Prince Fielder and Buying Wins

Dave · November 14, 2011 at 9:51 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

This afternoon, Jon Heyman sent out the following message on Twitter:

#Mariners are hoping to be in on Prince (but not Pujols). Unsure if there’s room in budget though. But will give it a run.

As Jeff noted in more depth than I’ll get into, this is basically not news – it’s pretty clear that there are a lot of prices up to which the M’s would happily sign Prince Fielder. $1 million a year? Obviously. $10 million a year? They couldn’t sign fast enough. $15 million a year? Yeah, they’d do that.

Of course, none of that matters, because Fielder’s actual price is going to be far above any of those numbers. He turned down a 5 year, $100 million contract a year ago (and reportedly didn’t even bother countering), and that was before he had the best year of his career and became a free agent. If he thought he was worth more than $20 million per season as an arbitration eligible guy coming off an okay year, he’s not going to settle for anything close to that as a free agent coming off a really good year. The reality is that Fielder’s probably going to get $25+ million per year, and the only real question is how many years he’ll get at that price.

That brings us back to Heyman’s statement that the M’s are not sure they can fit him into the budget. I know for a lot of you, the answer is as simple as “increase the budget”, but let’s look at the reality of that kind of roster construction plan.

As we’ve noted, a team full of league minimum replacement level players would be expected to win about 43 games, so to be a legitimate contender, a team needs 45-50 WAR. Tampa Bay had the lowest WAR total (+46) of any of last year’s playoff teams, so reality bears this out. The going rate for a win in the free agent market is about +5 million per win, give or take a bit depending on position and skillset. If a team attempted to buy their entire roster through free agency with a goal of accumulating +50 WAR, they’d need a $250 million payroll in order to make the strategy work. If they were really clever and took advantage of market inefficiencies, getting lower cost relievers and finding value with good defensive players, they might be able to buy +50 WAR for $225 million. Regardless, you’d need some kind of monstrous payroll to build a good team exclusively through free agency.

That’s why no one does it, and every team uses free agency as a way to add supplementary talent to cost-controlled players who were developed internally – even the Yankees. Teams can afford to pay $5 million per win for a few players on the roster, but the more market-rate players you add, the more it forces you to come up with quality low-cost performers elsewhere in order to make that kind of roster construction work.

A payroll of about $100 million means that your entire roster needs to be producing at an average of $2 million per win. That’s about where the Mariners are now, and that $2 million per win total has to be the goal. If they signed Fielder to go along with Felix, they’d essentially have two guys returning an expected +11 wins for about $45 million, or right around $4 million per win for the pair. That would leave the team with about $50 million to get the other 39 wins, which is simply not a reasonable request. Unfortunately, a team with a payroll under $100 million simply can’t pay the going market rate for wins to two superstar players unless they have an absolutely crazy amount of cheap young quality talent already in place.

You know how many teams in baseball had two players making $20+ million per year in salary last year? Two – the Yankees (Rodriguez, Sabathia, and Teixeira) and the Phillies (Howard and Halladay). The Yankees had a team payroll of $207 million, while the Phillies came in at $166 million. This year, the Red Sox (Crawford and Gonzalez) will join the club, and their payroll is expected to be in the $165 million range as well.

Even if the Mariners added $30 million to their payroll and came in at $125 million, they’d still be far below the spending threshold that other teams have achieved before they’ve committed market rate salaries to multiple star players. If you have the kind of revenues that the Yankees and Red Sox have, there’s enough left over to fill out the roster with good players even after spending $5 million per win on a few spots, but for 90% of the teams in baseball, that’s simply not the case.

This isn’t an issue of the M’s ownership just needing to kick a bit more into the pot so the team can afford a player like Prince Fielder. The M’s already have a player like Prince Fielder – he’s from Venezuela and he’s pretty good at that whole pitching thing. They’re getting Felix at a discount over his market rate, but he’s still getting paid at the level of a star quality player.

You want a roster with both Felix and Fielder making the kind of money the market has set for their services? Well, then, you either need a $150+ million payroll, or you need the rest of the roster to be made up of amazing players developed through the farm system who are making a fraction of what they’re really worth.

The reality is the Mariners don’t have either of those things. There aren’t enough low-cost kids producing at high quality levels to allow the team the ability to pay the market rate for two premium talents, and the Mariners simply aren’t in a position to have a large enough payroll to justify setting aside $45 million of their budget towards paying the market rate for wins. There just wouldn’t be enough left over to put together a realistic contender around those two, even if you decided that you weren’t re-signing Ichiro after the season and were going to allocate all of his money to Fielder’s future salary.

If the M’s have $25 million to spend this winter, they can’t simply just buy five wins, which is about what you’d hope for from bringing in Fielder. This is a team that needs to get something more like 12 wins for every $25 million it spends, and while Ackley and Pineda give them enough wiggle room to make allowances for extra spending in places, the M’s simply don’t have enough Ackleys and Pinedas to give them the room to have both Felix and Fielder and a roster around them that can be a viable contender.

At $15 million, the M’s could make it work. If you really stretched it and found value elsewhere this winter, you could maybe make $20 million work. $25 million, though? Sorry, but it just doesn’t make sense. Fielder will get his money, but he shouldn’t get it from the Mariners.

Comments

142 Responses to “Prince Fielder and Buying Wins”

  1. Jamison_M on November 15th, 2011 5:52 pm

    I’m completely baffled by Mike Carp’s WAR… he put up a .5 WAR in 2011. Had he played the entire season he was on pace for about 1 WAR… but, he was on a 162-game pace for 25 HRs and 94 RBI. How does someone with that kind of production only figure to add ten runs more than a replacement level player. Josh Wilson would not reach 70 RBI if he took up two places in the batting order.

    I know there are a ton of other factors that determine a players WAR, but I don’t know what they are. Can anyone explain to me how someone with 25 HRs and 94 RBI scores such a low WAR?

  2. just a fan on November 15th, 2011 6:01 pm

    Maybe because Carp was mostly a DH? That’s my guess. Wilson is not a fair comp as he has the 2nd highest positional adjustment as a SS.

  3. just a fan on November 15th, 2011 6:05 pm

    Gar – I had not thought of that but wow is that a great idea!!!! Lets leave enough room to grab Edgar too.

    Man I can smell the pennant already!

  4. Jordan on November 15th, 2011 6:34 pm

    Thanks Dave, I completely forgot Felix’ contract is backloaded.

    Signing Prince does not make financially sound roster construction sense. In the simplest terms, the probability of maximizing value out of the rest of the roster is very low. However, still I need more reasons to go to a game. Maybe, the marketing team could have the Prince’s court too?

    It’s not that I don’t care if the team wins; I’ve become accustomed to watching them lose. Yet, I need anything that shows the owners are committed to winning. It’s almost like I’d be in favor of overpaying like the Nationals did with Werth. At least this form of desperation is not like the Bedard situation. We are not dumping prospects, and no one disputes Fielder is a superstar. The only problem is the dollar amount and his likelihood to not age well.

    I’d love to see a repeat of the 2008 offseason; only this time we hold on to our promising prospects while taking a gamble on some bigger names.

  5. Liam on November 15th, 2011 6:36 pm

    I know there are a ton of other factors that determine a players WAR, but I don’t know what they are. Can anyone explain to me how someone with 25 HRs and 94 RBI scores such a low WAR?

    There’s more to baseball than home runs and RBIs.

    Mike Carp and Dustin Ackley played a similar amount of time (313PA to 376PA) as was their hitting according to wRC+ (117). Average is 100, so they were both above average. Ackley ended up with 2.7 WAR while Carp managed only 0.5. So what gives?

    To start, defense. UZR rated Carp at -6.2 for the season and Ackley at 2.3 (0 is average) Over a full season, Carp would have lost more than 1 WAR just from his bad defense.

    Next, positional adjustments. (It’s easier to find a good hitting DH compared to a good hitting catcher or short shop)

    Catcher: +12.5 runs
    Shortstop: +7.5 runs
    Second Base: +2.5 runs
    Third Base: +2.5 runs
    Center Field: +2.5 runs
    Left Field: -7.5 runs
    Right Field: -7.5 runs
    First Base: -12.5 runs
    Designated Hitter: -17.5 runs

    Ackley played 2B, while Carp shifted between 1B, LF and DH. What this means is that the expected offensive performance from those positions is higher than at second base, so Carp is dinged a few points.

    Ackley’s positional adjustment is 1.0 (Only played half the season) while Carp’s was -5.4.

    Lastly, baserunning. -1.2 for Carp, +0.9 for Ackley. This is how two similar hitting players end with with a +2 WAR difference.

    You can read more about how WAR is calculated here.

  6. gwangung on November 15th, 2011 6:38 pm

    You can read more about how WAR is calculated here.

    Might be a good idea to click on the link before responding.

    Just saying.

  7. SODOMOJO360 on November 15th, 2011 6:39 pm

    This is such a waste of time. Has anyone thought about why Prince would want to sign with a rebuilding team? Unless we can give him the most money, which we can’t, he’s not coming here. The fact that Jack Z. drafted him has nothing to do with winning and getting the most money which are the two major things elite players look for.

  8. JoshJones on November 15th, 2011 6:41 pm

    If we don’t sign Fielder/aquire a big name hitter via trade or FA then we are simply just spining out wheels.

    What’s the one thing we have going for us? YOUTH. A great deal of talent and youth under team control for the next few years for cheap (minus felix)

    We need to add a hitter who can be a 5+WAR hitter for the next 5+ years. If it’s not Fielder, it better be someone, and it needs to be this season.

    Everyone can disagree and throw out all these ideas about how they would fix it.
    Ryan Doumit, Erik Bedard, Angel Pagan, Chris Capuano, etc, etc. Those are all great ADDITIONS. But just that, additions.

  9. stevemotivateir on November 15th, 2011 7:37 pm

    ^Who’s to say Carp wont put together a full season, playing the way he did last season once he got steady at-bats? Who’s to say Smoak doesn’t put together a strong season, like the way he started and ended the last? Or Ackley taking it up a notch, like we all know he will?

    “Additions” that are solid players that do what’s expected of them, along with our youth stepping things up, can make all the difference that’s needed. If there’s still a hole by the time the trade deadline rolls around, then maybe you can find an impact bat (or arm) that’s needed at that time. The Mariners don’t have to go after the biggest names now, or be left in the dark the entire season. Anyone would love to see Fielder in the middle of the line-up. But you have to draw a line. Dave did a great job of showing where that line is, realistically. We’re not spinning our wheels if we don’t make a big move now. We’re still moving forward.

  10. rth1986 on November 15th, 2011 7:56 pm

    To be fair, Ackley, Ichiro and Gutierrez all have the ability to be 5 WAR players. Whether they reach it or not is another story. Gutierrez merely needs to be a league-average hitter again, which hopefully he’s still capable of. We all know about Ichiro – he needs a complete rebound. Ackley might not be a 5 WAR player in 2012, but he certainly has the ability – with his hitting, baserunning, positional advantagement, and decent fielding.

    I wouldn’t say the Mariners need a 5 WAR hitter so much as better players all around.

    I was especially troubled by Jack Z’s recent comments about his offseason priorities. Nowhere did he mention upgrading at catcher. The Mariners absolutely need to get a catcher to split playing time with Olivo or that position is a huge weakness. In order of need, I’d say it should be C, 3B, SP, LF/DH, LH RP.

  11. bookbook on November 15th, 2011 8:06 pm

    “The fact that Jack Z. drafted him has nothing to do with winning and getting the most money which are the two major things elite players look for.”

    This is true, but I find it disconcerting. Elite players seemingly want to ride other players’ success to a ring more than they want to be a fundamental part of changing fortunes, creating and being the cause of a new level of success and victory.

    About the money, I understand and believe that players ought to be able to pursue the best financial return on their ability. About the desire to join a proven winner instead of driving that transformation, I’m not impressed.

  12. eastcoastmariner on November 15th, 2011 8:09 pm

    In 2011, the Tigers had an opening day payroll of approximately $107 million. In 2012, the Tigers will have two $20 million+ players of their own; $41 million for Verlander and Cabrera. They expect to operate on a payroll of $110 million in 2012, much like they did in 2011.

    In addition, they have approximately another $50 million in 2012 committed to Martinez, Valverde, Young, Benoit, Inge, Peralta, Porcello, and Raburn. Essentially, they’ve committed 80% ($90 million of their $110 million payroll) to 10 players on their 25 man roster. Most likely, the remaining 15 spots on their 25 man roster will be filled out by players earning the minimum league salary (or close to it) in 2012.

    I understand the concern with adding a player who will require the contractual obligation that Fielder will demand, and the logic in this post exactly expresses why I’m not sure signing Fielder to a long term contract is in the team’s best interest. However, unless I’m missing something, I’m not quite sure why the Tigers could not be used as a blue print the Mariners could follow, rather than alluding to teams with gigantic payrolls such as the Phillies, Yankees, Red Sox, etc. that the Mariners have no shot to realistically construct themselves after.

    Am I missing something? Please briefly explain if you can Dave. Thanks!

  13. eastcoastmariner on November 15th, 2011 8:21 pm

    FWIW – The Cardinals (Assuming Pujols resigns in St. Louis) and Giants (Zito and Lincecum) are other examples of successful teams paying two players more than $40 million, while operating on a payroll slightly north of $100 million

  14. GLS on November 15th, 2011 8:53 pm

    I don’t think it makes any sense at all to sign Prince Fielder. He has a bad body and is limited both defensively and positionally. I would much rather see the Mariners keep the payroll down and wait for the right opportunity to come along to make an impact trade (or two or three). This is why I like the idea of trading for Joey Votto, should he become available. It’s an opportunistic move, which I believe is the right frame the team needs to be working from.

  15. gwangung on November 15th, 2011 9:02 pm

    We need to add a hitter who can be a 5+WAR hitter for the next 5+ years. If it’s not Fielder, it better be someone, and it needs to be this season.

    Why?

    Dave has argued that’s putting the cart before the horse. Why do you need that now, and NOT building up a team that can support a big bat?

  16. henryv on November 15th, 2011 9:02 pm

    After seeing the aging curve for “Henry-like” players (aka chunky) I wouldn’t want to give Prince much more than 3 year deal. Quite simply, I have NO faith in his ability to hold up much longer.

    Getting a 5-6 win player for a year or two isn’t worth $25M a year, especially when the evidence says that by year 3 or 4 of a 6 year deal he’s going to be a 2-3 win player.

    In 2013 the crop of free agents looks much better and more suited to the M’s needs.

    Let’s not be so desperate we start acting all stupid. If you’ve been losing a lot of hands of blackjack, it’s not suddenly time to start standing on 12’s.

  17. gwangung on November 15th, 2011 9:06 pm

    Am I missing something?

    I think you need to factor in the wins those dollars are bringing in; that’s part of the average $2 million etc.

    In other words, getting and developing the core players first with what you have, rather than getting the big player and not having the resources to get or develop those other cheap players.

    Right now, there are a lot of question marks in those core, cheap players. If we get Fielder and those question marks don’t pan out, where do you get other players to be that core?

  18. Browl on November 15th, 2011 9:38 pm

    With a $100 million payroll a team should be able to buy 20ish wins above replacement so the rest of that WAR needs to come from guys in their pre-free-agency years.

    Dave has written in the past that teams have 2 constraints when building a roster. There’s a payroll constraint and a roster size constraint. All things else being equal it might make some sense for a rebuilding team to go big at a couple of positions and hope they luck into a bunch of WAR for the league minimum at the other spots, as opposed to signing a bunch of solid guys without much upside.

    This isn’t really about the m’s or Prince. I think Prince will get paid more than he’s worth. Just more of a general theoretical question.

  19. Browl on November 15th, 2011 9:49 pm

    Right now, there are a lot of question marks in those core, cheap players. If we get Fielder and those question marks don’t pan out, where do you get other players to be that core?

    See what I don’t get is how signing a star player prevents acquiring cheap core players. These players presumably are developed from withtin. You certainly can’t sign these players as free-agents. If anything signing a star player would leave more playing time for these type players.

  20. ajoster on November 15th, 2011 10:34 pm

    I’m a little late to this discussion, but I thought it was a good post. I’m one of those frustrated fans who wants a big payroll increase and a big bat this offseason. However, I agree that Fielder would be a bad move.

    Some people have commented that a big star might help ticket sales. Are there many examples of a star player joining a bad team and increasing revenue by a significant amount without the team winning?

    Just for my curiosity, here’s a hypothetical: if the Mariners increased payroll by $25 million above where we’re assuming it will be next year, would signing Fielder be the most efficient use of that extra money?

  21. Dave on November 15th, 2011 11:11 pm

    However, unless I’m missing something, I’m not quite sure why the Tigers could not be used as a blue print the Mariners could follow, rather than alluding to teams with gigantic payrolls such as the Phillies, Yankees, Red Sox, etc. that the Mariners have no shot to realistically construct themselves after.

    You’re right, I missed the Tigers. My bad. If the Mariners upped their payroll by ~$15 million, they’d have a similar budget as Detroit. Of course, Fielder won’t sign for the 4/86 that Cabrera has left on his deal, so the Mariners would still be spending a slightly larger chunk of their payroll (and committing to that level of spending for a much longer period of time) on their two best players. And, there’s also the issue that Cabrera is better than Fielder, so they’d probably get slightly less in expected production from their SP/1B pair than what Detroit is getting.

    Beyond that, I’m not sure that the Tigers are really a blueprint for a successful organization. They won the AL Central with +48 WAR this year, but that was mostly the function of career years from Verlander, Peralta, Avila, and what will almost certainly be the best two months of pitching Doug Fister will ever experience.

    In the three years prior to this season, they averaged 80.3 wins per year. And, because ~37% of their payroll is tied up in two players, they’re likely going to have a 2012 roster with a lot of holes in it, since they can’t pursue significant upgrades at positions of need this year. What are the Tigers going to be next year if Jhonny Peralta isn’t a +5 win shortstop, Justin Verlander’s .236 BABIP regresses back to the mean, and Jose Valverde’s walk-the-bases-loaded-and-then-get-the-save routine stops working?

    Will the Tigers be able to win next year? Maybe, since the AL Central is kind of terrible. Would I consider their roster construction as something of a model that I would suggest other teams follow? I don’t think so.

  22. KaminaAyato on November 15th, 2011 11:12 pm

    See what I don’t get is how signing a star player prevents acquiring cheap core players. These players presumably are developed from withtin. You certainly can’t sign these players as free-agents. If anything signing a star player would leave more playing time for these type players.

    See, to me that’s putting the cart in front of the horse. Once you sign Fielder, the clock is ticking on his usefulness, whether that be the length of his contract, or the time until he either declines or becomes injured/injury prone.

    In that time you have to have the pieces around him to build a contender. The thing is the prospects you got from the draft/via trades are just that – prospects. Unless they’re a can’t miss like a Strasburg, there is a probability that they will not pan out. But in signing someone like Fielder you put an inferred time limit on figuring that part out.

    Now, if you are fairly certain that you do have the pieces coming up soon, great! If it doesn’t pan out, you need the next batch to mature and quick.

    I will eventually be scolded at for referring to this, but if we take my argument about the M’s in my article, Z felt that he was better off with his acquired players than anyone in the M’s system prior to his arrival (except Pineda). That says something about the state of the minors prior to Z’s arrival.

    Now look at the 8 playoff teams. Heck, look at the World Series champs the Cardinals.

    Of the 14 players I listed, 6 of those players were via the draft starting with Pujols in 1999 and ending in John Jay in 2006.

    Of the 3 free agents, they signed Carpenter in 2003 at age 27/28, and got Berkman to close out the offense with a 1-yr, $8 mil deal.

    And the traded players started in 2008 when they went younger trading Edmonds for Freese, giving up prospects for Holliday to strengthen the OF in 2009, obtaining Edwin Jackson and Jake Westbrook in 2010, and finally filling their SS spot with veteran Furcal.

    Now if you look at Carpenter’s history, he was released by the Blue Jays in 2002 after being oft-injured, signed by the Cardinals, injured again, released and signed again eventually getting that 5-yr, $63.5 mil contract in 2008 (which now looks like a steal).

    So the Cardinals brought up young players who took some time to develop, got a great player in Carpenter on the cheap (not at rockstar status/salary like a CC Sabathia, etc), swapped veterans who would not be part of the picture for younger players, used their surplus (or mortgaged) their farm system to acquire a star player, which they went all-in with with a 7-yr, $120 mil contract (start the clock!), then filled in the gaps via trade with the final piece being that 1-yr contract with Lance Berkman who was a buy-low candidate.

    So, ask yourself, are we at a point where we can go all-in with a player and build a contender with the pieces we have now in a couple of years?

    Outside of Pineda and Felix, the other callups were just in 2009 – 2 years ago. The other talent playing in the majors you can equate to Z synthetically building a farm system. Some, like Carp and League are panning out, while others like Guti are still unknown, and others yet are still too soon to be determined.

    This is where I think it is just a bit early to sign a player like Fielder because I think signing him is akin to signing Holliday in the Cardinals timeline.

  23. KaminaAyato on November 15th, 2011 11:23 pm

    (Sorry for the doublepost, I just thought of the Rangers after the editing period was over)

    Oh, and if you were to look at the Rangers, they basically started over in 2007, trading for 5 players. I suppose you could argue that the M’s are more like the Rangers in that they basically wiped most of the slate clean in 2007 and by 2011 built a World Series contender. But they also had the players to trade for high-quality prospects that Z did not have access to as well as a great waiver pickup in Nelson Cruz.

    So, you can’t expect a Texas turnaround in terms of length of time. But you may be able to look at it as the blueprint that the M’s might be modeling.

  24. The_Waco_Kid on November 16th, 2011 12:01 am

    I was especially troubled by Jack Z’s recent comments about his offseason priorities. Nowhere did he mention upgrading at catcher.

    Good point. Olivo was the one move Z made that I didn’t like from the start, but Z seems to love Olivo. This is a great example of why I don’t want to sign Fielder. We have many holes to fill, we’ll need the “additions” Josh mentioned, and I’m not sure we can get Fielder and any needed additions.

    I know some people are sick of hypotheticals and want to take the bird in the hand, but I think we have made a good case for the risks of signing Fielder. Huge signings are very risky and it’s not always the right call.

    I don’t know what else we can say. Eventually, some team will offer Fielder something like 6 years/$25M per year, we won’t outbid them, and I will be glad we didn’t.

  25. bookbook on November 16th, 2011 4:44 am

    They can make Fielder work at $15 million per, you say? Hmmm.

    Is this a closet argument for acquiring the services of one Jose Reyes?

    The fit’s not as obvious, and the injury concerns are daunting, but…

  26. Valenica on November 16th, 2011 6:31 am

    Some people have commented that a big star might help ticket sales. Are there many examples of a star player joining a bad team and increasing revenue by a significant amount without the team winning?

    Best example is when Texas signed A-Rod in 2001.

    2000: 2.58 million, no A-Rod, 71-91
    2001: 2.83 million, A-Rod, 73-89
    2002: 2.35 million, A-Rod, 72-90
    2003: 2.09 million, A-Rod, 71-91
    2004: 2.51 million, no A-Rod, 89-73

    The first year Texas had A-Rod they saw a 250k increase in ticket sales, with the same record. The year after they saw ticket sales go back to normal (and get worse) as they kept losing. In 2004 they traded A-Rod to NY, and saw ticket sales increase, because their wins increased.

    Star power has a nice one year effect, but if you don’t win with the star, ticket sales will not increase. IMO that’s what bankrupted Texas in the first place…they thought A-Rod would increase ticket sales even on a bad team, but it turns out he couldn’t. Just focus on winning and fans will come. There are no major benefits from Darvish, Fielder, or any major FA outside of the wins they give. This isn’t basketball.

  27. gwangung on November 16th, 2011 8:27 am

    See what I don’t get is how signing a star player prevents acquiring cheap core players.

    Let’s compare with this comment:

    Good point. Olivo was the one move Z made that I didn’t like from the start, but Z seems to love Olivo. This is a great example of why I don’t want to sign Fielder. We have many holes to fill, we’ll need the “additions” Josh mentioned, and I’m not sure we can get Fielder and any needed additions.

    This is a specific problems for the Ms, but I think you can generalize. I think there are always holes on a team that aren’t fillable from within or in trades. If you sign a big free agent but still have holes you have to fill that you can’t do from within, then I have to question if that free agent signing is wise.

    I think Dave and other people are concentrating on getting the rest of the team up to snuff. There are way too many holes right now that needs filling–catcher is one that is very difficult because the available players are just not that good (and Olivo just may be the best option available).

  28. Swungonandbelted on November 16th, 2011 8:39 am

    You can’t ignore the possibility of this becoming a freakin’ huge albatross contract in years five, six, seven

    This is how I’ve seen the potential Fielder contract. When I see Prince Fielder, I also see Mo Vaughn. Fielder may be able to hit the ball a ton, but at his weight, he’s one violent hack at a bad pitch away from wrecking his back…

  29. gwangung on November 16th, 2011 10:00 am

    When I see Prince Fielder, I also see Mo Vaughn. Fielder may be able to hit the ball a ton, but at his weight, he’s one violent hack at a bad pitch away from wrecking his back…

    You know…I have MUCH less concern about this if Fielder was the proverbial final piece.

    Since he’s piece 1 of 4 to 5, I’d have to say that this is a big concern.

  30. Jamison_M on November 16th, 2011 10:33 am

    Liam, thanks for your reply. You explained beautifully… I also checked out the link and read some more on WAR calculation. Very helpful.

  31. JoshJones on November 16th, 2011 1:42 pm

    A number of teams remain in play for Grady Sizemore including the Giants, Rockies, Cubs, Red Sox, Rangers, Mariners, and Nationals, according to Jon Paul Morosi of FOX Sports

    If this is true then those of you against Prince Fielder may get your wish. I’d be suprised if the M’s were in on Fielder AND Sizemore. Althought, that’s exactly what I would do.

    As a person advocating for Fielder allow me to ask this question. Would you preffer Prince Fielder 8yrs/$200M or a package of 1yr contracts +incentives for Erik Bedard, Grady Sizemore,and Ryan Doumit?

    Those are potential high upside signings who have been linked to the M’s with huge injury risk where Prince is almost a guaranteed 5+War player for probablly $10M more a season.

    I think this is where the M’s organization is at. Trying to decide between getting a bunch or HIGH upside players or one big name bat that they will have to overpay for.

  32. Dave on November 16th, 2011 1:56 pm

    If you think Bedard, Sizemore, and Doumit are going to cost $25 million combined, you’re nuts.

  33. JoshJones on November 16th, 2011 2:12 pm

    If you think Bedard, Sizemore, and Doumit are going to cost $25 million combined, you’re nuts

    Of course not Dave.
    Bedard 5M (proved he’s healthy “enough”)
    Doumit 3-5M (turned down 3M from the Dodgers)
    Sizemore 7M (With 8 teams in on him someone will overpay)

    That’s 15-18M. What do they all have in common? None of them have played even close to a full season the past 3 years.

    I’m not saying the package is a bad idea. I’m saying it’s 5-10M$ less than fielder with no guarantees. While Fielder will almost guarantee you a 5+WAR for the next 6-8 years.

  34. KaminaAyato on November 16th, 2011 2:15 pm

    As a person advocating for Fielder allow me to ask this question. Would you preffer Prince Fielder 8yrs/$200M or a package of 1yr contracts +incentives for Erik Bedard, Grady Sizemore,and Ryan Doumit?

    The latter because you need those high-upside players so that you can take the savings from signing said players (when they pan out) and apply them to a big name player when your team is on the verge of contending.

    We don’t have enough pieces in place right now to afford that big bat and compete for a WS. Felix and Pineda? Okay. Ackley, there’s another piece. Ryan? Defensively great and isn’t an offensive black hole.

    But everything else, including Guti and Smoak and in someways Carp and Vargas insofar as they need to prove their years weren’t a fluke, are still up in the air.

    That’s why it’s too early to sign a FA like Fielder, because there is still too much to sort out to waste those years we would’ve signed such a player for.

  35. Browl on November 16th, 2011 2:59 pm

    Well color me convinced. Reading my last comment I didn’t really account for high upside free agents. I sort of assumed that a certain amount of money would buy a certain amount of wins in free agency which isn’t really true. You can get free agent steals on bounceback players or underrated players.

  36. stevemotivateir on November 16th, 2011 6:29 pm

    The big unknown, is what payroll will be and what it will likely be for the next several years. We all assume it will be roughly the same as last year. Hard to imagine Fielder landing here if it’s the same or less.

    I still suspect we’ll see a move that nobody sees coming. Maybe someone like Brandon Inge in a trade (I offer no weight to that, just throwing a name out there). I think the biggest surprise, would be seeing Figgins and Moore on the opening day roster and Furbush & Beavan both at the back of the rotation. And no, I don’t mean one of them should be at the front:)

  37. momo2119 on November 16th, 2011 7:56 pm

    I have a feeling that along with his 5 wins, Fielder will make the the players around him better, especially the players batting around him in the order. We saw Fister go beast-mode when games have purpose. I expect a 2-3 WAR increase by the rest of the batters from the current predicted 2012 WAR team total as a result of Fielder’s presence in the lineup. That’s 7-8 WAR.

    Signing Prince will increase ticket sales too. While we probably won’t win the division, he will help us stay relevant for maybe an extra month or so and that extra month of being relevant will lead to extra ticket sales. I remember Strasburg in 2010, for his 7 starts, created 5 million (725000 per game) in additional revenue from attendance. He put an extra 16000 fans in seats per start. Assuming Seattle and Washington have similar ticket prices and that Fielder will increase ticket sales by 5000 for a month (that’s being somewhat conservative considering what happened to attendence after last season’s 17-game losing streak), Fielder will create an additional 2.5 million from ticket sales every year. I’ve got a gut feeling that if we get him it will be for less than 25 mil per year

  38. VivaAyala on November 16th, 2011 7:58 pm

    I have a problem with the idea that Fielder is a guaranteed five-win player.

    Over the last six years, the six years in which Fielder has been a regular player, Fielder has been worth:

    1.3, 5.1, 1.7, 6.4, 3.4, 5.5 wins (fangraphs)

    for a grand total of 23.4 wins. That averages out to a little less than 4 wins/year, not five. The same holds true if you take just the last four seasons (2008-2011). You can’t ignore the down years.

  39. bookbook on November 16th, 2011 10:12 pm

    I am really against signing Fielder for what he’s likely to cost for as long as he’ll cost.

    That said, the weight-related risk has been overstated a number of places, I think. Odds are he’ll age better than his Dad–he’s a better player who seemingly is working harder than his father did, etc.

    Also, Mo Vaughn is just one data point. We don’t get to use Chone Figgins as the reason not to sign fast, good athletes forever afterwards, do we?

  40. UnderTheClouds on November 16th, 2011 11:53 pm

    I think the Fielder speculation has to be a decoy, “leaked” to attract the spotlight while Jack Z pursues other options. I can’t imagine the Ms spending that high a percentage on one player even if they were a contender, let alone the perenial celler dweller.

    The financial dark clouds hovering over this team–I’d be a little surprised if payroll isn’t actually lowered next season.

  41. Jordan on November 16th, 2011 11:59 pm

    Would Carlos Quentin be worth trading for and what would he cost?

    If Casper plays well, having Quentin or Guti as the 4th option is not a bad thing (Ichiro won’t be benched).

    Would the Padres give up Headley if they were getting League + ? Bell may not accept their arb. offer so they’ll be needing a closer. I know their GM has said he’s ‘not available’ but what would it take to get Headley if he were?

    These two moves are marginal or better upgrades, probably won’t cost a ton and would possibly leave catcher as the last black hole to fill.

  42. gwangung on November 17th, 2011 8:52 am

    I have a problem with the idea that Fielder is a guaranteed five-win player.

    Good point.

    He’s likely to be, but his actual track record shows that there’s a chance he’ll be under that.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.