After the Yankees recent and reasonable contracts handed out to CC Sabathia and AJ Burnett, the media and fans have exploded with disgust. The big argument is that the Yankees are stupidly spending this money on pitchers and overpaying. This is false and I presume people do not know that, since they do not know how to value free agents.
Currently, there is a stat that does just that- WAR. WAR literally stands for Wins Above Replacement. A Replacement player is your typical AAA/AAAA player. A team of replacement players would easily set the record for most losses in a season. As Tangotiger wrote, WAR is, "he talent level for which you would pay the minimum salary on the open market, or for which you can obtain at minimal cost in a trade."
For positional players, the replacement level is set at -2.25 per 162 games, below the league average. However, since the AL is a tougher league than the NL, the AL replacement level is -2.5 and the NL replacement level is -2.
Along with league adjustments, there are positional adjustments. This is done to make sure an average defender at one position, lets say LF, is not equal to an average defensive SS. The adjustments are as follows:
+1.0 wins C
+0.5 SS/CF
+0.0 2B/3B
-0.5 LF/RF/PH
-1.0 1B
-1.5 DH
Starting pitchers and relievers have different baselines, since pitchers are expected to perform better out of the pen. The replacement level for starters is .380 win% and .470 win% for relievers. Again, there is a league adjustment; AL starters and relievers are .370% and .460% while NL starters and relievers are .390% and .480%. Closers have a replacement level of .570%. If a closer gets any wins above that level, it is multiplied by his Leverage Index.
The formula for calculating WAR for positional players takes into account league, position, PA, wOBA, and defense. The formula for starters and relievers includes ERA and IP. Right now, 1 WAR = $4.84 million. So a player with a 2 WAR on today's open market is worth about $10 million per year. The free agent value, this year $4.84 million, increases about 10% each season. Last year it was $4.4 million.
So lets test this out on some free agents or former free agents. First, we'll do Mark Teixeira. Marcel projects Teixeira to have a .386 wOBA. Subtract that from a projected league average- I am using .340. Use that answer (.46) and divide by 1.15. Times that answer by projected PA (in this case, 600). Now divide that by 10.5. Now add in 2.5 for the league adjustment, but subtract 1 for the positional adjustment. Adding in .84 for defense (Runs defensive metric/10.5) and Mark Teixeira's WAR is about 4.5. Multiply that by the free agent value of 4.84 and you will see Mark is worth about $22 million per year. An 8/176 deal is around fair price for him. (The .338 is whatever the league average wOBA is, which is EXACTLY equal to whatever the league average OBP is; 1.15 is the relationship between wOBA and runs; 700 is the number of PA per 162 games; 10.5 is the relationship between runs and wins- Tangotiger)
Now, lets do CC Sabathia. After plugging in projections on my WAR calculator (if you want one, just ask), Sabathia has about a 5.1 WAR. So he is worth about $25-$26 million on the open market and is worth an additional amount of money to the Yankees. They are paying him $23 million per year.
Finally, lets do AJ Burnett. After accounting for a risk of injury and not throwing 200 innings annually, his WAR is around 3.5. That makes him worth $16.94 per year. The Yankees are paying him fair value. If Burnett stays healthy and can pitch effectively for 200+ innings, the Yankees could even have a bargain on their hands. Of course, this and the CC contract can blow up on their faces because of injury.
If anyone wants an exact formula for batters, just ask me. And there- now you can tell if a team is spending too much on a player or not. You are welcome.
12/16/08
Marlins president bashes Yankees signing of CC Sabathia
While on a radio show, the president of the Marlins called in to complain that the actions taken by the Yankees in signing Sabathia are irresponsible and sets a bad precedent for future contracts.
1. Well, the Yankees were not irresponsible. CC Sabathia is worth about $25-$26 mil per year. The Yankees are paying him $23 mil per year. It should also not set a bad precedent for future contracts, unless teams plan on giving this much money to average players, not top players in all of baseball
2. He draws 500 people a night if he is lucky. Maybe if he invested money in his team, the attendance figures would rise, giving him a return on his payroll investment. But hey, he should be rejoicing because of the increased amount of revenue sharing he will receive because of the signing.
However, I see his point on why the Yanks are "irresponsible". Since the Yanks get a revenue sharing break from their new stadium, the Marlins president won't be able to buy his luxury yacht and summer house this season.
1. Well, the Yankees were not irresponsible. CC Sabathia is worth about $25-$26 mil per year. The Yankees are paying him $23 mil per year. It should also not set a bad precedent for future contracts, unless teams plan on giving this much money to average players, not top players in all of baseball
2. He draws 500 people a night if he is lucky. Maybe if he invested money in his team, the attendance figures would rise, giving him a return on his payroll investment. But hey, he should be rejoicing because of the increased amount of revenue sharing he will receive because of the signing.
However, I see his point on why the Yanks are "irresponsible". Since the Yanks get a revenue sharing break from their new stadium, the Marlins president won't be able to buy his luxury yacht and summer house this season.
Olney: Why are teams bidding for a free agent?
Bustner Olney writes why Baltimore and Washington should not be bidding for Mark Teixeira.
Read: Stop bidding so Boston can sign him.
Read: Stop bidding so Boston can sign him.
12/3/08
Will Peter Gammons Retire?
I am not even going to break down this quote. It's too awful to do so.
Gammons on the new Pedroia contract...
Quote:
That it got done this quickly shows how much Pedroia loves playing in Boston, and that he prefers playing to dickering over arbitration and free-agent dollars. His favorite phrase is "it's all about winning."
And he means it.
Just, wow.
Gammons on the new Pedroia contract...
Quote:
That it got done this quickly shows how much Pedroia loves playing in Boston, and that he prefers playing to dickering over arbitration and free-agent dollars. His favorite phrase is "it's all about winning."
And he means it.
Just, wow.
I like white Rice...
... but not black Rice.
Evans was a life long Red Sox right fielder, whose career just spanned three decades. His career from 1972-1991. Jim Rice played from 1974-1989, so Evans played during the same exact era as Rice, on the same team, on the same patch of outfield grass. Rice still has a shot to make the HOF in his fifteenth try. Evans was knocked off the voting in three seasons, never getting higher than 10.4% of the vote in any of those three years.
So my question is, if Evans barely made a dent in the voting for three years, why was Rice not kicked off the ballot in even shorter time? So lets look at the numbers (KEEP IN MIND I AM NOT ADVOCATING OR DENYING THAT EVANS SHOULD BE A HOF'er):
JR: 9058 PA- .298/.352/.502/.854/128+ with a .375 wOBA, .293 EqA, 1367 EqR, 80.2 WARP3
DE: 10569 PA- .272/.370/.470/.840/127+ with a .374 wOBA, .296 EqA, 1606 EqR, 116.5 WARP3
Hmmm, who was better? Near identical OPS+ and wOBA. But Evans has a better EqA even though he played longer past his prime and even though the disparity in PA is big, I doubt in the twilight of Rice's career, he would muster enough EqR and WARP3 to pass Evans. The WARP3 is really striking. 80.2 is bad for a HOF hitter. Just bad. Pitiful. Disgusting. In almost as many PA, Bernie Williams has a much higher WARP3.
And the rest is taken from a member of SOSH:
Always regarded as a good defensive outfielder, Evans topped 10 assists from right field five times in his career. Additionally, for his career he scored 277 runs above replacement as a right fielder and 85 runs above average against other right fielders. In stark contrast, while Rice was able to accumulate a great deal of assists over his career (likely aided by both his throwing arm and playing LF at Fenway), Rice was not able to score close to an average RAA over the course of his career (-51)....While I do not think Rice should be a member of the Hall of Fame (though he deserves much consideration), I do believe his teammate does. Evans was a much better fielder, almost an equal as a hitter and lasted much longer. While Jim Rice had a season that trumps any season of Evans (Rice’s 78 ranks with the best of seasons), Evans was a tremendous RF season after season, over three decades. He’s Boston’s Billy Williams.
He sums it up nicely. Rice is not a HOF'er and if any Red Sox alumnus deserves to be in the HOF, it is Dwight Evans and not Rice. End o' story.
And one thing real fast on Tim Raines and why he is a ROCK that deserves to be in the HOF. In the National League in the 1980s, the league slugging percentage once topped .400 (1987, .404) and often was .360-.370. As a result, the "break-even" point for stolen bases was a lot lower than the 75-80% it is today (somewhere around 62-65%, I think). Because so few players had extra base power, the ability to get yourself into scoring position without giving away an out was incredibly valuable. Stealing 60+ bases at an 86% clip (which was Raines success rate from 1981-1990, when he averaged 62.7 steals/year) provided a ton of value. That is just another point to prove Raines is a HOF player.
Evans was a life long Red Sox right fielder, whose career just spanned three decades. His career from 1972-1991. Jim Rice played from 1974-1989, so Evans played during the same exact era as Rice, on the same team, on the same patch of outfield grass. Rice still has a shot to make the HOF in his fifteenth try. Evans was knocked off the voting in three seasons, never getting higher than 10.4% of the vote in any of those three years.
So my question is, if Evans barely made a dent in the voting for three years, why was Rice not kicked off the ballot in even shorter time? So lets look at the numbers (KEEP IN MIND I AM NOT ADVOCATING OR DENYING THAT EVANS SHOULD BE A HOF'er):
JR: 9058 PA- .298/.352/.502/.854/128+ with a .375 wOBA, .293 EqA, 1367 EqR, 80.2 WARP3
DE: 10569 PA- .272/.370/.470/.840/127+ with a .374 wOBA, .296 EqA, 1606 EqR, 116.5 WARP3
Hmmm, who was better? Near identical OPS+ and wOBA. But Evans has a better EqA even though he played longer past his prime and even though the disparity in PA is big, I doubt in the twilight of Rice's career, he would muster enough EqR and WARP3 to pass Evans. The WARP3 is really striking. 80.2 is bad for a HOF hitter. Just bad. Pitiful. Disgusting. In almost as many PA, Bernie Williams has a much higher WARP3.
And the rest is taken from a member of SOSH:
Always regarded as a good defensive outfielder, Evans topped 10 assists from right field five times in his career. Additionally, for his career he scored 277 runs above replacement as a right fielder and 85 runs above average against other right fielders. In stark contrast, while Rice was able to accumulate a great deal of assists over his career (likely aided by both his throwing arm and playing LF at Fenway), Rice was not able to score close to an average RAA over the course of his career (-51)....While I do not think Rice should be a member of the Hall of Fame (though he deserves much consideration), I do believe his teammate does. Evans was a much better fielder, almost an equal as a hitter and lasted much longer. While Jim Rice had a season that trumps any season of Evans (Rice’s 78 ranks with the best of seasons), Evans was a tremendous RF season after season, over three decades. He’s Boston’s Billy Williams.
He sums it up nicely. Rice is not a HOF'er and if any Red Sox alumnus deserves to be in the HOF, it is Dwight Evans and not Rice. End o' story.
And one thing real fast on Tim Raines and why he is a ROCK that deserves to be in the HOF. In the National League in the 1980s, the league slugging percentage once topped .400 (1987, .404) and often was .360-.370. As a result, the "break-even" point for stolen bases was a lot lower than the 75-80% it is today (somewhere around 62-65%, I think). Because so few players had extra base power, the ability to get yourself into scoring position without giving away an out was incredibly valuable. Stealing 60+ bases at an 86% clip (which was Raines success rate from 1981-1990, when he averaged 62.7 steals/year) provided a ton of value. That is just another point to prove Raines is a HOF player.
11/24/08
Solving baseball's problems
If there is one thing most baseball fans can agree on, it’s their passionate hate for the New York Yankees. Why? Well, as one Phillies fan puts it, “they buy their way into championships”.
Large market teams such as the Yankees, Boston Red Sox, and Los Angeles Angels have the financial power to sign expensive free agents, over small market teams such as the Milwaukee Brewers. In fact, the Brewers contract offer of four years and $100 million to this year’s top free agent, CC Sabathia, was dwarfed by the Yankees offer of six years and $140 million.
The financial authority that large market teams have over small market teams is why baseball fans want a salary cap. A salary cap is simply a limit on how much a team can spend on their roster payroll. By implementing a cap, fans feel that a competitive balance will be restored to baseball since large markets teams will no longer be able to outspend small market teams on pricy free agents.
However, success is not directly tied to payroll. In 2008, of the teams with the ten highest payrolls, only five made the playoffs. In fact, the league’s three highest payroll teams did not even make even make the playoffs. The Tampa Bay Rays, the American League champions and World Series participant, had the second lowest payroll at just over $43 million. Competitive balance in baseball is fine and the belief that teams with money have a competitive advantage is a fallacy.
With a cap, small market teams would still not spend. Just because large market teams will be restricted, there will still be no incentive for the owners of small market teams to spend. Meanwhile, a cap would unfairly punish successful and organized franchises. Also, while large market teams can spend more money on their payroll, to be successful, they still need to spend it wisely. Spending money on just anybody is not smart business and can hurt teams. Before the 2007 season, the San Francisco Giants signed pitcher Barry Zito to a seven year and $126 million dollar contract, the largest ever for a pitcher at the time. Since then, Zito has been one of the worst starters in baseball and his contract has hurt the Giants.
Major League Baseball’s solution to the “problem” was revenue sharing. Under the current contract, all teams must pay out 31% of their local revenue and it is split evenly among all thirty teams. Also, MLB’s Central Fund is divided up among teams according to their revenue. In affect, revenue sharing is basically the transition of money from large market teams to small market teams.
The current revenue sharing system has its own problems. Again, owners of small market teams have no incentive to re-invest the money they receive from large market teams on their payroll. This is because if the team spends the money they receive to build a winning team, they will receive less money from revenue sharing. In 2006, the Rays collected more than $30 million in revenue sharing. However, their payroll was just $35 million. In most cases, the money of large market teams goes straight to the pockets of small market owners, which defeats the purpose of the system.
The best solution to revenue sharing comes from Michael Lewis, an assistant marketing professor at Olin Business School in Washington University. His solution takes into account team payrolls, winning percentage, attendance, and size of the local population. Depending on attendance, the amount of money a team receives from revenue sharing can go up or down. If a team’s attendance is around 70%, their revenue sharing will go up. If their attendance is below 50%, they won’t receive as much money.
This improved revenue sharing is the best way for baseball to allow small market teams to keep up with the financial strength of large market teams. If revenue sharing is tied into attendance, it will give franchises a reason to build a successful team, so more fans show up to games. If more fans show up, teams gate receipts, fan loyalty, and revenue sharing will go up. By forcing teams to construct winning teams, it will increase the competitiveness and health of the league.
Michael Lewis’s solution is a win-win. Teams get better, attendance goes up, and owners make more money. What’s not to like?
Large market teams such as the Yankees, Boston Red Sox, and Los Angeles Angels have the financial power to sign expensive free agents, over small market teams such as the Milwaukee Brewers. In fact, the Brewers contract offer of four years and $100 million to this year’s top free agent, CC Sabathia, was dwarfed by the Yankees offer of six years and $140 million.
The financial authority that large market teams have over small market teams is why baseball fans want a salary cap. A salary cap is simply a limit on how much a team can spend on their roster payroll. By implementing a cap, fans feel that a competitive balance will be restored to baseball since large markets teams will no longer be able to outspend small market teams on pricy free agents.
However, success is not directly tied to payroll. In 2008, of the teams with the ten highest payrolls, only five made the playoffs. In fact, the league’s three highest payroll teams did not even make even make the playoffs. The Tampa Bay Rays, the American League champions and World Series participant, had the second lowest payroll at just over $43 million. Competitive balance in baseball is fine and the belief that teams with money have a competitive advantage is a fallacy.
With a cap, small market teams would still not spend. Just because large market teams will be restricted, there will still be no incentive for the owners of small market teams to spend. Meanwhile, a cap would unfairly punish successful and organized franchises. Also, while large market teams can spend more money on their payroll, to be successful, they still need to spend it wisely. Spending money on just anybody is not smart business and can hurt teams. Before the 2007 season, the San Francisco Giants signed pitcher Barry Zito to a seven year and $126 million dollar contract, the largest ever for a pitcher at the time. Since then, Zito has been one of the worst starters in baseball and his contract has hurt the Giants.
Major League Baseball’s solution to the “problem” was revenue sharing. Under the current contract, all teams must pay out 31% of their local revenue and it is split evenly among all thirty teams. Also, MLB’s Central Fund is divided up among teams according to their revenue. In affect, revenue sharing is basically the transition of money from large market teams to small market teams.
The current revenue sharing system has its own problems. Again, owners of small market teams have no incentive to re-invest the money they receive from large market teams on their payroll. This is because if the team spends the money they receive to build a winning team, they will receive less money from revenue sharing. In 2006, the Rays collected more than $30 million in revenue sharing. However, their payroll was just $35 million. In most cases, the money of large market teams goes straight to the pockets of small market owners, which defeats the purpose of the system.
The best solution to revenue sharing comes from Michael Lewis, an assistant marketing professor at Olin Business School in Washington University. His solution takes into account team payrolls, winning percentage, attendance, and size of the local population. Depending on attendance, the amount of money a team receives from revenue sharing can go up or down. If a team’s attendance is around 70%, their revenue sharing will go up. If their attendance is below 50%, they won’t receive as much money.
This improved revenue sharing is the best way for baseball to allow small market teams to keep up with the financial strength of large market teams. If revenue sharing is tied into attendance, it will give franchises a reason to build a successful team, so more fans show up to games. If more fans show up, teams gate receipts, fan loyalty, and revenue sharing will go up. By forcing teams to construct winning teams, it will increase the competitiveness and health of the league.
Michael Lewis’s solution is a win-win. Teams get better, attendance goes up, and owners make more money. What’s not to like?
11/21/08
My farewell to Mike Mussina
Dear Mr. Mussina,
Your recent retirement brings an end to a brilliant eighteen year career. In those eighteen years, you made 536 starts, totaling 3562.2 innings. You've notched a 3.68 ERA, 3.57 FIP, 1.19 WHIP, 7.11 K/9, 1.98 BB/9, and 3.58 K/BB. Moreover, when comparing your stats to the league average and finding the difference, for your career you are:
-Second in Baserunners/9
-Tenth in ERA
-Third in K/BB
- Fourth in BB/9
Going further, you ranked in the top 10 in the AL in:
-Strikeouts ten times
-ERA ten times
-RSAA seven times (Runs Saved Against Average)
-Hits/9 nine times
-WHIP eleven times
-K/9 ten times
-BB/9 fourteen times
-K/BB fourteen times
So, Mr. Mussina, your resume is not lacking. You spent your entire career in the AL East, a time when the Jays won two World Series, Yankees won four World Series, Red Sox won two World Series, and the Rays appeared in one world series. Yet you still accumulated these stats.
But I am not writing to tell you that. I am writing to thank you. To thank you for all your shining moments in pinstripes and all the joy you brought to Oriole fans, Yankee fans, and baseball fans. For your entire career you were Mr. Almost. Almost won a World Series. Almost won Cy Young. Almost threw a perfect. Almost won 20 games- until 2008. It was a magical season, in which you were one of the few Yankee bright spots and you made the season more enjoyable, even when we were eliminated. In May after a putrid start against Baltimore, where you did not even survive the first, we thought you were done. It was time to give up. But you battled back. You proved us wrong. On a damp, September Sunday in Boston, you had us watching, even though we were eliminated from the playoffs. We watched because we wanted to see you finally achieve something. Not fall short. And you did it- you finally won that 20th game for the first time.
We love you for your personality. Your post game interviews were a must for any Yankee fan. Your candid dislike of Carl Pavano was great. And in 2006 when you ordered Joe Torre to sit back down on the bench so you could stay in the game, our love grew even deeper for you.
We love you for all your great performances. Your start in game 3 of the 2001 ALDS kept us alive in that series. Seven innings, four hits, one walk, and no runs. Your near perfect game made for an awesome Sunday night duel with David Cone. Your perfect tough lasted twenty six outs and two strikes.
Most of all, we revere you for your epic performance in game 7 of the 2003 ALCS. In the top of the fourth, you made your first career relief appearance. The score was 4-0 Boston with men on first and third and no outs. You struck out Jason Varitek and then got Damon to ground into an inning ending DP. You then threw two more scoreless innings, saving the game and the series for us.
We will miss you, Mr. Mussina and we wish you the best in the future.
Sincerely,
A big fan
P.S. One last time: MOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEE!!!
Your recent retirement brings an end to a brilliant eighteen year career. In those eighteen years, you made 536 starts, totaling 3562.2 innings. You've notched a 3.68 ERA, 3.57 FIP, 1.19 WHIP, 7.11 K/9, 1.98 BB/9, and 3.58 K/BB. Moreover, when comparing your stats to the league average and finding the difference, for your career you are:
-Second in Baserunners/9
-Tenth in ERA
-Third in K/BB
- Fourth in BB/9
Going further, you ranked in the top 10 in the AL in:
-Strikeouts ten times
-ERA ten times
-RSAA seven times (Runs Saved Against Average)
-Hits/9 nine times
-WHIP eleven times
-K/9 ten times
-BB/9 fourteen times
-K/BB fourteen times
So, Mr. Mussina, your resume is not lacking. You spent your entire career in the AL East, a time when the Jays won two World Series, Yankees won four World Series, Red Sox won two World Series, and the Rays appeared in one world series. Yet you still accumulated these stats.
But I am not writing to tell you that. I am writing to thank you. To thank you for all your shining moments in pinstripes and all the joy you brought to Oriole fans, Yankee fans, and baseball fans. For your entire career you were Mr. Almost. Almost won a World Series. Almost won Cy Young. Almost threw a perfect. Almost won 20 games- until 2008. It was a magical season, in which you were one of the few Yankee bright spots and you made the season more enjoyable, even when we were eliminated. In May after a putrid start against Baltimore, where you did not even survive the first, we thought you were done. It was time to give up. But you battled back. You proved us wrong. On a damp, September Sunday in Boston, you had us watching, even though we were eliminated from the playoffs. We watched because we wanted to see you finally achieve something. Not fall short. And you did it- you finally won that 20th game for the first time.
We love you for your personality. Your post game interviews were a must for any Yankee fan. Your candid dislike of Carl Pavano was great. And in 2006 when you ordered Joe Torre to sit back down on the bench so you could stay in the game, our love grew even deeper for you.
We love you for all your great performances. Your start in game 3 of the 2001 ALDS kept us alive in that series. Seven innings, four hits, one walk, and no runs. Your near perfect game made for an awesome Sunday night duel with David Cone. Your perfect tough lasted twenty six outs and two strikes.
Most of all, we revere you for your epic performance in game 7 of the 2003 ALCS. In the top of the fourth, you made your first career relief appearance. The score was 4-0 Boston with men on first and third and no outs. You struck out Jason Varitek and then got Damon to ground into an inning ending DP. You then threw two more scoreless innings, saving the game and the series for us.
We will miss you, Mr. Mussina and we wish you the best in the future.
Sincerely,
A big fan
P.S. One last time: MOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEE!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
