Source: Castro Agrees to 7/60M Extension (Option Year: 16M)

[jersey cubs fan]

Remember the racist announcer/beat writers discussion?

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/08/how-baseball-announcers-subtly-favor-american-players-over-foreign-ones/261265/

 

If a player is described as "impatient" or "over-aggressive," there is a greater than 50 percent chance that player is not white. This echoes the findings of similar research in the field of print sports journalism.

 

 

This appears to be a major flaw in the study. It's commonly accepted that the "can't walk off the island" mentality is real. So while a non-American born player may be more likely to be described as impatient or over-aggressive, there's a good chance that the description is accurate, which would negate any sort of theory that bias is the reason that description is used.

[Tracer Bullet]

I'm splitting hairs here, but I would have preferred to see the contract start out at around $6-7M in year 1 to keep it down around $8-9M years 6 and 7. Like I said though, really splitting hairs. This is a great deal for the Cubs.

 

Backloading is good.

That is a little bit of an oversimplification. Backloading is not inherently good or bad. My personal preference would be to minimize backloaded contracts on a rebuilding team, but that doesn't necessarily mean it is a bad thing. Either way, it really should not be much of a factor here.

 

Why wouldn't you prefer for a rebuilding team to invest the extra couple million in those rebuilding years to pay for (1) the higher backloaded years, and (2) other stuff with the extra money from the investment.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'm splitting hairs here, but I would have preferred to see the contract start out at around $6-7M in year 1 to keep it down around $8-9M years 6 and 7. Like I said though, really splitting hairs. This is a great deal for the Cubs.

 

Backloading is good.

That is a little bit of an oversimplification. Backloading is not inherently good or bad. My personal preference would be to minimize backloaded contracts on a rebuilding team, but that doesn't necessarily mean it is a bad thing. Either way, it really should not be much of a factor here.

 

Why wouldn't you prefer for a rebuilding team to invest the extra couple million in those rebuilding years to pay for (1) the higher backloaded years, and (2) other stuff with the extra money from the investment.

 

Because in the short-term, with payroll plummeting and no apparent intentions of signing guys now, you can pay guys a little more now, thus leaving more room at the back end when you do want to sign guys. Plus, "other stuff" isn't really a thing.

 

That being said, this contract hardly looks backloaded at all. The climb is very gradual.

[davell]

Arbitration for 4 years would have resulted in 4 consecutive raises for him, as it is. Conceivably he'd then have received another salary bump as a FA as well. My guess is if we went year to year with him in arb, he'd have gotten something like 4,7,11, and 15, based on him becoming a perennial AS caliber SS, possibly more. Hell of a deal.

[jersey cubs fan]

Arbitration for 4 years would have resulted in 4 consecutive raises for him, as it is. Conceivably he'd then have received another salary bump as a FA as well. My guess is if we went year to year with him in arb, he'd have gotten something like 4,7,11, and 15, based on him becoming a perennial AS caliber SS, possibly more. Hell of a deal.

 

Yeah, comparatively speaking this was front loaded. And I'm glad. They have excess cash now, nothing to spend it on and it allows them to keep the total down, plus the out year salaries.

[Rob]

I'm splitting hairs here, but I would have preferred to see the contract start out at around $6-7M in year 1 to keep it down around $8-9M years 6 and 7. Like I said though, really splitting hairs. This is a great deal for the Cubs.

 

Backloading is good.

That is a little bit of an oversimplification. Backloading is not inherently good or bad. My personal preference would be to minimize backloaded contracts on a rebuilding team, but that doesn't necessarily mean it is a bad thing. Either way, it really should not be much of a factor here.

 

No, backloading is good.

[WrigleyField 22]

I'm splitting hairs here, but I would have preferred to see the contract start out at around $6-7M in year 1 to keep it down around $8-9M years 6 and 7. Like I said though, really splitting hairs. This is a great deal for the Cubs.

 

Backloading is good.

That is a little bit of an oversimplification. Backloading is not inherently good or bad. My personal preference would be to minimize backloaded contracts on a rebuilding team, but that doesn't necessarily mean it is a bad thing. Either way, it really should not be much of a factor here.

 

No, backloading is good.

Only to the extent that the following is true.

 

The increases on salary will be covered by future additional revenue, savings, or current capital. (dont dig into a hole)

There is no risk of losing unspent capital to taxes. Of course if you have 30mil extra lying around the time value of money says it will be worth that and more. Salary is one of the easiest expenses to net against revenue to lower taxable income. Essentially you dont want revenue to outpace costs too much. This is the timing effect of taxes. If more salary now helps timing, thats good because a 15% tax you could have avoided now easily negates the time value if money.

 

The above is also less true for salary cap sports where cap planning is a concern and frontliading is more often helpful. Although there is a lux tax in baseball so you could reach the point where forwarding some salary up front saves you money because of potential lux tax two years down the road.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[davell]

Deal is official, no confirmation of numbers Rosenthal reported.

[Cubswin11]

Deal is official, no confirmation of numbers Rosenthal reported.

The numbers are on the previous page

[Guest]

Deal is official, no confirmation of numbers Rosenthal reported.

The numbers are on the previous page

 

Those are the numbers that Rosenthal reported to which davell was referring.

[Cubswin11]

Deal is official, no confirmation of numbers Rosenthal reported.

The numbers are on the previous page

 

Those are the numbers that Rosenthal reported to which davell was referring.

My bad. Nothing to see here then, move along

[davell]

Yeah, I figure Rosenthal got it right, but they weren't in anything I've seen yet as being official.

[Guest]

Kinda doubt it, but does anyone have a subscription to Joe Sheehan's site?

 

http://joesheehanbaseball.blogspot.com/

 

"Starlin Castro has so many baseball tools that he's been able to, in his early twenties, be an average baseball player without possessing very many skills. If he's able to learn skills -- better focus and decision-making in the field, better technique when fielding and throwing, better choices as to when to swing and when not to swing, better swing mechanics -- he could be, no exaggeration, one of the best players of his generation. It's not that he has to become a high-walk player; there are plenty of great players who didn't walk very much. OBP is OBP whether you get there via hitting .320 with 35 walks or hitting .270 with 70 walks. It's a misunderstanding of stathead orthodoxy to think that walks are a goal unto themselves. OBP is the goal. It's also not that he has to become a low-error player. Athletic infielders will turn singles into errors; they'll turn more singles into outs, which is where their value lays. "

[Guest]

Probably the most important player to the Cubs’ future success is Starlin Castro. Coming into play on June 25, Castro had a measly six walks on the season through 72 games. But in his 60 games since that point, Castro has drawn 21 walks and looks as though he’s significantly altered his approach at the plate. It’s not a coincidence that Castro’s newfound patience began shortly after Rowson was named interim hitting coach.

 

“He’s focusing on (being more patient),” Rowson said. “We’ve talked about it and to his credit he’s really come out and worked hard on his pitch selection. He really has made a great effort to get better pitches and you see it. You’re starting to see him work pitch counts, there’s been some occasion where he’s gone from 0-2 to drawing a walk, which is outstanding for him. It’s really tough for a player to do that midseason, it shows what kind of athlete Starlin is and what type of hitter he can be.”

 

Castro, who has consistently been a .300 hitter early on in his career, has seen his batting average plummet to .275, a side effect of adjusting his approach midseason. However, it’s Rowson’s contention that this is merely a bump in the road for Castro.

 

“I expect this guy to be the hitter that he’s always been, we’re just adding a little to his arsenal,” Rowson said. “Obviously there’s growing pains with anything you do for the first time. But he’s taking it head on, he’s working really hard at it. But I do feel like he’s going to be an elite hitter at the major league level for the future.”

 

Rowson added that despite his struggles, Castro hasn’t been deterred in his quest to improve his offensive skill set. They’re both focusing on the positives and know that as Castro continues to have strong at-bats, not only will he walk more, but he’ll once again hit like he’s proven he can. The added benefit to Castro being more selective is that he’ll be swinging at better strikes and thus be able to drive the ball better, leading to more extra-base hits.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/13265/dejesus-shows-young-cubs-value-of-patience

[SABR Gamer]

September Castro has been pretty sexy.

 

.338/.393/.506

[mookie]

That line is better than dirty porn.

[sneakypower]

.311/.373/.492 the second half of August; he's been great for over a month now

 

also,

6 BB in first 72 G (.013 isoD)

26 BB in 78 G since (.062 isoD)

[treebird]

.311/.373/.492 the second half of August; he's been great for over a month now

 

also,

6 BB in first 72 G (.013 isoD)

26 BB in 78 G since (.062 isoD)

 

[picture]aceventureYUMMYgif.com[/pic]

[Sammy Sofa]

When he does that all year next year Theo is going to feel like an [expletive].

[Guest]

Castro is down to -2 on Fangraphs for fielding runs. -1.9 UZR/150.

[davell]

I'm not a defensive metric guy whatsoever, don't really know much about them honestly. But, isn't that still basically averagish? If so, that's all I truly hope for out of his defense anyway.

[El Duderino]

Yes, because he's clearly gotten worse over the course of the season. :roll:

[Guest]

I'm not a defensive metric guy whatsoever, don't really know much about them honestly. But, isn't that still basically averagish? If so, that's all I truly hope for out of his defense anyway.

 

It's definitely still his best year defensively. Just a drop off from where he was early in the year.

[sneakypower]

he's still exhibiting above-average range, but it's mostly decision-making; you'd think that could more easily be teached/instructed

[imb]

did you say teached?

 

maybe if we weren't mathematically eliminated from the playoffs back in May, castro would be more inclined to make better decisions on the field