Scott Boras' Critique of Free Agency
By Ryan Rosso
So Matt and I realized that there was more going on in the baseball world that isn't necessarily conducive to our normal fastball/changeup style. So in an effort to get some more posts out, we decided to create the "Extra Innings" portion of the blog to give us an opportunity to comment on other aspects of the league. We hope you enjoy!
Scott Boras' last major high profile client, Kyle Lohse, signed with the Milwaukee Brewers earlier this week, giving the notorious agent the ability to finally sound off over the new free agency rules.
Lohse with a Milwaukee M
Venting to FoxSports.com, Boras claimed, "When you have a system that does not reward performance, you know we have something corrupt in the major league process. You cannot have that in the major league system, because it's not rewarding performance." Boras later goes on to claim that the new process hurt Kyle Lohse and Adam LaRoche from locking down larger contracts.
But is it fair to call the new process corrupt?
During the offseason, MLB updated free agency procedures in yet another attempt to improve the competitive levels of small market teams. Previously, players were allocated a ranking by the Elias Sports Bureau. Players who had an A or B ranking and denied arbitration forced their new teams to give up a draft pick. While the new team had to forfeit the draft pick, they did not have to forfeit over the signing bonuses associated with those picks.
Under the new system, only players who are offered qualifying offers of $13.3 million are tied to draft picks. This pool of players is substantially lower than before, but when teams sign other free agents, they must also forfeit over the draft pick signing bonus, which ranges from $100,000 to $2.6 million (the first 10 picks are protected from being poached). This money reduces the total pool of dollars, which is regulated by the MLB based on draft pick slot values, and reduces the overall amount teams can offer to players as signing bonuses.
This changes how teams need to approach their draft picks, since they now will have to balance between building the current team and replenishing their farm system. The new system also creates different interpretations of draft pick value depending on when the team wants to be competitive and helps small market teams compete against the deeper-pocketed teams.
Under the old system, big market teams were able to poach big stars, and while they lost a draft pick, they could just roll over the bonus money associated with that pick to a larger signing bonus for a later pick. With money finally being sacrificed, small market teams are compensated for losing out on their players that they just can't afford to keep anymore, and can still offer appropriate signing bonuses to their additional draftees. The additional draft picks coupled with the additional draft pool money will help stack small market farm teams with top prospects. While there is risk associated with prospect development, a deep farm system reduces this risk, as seen with the 2012 A's. Strong seasons can then boost ticket sales, creating the additional revenue needed to keep homegrown talent.
Any system created to help increase the competitive level of the game can't be considered corrupt, but the "corrupt" claim implies that the system is broken with a certain party not receiving their fair share.
Boras is correct in claiming that it reduces the value of players who received qualifying offers. But, he doesn't seem to see that these players contracts are becoming more in line with their actual market value. Kyle Lohse couldn't find a home with teams looking to win now, and the contract Boras was after was too pricey for those looking to rebuild. As a result, Boras had to lower his normally-astronomically-high asking price to compensate for a lost draft pick. This resulted in less money for a pitcher who is on the backend of a career with one good season.
As one NL exec said, "If we really want the player and feel he can make the difference for us in having a championship club – or building toward a championship club – it's not a significant factor. Look, we all like picks and prospects, but even among the top 50 prospects in the game more than half of them never make it." Top free agents Josh Hamilton, who signed with the Angels, Nick Swisher, who signed with the Indians, and BJ Upton, who signed with the Rays, all signed huge contracts despite draft pick compensation, showing that the tradeoff is, in some situations, worth it.
Thus it becomes clear that the only people losing out on this new system are the agents pushing the value up for all MLB players. To quote MLB's top labor executive, "The fact that one Scott Boras client has not signed does not convince me that the system is broken." I can't help but agree.
It's ok Scotty, qualifying offers aren't that bad.
Aroldis Chapman: To Start or Close?
The Fastball
By: Ryan
No 9th inning pitcher was feared more last year than Aroldis Chapman. The dude is a beast; standing 6'4 and throwing heat that tops 100 mph, he easily overpowers hitters and eliminates late game heroics. This kind of dominance led to extensive speculation in the offseason about a possible switch to the front half of games. If your best pitcher is your closer, why not have him start?
While this seems like an easy switch to make for a pitcher, there aren't that many pitchers who have successfully made the switch. Sure there are numerous guys who have done it, but only John Smoltz and Dennis Eckersley remain the only two pitchers to record a 20 W season and a 50 Save season in their careers. The lack of other dominant names suggest the difficulties that pitchers face when transitioning, all of which should be considered when thinking about where Aroldis will pitch.
Obviously, the biggest difference between the two pitching roles is the number of innings. This impacts pitchers in two ways. First is the additional innings during the game, which is analogous to the difference between a sprinter and marathon runner. The marathon runner has to worry about their pace and making it to the end of the race, which is similar to the starter who needs to worry having enough juice to make it deep into the game. In comparison, the sprinter just needs to hurry up and finish. If Aroldis where to start games, his 100+ fastball would likely need be reduced to the mid 90's so that he could log innings. A mid 90's fastball is still great, but it lacks the dominance that helps Chapman as a closer. Without trying to overpower hitters on speed alone, Aroldis would have to develop great control over his pitches (which he isn't known for).
The additional innings also brings Aroldis' durability into question. His workload will increase from 75 innings a year to 180+. This is a huge increase, especially for someone who experienced left should fatigue after pitching 70 innings last year. The Reds could attempt to mediate this by implementing an innings cap similar to Strasburg after Tommy John, but that also presents problems that question the motive to move Chapman to SP.
An innings cap wouldn't be the only thing Chapman would share with Stras, both are known for the infamous inverted W pitching motion. This is know to cause tremendous strain on the pitcher's elbow and shoulder, sometimes resulting in Tommy John surgery as was the case with Strasburg. The inverted W could also explain Chapman's fatigue at the end of last year, and exposes the risks that can come with a heavier workload.
See any similarities?
If Chapman were to start, he'd also have to work through the lineup numerous times in a game. One of the key advantages pitchers use to do so is employ different pitches to deceive the hitter. Currently, Chapman has a fastball, a fastball, and a fastball. Ken Rosenthal of FoxSports.com saw Chapman start recently in spring training and noted, "He couldn't get his off-speed stuff over the plate." This is a major problem for any pitcher no matter how fast you throw. Without at least two more pitches at major league level, Chapman shouldn't even be considered for the starting role.
It won't help the Reds get to the playoffs by having Chapman struggle and become another mid rotation starter with an injury risk. Instead the Reds are making the right choice by leaving Chapman as the closer and the head a dominant bullpen.
How can we forget.
The Changeup
By: Matt
Aroldis Chapman wants to be a closer. The Reds are shooting for a World Series crown this year and Chapman was one of the best closers in baseball last year. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right? Well…not exactly. Quite simply, if the Cincinnati Reds want to get the maximum value out of Aroldis Chapman. They need him to be a starting pitcher.
When the Reds originally signed Chapman to a six-year, $30.25 million contract in 2010, it was with the intention of making him into a starter. He was only thrust into the closer role last year because of injuries. And he took to it. He became one of the elite closers in baseball and his triple-digit fastball put fear into the hearts of many hitters. The back end of the Cincinnati bullpen was quite formidable, especially after a midseason trade for Jonathan Broxton. And the Reds roared into the playoffs with one of the best records in baseball before they ran into trouble. The ace of the staff Cueto went down with an injury, and the rest of the Cincinnati starters were not able to match up, leaving games out of reach and Chapman sitting in the bullpen watching. He logged only 3 innings of work, and gave up 1 run. Not quite the domination that fans were used to during the regular season. Mostly, since he didn't get the chance to showcase his stuff in limited innings due to his role.
The role of the closer is sexy. They have been immortalized by Hoffman, Rivera, Wild Thing, and Beard, but their value is way overstated.
Dominating Closers. Small WARs.
Short Term Value
While WAR has its downsides as a statistic, it is a decent metric for assessing value and will work for this case. Chapman posted a 3.6 WAR last year as the Cincinnati closer which ranked him among the top relievers, however, the difference between WAR for an average and an elite closer is about 1.0. For comparison, Chapman's possible replacement Jonathan Broxton had a 1.1 WAR in 35 innings with Kansas City before his trade, so if you were to project his numbers across the 70+ innings that Chapman pitched in the regular season you would put him at about 2.2, close to the league average. So, we can project Chapman as about a +1 win player by keeping him in the closer role. An elite closer definitely helps their team, but as you can see, their value is limited.
Now let's compare with starting pitchers. The league average starter that pitches a full season posts a WAR of around 2.3. The Reds fifth starter, Mike Leake would be the most likely to lose his job were Chapman to move to the rotation. Last year, he made 30 starts, threw 179 innings. Posted a 4.58 ERA and a 4.47 FIP, meaning these numbers were pretty close to accurate. All of this amounted to a WAR of 0.6. Even if Chapman were to not reach ace status and post only his baseline ZiPS projection, he would post a 3.63 ERA across 144 innings with a WAR of around 3.0. This would be far better than Leake, and create more net value and wins for the Reds in the short term than keeping him in the bullpen.
Long Term Value
As for the long term, the value would be way better. The track record for changing relievers into starters is there. Daniel Bard, Neftali Feliz, Lance Lynn, Jeff Samardzija, and Chris Sale have all had success recently. The most obvious comparison for our purposes is with Sale. The hard-throwing lefty made the transition from bullpen to starter last year to great results. The Sox were careful about spacing out his starts and giving him enough rest and he posted a 3.05 ERA in 192 innings with 192 Ks and 5.7 Wins Above Replacement. Sale made the jump to ace status immediately, and since both are hard-throwing left handers with movement, it seems possible that Chapman could do the same. The stuff is obviously there, as Chapman can pop 100 with ease. His slider is nasty, and reports show that his changeup, though still developing was starting to come along in Spring Training. If he were to start, comparisons to Randy Johnson or Dontrelle Willis's early years are easy to make. If Chapman came even close to these levels, the Reds would be foolish to keep him trapped in the bullpen.
Starters like Chris Sale get all the love.
The Reds have a team that is built around a strong core of young players. Joey Votto, Jay Bruce, Todd Frazier, Johnny Cueto, Mat Latos, and Brandon Phillips are all under contract for multiple years, and all except for Phillips are under 30. The team does not have to mortgage their future to win right now, and by moving Chapman to a starting role, they would create more value in the short and long term.
World Baseball Classic or World Baseball Flop?
Congratulations to the World Champion Dominican Republic, the best team in baseball! Ok, so no one actually believes that the WBC winner is the best team, but that doesn't mean that the Classic isn't good for baseball.
World Banana Champions
Putting baseball on a national stage is first and foremost the best part of the Classic. This year's tournament received record ratings in Japan and Puerto Rico and did a lot to showcase the international stars of the game.
74% of TVs on in Puerto Rico tuned in to final moments of PR's #WBC win over Japan Monday.
— MLB (@MLB) March 19, 2013
More important than ratings, though, is the passion the game creates. Baseball was eliminated as an Olympic sport in 2008, and since that time the Classic has stepped in to fill the void. The "World Series" is a bit of a misnomer, as American baseball only has one Canadian team. However, the best players from around the world want to play in the MLB because they get to face the best competition and get paid the most money. While many of the players on the non US teams looked familiar, that they were playing for national pride heightened the meaning for many. The best part about this event is the passion it inspired in both the fans and players. American baseball is not the only style played, and the Latin fans and players showed a passion for every at bat that I haven't witnessed in American baseball except in the playoffs.
I understand that the WBC doesn't have the best players, as some are afraid of injury or afraid that it will affect their normal routines in preparing for the season. This is the normal argument, but it just isn't true. Jayson Stark writes that players playing who played in the WBC were 1/2 as likely to suffer an injury as those that did not. With this knowledge, the best players have no excuse not to represent their country. If the US filled out a roster with Verlander, Kershaw, Trout and Posey you mean to tell me you wouldn't be waving the flag and cheering with everything you've got? That's a tournament I'd like to see.
Baseball is a great game that has a huge international presence. While it isn't anywhere near soccer in terms of world popularity, the sheer number of foreign born athletes in the MLB shows the ability for the sport to grow and develop players outside the United States. At the start of the 2012 season, 28.4% of players on Opening Day rosters were born outside the US. And with players like Roberto Clemente, Fernando Valenzuela, and Ichiro decorating the game's past, there is an incentive for Bud Selig to seek development of international talent, both for the betterment of the game and his pocketbook. With an excellent model in the World Cup, which even manages to get the US excited about soccer, and removal from the Olympic games, baseball can pull on the national pride of its fans to create a similar tournament. Yet the current setup is a disaster. The World Baseball Classic is a great idea that is horrendously executed.
The biggest and most obvious flaw within the WBC is its timing. Taking place only weeks after pitchers and catchers report, the WBC forces players to enter a playoff mentality without even getting accustomed to a regular season game. With rusty players, there is going to be a large discrepancy in player output. The March start time for the WBC also puts MLB teams in an awkward position. Teams want to respect their players' wishes to play for their home country, but at the same time they don't want to lose their stars to injury not even 30 days before the start of the season.
Unfortunately, this happened this year as the Mets lost their one remaining notable player, David Wright, to an injured rib cage. He is currently questionable for Opening Day. The Dodgers refused to let their ace, Clayton Kershaw, partake in the WBC this past year in an overprotective measure to prevent any residual inures from flaring up. With teams getting more protective of their players, a trend likely to increase in the future, less stars enter the tournament, leaving the WBC as an exhibition for teams to develop their AAA talent at something more competitive than Spring Training.
If there's fewer stars, there's fewer fans, which could explain the struggling attendance. Recently, there was a China-Brazil game in Japan which brought in 3,100 people (at least that's what was announced). A similar attendance was present at the China-Cuba game a day earlier. While some might try to disregard these events since Japan wasn't playing in either of the games, the low turnout does speak against the execution of the WBC and lack of internationally relevent star power.
Can you find 3,000 people in this photo?
Another flaw within the WBC is its ability to go dormant for years at a time. Unlike the World Cup, where teams begin qualifying and playing together years before the tournament, national teams dissipate until the next WBC starts. Even if they are playing together, they lack the star presence that fills out the rosters once every four years. This leaves teams no time to develop chemistry, minimizing the chances of a cinderella story and essentially designating the winner as the team has the most raw talent. In other words, you don't get a Giants 2013 story in the WBC.
The WBC does little to encourage other countries from trying to qualify for the tournament. Every team who won one measly game in the 2009 WBC was guaranteed a berth in the 2013 tournament. The teams who didn't win were forced to duke it out in a qualifying round with other interested countries. Thus, between the rest of the world, two spots were up for grabs out of 16. This does little to stimulate competition and international excitement, unless you live in one of the "pre-selected" countries.
One final interesting tid-bit shows how out of touch the WBC is with the rest of the world. The Netherlands team is comprised predominantly of players from Curacao. Curacao is an autonomous territory that is part of the Netherlands, somewhat similar to Puerto Rico's relationship with the United States. However, Puerto Rico has its own team in the WBC, whereas Curacao is listed as the Netherlands. At least Curacao has its own World Cup team.
Curacao National Soccer Team
A lot needs to change in the WBC for it to accomplish what it was designed to do. Until then, we'll wait for Opening Day.
Should I Stay or Should I Go? – Oakland A's
Even though the Oakland Athletics won the AL West last season, team owner, Lou Wolff, has not let the champagne bottles distort his goal of moving the team out of Oakland and into the South Bay. While there has only been one team that has changed cities in nearly 40 years, the move makes sense for both the Oakland Athletics and the City of San Jose.
The Oakland A's have been struggling with a fan base that just doesn't seem to want to turn out to games. Since the Barry Zito days (2005), the team has had yearly attendance in the bottom five of all MLB teams every year and was dead last in two of those seasons. Last year, even though the team came from behind to clinch the ALDS on the last day of the season, they still had the fourth worst attendance on the year, averaging only 20,000 fans per game. If we instead look at attendance percentage, the 2012 number looks pretty impressive at 60%. While this rating seems fairly high, the stadium is listed at only holding 35,000 people, with tarps blocking off an extra 20,000 seats that are usually full for Raiders games. Even though the relocation news is motivating the community to make awesome t-shirts and create buyer groups willing to commit to a downtown stadium, it doesn't seem to have any effect on fan turn out. Unfortunately, the A's simply can't afford to stay in Oakland if turnout remains this low.
The timing makes sense as well, since the team is in need of a new stadium. Oakland Coliseum is considered one of the worst stadiums in the MLB, alongside Tropicana Field. Even Bud agrees with this statement. This concrete behemoth is the last multi-purpose stadium left in the United States, and the Mt. Davis facelift it received in 1996, turned the Coliseum into a football stadium that baseball teams play in. Instead of making a new Coliseum in Oakland, which would commit them to the area and obligate them to the taxpayers (if it were publicly funded), it makes more sense for the A's to move now, so they can begin to develop and invest in their new community.
Mt. Davis is above the Center Field wall.
Economically, it makes the most sense for the A's to move to San Jose. There is no doubt that the team would do wonders for the San Jose economy, reports indicate a $2.9 billion impact over 30 years. This type of money would make any city excited over the possibility of a MLB team moving within their lines. Additionally, the economic benefit to the A's, although not as large, will surely do wonders for the competitiveness of the team. A move to San Jose would eliminate the team's eligibility for revenue sharing dollars, which in recent seasons has been around $30 million. Yet, many expect the team to make millions more from ticket sales, concessions, and luxury seats, leaving the A's in a far better position. This increased revenue will roll over into increased wins, finally giving the A's the money to lock down their talent instead of shipping them to the Yankees.
Nick Swisher: Former Athletic
Thus it becomes clear that a move to San Jose would expand on the recent resurgence found in the A's organization last season and should be the favorite option for the team in the future. If it doesn't work out, they can always change their name to the San Jose Athletics of Oakland.
My colleague makes some good points about the low turnout of fans in recent seasons. Without fans a team cannot pay its players enough to be competitive. Additionally, without many fans, it is hard to attract players to your team.
That being said, in the years since 2005, the A's have had only three winning seasons: 2005, 2006 and 2012. It takes a special kind of person to support a team when they have a culture of losing so Oaklanders can be forgiven if they are not buying tickets every night to watch a below .500 team. But in the 2012 season, the A's played well and made the playoffs on a remarkable run, and what happened? The fans showed up and the A's had their highest yearly attendance in 5 years. It's no coincidence that in '05, '06, and '12, the A's averaged 1.92 million people per year, while in their losing seasons they averaged 1.57 million. If you play well, they will come.
The 2012 Oakland Athletics
The way that this debate has drawn out for so many years shows a few things. One, the Giants territorial claim has merit and the commissioner is serious about upholding those rights. And two, though San Jose may be a good place to put a team financially, members of the Oakland community are serious about keeping the A's.
The idea of "territory" might seem silly to some, but the San Jose Giants have been around since 1988 and have built up a following. They have won 6 class-A league titles in that span and helped to develop more than one hundred big league players. The Giants are serious about keeping San Jose as part of their territory in the same way that the Red Sox would be adamant about blocking an expansion team in Connecticut.
It will be interesting to see if the fans show up for the 2013 season. Coming off a good year that did a lot to build up Oakland pride as well as returning fan favorites like Coco Crisp and Grant Balfour should help boost attendance. But there is only so much of an argument you can make for staying if fans don't show. It will also be up to business leaders in the Oakland community to come together to put a plan for a new stadium or a renovation of the Coliseum and the surrounding area that shows investment in the community and seriousness about keeping the team around. There is opportunity for all in a new stadium in Oakland, but if Wolff has already made up his mind about leaving he may not see it.
So, what do you think? Should the A's stay put or move to greener (and golder) pastures? Vote and leave your comments below.
Make or Break Players
2012 wasn't kind to many players last season. But fortunately for them, 2013 is upon us and with it comes the opportunity to turn around their slump and help their team compete throughout the season. While ESPN recently posted an article listing the players they thought were most crucial to helping their team, we here at FB/CU thought the list focused too much on the big name stars who will likely produce as they always do. Instead, we decided to dive a little deeper and locate the bubble players whose performances should dictate the trajectory of their team's season.
National League:
East: Brian McCann (C) Atlanta Braves
The Braves have a couple candidates that could be listed here since both Uggla and Upton also had subpar seasons last year. While the Braves lineup will be able to tolerate another slumping season from one of them, two slumping Braves could prove costly. Upton will likely improve (since both Uptons will think they're playing in the schoolyard), and if we assume Uggla slumps again (which has been the case up to this point in spring training), McCann will be the question mark. His 2012 BA and OBP were 50 points under his career stats, leaving him with a WAR of 0.6 for 2012. While most of this was due to nagging injuries throughout the season, McCann is likely to start out on the DL in 2013 because he is recovering from offseason surgery on his shoulder. If he returns to form after the DL stint, expect a high .200BA, 20+ homers, and a 3.0 WAR. These numbers would help balance the bottom of the Braves order, and prove a huge improvement over their backup catcher who averages a WAR of 0 over the last three seasons.
Can one of these guys bounce back?
Central: Francisco Liriano (SP) Pittsburgh Pirates
The Pirates attempted to add some guys in the offseason that could help shoulder the brunt of a 162 game season, something they couldn't do in 2012 (the team limped to October after being playoff contenders early, with a record of 20-39 in the last two months of the season). Liriano is the acquisition with the most uncertainty, since he has only had two great seasons in his career. He had a WAR above 4 in both of those seasons (2006, 2010) and a WAR under 1 in every other season (2007-2009, and 2011-2012). With that being said, this is his first season in the National League and Liriano should be able to take advantage of having one less bat in the lineup. Additionally, many batters will be facing Liriano for the first time, giving him an advantage that should keep ERA and WHIP numbers low. If Liriano finds a way to keep his walk count down, as he did in 2006 and 2010, he will prove to be a formidable back of the rotation starter, giving the Pirates something that the Cardinals don't seem to have.
West: Brandon McCarthy (SP) Arizona Diamondbacks
McCarthy's season was cut short last year when he was hit in the head by a pitch, requiring a 2 hour surgery to relieve cranial pressure. While his stats last season were impressive, there is no doubt that this incident had a psychological impact that could send his 2013 season off course. If this doesn't happen, expect his transition to the NL to produce a drop in his ERA, which averaged 3.28 over the last two seasons, and an increase in his SO numbers. He's a great ground ball pitcher who keeps his walks down, and his experience will complement the talented youth that comprises the rest of the rotation. A strong year from McCarthy gives the Diamondbacks an extremely talented pitching staff that could compete for the postseason, and more importantly, displays the strength and determination of McCarthy.
Follow this guy on twitter. Now.
American League:
East: Melky Cabrera (OF) Blue Jays
The Jays acquired many new stars in their blockbuster with the Marlins, which we talked about here and also added a Cy Young Award winner to boot, but their success might depend on all of these star personalities gelling together. One potential impediment to that goal might be Melky Cabrera. Melky put up career numbers last year with the help of some herbal supplements but what was telling is that even after his suspension was up, the Giants management (to their credit) did not offer him a spot on their postseason roster. If Melky just does his job and stays out of trouble, then the Jays and all their talent should have a spot in October.
It's hormone-free milk, I swear.
Central: Nick Swisher (OF) Indians
I like what's going on in Cleveland. The management seems serious about spending money to win. They brought in a proven manager in Terry Francona and the lineup on paper looks like it could so some damage. However, they don't have any starters that would be more than a 3 or 4 guy on most teams, so the lineup is going to have to produce. That production will have to start with the team's biggest acquisition of this offseason Nick Swisher. Swisher has hit 20+ homers in every one of his full seasons in the big leagues and helps his team by drawing a lot of walks and getting on base. In New York it was easy for Swisher to draw a walk and let the superstar hitting behind him take care of business, but in Cleveland, Swisher might not have the same kind of protection, so it will be on him to hit in the clutch and be the guy there, whether or not he steps into that role and carries his team offensively might determine whether or not Cleveland is able to contend in a weak division.
West: Yu Darvish (SP) Rangers
In the wild west, the Angels on paper look primed to run away with things, but even though Texas missed the playoffs last year, counting them out would be folly. Texas this year is good, but not great. And what is separating them from that greatness is an ace starter. In his first year in the Majors, Darvish put up a 16-9 record with a ERA of 3.90 in 191 innings. He struck out 221 but walked 89. He has the stuff, but wasn't able to put everything together last year. Darvish with a year of major league experience under his belt has the potential to be crazy good. If he can get his walk numbers down he won't dig himself into holes like he often did last year and the Texas lineup will give him enough of a cushion to win a lot of games. If Darvish makes the ascension into ace status this year, Texas could easily find themselves playing October baseball yet again.
At least the Rangers won't have to deal with this anymore. He's with the Angels now.