SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Jacoby Ellsbury nearing 7 yr/$153mm deal w/MFY
|
Post by jmei on Dec 4, 2013 15:44:32 GMT -5
Look at his full-season stats and rates. Speed: 2008 = 8.2, 2009 = 8.1, 2011 = 6.3, 2013 = 8.2. I fail to see how 2013 is "well above his career averages" unless you only look at the "average" which includes injury seasons. I'm perfectly comfortable ignoring his injury-lost seasons because there were caused by freak accidents rather than soft-tissue problems. UZR/150, CF 2013: 12.9 Career: 8.0 2008, 2009, 2011: 14.3, -10, 16.1 TZ/yr, CF 2013: 21 Career: 4 2008, 2009, 2011: 12, -9, 4 DRS/yr, CF 2013: 13 Career: 4 2008, 2009, 2011: 7, -5, 6 Baserunning runs above average 2013: 11.4 Career, per 150 games: 8 2008, 2009, 2011: 9, 6.9, 2.5 Again, I'm pretty uncomfortable just throwing those injury seasons out completely, but even if you do, it sure looks like he significantly outperformed his non-injury years in 2013 by every metric but UZR/150. Just wanted to clarify what I meant, and I'll gladly accept your offer to agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 4, 2013 15:51:42 GMT -5
Right, just like home run totals. Players don't hit 32 in one season and never crack 10 in any other year, wild fluctuations in performance just doesn't happen like that. Come on Beasley, you're better than that. You know defense is a different animal. Says who? Players absolutely have good and bad defensive years.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 4, 2013 15:55:45 GMT -5
Come on Beasley, you're better than that. You know defense is a different animal. Says who? Players absolutely have good and bad defensive years. It's hard to determine if bad stats are a result of a bad defensive year or statistical anomalies. Hitting stats are way more of an exact science.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 4, 2013 16:08:44 GMT -5
Agreed. The next CBA should see a huge boost in the cap. It's pretty likely that $22 million in 2020 is going to be like $12-14 million in today's money. Not inconsequential, but unlikely to handicap a rich team. This is the best point made thus far regarding the Ellsbury contract. The Victorino contract last year seemed crazy, and now its reasonable. I'm not so sure we're going to see a "huge boost" in the CBT starting in 2017. I realize the players will fight for it, but there's already huge money in the game, I see the fight being more about minimum spending and penalties for not reaching that than a MAJOR increase. It will go up, but I still don't think top end salaries are going to go up by as much. The bottom line is these huge contracts are killing themselves because literally the only GOOD multi-year 20M contract was Manny's. At some point, the risk is just too great to pump huge dollars for a lot of years into one player. When Manny became the first player to sign a 20m deal the Yankees payroll the same year was $112M. Today, the highest contract is $27.5M or 138% higher than Manny's deal (AAV). By comparison the Yankee's payroll has risen by 204% over that time. Are we going to see a 200% increase in the cap figure? I don't think there's a chance in Hell of that happening. The bigger issue is that most of these 20m+ deals end up being awful contracts for whoever is holding them. The track records are atrocious and only getting worse versus better. www.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/league-info/highest-paid-players/1. Roger Clemens, $28,000,022 (2007) 2. Alex Rodriguez, $27,500,000 (2008-17) - God Awful3. Justin Verlander, $25,714,286 (2013-19) - Too early to tell, but wasn't the best first year although he almost made up for it in post season
4. Alex Rodriguez, $25,200,000 (2001-10) - Worked
5. Ryan Howard, $25,000,000 (2012-16) - God Awful
. . Josh Hamilton, $25,000,000 (2013-17) - God Awful
. . Felix Hernandez, $25,000,000 (2013-19) - too Early8. Zack Greinke, $24,500,000 (2013-18) - Too early, but didn't earn it in year 1
9. CC Sabathia, $24,400,000 (2012-16) - Not looking Good
10. Cliff Lee, $24,000,000 (2011-15) - first 2 year worked but entering age 36 season. . . Albert Pujols, $24,000,000 (2012-21) - HAHAHA. . . Cole Hamels, $24,000,000 (2013-18) - lots of years left entering 30 - i'd bet against this working well
13. Prince Fielder, $23,777,778 (2012-20) - Bad14. CC Sabathia, $23,000,000 (2009-15) - misleading due to opt out, but first version was good. . . Joe Mauer, $23,000,000 (2011-18) - Bad
16. Johan Santana, $22,916,667 (2008-13) - God Awful 17. Manny Ramirez, $22,500,000 (2009-10) - Bad
. . . Mark Teixeira, $22,500,000 (2009-16) - time to go, but looking Bad. . . Joey Votto, $22,500,000 (2014-23) -too early to tell, but my guess is this is going to be atrocious20. Adrian Gonzalez, $22,000,000 (2012-18) - Bad - just because he's a solid player does make this contract good - no more power
21. Roger Clemens, $22,000,022 (2006)22. Matt Cain, $21,250,000 (2012-17) - Too early, last year wasn't good and the first was decent
23. Ryan Braun, $21,000,000 (2016-20) - doesn't even kick in for 3 more seasons Nope
24. Carl Crawford, $20,285,714 (2011-17) - Bad25. Tim Lincecum, $20,250,000 (2012-13) - Awful - as much as 2 years can be
26. Manny Ramirez, $20,000,000 (2001-08) - Great Deal
. . . Roy Halladay, $20,000,000 (2011-13) - Turned out awful - that's the risk of giving older pitchers or pitchers in general (see Johan) these deals. . . Matt Kemp, $20,000,000 (2012-19) - too early, but early returns are awful - and early years are supposed to be the good ones
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 4, 2013 16:19:07 GMT -5
Yeah those contracts all look pretty bad when you automatically define them all as bad. For instance, if you think the Manny contract worked out, how can you say that Votto is "going to be atrocious"? Manny, 26-29: 166 OPS+. Votto, 26-29: 163 OPS+. Plus Votto actually plays defense and isn't a crazy person.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 4, 2013 16:46:51 GMT -5
First, I didn't automatically call them all bad, so that's an unfair characterization. I said most have been and that's entirely true.
Secondly, to be fair on Votto I should have started with "Too early to tell, but my guess is ...." It is too early to draw a conclusion since it hasn't started yet.
Manny's contract covered his ages 29 - 36 seasons. Votto's covers his age 30-39 seasons.
Manny was a power hitter on steroids, Votto isn't. If you think for a minute his numbers are going to look great at 35-39 then all the power to you, but don't compare a known steroid guy to a non-steroid guy. There's a reason why offensive production has changed the last few years. Yes Ortiz has defied logic or testing, but that's the exception rather than the rule. Exceptional players, do things like this so Votto could do it (he's one of my favorite players in the game).
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,924
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 4, 2013 18:10:13 GMT -5
The always pretty clueless Pete Abraham (who has to be thankful he has Nick Cafardo and Dan Shaughnessy making him look like Stephen Hawking) is gloating about how correct he was at labeling Ellsbury a mercenary. I posted this reply, which is relevant to others sharing his opinion:
|
|
|
Post by pedey on Dec 4, 2013 18:11:49 GMT -5
Manny performed very well in every year of his big contract, which actually ended after the 2008 season. Although he was crazy at tunes, he helped the Sox win two world series. I wouldn't call it a bad contract.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,924
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 4, 2013 18:14:34 GMT -5
Come on Beasley, you're better than that. You know defense is a different animal. Says who? Players absolutely have good and bad defensive years. Or medicore ones versus astonishing ones. I don't know how anyone could have watched Coco Crisp in 2006 and 2008 versus 2007 and still not get that.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 4, 2013 21:43:25 GMT -5
Good fun at BP as Ben Lindbergh examines the dynamics of Ellsbury's signing with the Yankees. A couple of quotes should pull you in (this one's not behind the paywall I believe): He goes on to examine the financial propostion behind the lavish spending, using the analysis pioneered by Nate Silver's, the one about marginal wins when you're on the cusp of the playoffs. If the MFY do pull in Cano, that's a decently stacked lineup, one they should be able to brutalize most opponents with - pitching or no pitching.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 4, 2013 22:16:17 GMT -5
Manny performed very well in every year of his big contract, which actually ended after the 2008 season. Although he was crazy at tunes, he helped the Sox win two world series. I wouldn't call it a bad contract. No one did
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 4, 2013 22:34:41 GMT -5
Manny performed very well in every year of his big contract, which actually ended after the 2008 season. Although he was crazy at tunes, he helped the Sox win two world series. I wouldn't call it a bad contract. No one did Speaking of Manny being "crazy tunes," go read Leigh Montville's bio of Ted Williams. There are some striking similarities in personality both on (Williams once had a ball fall in front of him in the OF for a double because he was "practicing his swing in the outfield and didn't hear the ball hit") and off - Williams basically acted like a foul mouth 12 year old off the field who always had to have his way. Not saying they were identical, but a lot of loopiness has been possessed by great-hitting Sox LFs over the years.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Dec 5, 2013 7:25:12 GMT -5
Ken Davidoff ?@kendavidoff 18u I hear the #RedSox's talks with Jacoby Ellsbury didn't get beyond the $80 million (over 5 years) range.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Dec 5, 2013 10:31:00 GMT -5
The attacks on Ellsbury by the Globe and some talk radio hosts is borderline offensive.
I love how Abraham cites John Lester for his "loyalty" to the organization. John Lester's contract bought the Red Sox only one extra year of control at $13M. If Lester had been a free agent this year, his 2014 salary probably would have been around $18M. Ellsbury on the other hand was asked to sacrifice three years of free agency for a lower AAV than he eventually got.
Abraham should not imply that Lester sacrificed a huge amount or several years of free agency out of loyalty to the organization and is somehow a saint for doing so while Ellsbury is the devil. It's simply a false narrative put forward to attack a player that Abraham doesn't like personally. It's disgusting yellow journalism.
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Dec 5, 2013 10:38:50 GMT -5
I may be lower on Ellsbury than most, but I don't blame him for leaving at all considering the money he was offered. Honestly, these media types need to look at the big picture. These players are drafted by a team and have no real choice but to sign with that team. They are forced to stay with said organization often for 9-10 years of their lives. Who says they even really like that team/organization? Especially in Ellsbury's case where they kind of screwed him over before. Players have no reason to be loyal to any team to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 5, 2013 10:53:13 GMT -5
I may be lower on Ellsbury than most, but I don't blame him for leaving at all considering the money he was offered. Honestly, these media types need to look at the big picture. These players are drafted by a team and have no real choice but to sign with that team. They are forced to stay with said organization often for 9-10 years of their lives. Who says they even really like that team/organization? Especially in Ellsbury's case where they kind of screwed him over before. Players have no reason to be loyal to any team to be honest. And we can't expect them to automatically be like us and love the Red Sox til death. Players are about as loyal to teams as teams are to them, which is probably the way it should work. Besides, if everyone were like Pedroia, he wouldn't be so special.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,924
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 5, 2013 11:01:13 GMT -5
Ken Davidoff ?@kendavidoff 18u I hear the #RedSox's talks with Jacoby Ellsbury didn't get beyond the $80 million (over 5 years) range. I don't do Twitter, and maybe I misunderstand it, but didn't he leave out #ObviousLaughableBullshit?
|
|
|
Post by pokeefe363 on Dec 5, 2013 11:08:31 GMT -5
The one thing I hope this doesn't do is have the Red Sox do a knee-jerk reaction like sign Granderson or Beltran. Neither of those guys is worth giving away a 1st round pick.
|
|
|
Post by Gwell55 on Dec 5, 2013 11:17:10 GMT -5
I may be lower on Ellsbury than most, but I don't blame him for leaving at all considering the money he was offered. Honestly, these media types need to look at the big picture. These players are drafted by a team and have no real choice but to sign with that team. They are forced to stay with said organization often for 9-10 years of their lives. Who says they even really like that team/organization? Especially in Ellsbury's case where they kind of screwed him over before. Players have no reason to be loyal to any team to be honest. There are one or two things most players are predictable about in their desire to stick with winners and not to play for teams that ripped off their personal favorite player when they were young. In that case it should be noted that Jake turned down the Mariners for Griffey slights. It shows in Sherman's Post article that where he stated that the Yanks thought he would go to the Mariners by him being from Oregon, but that wasn't true. It is telling that the Mariners were willing to give Ellsbury a nine-year deal and Ells was uninterested or as MLBTradeRumors puts it "apparently less than enthused about going to Seattle." nypost.com/2013/12/04/how-jacoby-ellsbury-became-a-yankee/
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 5, 2013 12:14:18 GMT -5
I may be lower on Ellsbury than most, but I don't blame him for leaving at all considering the money he was offered. Honestly, these media types need to look at the big picture. These players are drafted by a team and have no real choice but to sign with that team. They are forced to stay with said organization often for 9-10 years of their lives. Who says they even really like that team/organization? Especially in Ellsbury's case where they kind of screwed him over before. Players have no reason to be loyal to any team to be honest. And we can't expect them to automatically be like us and love the Red Sox til death. Players are about as loyal to teams as teams are to them, which is probably the way it should work. Besides, if everyone were like Pedroia, he wouldn't be so special. First off, if ESPN offered to substantially increase Pete Abraham's salary and job security, how ridiculous would it be to call him a "mercenary", or attack his "loyalty" to the Boston Globe, for taking the job? How many people in the world can legitimately say that they're not "mercenaries"? Very few, and I'm certainly not going to condemn anyone for wanting to make a better living off of their talent and their labor. How selfish would that be, to say that you should take less money just so that I can find you more admirable? Now, this is where I'm really going to rant and rave, so buckle up. Obviously any athlete is going to tell you that he loves the team/city he's playing for if asked on the record, but how freaking dumb do you have to be to actually believe that? If you grew up in Boston/New England and your mom took you to a dozen games at Fenway every year, obviously you're going to have a deep attachment to the team, but it's insanely juvenile to expect someone who grew up in Oregon and who plays baseball as a profession to feel even remotely the same way about it. It's like those people I run into who won't ever shut up about how awesome their hometown is, or want to convert me to liking their favorite band, or make me watch whatever dumb movie they think is awesome because they watched it every day when they were 14. Your attachment is personal, New Jersey and Rage Against The Machine and Space Balls aren't really all that special objectively and you're not going to get me as a 29 year old with my own set of experiences to start thinking and feeling about those things the way you do. The whole thing is childish and absurd, and what's worse, I'm pretty sure that all these guys know that it's childish and absurd. But you've gotta play to the dumbest elements of the fanbase to maintain an audience, I guess.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,924
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 5, 2013 14:02:08 GMT -5
Now, this is where I'm really going to rant and rave, so buckle up. Obviously any athlete is going to tell you that he loves the team/city he's playing for if asked on the record, but how freaking dumb do you have to be to actually believe that? I loved the rest of your rap, but I want to chime in that athletes who say that aren't lying or bullshitting, they're just using the word "love" in a completely different sense than the fan sense that you went on to outline. I love the Red Sox. I can't see myself loving any other MLB team like that, ever. We've all had jobs we loved, and could easily see ourselves loving any number of other good jobs. It's "love" as in I love my wife or child, meaning an emotional attachment. As opposed to "love" as in "am completely satisfied with and have no complaint." I have a 55" rear-projection Mistubishi HDTV that I bought in 2000 (yes, before there were any HDTV broadcasts). I adore it. Love it to death. Can't think of anything I've bought that has given me more pleasure. Can't wait to get rid of it and get a 65" 4K Sony.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Dec 5, 2013 16:40:00 GMT -5
See I don't think you can categorize these contracts as bad purely just on performance - pay. You are overpaying for guys for their premium years, which is early in these contract life. A-Rod and Tex might now be bad contracts, but you can give back the 2009 series without them. There is some give and take. There are times teams can, and are more than willing to, give out big contracts because they have a young players who are underpaid. If that is the price of a championship, most big market owners are fine to pay. You may look at Crawford, Gonzo, as bad contracts, and Kemp + Greinke as potentially bad, but Magic will smile and say he thinks he has a top 5 team, which he probably does. In a big market like LA or NY, even Boston you need the fair weather fans. I read this today and I think it makes perfect sense on why the Yankees are overpaying. From the Wall Street Journal. online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303997604579238550215265832?mod=wsj_nview_latestThere big contracts are a cost of doing business. There is the money ball side of making smart choices with your money to maximize your value. Then there is the Yankee way, where they will spend 50M on talent to increase ticket revenue by 100M. There is a lot of marketing and revenue tied to these players that comes back. I don't have the numbers but compare Ellsbury Jersey sales to Nava's. Would the average fan rather buy an Pierzynski jersey knowing he will only be here for a year, or an Ellsbury jersey if he is signed for 7. It's on all the radio shows, promotions, dunken donuts commercials, the big names bring money back. The marketing research they did with Theo for "Sexy" players is true. Ellsbury is the only Red Sox player my girlfriend knows, and we watched them every night (Admit it, dudes got a great ass). In a big market it's not all that much about being smart with your money as much as it is attracting more people. How many cute girls at the gym do you see wearing a #2. There are business factors to consider outside of the $ per War. I honestly believe Ellsbury being a good looking guy played a part in the signing. On a side note, I have 0 animosity to Ellsbury for going to the Yankees, but I really hope it reignites the rivalry. Some of my favorite momements in recent history were the fights the Sox's use to have with the Yankees. Hope Dempster plunks him.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 5, 2013 17:04:18 GMT -5
Wait, what? He finished in the top 10 in the National League in nearly every category. He had an awesome season.
|
|
|
Post by mattpicard on Dec 5, 2013 17:14:38 GMT -5
Wait, what? He finished in the top 10 in the National League in nearly every category. He had an awesome season. Yeah, that's a weird claim. He finished 8th in Cy Young voting, and posted the second best ERA, ERA+, and WHIP of his career. His FIP/xFIP's were a bit higher than in recent years, but still better than his career norms. I also don't think we should forget that he's an absolutely fantastic hitter, winning the Silver Slugger after hitting .328 with a 126 OPS+ and 1.3 oWAR. And hey, it's certainly not his fault Carlos Quintin made him miss a five starts by fracturing his collarbone. Looking at the Dodgers schedule during the time he was out, he missed out on facing some very weak offensive teams.
|
|
|
Post by bighead on Dec 5, 2013 18:27:07 GMT -5
I may be lower on Ellsbury than most, but I don't blame him for leaving at all considering the money he was offered. Honestly, these media types need to look at the big picture. These players are drafted by a team and have no real choice but to sign with that team. They are forced to stay with said organization often for 9-10 years of their lives. Who says they even really like that team/organization? Especially in Ellsbury's case where they kind of screwed him over before. Players have no reason to be loyal to any team to be honest. There are one or two things most players are predictable about in their desire to stick with winners and not to play for teams that ripped off their personal favorite player when they were young. In that case it should be noted that Jake turned down the Mariners for Griffey slights. It shows in Sherman's Post article that where he stated that the Yanks thought he would go to the Mariners by him being from Oregon, but that wasn't true. It is telling that the Mariners were willing to give Ellsbury a nine-year deal and Ells was uninterested or as MLBTradeRumors puts it "apparently less than enthused about going to Seattle." nypost.com/2013/12/04/how-jacoby-ellsbury-became-a-yankee/Call me a skeptic but this mention of the Mariner offer is about as definitive as the weatherman's forecast in Boston.: "The Yankees came to believe the Mariners were offering eight years to Ellsbury with a willingness to go to a ninth. There had been a feeling that Ellsbury would follow that money because he is from Oregon. The Yankees wouldn’t go eight or nine years, but when they indicated to Boras they would exceed Carl Crawford’s deal – seven years at $142 million..." No mention of total dollars or AAV. This is spin to make it sound like the money was NOT the only factor and winning or spotlight or tradition were factors. We already know spotlight was not a factor because there is plenty in Boston. Same for tradition event though it has not always been winning. Plenty of chances to win here too though these days. I'm calling BS there. Then there is also this from Olney: "Based on conversations with executives in the sport, I’d guess the Yankees outbid other serious suitors -- teams that had a legit shot to land Jacoby Ellsbury -- by something in the range of $40 million to $50 million. ...this is the way it had to be if they were going to take the player off the board in early December.." Again, I don't fault the guy for taking the best deal but let's not sugar coat this as a strategic decision. His strategy was to get as much compensation as possible.
|
|
|