BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Red Sox place Rusney Castillo on outright waivers

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, June 20, 2016

Red Sox place Rusney Castillo on outright waivers

Well, this is an expensive mistake.

Since he was placed on outright waivers Saturday, Castillo would clear Monday. He’s still owed $32.5 million over the next three seasons, with a $13.5 million option after 2019. Because of that price tag, Castillo is likely to go unclaimed and be outrighted to Pawtucket. He will no longer be on the Red Sox’ 40-man roster.

Castillo’s contract was record-setting for an amateur international player, surpassing the $68 million deal that Jose Abreu signed with the White Sox in 2013. The Sox outbid the Tigers, Phillies, Giants, and Mariners for Castillo’s services, hoping that he would make the kind of immediate impact made by fellow Cubans Abreu, Yoenis Cespedes, and Yasiel Puig, who became All-Stars after coming to the majors.

jimfurtado Posted: June 20, 2016 at 08:36 AM | 76 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: red sox, rusney castillo

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. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: June 20, 2016 at 08:49 AM (#5247749)

Glad Boston is doing this. Because of Betts, Bradley, and Bogaerts (and to a lesser extent, Swihart), the Castillo decision is being glossed over...but what a horrible waste of money. It is stunning how much money the Red Sox are wasting on Panda, Hanley, and Castillo. One could argue the Red Sox best performers this year are the ones making no money:

Bogaerts, Betts, Bradley, Wright, Shaw, Vazquez, Swihart, Barnes...

Pedroia is obviously making good money - but he signed a very team-friendly deal. Ortiz has basically been going year-to-year for a while, and is worth what they are paying him. Price is pitching very well, and obviously makes bank.

But you ask yourself, as a fan, what the team could have done with the $50+ million they are blowing on Hanley, Panda, and Castillo. That's a big time bat and a big time starting pitcher.

2. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:03 AM (#5247759)

One could argue the Red Sox best performers this year are the ones making no money:

One could argue? 5 of their top 7 by WAR make a COMBINED $2,792,500. I think you may be hedging a bit.

3. Nasty Nate Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:25 AM (#5247762)

Maybe Pawtucket has the highest player payroll in the minors. The International League needs a salary cap!

4. Misirlou cut his hair and moved to Rome Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:26 AM (#5247764)

Throw Buchholtz into the mix and it's $64.5 mil for -0.5 WAR. More than the Rays entire payroll.

5. jmurph Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:36 AM (#5247767)

Is this in the conversation for worst contract in history? 72.5 million for 1.3 WAR?

6. Misirlou cut his hair and moved to Rome Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:40 AM (#5247768)

Is this in the conversation for worst contract in history? 72.5 million for 1.3 WAR?

The Angels will pay Josh Hamilton $107.5 mil for 2.9.

7. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:42 AM (#5247771)

Throw Buchholtz into the mix and it's $64.5 mil for -0.5 WAR. More than the Rays entire payroll.

Hey now, don't go forgetting about the $9 mill Allen Craig makes.

8. Rally Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:48 AM (#5247778)

Ryan Howard, -4.6 WAR and falling for the years covered by his contract, 125 million.

He’s still owed $32.5 million over the next three seasons, with a $13.5 million option after 2019.

That's a player opt out.

9. Jose is an Absurd Sultan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:52 AM (#5247780)

Prediction: Castillo will not opt out. (who says I'm not willing to make bold predictions?)

10. jmurph Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:53 AM (#5247782)

The Angels will pay Josh Hamilton $107.5 mil for 2.9.

Yikes. Though that's a lot cheaper per WAR!

11. bfan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:53 AM (#5247783)

Hector Olivera, a lot of money paid by the Braves (not yet determined) for -0.2 WAR. Thank goodness MLB was kind enough to suspend him, to mitigate the Braves salary cost here.

12. Nasty Nate Posted: June 20, 2016 at 09:54 AM (#5247785)

FWIW, the Dodgers' Ethier, McCarthy, Ryu, Howell, Anderson and Crawford are approximately at $82 million for -1.0 WAR.

13. ReggieThomasLives Posted: June 20, 2016 at 10:33 AM (#5247813)

It's not even the worst Cuban signing. Yasmany Tomas, $69M, -1.7 WAR so far.

14. bfan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 10:37 AM (#5247819)

It's not even the worst Cuban signing. Yasmany Tomas, $69M, -1.7 WAR so far.

Am I sensing a pattern here?

15. Cargo Cultist Posted: June 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM (#5247822)

You think that the Red Sox are going to learn anything from all of these horrible contracts they have signed? I'm betting on not.

16. bfan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 10:43 AM (#5247827)

You think that the Red Sox are going to learn anything from all of these horrible contracts they have signed?

Yes, they will learn to keep taking chances with costly failure and big upside consequences, because they can always afford to bury a few bad contracts when you have market success to the extent that they do.

17. Cargo Cultist Posted: June 20, 2016 at 10:45 AM (#5247828)

A "few"??? We have very different definitions of "few."

18. Cargo Cultist Posted: June 20, 2016 at 10:50 AM (#5247831)

I'm not just talking the current three abominations. Look back a number of years.

19. bfan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 10:52 AM (#5247834)

20. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 11:03 AM (#5247842)

Well, let me quote F. Scott Fitzgerald..."Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me."

The Red Sox can bury many bad contracts that would sink a middle market team, because they have the revenue to do so.

Sure, but that doesn't mean you should be going around signing/acquiring contracts that are bad the moment the ink is dry. You want to use that leverage to carry the back end of big FA deals that brought you substantial value on the front end.

If David Price gives you 4 good years, and then you have to carry the last 3 as dead money, that's one thing. But the Sandoval, Ramirez, Craig, Castillo type situations, where the contracts never produce any value, are to be avoided.

21. jmurph Posted: June 20, 2016 at 11:10 AM (#5247847)

I'm reasonably sure bfan isn't advocating for signing contracts the team knows will be bad. He's advocating for taking some risks because they're rich and can afford it, just like the Yankees and Dodgers and Cubs and...

22. akrasian Posted: June 20, 2016 at 11:15 AM (#5247849)

23. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 11:42 AM (#5247861)

Right. Some Cuban contracts work out very well. I suspect teams in advance don't know for sure which will be the ones that work out - too many variables. But it's a way of possibly adding impact talent without it costing draft picks or anything but money - which teams like the Red Sox have plenty of. Obviously, they'd rather get the talent without taking a financial risk, but that's not possible.

Sure, but even the good Cuban contracts have been trending south; Puig and Abreu have both been awful this year.

What's the best example of a $25M+ Cuban signee who's doing well right now?

24. Jose is an Absurd Sultan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 11:56 AM (#5247869)

You think that the Red Sox are going to learn anything from all of these horrible contracts they have signed? I'm betting on not.

This is one of those things that sounds logical but really makes no sense. What's the lesson the Sox should learn? As a Red Sox fan I don't want them to "learn" not to sign big money free agents because that would mean not acquiring players like Price or retaining players like Ortiz, Pedroia or Bogaerts and Betts down the road.

I mean yeah, I hated the Sandoval signing and the Lugo signing back a few years when they happened but I'm pretty sure the Sox weren't sitting around saying "these are bad moves but let's make them anyway." The Sox have the money to absorb the occasional bad contract. Obviously too many of them is a problem but right now they aren't hurting because of these deals. The thing I've been encouraged by this year is how willing they have been to make performance-based decisions, Shaw starting over Sandoval, Buchholz to the bullpen, now releasing Castillo.

25. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 11:58 AM (#5247870)

What's the best example of a $25M+ Cuban signee who's doing well right now?

Abreu. Chapman's deal with the Reds was pretty good, too.

Edit: Iglesias as well.

26. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:04 PM (#5247874)

Abreu. Chapman's deal with the Reds was pretty good, too.

As I noted, Abreu is having a terrible year.

If I'm reading Cots correctly, Chapman has been paid something like $48M for 11.2 WAR to date, plus the remainder of this season.

That's OK, but far from great, for a non-FA signing.

27. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:08 PM (#5247876)

What's the best example of a $25M+ Cuban signee who's doing well right now?

Cespedes.

28. Tom Nawrocki Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:09 PM (#5247877)

As I noted, Abreu is having a terrible year.

29. Zonk isn't banned, he's under review Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:10 PM (#5247878)

Abreu's having a down year, to be sure, but I'm not sure a 110 OPS+ can ever be having a "terrible" year... His BABIP is fairly far down from his previous two years, but I suppose most alarmingly - his ISO is down into pedestrian territory.

That said - Abreu has really picked it up over the last month. He's hitting 344/386/623 in June.

EDIT: Coke to Tom

30. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:21 PM (#5247885)

"Terrible" is an oversell. A 110 OPS+ is not what you hope for from your first baseman, but it's above average for the position, and miles ahead of someone like Justin Upton. It's also the worst year of Abreu's career so far, and there's every reason to think he'll bounce back to his prior form.

I generally follow players on Fangraphs, and he's at a 96 wRC+, which is awful for a 1B. His baserunning must be atrocious this year to account for that difference.

In general FG and BRef really diverge on Abreu. FG has him at -0.1 WAR, BRef at 0.9. So, if BRef is right, I retract terrible. But if FG is right, he has been terrible.

31. jmurph Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:26 PM (#5247888)

and miles ahead of someone like Justin Upton

Whoa, did not realize how bad he's been. The Tigers have some absolutely disastrous contracts on the books.

32. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:28 PM (#5247890)

These Cuban guys are really feast or famine, aren't they. Are there any who've put up a number of WAR per year that is less than 3 and more than zero?

Hard to get used to the new world where there are all these Cuban guys nobody has ever heard of that are on some team's payroll for $40 million dollars. Even the failed draft picks of their era only got $10 million signing bonuses.

33. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:31 PM (#5247894)

If I'm reading Cots correctly, Chapman has been paid something like $48M for 11.2 WAR to date, plus the remainder of this season.

That's OK, but far from great, for a non-FA signing.

34. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:37 PM (#5247901)

That is 11.2 WAR for $4.28 per WAR. And money was it, no draft picks, no prospects. I'd consider that fantastic value. It's pretty clear teams are willing to throw money away on the chance they can get a player at no other cost to the team. If you don't see the Chapman deal as a very good thing for the Reds, is there any deal out there you like?

If he was an established MLB player, $4.3 M/WAR is outstanding value. Not so much for a prospect, and for a RP (who's WAR is inflated by leverage index).

I loved the Mets contract with Cespedes.

As a rule, I hate paying RPs.

35. Nasty Nate Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:40 PM (#5247907)

for a non-FA signing

Wasn't Chapman a FA signing?

36. Benji Gil Gamesh VII - The Opt-Out Awakens Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:44 PM (#5247908)

As a Red Sox fan, sure I wish they hadn't wasted so much on what looks to be a complete bust, but what I like is that they are making sure it doesn't cost them in other ways--neither space on the 25-man, and now even on the 40-man.

37. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:44 PM (#5247909)

If he was an established MLB player, $4.3 M/WAR is outstanding value. Not so much for a prospect, and for a RP (who's WAR is inflated by leverage index).

Outside of the draft where are these prospects to be had for nothing? The ones that don't cost anything in trades?

38. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:46 PM (#5247911)

These Cuban guys are really feast or famine, aren't they. Are there any who've put up a number of WAR per year that is less than 3 and more than zero?

The guy referenced in the title of the thread put up .8 WAR in 80 games last year. Solid 1.5 WAR/YR pace.

39. Misirlou cut his hair and moved to Rome Posted: June 20, 2016 at 12:56 PM (#5247921)

These Cuban guys are really feast or famine, aren't they. Are there any who've put up a number of WAR per year that is less than 3 and more than zero?

Alexi Ramirez: 1.5, 2.4, 5.6, 3.5, 2.7, 2.8, 3.1, 1.0

40. Jose is an Absurd Sultan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 01:08 PM (#5247929)

These Cuban guys are really feast or famine, aren't they. Are there any who've put up a number of WAR per year that is less than 3 and more than zero?

Is that really unusual? Any way you want to look at the draft (by year, by draft slot) it seems to skew very similarly and even the history of big ticket free agent signings looks similar. I think it's just the nature of baseball.

41. Cargo Cultist Posted: June 20, 2016 at 01:59 PM (#5247970)

My take on it is that the Sox were incredibly stupid to offer those contracts. There are better ways to spend money, get production, and minimize risk.

Your mileage may vary.

42. Jose is an Absurd Sultan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:09 PM (#5247978)

That makes sense but it really hinges on getting the evaluations right. While big money contracts have a way of going bad in a hurry I think it's very very difficult to be consistently competitive without signing those kinds of players. The only contract they've signed in recent years where I felt they made a mistake of process was the decision to sign Hanley AND Sandoval. I think that was a bit too cute by half.

Castillo (or Lugo or even Sandoval on his own) wound up as bad deals but that's just a mistake of talent evaluation rather than any kind of process error. Like I said previously I would be very unhappy if the Sox took the approach of never signing the big money guys.

43. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:11 PM (#5247982)

Castillo (or Lugo or even Sandoval on his own) wound up as bad deals but that's just a mistake of talent evaluation rather than any kind of process error.

It seems like the same process error was responsible for both the Castillo and Sandoval deals, as well as several other questionable moves: the specific targeting of under-30 free agents, regardless of those players' skills, aging curves, or fit for the Red Sox's needs and roster.

44. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:29 PM (#5247993)

Outside of the draft where are these prospects to be had for nothing? The ones that don't cost anything in trades?

Why are you so fixated on this? These guys are not established MLB players, and the price per WAR (inlcuding the busts) seems to be a lot closer to that of FAs than to draftees, and amateur Int'l FAs. That's all I'm saying.

Given the huge uncertainty around guys who've never played in MLB, you'd think the Cuban FAs should cost a lot less per WAR than they do.

If they have the same bust rate as #1 picks, they should cost a lot closer to the $10-15M #1 picks used to get than to the $40M they're currently getting.

45. Jose is an Absurd Sultan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:29 PM (#5247994)

the specific targeting of under-30 free agents, regardless of those players' skills, aging curves, or fit for the Red Sox's needs and roster

I'd agree with about half of that. Both players fit the Red Sox roster needs extremely well. Third base had been a black hole in 2013 and 2014 and the Sox needed outfield help. At the same time any team is better off in the long run if they can land free agents who are under 30. I'd bet the vast majority of the really bad deals are the ones given to over 30 players.

That said you are probably right that the Sox got a bit too hung up on finding those under 30 guys. Sandoval was so obviously a guy who should have been treated as much older than he actually is.

46. Jose is an Absurd Sultan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:31 PM (#5247998)

If they have the same bust rate as #1 picks, they should cost a lot closer to the $10-15M #1 picks used to get than to the $40M they're currently getting.

47. TDF, trained monkey Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:40 PM (#5248008)

What's the best example of a $25M+ Cuban signee who's doing well right now?

Chapman's deal with the Reds was pretty good, too.

If I'm reading Cots correctly, Chapman has been paid something like $48M for 11.2 WAR to date, plus the remainder of this season.

The original contract (which covered '10-15) paid him a total of $38.25M for 10.9 bWAR, or $3.5M/win not the $4.25M/win you suggest - the final $11M ($9.5M after the suspension) for 0.3 WAR wasn't part of the original signing.

When you also consider the additional marketing income (there's no doubt people bought tickets just on the chance to watch him - I did), that's a pretty good deal.

48. Davo Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:42 PM (#5248013)

Dammmn. .245/.304/.320 in AAA?

Based on early returns, I'd say it looks like baseball people were over-estimating the talent level in Cuban leagues and underestimating it in the Korean leagues. Kang, Kim, Lee and Park are looking like steals so far!

49. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:43 PM (#5248015)

The problem with the comparison is the #1 picks don't have any leverage. If Bryce Harper had been free to negotiate his contract with any club you can safely assume his signing bonus would have had a lot more in common with Yoan Moncada or Jose Abreu than it actually did.

Sure, but the question would then be, is the #1 pick a good signing at $40-50M. Probably yes. But the #5-10 signings? Probably no.

MLB economics are distorted by the reserve clause. MLB FAs are only "worth" $7M/WAR b/c there is all that cheap pre-FA talent subsidizing the teams. If every player were a FA every year, the "price" of 1 WAR would be more like $2-3M. So, you can't use that $7M number to value non-MLB FA production.

50. TDF, trained monkey Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:51 PM (#5248023)

If they have the same bust rate as #1 picks, they should cost a lot closer to the $10-15M #1 picks used to get than to the $40M they're currently getting.

The problem with the comparison is the #1 picks don't have any leverage. If Bryce Harper had been free to negotiate his contract with any club you can safely assume his signing bonus would have had a lot more in common with Yoan Moncada or Jose Abreu than it actually did.

(1) Cuban players, right or wrong, are seen as immediately ready for MLB play; drafted players always* need time in the minors.
(2) That's beside the point now, as there's a fairly hard cap on international (including Cuban) FAs.

*Mike Leake excluded.

51. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:54 PM (#5248025)

So, you can't use that $7M number to value non-MLB FA production.

Except that they are FA. Anyone can sign them. Are Cubans scouted as well? No. Are they typically younger, giving the team control over their peak years? Yes. Go ahead and arbitrarily assign Cuban FA a $2-3M per WAR value if you want, but enough GM's are clearly rating them higher than that.

52. TDF, trained monkey Posted: June 20, 2016 at 02:57 PM (#5248030)

If every player were a FA every year, the "price" of 1 WAR would be more like $2-3M. So, you can't use that $7M number to value non-MLB FA production.

The new "replacement level" calculation used by BBRef and Fangraphs normalizes to 1,000 WAR available per season. Total MLB payroll in '15 was about $3.74B, making a win worth about $3.74M.

EDIT: According to Spotrac, total payroll is just over $4B this season, making a win worth just over $4M.

53. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 03:05 PM (#5248041)

54. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 20, 2016 at 03:14 PM (#5248052)

Red Sox place Rusney Castillo on outright waivers

It was only a few weeks ago that I was scolded here for suggesting that Castillo had no real trade value given his contract & AAA numbers. Even when they recalled him, Boston only gave Castillo 1 or 2 at bats a week, so it seems they didn't think much of him either. Hindsight is 20-20, but teams certainly don't want to make expensive mistakes if they can avoid it, so I assume the Red Sox will spend some time trying to figure out if they missed something, or Castillo changed after they signed him, or whatever.

It's not unknown for players to bounce back after being outrighted, but pretty rare, I think. Playing out the contract in the minors is probably pretty painful, although profitable, for Castillo. Kei Igawa soldiered on for another 3 years pitching in AAA ball after his short, unhappy stint as a Yankee starter ended, and folks said he was very professional about it.

55. TDF, trained monkey Posted: June 20, 2016 at 03:24 PM (#5248060)

Except that they are FA. Anyone can sign them. Are Cubans scouted as well? No. Are they typically younger, giving the team control over their peak years? Yes. Go ahead and arbitrarily assign Cuban FA a $2-3M per WAR value if you want, but enough GM's are clearly rating them higher than that.

And most of those deals appear not to be working out well for those GMs.

I'm sure it's been researched (because I've seen it discussed around here) - do FA signings in general "work out well"? We see a $/WAR figure bandied about as players sign contracts, but isn't that in expected WAR?

56. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 03:36 PM (#5248074)

And most of those deals appear not to be working out well for those GMs.

Puig - $40M - 12.1 WAR
Chapman - $38.25M - 10.9 WAR
Jose Iglesias - $11.33M - 4.7 WAR
Abreu - $66.36M - 10.2 WAR
Alexei Ramirez - $34.8M - 22.6 WAR
Cespedes - $36M - 15.8 WAR

The Sox also have Moncada in their system doing very well for $36M (I think?).

Abreu has 3 more years on his contract, Puig has 2. I'd be ok with all of those contracts.

Obviously Tomas, Hector Olivera, Castillo are probably not going to be worth anything. 6-3 is pretty darn good.

57. Davo Posted: June 20, 2016 at 03:57 PM (#5248094)

Aledmys Diaz is looking like a good deal so far. Same with Raisel Iglesias and Leonys Martin. For older guys, do we count Kendrys Morales and Adeiny Hechavarria?

Alex Guerrero belongs on the list of failures, too. And Erisbel Arruebarrena. Dayan Viciedo too, maybe--or did they sign him for so little it was practically free?

58. covelli chris p Posted: June 20, 2016 at 03:59 PM (#5248097)

Alex Guerrero belongs on the list of failures, too.

he was looking very promising as recently as last spring. what happened?

59. bfan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 04:27 PM (#5248127)

Dian Toscano was signed to a 4 year, $6 million deal by the Braves. I think he went 0-1 with immigration, which was a real detriment to his USA baseball career.

60. Jobu is silent on the changeup Posted: June 20, 2016 at 04:28 PM (#5248131)

EDIT: According to Spotrac, total payroll is just over $4B this season, making a win worth just over $4M.

If that's the number you use, you will probably turn a profit but you will never win, because it will drive you to exclusively field pre-FA guys. It's everybody's pipe dream, sure, but nobody has ever been able to draft that well.

61. villageidiom Posted: June 20, 2016 at 04:29 PM (#5248134)

It was only a few weeks ago that I was scolded here for suggesting that Castillo had no real trade value given his contract & AAA numbers.

It was only a few weeks ago that you were scolded for suggesting Castillo had no real trade value even if Boston eats his contract and because of the mere fact that he was in AAA, not his numbers there. And you were scolded on the basis that Castillo's 2016 MLB projection was better than that of several MLB teams' actual outfielders (though not any of Boston's, hence his being in AAA for Boston), which on a basically free contract that would have value to other teams.

We now resume the thread that isn't about you, already in progress.

62. The Yankee Clapper Posted: June 20, 2016 at 04:40 PM (#5248144)

There is overvaluing your own team's prospects, and then there is overvaluing your own team's prospects even after they have been outrighted to the minors.

63. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: June 20, 2016 at 04:44 PM (#5248146)

It was only a few weeks ago that you were scolded for suggesting Castillo had no real trade value even if Boston eats his contract and because of the mere fact that he was in AAA, not his numbers there.

That still seems like kind of a silly reason to scold him.

64. akrasian Posted: June 20, 2016 at 04:44 PM (#5248148)

And most of those deals appear not to be working out well for those GMs.

Well, the Dodgers overpaid in some sense for Olivera, when they didn't really want him all that much - because he was desirable talent that only cost money. They then flipped him months later for a young starting pitcher and a valued prospect, eating most of the money. The valued prospect then was the key player in a trade that brought them Trayce Thompson, starting OF and a good pitching prospect.

I don't think the Dodgers are particularly regretting the signing.

65. bfan Posted: June 20, 2016 at 04:45 PM (#5248149)

I don't think the Dodgers are particularly regretting the signing

Well in this robust game of pass the trash, I can tell you who is regretting it.

66. Walt Davis Posted: June 20, 2016 at 05:12 PM (#5248166)

If they have the same bust rate as #1 picks, they should cost a lot closer to the $10-15M #1 picks used to get than to the $40M they're currently getting.

As noted, #1 picks only got to negotiate with one team. Further, non-bust #1 picks then went on to earn another $18-30 M in arbitration salaries.

If that's the number you use, you will probably turn a profit but you will never win, because it will drive you to exclusively field pre-FA guys. It's everybody's pipe dream, sure, but nobody has ever been able to draft that well.

Huh? With replacement value at 48 wins, you'd need to buy 45 marginal wins to get to 93 projected wins or, at $4/win, would be a payroll of $180 M ... or nearly $200 M once you include the fixed costs. There are only a couple of teams operating at that level.

If what you mean to say is that refusing to spend any of your excess from your pre-FA players who are priced way below $4/win on the FA market will usually leave you high and dry, that's true. But then such a team wouldn't be paying anything close to $4/win.

67. Walt Davis Posted: June 20, 2016 at 05:19 PM (#5248172)

FWIW, the Dodgers' Ethier, McCarthy, Ryu, Howell, Anderson and Crawford are approximately at $82 million for -1.0 WAR.

And you can add AGon at $22 M for .5 WAR this year plus money they're paying Kemp, Oliveira to play for other teams plus that crazy suspended guy (not getting paid this year but still on the hook for future years) plus another Cuban named Yasiel Sierra who doesn't seem to have really been any good in Cuba either.

I added it up the other day and came to $120 M in wasted payroll NEXT YEAR, although that included AGon who might bounce back ... but didn't include Kazmir who's been not very good this year.

68. TDF, trained monkey Posted: June 20, 2016 at 05:19 PM (#5248174)

EDIT: According to Spotrac, total payroll is just over $4B this season, making a win worth just over $4M.

If that's the number you use, you will probably turn a profit but you will never win, because it will drive you to exclusively field pre-FA guys. It's everybody's pipe dream, sure, but nobody has ever been able to draft that well.

I was only responding to the statement "If every player were a FA every year, the "price" of 1 WAR would be more like $2-3M". IOW, I don't think you can build a team paying that much, but in a hypothetical "everyone's a FA" world that's how it would shake out as long as total salary spending stayed the same.

69. karlmagnus Posted: June 20, 2016 at 05:19 PM (#5248175)

I opposed this signing at the time, because Castillo's Cuban numbers were a distinct class below those of truly elite players like Abreu, and I thought there was little chance second tier Cuban talent would translate well to the majors. Cherington got over-excited by Abreu's first year and assumed the island was teeming with Babe Ruths. This was always statistically unlikely.

70. Walt Davis Posted: June 20, 2016 at 05:50 PM (#5248200)

underestimating it in the Korean leagues. Kang, Kim, Lee and Park are looking like steals so far!

Kang for sure. Park's been slumping badly and is down to 206/289/442, 95 OPS+. Lee is hitting well as a RH platoon 1B, starting to get more PT. Kim struggled to get playing time too and is putting up a line that looks unsustainable but maybe he's the new Ichiro (340/419/427, 391 BABIP) with more patience but even less power and no steals.

But all of those guys were a lot cheaper than the Cubans. Heck, add them together and the total guaranteed is less than half what Castillo cost.

71. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: June 20, 2016 at 06:55 PM (#5248219)

because Castillo's Cuban numbers were a distinct class below those of truly elite players like Abreu

Am I misrembering or had Castillo actually not played professional ball for like a year prior to the signing?

72. villageidiom Posted: June 20, 2016 at 07:39 PM (#5248236)

Am I misrembering or had Castillo actually not played professional ball for like a year prior to the signing?

You are correct. BB-Ref has Cuban-league stats now, BTW.

There is overvaluing your own team's prospects, and then there is overvaluing your own team's prospects even after they have been outrighted to the minors.

You couldn't even accurately state your own comments from a couple months ago. You can hardly be trusted to parse the valuations others are giving Castillo.

73. Squash Posted: June 20, 2016 at 08:38 PM (#5248265)

Sure, but the question would then be, is the #1 pick a good signing at $40-50M. Probably yes. But the #5-10 signings? Probably no.

But there aren't 5-10 guys getting huge Cuba money every year - there are 1 or 2, sometimes none. So clubs don't seem to think very many of these guys are worth the proverbial #1 pick, and are paying them as such.

74. ReggieThomasLives Posted: June 20, 2016 at 08:43 PM (#5248269)

closer to the $10-15M #1 used to get

What's a reasonable WAR expectation for a #1 pick? From 2003 to 2012 they've averaged a little over 11 WAR, but that group will probably average over 20 WAR when their careers are done. No idea how much of that will fit in control years.

But yea, in a free market #1 picks easily sign for $60M+ each year.

75. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: June 20, 2016 at 10:28 PM (#5248359)

For the record, I follow Upton quite closely, as he's currently torpedoing both of my Scoresheet teams. But he's been just fine for the last few weeks. He had a rough start with a new team, but I wouldn't worry about him long term (not that it seemed like anyone here was worried about him).

76. Tom Nawrocki Posted: June 20, 2016 at 10:30 PM (#5248360)

It's over in Miami. A new record for most runs scored in a game on only solo homers, with eight.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Monday, June 20, 2016

Red Sox place Rusney Castillo on outright waivers

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

Hot Topics