Go for it, my brother. I felt it was fair to look at top 28-year-olds, whether or not they were up for new contracts, as comps for Sanchez. I suppose there is the folklore that players let up once they are comfortable, but I don't really go for that.
Instead of asking "In hindsight, would you have signed Carlos Silva to a 5 year contract after 2007 because he was 28?" (which he didn't sign), is, how have pitchers who commanded 5 year+ contracts in free agency at age 28 faired historically, and how can we use that sample, instead of this pretty random group of 28 year olds from 2007, to make some kind of prediction about how a 5 year commitment to Sanchez will eventually wind up looking? Obviously to do that you would have to go back through the years 2007 and earlier. Maybe I will blog about it myself one of these days if you don't want to.
Nurse is right that $80M wouldn't do it. But the angle I was taking was whether to go after him at all, once a 5-year contract at significant per-year price was established. As for WH's point about Zito, I was trying to take a less-anecdotal approach and consider an off-season five years earlier than when I was writing, and use that to try to project five years from then. Seven pitchers is SSS of course, but when the argument is that Sanchez is special due to his young age at 28, SSS may be all you get. I guess I'm trying to claim that SSS > anecdote. Since I'm not sure what longitudinal means in this context, I have to take a pass on your last paragraph. It's true that one bad contract like Zito's does not have to kill a team, and revenues/contracts have historically tended to rise, but it makes threading the needle just that much harder; 18 million here and 18 million there and pretty soon you're talking big money. Thanks for the comments.
Take the poster child for "classic bad pitching contract," Barry Zito. 7 years, 126 million. He's in the final year of it now, and earning less in terms of AAV than Buehrle and Santana. But he was signed a year earlier, and got locked into 2006 salaries and projections instead of 2008 or 2012 salaries and projections. It should go without sayin but those things tend to go up pretty fast in baseball. Which is why I think this aversion to long-term contracts is overblown. Even if your guy turns into a Zito, a team can still be a consistent contender as the Giants have shown. I like the longitudinal approach here but I think you should compare how much the guys who have been piecemealed onto contracts over that span have earned and produced, as compared to the guys who were locked up to big deals early. Carlos Silva earned 45 million between 2 separate 2-year contracts after leaving the Twins while posting a 6.77 ERA in under 200 innings. Nowhere near as bad as Zito's in retrospect. Heck, even Meche managed to post two 200+ inning seasons of sub-4 ERA ball in his 5-year, 55 million/deal. A bad contract but hardly an albatross in 2012 money, the final year of his deal. *edited for clarity
Since you would have to outbid Detroit the question should be do you sign Sanchez at 5 and 90.
These are the managerial moves that will define Gardy's final contract year. Are the young players progressing? Is the current manager building up the organization? Too soon to tell, but woudln't it be nice if a ballgame at Fenway in early May 2013 will be remembered as a turning point in Aaron Hick's long career as a Twin? Gardy has had this impact in the past, as Justin Morneau credits his turnaround, not on a fight with Torii Hunter in Kansas City, but with a sit-down heart-to-heart with his manager, early in his 2006 MVP season. JockBio: Justin Morneau Biography I'm hoping Uncle Gardy takes the kid aside when the cameras aren't rolling, debriefs the situation, and puts "Hicksie" back in center field tonight. I would love to see the kid get his first multi-hit game of the season on the backside of this incident.
Hicks is a big boy who's not going to cry because Gardenhire yelled at him for a stupid play.
Was this really worth the tirade, captured by the cameras? Was it worth embarrassing the kid?
I believe there should be a "?" at the end of the title, not a million "!"
I also am not in love with the way the "closers" are used in today's game. When did it start? Eckersly? I think it takes away some of the creativity and options from managers, but if I'm being honest, they all do it because it works most of the time.
Just seeing the name "Adam Johnson" in writing again has turned my blood cold. It sure looks like the moral here is to go hard after international players, right?
Thank you for the comment. I just like having a chance to explore the season as I experience it, in bits and pieces.
I agree, it was my outlet at the time, so I used it that way. Adult beverages were definitely the gateway for my rant, I apologize.
I appreciate that this is a blog, but these thoughts would also work well on the drunken rambling thread... agreed though, IMO there are some situations that call for bringing in your best reliever even if it isn't the 9th inning with a lead. For me though many of these instances come in the 8th
I love these personal reflections you do. Thank you.
I liked this post very much too. Well done.
Read the Sam Miller article. Thanks
Good post
Get back on your meds, my brother.
Thanks Jeremy, always enjoy your posts and work
