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

Monday, March 26, 2018

Scott Kingery signs 6-year deal with Phillies | MLB.com

The Phillies and Kingery signed a six-year, $24 million contract Sunday that will carry him through the 2023 season and includes club options for ‘24-‘26 that could make the deal worth $65 million, a source told MLB.com. If Kingery becomes a superstar like the Phillies believe he will, it will be a marvelous, club-friendly deal. Kingery, meanwhile, just became set for life. Kingery’s teammates? They believe they just got a whole lot closer to their postseason dreams.

Jim Furtado Posted: March 26, 2018 at 05:49 AM | 41 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: phillies, scott kingery

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.

   1. A triple short of the cycle Posted: March 26, 2018 at 08:24 AM (#5642938)
Now, we have leaders in our clubhouse. Guys who we will be working with for years and years to come. They are the right kind of leaders. They post every day. They play their hearts out. They care for their teammates. Guys like Scott, but not just Scott.

Does this mean what I think it means?

   2. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 26, 2018 at 08:51 AM (#5642943)
It's not really clear from context.
   3. PreservedFish Posted: March 26, 2018 at 09:13 AM (#5642947)
Is this a good deal for the Phils? Is 24M so little that it doesn't matter if he totally busts?
   4. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 26, 2018 at 09:19 AM (#5642948)
Seems like a very good deal, given what he'd end up costing if he's the kind of player people expect him to be. He's regarded as having a high floor, which limits their risk.
   5. Greg K Posted: March 26, 2018 at 09:23 AM (#5642950)
Does this mean what I think it means?

I assume it means post on BTF? I know the only reason I'm here everyday is because I assume it is what my boss expects of me.
   6. Zonk is a Doorknob Whisperer Posted: March 26, 2018 at 09:45 AM (#5642964)
How often do such deals get ripped up if the player pans out, though?

Didn't Ryan Braun's extension up redoing a couple arb buyout years?
   7. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: March 26, 2018 at 10:05 AM (#5642981)
Everyone compares Kingery to Dustin Pedroia. This would be a good deal for the first six years of Petunia. We'll see.

This is a good opportunity to point out that Scott Kingery is NOT the son of Mike Kingery. Not even related. He was a walk-on at Arizona (mostly because of his height) despite having been to the Little League World Series. But then he was a second-round pick.

This removes from the major-league roster Jesmuel Valentin, who IS the son of José Valentin and was a FIRST round pick. See, you thought Jesmuel was the underdog in this comparison. Not exactly!
   8. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 26, 2018 at 10:09 AM (#5642986)
This removes from the major-league roster Jesmuel Valentin, who IS the son of José Valentin


The younger Valentin just got arrested for beating his wife a couple of days ago, so I'm A-OK with this outcome.
   9. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: March 26, 2018 at 10:23 AM (#5642995)
Does this mean what I think it means?
It means you better step up. I don't think I saw any posts from you all weekend, bro.
   10. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: March 26, 2018 at 10:59 AM (#5643030)
6–I know the Royals ripped up Salvy Perez’s initial deal and signed him to a new one at closer to market value once he became a star.
   11. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: March 26, 2018 at 01:07 PM (#5643135)
I see very little in his minor league numbers to justify thinking he's going to be Dustin Pedroia.
   12. Jesse Barfield's Right Arm Posted: March 26, 2018 at 01:08 PM (#5643141)
Re: #8.

The story on Valentin is from three years ago, so I'm not sure it's fair to say he "just" got arrested.

Also, according to him, the charges were dropped and he didn't serve any penalty.

http://www.philliesnation.com/2016/06/pn-interview-reading-second-baseman-jesmuel-valentin/
   13. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: March 26, 2018 at 01:14 PM (#5643155)
Google News and Google in general are totally broken when it comes to dates. Doing date-specific searches doesn't work anymore. And I too did a search for Jesmuel Valentin to see if he was demoted or not, and at the top I see the headline "Jesmuel Valentin arrested for domestic violence" clearly dated "4 days ago". Then I click on it and luckily the news site has a date at the top of the article that says April 11, 2015. What the hell?!
   14. Zonk is a Doorknob Whisperer Posted: March 26, 2018 at 01:28 PM (#5643174)
Google News and Google in general are totally broken when it comes to dates. Doing date-specific searches doesn't work anymore. And I too did a search for Jesmuel Valentin to see if he was demoted or not, and at the top I see the headline "Jesmuel Valentin arrested for domestic violence" clearly dated "4 days ago". Then I click on it and luckily the news site has a date at the top of the article that says April 11, 2015. What the hell?!


Not to sidetrack, but Google has a fair amount of recent problems from what I can tell... I've noticed some increasing problems with the Chrome browser - in particular, a caching problem that has recently required me to constantly clear all cookies, history, and local cache, otherwise, the browser fails to open any tabs except incognito. I've switched back to Firefox because I'm tired of dealing with it.
   15. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: March 26, 2018 at 01:57 PM (#5643203)
in particular, a caching problem that has recently required me to constantly clear all cookies, history, and local cache, otherwise, the browser fails to open any tabs except incognito.
Sounds like a feature, not a bug.

Wait, you mean you go to non-porn websites?
   16. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: March 26, 2018 at 03:30 PM (#5643297)
Sorry, my bad. I saw the date tag on Google news and thought it was a new story.
   17. Walt Davis Posted: March 26, 2018 at 03:37 PM (#5643305)
$24 M spread out over (mostly) 3 years is pretty ignorable. It's not as ignorable as Jon Singleton's $10 M but sounds like Kingery is expected to be a better player. Even if he can cobble together 5-6 WAR over these years, the Phils do just fine. Dustin Ackley managed to make it to 8 WAR so that's about how good this kid has to be.

It's the 3 options where they really make out like bandits and I'm surprised agents/players are still being so cavalier with these. This is already Kingery's age 24 season so, if he's good, he won't see FA until age 33, a terrible age to be an FA.

On tearing up these contracts as part of extensions, other than Salvador Perez, they're not so much "torn up" as used as leverage. In this case, it's unlikely the Phils will want to move early to extend him for his age 33-36 seasons but, if they did, they start their negotiations with "we already have you for 3/$441 so how about we sweeten that a bit in exchange for cheaper ages 33-36 AAV" or similar.

Deals like this I think have become a problem for the MLBPA. Not so much for the JDMs of the world but one reason Neil Walker and Moose have a hard time finding jobs is because there are young guys on contracts like this. These sorts of contracts are also quite tradable if things aren't working out for the Phils -- e.g. one reason Walker and Moose had trouble finding jobs is because Dee Gordon and Longoria (on an extension) were reasonably priced and traded. So come 2024, any FA 2B will also be competing with the possibility of the Phils trading Kingery's 3/$41 options.

Or to put it all another way, sounds like Kingery has guaranteed he won't make more money in a season before 2027 than Jay Bruce will make this year -- in raw dollars much less inflated dollars.

The owners have done a great job of leveraging the reserve years -- we've got you for 6 years, we could wait a couple weeks to bring you up so really we've got you for 7 years, you won't make "real" money for another 3+ years and really not for another 5 and anything could happen ... we're offering you enough money that you'll be set for life with no risk and all we ask in return is that you potentially save us about $24 M. Under the circumstances (correctly described by the team), it's usually a good deal for the player, swapping a potential $90 for a guaranteed $24 and reasonably likely $65 but it's not how the system was supposed to work and it pressures the marginal FAs to meet those prices.
   18. Rally Posted: March 26, 2018 at 03:52 PM (#5643328)
It's the 3 options where they really make out like bandits


Only if Kingery develops into a star. When the option years start he'll be 30 years old. If he's on a Robinson Cano type HOF path then options for 13-15 million will look cheap. If he busts, they'll never be picked up anyway. If he turns into a good solid player like Neil Walker or Todd Frazier, he won't regret giving the team those options.

Kingery is MLB's #35 prospect. Being an established 2-3 WAR player 6 years later is probably an above average outcome. Being on a HOF path from that starting point has got to be what, 1 in 100?
   19. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 26, 2018 at 04:39 PM (#5643374)
Kingery is MLB's #35 prospect. Being an established 2-3 WAR player 6 years later is probably an above average outcome.

That seems really optimistic. That would mean MLB should be producing new 35 2-3 WAR players every year.
   20. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: March 26, 2018 at 04:47 PM (#5643380)
Not exactly - you can be one of the top prospects multiple years in a row while still only being one player.
   21. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 26, 2018 at 05:03 PM (#5643386)
Not exactly - you can be one of the top prospects multiple years in a row while still only being one player.

True. But, that's not counting on any 2-3 WAR players coming from prospects worse than #35.
   22. Stevey Posted: March 26, 2018 at 05:21 PM (#5643406)
If he turns into a good solid player like Neil Walker or Todd Frazier, he won't regret giving the team those options.


In seven to nine years, $13-15M is not going to buy you even an average player, and probably only a one win player. As long as he has still deserves to be on a major league roster somewhere, he will be underpaid from 2024 to 2026.
   23. Stevey Posted: March 26, 2018 at 05:25 PM (#5643412)
Kingery is MLB's #35 prospect. Being an established 2-3 WAR player 6 years later is probably an above average outcome.


#35ish prospects should be expected to produce seven wins over their first seven years on average. I wonder how this changes if we use median instead of mean.
   24. Howie Menckel Posted: March 26, 2018 at 11:56 PM (#5643519)
the thought experiment is interesting if either:

- the players already are financially set for life, so they're just playing games with irrelevant loot, or

- even the longterm deal doesn't make them secure financially.

this is purely in between, again: a young player who has yet to appear in a MLB game can sign a deal where - if he has good financial advice - he will never have to work again in his life. even if he gets hurt and/or washes out.

that's real life. how many of you guys like to risk millions in Vegas?

now, the huge number of pro athletes who squander every nickel by age 40 is an issue - but it's a separate issue.
   25. PreservedFish Posted: March 27, 2018 at 12:26 AM (#5643522)
In seven to nine years, $13-15M is not going to buy you even an average player, and probably only a one win player. As long as he has still deserves to be on a major league roster somewhere, he will be underpaid from 2024 to 2026.


Sure about that?
   26. Buck Coats Posted: March 27, 2018 at 06:50 AM (#5643541)
Yeah at this rate 13-15M is going to be the highest salary in baseball
   27. McCoy Posted: March 27, 2018 at 08:15 AM (#5643548)
In seven to nine years, $13-15M is not going to buy you even an average player, and probably only a one win player. As long as he has still deserves to be on a major league roster somewhere, he will be underpaid from 2024 to 2026.

Baseball's revenue would have to grow by leaps and bounds over the next half decade to do that. I don't see that happening. Where is all this new revenue coming from? TV deals are at an all time high and possibly ready to decline or stall out. Attendance is high and prices are high as well. You're basically talking about doubling or tripling MLB's revenue and I just don't see where that money is going to come from.

Yeah at this rate 13-15M is going to be the highest salary in baseball

Not even the union getting crushed would create this kind of environment. You would need MLB to economically collapse for this to happen. I don't see that either.
   28. Stevey Posted: March 28, 2018 at 02:34 AM (#5644071)
Baseball's revenue would have to grow by leaps and bounds over the next half decade to do that.


If a FA win is worth $8M now, $13-15M already doesn’t buy you an average player. If salaries go up by 7.5% annually, $8M per win becomes $13M per in seven years. MLB has to keep pace with the S&P, while still giving the same percentage of revenue to players to make Kingery’s contract pay him like a one win player for his first FA year. Even at a paltry 3% growth in revenue, $13M would be the get you a projected 1.3 WAR. That’s a step up from just anyone who deserves to be on a roster, but we’re still talking about a pretty fungible performance.

TV deals are at an all time high


And setting new records all the time, and guaranteed for 10-20 years with raises built in annually. Maybe this is a bubble that will burst at some point. Maybe eve the Rays bring in a billion dollars worth of eyeballs.
   29. Rally Posted: March 28, 2018 at 08:07 AM (#5644077)
Yeah at this rate 13-15M is going to be the highest salary in baseball


If Miguel Cabrera fails to finish top 10 in the 2023 MVP voting, he won't get paid 30 million in 2024.

It will top Eric Hosmer, who drops from 21 million in 2022 to 13 for 2023-2025.

But Jose Altuve will make 29 million in 2024.
   30. PreservedFish Posted: March 28, 2018 at 08:26 AM (#5644078)
If a FA win is worth $8M now, $13-15M already doesn’t buy you an average player.


Tell that to Todd Frazier and Mike Moustakas.

MLB has to keep pace with the S&P,


Why?

Also, the belief that the S&P will inexorably grow for the rest of everyone's lifetime is entirely fallacious. It has gone through long periods of stagnation in the past and may again. Or worse. My Roth IRA hopes that 7.5% annual growth remains the status quo, but I'm not counting on it.
   31. manchestermets Posted: March 28, 2018 at 08:34 AM (#5644080)
What's the definition of an average player? In my mind, it's 81/25 = 3.24, but that sounds too high and it can't be as simple as that, can it?
   32. PreservedFish Posted: March 28, 2018 at 08:49 AM (#5644081)
The rule of thumb people around here use is 2 WAR, or maybe 2-2.5 WAR.

Probably a bunch of reasons your math doesn't work. You're using zero wins as the baseline, for starters, which doesn't have much practical value.
   33. Rally Posted: March 28, 2018 at 08:51 AM (#5644083)
What's the definition of an average player? In my mind, it's 81/25 = 3.24, but that sounds too high and it can't be as simple as that, can it?


I'm guessing the equation above is looking at absolute wins, which only Bill James cares about. A team of replacement level players will win about 48 games. So (81-48)/25 = 1.3 WAR for each player on the roster.

That is split at 59% to position players and 41% for pitchers, so 19.5 and 13.5 WAR respectively. Know lets look at playing time. Last year the average team had a bit over 6000 PA. So a full time position player with 600 PA should be, on average, 1.95 WAR. Close enough to 2.

Pitching staffs need to fill about 1450 innings. So a pitcher throwing 200 innings is, on average, getting 13.8% of the team's WAR or 1.9. But not too many people throw 200 innings anymore, only 15 had 200 and only 2 (barely) over 210.

If you say 180 innings is the new standard full time pitcher, then he'll average 1.7 WAR.

   34. PreservedFish Posted: March 28, 2018 at 08:52 AM (#5644084)
You could also just eyeball it.

The 15th best 3B last year had 2.7 WAR.
The 15th best 1B had 2.4 WAR.
The 15th best SS had 2 WAR.
The 15th best C had 2.1 WAR.
The 15th best 2B has 2.2 WAR.
   35. Rally Posted: March 28, 2018 at 08:59 AM (#5644086)
This would add up to an average team with 25 players who never get hurt and are all equally average (I guess bench vs starter, starter vs reliever is determined randomly)

9 hitters at 1.9 WAR
4 reserves at 0.6 WAR, getting 175 PA each
5 SP, 180 innings, 1.7 WAR
7 relievers, 75 innings and 0.7 WAR

Adds up to 33 WAR, 81 team wins.
   36. manchestermets Posted: March 28, 2018 at 10:09 AM (#5644110)
I'm guessing the equation above is looking at absolute wins, which only Bill James cares about. A team of replacement level players will win about 48 games. So (81-48)/25 = 1.3 WAR for each player on the roster.


Of course, that's where I'm going wrong. Thanks.
   37. McCoy Posted: March 28, 2018 at 10:41 AM (#5644134)
If a FA win is worth $8M now, $13-15M already doesn’t buy you an average player. If salaries go up by 7.5% annually, $8M per win becomes $13M per in seven years. MLB has to keep pace with the S&P, while still giving the same percentage of revenue to players to make Kingery’s contract pay him like a one win player for his first FA year. Even at a paltry 3% growth in revenue, $13M would be the get you a projected 1.3 WAR. That’s a step up from just anyone who deserves to be on a roster, but we’re still talking about a pretty fungible performance.

According to Fangraphs in 2011 the cost per win was something like 7.5 million dollars. If it is 8 million dollars nowadays that isn't much growth over the last 7 years.
   38. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: March 28, 2018 at 10:51 AM (#5644147)
A team of replacement level players will win about 48 games.


Let's see, the 2003 Tigers won 43 games and their players are credited with 4.0 WAR. (5.1 for hitters and -1.1 for pitchers.) I'm sure this would be way different if the low values went out to 2 or 3 decimal places before being added up, but shouldn't the total be negative? Or can it not be added up this way?
   39. PreservedFish Posted: March 28, 2018 at 10:59 AM (#5644155)
It's possible that they underachieved their underlying statistics, right?
   40. McCoy Posted: March 28, 2018 at 11:04 AM (#5644160)
Pyth had the Tigers at 49 wins. I don't know what their second and third order wins was.
   41. Stevey Posted: March 28, 2018 at 12:59 PM (#5644297)

Tell that to Todd Frazier and Mike Moustakas.


So we have one fluke year against how many of steady growth in MLB?

Why?


For conservative purposes of our example. Franchise values have easily beaten the S&P for at least a generation.

the belief that the S&P will inexorably grow for the rest of everyone's lifetime is entirely fallacious.


Sure, no one will ever guarantee it forever. But despite the past stagnations and even collapses, it still hits that 7%. It's not 7% in good times and stagnation in bad. You are doing nothing more than demonstrating selective memory for the near-worst cases.

According to Fangraphs in 2011 the cost per win was something like 7.5 million dollars


By the same measure that sees that value at over $10M now.. At that calculation and increase from 2011 to 2017, a win will cost $15M in 2024.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Ghost of Sox Fans Past
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogGoin' to Carolina in OMNICHATTER's mind, for September 18, 2018
(47 - 9:59pm, Sep 18)
Last: Moses Taylor, aka Hambone Fakenameington

NewsblogOTP 2018 September 17: How Brett Kavanaugh explains his baseball ticket debt
(875 - 9:54pm, Sep 18)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogSherman - Statistical Revolution Is Killing The Next Generation Of MLB Fans
(28 - 9:12pm, Sep 18)
Last: Howie Menckel

Gonfalon CubsThe Final Push
(102 - 9:11pm, Sep 18)
Last: Meatwad

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (September 2018)
(341 - 9:00pm, Sep 18)
Last: Cowboy Popup

NewsblogOT - 2018 NBA Thread (Pre-Season Edition)
(337 - 8:47pm, Sep 18)
Last: maccoach57

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-18-2018
(51 - 8:42pm, Sep 18)
Last: AndrewJ

NewsblogHow to fix baseball? Two ways MLB can improve its product without changing the game on the field
(52 - 8:37pm, Sep 18)
Last: AndrewJ

NewsblogWho’s in and who’s out of the MLB postseason?
(13 - 8:35pm, Sep 18)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOrioles match club record with 107th loss, 5-0 to Blue Jays before tiny home crowd
(31 - 8:05pm, Sep 18)
Last: donlock

NewsblogHeard the song of a poet who died in the OMNICHATTER! for Sept. 17, 2018
(123 - 7:56pm, Sep 18)
Last: AT-AT at bat@AT&T

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(781 - 7:42pm, Sep 18)
Last: AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther

NewsblogNashville Divorces Athletics
(21 - 4:34pm, Sep 18)
Last: Bote Man the walk-off king

NewsblogChristian Yelich makes baseball history with second cycle of season
(17 - 4:11pm, Sep 18)
Last: Batman

NewsblogTaking Back the Ballparks - Los Angeles Dodgers
(17 - 3:38pm, Sep 18)
Last: QLE

Page rendered in 0.3832 seconds
46 querie(s) executed