Pujols signs with Angels pg 151

[Tracer Bullet]

those top 10 look really good. 11 is much too early to tell. but 12-15? yikes. go elite, but don't go near-elite.

 

to be fair, santana was elite... health has been the main problem with him.

 

yes, he was. he's also 1 of 2 pitches in the top 15. and CC is the only pitcher in the top 20 that's not a bad deal just a couple years in (and it might look really bad in a couple years if he falls apart). so maybe go elite and stay away from near-elite or pitchers.

 

speaking of santana, boy the twins worked that pretty well (read: lucked out). he leaves, has 1 great year and then the injuries pop up.

[TruffleShuffle]

speaking of santana, boy the twins worked that pretty well (read: lucked out). he leaves, has 1 great year and then the injuries pop up.

 

well, except for the return they got for him. he's an elite SP pitcher and all they really got was carlos gomez (the rest of those guys have done almost nothing at the big league level). this isn't really 20/20 hindsight either; a lot of people thought they should have gotten a better return.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Just sayin, though: He's got 911 PAs of .301/.397/.551 since turning 30, and the defensive metrics have nosedived on him the past few seasons.

 

Last year was the 4th best of his 10 MLB seasons.

 

By what measure?

[Guest]

Just sayin, though: He's got 911 PAs of .301/.397/.551 since turning 30, and the defensive metrics have nosedived on him the past few seasons.

 

Last year was the 4th best of his 10 MLB seasons.

 

By what measure?

 

OPS+

 

Offense swan-dived league wide last year.

[TruffleShuffle]

defensive metrics are notoriously unreliable when it comes to 1B.

[dew1679666265]

I'm pretty sure the Rangers would disagree with you on the first ARod deal ;)

 

Throughout the entire first ARod contract, the Rangers never had a payroll higher than $105 million. The smallest portion of the Rangers' payroll that ARod took up during his time there was 1/4. At the same time, ARod posted WARs of 7.8, 9.8 and 9.1.

 

The contract was fine, it was the wrong team to give out that contract, however.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

defensive metrics are notoriously unreliable when it comes to 1B.

 

They are a huge part of those gaudy WARs he posted many years.

[Guest]

(And I get that Pujols is better than almost all of these guys... which is why the magnitude of his deal is gonna put him at or near the top of the list.)

 

and if you look at the top of the list, how many teams are disappointed with the production they got for their dollar? the yankees probably will be for ARod Part II; nobody should've been for the previous monster contract. jeter? meh... his defense is mostly lousy, but it's the yankees and he was still very good through the entire life of that contract. jury is still out on mauer. teixeira and sabathia contracts look fine. manny probably wasn't worth $20m a year, but just because his glove was awful... offensively they got what they were paying for. tulo and agonz - who knows. miggy cabrera appears well on his way to earning that contract.

 

if you narrow it down to elite players things don't really look that bad.

I'm pretty sure the Rangers would disagree with you on the first ARod deal ;)

The Rangers easily got the production they wanted for that contract. The fact that Hicks ran into money problems outside the game doesn't mean that was a bad contract at all.

[Tracer Bullet]

speaking of santana, boy the twins worked that pretty well (read: lucked out). he leaves, has 1 great year and then the injuries pop up.

 

well, except for the return they got for him. he's an elite SP pitcher and all they really got was carlos gomez (the rest of those guys have done almost nothing at the big league level). this isn't really 20/20 hindsight either; a lot of people thought they should have gotten a better return.

 

yeah, i didn't word that very well. i just meant they got the best out of him and then he goes and signs a fat contract that doesn't look so good so far (though he's still fairly young). maybe they knew he was going to tank and were just being nice with the trade. 'no really, this is enough. believe us.'

[davearm2]

(And I get that Pujols is better than almost all of these guys... which is why the magnitude of his deal is gonna put him at or near the top of the list.)

 

and if you look at the top of the list, how many teams are disappointed with the production they got for their dollar? the yankees probably will be for ARod Part II; nobody should've been for the previous monster contract. jeter? meh... his defense is mostly lousy, but it's the yankees and he was still very good through the entire life of that contract. jury is still out on mauer. teixeira and sabathia contracts look fine. manny probably wasn't worth $20m a year, but just because his glove was awful... offensively they got what they were paying for. tulo and agonz - who knows. miggy cabrera appears well on his way to earning that contract.

 

if you narrow it down to elite players things don't really look that bad.

I'm pretty sure the Rangers would disagree with you on the first ARod deal ;)

The Rangers easily got the production they wanted for that contract. The fact that Hicks ran into money problems outside the game doesn't mean that was a bad contract at all.

I'm quite certain I will regret going here, but I think it's safe to say that WAR numbers don't come close to embodying what the Rangers were hoping to get out of that deal.

 

In the end, the Rangers paid nearly $50m/yr for 3 playoff-less seasons, with unrealized revenue streams, ticket sales, marketing synergies, etc. It was a failed experiment, and one the Rangers bet big on.

[TruffleShuffle]

who gives a crap. was a-rod worth the $252 million he was paid over 10 years?

[davearm2]

who gives a crap. was a-rod worth the $252 million he was paid over 10 years?

The Rangers, duh.

 

Do you think they would have traded him if the plan was working as expected?

[SouthSideRyan]

who gives a crap. was a-rod worth the $252 million he was paid over 10 years?

The Rangers, duh.

 

Do you think they would have traded him if the plan was working as expected?

 

The trade was an epic failure on the Rangers part. They ate 67M of the 179M left on A-Rod's contract to get rid of him for an inferior player 6 months his younger. They paid 80M for 2 years of Soriano and the return on his trade to Washington rather than 7 years of A-Rod for 179M. Just hilariously awful.

[TruffleShuffle]

so you're saying a-rod wasn't worth $252 million because tom hicks is a complete moron. compelling argument.

[TruffleShuffle]

I'm quite certain I will regret going here, but I think it's safe to say that WAR numbers don't come close to embodying what the Rangers were hoping to get out of that deal.

 

why is it safe to say that? he gave them 26.7 WAR in three seasons (using fangraphs numbers). his last season with seattle he posted a 9.6 WAR, so yes his average WAR was down slightly from his final year in seattle (which had been his best year to that point). the guy led the league in WAR 4 times during that contract and won the MVP three times. unless you had completely unrealistic expectations for him, like he was going to play like steroids-era bonds for 10 consecutive years, the contract was not an unreasonable one.

 

or are you arguing that because the rangers deemed him "not worth it" 3 years into the deal, then he was a bust? i guess if you are using that line of logic then you probably think the island of manhattan is pretty worthless, since native americans accepted like $25 worth of beads and [expletive] for it during the 17th century.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If a 25-year-old A-Rod were on the FA market this coming offseason, I'd give him 8/35 without a second thought.

[TruffleShuffle]

i think i know what this is about. a-rod and pujols don't spend enough time practicing how to bunt.

[Guest]

defensive metrics are notoriously unreliable when it comes to 1B.

 

They are a huge part of those gaudy WARs he posted many years.

 

UZR is far from the only data point suggesting Pujols is an asset at first base.

[imb]

All he's saying is that the Rangers envisioned ARod making them a legitimate contender and becoming the face of baseball while he was there, which didn't happen. Not that it's his fault.

[Guest]

All he's saying is that the Rangers envisioned ARod making them a legitimate contender and becoming the face of baseball while he was there, which didn't happen. Not that it's his fault.

I understand what he's saying. I simply don't agree with his logic. ARod couldn't control whether or not the Rangers were contenders or if they made money. All he could do was play baseball well enough to justify the money spent on him.

 

Which he did quite adequately.

[davearm2]

All he's saying is that the Rangers envisioned ARod making them a legitimate contender and becoming the face of baseball while he was there, which didn't happen. Not that it's his fault.

 

Thank you. I thought I was being clear when I stated that WAR numbers don't fully embody what the Rangers were hoping to get out of that deal. ARod was expected to be a cross-cultural mega-star global icon on the order of Beckham or MJ, not *just* the best player in MLB. All wearing a Rangers' "T" cap. Heck Boras marketed him as such during that free-agent tour.

 

And you're right, it was not ARod's fault that stuff didn't materialize.

[davearm2]

All he's saying is that the Rangers envisioned ARod making them a legitimate contender and becoming the face of baseball while he was there, which didn't happen. Not that it's his fault.

I understand what he's saying. I simply don't agree with his logic. ARod couldn't control whether or not the Rangers were contenders or if they made money. All he could do was play baseball well enough to justify the money spent on him.

 

Which he did quite adequately.

It's not my logic. Boras pitched this image.

 

Tom Hicks' mistake was buying what the Boras/ARod camp was selling. Surely 10/252 wasn't Hicks' initial offer for christ sakes.

[TruffleShuffle]

the yankees gave him a bigger contract later in his career. the rangers' problem was not understanding the value of their asset and giving the yankees a very valuable player at a discount price in a salary dump.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

those top 10 look really good. 11 is much too early to tell. but 12-15? yikes. go elite, but don't go near-elite.

 

That's how I feel about the Pujols deal. When you sign a big money FA, you always pay too much. But if you get the production you want, you can live with it.

 

Go elite, but stay away from the near elite because those guys will make almost as much as the elite guys without coming close to the guarantee of production. Pujols is elite. Pay the man.

[davearm2]

the yankees gave him a bigger contract later in his career. the rangers' problem was not understanding the value of their asset and giving the yankees a very valuable player at a discount price in a salary dump.

Actually I think it would be safer to say the Rangers' problem was that they overvalued ARod as an asset at the time they signed him.

 

Three years in, they came to realize exactly what I was explaining earlier with regards to Pujols... they were paying him a whole lot more money than he was bringing in for them. All of the cross-promotion and branding and yadda yadda never took off the way they thought it would, the on-field success of the team never materialized, and the jump in ticket sales was nonexistent.