On the Gonzalez signing: What is the real value of a 2nd round draft pick?
When the Orioles signed Type-A free agent Mike Gonzalez to a two-year, $12M contract on Wednesday, one of the major concerns of many was the loss of the Orioles 2nd round draft pick in 2010. My first inclination was to agree, but after thinking about it for awhile I realized I had no idea the actual value of a second round draft pick. What is the likelihood of a 2nd round draft pick not only reaching the majors but having a significant impact? How does a team leverage that against the value they can get from the free agent, in this case "just" a relief pitcher (albeit one with a very good track record)?
To find some answers, I did what I usually do: I went to Baseball Reference. Using their draft section, I looked at every 2nd round draft pick from 1985 to 2001. I'd planned on using 20 years of data but frankly, once I got to 17 it seemed that I had enough (read: I was tired of looking at it).
From 1985 to 2001 there were 506 second round draft picks. Of those, 262 (51.78%) never saw a day in the MLB. Of the remaining 244, 14 didn't sign but were re-drafted in the future and eventually made it to the MLB. That leaves 230 (45.45%) of the draftees who signed and eventually had an appearance in the MLB.
45% is a decent chance, but that includes players who possibly spent just 1 day on a big league team. When all players who played less than 100 games are removed, the total drops to just 22.92%, 49 pitchers and 67 position players. The list includes a few great players (Randy Johnson) and a number of solid players (Carlos Beltran), but also plenty of the Freddie Bynum variety.
So at what point is the trade-off worth it? Is it ever worth it for a relief pitcher? And if the Orioles aren't intended to compete in 2010, does it even matter? The argument could be made that a 2nd round draft pick with even just a 23% chance of making 100 major league appearances is more beneficial to the future of this team than a reliever who might be gone after 2011.
I'm not sure I buy that, though. If 2011 is indeed the year that the Orioles are supposed to make their big move into the pennant race, winning in 2010 is important as well. It's important for the young players who are developing, it's important when trying to land free agents, it's important to show the players that 2010 isn't another year to roll over. Opponents of this thought process will counter with the fact that adding Gonzalez might get the Orioles a few wins, but that's it. And what good will that do?
I think it all comes down to philosophy. The Gonzalez signing and the Millwood trade are, to me, a sign of a different Andy MacPhail. With phase one over, this is how he is tackling phase two. He decided that the benefits of Mike Gonzalez outweigh the potential of next year's 2nd round draft pick. And given the numbers, I can see his point.
Players drafted in the 2nd round, 1985-2001, with at least 100 games played
| Player | Years Played | Total Games | Career OPS+ | Player | Years Played | Total Games | Career ERA+ | |
| Tim Jones (INF) | 1988-1993 | 252 | 68 | Bruce Ruffin | 1986-1997 | 469 | 98 | |
| Kirt Manwaring (C) | 1987-1999 | 1008 | 69 | Mike Schooler | 1988-1992 | 260 | 136 | |
| Milt Cuyler (OF) | 1990-1996, 1998 | 490 | 71 | Randy Johnson | 1988-2009 | 618 | 136 | |
| Dave Hansen (SS) | 1990-2005 | 1230 | 99 | Dave Otto | 1987-1994 | 109 | 80 | |
| Todd Zeile (C/3B) | 1989-2004 | 2158 | 103 | Kevin Wickander | 1989-1996 | 150 | 108 | |
| Todd Hundley (C) | 1990-2003 | 1225 | 102 | Roger Pavlik | 1992-1998 | 131 | 103 | |
| Terry Shumpert (2B) | 1990-2003 | 854 | 80 | Erik Hanson | 1988-1998 | 245 | 105 | |
| Albert Belle (OF) | 1989-2000 | 1539 | 143 | Kevin Tapani | 1989-2001 | 139 | 99 | |
| Derek Bell (OF) | 1991-2001 | 1210 | 99 | Jeff Tabaka | 1994-1998, 2001 | 130 | 96 | |
| Jeff Branson (SS) | 1992-1998, 2000-2001 | 694 | 77 | Dave Burba | 1990-2004 | 511 | 99 | |
| Bob Hamelin (1B) | 1993-1998 | 497 | 109 | Richie Lewis | 1992-1998 | 217 | 93 | |
| Dave Silvestri (SS) | 1992-1999 | 181 | 65 | Jeremy Hernandez | 1991-1995 | 133 | 114 | |
| Scott Livingstone (3B) | 1991-1998 | 673 | 86 | Eric Grunderson | 1990-92, 94-00 | 254 | 93 | |
| Brian Hunter (OF) | 1994-2003 | 1000 | 72 | Pete Schourek | 1991-2001 | 288 | 91 | |
| Clay Belllinger (SS) | 1999-2002 | 183 | 57 | Arthur Rhodes | 1991-2009 | 780 | 107 | |
| Andy Fox (3B) | 1996-2004 | 776 | 73 | Joe Slusarski | 1991-93, 95, 99-01 | 118 | 81 | |
| Darrell Whitmore (OF) | 1993-1995 | 112 | 44 | Chris Nabholz | 1990-1995 | 141 | 97 | |
| Jayhawk Owens (C) | 1993-1996 | 130 | 73 | Joe Grahe | 1990-1995, 1999 | 187 | 100 | |
| Aaron Ledesma (SS) | 1995, 1997-2000 | 283 | 81 | Frank Rodriguez | 1995-2001 | 184 | 88 | |
| Tim Hyers (1B) | 1994-1996, 2000 | 133 | 55 | Bob Wickman | 1992-2007 | 835 | 125 | |
| Kevin Stocker (SS) | 1994-1996, 1999-2004 | 846 | 79 | Chris Haney | 1991-2002 | 196 | 108 | |
| Herb Perry (3B) | 1994-1996, 1999-2004 | 529 | 96 | Bill Pulsipher | 1995, 98-01, 05 | 106 | 63 | |
| Terrell Lowery (OF) | 1997-2000 | 123 | 99 | Mike Matthews | 2000-2005 | 230 | 92 | |
| Bobby Hughes (C) | 1998-1999 | 133 | 75 | Jon Lieber | 1994-2008 | 401 | 103 | |
| Jason Giambi (1B) | 1995-2009 | 1952 | 143 | Tim Crabtree | 1995-2001 | 342 | 116 | |
| Brian Banks (C) | 1996-1998, 2002-2003 | 273 | 83 | Jeff Suppan | 1995-2009 | 412 | 98 | |
| Scott Rolen (3B) | 1996-2009 | 1748 | 124 | Jay Witasick | 1996-2007 | 405 | 97 | |
| Chris Singelton (OF) | 1999-2003, 2005 | 704 | 87 | Scott Sullivan | 1995-2004 | 558 | 113 | |
| Greg Norton (3B) | 1996-2009 | 1107 | 93 | Bryan Rekar | 1995-2002 | 131 | 87 | |
| Brad Fullmer (3B) | 1997-2004 | 807 | 111 | Jarrod Washburn | 1998-2009 | 312 | 109 | |
| Mike Darr (OF) | 1999-2001 | 188 | 93 | Brett Tomko | 1997-2009 | 389 | 92 | |
| George Lombard (OF) | 1998-00, 2002-03, 06 | 144 | 68 | Buddy Carlyle | 1999-00, 05, 07-09 | 104 | 76 | |
| Mark Bellhorn (SS) | 1997-2007 | 731 | 92 | Randy Wolf | 1999-2009 | 279 | 103 | |
| Ben Petrick (C) | 1999-2003 | 240 | 88 | Scott Linebrink | 2000-2009 | 491 | 122 | |
| Marlon Anderson (2B) | 1998-2009 | 1151 | 83 | Tyler Walker | 2002, 2004-09 | 262 | 101 | |
| Craig Wilson (C) | 2001-2007 | 698 | 113 | Chad Harville | 1999, 01, 03-06 | 175 | 85 | |
| Carlos Beltran (OF) | 1998-2009 | 1562 | 119 | Aaron Cook | 2002-2009 | 197 | 111 | |
| Sean Casey (1B) | 1997-2008 | 1405 | 109 | Matt Belisle | 2003, 2005-2009 | 156 | 89 | |
| Henry Mateo (SS) | 2001-2006 | 190 | 50 | Gary Majewski | 2004-2008 | 229 | 93 | |
| Jacque Jones (OF) | 1999-2008 | 1302 | 98 | John Lackey | 2002-2009 | 234 | 117 | |
| Milton Bradley (OF) | 2000-2009 | 941 | 115 | Jack Taschner | 2005-2009 | 202 | 88 | |
| Mike Caruso (SS) | 1998-1999, 2002 | 281 | 66 | Brian Tallet | 2002-03, 2005-09 | 189 | 102 | |
| Brent Abernathy (SS) | 2001-2003, 2005 | 232 | 67 | Joel Hanrahan | 2007-2009 | 148 | 89 | |
| Jimmy Rollins (SS) | 2000-2009 | 1406 | 97 | Manny Delcarmen | 2005-2009 | 241 | 125 | |
| Josh Paul (OF) | 1999-2007 | 321 | 68 | Chad Qualls | 2004-2009 | 241 | 125 | |
| Michael Restovich (OF) | 2002-2007 | 152 | 79 | Andrew Sisco | 2005-2007 | 151 | 88 | |
| Rick Ankiel (OF) | 1999-01, 2002, 07-09 | 342 | 98 | Brandon League | 2004-2009 | 168 | 108 | |
| Jason Grabowski (C) | 2002-2005 | 190 | 62 | Neal Cotts | 2003-2009 | 284 | 100 | |
| Gerald Laird (C) | 2003-2009 | 509 | 75 | Danny Haren | 2003-2009 | 196 | 123 | |
| Adam Dunn (OF) | 2001-2009 | 1290 | 132 | |||||
| Brandon Inge (C) | 2001-2009 | 1153 | 84 | |||||
| Jody Gerut (OF) | 2003-2005, 2008-2009 | 542 | 105 | |||||
| Chris Magruder (OF) | 2001-2005 | 270 | 66 | |||||
| Carl Crawford (OF) | 2002-2009 | 1081 | 103 | |||||
| Rob Bowen (C) | 2003-2004, 2006-2008 | 216 | 71 | |||||
| Brandon Phillips (2B) | 2002-2009 | 736 | 90 | |||||
| Ryan Doumit (C) | 2005-2009 | 410 | 104 | |||||
| Ryan Ludwick (OF) | 2002-2009 | 515 | 117 | |||||
| Ben Broussard (1B) | 2002-2008 | 705 | 105 | |||||
| Bobby Hill (2B) | 2002-2005 | 249 | 83 | |||||
| Xavier Nady (OF) | 2000, 2003-2009 | 679 | 108 | |||||
| Freddie Bynum (SS) | 2005-2008 | 188 | 68 | |||||
| Lance Niekro (3B) | 2003, 2005-2007 | 194 | 81 | |||||
| Kelly Shoppach (C) | 2005-2009 | 571 | 95 | |||||
| J.J. Hardy (SS) | 2005-2009 | 571 | 95 | |||||
| Dallas McPherson (3B) | 2004-2006, 2008 | 128 | 102 |
39 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
IMO, this was a good move
clearly the bullpen has been struggling for the last few years. instead of drafting yet another guy and stockpiling even more young arms, why not just go for the instant gratification of a guy who will probably end up performing better than a second rounder anyway?
Tennessee Born Baltimore Raised
And even better write-up
I noticed on the boards a few people with skepticism about giving up a “2nd round pick,” like this was the NFL or something. Fortunately for the Orioles, it seems like our scouting has really improved over the course of MacPhail’s tenure. If you go into the draft having done your homework, theres no reason need that 2nd round pick. Hell, the “diamond in the rough” may be lying somewhere in the later rounds even. Jerry Cransick (I know, I know…ESPN, but it helps prove the point) wrote an article in June of 2007 (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=2894316) highlighting some late round successes.
Mike Piazza in the 62nd round ’88
Albert Pujols in 13th round of ’99
Jeff Conine (a servicable Oriole) 58th round of ’87
Also, Dan Uggla, a rumored Oriole target at one point, was an 11th round pick.
The MLB draft is not comparable to NFL, NHL, NBA, etc. Especially because baseball is a sport that places a great deal (and necessity) upon player development for drafted players. I’m really glad Stacey wrote this. I also agree that Gonzales was worth the 2nd round pick.
I have to object to this form of analysis of the "value" of a second round pick
The problem is that one of the most significant assets a baseball franchise has are its minor league players. Yes, one of the ways that teams utilize these assets is by developing them into major league talent internally. But another significant use of prospects is on the trade market.
Take a look at the MLBTR series “Trades of the decade”:
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/11/discussion-the-trade-of-the-decade.html
Now, look at the players involved. Half of the players traded to the Mariners for Griffey never made the majors. One of the four players sent to Pittsburgh in the Ramirez/Bay three way deal has never made the majors and two more are marginal contributors at best. Two of the four prospects the Marlins received for Josh Beckett are not major league players, as is one of the five the Rangers acquired for Teixeira. And these are just the biggest deals of the last ten years.
Jason Knapp, one of the key pieces in the deal that sent Cliff Lee to Philly, was a 2008 second round pick. So was Jess Todd in 2007, one of the pieces in the deal that brought Matt Holliday to the Cards. So was Chris Tillman in 2006. So was Jeff Locke, one of the key pieces in the deal that brought Nate McLouth to Atlanta, and Brent Anderson, one of the keys to the Dan Haren trade, and Justin Masterson from the Victor Martinez deal. And that’s disregarding top prospects who are still with the team that drafted them like Mike Stanton of the Marlins, Freddie Freeman of the Braves, Austin Romine of the Yankees, and James Darnell of the Padres, all of whom might be busts in the majors but have a lot of trade value right now. In fact, looking at the 2008 second round class, nearly all of them have a lot of trade value: Kyle Lobstein, Anthony Gose, Destin Hood, Robbie Ross, Tyler Ladendorf (already dealt to acquire Orlando Cabrera), Zeke Spruill, Derrick Gibson and Charles Blackmon are all players on their respective teams top 20 prospect lists.
So maybe the person we take in the second round doesn’t make the big leagues or doesn’t make an impact when they do. But they could be the lead prospect in a deal bringing us a Victor Martinez, or a Cliff Lee, or an Adrian Gonzalez for that matter. And they could have been that prospect in one year, ready to bring us a superstar when we’re looking to contend in 2011. And that’s my problem with giving up the pick for Gonzalez. We’re making it harder to get the great player we need soon to get the good player we don’t have much use for now.
to get the good player we don’t have much use for now
..and that’s the debateable part. Some would argue, myself included, that it’s crucial to the team’s success this year that we have some sense of confidence when we hand the game off to the bullpen—particularly for the psyches of the younger pitchers. The bullpen’s performance post-Sherrill last year was a disaster, and in September it was a downright tailspin.
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
Well, here we can open a whole can of worms
Such as how much better Gonzalez is than Capps, Valverde, and so on, as well as whether the “psyches” of the younger pitchers are truly effected by what the bullpen does, and so on. Not to mention the health risk that comes with Gonzalez.
That said, there is certainly a case to be made that the tradeoff is worth making. But it is important to see the entire scope of the value we’re giving up.
Don't rule out
the possibility of Gonzalez re-signing after 2011. We are much more likely to have him in 2012 than if he went and signed a 2 year deal with the Angels or something.
That's a fair point
But I have hard time quantifying what kind of prospect one would need to draft in order to prepare for future trades. Is the only requirement that the prospect be drafted in one of the earliest rounds? If so, it seems that we’d have to assume that the general managers aren’t kinda dim and uninformed. I think that losing one pick might push the talent pool down a little bit but then the Orioles will have that much more money for signing other picks, drafting people that might otherwise slip down due to signability or money issues.
Well, here it always varies
There are typically four major categories of players taken in the second (and third) rounds: solid but low-ceiling prospects, like Tyler Townsend; players with first-round talent but positional and/or attitude and/or injury questions, like Mychal Givens; raw, toolsy types like Xavier Avery; and the top signability players, like Luke Bailey this year. The first category are attractive here because they sign for slot, the second and fourth due to talent, and the third due to upside. And while there are signability players like Ohlman who remain available in the later rounds, Ohlman didn’t cost that much less than Bailey but isn’t nearly as good of a prospect.
So, when it comes to trades, it all can be valuable. The first category is most likely to retain their value, but it isn’t that huge to begin with. The other three categories have more upside and more downside. But what I think matters is two things: the first is that in the second round, over two thirds of the players taken have significant trade value, and the second is that most prospects have a lot more value as prospects than they ever do in the major leagues. This is because young talent that does have value in the major leagues is so vastly underpaid that everyone covets it.
In this sense, you can never have too many prospects, and having a lot of them allows you to both trade them aggressively to meet your major league needs and to develop young stars from within. The Red Sox have done this, aggressively trading top prospects including Hanley Ramirez, while at the same time having enough depth to have developed Pedroia and Lester and Papelbon and Ellsbury and Youklis. That is the most efficient path to success.
Don't forget the other part of the Boston strategy
I think they avg like 30mil/ yr in payroll for players not even on the team.
by GeoffreyA on Dec 18, 2009 4:55 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Yes
They spend money that we can’t spend, and some of it unwisely.
But there is no reason that we can’t spend what they do on player development, and since our picks have been much higher in the draft, we should come out ahead of them.
We’re literally only a handful more draft picks and international signings away from being able to trade for people like Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Johnson and other stars without losing any of the minor league depth we have now. Whether or not those players make the majors, that would represent an investment in our major-league future.
What about players that Gonzalez might bring back?
If I understand you, you are arguing that Stacey is undervaluing the draftees because she is not considering the “potential players” they might bring in return. If you bring those into the equation, don’t you also have to consider the potential players Gonzalez might bring back? For instance, the draft picks he might bring if he leaves as a Type A FA in two years?
Am I making sense? I think Stacey is right to limit the variables. Adding in ALL potential players might shift the balance by a percent or two, but they will be close enough to offsetting to make her research good enough for the purposes of discussion.
Well, sure...
…that said, I don’t know that the Orioles will offer arbitration, I don’t know that Gonzalez will be a Type A free agent again, I don’t know that free agent compensation will still exist after the next CBA (in fact, I’m pretty sure it won’t, at least not in its current form), and I don’t know that Gonzalez will be healthy enough to trade in the future. And moreover, I know that with the market as it currently stands, prospects are overvalued on the trade market and current players are undervalued, so we will probably get a lesser return trying to deal an established reliever than we would a B/B+ prospect.
I’m going to stand by my previously stated opinion – most prospects are more valuable as prospects than they are as major leaguers.
But you're comparing apples and oranges
In a trade, a prospect has some demonstrated big-league value. In the draft, he doesn’t. So to compare Jason Knapp to what we might have gotten in next year’s second round isn’t fair.
by mystery tramp on Dec 19, 2009 10:47 PM EST up reply actions
My philosophy
My philosophy is to pick a year when the Orioles might contend. It won’t be 2010, but it might be 2011 or 2012. Every move that I made would be tested against whether the move would improve the 2012 team. Thus, I would not have traded for Milwood unless I were convinced that having him eat innings in 2010 will improve the pitchers who will be on the mound. For example, having Millwood might allow Arrieta to improve in the minors rather than force feeding him to the majors. Thus, I would not have signed Gonzales. But, I might have signed Atkins because his presence in the majors will buy time for Bell to develop at Norfolk.
I don’t think that the young pitchers are devastated by what the bullpen does. I think that they worry about their ERA and the 5-7 innings that they turn in. Hence, I would not have given up a 2nd round pick for Gonzales. We probably won’t have Gonzales in 2012, but we would have the draft pick.
Speaking of which
I don’t know if anyone posted KLaw’s opinion on the signing, and at this point it would probably be lost on the Gonzalez story. I won’t post the whole thing since it’s Insider, but some here it is:
I don’t see Gonzalez making a huge difference for the Orioles in 2010, since contention is close to out of the question next year — but they’re going to be a dark horse in 2011 as their young starters gain experience, more kids like Josh Bell and maybe Brandon Snyder arrive, and Matt Wieters unleashes hellfire on the American League. At this point, having a premium late-game reliever would make more sense, both in baseball and financial terms.
If anything, the loss of the second-round pick is the real negative here, as the Orioles are still building and have added some talent through their high picks in the last few drafts under scouting director Joe Jordan. It’s certainly a top-60 pick and could end up a top-50 pick depending on where the remaining Type A and Type B free agents land, and Jordan’s track record is good enough that I’d hesitate to ever take a top-100 pick away from him while the team remains in building mode.
http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=4750863&name=law_keith
I will say this
It is interesting to me that the people like Law, Fangraphs, the Hardball Times, etc. all hate this deal a lot less than I do. The only analyst I’ve seen whose reaction was similar to mine was Rob Neyer.
Another discussion piece to flesh out...
Since Andy MacPhail’s arrival to Baltimore, is there a personnel move he has made that was a step backward? He’s trimmed the fat, overhauled the outfield, set up a successful, tiered blueprint for developing the young pitchers we have in the minors, and pursued free agents who are the right men for the right time. Example, personally I wasn’t crazy about Milwood. But Milwood a couple million for a Rule 5 draft pick and Chris Ray, you’ve gotta tip your cap. He must know that a 2nd round pick for one year (1 year, not like we’ve traded away all of our 2nd round picks for the next 20 years) isn’t a step backward. The man is savvy. He has also made it clear that he intends to re-establish the organization bottom-up, through the draft each year.
All in all, James, you present a good point, but if the Orioles returning to winning ways hinges on the 2nd round draft pick of the 2010 Amateur draft, we’ve got issues.
I'll point out of course...
…that winning and losing isn’t the only concern for MacPhail and the real-life Orioles. They need to attract fans and good employees. I don’t think that the future depends on one pick as much as it does the Orioles as an organization calculating the value of their assets properly. Their returning to winning ways does depend on that.
However, they have to care of the impact on the fans of blowouts and meltdowns, and I don’t – in this context, a loss is a loss. They have to care about the perception of the team among professionals in the game. Heck, they have to care about getting themselves on ESPN. I don’t fail to see that there are reasons to make this move that I know about, and lots more than I have no idea about. And I’m inclined to agree with the Hardball Times piece that pointed out we got him at a discount in dollar terms.
But I care that we value the second round pick properly. I’m willing to spend it just as much as I’m willing to deal the prospect we’d get with it. I just want to get the most out of it.
The bullpen is important
whether we contend or not in 2010. We’ve seen 30-3. We’ve seen the meltdowns post-Sherrill. I believe those things wear on a team’s psyche (not to mention a fan’s psyche). It’s losing plus the added burden of losing when ahead. Not to mention that absent a true closer you can damage the confidence of relievers who wind up misplaced in their respective roles. The benefit of a quality closer extends beyond that pitcher to the rest of the bullpen as well.
again...
If the success of failure Orioles franchise, namely our farm system and stock of usable or tradeable prospects is in a “make or break” hinging on the 2010 2nd round pick of the Amatuer Draft…I should prob start shopping around for a new team to watch.
Secondly, I think for our future to be successful it is critical to provide our young rotation with a solid bullpen behind it. These guys are still going to have some rough patches to go through. If we want them here and effective we owe them support in the form of a deep pool of bullpen arms that will be freed up from specific roles with the aquisition of Gonzales who may or may not be our closer, thus leaving johnson to 8th inning duties.
I guess
the question is which is more valuable: Mike Gonzalez or our second rounder this year plus the opportunity to acquire someone else. Here’s why I think the latter is more valuable.
A lot of the talk about Gonzalez’s positives are how he “settles the bullpen” and lines everyone up (or whatever). But Jim Johnson could just as easily been the closer in 2010 and probably done a pretty darn good job at it, too. So we’re giving up the money and draft pick to basically move Dennis Sarfate out of the bullpen, essentially replacing the replacement level Sarfate with Jim Johnson (and Johnson with Gonzalez), which will probably net us something like a win.
Even if you don’t want to use WAR or other advanced metrics (your loss), you have to acknowledge that a) Gonzalez is not significantly better than Johnson, and b) the impact difference between any two relievers, regardless of how much better one is than the other just doesn’t amount to much. Maybe in your mind it’s a win and a half difference now. Maybe it’s one win. But it isn’t a big difference, really (though of course every win means something). And so we’re giving up a second round draft pick for “not a massive difference”.
And we could have replaced Sarfate with an arm in a lot of ways that didn’t come with the cost of any draft picks (internal options or the completely overlooked Kiko Calero) which could have also easily netted a similar type of improvement in terms of wins.
In other words, the Orioles gave up a draft pick – which even if you don’t consider especially valuable definitely is still valuable – for the name-value of a “proven closer” when a lesser option would have provided similar value for less cost. And therefore it is an obvious overpayment, and for a team that still projects to win 75ish games this year (barring other moves) it was foolhardy, even if it doesn’t exactly set the Orioles back in any truly meaningful way.
"I like baseball, movies, good clothes, whiskey, fast cars ... and you. What else you need to know?"
What the hell?
But Jim Johnson could just as easily been the closer in 2010 and probably done a pretty darn good job at it, too.
Jim Johnson was AWFUL as a closer this year:
Split BA OBP SLG OPS BAbip tOPS+ sOPS+ 8th inning .228 .308 .346 .654 .265 76 81 9th inning .311 .357 .487 .844 .340 125 143
What makes you think he’ll suddenly develop a talent for it next season?
"I doubt he could reach [second base]...mostly cuz his fucking arm was in Aybar's nuts." – twistedlogic
I don't know how much Capps cost....but judging from what your arguments are I'm assuming he's the guy you would have wanted
But mlbtrade rumors said Valverde is a type A free agent as well, so going after him would be moot point. And based on what Johnson did last year as a closer (albeit he was going thru the birth of his first kid) it seems like he would need a little more grooming before he closes out games. The idea of him as a closer is great because his command is good and he throws hard, he seems to have the mentality for it too. But he might need a year or two before he can. I just don’t think were going to agree on this. I like the Gonzalez move, Capps may not have cost us a draft pick but Valverde seemingly would. When it comes to anything that has to do with money and budgeting I usually just go with what MacPhail says/does becasue he seems pretty shrewd.
lets not forget
the O’s have the third pick in the draft, and by forgoing the 2nd round pick they’ll be able to concentrate on signing that prospect + dedicate the bonus money they spent there to the 1st round.
I think this is a smart move overall, and closers are hard to come by — and i don’t think we have anyone on staff that can grow into the role in the next couple years.
re:
closers are hard to come by — and i don’t think we have anyone on staff that can grow into the role in the next couple years.
I can’t disagree with this sentiment enough. We’ve already seen that Jim Johnson can handle the role just fine.
"I like baseball, movies, good clothes, whiskey, fast cars ... and you. What else you need to know?"
maybe the numbers say that
But all I can think of is Jim Johnson at the end of the year giving up runs and being the saddest sack in history. I mean, I think I agree with you and I think he’d probably be ok, but that’s what pops into my head.
And perhaps all that was because the season wore on him...
I still like the Gonzalez signing if nothing else because of what he represents over the next two years. First, no matter what has been said, his numbers are solid. Against righties, against lefties, the guy can get them out while keeping their batting average below .250. That’s pretty fantastic.
More importantly, however, is the future. 2011 is when we expect this team to compete. It’s at that point that their placement on the draft board will be lower because, hopefully, they will no longer be basement dwellers. If that’s the case, and Gonzalez moves on having taught Kam or JJ or someone else the ropes to closing, the guy leaves as a type-A free agent, netting them two draft picks. Barring that Gonzalez’s arm falls off or he doesn’t pitch at all, he’s going to be a type-A because he’s a closer and if you look at the closers that were out there, they’re mostly type-As.
There’s some foresight.
I don't know about this
I touched on this before in my post on the bullpen, but Johnson is simply not an elite reliver – he doesn’t strike out nearly enough people. In 2008, he well outperformed his FIP of 3.38 and his 2009 FIP was pretty much in line with his 2009 ERA at 4.30. Worse yet, there is a good indicator that even his 2008 FIP was lucky, as his 2008 xFIP was 4.49.
I am also arguing against the Gonzalez signing, but not because I think Johnson is good enough. On a contender, I think Johnson is a seventh inning guy.
The entire position of "closer" is overrated
and often one of the easier tasks in the bullpen. I know that’s not going to play well with a lot of you all, but it’s my belief – and the closer is especially overrated on a mediocre team. I mean, you don’t even need to tell me you disagree because I know, but this is where I’m coming from.
What gets me is that Andy MacPhail seemed to know this when he made Sherrill the closer and then flipped him for Bell. That was some brilliant maneuvering, and then he comes back with this? It’s just inconsistent if nothing else.
"I like baseball, movies, good clothes, whiskey, fast cars ... and you. What else you need to know?"
Sure, there's that
I think that you bring up an excellent point there, but regardless of which innings they pitch, there are elite relievers, and Johnson I just don’t think will be one of them.
I also agree that we don't need an elite reliever now...
…and as I’ve written before, most elite relief seasons are flukes, so I don’t think that paying a lot for a reliever is smart.
But in this context, I was simply pointing out that if we want one, Johnson isn’t it.
I couldn't agree less
Having a decent bullpen and a shut down closer is essential to any team that wants to win a few games. Are you saying that Mariano Rivera is overrated? That simply doesn’t make sense. The Orioles want to compete in 2011, then they need to start winning some games in 2010. They probably won’t make a run at the playoffs this year. Fine. But they should have a goal of winning 82 games in 2010. Millwood and Gonzalez will help them in that direction. I simply do not agree that relief pitchers are failed starters. It may have been true twenty years ago, but no longer is. Closers are not overrated. I will not concede that to you.
Look brother
neither of us is going to convince the other (or anybody who disagrees with themselves) on this particular issue, so we’ll just have to let it be.
Why should they have a goal of winning 82 games? Yeah, I want to have the pride of a winning season, too, but look at Toronto. They had a decade where they had multiple seasons over .500 and didn’t even come close to sniffing the playoffs once. Not once. In my book, .500 cannot be the goal – that’s aiming way too low.
I will admit though, that while these moves do not help us get to the playoffs, they don’t exactly hinder us. But you could argue that because they don’t really do anything, why bother doing them in the first place?
"I like baseball, movies, good clothes, whiskey, fast cars ... and you. What else you need to know?"
well, when you've hit the bottom
you can’t go anywhere but up.
by twistedlogic on Dec 19, 2009 5:00 PM EST up reply actions
Splitting hairs over hypotheticals
I want to see the Orioles win games where they have the lead in the 8th. Not in 2011 or 2012, but in 2010!
The fact that they went out and got someone who just might be able to do that job makes me happy. And just think: He’ll be pitching to Mr. Wieters.
Enough to warm me in this cold New England freezer where I live.
50/50
I understand and agree with what this article says BUT…I counted about 15 very good players on that list…i.e. Carlos Beltran/John Lackey type of players and IF the up coming draft is deep enough and IF MacPhail feels that he can pick a player in the 2nd round who will make it to the majors and play more than 175 games in the majors in the next 3 years then I say he should have stayed with the 2nd round pick, if not the new pitcher is fine.




















