A-Rod or Cabrera?
I'm kind of surprised about how little discussion there's been here of A-Rod's soon-to-be-signed contract - 10 years/$275 million. I find this particularly strange in light of all the discussion about Rolen's availability via trade. The re-signing of A-Rod will take 1 3B off the market and 1 team who needs a 3B out of the running for one. That leaves the Dodgers, the Angels, the Red Sox, Braves, Phils, the Twins maybe. Who else? The Sox'll probably re-sign Lowell unless one of the others panics at losing the opportunity to bring A-Rod westward and throws a mountain of money at him.
Is anyone more likely to panic now and trade for Rolen? I doubt it but it does increase the price in the trade market for Miguel Cabrera. The news on A-Rod somewhat spoiled my idea for today's post but I'm going to go ahead anyway. A-Rod's contract is huge - much higher than the 2nd highest contract in baseball. We don't yet know the details but we do know the framework has been set for a 10 year contract that will average $27.5 million per season. Interestingly, Pujols made $15M last year and will make $16M in '08. So A-Rod's contract will earn him 72% more money than Pujols will make next year. He'll be under contract until he's 42 years old - the age Barry Bonds was when the '07 season started.
We could see this coming. We all knew that A-Rod was going to get at least 8 years and at least $200 M. To me, this contract isn't surprising at all. But it's still a huge chunk of money. Some have made the argument that he's worth it and the Cards should've found a way to make it work. Wouldn't A-Rod and Albert be great in the lineup together for the next 10 years? Of course they would but Albert's contract expires after 2011 - the Cards have an option they'll almost certainly exercise if Albert continues to stay healthy and produce and then he'll earn an A-Rodian payday. The Cards surely couldn't afford 2 $25-30 M players at once.
Others will say A-Rod's not worth it - no player is. Setting aside all the "he chokes in the postseason stuff", the primary argument would be that most teams can't spend a 20-25% of their payroll on 1 player and expect to remain competitive. The Yankees could do it b/c they're the Yankees but other teams would have to forgo something else of value in order to pay A-Rod the king's ransom that he's set to receive. These are valid points, of course.
A-Rod's primary competition in the 3B market, however, was not from another free agent, but from Miguel Cabrera. The Marlins appear set to trade him and, if anyone was going to diminish his market, it would have been him. He is, of course, a spectacular hitter - one of the 4-5 best in the majors. Some make an issue of his weight or defensive liabilities, but the guy can rake. He should be moved to 1B, sooner rather than later, but, even playing a poor 3B, he's still worth a ton of loot just from his ability to hit the baseball. Some complain that he's "just going to be another Manny Ramirez" as if that's a bad thing. ManRam is headed to the Hall of Fame, dreadlocks and 7th inning stretch piss-breaks notwithstanding.
But while A-Rod is 32, and will be 33 in July, Cabrera will turn 25 in April. He's got 2 years until free agency and will probably earn less than half of what A-Rod's set to earn in the next 2 years. There are a lot of reasons to like Cabrera more than A-Rod. Move him to 1B and he's about as good as Pujols, at least offensively. So teams like the Dodgers and Angels would have had to decide whether to make a run at A-Rod or try and trade for Cabrera.
That's the scenario I intended to throw out there this morning. Which is better? The problems w/ signing A-Rod are that he's already 32 and will be paid until he's 42 and that he's set to make more money than the GNP of most of the countries in the world. The main problem w/ Cabrera is that a team would have to trade for him - and he won't come cheaply. According to the Palm Beach Post , the Marlins want Howie Kendrick, Nick Adenhart, and 2 others from the Angels for Cabrera. From the Dodgers, they're asking for 4 of Billingsley, LaRoche, Kemp, Loney, and Kershaw. Of course, they won't get that much but it probably would mean 3 of the 4 from either team in order to receive Cabrera. Is it worth it?
The only way a Cabrera trade makes sense is if the team is also able to re-sign him long-term. There is a lot of talent on the 2 teams' lists and 2 years of Cabrera, I don't care how much he hits, isn't worth all that. But what about 12 years of Cabrera - 2 and then a 10 year contract along the lines of A-Rod's? That's what he'll get when he becomes a free agent - 10+ years and $250-300 M. We can quibble about exact dollar amounts but that's not really the point. He'll get a lot of years and a lot of money - he'll just be 27 when he's a free agent - not 32!
Still, if you had the choice between A-Rod or Cabrera, which would you choose? And, make no mistake, before A-Rod agreed to re-sign w/ the Yanks, when it appeared the Yanks were completely out of it, these teams did have the choice b/c they had the money and the prospects to make either happen. In fact, the Yanks probably also had the choice. They could've given up Hughes, Kennedy and Melky Cabrera or Cano or whatever and gotten Miguel. They certainly could've backed up the armored car and signed Miguel to an extension. They chose A-Rod! Did they choose wisely?
My view is that they did. Say what you want about A-Rod, but he's a certain hall-of-famer and will go down as 1 of the 3-4 best players of his generation. His postseason OPS is basically the same as the great Derek Jeter's (.844 to .846). He's a tremendous hitter who could easily transition to 1B and then DH and hasn't played fewer than 148 games since 1999. If anyone's worth $27.5 M per year, it's A-Rod. MORP has him worth about $44 M last year and the Hardball Times' Fair Market Value Calculator has him worth about $38 M. He was tremendous last year, of course - possibly his best year in a career of outstanding years - but with all the talk of teams overpaying for free agents, he seems to be one who will probably be underpaid during the course of this contract. Even if he is hurt and unproductive in his last couple of years, the surplus value the Yanks will probably receive from the first 7-8 years will, in all likelihood, make up for his diminished production in the last couple.
Still, Cabrera's 7 years younger. But will he save the team any money? No. He's going to get that A-Rodian contract I referred to earlier. As I said, I'm not that worried about the D as he could be moved to 1B by any team that trades for him. He won't be Albert over there but he would be passable. He's going to terrorize pitchers for a long time if he's able to stay healthy and there's nothing in his past to indicate that that might be a problem. But the problem for me lies in trading Kershaw, Kemp, and Loney; or Kendrick, Adenhart, and E. Santana; or whatever the Marlins will receive in exchange for Cabrera. That's 15-18 years worth of a huge amount of talent just for the right to have Cabrera for 2 years and, hopefully, pay him King Midas' fortune for 10 more. Is Cabrera worth it? 12 years of Cabrera in exchange for 16 years of Kershaw, Kemp, and Loney? Maybe so - but A-Rod, despite the enormous contract, is still a better value. Had the Dodgers signed A-Rod, they would have gotten A-Rod PLUS Kershaw, Kemp, and Loney. By re-signing A-Rod and not trading for Cabrera, the Yankees got A-Rod, Hughes, Kennedy, and Melky Cabrera. They also retained the possibility, however remote, that they might be able to also sign Cabrera in 2 years. Which would you rather have - A-Rod, Hughes, Kennedy, and Melky Cabrera; or Miguel Cabrera? To me, it's a no-brainer. That's a 4 for 1 trade I'd make any day of the week, despite the 10 years and $275 M.
On an unrelated note, David Eckstein appears to be open to playing 2B and has met with the Mets to discuss filling that void in Flushing. This is a smart move on his part as the SS holes have all but dried up and this is a way to increase his market power. He's now looking for Julio Lugo-esque (I think I just threw up a little in my mouth) type contract - 4 years, $36 M. Do not adjust your monitor! You read that correctly. 4 years, $36 M for David Eckstein. It's been great knowing you, David. You're a little sparkplug - plucky and spunky and all those things that fans like. Thanks for the World Series title! We'll remember you fondly. How we'll replace him, I don't know. God help us if it's Cesar Izturis! This Alexei Ramirez intrigues me a little. He's a 26 year old Cuban defector who was 6-16 in the World Baseball Classic - plays SS and CF. He may or may not be ready to play in the big leagues. A couple years ago, Clay Davenport at BP compared Cuban baseball to to short-season A ball . Might be worth a flyer! Erik suggested D'Angelo Jimenez in this diary . I've heard worse suggestions! (I'm looking at you, Cesar!). Then there's this Brendan Ryan guy - nah, nevermind. Let's not even go there.
0 recs |
68 comments
Comments
No thanks on Jiminez--
by aet15 on Nov 18, 2007 2:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
If you sign Alexei
As far as Cabrera and Arod, I'll take neither. Cabrera needs to be a DH or 1B immediately. He'll cost a shitload in pre-arb talent. He becomes a free agent in, what, 2 years? If you want to keep him you'll probably have to pay him a Manny contract on top of premium talent and the 15-20 million he makes in the next two years.
I understand why it could theoretically cost that much in talent. That's the superstar premium. That kind of offense coming from one roster spot is just flat out scarce. Same goes for Arod.
Arod already plays a mediocre 3B. He's past his prime. He has a career .323 EQA (147 OPS+). (Pujols .338 EQA, 167 OPS+). If you want to keep him healthy and hitting, and if you don't want his defense yo become a liability then you have to move him to 1B or DH halfway through the next decade. Then what do you have?
Well, in 2012 you have a 36yo first baseman who's on the downslope of his career. PECOTA thinks he'll put up a .300 EQA or so at that point. That's like paying BJ Upton $30 million to play first base for you this year, then expecting him to get worse for the next five years when you (presumably) owe him $30 million per until he's done.
Arod's an elite player so his career could take an unprecedented path like Barry Bonds, but I wouldn't bet on it.
I don't know which I'd rather do, if I had to choose. Depends on if I'm the Yankees. Kershaw should be good, but you're trading future for known superstar performance. You are probably going to have to ALWAYS going to have to overpay in (ceiling, probable, whatever) future performance. Kemp and Loney are not that special, although I like both of them just fine, they are replaceable.
So I'd say that I'd rather trade replaceable pieces and future performance than sign a possibly franchise-crippling contract, if I'm not the Redsox/Yankees.
And really, I'll believe one of these huge talent hauls for 1 or 2 years of a player when I see it.
by plh903 on Nov 18, 2007 3:23 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
USA 6, Cuba 3. Rasmus named best CF in tournament.
Colby Rasmus was named the best center fielder in the tournament.
Jayson Nix hit a home run for USA in the final game. He was named the tournament's best second baseman.
Taken from the live Stadeo.TV broadcast of the Baseball World Cup final game and closing ceremonies. http://stadeo.tv/
11/18/2007 7:21 AM ET
Team USA wins gold at World Cup
Ends Cuba's 25-year tournament run with 6-3 victory
By Daren Smith / MLB.com
[Excerpts]
Team USA ended a 33-year drought -- and Cuba's 25-year dominance -- at the IBAF World Cup with a 6-3 victory in the gold medal game on Sunday in Taiwan.
Rays outfield prospect Justin Ruggiano collected three of Team USA's 14 hits.
Rockies prospect Jayson Nix and Phillies farmhand Jason Jaramillo each had two RBIs for the United States, which built an early five-run cushion and held on to win this biennial tournament for the first time since 1974.
Angels farmhand Steven Shell (1-0) got the win in relief, allowing one run on two hits with three strikeouts over three innings. Jerry Blevins (Athletics) retired both batters he faced and Jeff Stevens (Indians) got the final two outs.
Stevens was mobbed at the mound after Rays prospect Justin Ruggiano caught Ariel Pestano's fly ball to right field to end the game.
After losing to Italy, 6-2, on Nov. 9, Team USA outscored its opponents, 45-16, during a seven-game winning streak.
by CardsWin on Nov 18, 2007 8:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Boxscore isn't up yet
by Hardcore Legend on Nov 18, 2007 9:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
take it all Cuba!
by jealousblues on Nov 18, 2007 2:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Final stats for Rasmus in World Cup Baseball Cup
OBP .459
SLG .613
OPS 1.072
Colby had 6 walks vs. 4 strikeouts.
Over half of his hits were for extra bases.
AB 31
H 11
2B 5
HR 1
BB 6
K 4
RBI 5
SB 2
CS 1
DP 0
No errors
In today's win over Cuba Rasmus had one single and an RBI in 4 AB, and he was caught stealing.
Bryan Anderson and Chris Perez did not play.
Rasmus and Anderson were the youngest players on team USA.
Box score here:
http://mlb.mlb.com/usa_baseball/downloads/y2007/wc_box_111607.txt
by CardsWin on Nov 18, 2007 2:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why not Ryan again?
Anyway, back to the post, you're absolutley right, IMO. You can't look at it as only ARod for $275 mil - it's ARod plus hanging onto your prospects (Hughes, Kennedy, and Melky Cabrera) for $275 mil - and that's a much better deal than just Cabrera.
As for the Cards, while both are talented players, neither one is really a good fit here, mainly for the reason named Albert Pujols. As you said, can't aford both (ARod), and if Miggy C is moving to 1B, then the point is rather moot.
Good post!
by SmashedAtoms on Nov 18, 2007 10:02 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
crazy, but
by birdsonthebat on Nov 18, 2007 11:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
edgar V gonzalez
Anyway he's a minor league free agent and after not being called up despite Rolen breaking down and Kennedy's complete lack of output this season I can't see him coming back to our club. Our bringing in the inferior Cairo as a backup infielder instead of promoting him was the straw that broke the camels back, and IIRC he asked for his release early.
by SleepyCA on Nov 18, 2007 2:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
of course
by SleepyCA on Nov 18, 2007 2:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
thanks
by birdsonthebat on Nov 18, 2007 3:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no wonder
by birdsonthebat on Nov 19, 2007 12:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The comment about Ryan
by chuckb on Nov 18, 2007 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Izturis before Ryan.......
by jillsinmo on Nov 18, 2007 1:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
a-rodian logic
by sportsman on Nov 18, 2007 10:51 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Yankees have a win goal of
The marginal gains by retaining ARod and making the playoffs are probably worth $300M over 10 years to the Yankees.
by azruavatar on Nov 18, 2007 11:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
miggy
by wannabeGedman on Nov 18, 2007 12:35 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
LA Teams
The Angels, on the other hand, may be the ones to pull the trigger on this one. They desperately need another bat to help out Guerrero, and have the kids to pull this deal off. Santana is a huge talent who's been enigmatic his whole time there, and would probably be a good center piece for a Cabrera deal.
by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 18, 2007 2:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Loney's upside is
Kemp strikes out too much to hit .300, and his so-far OPS+ of 111 is powered by an unsustainable .430 on-contact BA. He has an isoD of .30.
by plh903 on Nov 18, 2007 8:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
on the other hand...
by Timbo02 on Nov 18, 2007 1:57 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
This is hilarious
by chuckb on Nov 18, 2007 2:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Lol I saw that too
by redbirdnation8206 on Nov 18, 2007 2:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ken Tremendous is the best
by Glenn Brummer stole home on Nov 18, 2007 2:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That. Was. Awesome.
by Mr Clean on Nov 18, 2007 4:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
they love
by jeff abs on Nov 18, 2007 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Post-season splits,
Someone should start a site ripping FJM's analysis.
by plh903 on Nov 18, 2007 8:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
That is so arrogant and stupid
He also has a WS MVP and two WS rings, which is one and two more than A-Rod. Say what you want about his numbers, but him "totally not helping you win" is just a stupid and mean-spirited thing to see. As much as the stat nazis refuse to admit it, there ARE such things as intangbibles. I also love how people criticize Eckstein for being "scrappy" and "hustling" -- as if those are bad qualities -- and then turn around and criticize people like Juan E. or Miguel Cabrera or whoever else for being lazy.
Eckstein isn't a 4/$36 million player to be sure, but he has had an outstanding career for someone who had to walk on his college team, and he will always be a more LIKABLE player than jerks like A-ROD. The fact is, there are some people who care about people as opposed to just raw numbers. The cynical, negative attitude people show toward players like Eckstein is just a drag.
And Keith Law has to be the most joyless baseball writer there is. Leave it to him to make writing about the world's greatest game seem about as much fun as drafting a coroner's report. I've said it before, but his writing (and that of this Ken Tremendous jerk) at least gives the IMPRESSION that he a) doesn't like baseball and/or b) doesn't get what it is that makes the game fun, interesting, or compelling. What a killjoy.
by willievinceterry on Nov 18, 2007 9:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, actually what
I could give a shit about the intangibles, actually. The fact is that Eckstein has usually put up good UZRs, and has an average EQA and he plays SS. For a small amount of money, he's not a bad player.
It's the second time he's said Eckstein is "terrible" and the millionth that he's said Arod is the best hitter on the planet, and those things just aren't true.
I just had an interesting email exchange with him about it, actually. He said it's a humor site and he's hyperbolic at times, etc.
by plh903 on Nov 18, 2007 10:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
that's unfortunate
by SleepyCA on Nov 18, 2007 10:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just to clarify, plh903
by willievinceterry on Nov 19, 2007 12:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, I totally didn't think
by plh903 on Nov 19, 2007 1:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately, he quotes...
by GOOCH24 on Nov 18, 2007 5:10 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Law is right
"Eckstein's 3.64 pitches per plate appearance would have ranked him #123 among MLB players in that category last year. I say "would have," because he was injured so much he didn't have enough AB to qualify. In 2006, his 3.75 was good for 95th."
Hmmmm.
by jdub176 on Nov 18, 2007 5:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
p/pa for 2007 "starting" players
http://www.vivaelbirdos.com/comments/2007/10/12/142836/58/2#2
eck isn't even one of the better players on OUR team in terms of p/pa, and we were awful as a team.
by SleepyCA on Nov 18, 2007 5:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
True...
by GOOCH24 on Nov 18, 2007 5:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Ummm...no, it isn't
Claiming that we can't compare Eck's P/PA to the league average "because" he's a leadoff hitter is quite a stretch.
One doesn't look at the lineup position to determine how to judge the stats...one looks at the stats to determine the best lineup position.
The fact is, this urban legend that Eckstein "always works the count" is simply not correct (at least in the last two years...he did okay in 2005) and needs to go away. He has been BELOW average in working the count the last two years.
His OBP (.356 in 2007), on the other hand, is fairly good for today's leadoff hitters, since it's increasingly rare to find an OBP in the #1 spot above .360 these days. Indeed, the average NL OBP from the #1 spot in the lineup for 2007 was: .341.
So while Eck's OBP is decent, his P/PA is still below average. Furthermore, his speed is insufficient to steal many bases (he stole all of 10 last year, way below the average leadoff hitter), and his power is also below average for leadoff. Even with his slightly higher than average OBP, his OPS was 30 pts below the AVERAGE #1 hitter, due to his 45pt SLG deficit.
So let's recap:
ECKSTEIN vs. Avg NL Leadoff Hitter
OBP: Above Avg
P/PA: Below Avg
Speed: Below Avg
Power: Below Avg
OPS: Below Avg
ECKSTEIN vs. Avg NL Shortstop (Defense)
Range: Below Avg
Arm: Below Avg
Overall: Below Avg
Ipso facto, Eckstein is not a good leadoff hitter, and not a good shortstop. He might be passable at 2B and hitting in the #8/#9 slot, but NOT for the money he's looking to get this offseason...unless you significantly overvalue AlxFritz's GPI+ (Grit Per Inch) stat, of course.
by Mr Clean on Nov 18, 2007 6:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
given that
by SleepyCA on Nov 18, 2007 6:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes...
You go to war with the lineup you have, not the lineup you want. Eckstein is a middle infielder and, like most such starting players, ends up at the top of the order (when they don't suck offensively...which is when they lineup at the bottom of the order). So among middle infielder / center fielder types...we're already comparing Eck to the good ones (i.e. the ones that make it to the top of the order).
Saying that Eck is 'below average' is simply an unrealistic evaluation of what Eck brings to the table. The fact is, you can't field a team of first-baseman. And including them in comparing what Eck brings to the table is just silly. Among players that play Eck's position and hit where Eck hits, Eck is NOT below average in taking pitches. For example, Eck ranked 9th in P/PA in 2006 (and was just a few hundreths of a point off of 6th). He has ranged from very good (4.01), when he was first in all of baseball in P/PA among shortstops, to the middling numbers he's put up recently (3.6). He is not, however, below average unless you throw in the 1st baseman, corner outfielders, and DH's hitting in the middle of the order and racking up P/PA due to pitcher's fear of their power.
There aren't too many power hitters hitting at the top of the order as a table setter. And there aren't too many power hitters playing at SS. When you compare Eckstein against the players he is truly replaceable by, we see that his P/PA is an asset (if a declining one). D.GOOCH
by GOOCH24 on Nov 18, 2007 8:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
well....
by GOOCH24 on Nov 18, 2007 8:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No offense, GOOCH...
Before, you said that "the one quality he brings to a lineup is his ability to work a count." That doesn't say anything about 'only among shortstops.' In fact, "brings to a lineup" implies 'stick him anywhere and his scrappy, high P/PA at bats will benefit the team.' Sadly, this is not, in fact, the case.
And when I took issue with that and pointed out that his P/PA were below average for the league, you switched to "[Y]ou can't field a team of first-baseman. And including them in comparing what Eck brings to the table is just silly. Among players that play Eck's position and hit where Eck hits, Eck is NOT below average in taking pitches." Which conveniently ignores my earlier point that Eck WAS below average for leadoff hitters in P/PA.
Here it is again:
NL LEADOFF HITTERS (w/ 200+ PA hitting #1):
Of the 21 #1 NL hitters w/ 200+ PA hitting leadoff, Eck ranks 15th in P/PA
Willie Harris is #1, with a P/PA of 4.31
Norris Hopper is #21, with a P/PA of 3.28
David Eckstein is #15, with a P/PA of 3.66
Average for NL #1 hitters: 3.76
For those of you scoring at home, that's below average.
Want to try looking only at just NL Shortstops? Okey-dokey.
NL SHORTSTOPS (w/ 200+ PA as SS):
Of the 20 NL SS w/ 200+ PA, Eck ranks 11th in P/PA
Felipe Lopez is #1, with a P/PA of 4.01
Cesar Izturis (!!!) is #20, with a P/PA of 3.43
David Eckstein is #11, with a P/PA of 3.64
Average for NL Shortstops: 3.71
So, yes, David is closer to average in that he falls 11th out of 20 when you look ONLY at NL shortstops, but he's still below average.
Note that if you combine the two and make it NL Shortstops who also had 200+ PA batting #1, he's actually dead last in P/PA (6th out of 6, although only by a tiny amount).
I suppose if you keep looking, you might find a split where he won't be below average...say Shortstops under 5'8" hitting leadoff for teams with bird mascots...I bet he's the best in the league in that group! However, I think that would be missing the point. That point is that Eckstein was above average in P/PA in 2005. In 2004, 2006, and 2007, he was not.
So while I personally disagree with your assertion that you "can't compare him to other kinds of players when claiming that he sees plenty of P/PA," even if you DON'T compare him to other kinds of players, he's STILL below average.
And for the record, whenever his "scrappy at bats" are referenced (by Dan, Al, or whomever) I've never YET heard anyone describe Eckstein as a "pesky at bat who can really work the count...for a shortstop hitting leadoff." I wonder why not?
by Mr Clean on Nov 19, 2007 2:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Putting words in my mouth...
Eck is 11th out of 21 among shortstops in the WORST P/PA season of his career. In an injury shortened season. The fact that there are a few outlier P/PA above him doesn't make Eck 'below' average. The mean is influenced by outlier observations. IOW, it doesn't make sense to argue that Eck is a worse player because Lopez and Harris took a few more pitches. Eck was average among shortstops. He was near-average among leadoff hitters. In his worst P/PA season to date.
P/PA is an Eckstein asset in most seasons. At worst, he's been smack dab in the middle. Nuff said. D.GOOCH
by GOOCH24 on Nov 19, 2007 9:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And to put the cherry on top...
by GOOCH24 on Nov 19, 2007 10:13 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ipso facto
On the anal-retentive Latin phrase tip, I'm not sure ipso facto is the one you want there ... unless it's a sarcastic/intentionally wrong usage a la Ricky Gervais in The Office, in which case I apologize.
by willievinceterry on Nov 18, 2007 9:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What are you basing
I don't really care about the lineup discussion. You want to optimize your lineup to give you a few runs here or there, but realistically all you care about is judging him against the players that play his position. Find the best 8 you can, then figure out the lineup (which doesn't really matter that much).
So how does Eckstein stack up against other shortstops? Last year, shortstops as a group (18,000 AB) put up an EQA of .255. Eckstein posted a .267. His unadj career mark is .256 (essentially average) and adjusted it's .262. Basically a league average hitter overall.
OBP matters more than those other categories. Also, it matters how many outs those dudes are making on the basepaths. Power matters too, but not as much. That's why we have fun stats like EQA that wraps it up in a neat package.
So, I don't think he's just "passable" at 2B. I think he's fine at SS for the right money and years, assuming he just had a down year defensively (which happens to good defenders all the time).
You can't just say "(Defense) overall: below avg" and make that his true talent level.
by plh903 on Nov 19, 2007 4:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It was based on 2007
For any athlete with marginal skills, especially an aging athlete with marginal skills, that scares me. Add to that the fact that he's missed significant time to potentially chronic injuries the past two years, and it doesn't make for a very high confidence level in his likely production at Shortstop next year. Plus, he'd have at LEAST 10-20 more errors every year if Albert weren't over at 1st base constantly picking his poor throws out of the dirt or jumping around to snag his errant tosses. If he goes somewhere else, that team better have a damn good 1B, or else Eck's defense will be seen as significantly worse.
As for 2B, I have no idea if he would be "good", since I've never seen him play 2B - and apparently neither has anyone else, for that matter...I just looked and he's had all of 14 games starting at 2B in his career. (Interestingly, in those 14 games at 2B, he has 3 Errors in 59 Total Chances, which isn't very good.) But I can easily assume he'd be "passable."
Don't get me wrong...I like David's decent OBP, his ability to make contact, his attitude, etc. I just think that with the possible exception of his above average OBP, he's relatively easy to replace for the most part, and for a LOT less. AND I really dislike this completely erroneous (and maddeningly pervasive) misperception that he sees a ton of pitches and is great at "working the count." The facts simply don't support it.
by Mr Clean on Nov 19, 2007 5:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
And checking...
by GOOCH24 on Nov 18, 2007 5:52 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Please stop propagating this ERROR
Ergo, "working the count" is NOT an asset of his.
He did okay in 2005 w/ his P/PA, and now everyone seems to think he's forevermore a pesky, ultra-patient hitter. HE IS NOT.
by Mr Clean on Nov 18, 2007 6:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You gotta appreciate
by chuckb on Nov 19, 2007 12:20 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Houston
I will be reading next Sunday.
So you have at least 1 Cardinal fan who thinks what you write is "important"
by Harknights on Nov 18, 2007 6:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Uhh....
by GOOCH24 on Nov 18, 2007 8:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
you
by baw on Nov 18, 2007 8:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Or....
by GOOCH24 on Nov 18, 2007 8:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Post it anywhere you want
by chuckb on Nov 19, 2007 12:22 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually, it IS an error...
"His assets are middling on base skills and working the count (i.e. 'pest' skills). D.GOOCH"As I cited above, being below average 3 out of the last 4 years means "working the count" is clearly NOT one of his assets.
Decent OBP, yes. P/PA, no.
by Mr Clean on Nov 19, 2007 1:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ay...
by GOOCH24 on Nov 19, 2007 9:15 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We'll have to agree to disagree...
You've gone from parroting Dan and Al's unqualified "he really works the count" to a tortuous definition of who he is eligible to be compared to, and even under that more limited case, he barely cracks average. For the record, even if you limit the pool to blonde middle infielders named David, an average P/PA does not mean "he really works the count." You then decry the unfair "outliers" who artificially raise the mean. But when YOU are the one to limit the statistical comparison from the entire league to only 20 players, you don't get to cry about the more talented players that also play David's position and then try to justify their exclusion, too. What's next? Lamenting that Pujols' numbers are way outside the norm, so he qualifies as a "statistical outlier" and other 1B shouldn't have to be compared to him? Come on.
At any rate, from this point on every time you advocate for Eck's 'awesome P/PA skills', I expect you to qualify your "he really works the count" with the required "for a middle infielder hitting leadoff" or whatever your very limited criteria are.
For me, I'll keep comparing P/PA to the league, since that's what most people do.
by Mr Clean on Nov 19, 2007 2:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll agree you've been disagreeable
- False historical record. Recall: this post did not begin with Al or Dan (lol). It began with Keith Law arguing that one of Eckstein's weaknesses was his P/PA. As I argued, that is an asset of Eck's (if a declining one). It is NOT a weakness.
- Selective use of data. Whereas I have made an effort to restrict Eck comparisons to his real competition (unless someone is going to suggest that Carlos Delgado is going to be at short and leading off for the Mets next year), you have artificially restricted our comparisons of Eck to this year. In 2005 he led the league in P/PA for his position and his spot in the lineup. In 2006, an injury year like 07, he was smack dab league average, again for his position and/or lineup spot.
- Mathematical ignorance. If you don't understand my point regarding means and medians, then I'd reccomend you not try and ridicule them. Limiting our sample to Eck's relevant comparables has nothing to do with the statistical argument I made regarding outliers. Hence your response there is a non-starter. As is your example of Pujols. We are not comparing one player to another to see who is the better offensive player. We are comparing Eck against those who play his position and hit where he does in the lineup to see how he stacks up as an acuisition and what his relative attributes are as a player to that average.
- Exaggeration. I think the fact you don't have the facts on your side is illustrated by the straw man you've made of my point. I didn't argue Eck had "awesome" P/PA skills. I argued his P/PA skills are an asset (if a declining one). Eck has been above average in P/PA skills for his position in his career. His recent decline has him with an average P/PA. If you're going to list his weaknesses as a player acquisition, listing his P/PA is silly and wrong. D.GOOCH
by GOOCH24 on Nov 19, 2007 3:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The House that A-Rod Built.
(here is to hoping he never does get a WS ring).
Thanks for another good thread HC.
by Birds on the Bat on Nov 19, 2007 12:54 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
nice way to look at this H-Town
i guess i also think ARod is worth more than Miggy. but unlike you i dont think in 2 years Miggy will get an ARod type contract. as a one dementional player he simply isn't worth $200-$300 Million dollars. all he can do is hit. which like you said ain't that bad of a thing. but still, would a team really be that stupid to pay a guy $300 million when all he can do is hit?
one reason is he's put on a few pounds the past few years & he's a libility at 1st, 3rd or a corner outfield position. he seams down right uninterested when he plays defense. it appears he has a bad work ethic. and thats why so many posters here think it would be good for him if he played along side of Albert in the hope that some of Albert's famous work ethic would rub off on Miggy.
Miggy's like a right handed david ortiz. and he only got a 4 year $52 million dollar contract when he signed his extension. granted ortiz is ARods age, but he signed that in april of last year.
i hope GM's see that Miggy has become a one dementional player and that he's not worth half the money ARod will get. ARod is worth so much party because he is a gold glove defender at SS & 3rd. if Miggy keeps going down the path he's currently on it's clear he'll never win a gold glove. so why would you pay Miggy the same amount of money you'd pay ARod when you are not getting the same caliber of player?
its stupid to give up so much talent for a guy like Miggy. sure he can rake, but he's not worth so many top prospects. maybe one or two but if a GM was smart, he'd not go nuts and offer half his farm system. instead he'd wait for the Fish's asking price to come down. and if that didnt work the team should just wait till he hits free agency & give him $60-$100 million over 8-10 years. because he will hit free agency. i cant see him taking an extension on his current deal if he gets traded. i think he'll be disappointed by the offers, but he'll still test the free agency waters.
of course i'm usually wrong about every thing & i'm sure this time is no different.
OH on the ECK front. if the mets want give him $36 million to play 2nd, then i only have one thing to say.
thanks for the memories ECK. good luck & GOD bless.
by gdm426 on Nov 19, 2007 3:24 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
But didn't the Mets just resign Luis Castillo...
I know I would.
by matt reeder on Nov 19, 2007 7:05 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
If those are Eck's demands
by lordsummer on Nov 19, 2007 9:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pujols...
2008-2011 - $18mil/season = $72mil
2012-2014 - $20mil/season = $60mil
Unless the mang is injured and his play is severely effected he'll probably be looking at 8-10 years at $25mil each when he hits free agency...this adds $2mil/season for 4 seasons in order to get a 3yr/$60mil deal at the end. He'll be 35 (I believe) going into 2015.
Maybe going into 2013 you add another 3 years with a new 5yr/$119mil extension.
by cardzfanbub on Nov 19, 2007 8:26 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I dunno
(10 year contracts for professional athletes are nuts. I don't care if it's A-rod, I don't care if it's freaking Babe Ruth, Hee Sop Choi can run into him and knock a random limb loose at any point. If I were Bill DeWitt, I'd probably moan in my sleep about Scott Rolen and setting fire to 12 million dollars and wake my wife up every couple of weeks.
I suppose that's one of many reasons why I don't own a major league franchise.)
by lordsummer on Nov 19, 2007 9:24 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Please refer to Mr. Choi
"That G*dmnd 6'5" sonufabuck that ruined Rolen's shoulder"
All further mentions of Mr. Choi should also include a clause that he ruined numerous fantasy teams and is a stiff defensively.
Thanks. :)
by bukowski on Nov 19, 2007 2:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 

















