Interesting Article About Free Agents and Losing Teams
by yurizanow on Dec 16, 2009 11:23 AM EST
Email
Print
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/sky_andrecheck/12/10/free.agents/index.html
This was on the Sports Illustrated baseball page. It's kind of interesting food for thought about what happens to teams that aren't successful and as a result avoid signing free agents. I've put two interesting quotes below.
For GM's who figure that their teams will probably not contend, it seems like a smart strategy to not squander resources by signing free agents who won't help win a pennant. But is this really the right choice? In principle maybe, but reality is another story.
While waiting for a team's young nucleus to come together before adding free agents seems like a good strategy, teams that adhere to this can get stuck in a perpetual cycle of rebuilding. Huntington's Pirates have been in that rut for the past 17 years. It costs a lot of money to retain decent players with six or more years of MLB service. However, it's difficult to construct even a .500 team with only young players ineligible for free agency. Hence a team with a rebuilding mantra may be constantly letting free agents go and avoiding major signings because they are not one or two players away from playoff contention. The Catch-22 is that it's not cost-effective to sign free agents to play for a non-contending team, but it's nearly impossible to build a contending team without having at least a few higher-priced free agents.
To avoid this cycle a sub-.500 team has to spend at least enough to put a decent product on the field, even though it may not transform them into a contender immediately. The Tigers used this approach to great effect in building their 2006 World Series club. While their young nucleus was far from ready in 2004, they began making some mid- to high-priced signings which helped them climb back to respectability. Though the team wasn't close to contention in 2004 or 2005, they assembled the pieces, such as Ivan Rodriguez and Magglio Ordonez, and with the help of their young pitching and a bit of luck, turned the franchise from laughingstock to success. Had GM Dave Dombrowski waited until the young nucleus came together, he would not have had the other pieces to contend in 2006 and may have missed his window.
In contrast, teams such as the Pirates and Reds seem to be perpetually rebuilding. It's not that they haven't produced good young players -- Jason Bay and Adam Dunn, among others, have come from their systems -- but before management deemed the young nucleus ready, those players became eligible for free agency without the support they needed from additional players. Tampa Bay is another team that could have benefited from a few more acquisitions in its down years. In 2008 the Rays' young nucleus arrived early and produced a great season, but the team could have been that much better had it signed a few supporting pieces ahead of time. As it stands now, the clock is ticking on the Rays' young nucleus, before it becomes too expensive to keep together.
FanPosts are user-created content and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors of Camden Chat or SB Nation. They might, though.
7 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Another interesting quote
Frugality on the free-agent market may be penny-wise, but it can often be pound-foolish. In a perfect world it would be wonderful to time a roster so that the current team matures at the exact moment when the ideal free agents are out there and ready to be signed. A young nucleus which is capable of winning 80 games on its own could be fortified with four or five free agents who could collectively be signed for $50-$60 million per year. The players would perform to expectations and the team would become a moderately priced contender. In reality, though, that rarely happens. Players don’t develop exactly as predicted, and injuries can wreak havoc with even the most smartly constructed rosters. Assuming that those coveted free agents are out there and willing to sign with your club at the moment of need is another major leap, especially since players are less willing to sign with a perpetually losing club. Plus, there’s plain luck to contend with, as it’s not uncommon for a good team on paper to finish with a mediocre record, or vice-versa.
Free agents making at least $5 million per year account for about one-third of all major league production and give their teams an average of about 10 marginal major league wins. Take these 10 wins away, and the average free-agent-less team will be a bottom-dwelling 71-game winner. Of course, with skill and luck it’s possible to overcome that deficit and build a contending team without them — but doing so is obviously much harder. That means that teams waiting for a contender built of young players to emerge before becoming a player in the free-agent market could be waiting for an awfully long time, and subjecting their fans to long spells of bad baseball.
The other problem with the wait-and-rebuild approach is its effect on attendance and fan morale during the down years. While everyone’s ultimate goal is a championship, there is value in winning games even if a team isn’t going to be a World Series contender. An analysis of attendance and winning percentages will show that each win boosts attendance by about 500 fans per game. Signing a few free agents to go from 70 to 80 wins might not produce a pennant, but it will help at the gate, paying off at least a portion of those players’ salaries. As anyone who has followed a 70-win team can tell you, those extra 10 wins sure make it easier to continue following a bad ball club. By spending at least enough to put a competitive team on the field, a team can avoid seeing its fan base erode due to years of poor performance, as has happened in places such as Pittsburgh.
Signing a few free agents to go from 70 to 80 wins might not produce a pennant, but it will help at the gate, paying off at least a portion of those players’ salaries.
Sure, but signing a few agents may not help you go from 70 to 80 wins. Under Flanagan, the O’s were quite aggressive with free agents (e.g., Tejada, Javy Lopez, the reliever trio), but the team lost consistently.
Vizzini: Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?
Man in Black: Yes.
Vizzini: Morons.
The O’s also had no youth with potential during all those years to possibly compliment a decent set of free agents. Only Tejada was an honest to goodness decent ball player. See your comment below about idiotic dips into the FA pool. That was the O’s as well.
While waiting for a team’s young nucleus to come together before adding free agents seems like a good strategy, teams that adhere to this can get stuck in a perpetual cycle of rebuilding. Huntington’s Pirates have been in that rut for the past 17 years.
Actually, this really isn’t the Pirates’ problem. Like the O’s, the Pirates have frequently dipped into the free agent pool, often idiotically (e.g., Jeremy Burnitz, Derek Bell).
Vizzini: Let me put it this way. Have you ever heard of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates?
Man in Black: Yes.
Vizzini: Morons.
The Twins do a decent job of promoting talent through their system, but they also don’t play against the yankee teams. I mention the Twins because that was the franchise MacPhail stated the O’s should emulate. The O’s will need to buy some talent to compete. Not this year. I’m thinking AM wants to see how the very young pitchers pan out and he seems to have some faith in Bell that I don’t have. So this year is another year of mediocre free agents – typical Oriole stuff.
One area where I think Duquette/Flanagan thinking still reigns is that the O’s primary goal seems to be to stop the consecutive losing season streak. They need Matusz and Tillman to make big strides, an average innings eater, a bit of bullpen help, as well as Wieters/Jones/Markakis/Reimold/Roberts to produce throughout the year to flirt with .500. 81 wins is all they need to get the fans excited, and this off season sure looks like that’s the goal. The playoffs are some nice to have for somewhere in the future – maybe. Maybe I’m wrong, but it’s going to take another year and another off season to prove that the O’s really care about making the playoffs.
Maybe you have something here
This might back up what I just said in the Holliday thread. Maybe MacPhail’s interest is not a plant, but is real. We’ve dismissed Holliday in the past because we don’t need a LF and he will be too expensive and we’re not competing for a couple years anyway.
But maybe MacPhail is really going to get started this off-season. Maybe we don’t have the rotation to compete in the East, but we need to start bringing in the big gun free agents at some point. if we wait too long, it will be too late. When better to start than on a player the caliber of Holliday and the Yanks and Sox both seem to not be in the bidding?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Official Sponsor of Camden Chat GameThreads
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
