Buehrle's contract apparently controversial...

by hitlesswonder on Jul 12, 2007 11:05 PM CDT

Lichtman and Tango think that Buehrle's contract overpays him

Someone already mentioned the THT column which concludes Buehrle is overpaid.

On a more positive note, Chris Dial at BTF thinks the signing was a good one

I have to admit that I'm surprised that so many stats people have panned the deal. It makes me wonder if WAR for pitchers is really calibrated correctly. Perhaps it would be better to look at WAWSR (Wins Above White Sox Replacement) which clearly shows that replacement level players from the Sox system aren't nearly as good as replacement level players from other systems.

Anyway, for a team willing to carry a $100M payroll and one that wants to be good again rapidly, I have a hard time seeing it as bad.

I'd be interested in knowing what the people who post here think about the various analyses of the deal. And I'd also like to know why I didn't see a bunch of articles saying the Matsuzaka signing was a bad deal...

SouthSideSox is a community driven site. As such, users are able to express their thoughts and opinions in a FanPost, such as this one, which represents the views of this particular fan, but not necessarily the entire community or SouthSideSox editors.

Tweet Comment 30 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Matsuzaka's sox are red

GO SOX!

by rhythm on Jul 12, 2007 11:24 PM CDT reply actions

I need a subject

I don't have any data to back it up, but much of these opinions are based on the fact that Buehrle doesn't miss a lot of bats, and thus doesn't project very well. With the exception of the second half of last season, these projections have always been wrong about Buehrle. If Buehrle has beaten the projections in 85% of his seasons in the bigs, I think it's time to start reevaluating how those systems view a pitcher like Buehrle, and thus how his contract is judged.

The other question, which no one seems to ask, is what would the fallout have been from failing to sign Buehrle to a seemingly conciliatory contract? I think I do a reasonable job of removing emotions from roster decisions -- but I don't know how the Sox could have spun the failure to sign Buehrle in any positive light -- I don't know how I could have argued that the front office was making a genuine effort to put the best team it could field in the immediate future. It would have been a bloodbath at the gates until they won 90+ games again.

On Matsuzaka, I remember repeatedly comparing him to Javier Vazquez, while other pundits were calling him a surefire ace. Check out their current lines, I don't think there's a better comp for Matsuzaka out there.

AIM: SouthSideCheat

by The Cheat on Jul 12, 2007 11:38 PM CDT reply actions

This is exactly my point earlier

Well said Cheat. These systems have consistently predicted or should I say not predicted Buerhle correctly. So it seems a little odd to make conclusions based on these same systems measuring his worth.

On top of it to not take into account the "politics" of baseball is just goofy. It is still a business, it is still the White Sox, you do need folks to come to the park. A rejection of such an open gesture from Buerhle would have hurt.

Bottom line if in this current market place he is not worth 14 mil a year, most pitchers are not worth it either, so what's the point of the articles?

"Find out what you are doing wrong and STOP doing that."

by Tdogg on Jul 13, 2007 8:09 AM CDT up reply actions

Ha!

They haven't created the projection system yet that accurately predicts Buehrle. THT, BP, they've missed on him every season expect 2006.

Great contract, great pitcher.

by Stealfirstbase on Jul 12, 2007 11:57 PM CDT reply actions

You can sum it all

up by realizing that MGL was projecting Buerhle to be an equivalent pitcher to Jake Westbrook (about 2.5 WAR). This despite the fact that Buehrle's career ERA+ is 123 and Westbrook's is around 100. So this all comes back to projection systems. I posted this on BTF: If Buerhle winds up being a similar pitcher to Westbrook, then MGL's right we drastically overpaid.

by bhoov on Jul 13, 2007 9:51 AM CDT reply actions

Buehrle

My problem is there seems to be two different tracks pitchers who meet Buerhle's career so far travel, just look at his top 2 comps to see an example.

Go Badgers!

by shaftr on Jul 13, 2007 9:55 AM CDT reply actions

GREAT DEAL!

I built you a case (post 34 in the top link of the blog) that you got Buehrle very cheap.

I should also note that the Whitesox have allowed alot of unearned runs with Buehrle on the mound over his career. Unless it's the same fielders making the mistakes every single year, you've got to attribute alot of that to him.

by tangotiger on Jul 13, 2007 10:36 AM CDT reply actions

Unearned runs

Just watching Buehrle over the years, he definitely seems to have more difficulty pitching over errors than many other pitchers. Even in 2005, when the Sox defense was excellent he gave up a suprising number of unearned runs. The typical fan explanation for that seems to be that he lacks guts, mental toughness & falls apart when things don't go well. For all I know that could be true, but I wonder if it is simply a product of not missing many bats & it being harder to pitch around the extra men on base with so many balls put in play.

Anyway, I liked post 34. I'm going to make that the official analysis I subscribe to about this deal.

by hitlesswonder on Jul 13, 2007 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions

I am so confused

I thought Mark Buehrle signed for under the market value? Anyway I find it very offensive that all of a sudden the White sox organization is being portrayed as imbeciles. I really would like to know what planet these people are from because it's certainly not planet earth. These people fail to mention that Mark doesn't walk allot of batters. Even in 2006 when he struggled he didn't walk over 50. This deal is certainly not as bad as the one SanFran gave to Barry last year. If you look at Barry Zito's number you'll see that he misses allot of bats but is always closing in on 90-100 walks by seasons end. Now that's a pitcher that will rapidly decline. Ahh wait it already started. He's given up 100 hits in 104 innings walked 50 and his strikeout total is down this year. Imagine how bad he's going to look over the length of that seven year contract. YIKES!

FORGIVE ME GREG WALKER FOR I HAVE SINNED. IT'S BEEN A YEAR SINCE I CONSISTENTLY HIT THE BALL.

by chisox on Jul 13, 2007 10:36 AM CDT reply actions

Imbeciles?

Please note that I initially thought fair market value was around the 4/48 mark, as opposed to the 4/57 he got. Just tweaking a number here or there, and it's easy enough to justify 4/57. And easy enough to justify 4/70. I mean, they're in the ballpark. I definitely don't consider it a bad deal.

A bad deal that I called at the time was Carlos Lee. A fantastic deal was Chase Utley. Those were off by FIFTY million $. Being off by 10 million $ either way can easily be considered part of the uncertainty of whatever parametersyou chose.

There is zero justification for Carlos Lee's deal.

by tangotiger on Jul 13, 2007 11:12 AM CDT reply actions

You're right Chase Utley was a great deal...

but he wanted to stay in Philadelphia. I would know because I live in the city. It makes a big difference when a player negotiates a contract before he hits the open market. I hope you see that.

I agree with you that some of these deals are ridiculous but you also have to realize that baseball is an entertainment business. IT IS WHAT IT IS.

If you think there is no justification for the Lee deal then what do you think of Vernon Wells signing for 7 years/$126M. He got that deal without even touching the free agent market.

Here are some more examples that the Astros GM could use as JUSTIFICATION for the Carlos Lee signing

Aramis Ramirez 5 years/$75M 1 year less and 1 million less than Carlos. Almost identical offensive #'s

Carlos Beltran 7 years/$119M He's a center fielder but is he that much better than Carlos offensively?

J.D. Drew 5 years/$70M- Was never that good to begin with and was rarely in shape

Jason Giambi 7 years/$120M. This contract was signed WAY BACK IN 2002

Derek Jeter 10 years/$189M This contract was signed WAY BACK IN 2001. Who's better offensively Jeter or Utley?

FORGIVE ME GREG WALKER FOR I HAVE SINNED. IT'S BEEN A YEAR SINCE I CONSISTENTLY HIT THE BALL.

by chisox on Jul 13, 2007 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions

I will say though

Buehrle's 2006 numbers does gives some credence to what these guys are saying. Oh well its still a good contract.

FORGIVE ME GREG WALKER FOR I HAVE SINNED. IT'S BEEN A YEAR SINCE I CONSISTENTLY HIT THE BALL.

by chisox on Jul 13, 2007 12:42 PM CDT up reply actions

Utley

My analysis of Utley was based on his years of service. And even then, he was underpaid drastically.

I did a thorough analysis of most of the free agent and arb-eligible signings on my site, with justifications for each one. The Carlos Lee deal was by far the worst.

by tangotiger on Jul 14, 2007 6:16 PM CDT up reply actions

Dial's article...

points out how hard it is to pin down Mark Buehrle and find comparable pitchers. In the thread on that article, someone comes up with a list of similar pitchers (statistically) to Buehrle over the same age range -

Greg Maddux
Bret Saberhagen
Fergie Jenkins
Tom Glavine
Dave Stieb
Frank Tanana
Johnny Antonelli
Mark Gubicza
Dan Petry
Alex Fernandez
Curt Simmons
Jim Kaat
Jim Abbott

Some of those make more sense than others. If you watched them pitch, you wouldn't compare Buerhle to Antonelli or Jenkins - their statistical similarity comes more from the differences in the eras they pitched in (strikeouts are a lot more common than they used to be) rather than how they compare to their peers.

He's certainly nothing like Bret Saberhagen, who was alternately brilliant and mediocre, or Frank Tanana, who was a fireballer early in his career and crafted a second career as a crafty junkballer.

It's tough; there aren't many pitchers who have been able to acheive sustained success despite a low strikeout rate, like Buehrle, in the modern era. I'd like to think of him as sort of a Tommy John for the modern age, and if so, that would be wonderful.

I think he's past the point where we need to worry about a DIPS blowback, like BPro seems to be continually convinced will happen.

I also think that we're past the point where we need to worry about some sort of mechanical issue causing injury problems, like Mark Mulder. He's never had any indication of that.

The main worry is that he'll start to simply break down under the weight of all those innings, and it's pretty rare that that happens before one age-32 season. I think that will be a concern once he gets to be 34-35-36, but not during this contract.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Jul 13, 2007 11:13 AM CDT reply actions

to rehash from another thread

if you were ever going to roll the dice, this - not barry zito or kevin brown or mike hamptom - is the guy to do it for because you've got more positives in your favor than with those guys. baseball - and business - usually rewards those who take risks (calculated ones, of course).

at any rate, it certainly is amazing to see the disconnect between baseball numbers guys and the mainstream media/fans. you probably can't get a bigger divide than on this one.

i'm reticent to fully endorse the deal as a slam dunk for the sox, for a lot of the reasons cited. however, this was a deal the sox basically had to make and one that i would have made. even if it does turn real bad real quick, i don't see it as paralyzing the sox.

Yeaaah. I'm gonna need you to go ahead and provide me with an official press release on that. OK? Great.

by larry on Jul 13, 2007 11:45 AM CDT reply actions

I don't even know...

if the numbers guys are unanimously against this signing. There's a lot of back-and-forth over at BTF on this.

I think the main problem that some stats guys have with Buehrle is that he's been successful without striking a lot of guys out. I think that when people think of top-flight pitchers, the guys you want to lock down for a long time, they think of guys like Roger Clemens or Johan Santana or Randy Johnson, guys who will go up there and blow opposing hitters away.

Buerhle allows a lot of balls in play, and there aren't many guys who have sustained success despite that. The few who do (Jim Palmer, Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine) are Hall-of-Famers, and there's an understandable reluctance to group Buehrle with those guys, because he's a step or three down from those guys.

Buehrle is a hard one to peg. Like I said above, I would be ecstatic if his career ended up looking like Tommy John's (with an appropriate adjustment for the era he's pitching in), and I think that's very doable.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Jul 13, 2007 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions

"Buehrle is a hard one to peg"

Which is exactly why they should not be writing these articles about it being a bad deal. The model doesnt work for him, the sample is too small, etc...

Who is to say if he pitched in Oakland or San Diego what his stats would look like? I know we adjust for these but damn he would be ridiculous in 1 of those parks. Until his dreadful 2nd half Buerhle ranked higher than Santana in some of the lists( I understand Johan was and would have passed him easily in time.) I just point it out because people seem to forget exactly how good this guy was.

I don't normally buy into the east coast mumble jumble but I have to admit, when Boston spends 1 trillion dollars on dice K and I see articles from the stat community justifying it........ what gives??? These guys can take the time to research money factors for them but can't for a team in a 2 club city in which they are 2nd tier?

Hogwash.

"Find out what you are doing wrong and STOP doing that."

by Tdogg on Jul 13, 2007 12:53 PM CDT up reply actions

Again...

statheads like Matsuzaka because he strikes lots of guys out, and there's precedent for thinking that striking lots of guys out is predictive of sustained success.

To put it another way, you can watch Matsuzaka and see how he's successful. On the other hand, while Buehrle clearly gets the job done, it's harder to see exactly how, and that makes some people less excited about his future prospects.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Jul 13, 2007 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions

Maybe

They should start analyzing pitching tempo.

FORGIVE ME GREG WALKER FOR I HAVE SINNED. IT'S BEEN A YEAR SINCE I CONSISTENTLY HIT THE BALL.

by chisox on Jul 13, 2007 1:10 PM CDT up reply actions

I think...

real serious analysis of mechanics is just getting started. Carlos Gomez (who spends a lot of time examining pitching mechanics and has posted here once or twice) really likes Buehrle's mechanics, I believe.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Jul 13, 2007 1:14 PM CDT up reply actions

Jerry

I get the K factor. But the $$$ money spent on Dice-K still was not justified under strict comparsion rules. No they had to and did "think" outside the box to make overall sense of it.

"Find out what you are doing wrong and STOP doing that."

by Tdogg on Jul 13, 2007 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions

Matsuzaka

I agree about the K's, but it's interesting to me that Daisuke is a year younger than Buehrle and signed a 6 year deal worth $52M plus Red Sox are on the hook for the $52M posting fee. And Daisuke has famously thrown A LOT of pitches at a young age. So, $100M for a 27 year old pitcher with lots of wear on his arm. But that signing was pretty acclaimed as a great one at BTF if I remember.

Obviously, Boston has money to burn and has to compete with NYY so there are circumstances definitely influence the relative merits of the deal for the Red Sox. But so are there for the White Sox and Buehrle. I guess it really does come down to Ks, but I do wonder if the relative standing of the 2 organizations in the stats community doesn't influence the analysis a little.

by hitlesswonder on Jul 13, 2007 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions

I don't mean to hijack the thread

Did anybody else hear about this?

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/mlb_experts/post/Five-and-Fly-Apocalypse-prediction?urn=mlb,39045

FORGIVE ME GREG WALKER FOR I HAVE SINNED. IT'S BEEN A YEAR SINCE I CONSISTENTLY HIT THE BALL.

by chisox on Jul 13, 2007 1:00 PM CDT reply actions

Yeah...

I saw that.

If I had a dollar for everything that was going to "destroy baseball", I'd be able to get a pretty nice dinner for myself and my fiancee.

by The Jerry Royster Experience on Jul 13, 2007 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions

Last word

Here's my hopefully last word on the subject:

http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/index.php/site/comments/buehrle#36

by tangotiger on Jul 13, 2007 4:15 PM CDT reply actions

Great stuff tango

and not because the result is more favorable for the signing. That series of posts to me is the essence of sabermetirc (or really scientific thought).

A series of "hey what if I think about this another way". Maybe as x person says we really shouldn't be comparing Buerhle to guys that pitched in the '70's. Maybe he is better than the 2.5 WAR player that he was projected as coming into the season etc., etc.

by bhoov on Jul 13, 2007 6:02 PM CDT up reply actions