________________________________________________
From Camden Depot, February 21, 2009:
This past week, the Orioles signed Brian Roberts to a 4 year, 40MM extension. Add this on to the current contract which pays him 8MM for 2009. I think it would be unfair to think of this as a 5 year, 48MM dollar deal as I would regard this year as a sunk cost that we would have been unable to relinquish given the current trade market. This post will focus on projecting Roberts' performance over the life of the extension and trying to determine whether this was a good deal to make.
Methods
Predicting Offensive Performance
The offensive projections for Brian Roberts were taken from the CHONE projections. I believe that this is an optimistic system to use given Roberts age and position. CHONE is quite useful for short-term projections, but is not really geared to predict long-term performance. PECOTA may be slightly better determining long term performance as it makes predictions based on similarity scores. I will be using the CHONE numbers though as they are publicly available and allow for a bit more transparency in this exercise. Performance is converted into LW runs and related to replacement level value after accounting for projected playing time. For second basemen, replacement level was considered 62 runs while average production was considered as 85 runs.
Predicting Defensive Performance
Last year, Roberts was rated as below average at 2B by UZR/150. We actually rated him slightly above average. We think over the course of the next 5 years, he will probably miss about 5-8 plays more with each following season. That might seem aggressive, but that follows the path of typical players at this position. With this in mind, it was simply assumed that he will give up an extra 4 runs each season. This makes him a slightly below average fielder this year (-5 FRAA) and a poor one in 2013 (-21 FRAA). It should also be acknowledged that in this work average fielding ability is considered on par with replacement fielding ability. There are arguments for and against this approach, but we feel it is a pretty accurate description of what is truly available at the replacement level.
Predicting the Value of a Win
Offensive and defensive production expressed as runs above replacement value were than added. The total runs value was then divided by 10 to determine WARP, which was then multiplied by assumed market value. It is generally accepted that a win over replacement production is worth about 4.5MM. There is growing sentiment that the economic crisis may put that in doubt, but I think a correction will occur and it will remain at about that level. That being so, I have attached the 4.5MM value to 2009 and increased the value by 10% each year. In 2013, the value of a win is projected to reach 6.6MM.
Results
In the table below, I have listed Roberts' offensive production over the four years of the extension as well as his total production.
What you will notice is that over the course of the four year extension, he rates above average for two of those seasons and below average for two of those seasons. His lowest mark with regard to replacement value is being worth 0.9 WARP in 2013. Overall, he produces 7.7 WARP over the course of the extension. This could also be expressed as 0.5 wins above average. This potentially becomes problematic as the second half of his contract has his as -0.9 wins above average. Particularly in his final season, it may serve the team best if Roberts is on the bench.
The following table shows Roberts' actual contract against his projected worth over the course of the extension.
The projected value of his performance is worth 42.5MM with 63% of that worth coming in the first two seasons. Overall, the Orioles pay below the predicted going rate of cost per win. Although in the final two seasons they pay above.
Conclusion
The contract is fair, but may not be in sync with the Orioles development plan. Roberts' career path is not in line with the young arms in AA and AAA that this team is relying on to make it competitive. If the team is viable in the playoff race in 2013, it will most likely see Roberts losing time to L.J. Hoes or another second baseman. At this point, we assume that the Orioles should be able to stow away a moderately poor contract this year. In the end, the open question is whether or not the 40MM spent here could have been better applied on future free agents, international talent, or the draft?
Personally, I would not have extended such a deal, but it is understandable why Andy MacPhail chose to do so. Actually, a reason why I would offer Roberts an extension is if I was not planning to depend heavily on the young arms for plus performance. He is probably the best option we can obtain to bat lead off and he is a fine player for the next few years. If this is the plan, then I would expect major acquisitions in the next offseason cycle. The holes the Orioles will need to fill are most likely 1B, 3B, DH, and a top tier starting pitcher.
Although I doubt Ty Wigginton will actually produce well for the Orioles, he is an option at first base (his defense at third is incredibly bad). Next year's market is awfully thin at first and he is projected to hit 268/338/466. Though, he probably should be protected against excellent right handed pitchers. This might mean that this would be a good role for Luke Scott to platoon part time at first. A more expensive option would be to extend Aubrey Huff's contract. He most likely will not repeat last season's amazing performance, so he might be an option. Outside the organization, they could sign Nick Johnson and have him face all right handers and Wigginton play against lefties and backup other positions. It may be a situation where we look to find a left handed platoon player at first. Again, Luke Scott might be that guy.
As mentioned earlier, third base should not be left for Wigginton. They could resign Melvin Mora to a one year deal, but I think that would not be ideal. His defense is dipping to below average, he has trouble charging the ball, and he is at an age where batting performance could evaporate and be left way below average. In fact, the two seasons prior to last year were not good and it will be unlikely that he will play a solid third in 2010. The FA market will offer Troy Glaus and Adrian Beltre. Glaus projects as a fine hitter and a decent glove at third base. His age (33) and his previous back issues make him a dicey acquisition. I view Adrian Beltre as a better choice. He is 2 years younger than Glaus and will probably offer a level of play that is not commensurate with his actual performance. Many underestimate Beltre's glove and SafeCo's effect on his offensive performance. He will never be an offensive star, but, if he continues to provide a win to a win and a half with the glove, he is easily worth a four or five year deal at 13MM. He is someone the Orioles should target.
DH is another position with in house options. Those include Aubrey Huff, Luke Scott, Luis Montanez, Ty Wigginton, and Nolan Reimold. Outside the organization, the list includes Jason Bay, Vladimir Guerrero, Bobby Abreu, and Hideki Matsui. If they do not expect Huff to play 1B for them, then they should probably play the market. This past year saw player value plunge for DH type outfielders. With the market so limited to AL only teams and with many teams already filled at the DH slot, it may make sense to roll the dice and see what is out there. At worst, the in house options should perform at a high enough level to provide average production.
Finally, a starting pitcher would have to be acquired. I think it is doubtful that the inevitable parade though the middle and lower rotation this year will produce much in terms of dependable pitching. In reality, we will probably have Guthrie (a solid middle order pitcher on a competitive team) and two lower order guys emerging from this season. Next year, we can probably slot one of the young guys (i.e., Matusz) at the five slot. This leaves us with a front line pitcher. Next year's market may potentially carry John Lackey, Eric Bedard, and Rich Harden. Signing one of these guys will make the team far more competitive.
A potential lineup would look like this:
2B Brian Roberts
CF Adam Jones
RF Nick Markakis
1B Aubrey Huff
C Matt Wieters
3B Adrian Beltre
DH Luke Scott/Ty Wigginton
LF Felix Pie
SS Cesar Izturis
To go along with a top tier starter and a collection of third and fourth pitchers. This team rates in a highly competitive division as a 91 win team. Adding Beltre and a pitcher like Harden or Lackey is all that is needed in this scenario. If ways can be found to upgrade other positions, it should make the team more capable of reaching that level. I guess we will know a year from now.
________________________________________________
I guess I'll kick things off here, since I am a teacher and thus have no "real world" matters to attend to.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the calculations done regarding Roberts, especially the charts, which I believe I can actually comprehend. Please excuse me if I do not. Mondays are a slow start for me.
Assuming I am reading these charts accurately, it would appear that Roberts' deal is fair to the club in 2010 and 2011, iffy in 2012, and that by 2013 the team is definitely overpaying.
This projection makes sense, given Roberts' age and the value of the contract relative to this year's down market, but I don't think breaking down the contract year by year is entirely fair.
It became pretty clear during Roberts' negotations that he would only sign a four-year deal. Having endured nothing but losing while an Oriole, he wasn't going to sign for a "hometown discount." Rather, he would stay, but only if the club offered him above market value.
There are off-field reasons that the club caved to his demands and gave him a longer deal, but I think the best way to view this contract is to consider his value in 2009-2012 and measure that against his value in 2013. He was under contract already, but his trade value already diminished. And he wouldn't be a part of the club 2010-2012 if not for the 2013 portion of the contract. Therefore, I think spreading his deficits in 2013 across the four previous seasons would be a fair way to assess his value.
I assume that in doing so, the contract would appear to be either a good deal for the team or a "break even" situation. I would do the math myself, but I am an English teacher, the most useless type of teacher there is.
Those who can't do...
Sorry about my likely absence on most days this week, I had a few scientist-y things come up.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, to the subject, if I remember correctly, Roberts was interested in a three year deal, but at a yearly rate higher than what the Orioles were offering. It was never reported what that rate was. In return, the Orioles countered with a 4 year deal at a lower yearly salary. So . . . maybe it might be best to look at the contract as being a choice between these three scenarios:
1 year at 8.5MM
4 years at 44.5MM (3 year, 36MM extension)
5 years at 48.5MM
The first choice is what I have often supported. I think Roberts will be fine for a couple seasons, but is certainly in the decline phase of his career (as his defensive metrics show and his offensive power metrics hint at . . . not to mention historical comps to 2B). I think our chance to be competitive is a few years down the line. So, in not signing him, I am betting that his front loaded projection does not benefit us much and that we will be able to find a league average 2B elsewhere when we are ready.
Now the difference between my proposed Roberts' preferred deal and the 4 year extension is 4MM. In that case, if we do need him for his front loaded production . . . that we will actually try to be competitive for the next couple years; Roberts is actually a pretty OK value that final season for essentially 4MM. Am I rambling?
In that way, I think you are right in saying that the value should be spread out over the contract and within context. I hope Hoes is ready by Roberts final year, though. I think the CHONE offensive prediction is a bit optimistic.
I've personally gone back and forth on this contract. As Jon points out, the real bite is that the team and Roberts are likely headed in opposite directions.
ReplyDeleteMaybe this is one of those rare instances where making a move will benefit the organization because of the attached stigma? Reaching, I know...but perhaps it becomes easier to go after Beltre next winter and Hardy the winter after if Roberts in the fold?
Just throwing it out there...
Just looked at that post again...yuck, Monday morning grammar. I'll try to do better.
ReplyDeleteI just do not know how much I buy into the whole players want to go to teams with other big name players concept. I am sure competition plays a part in it, but I really feel that at the end of the day it comes down to money and what last season's record may have been. No offense to Brian, but I imagine he is not very high up on the list of concerns for visiting free agents.
ReplyDeleteIf this extension means anything, maybe it means that the Orioles plan to press hard for FA talent in the next two years. They have been complacent the past two off seasons for good reason as we really do not have the talent in place to merit such expenditures. Maybe they have a feeling the high minors talent will be able to contribute to a useful degree next year and it is close to the time the war machine needs to ramp up.
If not . . . it is a wasted contract.
In terms of value/price, this isn't a horrible deal. I'm more concerned about being stuck with a sub-par daily player in 2012 and 2013. There's no assurance that the O's will replace Roberts when a younger and more productive alternative becomes available. In fact, there's good reason to expect otherwise. Players with major contracts acquire a lot of inertia, especially when they're fan favorites. They tend to keep their jobs until they become obviously, egregiously bad. Roberts could be blocking a better player as early as 2011 (Miclat, if he doesn't stick at SS). If Miclat and Hoes don't develop, can we really expect the O's to acquire an early replacement for a fading Roberts by trade or FA, just so that Roberts can sit on the bench?
ReplyDeleteThat's a rhetorical question.
I like the idea that this commitment might encourage them to be more aggressive in making a move to contend in 2010, but I would hate to see a contender's mindset cause the Orioles to be overly conservative in slotting the young pitchers. I don't want the young guys thrown in over their heads, but I do disagree that they should be held back until they are absolutely fail-safe.
But that's another discussion.
When I looked at the deal I had Roberts' defense declining more steadily (closer to two plays a year) and his offense falling off faster. This was just a theoretical exercise, though, to find what Brian's next few years would have to look like for the $40 M to be justified. I agree with Jon that the CHONE prediction is a little high in the later years, but I think that your total valuation is pretty accurate. I also agree with Jon regarding the "Baltimore becomes a more desirable destination" argument. It's like "veteran leadership" - teams and players will talk about it, but when it comes time to put a dollar-sign on it they usually treat it as a rounding error.
ReplyDeleteThe contract is solid overall, but a likely hindrance in '13 (and maybe '12). Several of the negatives from above actually relate to other actions by the club instead of problems with the contract itself. These can go away given more of the quality decision-making that has been the mark of the team recently.
(1) Andy MacPhail (with Angelos' permission, I guess) gets to take some of the excess value that Roberts will provide this year (something along the lines of $4 M out of the $10 M or so) and put it into a some sort of risk-free financial asset. Then that money (which will appreciate in value) can be safely added to the 2013 Orioles' payroll budget to offset the negative value that Roberts might bring to the team.
This is kind of the equivalent of front-loading the contract so that the team's outflows of "salary" match up to the value Roberts provides the team. I don't think the contract would be thought of quite as poorly if he was set to make $5 M in 2013 instead of $10 M.
(2) The team is not beholden to fan pressure and is willing to place Roberts in the role that best helps the team.
(3) The team is willing to upgrade where possible/necessary.
If these things happen then the O's got a good deal in the most likely event (Roberts declines about as expected), but with an extra bonus if he manages to age more like Craig Biggio than Fernando Vina. There are other year/money combination that I would have preferred, but I'm still happy that Brian will be around for a while.
I think that on the whole, the Roberts contract will be a fair one. You might be cringing in 2013 but you'll get great value over the next two or three seasons.
ReplyDeleteThe Orioles reportedly did extensive analysis on aging and how a player like Roberts would perform over the next few years before offering him the current contract. That's good news..although they almost sound apologetic about it:
http://tiny.cc/yCnT6
I guess statistical analysis is still a dirty word...at least publicly.
And about Mora and third base...the Orioles already have an option on him for 2010 but it's doubtful that he'll be worth that $9 million. I can't imagine his fielding getting better at this point and Graig Nettles is the only 3B in the last 55 years to OPS better than league average.