Seattle Sports Insider

10/240

Twelve years on, payback on the ARod karma

Posted by

12/5/13

In the Shout Box, we've all gone from "wry smiles" to "playing with the Robinson Cano batting orders." HEH!!

.....

In this 2011 article, right after Matt Kemp signed an 8-year contract, Bill James answers a question "How likely is it that Matt Kemp will be an All-Star player in his 8th year?"

James answered it by creating a pool of player comps. His first cut created 956, and he cut that to 472 by reducing the RC/27 range to 6-11 runs. He spiralled in to 370, then to 170 players .... he whittled away, using judgment and intuition to create the comp pool, until he had 43 players he thought were good comps for Matt Kemp, 2011.

(For once, I'm not going to wax ecstatic about his methodology ... it's a reasonable approach, but not notably superior, probably, to just taking b-ref.com's comps.)

In the first year of the "contract," 34 of the 43 players had seasons worth $20M ... "you wouldn't feel ripped off if you paid $20M for it." Here is how the percentages broke down:

Year of contract	% Star Performance	Remark
1	80
2	72	Includes Winfield, Brett, Joe Gordon
3	74	Ruben Sierra
4	70
5	60	FAILING to meet standard: Brett, Yastrzemski, Duke Snider
6	63
7	42
8	42

Bill then adds those % numbers, and remarks that "the Dodgers can expect Kemp to have 5.05 successful ($20M plus) seasons over the life of the contract."

34% of Kemp's comparables had $20M seasons even in the 9th years following.

No Guarantees, Dept.

Acting like a big-city team, that is something totally new to Seattle fans, so they're probably thinking "Ummm, what? You mean there's a chance that we'd regret Cano's contract?"

Yes, there's a chance, a good chance. Anything you do can get you killed, including (especially) laying in bed and drawing the curtains.

But myself, I'm kind of surprised by the fact that HALF of these players are still big stars EIGHT years out. You're paying for the first five seasons; the next five seasons are deferred payments on 2014-19.

Here is that Fangraphs post, amusingly enough even attached to Cano's player page, that says "If you don't like 9/225, think of it as 5/175. With four really cheap years at the end, and deferred money."

.........

From a Stars & Scrubs standpoint, you spend $40 roto for Mike Trout, usually the worst thing that happens is that he gives you back $20-25. But for some reason, people would rather spend $20 and get zero. :: shrug :: In roto, I've always felt like you get a superduperstars, if he has a down year, you still have a good player.

And ANY hitting star is very comfortable to purchase, as opposed to a pitching star. Up to and including Felix Hernandez. I'd be a lot less worried about a catastrophe with Cano, than I would be about a catastrophe with Felix.

.........

Personally, I'd hit Cano in the 3 hole. My boyhood team, the Big Red Machine, had a second baseman hitting third, and that just set them up for history's most beautiful baseball team. Also one of Cano's best comps, George Brett, is the prototype 3 hitter.

Would like to be able to debate it. :- )

BABVA,

Dr D

Blog:

Dr's R/X

Comments

If you have a bad contact you want to move

And excess talent coming up the pipeline it seems like a decent possibility you can move at least most of the payment on that contract by including some prospect value.
I'm personally tired of the thinking that building a baseball team should focus more on 5 plus years out than this year. Dreamers dream of the future never to be, doers get things done. Which philosophy has a higher winning percentage? I'd wager it's the doers doing more of the winning while the dreamers continue to point to some future probabilistic reason to not do it now.
Cano looks similar to Edgar with the bat while being faster and hitting from the Safeco side. At 2b. First off, I'd pay that for Edgar age 31-40. At DH. Or Ortiz. I'd bet Beltran would be in that group too. A bunch of guys who were better hitters in their 30s than their twenties. Looking at a full lists of comps is more enlightening, but that's a trend I'm noticing in the ones I've thought of. That's exactly where the year 6+ stars seem obvious is in those hitters that just keep improving. And there have been many who were better on "the wrong side of 30".

Having Cano gives the roster stability.

Prospective FA's will not be oblivious to Cano's presence in the lineup - ESPECIALLY those FA's who are looking to rebuild their value on a short deal ala Beltre in Boston. And it's not like Cano's presence at the end of his contract, assuming it becomes an albatross, will block FA's from coming. I would argue it would actually HELP to have a guy like Cano on the roster, playing out the string for the last few years assuming he can Konerko his way into being a semi-useful piece of the lineup for the last year or two. It would show a commitment to players which has been utterly lacking in this organization - which is why RJ left, no?

One BIG difference, Doc

In 2011, Matt Kemp was not yet 27 years old. In that light, 8 more years of $20M performance seems more reasonable. Cano is now 31, 8 years on top of that is not quite like starting at an age 27 season.
Mays did it (he got 9 more), Brett got 7 more, Reggie Jackson got 6 more. OK, but Ryne Sandberg (who is one of the best B-R comps to Cano, only got 2 more.
I would bat him 3rd, too. Big Country Butler (or whatever RH bat we get) bats 4th. Seager 5th. I'm getting Mark Reynolds for a few $M to platoon with Smoaky, too.
It looks like it will be close, very close.

"Lineup legitimizer"

Ya, that's an interesting point. Those in, and around, the game, speak of the credibility that a Konerko type bestows, even if he's running on fumes. Or Edgar. As long as he was in uniform, the Mariners commanded respect.
It's an ephemereal benefit, of course.

For sure Kemp was younger

And that practically calls the whole article into question :- ) Kemp was younger, of course, but on the other hand his level of excellence wasn't established as well as Cano's is...
That said, we ran that little companion piece pointing out David Wright's comp set on b-ref.com ... there are a jillion ways to set comps lists...
.........
Your broad point is very well taken. I'm not sure the Mariners would be able to bank on ELITE performance for more than 4-6 years. They might easily have SEVERAL years in which he was an albatross.
Of course, the big teams operate with a lot of deadwood on the books.