This really is a very good signing. 2 years isn't a very long commitment at all and Dye likely would have gotten much more this offseason if he had waited.

Seems like a fine deal. Dye's really hit the heck out the ball since the AS break, and combined with the season he had last year, that bodes well for his future hitting. He'll probably continue to deteriorate as a fielder, but over a two year contract that wouldn't seem to me to be a problem.

sweet, a Misfits reference.

quick'n'dirty 5/4/3/2 projection has Dye around 875 OPS next year. There's always a risk of drop off with a guy his age, but it seems like a great deal to me - there will be a bunch of much lesser OFs making much more this winter.

Dye's really hit the heck out the ball since the AS break, and combined with the season he had last year, that bodes well for his future hitting.

Of course the future looks bright when you ignore his putrid first half of the season. B-Ref shows the two most similar batters are Cliff Floyd and Carl Everett. From ages 34 to 35 (the age of Dye for this extension), these two batters suffered from injury and ineffectiveness. That's not to say Dye will crash and burn, but how many aging contracts can the White Sox acquire and not have them backfire?

B-Ref shows the two most similar batters are Cliff Floyd and Carl Everett. From ages 34 to 35 (the age of Dye for this extension), these two batters suffered from injury and ineffectiveness.

The most similar batters for most 33 year-olds are players who flamed out early. Of course, Dye's most similar by age (Danny Tartabull) also started sucking young.

MCoA, was that just a throwaway line, or have you looked at the FAs to be and made that determination?

It's my guess that none of the available players are currently superstar status and so aren't likely to get record deals, and there area enough alternatives that teams will be able to find value if they don't focus on a single player.

JMP,

Here are the possible RF free agents for next season:

Kosuke Fukudome (31)
Bobby Abreu (34) - $16MM club option for '08
Milton Bradley (30)
Geoff Jenkins (33) - $9MM club option for '08
Trot Nixon (34)
Jose Guillen (32) - $9MM club option for '08
Shawn Green (35) - $10MM club option for '08
Eric Hinske (30)

This could be an example of the maxim that sometimes the best trades are the ones you don't make.

but how many aging contracts can the White Sox acquire and not have them backfire?

Well, Contreras looks to be backfiring right now, although he could probably be an effective pitcher in a bigger park and/or in the NL. Konerko's OPS+ is at 120 this year and he's signed for three more seasons. And even Thome is looking like he might be succombing to age (is that redundant?) -- his OPS+ this season is his lowest since 2000 (not counting 2005 due to injury).

This deal is fine, but Kenny still has a lot of work to do to get the Sox are competing for the AL Central crown in 2008.

This really is a very good signing.

Really?

So many Primates were screaming how stupid the D-backs were to give Eric Byrnes (age 31) his 3 year $30 million deal, but paying Jermaine Dye (age 33) $21 million/2 years is smart?

Eric Byrnes VORP = 35.8
Jermaine Dye VORP = 9.1

My sense of Dye is that he is seriously on the decline, his great 2006 season notwithstanding. Byrnes is playing over his head this year, but even down somewhat, he'll be better than Jermaine Dye over the next two years.

possible RF free agents for next season

That's not such a bad list. In fact, RF and CF are probably the strongest positions for FA next year.

This could be an example of the maxim that sometimes the best trades are the ones you don't make.

Amen. The choice for the White Sox was between A) having Dye on this deal, B) having two draft picks as compensation or C) having a year of Wily Mo Pena and possible future reliever Craig Hansen. The sox made the right choice with A, but even B would have been acceptable. C is clearly the worst choice listed.

Let me reiterate: Theo really dropped the ball on this one.

BTW, Dye's better than Byrnes. By a lot. A *whole* lot. I'd rather have Dye on this deal than Byrnes on his.

Eric Byrnes VORP = 35.8
Jermaine Dye VORP = 9.1

VORP's all well and good in the abstract, but I think the problem people had with the Byrnes contract is that there are perfectly good replacements waiting for him to leave.

How's Byrnes defense in center? If it's above average I think I'd rather have him than Dye. Though actually I think I'd rather have neither.

Byrnes = better fielder, better runner (by a whole lot), healthier, younger, and equal hitter (though much better this season).

Dye was a much bigger talent, though one who (I believe) is fading fast.

A reasonable projection for Dye going forward seems to be his 2005 season. UZR has had him as below average for the past few years, which would mean he'd be a few runs better than the average RF overall. I'm not so sure that's worth $11M.

The choice for the White Sox was between A) having Dye on this deal, B) having two draft picks as compensation or C) having a year of Wily Mo Pena and possible future reliever Craig Hansen.

B depends on a team being willing to give up a pick to sign Dye, and C would have saved CWS some cash.

I think the problem people had with the Byrnes contract is that there are perfectly good replacements waiting for him to leave.

I think this is the salient point. The D-backs had good, cheaper options, the White Sox do not. Nevertheless, in the abstract, Byrnes is worth at least as much as Dye for the next few years, IMO.

VORP's over-rating Byrnes.

Career OPS+
Byrnes 102
Dye 110

It's even worse when you look at the last 4 years
Dye
103
118
152
105

Byrnes
109
75
95
116 (and dropping el repido)

Dye plays in the tougher league as well.

Dye was a much bigger talent, though one who (I believe) is fading fast.

Here's the problem with that, though:

Last year was his career year.

This year he had a knee injury and played like a big pile of poo for the first 2 months.

His near problem cleared up. Since June 12, he has an OPS of 951. That's a 48 game sample size, or almost half his play so far this season.

Fading fast? He's hardly fading at all. His OPS+ in the last 2+ months is about the same as what he had last year.

VORP's all well and good in the abstract, but I think the problem people had with the Byrnes contract is that there are perfectly good replacements waiting for him to leave.

While Dye is blocking the likes of Luis Terrero.

Dye, Dye, Dye my darling
We’ll be seeing you again

We'll be seeing you... in Cell

Who uses a random citing of VORP to conclude that someone is a better hitter? What is that supposed to be?

When did ?? become a better defender?

The Diamondbacks outfield could have been Chris Young, Justin Upton and Carlos Gonzalez in the very near future. The White Sox don't have that kind of minors talent....but its only 2 years and Dye had a huge season last year so its a good case of buying low it would seem by Kenny WIlliams. I like Byrnes though, he's a popular guy to the fanbase.

Fading fast? He's hardly fading at all. His OPS+ in the last 2+ months is about the same as what he had last year.

Dag, if you were forced to bet (and based that bet on VORP), which player, Byrnes or Dye, would you take over the next two years? And regardless of who you pick, would you pick him by much? I don't see how anyone can conclude with any certainty that Dye will be appreciably better than Byrnes in 2008 and 2009. My own guess is Byrnes will be slightly better and play in significantly more games.

Well it looks to me the White Sox are trying to have the same team next year that they have this year, which last time I checked isn't performing quite up to par.

I'm not yet sold on this deal as being "very good" for the White Sox, unless. This is a bad team that is 5th in the AL in HRs but dead last in runs scored, and while Dye's signing isn't necessarily an either / or proposition on this count, it doesn't address CHW's issues. Dye's low BA, low OBP and poor contact rate has been endemic of the team's overall offensive problems this season.

It's always interesting to me how in basketball trades/signings all the focus is on the upside and future, whereas in baseball a great deal of emphasis is placed on past numbers. I dunno, maybe it's the stat-obsessionship baseball is built on, but Dye won't be getting paid for his OPS+ in 2005. Or at least he shouldn't be. And who out there really thinks he will perform at close to an OPS+ 110 two years from now? Does Jermaine Dye even think so?

It's always interesting to me how in basketball trades/signings all the focus is on the upside and future, whereas in baseball a great deal of emphasis is placed on past numbers.

I think that's just the way the sports are set up. Rookies get more $$ in basketball (and football) because they're mostly expected to step in and contribute right away. The money that Moustakas and his friends got last week is not that much compared to that, nor does it compare to what they'll get if they actually make it in the Show.

I thought the Byrnes contract was ok, not bad, and I like the Dye signing.

The VORP citation is bizarre. Here's a fuller uberstat citation, using RARP because it's easier to get quickly:

Further, I think a lot of people are discounting Dye's superbad first couple months, because he was injured and has come back strong with no apparent ill effects.

I'm not yet sold on this deal as being "very good" for the White Sox, unless. This is a bad team that is 5th in the AL in HRs but dead last in runs scored, and while Dye's signing isn't necessarily an either / or proposition on this count, it doesn't address CHW's issues. Dye's low BA, low OBP and poor contact rate has been endemic of the team's overall offensive problems this season.

This is my stance as well. Dye looks far better at the plate and field since his legs healed, so I'm not terribly worried about him on an individual level.

On the other hand, I am afraid that Kenny still believes the team is a contender without some big changes, and we're going to see the same team with the same exact crippling issues in '08. Dye's presence doesn't change the fact that the Sox have sent Jerry Owens, Darin Erstad, Juan Uribe and Alex Cintron to the plate in crucial situations the past two weeks because the guys on the bench somehow manage to be worse.

My own guess is Byrnes will be slightly better and play in significantly more games.

Clearly you can bet on Byrnes to play more games, and that may be reason enough to believe he'll be more valuable. I think Dye is the better talent but clearly the higher injury risk.

Byrnes has been a so-so outfielder at best that turned one outstanding half of baseball into a 3 year contract that's blocked the best prospects in the AZ system, one of whom is very likely to perform as well or better than Byrnes for the next three years at a minimum salary.

A 2 year commitment to a talented hitter who isn't blocking anyone of import is much better than a 3 year commitment to a below average hitter for a corner outfield spot who is blocking at least two or more talented prospects. And Byrnes got a complete no trade clause, so if he underperforms (which is likely) the DBacks only option is to cut him and pay him like they did with Ortiz. In reality, that will force them to play a sub par Byrnes in front of Gonzalez and other prospects for at least two years.

People underestimate the true cost of longer term deals, if Dye doesn't have a no trade than his contract is much more attractive than Byrnes.

Further, I think a lot of people are discounting Dye's superbad first couple months, because he was injured and has come back strong with no apparent ill effects.

But Dye has a pretty serious injury history, and he'll be 34 next year. He's only had one season since 2000 in which he's been worth $11M a year, IMO, and although 2006 was a great year for him I don't know that anything better than 2005 should be expected going forward.

But Dye has a pretty serious injury history, and he'll be 34 next year. He's only had one season since 2000 in which he's been worth $11M a year, IMO, and although 2006 was a great year for him I don't know that anything better than 2005 should be expected going forward.

If you look at his 2005 line in and of itself, it doesn't look that impressive. But it was dragged down by a putrid April, and through the rest of the year, he hit .296/.355/.548. In terms of impact, I think it was $11 million worth.

But, he has a no-trade clause through 2008, and a list of six teams for 2009, which diminishes his value to the Sox. Unless Williams pulls some magic deals out of his butt, I think he's clinging onto a dream.

Is this deal going to prevent the whitesox from doing something else in terms of bringing in new talent? No.

Is this deal blocking a similar or better player from taking the field? No.

How much potential is their in this move to be severe financial albatross to the club? Little.

Seems like a really good move.

#33

I agree that Dye has a pretty serious injury history, as any As fan can attest to; but I would argue that that is the reason why the White Sox got him to sign this contract. If not for his injury history and his struggles in the 1st half, he would probably have gotten more. Even if he somehow can no longer play beginning tomorrow, $22 million is hardly a financial albatross.

<edit: typos>

If you look at his 2005 line in and of itself, it doesn't look that impressive. But it was dragged down by a putrid April, and through the rest of the year, he hit .296/.355/.548. In terms of impact, I think it was $11 million worth.

I don't really see why having his production bunched up into the last 5 months makes his season as a whole more valuable.

-------------

Is this deal going to prevent the whitesox from doing something else in terms of bringing in new talent? No.

Is this deal blocking a similar or better player from taking the field? No.

How much potential is their in this move to be severe financial albatross to the club? Little.

Seems like a really good move.

You're basically saying the White Sox either have no budget restrictions or that this is a good way to spend their limited resources. No one thinks the former is true, and the latter is what's up for debate. And a deal not being an albatross doesn't make it really good.

Then again, as an A's fan I have bad memories of the last time Dye signed an $11M/year extension.

It's the length of this deal that makes it a good one, IMHO. $11 mil is decent for a good, not great, RF. But only committing 2 years is awesome. When the Red Sox were trying to acquire Dye, I was thinking he MIGHT re-sign for 3/30 after the season.

KW has scored bigtime with this plus the Buehrle signing.

You're basically saying the White Sox either have no budget restrictions or that this is a good way to spend their limited resources.

No, I'm saying it's unlikly that a better way to spend the 11m in one spot will show up. Based on the scarcity of quality free agents. This isn't a video game where you get extra points for level of difficulty. Leaving 11m unspent and winning 3 less games isn't good. You have a budget you spent the budget. Leaving money in the cookie jar doesn't have value unless you have something to spend it on latter.

No, I'm saying it's unlikly that a better way to spend the 11m in one spot will show up.

By why do they have to spend it in one spot? They could go for something like a Nixon/Kielty platoon in RF and spend the extra money elsewhere. They could also put that $11M toward finding a CF or SS. The move clearly affects their ability to bring in other talent by using up their finite resources.

How good do you expect Dye to be? Better than 2005?

And who said anything about leaving money in the cookie jar or video games?

How good do you expect Dye to be? Better than 2005?

I expect Dye to continue to be a good to very good ball player.

By why do they have to spend it in one spot? They could go for something like a Nixon/Kielty platoon in RF and spend the extra money elsewhere.

That platoon would cost you a couple mil cost you a roster a spot and you wouldn't get as much production on average. Dye is a good player.

Good points, Matt. A platoon costs more than the salary of the players in it (perhaps even in terms of clubhouse harmony).

A platoon does limit the roster, but doesn't really cost a roster spot. The benched platoon partner would just be the 4th OF or UT on days he doesn't. The tradeoff is saving money to upgrade elsewhere. Sometimes the tradeoff's worth it, and sometimes it's not.

And how much is a good ball player worth? Less than a very good ball player?

A day late to this discussion, but I'm just now seeing this (busy weekend).

I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand, it's not a long-term deal, it's not wildly overpaying, and Dye is clearly the most productive outfielder the team has. All things being equal, it's a good signing.

On the other hand, there's a full no-trade clause to this contract for 2008, and a limited one for 2009, which really has me scratching my head. Jermaine Dye is not going to be be a part of the next contending White Sox team, so why give him anything? There are better ways for the team to spend twenty million dollars.