Ichiro set to re-sign

[CubinNY]

OK, it's time for this misconception to die, right along with "clutch hitter" and "lineup protection".

 

Thinly built, speedy guys like Ichiro tend to age very well. Barring injury, they don't all of a sudden just get slow.

 

Somewhere along the line somebody blurted out this theory, because at a quick glance it might seem commonsensical, and now people just reflexively repeat it and accept it as fact even though it doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

 

Provide some scrutiny that disproves it. I don't know of any thinly built speedy guys like Ichiro whose game held up throughout their mid 30's. We're talking about a guy with little patience and very little power whose entire game is based on his ability to make contact and run to first. The closest comparable I can think of is Kenny Lofton, but he had more patience and more power. He has stuck around a while, but has been quite inconsistent.

Lofton

Otis Nixon

Ricky Henderson

Ozzie Smith

Lou Brock

Willie Wilson

Brett Butler

Davey Lopes

Omar Vizquel

 

What a terrible attempt to defend your stance.

LOL!

 

You said, "I don't know of any thinly built speedy guys like Ichiro whose game held up throughout their mid 30's." Well now you know of several.

 

Happy to be of service.

Except for the fact that Ricky was never thinly built, and Brett Butler, Davey Lopes, Otis Nixon, Lou Brock, Omar Vizquel, Ozzie Smith, and Kenny Lofton were pretty much medicore to crappy players by their mid 30s.

 

Is it really that hard to look up statistics?

 

Baseball reference is your friend.

So you're saying these guys weren't as good at 38 as they were at 25?

 

Gosh, I hadn't noticed that. :roll:

 

The point is, the decline seen in these guys' career paths is not at all atypical for any player, or indicative of some enhanced risk associated with being thin and fast.

 

In fact these guys aged much better than the general baseball population does.

I don't know how or why you continue to make suck claims based on no evidence whatsoever. It is mind bottling.

[jersey cubs fan]

The bottom line is this:

 

Baseball players decline as they age for a whole slew of reasons:

* diminished batspeed

* slipping hand/eye coordination

* eroding defensive skills

* fading power

* declining endurance and ability to hold up to the daily grind

* sapped arm strength

* declining footspeed

 

We could probably come up with a dozen more reasons too.

 

But of them all, declining footspeed would be well down the list. It might even be at the bottom of the list. It's just not a skill that's susceptable to rapid decline.

 

Therefore guys whose game is built on speed don't have as much to worry about compared to guys whose game is based on power, or defense, or whatever else.

Ichiro's game is not built on speed. It's built on an incredible ability to hit a baseball in almost any direct.

Why are you telling me that?

 

Tell it to the folks that seem to think Ichiro is going to suck in 3 years simply because his game's built on speed.

 

People are saying he will decline and not be worth anywhere near what he's getting paid, not necessarily suck.

[Backtobanks]

OK, it's time for this misconception to die, right along with "clutch hitter" and "lineup protection".

 

Thinly built, speedy guys like Ichiro tend to age very well. Barring injury, they don't all of a sudden just get slow.

 

Somewhere along the line somebody blurted out this theory, because at a quick glance it might seem commonsensical, and now people just reflexively repeat it and accept it as fact even though it doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

 

Provide some scrutiny that disproves it. I don't know of any thinly built speedy guys like Ichiro whose game held up throughout their mid 30's. We're talking about a guy with little patience and very little power whose entire game is based on his ability to make contact and run to first. The closest comparable I can think of is Kenny Lofton, but he had more patience and more power. He has stuck around a while, but has been quite inconsistent.

Lofton

Otis Nixon

Ricky Henderson

Ozzie Smith

Lou Brock

Willie Wilson

Brett Butler

Davey Lopes

Omar Vizquel

 

The difference between Ichiro and most of the guys on the list is that Ichiro probably will end his career averaging over 200 hits per year. With the fact that he is Asian, I would think he will be a a 1st ballot Hall of Famer. Most of the guys on that list would need an admission ticket to get into the HOF.

[jersey cubs fan]

OK, it's time for this misconception to die, right along with "clutch hitter" and "lineup protection".

 

Thinly built, speedy guys like Ichiro tend to age very well. Barring injury, they don't all of a sudden just get slow.

 

Somewhere along the line somebody blurted out this theory, because at a quick glance it might seem commonsensical, and now people just reflexively repeat it and accept it as fact even though it doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

 

Provide some scrutiny that disproves it. I don't know of any thinly built speedy guys like Ichiro whose game held up throughout their mid 30's. We're talking about a guy with little patience and very little power whose entire game is based on his ability to make contact and run to first. The closest comparable I can think of is Kenny Lofton, but he had more patience and more power. He has stuck around a while, but has been quite inconsistent.

Lofton

Otis Nixon

Ricky Henderson

Ozzie Smith

Lou Brock

Willie Wilson

Brett Butler

Davey Lopes

Omar Vizquel

 

What a terrible attempt to defend your stance.

LOL!

 

You said, "I don't know of any thinly built speedy guys like Ichiro whose game held up throughout their mid 30's." Well now you know of several.

 

Happy to be of service.

Except for the fact that Ricky was never thinly built, and Brett Butler, Davey Lopes, Otis Nixon, Lou Brock, Omar Vizquel, Ozzie Smith, and Kenny Lofton were pretty much medicore to crappy players by their mid 30s.

 

Is it really that hard to look up statistics?

 

Baseball reference is your friend.

So you're saying these guys weren't as good at 38 as they were at 25?

 

Gosh, I hadn't noticed that. :roll:

 

The point is, the decline seen in these guys' career paths is not at all atypical for any player, or indicative of some enhanced risk associated with being thin and fast.

 

In fact these guys aged much better than the general baseball population does.

 

You are listing guys who are nothing like Ichiro (Ricky, patience and power), guys who were never productive in the first place (most of your list) and guys who did fall apart as they reached their mid 30's.

 

You haven't come close to providing a list of guys whose game is similar to that of Ichiro who held up their production throughout their mid 30's.

[UBlink]

bad, bad deal. Who cares how much marketing he does? This hamstrings a team without a super high payroll. $20mil/year for a singles hitter? It's laughable

 

if Ichiro is worth $20mil/year, A-Rod is worth $50mil/year

 

The true cost of a player is his salary less any incremental revenue directly attributable to that player. If you pay Ichiro $20MM and you forecast additional incremental revenue of $10MM he costs you the same as a $12MM dollar player without the marketing power that only generates $2MM incremental revenue. Marketing makes a huge difference.

 

His greatest value to the team was in his first few years. He's going to get worse and worse in the field, and he is going to sell less and less. Teams hold onto guys later in their life for PR reasons more than marketing revenue reasons. Somebody on the verge of huge records might continue to bring in the money, but with attendance plummeting since Iricho-mania has cooled considerably and the team has struggled, his value has dropped considerably.

 

Teams worry much more about the PR backlash of letting a guy go than the revenue opportunity of keeping him around. They make most of their money off the player in his early years. The Yankees will be paying Jeter way more than he's worth long after his value was great for the team.

 

Whether the incremental revenue comes from the positive addition or from avoiding negative consequences is irrelevant to the argument. Teams still need to look at the net impact on the bottom line, and in this case ignoring the impact keeping or releasing Ichiro would have on total revenue would be foolish.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

It's hard to make a list of guys who remained as productive as Ichiro through their mid 30s because, frankly, there really haven't been many players like Ichiro to begin with. It's pretty close to impossible to predict how a player's game will evolve with age when said player pretty much defies all prescribed logic, fundamentals, recommended plate approach, batting stance, etc.

 

In order words, a player really comparable to Ichiro probably doesn't even exist in the first place.

 

That being said, the flip side is how many guys on that list provided earlier would YOU give $15-20 million per year to? None, of course. Maybe Rickey Henderson in his absolute prime (adjusted for inflation from the 80s, obviously) but certainly none of the others.

 

I think everyone actually agrees on this topic but are simply talking past one another. Is Ichiro - now or 5 years from now - worth $20 million a year on the pure basis of trying to win a WS within the construct of a limited payroll budget (i.e. any franchise outside of NY or Boston)? Probably not. But the positives of keeping him in Seattle far outweigh the negatives - both PR, marketing-wise and on the field - of letting him leave and being perceived as penny pinchers who let a demographic icon walk away because they didn't have the $ when they actually did, but just didn't feel like spending it.

[dew1679666265]

OK, it's time for this misconception to die, right along with "clutch hitter" and "lineup protection".

 

Thinly built, speedy guys like Ichiro tend to age very well. Barring injury, they don't all of a sudden just get slow.

 

Somewhere along the line somebody blurted out this theory, because at a quick glance it might seem commonsensical, and now people just reflexively repeat it and accept it as fact even though it doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

 

Provide some scrutiny that disproves it. I don't know of any thinly built speedy guys like Ichiro whose game held up throughout their mid 30's. We're talking about a guy with little patience and very little power whose entire game is based on his ability to make contact and run to first. The closest comparable I can think of is Kenny Lofton, but he had more patience and more power. He has stuck around a while, but has been quite inconsistent.

Lofton

Otis Nixon

Ricky Henderson

Ozzie Smith

Lou Brock

Willie Wilson

Brett Butler

Davey Lopes

Omar Vizquel

 

What a terrible attempt to defend your stance.

LOL!

 

You said, "I don't know of any thinly built speedy guys like Ichiro whose game held up throughout their mid 30's." Well now you know of several.

 

Happy to be of service.

Except for the fact that Ricky was never thinly built, and Brett Butler, Davey Lopes, Otis Nixon, Lou Brock, Omar Vizquel, Ozzie Smith, and Kenny Lofton were pretty much medicore to crappy players by their mid 30s.

 

Is it really that hard to look up statistics?

 

Baseball reference is your friend.

 

Number of times over a .360 OBP from 33 and older

Butler - 8

Lopes - 4

Nixon - 3

Brock - 2

Vizquel - 2

Smith - 2

 

None of them ever hit for much power, so OBP was the best judge given their style of play. Vizquel and Smith have never been known as good hitters, so I wouldn't say they "became" mediocre - they always were. Butler had an OBP over .400 3 times after 33. All the players played until they were between 40-42.

[jersey cubs fan]

Number of times over a .360 OBP from 33 and older

Butler - 8

Lopes - 4

Nixon - 3

Brock - 2

Vizquel - 2

Smith - 2

 

None of them ever hit for much power, so OBP was the best judge given their style of play. Vizquel and Smith have never been known as good hitters, so I wouldn't say they "became" mediocre - they always were. Butler had an OBP over .400 3 times after 33. All the players played until they were between 40-42.

 

Butler drew walks, Ichiro doesn't.

 

Playing until you are 40-42 is not the same thing as maintain the level of performance through your mid-30's.

[nilodnayr]

If you look at BP and Baseball-Reference you will find that Ichiro is a fairly incomparable player. After searching through the lists, the majority of the players were around during the WWs or even before. Those on the BR list who were in the more recent era and showed up multiple times are Ralph Garr, Bake McBride, Ron LeFore, and Griffey Sr. All of those guys showed up multiple times. And all but Griffey was out of the league by 34.

[dew1679666265]

Number of times over a .360 OBP from 33 and older

Butler - 8

Lopes - 4

Nixon - 3

Brock - 2

Vizquel - 2

Smith - 2

 

None of them ever hit for much power, so OBP was the best judge given their style of play. Vizquel and Smith have never been known as good hitters, so I wouldn't say they "became" mediocre - they always were. Butler had an OBP over .400 3 times after 33. All the players played until they were between 40-42.

 

Butler drew walks, Ichiro doesn't.

 

Playing until you are 40-42 is not the same thing as maintain the level of performance through your mid-30's.

 

I wasn't really arguing either side, just throwing out some stats that I found interesting. I tend to think Ichiro is a unique case - as you partially pointed out, he's very unsimilar to all the guys on the list. He doesn't rely only on speed as he has exceptional bat speed and hand-eye coordination. Will he be as good five years from now as he was when he broke in? No, but I also don't think he'll be a mediocre at best player either.

 

I definitely don't think he'll be worth this contract in five years, though.

[davearm]

Number of times over a .360 OBP from 33 and older

Butler - 8

Lopes - 4

Nixon - 3

Brock - 2

Vizquel - 2

Smith - 2

 

None of them ever hit for much power, so OBP was the best judge given their style of play. Vizquel and Smith have never been known as good hitters, so I wouldn't say they "became" mediocre - they always were. Butler had an OBP over .400 3 times after 33. All the players played until they were between 40-42.

 

Butler drew walks, Ichiro doesn't.

 

Playing until you are 40-42 is not the same thing as maintain the level of performance through your mid-30's.

Who, exactly, would you expect to "maintain [their] level of performance through [their] mid-30's"? If you're looking for a guy that'll be just as good at 38 as he was at 28, well, good luck with that.

 

Virtually all players decline through their mid-30s. That's the way things work. Nobody's arguing that Ichiro is somehow immune to this reality.

 

The point is, Ichiro is arguably less prone to a mid-30s decline than other guys with different skillsets.

 

You've been shown anecdotal evidence to support this (your hairsplitting notwithstanding), there have been studies done that support this, and beyond that, it's just simple common sense that a more fit and athletic player is going to be less prone to natural age-related decline than a less fit, less athletic one. Ichiro most definitely is in the more fit, more athletic column.

 

Therefore the notion that, because Ichiro is speedy, his production is therefore going to tail off more rapidly than joe average ballplayer is completely nonsensical and false.

Edited July 11, 2007 by davearm

[Derwood]

i think it's hilarious that some of you actually think that the supplemental income Ichiro provides for the Mariners is actually going back into payroll

[UBlink]

i think it's hilarious that some of you actually think that the supplemental income Ichiro provides for the Mariners is actually going back into payroll

 

It doesn't matter where the supplemental income goes, it still affects the team's bottom line. And the team needs to look at Ichiro's net impact on their bottom line. If they don't I think that's hilarious.

[davearm]

i think it's hilarious that some of you actually think that the supplemental income Ichiro provides for the Mariners is actually going back into payroll

 

It doesn't matter where the supplemental income goes, it still affects the team's bottom line. And the team needs to look at Ichiro's net impact on their bottom line. If they don't I think that's hilarious.

Exactly.

 

Revenue is revenue.

 

Whether or not it's rolled back into payroll is really not the issue.

[Rob]

Therefore the notion that, because Ichiro is speedy, his production is therefore going to tail off more rapidly than joe average ballplayer is completely nonsensical and false.

 

Yeah, you're probably right.

 

But Ichiro's production doesn't have to fall off more rapidly to make him less of an asset more quickly. Let's face it, Ichiro is valuable, but he's not a superstar. If he falls off much at all, he's Juan Pierre with a cannon arm instead of Ichiro... and there's a huge difference.

[RynoRules]

i think it's hilarious that some of you actually think that the supplemental income Ichiro provides for the Mariners is actually going back into payroll

 

What's really hilarious is that you don't have a basic understanding of the bottom-line nature of business and the importance of unique assets.

[Derwood]

i think it's hilarious that some of you actually think that the supplemental income Ichiro provides for the Mariners is actually going back into payroll

 

What's really hilarious is that you don't have a basic understanding of the bottom-line nature of business and the importance of unique assets.

 

i understand that the dude makes money. i'm just trying to say that there is no direct correlation between his making money for the team and the team spending more money on the team. for other examples, see: every team that has extorted a new stadium out of the taxpayers' pockets

[UBlink]

i think it's hilarious that some of you actually think that the supplemental income Ichiro provides for the Mariners is actually going back into payroll

 

What's really hilarious is that you don't have a basic understanding of the bottom-line nature of business and the importance of unique assets.

 

i understand that the dude makes money. i'm just trying to say that there is no direct correlation between his making money for the team and the team spending more money on the team. for other examples, see: every team that has extorted a new stadium out of the taxpayers' pockets

 

Apples and oranges - Ichiro is a combination package - to get the marketing benefits you have to have the player. It makes perfect sense to look at the net cost.

 

The level of subsidy a team gets from the local taxpayers has no direct connection to who plays for the team. Since the subsidy generally isn't connected to the performance of the team - either on the field or at the box office - it makes perfect sense to ignore it when making payroll decisions.

[Jon]

I'd love to have someone with a .410 OBP, but the guy has never had a decent IsoD or IsoP. Heck, he's only had 3 or 4 good seasons. Ichiro would have to be bringing in $10 million or more a year now after what gets divided up to the rest of the league for this to seem worth while. And that's not factoring the decline in interest he is going to bring as time goes on. I can't imagine he's bringing in as much money now as he was during his first two seasons.

I'd sure be curious to hear which 2 or 3 seasons you're tossing out as less than good.

 

His worst season was still worth over 8 wins. That's very good.

2003: .312/.352/.436/.788, 110 OPS+, 80% SB

2005: .303/.350/.436/.786, 109 OPS+, 80% SB

2006: .322/.370/.416/.786, 109 OPS+, 95% SB

 

Now he did add a significant amount of production in 2006 with his stolen bases, but overall those years aren't terribly impressive.

[davearm]

I'd love to have someone with a .410 OBP, but the guy has never had a decent IsoD or IsoP. Heck, he's only had 3 or 4 good seasons. Ichiro would have to be bringing in $10 million or more a year now after what gets divided up to the rest of the league for this to seem worth while. And that's not factoring the decline in interest he is going to bring as time goes on. I can't imagine he's bringing in as much money now as he was during his first two seasons.

I'd sure be curious to hear which 2 or 3 seasons you're tossing out as less than good.

 

His worst season was still worth over 8 wins. That's very good.

2003: .312/.352/.436/.788, 110 OPS+, 80% SB

2005: .303/.350/.436/.786, 109 OPS+, 80% SB

2006: .322/.370/.416/.786, 109 OPS+, 95% SB

 

Now he did add a significant amount of production in 2006 with his stolen bases, but overall those years aren't terribly impressive.

You're missing a whole lot by focusing on OPS+.

 

Above average hitting + outstanding baserunning + gold glove defense adds up to a very productive, well above average player.

 

As I pointed out, at his worst Ichiro's been worth 8+ wins. That's nothing short of very good production.

 

For some perspective, ARod's off year in 2006 was good for "just" 7.3 wins, even with a terrific OPS+ (140). But in 2004 ARod was good for 10 wins despite an OPS+ of "just" 133.

[Chocolate Milk]

i think it's hilarious that some of you actually think that the supplemental income Ichiro provides for the Mariners is actually going back into payroll

 

What's really hilarious is that you don't have a basic understanding of the bottom-line nature of business and the importance of unique assets.

 

i understand that the dude makes money. i'm just trying to say that there is no direct correlation between his making money for the team and the team spending more money on the team. for other examples, see: every team that has extorted a new stadium out of the taxpayers' pockets

 

You're in over your head.

[nilodnayr]

i think it's hilarious that some of you actually think that the supplemental income Ichiro provides for the Mariners is actually going back into payroll

 

What's really hilarious is that you don't have a basic understanding of the bottom-line nature of business and the importance of unique assets.

 

 

I think this was discussed a lot in the Dice-K threads over the winter, but isn't the $ made internationally divided equally among all teams, regardless of the license? I believer the discussion went something like that, although I don't think anyone was particularly certain. Obviously, he is going to have a business impact more than the normal player in terms of attendance and US licensing, but based on those dicussions over the winter, it isn't the bonanza that it could be.

 

Someone also mentioned the fact that he is already on the Mariners and therefore a lot of his marketing value has already been realized. Its a simple diminishing marginal returns concept that shouldn't be overlooked. Like the poster said, its more of a PR value than marketing. People already have Ichiro jerseys, they aren't going to run out and buy new ones because he agrees to an extention with the same team.

[Rob]

I'd love to have someone with a .410 OBP, but the guy has never had a decent IsoD or IsoP. Heck, he's only had 3 or 4 good seasons. Ichiro would have to be bringing in $10 million or more a year now after what gets divided up to the rest of the league for this to seem worth while. And that's not factoring the decline in interest he is going to bring as time goes on. I can't imagine he's bringing in as much money now as he was during his first two seasons.

I'd sure be curious to hear which 2 or 3 seasons you're tossing out as less than good.

 

His worst season was still worth over 8 wins. That's very good.

2003: .312/.352/.436/.788, 110 OPS+, 80% SB

2005: .303/.350/.436/.786, 109 OPS+, 80% SB

2006: .322/.370/.416/.786, 109 OPS+, 95% SB

 

Now he did add a significant amount of production in 2006 with his stolen bases, but overall those years aren't terribly impressive.

You're missing a whole lot by focusing on OPS+.

 

Above average hitting + outstanding baserunning + gold glove defense adds up to a very productive, well above average player.

 

As I pointed out, at his worst Ichiro's been worth 8+ wins. That's nothing short of very good production.

 

For some perspective, ARod's off year in 2006 was good for "just" 7.3 wins, even with a terrific OPS+ (140). But in 2004 ARod was good for 10 wins despite an OPS+ of "just" 133.

 

Using WARP3 is a bit dishonest, isn't it? Using a stat meant to compare current players to past players instead of the basic WARP which just compares players to each other that year when his yearly score would drop below 7 on the low end... it's a little fishy.

[Derwood]

there is a difference between a good business contract and a good baseball contract

[SouthSideRyan]

there is a difference between a good business contract and a good baseball contract

 

And this is neither.

 

Nilo summed up well what I've been trying to put into words all day.