Texas paper: Millwood signs with Rangers
DMZ · December 26, 2005 at 3:10 pm · Filed Under Mariners
The Dallas-Ft. Worth Star Telegram reports it’s a done deal, pending a physical tomorrow.
Update! $60m over five years, and the fifth year is voidable by the Rangers if Millwood doesn’t reach an innings target in the earlier years of the deal.
So, Washburn: 38m over 4 = ~9.5m/year
Millwood: 60m over 5 = ~12m/year
Now, whether or not you think both of those deals are crazy, the chances that Millwood will, over the life of those contracts, be worth 2.5m more a year than Washburn approach 100%
Comments
98 Responses to “Texas paper: Millwood signs with Rangers”
Guardado option picked up for 1 year, $6 million base.
Moyer signed to an incentive based contract for 1 year, $5.5 million base.
Everett signed to a 1 year contract with a buyout of a 2nd year option, $3.4 million base.
Lawton signed to an incentive based 1 year contract, $400k base.
Washburn signed for 4 years at $37.5 million guaranteed.
Which one of the above is different from the rest. (I admit that I intentionally left off the Johjima signing for the purposes of this exercise.)
Seriously, I don’t have that many problems with the Everett signing. If it works out, great. If it doesn’t then he’s off the books for next year, as are Moyer, Lawton, and Guardado.
The Washburn signing is just terrible terrible terrible! Paying Loaiza 1 year for $18 million would have been better. Any pitcher for 1 year would have been better. At least the M’s would have a much bigger budget to work with to re-constitute the team the next year.
If you take out the Washburn signing, this offseason front office strategy actually looks like there is some serious thinking behind it. Don’t commit longer than 1 year to any free agents, let the youngsters mature another year, see what you have at the end of 2006, and then go hard with multi-year contracts in the 2006-2007 offseason when the free agent class might be qualitatively better.
well, I believe that they got one of the best pitchers “available” in the FA market. I don’t believe he is a TOR starter but he is a solid #3. I also believe they overpaid him by about $3mm/yr and a year or two too many. If he is there big offseason SP then the M’s aren’t going anywhere next year, but if they manage to pull in an actual TOR via trade then they have as good a shot at the ALW as the others.
I look forward to your article on Johnson/Washburn. BTW, I enjoy the discourse because it is a great way to learn about the game
Seriously, I don’t have that many problems with the Everett signing. If it works out, great. If it doesn’t then he’s off the books for next year, as are Moyer, Lawton, and Guardado.
Except the odds of it not working out are pretty decent (because Everett’s pretty awful), and we could have afforded to pay Kevin Millwood his first 12 million, and have a cheap platoon option for Lawton to boot.
The problem is that taken AS A WHOLE, the signings are:
Guardado: age 35
Johjima: age 30
Moyer: age 42
Everett: age 35
Washburn: age 31
Lawton: age 34
Basically, this is what the M’s did in 2002 with Sierra, Cirillo and Baldwin, and in 2004 with Aurilia, Spiezio and McCracken all over again: sign a bunch of guys on the wrong side of 30 and hope and pray they don’t fall off a cliff, and just continue to be mediocre and overpaid. The only guy on that list likely to be a good value in 2008 is Johjima, and that’s not a lock considering he’s been heavily used at C in Japan… and given our past history with players suddenly going into disaster mode the last few years, how anybody can look at those signings as a group and think we’re making progress compared to 2005…well, I don’t see it.
It didn’t get us anywhere in 2002, and it dragged us down by 2004 once the core Mariner team from 2000-2001 got old/traded/lost their fastballs/etc. I’m not seeing this as a strategy for 2006 so much as the same sort of aimless shambling the Baltimores and Texases of the world do- one year it’s Chan Ho Park, another year it’s Jarrod Washburn.
#50. He was one of the top pitchers available, whether you like him or not. I didn’t say that he was a TOR starter but he was one of the best pitchers “available” on the FA market. I also said I thought he was overpaid and for too long.
Washburn is not the pitcher any saber wants but he is effective and a true #3 pitcher.
Washburn is not the pitcher any saber wants but he is effective and a true #3 pitcher.
Just because you keep saying it doesn’t make it true.
Jarrod Washburn is the third best starter on a non-playoff team. Last I checked, that wasn’t our goal.
TOR pitchers? You mean Toronto pitchers?
Okay, it took me awhile but I believe you mean TOP OF THE ROTATION pitchers. But shouldn’t that be TotR pitchers, kind of like LotR… you don’t leave off the the in abbreviating Tolkien’s classic. Of course, maybe you’re refering to TOP OF ROTATION pitcher (without the the) which begs the question: which rotation? Mariners AAA rotation? Mariners spring training rotation? Which one?
I confess I couldn’t figure out MOTO last year when discussing trades to improve our hitting lineup. It was embarrassing to have to ask.
And a slight tangent… I enjoy hearing old The The songs as television commercial diddies and such.
At least we’ve learned to not give those 30+ guys 3 year contracts (sans Washburn) and instead give them 1 year deals. It’s a bit of progress and more than some teams can claim.
I’m leaning heavy on the side that thinks Millwood made a Burnett decree re: Seattle.
Washburn is not the pitcher any saber wants but he is effective and a true #3 pitcher.
Tell me, was he an effective and true #3 in 2003-2004, when he went 21-23 with an ERA over 4.50, since apparently we’re not allowed to use stats “sabers” like?
If we get that from him the next two years, will you be pleased?
I’m not seeing this as a strategy for 2006 so much as the same sort of aimless shambling…
Yeah, I realize I overstated it by calling it a strategy and the Washburn signing pretty much seals it as the aimless shambling that you’re refering to. But even though Everett and others don’t actually improve the team, at least without the Washburn signing you could say that the front office has an eye on the longterm future of the team.
At least we’ve learned to not give those 30+ guys 3 year contracts (sans Washburn) and instead give them 1 year deals. It’s a bit of progress and more than some teams can claim.
Except for Everett, there’s an option that apparently vests on usage. My guess is if he hits .255/.315/.425 for 120 games with triple crown numbers of .255/21/85, he’ll vest and the front office will think this is great- even though those are pretty awful numbers from a DH (the average AL DH has hit .264/.345/.447 since 2001).
Oh, and Ruben Sierra and James Baldwin weren’t multiyear deals, either. It was pretty predictable that they’d either be mediocre or bad, though.
#51, Rusty:
They are all similar in one aspect–handedness. Washburn, Moyer, Guardado: all LHP. Lawton bats lefty, and Everett is a switch-hitter who was brought in for his lefty sock. Johjima bats righty, but looking at the acquisitions as a whole, it seems that the organization is putting a large emphasis on the asymmetry of the home park they play in.
55. Just because he doesn’t fit your profile of what constitutes a good pitcher doesn’t mean he isn’t effective or a solid #3 pitcher either. I know it is sacrilegious on this site to say so, but it is possible to pitch to contact and be a good/effective pitcher. His k/9 might not be pretty but he keeps the ball in the park and doesn’t walk a lot of guys and doesn’t give up a lot of HRs either. As a result, he doesn’t allow a lot of runs to score, which is what a pitcher is supposed to do.
Sooooo he’s Ryan Franklin, who we just released, in a good year.
#58. EC, if he has a 3.2 era like he did last year or a 3.93 era (like he has over his career) for the next two years will you?
3.93? In Safeco? For that money? I’d be livid. And probably will.
63. Umm, no Derek, I said LOW HR/9 not high. Big difference between pitching to contact effectively and serving up BP.
Ummm, no, Biblo, I said “in a good year”.
And the difference is not so large. See: Ryan Franklin, good year, vs Ryan Franklin, bad year.
Well 3.93 would be better than anybody on the staff not named Felix, but that wasn’t my point, was it?
if i got Ryan’s good year every year, then I would be happy with him on my team. And lets be honest, so would you.
and Franklin gives up a lot more bb and gophers than Washburn, even pitching in Safeco.
actually, I take that back, neither of us would want Franklin. IN ANY YEAR! 😉
“if i got Ryan’s good year every year, then I would be happy with him on my team.”
If you got that from a player, then it would cease to be Ryan Franklin in any meaningful sense.
Not for that kind of money.
You seem to be confused about a fundamental aspect of pitcher evaluation, so I’m going to try and be nice about this.
A pitcher has very little control over what happens after a batter makes contact and puts a ball into play. You can go look up the Voros/Woolner/Tippett research articles if you’d like.
So if you’re Ryan Franklin, and you don’t give up walks and don’t strike out guys, relying almost entirely on your defense, if you’ve got a good defense and you’re lucky, you look good. If the balls drop that night, you get shelled. So it is from game to game and year to year.
Not to say that these guys aren’t valuable in that role, but that skillset: pound the strikezone, gamble on a hit rather than give up a walk — is common and cheap. There’s no need to pay for it.
Further, it’s important to realize that when you look at, say, Franklin’s good season. If he puts up a 2.50 ERA without striking anyone out, there’s a chance he’ll do it again.
But the odds he’ll put up a league-average line are far, far greater.
This is why that argument for Washburn fails: no pitcher can reliably put the ball into play and get a huge number more outs than you’d expect. If that’s not a skill, than you’re paying for something that doesn’t exist, and that’s folly.
Four comments in a row = sorry, but it’s time for you to hit the David J. Corcoran Memorial Time-Out Lounge.
Hey Bilbo, I ran the #’rs. Over the last 3 years Franklin Pitched 677 innings and gave up 95 gave up 95 HR’s. Washburn pitched 577 innings and gave up 73 HR’s. You figure it out.
Oops! I typeoed, Washburn only pitched 534 innings.
DMZ, at what point do you consider a skill that has been repeated a repeatable skill?
Again, I am not saying that Washburn is an “ace” or even worth what the M’s are paying him, merely that he is a good MOR starter and an improvement over what we had last year. But you cannot deny that he has some skill that has allowed him to succeed -repeatedly- in spite of low K/9 rates. Has he had some mediocre years? absolutely. At some point you have to look at the individual and not lump him into the masses because historically that is where the majority fall.
#46–“Moyer’s a local hero and has significant non-performance value to the team.”
speaking of which, anyone see the Moyer Foundation special on Christmas day? 🙂
at what point do you consider a skill that has been repeated a repeatable skill?
Again, I refuse to grant you the premise of this question.
Preventing hits on balls in play to the extent you seem to think is not a repeatable skill. Even Jamie Moyer, who over his career has had fewer balls-in-play go for hits, has only a modest effect.
Strikeouts are repeatable.
Low walks are repeatable.
Putting 100 balls into play and only seeing 2 of them go for hits is not.
Seriously, go read Voros/Tippet/Woolner’s research before you continue arguing this.
I can guarantee that BB has read Voros and knows the saber-side well but yet he felt it appropriate to pay what he did for Washburn. Why? I am not saying that it makes it a good decision, in fact, I would rather have Millwood as well.
But the reality is that the M’s signed Washburn and I have been trying to understand why. My research has led me to believe that Washburn does some things that match up well with the M’s and will allow him to be an above average pitcher in Seattle.(namely, a LHP in Safeco, decent HR/9, holds runners well and a good defense behind him).
While Voros talks about the inability of pitchers to control balls in play, it doesn’t mean that pitchers can’t do other things to icrease their effectiveness. Also, as I understand it Voros and Woolner have some interesting comments on handedness and trickery, which may be relevant to this discussion.
I can guarantee that BB has read Voros and knows the saber-side well but yet he felt it appropriate to pay what he did for Washburn.
Your guarantee is reckless. Bavasi may have heard of what Voros et al have looked at, but that doesn’t mean he’s up on current research. For one example, Bavasi doesn’t know about advanced defensive metrics different people are working on, like Davenport/MGL/etc.
He doesn’t. It’s that simple. He doesn’t evaluate defense that way.
Arguing that Washburn is going to be an above-average pitcher here is an argument that any pitcher would be above-average here, and if that’s true, then *any* pitcher would be above-average here, and paying Washburn that money is pointless.
While Voros talks about the inability of pitchers to control balls in play, it doesn’t mean that pitchers can’t do other things to icrease their effectiveness.
Yes, like striking batters out, which Washburn doesn’t do.
The factors that are being investigated (does being a pitcher who changes speed allow a pitcher to do better on BIP?) are, even if they pan out, almost insignificant in comparison to a batter who strikes out an extra guy a game.
9 million per year for trickery? Even the 6 million that Bilbo seems to think Washburn is worth is a bit steep for trickery.
It’s unfathomable to me that Bavasi truly understands the theories that Voros and Trippet have researched and reported on. Yes, he might have read it but how can he understand it when he signs guys like Washburn and Sele. Granted, those are the only two starting pitcher data points we have but they run almost directly counter to the theories being discussed.
There were good DIPS pitchers available this year. But their names were Burnett, Milwood, Loiaza and Kevin Brown. Bavasi struck out on the first three. And unfortunately Brown carries the biggest risk in terms of performance of those 4, although he’ll probably sign for the least contract too.
Oh, I forgot to mention one excellent DIPS pitcher who was made available in trade, Josh Beckett. But darn if the Red Sox didn’t snap him up. There’s an organization that understand DIPS theory.
Bilbo, I posted Washburn’s HR’s given up and innings pitched over the last 3 years so you would see that saying he has a “decent” HR/9 inning rate is not really true. Ryan Franklin gave up 1.26 HR’s per 9 innings over the last 3 years and Washburn has given up 1.23 over the same time period. Even if adjusted for park differences Washburn is average at best at keeping balls in the park.
Changing speeds in the range that major league pitchers do has little bearing on how a batted ball entering the playing field might move differently (ie. towards defenders, ground, higher, less squarly than it looked like it might be hit 1/10 second before)in comparison to movement and spin. But then even a good change-up moves because of gravity pulling the object further down against lesser momentum than the expected (or comparison A) Fastball. Spin can easily change with the amount and angle of contact…Thier research is in a limited and not complete field of baseball possibility. It’s the greatest thing in the world to the people who will eventually expand upon that research, but…
Sele last year was a good signing…Low $$$ high possible reward. It did not work out greatly, but it worked out. He was not good, but he wasn’t paid good bench player money to be in the starting 5. What more should we have expected?
DMZ what SP had a .020 batted against that you are claiming they can’t repeat? (I fully agree it’s worth betting against the streak, (the whole farm))
Jarrod Washburn succeeded because he stranded 82 percent of his runners last year.
That is NOT a skill.
Period.
Unbundle yer panties, guys. One of Millwood’s comps is Chan Ho Park. He’s been a flyball pitcher three years of his career, though that tendency has turned around the last few years. He’s had an ERA+ of more than 104 just three times in eight seasons, while the man he replaced, Kenny Rogers, had an ERA+ of less than 104 in 11 seasons just four times — and this was while Millwood was pitching in principally pitcher-friendly environments, and Rogers was pitching in hitter-friendly parks! I see this deal as remarkably like one the Rangers signed for Chan Ho Park, save for the fact that Millwood has been healthy throughout his career. He may be around to pitch, but I don’t see him being the savior of the Texas rotation everyone here seems to think he is.
Look past ERA.
It’s the mantra of the offseason.
Yo, Dave, I dig that, which is why I tell you that right behind Washburn in the list of overrated pitchers (as measured by DIPS) we find Kevin Millwood. He got immensely lucky; it won’t happen again, and the betting money is that he’ll be a pumpkin by the All Star break.
Millwood’s Fielding Independant ERA: 3.77
Millwood’s expected Fielding Independant ERA: 3.99
Yes, Millwood pitched over his head. That’s obvious.
But if you think a FIP below 4 is a pumpkin, well, you’ve got some pretty high standards. Millwood’s FIP was 5th best in the AL last year and his xFIP was 7th best.
Millwood’s not the best pitcher in the AL, and yes, there was a lot of luck (or non-repeatable skills, or whatever) involved in his winning the ERA title. But he’s so far from a pumpkin, it’s not even funny.
Various. Great, great thread.
‘Boras goodwill’ Texas is the ultimate repository of Boras Goodwill after the ARod deal..
“Why do people assume that the 2006 Mariners are going to be above average defensively. With Betancourt, Beltre, and Ichiro, there are three good defensive players in the everyday line-up. I think Reed’s average, maybe a little better. But left field is a hole, and Lopez isn’t much to write home about at second. Sexson wasn’t very good at first base last year.” Dave, this is so, so cogent. Could you do some relative evaluation weighted by position with comments at least at a division level?
“Your guarantee is reckless. Bavasi may have heard of what Voros et al have looked at, but that doesn’t mean he’s up on current research. For one example, Bavasi doesn’t know about advanced defensive metrics different people are working on, like Davenport/MGL/etc.” Derek, would it be possible to project the 40 or 25 man roster, given the new contracts for two or three years, with guestimates on prospects accepted? It seems so much of this is driven by bb’s own contract and this is a poor man’s Gillick doing a this year or bust, excepting the Washburn signing as due to his long term relationship. Long winded way of saying this year may push the long term building of the club backward.
There does not seem to be any standard screen to pick these people. From a standard scouting perspective, in terms of “tools”, Washburn and Everett are far off their personal bests and far below any standard of good. Some of the scouting screens might say warning about each of them, such as consistentcy of fastball, as in he touched 90 but was 87-88 most of the game…ip/games has declined. For Everett, he’s just plain fat and can’t run any more…12 doubles 23 hrs is not going to be matched in this park…its perplexing cause the numbers point to the same thing. Why they would be signed, let alone at fairly rich levels in Everett’s case and the Washburn levels screams of complete desperation and incompetence.
Lawton is a good signing and makes the Everett thing look even more strange, unless he ends up in cf…
I don’t know that I’m especially disappointed. The Washburn signing sucked, but I don’t know that that means we should have dedicated 5 years 60m to Millwood. If we were going to contend next year it might have been worth it, but in the absence of enough other moves to make this year count it probably would have been best to sign neither Millwood or Washburn, pick up a few question mark pitchers, and spending this year seeing what we got.
Well said, #92. If we could not get Millwood or Burnett, I would have been happier with several (cheap) (1-year only) question marks. How many 5-year contracts with pitchers work out well? How many 4-year contracts? When will GMs learn? Will I repeat that question every off-season until my head explodes? Only time will tell.
Just generally curious about the opening salvo that “the chances that Millwood will, over the life of those contracts, be worth 2.5m more a year than Washburn approach 100%”
Something happened in 2004 that made him worth only $7.0 Million for the 2005 season. As stated earlier or on a separate thread, there are a lot of factors that one cannot predict (most notably injury) that can make a pitching contract worth it, or a bust over the whole term.
“One of Millwood’s comps is Chan Ho Park.”
Did you follow the link you provided? Chan Ho Park’s name is nowhere to be found. Similarly, in Millwood’s list of PECOTA comps, Park is nowhere to be found. They both signed multi-year deals with Texas, past that, I don’t know that I’d call them similar pitchers.
90 – Dave, is FIP better or worse than DIPS at projecting future years’ ERAs?
95 – my bad, it’s backwards; one of Chan Ho Park’s comps is Millwood.
I was mildly surprised that a team that is paying Alex to play for the Yankees would spring for a 5 year contract for a pitcher.
I realize that Millwood is not Park, but still, a pitcher is risky.
LF Monster in #85, I’m with you on the lack of refinement in research on batted balls in play. It’s better than nothing, and in particular it indicates clearly the worth of Ks and BBs; it is far less clear in evaluating subtle differences in outcome based on pitcher-specfic movements on pitches which are a function of skill and hence repeatable. Guys with low K/9s are inherently worth less, but _specific individuals_ with unique spin or motion may influence outcomes to a degree which _pitchers as a whole_ cannot. The question isn’t settled, and the differences are significant in evaluating someone like, say, Kenny Rogers.
Millwood was going to cost a bundle to sign; that is the outcome here. He’d be nice to have, but I’m not crying that the Ms didn’t pay this particular price. That someone conceived of Jarrod Washburn as a ‘reasonable alternative’ makes me cry like Viga-Glum.