Free Agent Predictions

[toonsterwu]

If the Nationals can move some money (namely, getting rid of Lannan/Gorzelanny's contracts and moving the 11 mil left on LaRoche), it wouldn't surprise me if they signed 2 big ticket items, namely, a SP and a 1st baseman. Rizzo has the flexibility to make one happen right now, probably, but might need to clear some room to make two happen.

[mookie]

If the Nationals can move some money (namely, getting rid of Lannan/Gorzelanny's contracts and moving the 11 mil left on LaRoche), it wouldn't surprise me if they signed 2 big ticket items, namely, a SP and a 1st baseman. Rizzo has the flexibility to make one happen right now, probably, but might need to clear some room to make two happen.

 

I swear I read a blurb a few months back saying the Nationals had zero interest in Prince. It could have been bollocks, and things definitely could have changed, but I wouldn't be shocked if it was true.

[BeerHere]

If the Nationals can move some money (namely, getting rid of Lannan/Gorzelanny's contracts and moving the 11 mil left on LaRoche), it wouldn't surprise me if they signed 2 big ticket items, namely, a SP and a 1st baseman. Rizzo has the flexibility to make one happen right now, probably, but might need to clear some room to make two happen.

 

I swear I read a blurb a few months back saying the Nationals had zero interest in Prince. It could have been bollocks, and things definitely could have changed, but I wouldn't be shocked if it was true.

You're right, probably bollocks.

[Banedon]

But we've got to get off this addiction of signing the best free agents whenever they are available, no matter how much we have to give them, and into what age we have to sign them.

 

are you freaking kidding me? When the hell did this ever happen? this isn't an addiction that exists

 

Yeah, I'd like an example of this. Other than Soriano (which is really stretching the definition of "best free agent"), please provide an example of a time when the Cubs signed the best free agent available.

[toonsterwu]

If the Nationals can move some money (namely, getting rid of Lannan/Gorzelanny's contracts and moving the 11 mil left on LaRoche), it wouldn't surprise me if they signed 2 big ticket items, namely, a SP and a 1st baseman. Rizzo has the flexibility to make one happen right now, probably, but might need to clear some room to make two happen.

 

I swear I read a blurb a few months back saying the Nationals had zero interest in Prince. It could have been bollocks, and things definitely could have changed, but I wouldn't be shocked if it was true.

 

There's been some mixed signals. I rememebr the blurb - it was Bill Ladson of mlb.com (Nationals site), but there is some speculation that the Nationals are trying to keep things under wrap. Now, they are paying LaRoche a fair amount and Marrero showed some flashes, plus Morse can go to LF, so I don't think 1st base is their priority (I think CJ Wilson is likely their top priority), but the 1st base market, well, Fielder/Pujols, will likely drag on for a bit. Actually, 1st base might not even be the 2nd priority - upgrading the top of the order might be priority number 2.

[mookie]

If the Nationals can move some money (namely, getting rid of Lannan/Gorzelanny's contracts and moving the 11 mil left on LaRoche), it wouldn't surprise me if they signed 2 big ticket items, namely, a SP and a 1st baseman. Rizzo has the flexibility to make one happen right now, probably, but might need to clear some room to make two happen.

 

I swear I read a blurb a few months back saying the Nationals had zero interest in Prince. It could have been bollocks, and things definitely could have changed, but I wouldn't be shocked if it was true.

 

There's been some mixed signals. I rememebr the blurb - it was Bill Ladson of mlb.com (Nationals site), but there is some speculation that the Nationals are trying to keep things under wrap. Now, they are paying LaRoche a fair amount and Marrero showed some flashes, plus Morse can go to LF, so I don't think 1st base is their priority (I think CJ Wilson is likely their top priority), but the 1st base market, well, Fielder/Pujols, will likely drag on for a bit. Actually, 1st base might not even be the 2nd priority - upgrading the top of the order might be priority number 2.

 

I think they are the dark horse victor of Yu Darvish. Maybe they align that signing with a trade for Span or Upton. Whatever they do, they will be one of the fun teams to watch this off season.

[davearm2]

I might be inclined to agree with you, if I thought Pujols would be in his late 30s at the end of his deal. 41 or 42 seems more plausible to me.

 

Pujols for 6 years, $180M? Sign me up. Pujols for 10 years, $240M? IMO you're going to have a very similar situation as Soriano for the last 3-4 of those years. I'd say the "albatross odds" are about equal.

 

Ok, for 2 years of a 10 year deal Pujols would be in his 40s (2020- 40; 2021- 41). The contract may turn into an albatross, I've never denied that. But the likelihood of it is so much lower with Pujols than with Soriano simply because of the differences between the two players. Pujols' success is derived from having a great approach at the plate, being a patient and disciplined hitter, understanding and manipulating the strike zone, and staying very well conditioned. Soriano's success was derived from being exceptionally athletic. The chances of Pujols' success remaining later in age are far higher than Soriano's.

 

Does that make late career success a sure thing for Pujols? Of course not. But his chances of being Frank Robinson and Johnny Mize are higher than his chances of being Alfonso Soriano.

 

Just for reference sake:

Soriano 4 years before his deal was up (2011 season): .325 wOBA/1.3 WAR

Robinson 4 years before retirement (age 38): .383 wOBA/4.4 WAR

Mize 4 years before retirmenet (age 37): .412 wOBA/2.3 WAR

We can agree to disagree without bringing Frank Robinson and Johnny Mize into it. Those guys have about as much to do with this as Fran Tarkenton and Bill Russell.

 

Look, Pujols' production curve is going to turn south during the course of his next deal. Neither of us knows exactly when (if it hasn't already), or how severely. You're confident it's going to be late and gradual. Me, not so much.

 

As I said, 6 or 7 years at a higher AAV? I'm in. 9-10 years? I'm queasy, even at a reduced AAV.

[BeerHere]

Darvish isn't a FA though. I think the situation is similar to DiceK with a posting fee (or whatever) is involved. Given his age and effectiveness I think he is going to be priced out of the Nats range. If he does post he almost has to go to a big market team based purely on the cost. Yanks or Angels is my best guess.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

We can agree to disagree without bringing Frank Robinson and Johnny Mize into it. Those guys have about as much to do with this as Fran Tarkenton and Bill Russell.

 

Look, Pujols' production curve is going to turn south during the course of his next deal. Neither of us knows exactly when (if it hasn't already), or how severely. You're confident it's going to be late and gradual. Me, not so much.

 

As I said, 6 or 7 years at a higher AAV? I'm in. 9-10 years? I'm queasy, even at a reduced AAV.

 

Or Alfonso Soriano?

 

Why should we expect sudden and soon?

[davearm2]

The beautiful thing is that I'm 100% confident that Epstein and his staff will have cutting edge forecasting methods that are way more robust and reliable than you and me sitting here spitballing :good:

 

They will crunch the numbers backwards and forwards, and if Pujols' (or Fielder's) pricetag falls within the range that their black box says is a worthwhile risk, then they'll be aggressive in getting a deal done. If the price goes beyond that, they'll bow out. Either way, the decision will surely be backed by sound theory and rigorous empirical analysis.

[davearm2]

We can agree to disagree without bringing Frank Robinson and Johnny Mize into it. Those guys have about as much to do with this as Fran Tarkenton and Bill Russell.

 

Look, Pujols' production curve is going to turn south during the course of his next deal. Neither of us knows exactly when (if it hasn't already), or how severely. You're confident it's going to be late and gradual. Me, not so much.

 

As I said, 6 or 7 years at a higher AAV? I'm in. 9-10 years? I'm queasy, even at a reduced AAV.

 

Or Alfonso Soriano?

 

Why should we expect sudden and soon?

I didn't say I expected that.

 

If I expected that, then 6 or 7 years would be too many, too.

[KingKongvs.Godzilla]

I didn't say I expected that.

 

If I expected that, then 6 or 7 years would be too many, too.

 

Touché.

[dew1679666265]

We can agree to disagree without bringing Frank Robinson and Johnny Mize into it. Those guys have about as much to do with this as Fran Tarkenton and Bill Russell.

 

Robinson and Mize are two of B-R's most similar batters to Pujols. They're also two historically great hitters, just as Pujols is a historically great hitter. They're also hitters who played into their very early 40s, like Pujols would should he sign a 10 year deal with the Cubs. If we're going to talk about a historically great player's likelihood to fall off a cliff in his late 30s and early 40s, shouldn't we compare him to other historically great hitters who played into their late 30s and early 40s? Instead of comparing him to a pretty good for his time hitter who everybody knew would fall apart a few years into his deal?

 

There's vastly more comparison between Pujols and them than there is between Pujols and Soriano. Your statement should have read: "Alfonso Soriano has about as much to do with this as Fran Tarkenton and Bill Russell."

 

Look, Pujols' production curve is going to turn south during the course of his next deal. Neither of us knows exactly when (if it hasn't already), or how severely. You're confident it's going to be late and gradual. Me, not so much.

 

As I said, 6 or 7 years at a higher AAV? I'm in. 9-10 years? I'm queasy, even at a reduced AAV.

 

I'm queasy about it too, but I'm willing to take the risk because of the exceptional performance he's likely to give us through his first 4-5 years and then the likelihood that he ages gracefully rather than falling off the cliff early.

[dew1679666265]

The beautiful thing is that I'm 100% confident that Epstein and his staff will have cutting edge forecasting methods that are way more robust and reliable than you and me sitting here spitballing :good:

 

They will crunch the numbers backwards and forwards, and if Pujols' (or Fielder's) pricetag falls within the range that their black box says is a worthwhile risk, then they'll be aggressive in getting a deal done. If the price goes beyond that, they'll bow out. Either way, the decision will surely be backed by sound theory and rigorous empirical analysis.

 

I do agree with this. If Theo chooses not to go with Prince or Pujols, I'll trust his judgement but I'll be extremely confused as to what his strategy is to build the team.

[davearm2]

We can agree to disagree without bringing Frank Robinson and Johnny Mize into it. Those guys have about as much to do with this as Fran Tarkenton and Bill Russell.

 

Robinson and Mize are two of B-R's most similar batters to Pujols. They're also two historically great hitters, just as Pujols is a historically great hitter. They're also hitters who played into their very early 40s, like Pujols would should he sign a 10 year deal with the Cubs. If we're going to talk about a historically great player's likelihood to fall off a cliff in his late 30s and early 40s, shouldn't we compare him to other historically great hitters who played into their late 30s and early 40s? Instead of comparing him to a pretty good for his time hitter who everybody knew would fall apart a few years into his deal?

B-R lists 20 similar players, not two. You weren't cherry-picking were you?

 

Guys like Mickey Mantle, Jimmie Foxx, Joe DiMaggio, Mel Ott, Duke Snider and Ken Griffey Jr. don't help your argument. In fact those guys are exactly what you describe: historically great players that fell off a cliff in their late 30s.

[CP_414]

My random guesses sure to be wrong...

 

Albert Pujols - Cardinals

Prince Fielder - Cubs

CC Sabathia - Yankees

CJ Wilson - Nats

Jose Reyes - Giants

Jimmy Rollins - Brewers

Aramis Ramirez - Angels

Carlos Beltran - Giants

David Ortiz - Red Sox

Jonathan Papelbon - Red Sox

Francisco Rodriguez - Marlins

Heath Bell - Padres

Brad Lidge - Phillies

Joe Nathan - Twins

Jonathan Broxton - Red Sox

Ryan Madson - Phillies

Mark Buehrle - White Sox

Michael Cuddyer - Phillies

Carlos Pena - Pirates

Yu Darvish - Blue Jays

Edwin Jackson - Reds

Johnny Damon - Rays

Juan Pierre - Marlins

Roy Oswalt - Retires

[Sammy Sofa]

But we've got to get off this addiction of signing the best free agents whenever they are available

 

You're kidding, right?

[dew1679666265]

B-R lists 20 similar players, not two. You weren't cherry-picking were you?

 

Guys like Mickey Mantle, Jimmie Foxx, Joe DiMaggio, Mel Ott, Duke Snider and Ken Griffey Jr. don't help your argument. In fact those guys are exactly what you describe: historically great players that fell off a cliff in their late 30s.

 

It'd be cherry picking if I was using those two specifically to prove my point that Pujols would be great late in his career. My point was that there are other, better comparisons to be used than Soriano, who bears no resemblance to Pujols in any way, shape, or form.

 

There are plenty of examples of historically great players who were very good to great into their late 30s and early 40s. There are also plenty of examples of historically great players who fell off a cliff quickly in their 30s. If we're going to talk about comparisons to Pujols, let's talk about those guys and not Alfonso Soriano, who most people on here seem to be using to argue against the Cubs giving out any more big contracts to anyone over the age of 26.

[Sammy Sofa]

B-R lists 20 similar players, not two. You weren't cherry-picking were you?

 

Guys like Mickey Mantle, Jimmie Foxx, Joe DiMaggio, Mel Ott, Duke Snider and Ken Griffey Jr. don't help your argument. In fact those guys are exactly what you describe: historically great players that fell off a cliff in their late 30s.

 

Mantle, DiMaggio, Snider and Griffey all had careers cut short due to chronic serious injuries (mostly with their knees). Pujols obviously isn't impervious or invincible, but he hasn't he had the repeated and serious issues those guys dealt with for long periods of time (or even the entirety of their careers). Foxx's career was sidelined by him being a ridiculous drunk. Ott did indeed fall off a cliff production and ability-wise, but that was after playing 18 120-game or more seasons (4 in the 120's, the rest all 135 and up), so it's not like he didn't have a very long career and fell out of the game prematurely; the guy was a full time player when he was just barely 19.

[XZero771679666304]

B-R lists 20 similar players, not two. You weren't cherry-picking were you?

 

Guys like Mickey Mantle, Jimmie Foxx, Joe DiMaggio, Mel Ott, Duke Snider and Ken Griffey Jr. don't help your argument. In fact those guys are exactly what you describe: historically great players that fell off a cliff in their late 30s.

 

It'd be cherry picking if I was using those two specifically to prove my point that Pujols would be great late in his career. My point was that there are other, better comparisons to be used than Soriano, who bears no resemblance to Pujols in any way, shape, or form.

 

There are plenty of examples of historically great players who were very good to great into their late 30s and early 40s. There are also plenty of examples of historically great players who fell off a cliff quickly in their 30s. If we're going to talk about comparisons to Pujols, let's talk about those guys and not Alfonso Soriano, who most people on here seem to be using to argue against the Cubs giving out any more big contracts to anyone over the age of 26.

 

It's not just his age. I felt a lot better about Pujols prior to this season. It could well have been the spectre of the contract situation hanging over him, but he did drop 100 points off his career OPS this year. In 2011 he had the lowest OPS, OPS+ and WAR of his career. And he has not been injury free in recent seasons, either.

 

Having said all that, you are right that the Cubs will have the financial flexibility to absorb the hit if Albert tails off further in a few years (I actually made this argument myself earlier in the year and then contradicted that a page or two ago).

 

But would I say he's a safer bet to outperform Fielder over the next 5-6 years? I have serious doubts about that. Of course you can factor in Pujols' defense, but I'd feel better about signing Prince, tbh.

Edited October 26, 2011 by XZero77

[toonsterwu]

Darvish isn't a FA though. I think the situation is similar to DiceK with a posting fee (or whatever) is involved. Given his age and effectiveness I think he is going to be priced out of the Nats range. If he does post he almost has to go to a big market team based purely on the cost. Yanks or Angels is my best guess.

 

Blue Jays and Nats arguably have more flexibility to spend this off-season than the Yankees, unless the Yankees dramatically increase payroll, and there has been no indication that that will happen. They were at 68 mil or so this year, and there's talk that they could get into the 90-100 mil range. The Lerner's are willing to spend.

[Guest]

It's not just his age. I felt a lot better about Pujols prior to this season. It could well have been the spectre of the contract situation hanging over him, but he did drop 100 points of his career OPS this year. In 2011 he had the lowest OPS, OPS+ and WAR of his career. And he has not been injury free in recent seasons, either.

 

For reference, Pujols' 5.1 WAR this season was as good or better than 4 of Fielder's 6 seasons. Also, after a slow start, he hit .316/.383/.571/.954 over his last 520 PA's this year. Those numbers surpass Fielder's 2011 when you include park factors. That's the big difference. When Albert slows down, he puts up Prince Fielder seasons on the way down instead of Ted Williams seasons. When Fielder slows down, he puts up Dmitri Young seasons on the way down.

[bukie]

It's not just his age. I felt a lot better about Pujols prior to this season. It could well have been the spectre of the contract situation hanging over him, but he did drop 100 points of his career OPS this year. In 2011 he had the lowest OPS, OPS+ and WAR of his career. And he has not been injury free in recent seasons, either.

 

For reference, Pujols' 5.1 WAR this season was as good or better than 4 of Fielder's 6 seasons. Also, after a slow start, he hit .316/.383/.571/.954 over his last 520 PA's this year. Those numbers surpass Fielder's 2011 when you include park factors. That's the big difference. When Albert slows down, he puts up Prince Fielder seasons on the way down instead of Ted Williams seasons. When Fielder slows down, he puts up Dmitri Young seasons on the way down.

Unless you think that Pujols will rebound somewhat and remain relatively injury-free, though, going forward the best case for Albert Pujols is Prince Fielder seasons with passable defense. The next five years, the comparison will be between Fielder's age 28-32 seasons and Pujols' age 32-36 seasons. Even if we all assume Fielder will drop off a cliff after that, Pujols will likely be well declined by then as well.

 

So, over the next five years, who will have more value? Pujols, who is already declining, or Fielder, who may still be improving yet for a couple years?

[dew1679666265]

It's not just his age. I felt a lot better about Pujols prior to this season. It could well have been the spectre of the contract situation hanging over him, but he did drop 100 points off his career OPS this year. In 2011 he had the lowest OPS, OPS+ and WAR of his career. And he has not been injury free in recent seasons, either.

 

This season was definitely a concern and has tempered my excitement over going after Pujols a bit. However, this past season alone isn't enough for me to oppose the Cubs putting forth a strong push to get him. Maybe you don't hand him the blank check I thought we should at the start of the year, but you still hand him a really, really big check.

 

Having said all that, you are right that the Cubs will have the financial flexibility to absorb the hit if Albert tails off further in a few years (I actually made this argument myself earlier in the year and then contradicted that a page or two ago).

 

This is what people keep ignoring. If the Cubs' payroll keeps going up like it should under Ricketts and if Theo/Hoyer do the job like we all expect they will, we'll have both the payroll room and the cheap, very good talent necessary to absorb the likely dropoff we'll get from Pujols late in the deal. Soriano's contract alone wouldn't be all that bad if we didn't have the vast majority of the production of the team coming from guys we didn't develop on our own. That can't be stressed enough, I don't think.

[XZero771679666304]

It's not just his age. I felt a lot better about Pujols prior to this season. It could well have been the spectre of the contract situation hanging over him, but he did drop 100 points of his career OPS this year. In 2011 he had the lowest OPS, OPS+ and WAR of his career. And he has not been injury free in recent seasons, either.

 

For reference, Pujols' 5.1 WAR this season was as good or better than 4 of Fielder's 6 seasons. Also, after a slow start, he hit .316/.383/.571/.954 over his last 520 PA's this year. Those numbers surpass Fielder's 2011 when you include park factors. That's the big difference. When Albert slows down, he puts up Prince Fielder seasons on the way down instead of Ted Williams seasons. When Fielder slows down, he puts up Dmitri Young seasons on the way down.

 

I realize much of that, but my concern is that this season could represent a trend. That .954 would still represent the lowest OPS of his career. He could rebound, but you can't simply dismiss the possibility that he could drop off in a fairly precipitous fashion. I'm not saying he will or that such a decline is even likely, but this year threw up a red flag.

 

And you can't dismiss the age factor, either. Yes, it's gonna be ugly when Prince hits the downslope. But how far away is Albert's decline phase relative to Prince's? Albert may already be in his. When camps break, Fielder will be 28 and Albert will be 32, and Prince sure as hell won't be getting a 10 year deal from anyone like Albert might.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'd be tickled to see Pujols in Cubbie blue in 2012. But I'd be a little less confident about what that meant in the long term than if Al had posted numbers a little closer to his career marks in 2011.