Lee Signs (report)

[srbin84]

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy to have Lee around for the next few seasons. I think he's a wonderful player and apparently a good person to have around the clubhouse.

 

65 million and a no-trade clause is pushing it, though. Assuming 5% salary inflation, he's only predicted to be worth a bit over $45 mil over the next five years.

 

Oh well, it's not my money.

 

I think the Cubs signed him for below market value.

[Wheelimus]

Good signing. I think he could have gotten more on the free agent market with another All-Star season, so I'm happy. We got a small hometown discount, and it's really only 4 seasons :D

[Shilzzz]

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy to have Lee around for the next few seasons. I think he's a wonderful player and apparently a good person to have around the clubhouse.

 

65 million and a no-trade clause is pushing it, though. Assuming 5% salary inflation, he's only predicted to be worth a bit over $45 mil over the next five years.

 

Oh well, it's not my money.

 

i've seen people say this type of thing before and i guess i'm kind of confused. where do you guys get this sort of assesment and what is it based off of?

[Rob]

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy to have Lee around for the next few seasons. I think he's a wonderful player and apparently a good person to have around the clubhouse.

 

65 million and a no-trade clause is pushing it, though. Assuming 5% salary inflation, he's only predicted to be worth a bit over $45 mil over the next five years.

 

Oh well, it's not my money.

 

I think the Cubs signed him for below market value.

 

I'm not debating that they signed him below market value.

 

I'm just saying it's possible the money could have been used more effectively. Then again, possible certainly does not equal probable, especially with this front office.

 

And J-Shill, I got the info from Baseball Prospectus, and it's based off his five year PECOTA projections.

[Omar]

Oh thank god.

[SouthSideRyan]

Projection models are regressed way too much for me to put any faith in their estimators as to what a player's contract should be.

[CubsWin]

Projection models are regressed way too much for me to put any faith in their estimators as to what a player's contract should be.

I agree. They also don't take into account the home stadium the player was playing in at the time or adjustsments the player's has made to his swing.

 

Sometimes players gain a new level of mastery over a new pitch or hitting the inside fastball in the case of DLee and it leads to a whole new level of production. Regressive projections fail to take developments like those into account.

[RynoRules]

Projection models are regressed way too much for me to put any faith in their estimators as to what a player's contract should be.

I agree. They also don't take into account the home stadium the player was playing in at the time or adjustsments the player's has made to his swing.

 

Sometimes players gain a new level of mastery over a new pitch or hitting the inside fastball in the case of DLee and it leads to a whole new level of production. Regressive projections fail to take developments like those into account.

 

Go see the baseball discussions thread on this topic: PECOTA has his stats progressing, regressing and then progressing again. That's really helpful.

 

My take on Lee is that his worth to the org. is enhanced by his 'tude. He's a good guy (apparently), good ambassador, likes it in Chicago, doesn't whine and complain, etc. I think the Cubs value guys like that.

[CubsWin]

Of course, the way Lee produces over the next 5 seasons will ultimately determine the "value" of this deal for the Cubs, but standing here and projecting out into the future, I think it is a safe bet that Lee will be paid at or slightly below market value for his production level during the life of this contract with a decent chance that he will be well below market value.

 

If you consider Magglio Ordonez's contract which will be paying him 15 million a year over the next 4 seasons, Beltran's contract which is just silly, Delgado's contract which will pay him several million more over the next 3-4 years than Lee will get despite the fact that he will be 34 in June and Furcal's contract which will be paying him 13 million over the next 3 seasons, this Lee deal doesn't look to shabby.

 

Even if he regresses from last season, which certainly one would expect, this deal should be quite fair. If he continues at or near his '05 level of production, this contract could be somewhat of a steal.

[CubsWin]

Projection models are regressed way too much for me to put any faith in their estimators as to what a player's contract should be.

I agree. They also don't take into account the home stadium the player was playing in at the time or adjustsments the player's has made to his swing.

 

Sometimes players gain a new level of mastery over a new pitch or hitting the inside fastball in the case of DLee and it leads to a whole new level of production. Regressive projections fail to take developments like those into account.

 

Go see the baseball discussions thread on this topic: PECOTA has his stats progressing, regressing and then progressing again. That's really helpful.

Are you referring to his projected production progessing, regressing and then progressing again? Or are you referring to the method of projection?

 

I was referring to the method used to create a projection, a method based solely on his previous statistics and thus called a regressive projection. Such a projection doesn't take into account the ballpark the player was playing in at the time or adjustments he has made such as mastering a new pitch or hitting the inside fastball, etc.

[treebird]

Projection models are regressed way too much for me to put any faith in their estimators as to what a player's contract should be.

I agree. They also don't take into account the home stadium the player was playing in at the time or adjustsments the player's has made to his swing.

 

Sometimes players gain a new level of mastery over a new pitch or hitting the inside fastball in the case of DLee and it leads to a whole new level of production. Regressive projections fail to take developments like those into account.

 

Go see the baseball discussions thread on this topic: PECOTA has his stats progressing, regressing and then progressing again. That's really helpful.

Are you referring to his projected production progessing, regressing and then progressing again? Or are you referring to the method of projection?

 

I was referring to the method used to create a projection, a method based solely on his previous statistics and thus called a regressive projection. Such a projection doesn't take into account the ballpark the player was playing in at the time or adjustments he has made such as mastering a new pitch or hitting the inside fastball, etc.

 

what do you mean they don't take into account ballpark? of course they do. do you know anything about this stuff?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Go see the baseball discussions thread on this topic: PECOTA has his stats progressing, regressing and then progressing again. That's really helpful.

 

Are you expecting him to produce the exact same for 4 years? It's not like they're predicting a Pat Burrellesque fall and rise. I'd be more skeptical of the projections if they had a player stay the same or straight rise/decline for the whole period of time.

[CubsWin]

Projection models are regressed way too much for me to put any faith in their estimators as to what a player's contract should be.

I agree. They also don't take into account the home stadium the player was playing in at the time or adjustsments the player's has made to his swing.

 

Sometimes players gain a new level of mastery over a new pitch or hitting the inside fastball in the case of DLee and it leads to a whole new level of production. Regressive projections fail to take developments like those into account.

 

Go see the baseball discussions thread on this topic: PECOTA has his stats progressing, regressing and then progressing again. That's really helpful.

Are you referring to his projected production progessing, regressing and then progressing again? Or are you referring to the method of projection?

 

I was referring to the method used to create a projection, a method based solely on his previous statistics and thus called a regressive projection. Such a projection doesn't take into account the ballpark the player was playing in at the time or adjustments he has made such as mastering a new pitch or hitting the inside fastball, etc.

 

what do you mean they don't take into account ballpark? of course they do. do you know anything about this stuff?

They do? I was told they did not.

 

But, wow, what's with the reaction? I'll try not to make a mistake in a thread you are reading ever again. :P

[RynoRules]

Go see the baseball discussions thread on this topic: PECOTA has his stats progressing, regressing and then progressing again. That's really helpful.

 

Are you expecting him to produce the exact same for 4 years? It's not like they're predicting a Pat Burrellesque fall and rise. I'd be more skeptical of the projections if they had a player stay the same or straight rise/decline for the whole period of time.

 

So you are saying the majority of ball players have projections that zig zag up and down during the prime of their careers? Forgive me if I am skeptical.

[SouthSideRyan]

Go see the baseball discussions thread on this topic: PECOTA has his stats progressing, regressing and then progressing again. That's really helpful.

 

Are you expecting him to produce the exact same for 4 years? It's not like they're predicting a Pat Burrellesque fall and rise. I'd be more skeptical of the projections if they had a player stay the same or straight rise/decline for the whole period of time.

 

Expecting a progression 3 years down the road to be exact enough to predict slight upswings and downswings is pretty ridiculous.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Go see the baseball discussions thread on this topic: PECOTA has his stats progressing, regressing and then progressing again. That's really helpful.

 

Are you expecting him to produce the exact same for 4 years? It's not like they're predicting a Pat Burrellesque fall and rise. I'd be more skeptical of the projections if they had a player stay the same or straight rise/decline for the whole period of time.

 

So you are saying the majority of ball players have projections that zig zag up and down during the prime of their careers? Forgive me if I am skeptical.

 

You don't think player's performance fluctuates during their prime? They aren't projecting Lee to drop 100 points in OPS.

[Guest]

Brian Dopirak has really had a bad start to the season. First he breaks his foot. Then his only path to the majors is clogged for the next 5 years.

 

Rubbing salt in the wound.

 

 

 

 

 

that said...

 

 

I am happy to have Lee around for the next several years. Let's hope he lives up to the deal.

[oldcubsfan]

Projection models are regressed way too much for me to put any faith in their estimators as to what a player's contract should be.

I agree. They also don't take into account the home stadium the player was playing in at the time or adjustsments the player's has made to his swing.

 

Sometimes players gain a new level of mastery over a new pitch or hitting the inside fastball in the case of DLee and it leads to a whole new level of production. Regressive projections fail to take developments like those into account.

 

Go see the baseball discussions thread on this topic: PECOTA has his stats progressing, regressing and then progressing again. That's really helpful.

Are you referring to his projected production progessing, regressing and then progressing again? Or are you referring to the method of projection?

 

I was referring to the method used to create a projection, a method based solely on his previous statistics and thus called a regressive projection. Such a projection doesn't take into account the ballpark the player was playing in at the time or adjustments he has made such as mastering a new pitch or hitting the inside fastball, etc.

 

what do you mean they don't take into account ballpark? of course they do. do you know anything about this stuff?

 

I know enough about these so called projections to know they are not an exact science. Conjecture maybe, science no.

The main question is do people want Lee for next year, well if so, these are the deals being signed.

[cubweiser03]

So basically a 4/52 extension. Well, I guess that's not too bad, like I've said before this is pretty much a no-win situation.

 

Funny, does Ortiz and Lee have the same agent. Yahoo reports Ortiz just signed a 4 year $52M extension. Both these guys are the same age separated by 2 months. There stats are pretty identical. The big difference is Lee's speed and defense.

 

Fair market value.

[Shilzzz]

Don't get me wrong, I'm very happy to have Lee around for the next few seasons. I think he's a wonderful player and apparently a good person to have around the clubhouse.

 

65 million and a no-trade clause is pushing it, though. Assuming 5% salary inflation, he's only predicted to be worth a bit over $45 mil over the next five years.

 

Oh well, it's not my money.

 

I think the Cubs signed him for below market value.

 

I'm not debating that they signed him below market value.

 

I'm just saying it's possible the money could have been used more effectively. Then again, possible certainly does not equal probable, especially with this front office.

 

And J-Shill, I got the info from Baseball Prospectus, and it's based off his five year PECOTA projections.

 

how does it relate to contracts though? i know how PECOTA works, and love to read about it, but are they comparing what he may do to what, say, bert pujols may do and the contracts of both?

[Andy]

Brian Dopirak has really had a bad start to the season. First he breaks his foot. Then his only path to the majors is clogged for the next 5 years.

 

Rubbing salt in the wound.

 

 

 

 

 

that said...

 

 

I am happy to have Lee around for the next several years. Let's hope he lives up to the deal.

That's a good point - the deal all but assures that Dope will be deadline-deal bait in the future.

[jjgman21]

I hate no trade clauses, but I suppose in effect the no trade clause is really only until July 2008. He'd have 10-5 rights in 2009 and 2010 anyway.

 

I think even if Derrek regresses from last year, he's the type of hitter who could readjust, get back to taking walks and going to right, and maintain the numbers he put up in 02-03 for several years to come. even with those types of numbers, combined with his defense, 14M in 2010 isn't a bad contract. barring injury, this isn't the type of contract that will completely hamper the Cubs at the end the way Sosa's did.

 

I will be interested to see how it is structured.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

As has been mentioned, Dopirak will be traded sooner if not later. He doesn't have a future in this organization any longer. He can only play first, his options will run out before Lee's deal is up, and he's not versatile enough for a bench role.

 

I'm not saying he'll be moved this season, but I'd be really surprised if he's in the organization one year from now.

[Jon]

Dope's value won't be that high this trading deadline unless he really tears it up when he gets off the DL in June. The Cubs might have to hold onto him for another season just in hopes of him proving he can produce at AA and AAA. Of course, he'll be a year older, but they might not have much of a choice unless they want to move him while his value isn't as high as it could be.

[treebird]

Dope's value won't be that high this trading deadline unless he really tears it up when he gets off the DL in June. The Cubs might have to hold onto him for another season just in hopes of him proving he can produce at AA and AAA. Of course, he'll be a year older, but they might not have much of a choice unless they want to move him while his value isn't as high as it could be.

 

the cubs? never