRef does.

So I lean to Edwin being one of the best #2s (I mean, Cliff Lee ain't a #2 even though that's his role), instead of BB-Ref's measure of him as a good #2. But either way, he'd be a solid upgrade to any of Colon, Nova, and Burnett. With that offense and 32-33 starts, he'd have a decent shot at 20 wins.

And the Yankees bullpen would be very grateful.
   34. valuearbitrageur Posted: January 13, 2012 at 03:10 PM (#4036313)
I'll quibble a bit over "well above average." If you change the criteria to 2.5 WAR (BBRef again), 18 teams had at least two starters above that level and 11 teams had three.


If you set the bar at 2.5 WAR, there were 77 pitchers in the majors who met that criteria (by BBRef WAR) last year. Since there are only 30 #1 starter spots and 30 #2 starter spots, how are the other 17 pitchers #2 quality?

2.8 WAR is where the 60th starter landed this year in BBRef WAR.

Don't get me wrong, I like Jackson, I just think you're overrating him a bit. I think contending teams would prefer to have someone superior as their #2.


I agree with this. I'm a big proponent of the 2 studs leads to playoff success theory, and I understand the desire. If the Yankees can do better than Edwin they should. But if they can't, I think the subtle effects of moving Nova back to 3rd, getting another half inning from your #2 every start (and another partial inning from your #3 every start), will make a fairly significant change in how effective their pitching is.
   35. Walt Davis Posted: January 13, 2012 at 04:56 PM (#4036442)
For "second best starter" I simply grabbed whoever was second in ERA+ with 162+ innings pitched. It's a number, not a talent evaluation.

And this has been a major problem with several posts in this thread. You don't get to buy results, you only get to buy talent.

Using ERA+, 2009-11, 500+ IP:

11 pitchers at 130+
11 pitchers at 115-129
13 pitchers at 105-114

Jackson is #29 with a 108.

Using b-r WAR:

12 pitchers at 13+
9 pitchers at 10-<13
11 pitchers at 7.5-<10

Jackson is #27 with 9.1. In WAR, Jackson is just behind Beckett, just ahead of Gio and Garza.

Using K/BB:

9 pitchers at 3.5+
11 pitchers at 3-<3.5
11 pitchers at 2.5-<3
10 pitchers at 2.25-<2.5
8 pitchers at 2-<2.25

Jackson is at #36 with 2.33 similar to Jimenez, CJ Wilson, Santana, Danks.

I will let somebody else do fWAR and FIP and xFIP and whatever.

Those lists assume durability so more talented but less durable pitchers won't make it. Also young guys who pitched only the last 2 seasons won't make it. Is durability projectable? I have no idea (well, past injury helps predict future injury but Jackson could still be just one pitch away from missing the season). So we'll broaden the search to include more small sample sizes (while ignoring the increased variance in our predictions):

2009-11, 300+ IP, 80%+ starts (no point doing WAR here since it's a counting stat)

ERA+: Jackson is 45th (ignoring the retired Pettitte). Guys added a a mix of the injured (e.g. Johnson, Wainwright, Santana, T Hudson, Jurrjens) and the young (e.g. Bumgarner, D Hudson, Garcia).

K/BB: 59th ... finally something that suggests he might not be a #2 but still just across the border.

Now ignore durability almost entirely, requiring only 162 IP over the last 3 years and 80% starts and he's 51st in ERA+ (ignoring Pettitte and Washburn). But I assume nobody here really wants Erik Bedard or Ryan Vogelsong or Brandon McCarthy or Bartolo Colon as their #2 so that puts Jackson comfortably in the top 50.

There's no way you can slice it that Jackson isn't a #2 starter. If you want your #2 starter to have a true talent around, say, a 115 ERA+ then you have to have 2 of the top 25-30 starters on your staff. Sure, that's what a team like the Yanks or Sox will often try to do because they can afford it (see Phils) but that doesn't change the fact that Jackson has been a #2 starter in terms of quality and one of the better pitchers in the league in terms of quantity. Put those together and you have a good #2.

And he's only 28.

Would you be upset if your team traded for Gallardo or Garza as their #2? Garza and Jackson are the same age with very similar performance the last 3 years. He is two years older than Gallardo though. Given the age difference, there's no good reason to think he won't pitch as well as Oswalt, Kuroda or Rodriguez although maybe you can get them on shorter deals (but Wandy will cost you some talent). His numbers are about the same as Beckett, not substantially worse than Danks (1 year younger) or Buehrle (5 years older) or Fister (same age). It's also true his numbers aren't much better than Vazquez (7 years older), Wolf (7 years older) or Floyd (1 year older).

And, most appropriately, if you wanted a clearly better pitcher who was also available your choices were ... CJ Wilson. Wandy's got the 2nd best argument but is 5 years older. Or you could argue for Cahill who has pitched as well and is 4 years younger or Gio who is 2 years younger but probably has worse peripherals.
   36. Something Other Posted: January 13, 2012 at 05:49 PM (#4036502)
Why not Kuroda, Oswalt, trade for Wandy? There are options that would give them a better pitcher for '12 without any long-term commitment.

"long-term commitment" isn't necessarily a bad thing for the team...
But, but, but... Without digging up an earlier thread, isn't getting under the luxury tax by or in 2014 a big deal for the Yanks, as it resets the tax "clock"? And, doesn't signing Jackson for a three year or longer deal make that very, very difficult?

Based on my back of the envelope WAGs getting under the cap in 2014 actually gives the Yankees MORE to spend over the next five or six years, since when they (presumably) go over the cap in 2015 and beyond their tax rate is 17% versus something in the neighborhood of 40%. So, getting under doesn't just save them money, it gives them more money to spend. The Yanks should be very willing to give Oswalt or Kuroda (or Jackson, of course, in the unlikely event he might be willing to take 2/35 or so) a few million extra in order to NOT have to pay them in 2014, though admittedly Oswalt isn't likely to get a three year deal anywhere.

I noticed Wandy's team option in 2014 vests if he meets some performance marks. Are clubs allowed to buy out that kind of thing in advance? Could the Yanks trade for Rodriguez and give him $5m with the understanding that he's a FA after 2013--and does that 5m count against the team's 2014 payroll? The Brewers and FRod changed the terms of his vest during the 2011 season so I imagine this could work, although if it counts against the 2014 payroll for luxury tax purposes it's less than perfect for the Yanks.
   37. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: January 13, 2012 at 05:54 PM (#4036513)
There's no way you can slice it that Jackson isn't a #2 starter.
Well, you can use a method other than a straight average of the last three seasons. Jackson had a big year in 2009. If you take an average of 2010-2011, Jackson's 55th in pitching WAR. For a good club, that's much more of a #3 than a #4.

My dumber-than-Marcel projections (regressed weighted three-year averages) have Jackson projected to about 28 runs better than replacement. Based on some old numbers I have from 2009 and 2010, that would put him somewhere in the range of 45th-50th in MLB. Again, for a contending club, that's more of a #3 than a #2. (Though it's more a borderline definitional call than it was for 55th).
   38. Something Other Posted: January 13, 2012 at 05:58 PM (#4036518)
(regressed weighted three-year averages)


Do you have a link to an original post showing your method?
   39. Nasty Nate Posted: January 13, 2012 at 06:02 PM (#4036530)
But, but, but... Without digging up an earlier thread, isn't getting under the luxury tax by or in 2014 a big deal for the Yanks, as it resets the tax "clock"? And, doesn't signing Jackson for a three year or longer deal make that very, very difficult?

Based on my back of the envelope WAGs getting under the cap in 2014 actually gives the Yankees MORE to spend over the next five or six years, since when they (presumably) go over the cap in 2015 and beyond their tax rate is 17% versus something in the neighborhood of 40%. So, getting under doesn't just save them money, it gives them more money to spend. The Yanks should be very willing to give Oswalt or Kuroda (or Jackson, of course, in the unlikely event he might be willing to take 2/35 or so) a few million extra in order to NOT have to pay them in 2014, though admittedly Oswalt isn't likely to get a three year deal anywhere.


Good points, I hadn't thought of that. Will they be able to get under the cap if we assume they re-sign Cano to a huge contract?
   40. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: January 13, 2012 at 06:04 PM (#4036535)
Do you have a link to an original post showing your method?
There are some posts on the "dumber-than-Marcels" at ST.

"Method" is a generous term for this - it's more just a back-of-the-envelope calculation. For pitchers, I use a weighted average of 3/2/1/2, three for the most recent year, two for the next most recent, one for the year two years out, and a weight of two for a regression component (league average). I use 5/4/3/2 for hitters. (The different weights are based on some old discussions at Tango's place, if I remember correctly.

I use the value stats at B-Ref and Fangraphs, so I'm working with run values from the beginning. I do a projection based on both B-Ref and Fangraphs, and then average the two.

I found that it was hard to find good (read: better) value projections in the middle of the offseason, so I've started running these in a spreadsheet for my own analyses.
   41. JPWF1313 Posted: January 13, 2012 at 07:07 PM (#4036599)
And he's only 28.


and he's a pitcher, per Bill James, performance and K rate are more important in determining how many years a pitcher has left than age....

His K-Rate is all over the place....
His BABIP is all over the place... career .314
ERA+
2008: 100
2009: 126
2010: 95
2011: 106

ERA+ recalculating IP/ER using a .314 BABIP each year in place of actual BABIP:

2008: 96
2009: 109
2010: 96
2011: 119
   42. Mayor Blomberg Posted: January 13, 2012 at 07:54 PM (#4036619)
ERA+ recalculating IP/ER using a .314 BABIP each year in place of actual BABIP:

2008: 96
2009: 109
2010: 96
2011: 119


Right, so either a 2 yr or 4 yr deal for this Saberhagen wannabe.
   43. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 08:23 PM (#4036639)
Good points, I hadn't thought of that. Will they be able to get under the cap if we assume they re-sign Cano to a huge contract?
If a huge Cano contract is really the difference between them sliding under the cap and not, they might well take their chances letting him hit the open market. It is possible he'll leave, of course, but if the Yankees want him, I'd be very surprised if he left.
   44. NJ in DC (Now with Wife!) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 08:45 PM (#4036655)
Montero traded for Pineda according to Heyman. Further details to come.
   45. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: January 13, 2012 at 08:49 PM (#4036660)
More than just those two players involved he is saying.
   46. Blastin Posted: January 13, 2012 at 08:54 PM (#4036664)
I'm sad. I loved (this) Jesus. But.. Pineda's 23. We could have him for a real real long time.

Let's see the rest of the deal.

Edit: Noesi! Noo...
   47. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 08:56 PM (#4036668)
The deal is Pineda and Jose Campos for Montero and Hector Noesi, a source tells MLB.com's Greg Johns (Twitter link).


from mlbtraderumors
   48. Blastin Posted: January 13, 2012 at 08:58 PM (#4036670)
Campos is intriguing. Very very young. Younger than my sister, who is 19.5.

Pineda's good.

Now what do we do with the DH I wonder? Sign one of the old creakers?
   49. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:05 PM (#4036674)
Now what do we do with the DH I wonder? Sign one of the old creakers?

Maybe they can give Jorge a call? He and Jones would make a pretty nice platoon.

Edit: Carlos Pena? Derrek Lee? Johnny Damon?
   50. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:06 PM (#4036675)
First reaction is that this is a pretty even deal for both. I like it more for the Mariners, but that's because I think their ballpark gives them a distinct advantage in developing starting pitching.
   51. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:08 PM (#4036677)
Johnny Damon is available...
   52. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:09 PM (#4036678)
Jorge could come out of retirement...
   53. Blastin Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:10 PM (#4036680)
Too late for Luke Scott, eh.
   54. Boileryard Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:11 PM (#4036682)
Jorge could come out of retirement...

Adam Everett, too.
   55. Dock Ellis on Acid Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:12 PM (#4036685)
They need Edwin a whole lot less now!
   56. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:14 PM (#4036686)
First reaction is that this is a pretty even deal for both. I like it more for the Mariners, but that's because I think their ballpark gives them a distinct advantage in developing starting pitching.

Agree. Campos is a B prospect (as per Sickels) Noesi was a B last year. Campos has more upside, Noesi can deliver value today. I call it a wash, and gives both teams what they need. Yankees have lots of guys who can be #4-5 SP.

Montero and Pineda looks pretty close to a wash also. Montero probably has more certainty, by not being a pitcher, but Pineda does have the full year of MLB performance.

Pineda fills a huge need for NY. Not sure where Montero fits in Sea. RH power hitter will be hurt some. Is he DH right away? Or are they giving up on Smoak?
   57. Blastin Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:18 PM (#4036692)
So now DH then. Someone cheap and undervalued or old and on their way out?
   58. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:18 PM (#4036693)
Pineda fills a huge need for NY. Not sure where Montero fits in Sea. RH power hitter will be hurt some. Is he DH right away? Or are they giving up on Smoak?


Any reason they wouldn't stick him behind the plate and find out? I mean, Miguel Olivo is nice and all but why not see what happens?
   59. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:20 PM (#4036695)
So now DH then. Someone cheap and undervalued or old and on their way out?


With some of their veterans why not just rotate it? Yanks seem like the type of team that is structured well enough to not have a set DH. Maybe Andruw Jones nominally but really 3-4 times a week, A-Rod once a week, Tex, Jeter, even Russell Martin.
   60. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:21 PM (#4036697)
#### this ####...Im going to buy a Mets hat. Eat a dick Cashman
   61. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:21 PM (#4036699)
Any reason they wouldn't stick him behind the plate and find out? I mean, Miguel Olivo is nice and all but why not see what happens?

Managerial stupidity and over-emphasis on catcher D? Also, they have Olivo and Jaso.

I bet they try him in LF, if anywhere, and let Carp DH.
   62. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:22 PM (#4036700)
#### this ####...Im going to buy a Mets hat. Eat a dick Cashman

Seriously? Pineda is really good.
   63. APNY Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:23 PM (#4036702)
I fear a DH committee with Nunez getting lots of AB's for half the year before they realize Nunez sucks and then they trade prospects for a real bat. Just sign Pena now.
   64. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:24 PM (#4036705)
Screw that, bring back Cletus. He still smacked RHP around at a decent enough clip last year ...
   65. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:25 PM (#4036706)
With some of their veterans why not just rotate it? Yanks seem like the type of team that is structured well enough to not have a set DH. Maybe Andruw Jones nominally but really 3-4 times a week, A-Rod once a week, Tex, Jeter, even Russell Martin.

Well, then you need somebody that can play 3B/OF and hit RHP.

You could add Wilson Betemit and Johnny Damon, and mix and match.

Your DH/bench would be Jones, Betemit, Damon, Cervelli, and Nunez.
   66. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:25 PM (#4036709)
Oh, #### YEAH, we got Kuroda on a 1 year deal, too!
   67. Blastin Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:26 PM (#4036710)
It's sad, he seems like a good kid. But... prospect-hugging only makes sense when you're getting some old nothing in return. A 23 year old like Pineda? If there's anyone you'd trade him for, this would be the age and type. Yeah, Lee's better. But we get (at least) five years of Pineda.

Kuroda for one year, too!?!? Sweet.
   68. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:27 PM (#4036712)
Screw that, bring back Cletus. He still smacked RHP around at a decent enough clip last year ...

The man speaks truth: 118 sOPS+, 118 wRC+ vs. RHP. Nice complement to Jones. If he could catch even 20 games, it would make a lot of sense.
   69. Jose Is The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:28 PM (#4036713)
Wow, that's a nice move by Cashman.
   70. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:29 PM (#4036715)
Oh, #### YEAH, we got Kuroda on a 1 year deal, too!

Wow! Not taking any chances with that 2 WC play-in BS.

So, CC, Pineda, Kuroda, Nova, Hughes/Garcia.

Gotta think they're about to eat a big chunk of $ and send AJ packing.

Edit: Boston's got to throw a big chunk of change at Jackson now, dont' they?
   71. The John Wetland Memorial Death (CoB) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:29 PM (#4036716)
1 year deal for Kuroda, between 10-11 million.

Lovely.
   72. NJ in DC (Now with Wife!) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:31 PM (#4036717)
[70] Maybe Hughes and AJ gone. Yankees don't like the idea of Garcia in the pen, IIRC.
   73. Blastin Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:31 PM (#4036718)
So now we have 7 starting pitchers... Sabathia, Pineda, Kuroda, Nova, Garcia (man, they all end in a).... Hughes/Burnett..
   74. Blastin Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:32 PM (#4036719)
I bet just AJ. Stick Hughes in AAA, he has one option left.
   75. Drew (Primakov, Gungho Iguanas) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:33 PM (#4036721)
As a Red Sox fan, allow me to say...blech. Good moves by Cashman.
   76. Avoid running at all times.-S. Paige Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:34 PM (#4036724)
Wow! The pitching staff is suddenly exciting and awesome! I'm psyched about Pineda since I've heard in addition to being really good, he's a lot of fun to watch.
   77. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:37 PM (#4036725)
So, assuming some retread DH who can combine with Jones to give them a 110-120 OPS+ from the position, are they the clear #1 team in MLB now?

I bet just AJ. Stick Hughes in AAA, he has one option left.

Concur. Or long relief.

Or just ship Garcia out, or to long relief if Hughes is good in ST.

Anyway, you don't let a 36 y.o. Freddy Garcia affect your other plans.
   78. Blastin Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:38 PM (#4036727)
Yeah, Hughes can be last year's originally-Colon-eventually-Noesi.
   79. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:38 PM (#4036728)
I was looking forward to a full season of Montero, but Pineda could really solidify the rotation, which could be pretty good if Hughes regains his form and Nova holds his. Presumably the Yanks' evaluation of their other highly-rated catching prospects played a role here.
   80. APNY Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:38 PM (#4036729)
Heyman tweets Yanks now looking for a bat - mentions Pena
   81. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:42 PM (#4036734)
Heyman tweets Yanks now looking for a bat - mentions Pena

Makes all kinds of sense. LHB in DNYS. Kills RHP (140 wRC+) last year.

Jones can DH vs. LHP.
   82. Srul Itza Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:43 PM (#4036735)
Seems like Honey Badger finally came out of hibernation.
   83. NJ in DC (Now with Wife!) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:43 PM (#4036736)
So, assuming some retread DH who can combine with Jones to give them a 110-120 OPS+ from the position, are they the clear #1 team in MLB now?

The offense...is not that impressive. Maybe I'm spoiled from the past decade, but...yeah. That still scares me.
   84. Blastin Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:47 PM (#4036739)
We'll score about 5/5.3 a game if we sign a Pena-like bat.
   85. Bill McNeal Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:48 PM (#4036740)
So now DH then. Someone cheap and undervalued or old and on their way out?


Anyone signed that Fielder guy yet?
   86. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:50 PM (#4036742)
The offense...is not that impressive. Maybe I'm spoiled from the past decade, but...yeah. That still scares me.

Yes, but the SP now looks like it's among the best in the league, as opposed to pretty crappy (which it was at 6 PM today).
   87. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:53 PM (#4036744)
Anyone signed that Fielder guy yet?

You know, if he wants to do a one-year deal, and retest the market, 1/20-22 would not be crazy.

Fielder would loooooove hitting in Yankee Stadium, and the Yankees care about 2014 payroll, not 2012.
   88. NJ in DC (Now with Wife!) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:54 PM (#4036745)
Yes, but the SP now looks like it's among the best in the league, as opposed to pretty crappy (which it was at 6 PM today).

I don't think that's a certainty. I think the pitching staff is unlikely to suck now, but whether or not it will be great is still an open question. Pineda posted a 103 ERA+ and is a fly ball pitcher. I don't think it's guaranteed that he's going to be great yet, though he certainly has that potential. Kuroda is also moving from Dodger Stadium and the NL to DNYS. This move provides certainty, that's the only guarantee, IMO.
   89. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:57 PM (#4036748)
Pineda posted a 103 ERA+ and is a fly ball pitcher.

Yes, but, 9.1 K/9, 2.9 BB, at 22 projects damn well.
   90. The District Attorney Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:57 PM (#4036749)
If you have both Peña and Tex, the logical thing is to DH Tex. Wonder if Honey Badger don't care that much.
   91. Bill McNeal Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:57 PM (#4036752)
I'm kind of wondering if he might look at something like 2/50, which would expire when it sounds like NYY really wants to get their payroll down.
   92. Blastin Posted: January 13, 2012 at 09:59 PM (#4036753)
I think blowing him out of the water with a short deal is a good gamble.
   93. Dr. Vaux Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:00 PM (#4036754)
That was quick. I was very, very surprised that the Yankees were willing to take the chance of losing the division under the new setup. Pineda and Kuroda are both as likely as anyone to at least be average, it seems, which means that they now, with those two and also Nova, Garcia, Hughes, and even Burnett, have a good chance of having at least two or three guys behind Sabathia be above average. There's obviously still a chance that they could lose the division to a total pitching nightmare, but they've now done what they can to minimize it.
   94. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:01 PM (#4036755)
If you have both Peña and Tex, the logical thing is to DH Tex. Wonder if Honey Badger don't care that much.

Tex is a fine 1B. You don't F with the guy who's signed forever for a guy on a 1-year deal.

In any case, B-Ref has Tex at +5 avg. for the last 3-years, and Pena -7. You that sure about your scouting?
   95. The District Attorney Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:02 PM (#4036756)
Yup.
   96. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:03 PM (#4036757)
I'm kind of wondering if he might look at something like 2/50, which would expire when it sounds like NYY really wants to get their payroll down.

I think blowing him out of the water with a short deal is a good gamble.

Concur. He can put up super-gaudy HR #'s in YS, and go FA again at 30.
   97. Pujols Shot Ya Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:44 PM (#4036801)
I also concur. He should totally give up a ridiculous amount of money for a chance of either more or less money a year or two from now.
   98. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: January 13, 2012 at 10:53 PM (#4036807)
I also concur. He should totally give up a ridiculous amount of money for a chance of either more or less money a year or two from now.

Well, obviously, it only makes sense if no one is offering him what he considers a "ridiculous amount of money".

If the best offer was 5/100, he's not taking that much risk if he signs for 1/25. He's not going to have much trouble getting 4/75 next year.

Especially if the Dodgers and Mets get new owners, and the Cubs are closer to contention.
   99. TerpNats Posted: January 13, 2012 at 11:08 PM (#4036824)
ESPN is reporting Fielder is in the Metroplex, talking with the Rangers. Don't know whether this is merely a courtesy call, a move by Boras to put the heat on the Nationals or a sign that Texas won't be getting Darvish (who may wish to wait another year, then choose a traditionally higher-profile MLB team).
   100. Joe Kehoskie Posted: January 14, 2012 at 04:25 AM (#4036944)
... or the Rangers could be putting pressure on Darvish.

won't be getting Darvish (who may wish to wait another year, then choose a traditionally higher-profile MLB team).

From what I've read, Darvish isn't a free agent for two more years (after 2013 season).
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Darren
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogWhat's Buster Posey's best trait as a catcher? Here's what his pitchers had to say - Giants Extra
(3 - 3:12am, Oct 24)
Last: Bhaakon

NewsblogGleeman: Royals may bench Norichika Aoki for Game 3
(21 - 3:00am, Oct 24)
Last: PreservedFish

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(8 - 2:52am, Oct 24)
Last: mex4173

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(368 - 2:12am, Oct 24)
Last: RollingWave

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3402 - 1:51am, Oct 24)
Last: Swoboda is freedom

NewsblogKey question GMs have to weigh with top World Series free agents | New York Post
(28 - 12:50am, Oct 24)
Last: Dale Sams

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(867 - 12:47am, Oct 24)
Last: Poster Nutbag

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-23-2014
(13 - 11:36pm, Oct 23)
Last: EddieA

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(44 - 11:31pm, Oct 23)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogRoyals are not the future of baseball | FOX Sports
(39 - 11:25pm, Oct 23)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(8370 - 11:22pm, Oct 23)
Last: Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee

NewsblogI hope this doesn't get me fired. | FOX Sports
(23 - 11:17pm, Oct 23)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogGold Glove Awards finalists revealed | MLB.com
(53 - 11:07pm, Oct 23)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(904 - 10:56pm, Oct 23)
Last: frannyzoo

NewsblogSalvador Perez, Hunter Strickland Exchange Words In World Series (GIF) | MLB | NESN.com
(27 - 10:44pm, Oct 23)
Last: toratoratora

Page rendered in 0.8536 seconds
52 querie(s) executed