HOT STOVE LEAGUE 2K4/2K5

Oh man I don't see how this isn't pure gold for the A's (I mean assuming health and all that and that the Pirates assume a good part of this stupid back-weighted contract.)

Pedro to Mets? Good idea?

http://doc-baseball.blogspot.com/2004/11/to-pedro-or-not-to-pedro.html

but Oakland pays $1M and $2M for Kendall in 2005 & 2006 so a net $2M contribution from PIT and if Kendall gets traded again (with OAK, a high possibility), they pay nothing.

Apparently the Jays were the only MLB club that didn't have full operating control over its stadium.

sf chronicle article

My gut tells me that the Giants just bought the services of the Armando that no one likes, not the Armando happily toiling in relative obscurity in Florida. Even if they were getting the good Armando, I'm not sure he's worth $7M - I'm guessing most of that paycheck is to (briefly) allay the bullpen fears of San Fran fans.

At this rate, Nomah might be able to swing $15M, and Ordonez can probably sucker a team into a $80M / 5 year deal. (Granted, I'm exaggerating a bit, but this off-season doesn't seem as fiscally responsible as last year's.) (I could be mistaken.)

Also, the article mentions a lefty in the works for the Giants... hmmmm... any speculations? Their targeted salary of $79-80M looks to be in jeopardy unless they start dealing away some of their higher paid players.

PROS:
Benitez reminds me of Nen: 3 solid pitches with a high 90s fastball, a low 90s slider and a decent 3rd pitch. He's coming off a career year which is always risky, but could pay dividends for the Giants who haven't had a legitimate closer since 2002.

CONS:
His OPS allowed of .475 last year seems impossible to duplicate (Gagne allowed .508 in 04) but maybe playing half his games in PacBell will be similar to playing half his games in ProPlayer. His steady decline of K/9 (while still high at 8.01) spells trouble (although his control is much better than earlier in his career, eg: his WHIP was less than 1 for the first time in his career in 04).

Yeah, the obscure Defending World Champion Marlins.

At this rate, Nomah might be able to swing $15M, and Ordonez can probably sucker a team into a $80M / 5 year deal. (Granted, I'm exaggerating a bit, but this off-season doesn't seem as fiscally responsible as last year's.) (I could be mistaken.)

Ordonez might hit the jackpot if he gets a deal equal to Tejada ($72M/6) but I highly doubt Nomar is going to command 8 digits. Whereas Ordonez has a shot at regaining his pre-injury form, I don't think anyone considers Nomar anywhere near allstar ability.

Remember, Benitez is coming off a season where he was arguably was one of the top 3-4 closers in the game. He had the lowest ERA in the majors, the 2nd highest amount of saves in the NL, blew less saves then anyone not named Gagne in the NL. He is not some hobbly gimp who got benched in favor of Neifi Perez at times late last season.

Touche, duder, but the few times I recall folks mentioning their World Series win, it was as an "oh, by the way" afterthought. Either no one gave a spank, or the Marlins need better PR.

I'd be shocked if either of these guys get 2 years (esp. Nomar.)

Benitez has struggled at SBC Park, however, with a 4.91 ERA in five appearances. Furthermore, Benitez will be remembered most for allowing a dramatic three-run, pinch-hit home run to J.T. Snow in the ninth inning of Game 2 of the 2000 NLDS in San Francisco. The Giants, however, lost to the Mets 5-4 in 10 innings and blew a chance to take a 2-0 lead in the series, which they lost in four games.

from ESPN

Pedro Martinez - $90M/7yrs = $12.86M/yr

$38/3yrs = $12.66M/yr

= -1.5% decline

He made over $18M (with bonuses) last year for the Red Sox!!!

does he not have a world series ring (not bad, a 3-hit 7 inning shutout in the world series)?
Has Joe Morgan hijacked gygax's ILX account? The fact that he won a WS this year with by far the best team he's ever played on has nothing to do with the fact that he's not the pitcher he was in 1999 (when he was dominant in the playoffs, unlike this year save one WS game), or even 2002.

You guys are being unfair to discount inflation so heavily as well.

What makes you think there has been a lot of permanent inflation between 1997 and 2004 (obv at various points things were very inflated, but I not so sure things haven't stabilized at roughly the same point they were around then)?

Re: playoffs, Pedro had a 4.00 ERA this year in 27 IP. That's good (considering the higher level of competition) but not great, and not the kind of performance that makes you spend a few million more per year plus an extra year on the contract just to make sure you get that particular guy.

In the 1999 playoffs he was a lot better, and of course was a better pitcher then too. And five years younger. And on the DL four or five fewer times.

Very easy to say from an SF viewpoint (where the regional economy stalled then bombed), but at a national level, there is indeed permanent inflation:

Year PPI CPI
1997 -0.1% 2.3%
1998 -2.5% 1.6%
1999 0.9% 2.2%
2000 5.7% 3.4%
2001 1.1% 2.8%
2002 -2.3% 1.6%
2003 5.3% 2.3%

MiR:
Never mind inflation, I'm talking about Market Value 2004 vs Market Value 1997. Nobody's getting the 6yr+ contracts that were so common in the late 90's. Nobody's getting $15M+/yr either.

YET. We have yet to see any allstar young players sign (hellllloooo Beltran and Beltre!... not to say they deserve those type of contracts).

Re: playoffs, Pedro had a 4.00 ERA this year in 27 IP. That's good (considering the higher level of competition) but not great, and not the kind of performance that makes you spend a few million more per year plus an extra year on the contract just to make sure you get that particular guy.

Yes the team that owned him this year in the playoffs (whom he referred to quite publically as his "Daddy") was a $192M 1/2 allstar team (albeit with no chemistry). Yes, that team could knock 4 Runs in off anyone in the league. Big whoop.

In the 1999 playoffs he was a lot better, and of course was a better pitcher then too. And five years younger. And on the DL four or five fewer times.

Yes, and guys, trust me, I think that the Mets (or the Angels or whomever) will have their doctors and trainers present to look into Pedro's health to give the deal the "OK".

benitez's contract, otoh, is ludicrous.

also, local sportsradio says that SF is not done yet and are pretty much ready to announce the signing of Jermaine Dye tomorrow. They also confirmed that they are courting a "major league lefty"... could it be RJ?

Isn't that offer about what Schilling makes per year?

gary sheffield got a 3/39 contract last year. granted it was from the yankees, but it was pretty much market value by any estimation and i can't see why pedro doesn't deserve a similar, if not superior, offer.

The Sheffield contract from last year is a good example of the way the market has declined since 2000-1.

The Mets doctors can examine Pedro every which way, it doesn't matter if he's healthy right now, what matters is how likely he will break down in the future. He was on the DL nearly every year in his seven years with Boston, and there's no reason to assume that those trends won't continue. He doesn't throw as hard as he used to, his K/9IP ratio has declined for three straight years, and his K/BB ratio has declined for four straight years.

I'm a huge Pedro fan, but I think 3/38 is a risk. Maddux was a Cy contender only two years ago (16-6 2.62) but the same signs of decline had set in. And Maddux was *healthy* for his entire career! Now Maddux is making $6M. Similarly, I think Pedro will put up solid, but not great numbers, basically duplicating what he did last year. Is 16-9 3.90 for three years really worth $38M?

that may be true, but it's also a decent gauge for pedro's contract, imo. admittedly it's a bit awkward but it was what sprung to mind at the time, and i think their strengths and weaknesses probably even out nicely.

but more pertinent are the three biggest pitching deals of last year (that i can sort of remember):

colon 4/54
pettitte 3/39 REJECTED
vazquez 4/45

so, apparently it is.

honestly, i don't see much of an argument here. you've got a nominal superstar (fuck, nearly a legend) coming off a world series season in which he was paid 18 million dollars - so he's gonna be expecting big cash no matter HOW he performed. his big weakness is health, but he threw more innings last season than in any since his monstrous cy-worthy 2000 campaign. he's only 33. and though his performance was way down (to a mere 'very good'), in every year BEFORE that he was, on a rate basis, the best starter of all time - so you've got quite a lot of upside to gamble on. all in all, a risk (as w/ any injury prone pitcher - or as the hardcore statheads would probably say, any pitcher), but a worthy one if you've got the cash and need pitching.

anyway i'm all for the yanks offering up a big money 3 year contract (4 guaranteed is def stretching it) so i'm not just playing 'petey's' agent here.

Furthermore, top pitchers almost always make less than top position players. So maybe my Sheffield comparison wasn't the most appropriate ... instead, consider Maddux, who signed a five-year deal -- still in his prime, which unfortunately doesn't apply to Pedro anymore -- the year after Pedro for ~$11M per.

NY Times has major buzzkill on Mets-Pedro today; I pray it's true. Source says Mets would have to "overwhelm" him to pry him from Sox (ie, 4 years guaranteed at around 14.5 per).

'gax, "20 wins easy" in the NL East? With whose bullpen? Not likely even with the Braves', who have no interest.

So I got the terms of the Benitez deal:

Base Salary (+ signing bonus)
2005 $2.5M (+$1.6M) = $4.1M
2006 $4.0M (+$2.6M) = $6.6M
2007 $7.6M (+$0.0M) = $7.6M
2008 $0.0M (+$1.6M) = $1.6M
2009 $0.0M (+$1.6M) = $1.6M

mir, there are some obvious problems w/ using a contracts signed 8 years ago as your comparison point, one of them being that the market wasn't CLOSE to it's peak - it didn't peak until 4 years later, when mike mussina - definitely NOT coming off a cy young season - signed a 6 year 85 million dollar deal (w/ an option for a 7th at 17M = 7yr/102M).

there's also randy johnson, who signed that huge contract at 39 during the big regression year of aught2. (i wanted to say 2/40 but that can't be right since he's still under contract. was it 3yrs at 18M per??)

as for maddux's CURRENT contract, it's a pretty strong parallel but one, it's the exception and not the rule, two, "upside" - and this is just my perception, but with maddux there wasn't much chance he was going to return to his sub-3.00 era ways, while pedro's still a major strikeout pitcher, and i think there's still hope he's going to regain whatever it was he lost last year (that's up to ML teams to decide). there's also a world of difference between 33 and 37. but generally, i think if you're a big name and can put up a 3.50 era, you're going to make 11-14M per.

Unit is a freak of nature and is certainly not a fair comparison for the expected performance of great pitchers in their late-30's. Again -- the guy was a workhorse and had hardly ever been injured when he signed with the DBacks.

Unlike the other pitchers we've been mentioning, Pedro is a) past his peak, and b) injured a hell of a lot.

i think if you're a big name and can put up a 3.50 era, you're going to make 11-14M per

I agree, but this is more the reality of the market than smart GM'ing. And again, I wouldn't have a problem with Pedro earning 13M, I'd have a problem giving him that money for three years or more.

sure pedro's past his peak, but then his peak was a level on par with anything in the history of baseball, so...