A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Smartacus. Show Smartacus's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    Should have gotten a Toyota.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    Dempster is now on the books at 26.5 million. There isn't a team in baseball that would accept that trade value at more than half that amount guaranteed.

    Ummm, Dempster made $14M this year and someone traded for him.

    July desperation causes many a GM to overspend and overpay. You have called so many MLb GMs dumb, I find it hard to think you can't imagine someone trading for Ryan this July- justified or not.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    1) How much did Dempster make last year?

    2) Did he have a good season?

    3) Depreciation?  What are you talking about?  Look at the other free agent signings.  It's called 'appreciation', with an a.

     

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Dempster is now on the books at 26.5 million. There isn't a team in baseball that would accept that trade value at more than half that amount guaranteed. This bum depreciated 50% the moment Cherry drove him off the lot. Even at 33% depreciation, it simply shows that Dempster never had a 26.5 million market in the first place.

    Shane is now on the books at nearly 40 million. There isn't a team in baseball that would agree to pay even half that. There was never any 39 million market for Shane.

    Cherry was bidding against himself, without a doubt. Bluffed on a big scale.

    It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out that there was far superior value and fit than Shane at nearly 40 million, or the 20 million over 4 years that was his real market value.

    As for Dumpster, he is a fit for pitching depth, but his value ends at one year and about 13 million.

    Larry, if you read Softlaw like Most Red Sox management, please note that hiring an accountant will get you better labor acquisition and management value than InEpstein and Cherry.

    [/QUOTE]

    However, unlike cars where the supply matches or exceeds the demand, and therefore value can always be demanded, baseball talent is in short supply.  If a GM tries to do what you suggest (and dont get me wrong, I believe that you understand how to squeeze value in a vacuum), he does not get the player he wants.  Victorino was overpaid because, believe it or not, he had longer, big offers on the table.  The price tag always exceeds the value when the supply does not match the demand.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Dempster is now on the books at 26.5 million. There isn't a team in baseball that would accept that trade value at more than half that amount guaranteed. This bum depreciated 50% the moment Cherry drove him off the lot. Even at 33% depreciation, it simply shows that Dempster never had a 26.5 million market in the first place.

    Shane is now on the books at nearly 40 million. There isn't a team in baseball that would agree to pay even half that. There was never any 39 million market for Shane.

    Cherry was bidding against himself, without a doubt. Bluffed on a big scale.

    It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out that there was far superior value and fit than Shane at nearly 40 million, or the 20 million over 4 years that was his real market value.

    As for Dumpster, he is a fit for pitching depth, but his value ends at one year and about 13 million.

    Larry, if you read Softlaw like Most Red Sox management, please note that hiring an accountant will get you better labor acquisition and management value than InEpstein and Cherry.

    [/QUOTE]

    I dont understand or agree with your accounting of Dempster based on the contracts afforded Sanchez, Jackson and Haren.

    Your assigned value is assuming that Dempster will not pitch to 180-200 innings. Fair enough. But if he does, he will be worth the cost. I dont expect Dempster to be the pitcher he was with the Cubs last year. An arguement could be made that he was the best pitcher in all of baseball for the month of June. But I do expect 200 innings, 12-15 wins, and an era sub 4.00. If Dempster attains that, he is an exceptional value. Factor in his professionalism and willing to share that with players like De La Roas, Webster, Doubrant and Barnes as they come thru, how can you not like this signing for the SOx?  

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    SV is one of 12 OF who has a 20 WAR over the past 4 yrs. BJ Upton is a 12 and got 15 mil for 5 yrs and you say his real value was 20 mil over 4 yrs or 5 mil per yr. you say no team would pay half of the 13 mil the sox gave him. Yet he was traded for last yr when he made 9.5 mil. At 9.5 and BJ got 15 there was absolutely a market value of at least 12 mil. your translation of  economics is so far off base it amazes most.

    if you actually looked at similar pitchers you would see RD was signed for a market value contract. Or would you want Delarosa at 11 m and a 9 era, Kuroda got 15 mil.

    What do you think Lohse wants? I see 17/18 mil per yr.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Ummm, Dempster made $14M this year and someone traded for him.

    Someone traded for less than half that amount and then threw him the dumspter.

    Get back to me when mid thirties career loser NL pitchers like Dempster appreciate.

    [/QUOTE]

    Get back to me when "nobody will trade for CC and his contract", no wait....  Oooops!

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from bt33. Show bt33's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    in the end it's all about how they perform on the field. on paper the sox seemingly overpaid some in almost every spot (though ueahara's contract seems like a good deal), but if the players play well and stay healthy they will likely at least perfrom to or even outperfrom the numbers so a lot of this is predicated on how ell they do/if they stay healthy. I don't think too many people would argue that victorino/dempster/napoli/ross/drew COULDN'T earn their money - it's whether they are likely to do that. some would say not a chance in hell. 

    if you choose to go the FA route you are basically going after players in a certain age range (there are exceptions when players start very young) so there is risk inherent in that. the risk increaes with players who also have past inury issues. the point is also well founded that buying high is probably never a good strategy (though it's still done in business all the time), but it also comes down to the definition of what "high" is. From the perspective of this team, limiting years makes the additional dollars somehwat irrelevant and therefore increases "value" in their mind.

    Also, though we might assume they are overpaying almost everywhere (and it seems like they did), we really do not know what other offers were legitimately out there. are victorino, napoli, drew, dempster all cases of the red sox bidding (ala varitek) against themselves? were these offers a response to the actual marketplace? were they pre-emptive in the sense that they were offering more to fit into their strategy of fewer years? and did those values fit into the model being fluidly established? or is the overall approach/strategy novel enough that its parameters are unknown?

    think it's easier to disagree with the personnel selections and debate overall vision and approach (or a lack there of) than it is argue "value" of specific players in a changing marketplace, simply because if you're not privy to the behind the scenes of what was on the table for individual players, how can you know? i suppose you can begin to gage the marketplace in hindsight by examining comparables and seeing the patterns (and while it changes every season there are established practices) - and so far the signings have indicated a bloated market, but it still gets down to comparing like players and there is always additional debate around that.

    not sure how it will shake out in terms of how you'd compare sox signings to the rest of the MLB signings, but do think these arguments - 1. about overall vision and individual personnel decisions and 2. value in terms of a changing market/total deal dollar amt vs. shorter commitment and higher dollar value - are exactly the same thing. they are intertwined, yes, but it seems a times that people are debating two somewhat different premises at the same time. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    In response to EdithBRTN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Forum Gold Stars will not be given out to those forum posters who were pro-Crawford or con-Crawford until his conract is over with in 2017. Put your egos into mothball storage until that time.

    [/QUOTE]

    softy is the biggest liar on the face of the planet. He knows that I was against the CC signing, but feels better about himself by convincing himself that he was the only one against the deal.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    Carl Crawford – $142M
    Daisuke Matsuzaka – $103.1M
    John Lackey – $82.5M
    J.D. Drew – $70M
    Edgar Renteria – $40M
    Julio Lugo – $36M
    Matt Clement – $25.8M
    Keith Foulke – $20.25M
    Mike Cameron – $15.5M

    Signing FAs is fraught with danger, total rebuild was the way to go.

    Julio Lugo  2002 - 2006    

    games  576     UZR   10      WAR   12.7    OPS    .751  

    2007 -2010  (31 - 34)

    games  410      UZR  - 21     WAR  0.9      OPS  .663

     

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    In response to tom-uk's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Carl Crawford – $142M
    Daisuke Matsuzaka – $103.1M
    John Lackey – $82.5M
    J.D. Drew – $70M
    Edgar Renteria – $40M
    Julio Lugo – $36M
    Matt Clement – $25.8M
    Keith Foulke – $20.25M
    Mike Cameron – $15.5M

    Signing FAs is fraught with danger, total rebuild was the way to go.

    Julio Lugo  2002 - 2006    

    games  576     UZR   10      WAR   12.7    OPS    .751  

    2007 -2010  (31 - 34)

    games  410      UZR  - 21     WAR  0.9      OPS  .663

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    What about Manny? Papi? Ross? Aceves? others?

    I get your point, however, and have said trades were the better route this winter.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Dempster is now on the books at 26.5 million. There isn't a team in baseball that would accept that trade value at more than half that amount guaranteed. This bum depreciated 50% the moment Cherry drove him off the lot. Even at 33% depreciation, it simply shows that Dempster never had a 26.5 million market in the first place.

    Shane is now on the books at nearly 40 million. There isn't a team in baseball that would agree to pay even half that. There was never any 39 million market for Shane.

    Cherry was bidding against himself, without a doubt. Bluffed on a big scale.

    It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out that there was far superior value and fit than Shane at nearly 40 million, or the 20 million over 4 years that was his real market value.

    As for Dumpster, he is a fit for pitching depth, but his value ends at one year and about 13 million.

    Larry, if you read Softlaw like Most Red Sox management, please note that hiring an accountant will get you better labor acquisition and management value than InEpstein and Cherry.

    [/QUOTE]

    I dont understand or agree with your accounting of Dempster based on the contracts afforded Sanchez, Jackson and Haren.

    Your assigned value is assuming that Dempster will not pitch to 180-200 innings. Fair enough. But if he does, he will be worth the cost. I dont expect Dempster to be the pitcher he was with the Cubs last year. An arguement could be made that he was the best pitcher in all of baseball for the month of June. But I do expect 200 innings, 12-15 wins, and an era sub 4.00. If Dempster attains that, he is an exceptional value. Factor in his professionalism and willing to share that with players like De La Roas, Webster, Doubrant and Barnes as they come thru, how can you not like this signing for the SOx?  

    [/QUOTE]

    Dempster had 12-15 wins 5 times in his 15 year career, all, i might add, in the light-hitting NL. He owns a career 1.44 WHIP.
    He went 7-3 for Texas, albeit with a 5.09 ERA and 25 BBs in 69 IPs. Prorated over 200 IPs, that 72 BBs and a recipe for disaster.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

     


    What about Manny?   29 yo  future HOF in 2000,  1999 
    OPS   1.154   (like Sabathia (28) he was a young (for  a FA) superstar who never had a bad year entering FA).  If Verlander had been a 28 or 29 yo FA I'd have opened the vault.

    Papi?  released by the twins 

    Ross?  Like Beltre  one year deal

    Aceves?   $1.85 for 2 years FA at 28yo  arb '13  '14

     



     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Ummm, Dempster made $14M this year and someone traded for him.

    Someone traded for less than half that amount and then threw him the dumspter.

    Get back to me when mid thirties career loser NL pitchers like Dempster appreciate.

    [/QUOTE]

    Texas not only willingly paid his salry, they liked the guy so much, they traded away a top-100 prospect for him.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Joebreidey. Show Joebreidey's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    In response to Alibiike's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Dempster is now on the books at 26.5 million. There isn't a team in baseball that would accept that trade value at more than half that amount guaranteed. This bum depreciated 50% the moment Cherry drove him off the lot. Even at 33% depreciation, it simply shows that Dempster never had a 26.5 million market in the first place.

    Shane is now on the books at nearly 40 million. There isn't a team in baseball that would agree to pay even half that. There was never any 39 million market for Shane.

    Cherry was bidding against himself, without a doubt. Bluffed on a big scale.

    It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out that there was far superior value and fit than Shane at nearly 40 million, or the 20 million over 4 years that was his real market value.

    As for Dumpster, he is a fit for pitching depth, but his value ends at one year and about 13 million.

    Larry, if you read Softlaw like Most Red Sox management, please note that hiring an accountant will get you better labor acquisition and management value than InEpstein and Cherry.

    [/QUOTE]

    I dont understand or agree with your accounting of Dempster based on the contracts afforded Sanchez, Jackson and Haren.

    Your assigned value is assuming that Dempster will not pitch to 180-200 innings. Fair enough. But if he does, he will be worth the cost. I dont expect Dempster to be the pitcher he was with the Cubs last year. An arguement could be made that he was the best pitcher in all of baseball for the month of June. But I do expect 200 innings, 12-15 wins, and an era sub 4.00. If Dempster attains that, he is an exceptional value. Factor in his professionalism and willing to share that with players like De La Roas, Webster, Doubrant and Barnes as they come thru, how can you not like this signing for the SOx?  

    [/QUOTE]

    Dempster had 12-15 wins 5 times in his 15 year career, all, i might add, in the light-hitting NL. He owns a career 1.44 WHIP.
    He went 7-3 for Texas, albeit with a 5.09 ERA and 25 BBs in 69 IPs. Prorated over 200 IPs, that 72 BBs and a recipe for disaster.

    [/QUOTE]

    He's had 9 seasons where he had 9 seasons where he had 25 starts or more.  In those 9 seaosn, he's went 111-92.  Trying to add his rookie year, and the years he was a closer, as if they should be treated as if he was a starter, is feeble.  It makes it seem like you are grasping for straws.  Even your 1.44 Whip is incorrect, and all you had to do was to copy and paste.

    I didn't even care for the signing, but if my hobby was bashing all things Red Sox, I would try to be more logical.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    In response to EdithBRTN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Dempster had 12-15 wins 5 times in his 15 year career, all, i might add, in the light-hitting NL. He owns a career 1.44 WHIP.
    He went 7-3 for Texas, albeit with a 5.09 ERA and 25 BBs in 69 IPs. Prorated over 200 IPs, that 72 BBs and a recipe for disaster.

    Why did you "cherry pick" the split with Texas and forget about his stats with Chicago? His ERA for the year was 3.38. It looks like you have an agenda.

    [/QUOTE]

    Or cherry pick the W-L record at 200IP.

    21-9 is not bad.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: A Better Understanding of Value: Depreciation

    In response to Softlaw1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Texas not only willingly paid his salry, they liked the guy so much, they traded away a top-100 prospect for him.

    No, Joe, they reluctantly paid the small fraction left on his "salary". They sent a farm scrap that no one will ever here of, ever.

    And Moonshlep, you were so against Crawbust that you attempted to humor yourself with Boomerang in the infamous "Crawbury" circle jerk. Needless to say, Softlaw always gets the last laugh.

    [/QUOTE]


    No, actually we do...Some of your stuff really is laughable.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share