Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from can-you-dig-it. Show can-you-dig-it's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    our sox have won more world series than any other team the past 10 years so I would say the contracts are working out greatly.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from --The--Babe---. Show --The--Babe---'s posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    I love how it says for dice k with and without the 51M. Ummm...I know the members of the rfn like to act like it doesn't count, but it does.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    What's the moral of this story?

    Theo has lots of John Henry's money to spend and can therefore make a higher percentage of bad signings than the poor sucker who is GM in Minnesota or Toronto. The good news is he actually made enough good signings to keep the team selling tickets and repaying Henry in the most important way ( to them, of course) by making lots of money off the millions of bandwagon jumpers buying licenced merchandise and otherwise helping the Red Sox corporation become Red Sox Nation and get dues money and charge crazy prices for monster seats and food...also helped by Jerry Remy and his super salesmanship on air.

    In short: Epstein has done a commendable job but he's backed by a group with money to burn, his mistakes don't hurt as bad as they would if the Sox had a shoestring budget. I like him ,but let's not get too carried away. He's got some good people working for him, and he's in a position where small failures can be swept under the rug and life can continue.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from NUSoxFan. Show NUSoxFan's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    I love how it says for dice k with and without the 51M. Ummm...I know the members of the rfn like to act like it doesn't count, but it does.
    Posted by --The--Babe---

    It counts and it doesn't. It counts because the Sox paid that money, it doesn't count because that money was never included in the Red Sox's yearly payroll and therefore never made an impact on other signings.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from --The--Babe---. Show --The--Babe---'s posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out? : It counts and it doesn't. It counts because the Sox paid that money, it doesn't count because that money was never included in the Red Sox's yearly payroll and therefore never made an impact on other signings.

    Posted by NUSoxFan

    It certainly does impact other signings, it just doesn't count against the cap.

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

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out? : It certainly does impact other signings, it just doesn't count against the cap.
    Posted by --The--Babe---

    Looking at the signings he made after it, it certainly doesn't appear like it did.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    The author was bent on making a point IMO while trying to appear using a systematic measurement. I say this because he skipped the non-tender signing of Ortiz, Millar as a FA, the first Beckett extension and the most recent Buchholz extension. Or lesser transactions like Nick Green and Mark Bellhorn? Of course those balance the math.

    As far as Foulke goes would anybody not have spent $18.75M to win the first WS their franchise won in 86 years if they knew that the guy would be over used in the first post season and mess with the Fangraphs WAR valuations?

    All and all a guy trying to make a point while trying to appear to be objective.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from fancy-shamanski. Show fancy-shamanski's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    WAR is the biggest joke of a stat, anybody that takes WAR seriously losses a lot of credibility.  I don't think you have any real ability to evaluate players.
    David wells WAR +7.6.  while Timlins was 3.1?????? Are you serious Wells was not good player and did little to help the sox win a WS, his era was 4.45 in '06 (that's just too high) and then 4.98.  He offered little to this team, while timlin was the cornerstone of the bullpen.  If you think wells was a better signing or better player than timlin you are crazy. 
    Foulke was another essential player, especially important in 04.  He was injured after 04, but to say his value was equal to that of clements, really shows how stupid WAR is and thus its fsupporters.

    IF you support WAR you have no credibility.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    by Bob Zupcic/OverThe Monster In November of 2002, Theo Nathan Epstein was named as the General Manager of the www.sbnation.com/mlb/teams/boston-red-sox " class="sbn-auto-link" /> Boston Red Sox and became the youngest GM in history at that time. Eight plus years and 2 World Series trophies later, the 2011 Red Sox are battling for the playoffs in large part due to the maneuverings of Mr. Epstein. As the GM you have basically three ways to improve your squad and make sure that it is competitive each year: (a) Amateur Draft (b) Trades (c) Free Agency/Extensions In this post I will look at Epstein's Multi-Year Free Agent signings & Extensions. For contracts that have expired I'm using Fangraphs WAR and equivalent win earnings to get an idea of the value added by the player. I want to make the caveat here that by no means is this a tried and true method for evaluating value but its the best I have so here goes. For contracts that are on-going I'm using an equivalent methodology for contracts (since about 1/3 of the 2011 seasons has been played then I'm using 1/3 of equivalent value for that year) List after the jump chronologically and with comments:  Mendoza, Ramiro (2002) 2 years, 6.5 million: Nothing like jumping in and snagging one from your heated rivals to jump start your GM career. Unfortunately this one didn't work out as planned. Mendoza earned 0.4 WAR and 1.3 Million equivalent dollars making this deal worth: - 5.20 million Mueller, Bill (2003) 3 years, 6.7 million: The journeyman infielder from the www.sbnation.com/mlb/teams/san-francisco-giants " class="sbn-auto-link"> Giants was brought in to stabilize the Sox infield in 2004. Mueller became the type of player that Theo was looking for - good on-base skills, good/decent glove and fairly cheap. This one turned out quite rosy with the whole 2004 Curse thingy and Mueller playig huge roles all season. Mueller earned 9.5 WAR/29.3 Million equivalent dollars: +22.6 Million Timlin, Mike (2003) 4 years, 11.1 Million: Any GM that signed a non-closing reliever to A 4 year deal these days would be shot on site, but Theo took a chance on Timlin and it seemed to pay off. Mike was fairly critical in both World Series seasons had some stellar years. Timlin earned 4.1 WAR/14.1 Million: +3.1 Million Foulke, Keith (2004) 3 years, 18.75 Million: The Sox closer situation was pretty unclear heading into the 2004 season. Foulke was brought in to remedy that problem and he did, saving 32 games and pitching lights-out in the post-season. The problems came in 05 and 06 (the second and third years of the deal) when Foulke just kinda sucked. Foulke earned 2.2 WAR/6.8 Million: -11.95 Million Clement, Matt (2004) 3 years, 25.83 Million: Pedro left the club after the 2004 WS and the Sox went out and brought in Clement. Up to that point Clement had had some interesting but not exactly dominant seasons with the www.sbnation.com/mlb/teams/chicago-cubs " class="sbn-auto-link"> Cubs . His arm then decided to fall off and he amassed a total of 1+ seasons for the Sox. Clement earned 4.3 WAR/14.6 Million: -11.23 Million Wells, David (2004) 2 years, 8.15 Million: Wells was also brought in to ease the loss of Pedro and while he was not typically liked in Boston, he actually managed to earn his money. Wells pitched the entire 2005 season then was traded to the www.sbnation.com/mlb/teams/san-diego-padres " class="sbn-auto-link"> Padres in August of 2006 for www.sbnation.com/mlb/players/31324/george-kottaras " class="sbn-auto-link"> George Kottaras . Using an equivalent payout of 7.5 Million, Wells earned 4.5 WAR/15.1 Million: +7.60 Million (+ George Kottaras) Renteria, Edgar (2004) 4 years 40 Million:   The much publicized SS position was supposed to be fixed with the 4 year deal to Renteria who was coming off some solid seasons with both FL and STL. Come to find out Edgar could not handle Boston and was subsequently traded to Atlanta for www.sbnation.com/mlb/players/116/andy-marte " class="sbn-auto-link"> Andy Marte and cash. The Sox were on the hook for 19 Million of the deal and Edgar earned 1.8 WAR/6.1 Million: -12.90 Million ( + Andy Marte) Schilling, Curt (2004) 4 years 50.5 Million: Schilling, who came over in a trade with Arizona was extended to be the de-facto ace of the staff. Bloody Sock and all Schilling earned 17.8 WAR/61.6 Million. +11.1 Million Cora, Alex (2006) 2 years 4 Million: Not many multi-year deals go to utility infielders, but Cora got one. Cora earned 1.1 WAR/4.5 Million: +0.5 Million Tavarez, Julian (2006) 3 years, 10.55 Million: Tavarez brought his ugly mug to Boston on a 3 year deal for a guy who could both start and relieve. He ended up being outright released in May of 2008 but earned 2.3 WAR/9.4 Million.       -1.15 Million. Lugo, Julio (2006) 4 years 36 Million: Lugo was brought in to solidify the SS position that had been a revolving door since Nomar was traded. He ended up sucking pretty bad and the Sox ended up eating a good bit of his contract. He earned 1 WAR/4.2 Million. -31.40 Million Matsuzaka, Daisuke (2006) 6 years, 52 Million (plus 51 Million for negotiating rights): Dice's plight is very well known around these parts and since he's likely done for the span of this contract I went ahead and made the assumption that he does not earn any more value on his deal. Overall then he earned 10.4 WAR/44 Milllion. -8 Million w/o the 51 and -59 Million with it.   Okajima, Hideki (2006) 2 years, 2.5 Million: The other Japanese righty brought over prior to 2007 was Okajima, a 30-year old reliever with a funky delivery. He earned 2.6 WAR/11.2 Million. +8.70 Million NOTE: The remainder of the contracts below are still on-going thus the valuation of the deal at the time of this posting (~1/3 of 2011) was used for comparison. So the valuation is whatever the club has paid up to 2011 and a 1/3 value of their 2011 salary. Ortiz, David (2006) 5 years 64.5 Million: When his option was picked up last year is gave Ortiz another year to prove himself in a Sox uniform. His contract valuation at this point is 56.5 Million and he has earned 13.3 WAR/55.4 Million. -1.10 Million (but well on his way to getting in the positive) Drew, JD (2007) 5 years 70 Million: Theo's largest contract to date was Drew's 70 million. The topic of numerous rants, fanposts and discussion here at OTM, Drew has contract valuation at 60 Million and has earned 13.6 WAR/59 Million. -1.00 Million Youkilis, Kevin (2008) 4 years, 41.13 Million: The 2008 off-season saw Theo lock up his core of young players with Youkilis the eldest. Youk's valuation is 19.63 Million and he has earned 12.2 WAR/52.4 Million. +32.77 Million (Note that Youk has already earned more than his 4 year contract) Lester, Jon (2008) 5 years 30 Million: This deal was a complete steal as Lester has a contract valuation of 6.67 Million and has earned 12.8/55 Million. +48.33 Million (again Lester has already more than valuated his contract) Pedroia, Dustin (2008) 6 years 40.5 Million: The third of the core signed in 2008 Pedroia has a valuation of 6.83 Million and has earned 10.3 WAR/44.8 Million. +37.97 Million Scutaro, Marco (2009) 2 years 12.5 Million: Brought in to fill the SS position once again, Scutaro has contract valuation at 6.67 Million and has earned 2.8 WAR/11.4 Million. +4.73 Million (looks like he'll come in right at value) Lackey, John (2009) 5 years 82.5 Million: Theo picked up Lackey from the FA market in 2009 and signed him to a pretty lengthy and large deal for a 30 year old coming off of an injury. Remains to be seen how bad this one will be. Lackey's valuation is 23.08 Million and he has earned 3.9 WAR/15.5 Million. -7.58 Million. Cameron, Mike (2009) 2 years 15.5 Million: Cameron got quite a bit of money for a 4th outfielder but I'm guessing Theo saw him as more of a starter in CF at the time. Cameron has shown pretty much nothing so far - his valuation is 9.67 Million and he has earned -0.5 WAR/-2.3 Million. -11.97 Million (perhaps Cameron should pay the club back) Beckett, Josh (2010) 4 years 68 Million: After 2010 this one looked like it might be very bad, but Beckett has had a nice bounce back so far in 2011. Valuation is 5.25 Million and he has earned 2.1 WAR/9.5 Million. +4.25 Million Crawford, Carl (2010) 7 years 142 Million: Theo opened up the wallet to get Crawford and while much has been made of his poor starter in Boston, only time will tell on this one. Valuation 6.67 Million. Crawford has earned 0.3 WAR/1.2 Million. -5.47 Million . Jenks, Bobby (2010) 2 years 12 Million: Case for why not to sign relievers to multi-year deals. Jenks is valuated at 2 Million and has earned 0.2 WAR/0.9 Million. -1.1 Million Gonzalez, Adrian (2010) 8 Years 159.5 Million (including 2011 in his extension package): Big bucks here but Gonzalez has already shown that he is one of the top hitters in the league and a solid defender. Valuation 3.83 Million. He has earned 2.4 WAR/10.9 Million. +7.07 Million Overall, including current player valuations, the contract values come to 511.08 Million. Players have earned 534.70 Million giving an overage of +23.62 Million. While Theo has had a few stinkers (Renteria, Clement, Lugo, Dice) and has the potential for more (Lackey, Cameron, Jenks). The extreme value gained from signing younger players early and a few solid signings (Schiling, Mueller, Timlin, etc.) has allowed the overall mark to come up positive. 
    Posted by DPapiOrtiz


    You may not notice it as much with teams who are less fortunate because they don't have money to burn like the Sox and Yanks but those who are all make similar moves.  Some good and some bad but when the day is done here in Boston, Theo has done a pretty good job making it both interesting and exciting for us again.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from NUSoxFan. Show NUSoxFan's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    WAR is the biggest joke of a stat, anybody that takes WAR seriously losses a lot of credibility.  I don't think you have any real ability to evaluate players. David wells WAR +7.6.  while Timlins was 3.1?????? Are you serious Wells was not good player and did little to help the sox win a WS, his era was 4.45 in '06 (that's just too high) and then 4.98.  He offered little to this team, while timlin was the cornerstone of the bullpen.  If you think wells was a better signing or better player than timlin you are crazy.  Foulke was another essential player, especially important in 04.  He was injured after 04, but to say his value was equal to that of clements, really shows how stupid WAR is and thus its fsupporters. IF you support WAR you have no credibility.
    Posted by fancy-shamanski

    Of course Timlin had a Lesser WAR, Starters are always more important than relievers and will always affect the overall record to a greater degree.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    Well here's where WAR breaks down. I know one is a DH and the other is RF who is very good defensively BUT you could talk me until you were blue in the face and not convince me that David Ortiz at 56.5M for 5 years was paid 1.10M over his value and Drew who was paid $70M for 5 years was only paid $1.0M over value. Flawed calculation IMO. I could go on about defensive metrics in general and how subjective the basis for creating UZR is (as I understand it) but let's just say you asked any 2 GMs if they rather have Ortiz for 5 year at $56.5 or JD for 5 at $70M, almost all would take the DH and find a RF elsewhere.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter1. Show parhunter1's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    Yes, Matt Clement turned out to be a bad signing, though he looked worth it for half a season before taking one to the face.  But Clement was the consolation prize after Pavano signed with the Yankees.  How'd that one work out for Cashman?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

     I remember Clement having a great year until he took one in the melon in TB..never the same after that..Ilike stats and numbers, but I have a hard time relying on UZR and some other "new metrics" of baseball..Papi has been a great value but because hes a DH he gets rated lower?? Hes been the same value as Drew? sorry, dont agree..
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    I love how it says for dice k with and without the 51M. Ummm...I know the members of the rfn like to act like it doesn't count, but it does.
    Posted by --The--Babe---

    How does it count? It would be llike saying Gonzalez's real cost is X dollar + Rizzo and Kelly.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    Well here's where WAR breaks down. I know one is a DH and the other is RF who is very good defensively BUT you could talk me until you were blue in the face and not convince me that David Ortiz at 56.5M for 5 years was paid 1.10M over his value and Drew who was paid $70M for 5 years was only paid $1.0M over value. Flawed calculation IMO. I could go on about defensive metrics in general and how subjective the basis for creating UZR is (as I understand it) but let's just say you asked any 2 GMs if they rather have Ortiz for 5 year at $56.5 or JD for 5 at $70M, almost all would take the DH and find a RF elsewhere.
    Posted by fivekatz


    I've been fighting this battle ever since WAR/UZR became the new popular stats. I'm surprised Moonslav, who's posts are often good, hasn't come to their defense yet. Everything, well, almost everything about both stats are completely arbitrary.

    For WAR...who decides what a replacement player is worth? How do you figure what any single player is worth in terms of wins in such a team oriented game as baseball? Is a replacement player on the Sox the same as a replacement player on the Pirates?

    And UZR? OH my god, let's draw a completely arbitrary circle around what someone has decided is the territory a fielder SHOULD cover. What?!

    I know baseball is a staticians dream game...but there's already enough stats to pour over, no need to try and create something new...ever heard of reinventing the whell? People could figure out who was good, and who was not for 100 years without this nonsense. Or, the popular acronym KISS found throughout the working world - Keep It Simple Stupid.

    It's really insulting to fans to hear Epstein try and say Drew was worth "a tick more than his salary" last year according to their metrics. Basically, he's saying he's smarter than everyone else, we just don't get it. And really, his metrics have done him no more favors than anyone else, in fact, there have been 4 signings which were Epstein's favorites, again, according to THIER metrics, they were Lugo, Renteria, Drew and Crawford. Epstein lusted for, an went out and extended himself for each beyoond what most fans thought was reasonablem akk 4 were guven contracts that most view as overpay because he wanted to be sure and get them. Well, 2 were collosal flops. One was a great disappointment...and we'll see about Crawford. That's what all those extended metrics get you.

    Maybe they help when evaluating college talent better, which the Sox HAVE nailed.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

      BEING A   G M IS A LOT LIKE THE GAME OF GOLF ......  "NEVER UP, NEVER IN" !!!   I THINK THAT THEO & COMPANY HAS DONE ONE HECK OF A JOB.... YES, A LOT OF GOOD MOVES AND A FEW NOT SO GOOD MOVES !!   2 BEST MOVES......  1/ DUMPING NOMAR (CRY-BABY) THE TENT MAN & 2/ SENDING THE "DESPICABLE-MAN-CHILD-FRAUD-QUITTER-JUICER-S*IT-BUM" OUT TO MANNY-WOOD WHICH BEGAN THE CLEANSING PROCESS OF THE FRANCHISE !!!   WHAT SAY YOU, SPORT ????
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from NUSoxFan. Show NUSoxFan's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    Well here's where WAR breaks down. I know one is a DH and the other is RF who is very good defensively BUT you could talk me until you were blue in the face and not convince me that David Ortiz at 56.5M for 5 years was paid 1.10M over his value and Drew who was paid $70M for 5 years was only paid $1.0M over value. Flawed calculation IMO. I could go on about defensive metrics in general and how subjective the basis for creating UZR is (as I understand it) but let's just say you asked any 2 GMs if they rather have Ortiz for 5 year at $56.5 or JD for 5 at $70M, almost all would take the DH and find a RF elsewhere.
    Posted by fivekatz


    The real problem here is you aren't comparing apples to apples. If the GM was going for an improvement of their team overall, right then and there, they should go for JD. If they're looking to improve their offense, because they have an average right fielder, Ortiz should be the choice. With WAR you're suppose to compare the position to the position, which is why you don't compare relievers to starters.

    Also yes, Ortiz is barely worth the 50 million. By paying Ortiz that much money per year, you are counting on him to hit the 30 home runs, and 100RBIs, because without that, Ortiz doesn't contribute to helping your team. Gonzo can have an 0-4 night, and still maybe scoop a throw out to save an error for your team, contributing in some way. Everytime Ortiz has an 0-fer he's contributed literally nothing, making his WAR lower than a 1st baseman, because he's a DH.

    That doesn't change the fact that Ortiz is the best DH in the league. The Sox can afford to pay a premium price to make sure they have the best DH in the league. But a lower market team cannot, he isn't worth that much to them, because he cannot field a position. WAR can only compare apples to apples. Ortiz is the best DH in the league he has the highest WAR to back that up (at least last time I checked). J.D. wasn't the best right fielder in the league, but his WAR was higher than Ortiz's at several times, because he's playing a more valuble position.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from pinstripezac32. Show pinstripezac32's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
      BEING A   G M IS A LOT LIKE THE GAME OF GOLF ......  "NEVER UP, NEVER IN" !!!   I THINK THAT THEO & COMPANY HAS DONE ONE HECK OF A JOB.... YES, A LOT OF GOOD MOVES AND A FEW NOT SO GOOD MOVES !!   2 BEST MOVES......  1/ DUMPING NOMAR (CRY-BABY) THE TENT MAN & 2/ SENDING THE "DESPICABLE-MAN-CHILD-FRAUD-QUITTER-JUICER-S*IT-BUM" OUT TO MANNY-WOOD WHICH BEGAN THE CLEANSING PROCESS OF THE FRANCHISE !!!   WHAT SAY YOU, SPORT ????
    Posted by Bill-806




    I THINK THAT THEO & COMPANY HAS DONE ONE HECK OF A JOB.... YES, A LOT OF GOOD MOVES AND A FEW NOT SO GOOD MOVES !!


    agreed, but how can you give him any credit for this move


      2 BEST MOVES......  1/ DUMPING NOMAR (CRY-BABY) THE TENT MAN


    a) he had little choice

    b) he was so very lucky nomar turned down that 4 yr offer

    what would have happened if he had said yes


    he also had little choice with finally getting rid of manny

    but i give him credit for somehow getting JBay in return
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out? : I've been fighting this battle ever since WAR/UZR became the new popular stats. I'm surprised Moonslav, who's posts are often good, hasn't come to their defense yet. Everything, well, almost everything about both stats are completely arbitrary. For WAR...who decides what a replacement player is worth? How do you figure what any single player is worth in terms of wins in such a team oriented game as baseball? Is a replacement player on the Sox the same as a replacement player on the Pirates? And UZR? OH my god, let's draw a completely arbitrary circle around what someone has decided is the territory a fielder SHOULD cover. What?! I know baseball is a staticians dream game...but there's already enough stats to pour over, no need to try and create something new...ever heard of reinventing the whell? People could figure out who was good, and who was not for 100 years without this nonsense. Or, the popular acronym KISS found throughout the working world - Keep It Simple Stupid. It's really insulting to fans to hear Epstein try and say Drew was worth "a tick more than his salary" last year according to their metrics. Basically, he's saying he's smarter than everyone else, we just don't get it. And really, his metrics have done him no more favors than anyone else, in fact, there have been 4 signings which were Epstein's favorites, again, according to THIER metrics, they were Lugo, Renteria, Drew and Crawford. Epstein lusted for, an went out and extended himself for each beyoond what most fans thought was reasonablem akk 4 were guven contracts that most view as overpay because he wanted to be sure and get them. Well, 2 were collosal flops. One was a great disappointment...and we'll see about Crawford. That's what all those extended metrics get you. Maybe they help when evaluating college talent better, which the Sox HAVE nailed.
    Posted by ma6dragon9


    I  agree but would like to add some at the end...I dont think anyone knew Renteria would flop here..numbers say different..But thats where u have to throw numbers away and make sure this kid has the mental makeup to handle an environment like Boston..Numbers cant do that..That turned into a bad signing, but at the start it looked real good..Lugo was a tool and everyone but Theo saw it..Quick Lugo story..My friend was at a wedding of one of the long time security guys at fenway..Lots of fenway staff was there including Theo. She said when Theo came to the table and was talking to here date (another long time security gaurd) he said.."Alright, I gotta get outta here and take care of this Lugo s**t"..next day Lugo was gone...Pretty funny..
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out? : The real problem here is you aren't comparing apples to apples. If the GM was going for an improvement of their team overall, right then and there, they should go for JD. If they're looking to improve their offense, because they have an average right fielder, Ortiz should be the choice. With WAR you're suppose to compare the position to the position, which is why you don't compare relievers to starters. Also yes, Ortiz is barely worth the 50 million. By paying Ortiz that much money per year, you are counting on him to hit the 30 home runs, and 100RBIs, because without that, Ortiz doesn't contribute to helping your team. Gonzo can have an 0-4 night, and still maybe scoop a throw out to save an error for your team, contributing in some way. Everytime Ortiz has an 0-fer he's contributed literally nothing, making his WAR lower than a 1st baseman, because he's a DH. That doesn't change the fact that Ortiz is the best DH in the league. The Sox can afford to pay a premium price to make sure they have the best DH in the league. But a lower market team cannot, he isn't worth that much to them, because he cannot field a position. WAR can only compare apples to apples. Ortiz is the best DH in the league he has the highest WAR to back that up (at least last time I checked). J.D. wasn't the best right fielder in the league, but his WAR was higher than Ortiz's at several times, because he's playing a more valuble position.
    Posted by NUSoxFan


    Disagree. Simply looking at an 0-4 and assuming he provided literally nothing is shortsighted. What if he makes the pitcher throw, say, 25-30 pitches in those at bats, and helps lead to an early exit getting into a weaker bullpen? Or say, in a tied game, he rolls a pitch to second, advancing a runner ot third, who eventually scores the winning run? Or because he's there, the pitcher more agressively goes after the hitter in front of him, providing more fastballs, leading to a HR because the pitcher was trying to get out of the inning wihtout havig to face him? Or he forces the opposing manager to use his lefty specialist in the 6th to get out of a jam, not having him for an equally important spot in the 7th that blows up?

    It's never apples to apples in baseball. It's fruit salad to fruit salad; some has more oranges, others more grapes, still others more apples, and some lack any strawberries, but it's all fruit salad.

    The Sox, at times, have outsmarted themselves trying to project a player do something totally different in Fenway than they've ever done before because it's here now. That is rarely the case. Gonzalez isn't even doing anything different, just balls that would be in play in Petco are off or over the wall in Fenway, and we're talking two extremes in terms of ballparks, everyone saw this coming. Only the Sox did with a few others, and they've usually been wrong.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    WAR is the biggest joke of a stat, anybody that takes WAR seriously losses a lot of credibility.  I don't think you have any real ability to evaluate players.
    David wells WAR +7.6.  while Timlins was 3.1?????? Are you serious Wells was not good player and did little to help the sox win a WS, his era was 4.45 in '06 (that's just too high) and then 4.98.  He offered little to this team, while timlin was the cornerstone of the bullpen.  If you think wells was a better signing or better player than timlin you are crazy. 
    Foulke was another essential player, especially important in 04.  He was injured after 04, but to say his value was equal to that of clements, really shows how stupid WAR is and thus its fsupporters.

    Anybody who uses just ERA to judge a pitcher loses credibility.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    I've been fighting this battle ever since WAR/UZR became the new popular stats. I'm surprised Moonslav, who's posts are often good, hasn't come to their defense yet. Everything, well, almost everything about both stats are completely arbitrary.

    I rarely use WAR as a measuring stick but to say it iscompletely arbitrary is short-sighted. It is a metric that tries to includ many aspects of the game, not just one. It has serious flaws, but so do the people who want to use just BA, or OPS or Fldg % to make definitive judgements.

    For WAR...who decides what a replacement player is worth? How do you figure what any single player is worth in terms of wins in such a team oriented game as baseball? Is a replacement player on the Sox the same as a replacement player on the Pirates?

    It sounds like you don't even understand how WAR works, yet you bash it.

    And UZR? OH my god, let's draw a completely arbitrary circle around what someone has decided is the territory a fielder SHOULD cover. What?!

    And fielding percentage is based on one persons "completely arbitrary" judgemet call on what is an error or not. Range factor mean nothing to you. You'd rather have a SS make no errors and 200 plays a season, than one who makes 20 errors, but makes 400 plays a season.

    UZR also has serious flaws and is often used wrongly by posters on this site. I'll take a 3 year UZR rating over the 3 year Fldg% stat everyday of the week to decide who is a better fielder.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from midnight. Show midnight's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    I'll take a 3 year UZR rating over the 3 year Fldg% stat everyday of the week to decide who is a better fielder.
    Posted by moonslav59


    The problem with UZR is how arbitrary it really is.  Ellsbury is no where near as bad as UZR tries to make him out to be.  And other well rated players are no where near as good.  I could go on and on about the issues with UZR.  But then again I could go on and on about the flaws in WAR.  
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?

    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out?:
    In Response to Re: Multi-Year Contracts of the Epstein Age -How did they work out? : The real problem here is you aren't comparing apples to apples. If the GM was going for an improvement of their team overall, right then and there, they should go for JD. If they're looking to improve their offense, because they have an average right fielder, Ortiz should be the choice. With WAR you're suppose to compare the position to the position, which is why you don't compare relievers to starters. Also yes, Ortiz is barely worth the 50 million. By paying Ortiz that much money per year, you are counting on him to hit the 30 home runs, and 100RBIs, because without that, Ortiz doesn't contribute to helping your team. Gonzo can have an 0-4 night, and still maybe scoop a throw out to save an error for your team, contributing in some way. Everytime Ortiz has an 0-fer he's contributed literally nothing, making his WAR lower than a 1st baseman, because he's a DH. That doesn't change the fact that Ortiz is the best DH in the league. The Sox can afford to pay a premium price to make sure they have the best DH in the league. But a lower market team cannot, he isn't worth that much to them, because he cannot field a position. WAR can only compare apples to apples. Ortiz is the best DH in the league he has the highest WAR to back that up (at least last time I checked). J.D. wasn't the best right fielder in the league, but his WAR was higher than Ortiz's at several times, because he's playing a more valuble position.
    Posted by NUSoxFan
    I intellectually understand your points and they aren't without merit.

    But it is RF not SS. Yes it is an important RF because Fenway Park is Drew's home park but it is RF. There are games where Drew's abilities relative to any other RF won't even come into play. There aren't games where he and Ortiz will come to the plate 3-5 times. In 162 games even not wearing a glove Ortiz will impact more games than Drew and would be harder to replace with a league average guy. And frankly 2011 will slant the values of those two contracts and Orftiz will have earned every penny and Drew will be one year of wild over payment and at least one year (2010) of modest over payment. And at no time was Drew a bargain value. 

    I often have defended Drew based on the RS needs at the time he signed, his defense and his high OBP. I can only explain his lack of run production by saying that if SABR guys are right and RBI is a matter of luck, Drew is a historically unlucky guy.

    WAR is an interesting metric, I don't find its existence a problem but I just personally have issue with it as an absolute measurement, it is a rough estimation at best. And in part because it contains UZR which is a subjective exercise masquerading as a precise mathematical fact. Stats are an awesome part of baseball, the ability to forecast probability and measure performance over time is better served in baseball than any other sport probably. But to some extent our eyes, our experience and judgment become the best way to access performance with stats validating where they can those observations IMO.

    I certainly understand the other side of the argument.

    Just my takes

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share