Is the actual rotation the worst in the last 10 Y?

[Bellhorn04]

Yup, that's why one thing are the projections, and a very different animal what in real life happens. Probably I'm wrong, but I do not see any SP with a track record of 2.5 WAR/Y making 20 M.

 

Also have to keep in mind that the $20 million salary doesn't start until 2016.

[iortiz]

Pessimist? Naaahh, it is just that this pitching staff isn't encouraging at all to me. On the other hand our offense to me is one of the best in baseball.

[iortiz]

Also have to keep in mind that the $20 million salary doesn't start until 2016.

 

The NPV is practically the same compared with the number I presented.

[User Name]

Also have to keep in mind that the $20 million salary doesn't start until 2016.

 

The current value of a win exceeds 7 million and it's rising. 2.5 WAR right now should translate to nearly 18 million in value, possibly reaching that number next year. If the Sox overpaid Porcello's market value by around 3-4 million per in order to slice the contract by two full years relative to what the market is yielding for pitcher of his production and ability, that's great business considering the volatility of starting pitching. I don't understand why this concept is so difficult to grasp, especially considering this has been the Sox' M.O for a couple of years now, and with a good logical base behind it. What's not to like? You minimize risk by overpaying in a way that's going to minimize future contractual obligations while barely impacting a payroll of this magnitude.

[iortiz]

Again, how many pitchers with a 2.5 WAR track record are making 20 M these days aside Porcello? it's a honest question.

[Spitball]

Again, how many pitchers with a 2.5 WAR track record are making 20 M these days aside Porcello? it's a honest question.

 

It is not paying for a track record as much as paying (gambling) for future performance. Why pay for past performance? Pitchers are a risky investment, and teams have paid many millions for years of past performance. Sabathia is not earning his current millions. Cliff Lea isn't either. There are far too many injured others in the same over-paid category. Pitchers are a gamble, and Cherington is steering clear of long term for past performances. Time will tell if he is correct....and the jury is still out on Pocello future worth.

[a700hitter]

It is not paying for a track record as much as paying (gambling) for future performance. Why pay for past performance? Pitchers are a risky investment, and teams have paid many millions for years of past performance. Sabathia is not earning his current millions. Cliff Lea isn't either. There are far too many injured others in the same over-paid category. Pitchers are a gamble, and Cherington is steering clear of long term for past performances. Time will tell if he is correct....and the jury is still out on Pocello future worth.

 

What metrics are the FO relying upon as indicators that Porcello's game will progress to a level where he will be worth $20 million/year?

[Spitball]

What metrics are the FO relying upon as indicators that Porcello's game will progress to a level where he will be worth $20 million/year?

 

With what we have seen with recent contracts for pitchers, Porcello would have received a similar amount of total money for more years. The Red Sox gambled to give him the money on a shorter term contract. He had a 2.7 WAR last year, and they are assuming he will improve with a team with better defense.

 

We are talking about forward thinking here. I like it.

[User Name]

With what we have seen with recent contracts for pitchers, Porcello would have received a similar amount of total money for more years. The Red Sox gambled to give him the money on a shorter term contract. He had a 2.7 WAR last year, and they are assuming he will improve with a team with better defense.

 

We are talking about forward thinking here. I like it.

 

This is also a concept that should not be so foreign.

[Bellhorn04]

With what we have seen with recent contracts for pitchers, Porcello would have received a similar amount of total money for more years. The Red Sox gambled to give him the money on a shorter term contract. He had a 2.7 WAR last year, and they are assuming he will improve with a team with better defense.

 

We are talking about forward thinking here. I like it.

 

Good posts on the topic, Mr. Spitball.

[Palodios]

This is a debate that will go on for years I imagine.

 

iOrtiz, and others, are not going to change their opinion on this unless Porcello performs like an ace, because 20 million is "ace money".

 

The opposing side of the money isn't going to change their opinion either.

[a700hitter]

With what we have seen with recent contracts for pitchers, Porcello would have received a similar amount of total money for more years. The Red Sox gambled to give him the money on a shorter term contract. He had a 2.7 WAR last year, and they are assuming he will improve with a team with better defense.

 

We are talking about forward thinking here. I like it.

You didn't answer my question. It is fine to be forward thinking. Every business need to do that to be successful, but I was asking about metrics that would indicate that he would improve his game. As for the better Red Sox defense, that is probably off set by Fenway being more hitter friendly.

[SoxHop]

With what we have seen with recent contracts for pitchers, Porcello would have received a similar amount of total money for more years. The Red Sox gambled to give him the money on a shorter term contract. .

 

I wonder how much more it would have taken to get him for 5 years. Say you give him 90 mil, that's 18 mil a year. I don't think he would have turned that down. Essentially they Sox and Porcello are somewhat negotiating around 10 million dollars.

 

Would you all have done a 5 year contract for Porcello at 18 mil a year or 90 mil over the contract?

 

A question here. Does cutting a player at the beginning of a year and paying him out affect anything? Are there any repercussions for doing that?

 

I love that you all are discussing this contract. I find it one of the most interesting contracts to come around as most seem cut and dry, this one doesn't. I'm leaning on the side that believes it was a good deal for the Sox, and maybe only because salaries are going up so much so soon.

[iortiz]

With what we have seen with recent contracts for pitchers, Porcello would have received a similar amount of total money for more years. The Red Sox gambled to give him the money on a shorter term contract. He had a 2.7 WAR last year, and they are assuming he will improve with a team with better defense.

 

We are talking about forward thinking here. I like it.

oh, that is a very different animal. Some here were saying that this FO is expecting what he has shown in the recent past which is something around 2.5. I agree with you, I think this FO is expecting more from him to justify this contract. If he continuous posting a 2.5 WAR in the next four years, this contract will be a disaster since as far I remember no one with a 2.5 WAR track record is making 20 M. As you said time will tell, though.

[iortiz]

This is a debate that will go on for years I imagine.

 

iOrtiz, and others, are not going to change their opinion on this unless Porcello performs like an ace, because 20 million is "ace money".

 

The opposing side of the money isn't going to change their opinion either.

 

 

Expecting ace performance from Porcello? Not at all pal. If he post an ERA around 3.5 (No 2. Type) or in terms of WAR around 3.5 (good player), I will call it deal. Put that in your sig.

[Bellhorn04]

You didn't answer my question. It is fine to be forward thinking. Every business need to do that to be successful, but I was asking about metrics that would indicate that he would improve his game. As for the better Red Sox defense, that is probably off set by Fenway being more hitter friendly.

 

Bill James works for the Sox, right? I'm sure he gave them some projections for the years 2016-2019.

 

His 2015 projections for Porcello are available. 209 innings, which is an increase. James also sees a modest improvement in K/BB ratio.

 

Here's the funny part though - projected ERA? 4.00 on the nose.

[kreinbihl34]

Expecting ace performance from Porcello? Not at all pal. If he post an ERA around 3.5 (No 2. Type) or in terms of WAR around 3.5 (good player), I will call it deal. Put that in your sig.

 

A 3.5 WAR for a pitcher is top 20, at least for last year. That's not a good pitcher, that's a very, very good pitcher.

[a700hitter]

Bill James works for the Sox, right? I'm sure he gave them some projections for the years 2016-2019.

 

His 2015 projections for Porcello are available. 209 innings, which is an increase. James also sees a modest improvement in K/BB ratio.

 

Here's the funny part though - projected ERA? 4.00 on the nose.

I'd like to know what the math is behind those projections. I am sure that he didn't pull it from his ass. The projection of a 4.00 ERA makes it hard to justify the $20 MILLION/YEAR contract. I wonder how many starters with 4.00 ERAs have signed $20 million/year contract for 4 years.

 

Edti: I am not asking you to get me the math. I am just saying that I am curious about what goes into these projections.

Edited May 1, 2015 by a700hitter

[Bellhorn04]

I'd like to know what the math is behind those projections. I am sure that he didn't pull it from his ass. The projection of a 4.00 ERA makes it hard to justify the $20 MILLION/YEAR contract. I wonder how many starters with 4.00 ERAs have signed $20 million/year contract for 4 years.

 

Edti: I am not asking you to get me the math. I am just saying that I am curious about what goes into these projections.

 

I think there is more that went into Porcello's contract than just projections of his performance. Let's say for argument's sake that Porcello's true value right now is actually $16-17 million a year. I don't think too many people would argue with that. So the question is, why would they overpay him by $3-4 million a year? One of the answers, as has already been given, is in the number of years in the contract.

 

The other aspect is the issue of what it would cost the Sox to replace Porcello for next year. To trade for a comparable pitcher they have to give up prospects and then pay the guy. To sign a comparable pitcher as a free agent they have to give up a draft pick and pay the guy-likely overpay.

 

Personally I think that people who don't like the deal are getting a little hung up on the $20 million number and aren't able to get past that.

[seabeachfred]

It is not paying for a track record as much as paying (gambling) for future performance. Why pay for past performance? Pitchers are a risky investment, and teams have paid many millions for years of past performance. Sabathia is not earning his current millions. Cliff Lea isn't either. There are far too many injured others in the same over-paid category. Pitchers are a gamble, and Cherington is steering clear of long term for past performances. Time will tell if he is correct....and the jury is still out on Pocello future worth.

 

And right now NONE OF OUR STARTING PITCHERS are earning their way. Right now the whole sad and sorry and pathetic fivesome is a sunk cost.

[Spudboy]

I think there is more that went into Porcello's contract than just projections of his performance. Let's say for argument's sake that Porcello's true value right now is actually $16-17 million a year. I don't think too many people would argue with that. So the question is, why would they overpay him by $3-4 million a year? One of the answers, as has already been given, is in the number of years in the contract.

 

The other aspect is the issue of what it would cost the Sox to replace Porcello for next year. To trade for a comparable pitcher they have to give up prospects and then pay the guy. To sign a comparable pitcher as a free agent they have to give up a draft pick and pay the guy-likely overpay.

 

Personally I think that people who don't like the deal are getting a little hung up on the $20 million number and aren't able to get past that.

 

And as far as I am concerned, the discussion ends with this post.

[Kimmi]

You didn't answer my question. It is fine to be forward thinking. Every business need to do that to be successful, but I was asking about metrics that would indicate that he would improve his game. As for the better Red Sox defense, that is probably off set by Fenway being more hitter friendly.

 

I think you underestimate just how bad Detroit's infield defense has been. Over the past 2 seasons, the infield defense has cost the Tigers 52 runs. Spreading those runs out over the starting rotation, Porcello's Defense-Adjusted ERA over the past 2 seasons would be 3.92 in 2013 and 3.03 in 2014.

 

In addition to better defenders, Porcello should also be helped out by the Red Sox' defensive shifting. Detroit is a team that has lagged behind in that regard.

 

Better pitch framing should also help Porcello. Avila was not very good at framing. Hanigan will not be as good as Vazquez, but he is still very strong in that area. Each extra strike is worth approximately .14 runs.

 

Playing at Fenway is not going to offset all that defensive advantage, especially since Porcello is a ground ball pitcher. He gives up more HRs to left handers, and will probably be helped out by playing in Fenway with its deep right field. Fenway has the 4th lowest HR index for left handed hitters, while Comerica is neutral. Porcello's high home run rate so far is more or less due to random variation, or flukiness.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/three-things-the-red-sox-will-do-for-rick-porcello/

[Kimmi]

oh, that is a very different animal. Some here were saying that this FO is expecting what he has shown in the recent past which is something around 2.5. I agree with you, I think this FO is expecting more from him to justify this contract. If he continuous posting a 2.5 WAR in the next four years, this contract will be a disaster since as far I remember no one with a 2.5 WAR track record is making 20 M. As you said time will tell, though.

 

I don't think anyone said that the FO is expecting Porcello to perform at what he has in the recent past. I think the FO is banking on Porcello's upside. What some of us have said is that IF Porcello just performed at the level of his recent past, he would be worth his contract.

[Kimmi]

I think there is more that went into Porcello's contract than just projections of his performance. Let's say for argument's sake that Porcello's true value right now is actually $16-17 million a year. I don't think too many people would argue with that. So the question is, why would they overpay him by $3-4 million a year? One of the answers, as has already been given, is in the number of years in the contract.

 

The other aspect is the issue of what it would cost the Sox to replace Porcello for next year. To trade for a comparable pitcher they have to give up prospects and then pay the guy. To sign a comparable pitcher as a free agent they have to give up a draft pick and pay the guy-likely overpay.

 

Personally I think that people who don't like the deal are getting a little hung up on the $20 million number and aren't able to get past that.

 

To add to that, the Sox are also paying for his youth, health, and prime years. The economics of contracts lately indicate a trend that says that Porcello's contract really isn't an overpay. Here is a pretty good article from Fangraphs: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/rick-porcellos-upcoming-enormous-payday/

 

Notice that this author projected Porcello to get a contract in the range of 6yrs/$108 mil if he had reach free agency.

[Kimmi]

And as far as I am concerned, the discussion ends with this post.

 

A discussion cannot end until I get my 2 cents in.

[Spitball]

You didn't answer my question. It is fine to be forward thinking. Every business need to do that to be successful, but I was asking about metrics that would indicate that he would improve his game. As for the better Red Sox defense, that is probably off set by Fenway being more hitter friendly.

 

Bellhorn, Kimmi, User Name, and others have given you excellent answers. Porcello's FIP for the last four years has been 3.79 which is in line with Lester's, yet Porcello will be in his 20s for the duration of his relatively short contract while Lester will be 31 to 36 (possibly 37) with his contract.

[iortiz]

I'd like to know what the math is behind those projections. I am sure that he didn't pull it from his ass. The projection of a 4.00 ERA makes it hard to justify the $20 MILLION/YEAR contract. I wonder how many starters with 4.00 ERAs have signed $20 million/year contract for 4 years.

 

Edti: I am not asking you to get me the math. I am just saying that I am curious about what goes into these projections.

 

The terms of the contract are not that long. It is only 4 years, and given the discount rate that FG use to project salaries, the NPV is not that different from the current salary in a year basis (20 M). Said that if he still posting something around 2.5 WAR/4 ERA, this contract will be a disaster. Every offseason out there are some pitchers who can post something around those numbers in a year basis without commit all this money and cheaper.

[iortiz]

A 3.5 WAR for a pitcher is top 20, at least for last year. That's not a good pitcher, that's a very, very good pitcher.

 

He has not shown to be a very very good pitcher, nor good pitcher. He is nothing but a solid one in terms of WAR. His track record does not justify 20 by any means. Something around 3.5 makes you a good pitcher, nothing more, nothing less... Say a decent No. 2 .My guess is that our FO is expecting this from him to justify his contract.

Edited May 2, 2015 by iortiz

[iortiz]

I don't think anyone said that the FO is expecting Porcello to perform at what he has in the recent past. I think the FO is banking on Porcello's upside. What some of us have said is that IF Porcello just performed at the level of his recent past, he would be worth his contract.

 

You mean last season?, if so I'm Oks with that, although his WAR was not good.

[User Name]

The terms of the contract are not that long. It is only 4 years, and given the discount rate that FG use to project salaries, the NPV is not that different from the current salary in a year basis (20 M). Said that if he still posting something around 2.5 WAR/4 ERA, this contract will be a disaster. Every offseason out there are some pitchers who can post something around those numbers in a year basis without commit all this money and cheaper.

 

He has not shown to be a very very good pitcher, nor good pitcher. He is nothing but a solid one in terms of WAR. His track record does not justify 20 by any means. Something around 3.5 makes you a good pitcher, nothing more, nothing less... Say a decent No. 2 .My guess is that our FO is expecting this from him to justify his contract.

 

You mean last season?, if so I'm Oks with that, although his WAR was not good.

 

These posts prove that you don't understand baseball economics, WAR, or pitcher value, and I say that without a hint of malice. You just don't know what you're talking about.