Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

The Store

Photo

Re: Mauer's Contract

  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

#1 BCTwins

BCTwins

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 11:14 AM

Just read Jonah Keri's assessment of the 15 worst MLB contracts fully expecting to see Mauer's name on the list. It wasn't. There was, however, some discussion of one Mr. Correia, in connection with John Danks.

Jonah Keri on the worst contracts in MLB - Grantland

#2 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,020 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:27 PM

Mauer's contract only gets bad if he suddenly can't stay healthy (def a question) or begins to see his game regress (not really an issue IMO)

#3 The Greatest Poster Alive

The Greatest Poster Alive

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 218 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:29 PM

Mauer is not a bad contract yet. Had he posted another clunker of a season it'd be time to worry. But Mauer was not the problem for this team last year.

#4 Twins Twerp

Twins Twerp

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 784 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:50 PM

Mauer's contract had to be done. We would all have complained if it wasn't done, even though most of us complain that it was. One thing that wasn't discussed when he was signed, that is being discussed about players now, is inflation. With the value of the dollar obviously going down with the constant printing of money...his deall will keep looking less and less troublesome. Especially with the new 20-25 million dollars each team will recieve yearly with the new television deal MLB is (or has already) signed. The next 30 million dollar man is in our near future and had Mauer stayed a free agent, he may have been paid much more and gotten close to that 30 mil a year mark.

#5 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Moderators
  • 46 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 12:58 PM

2yr/$10M for Correia is the loose change some teams find in the sofa cushions - it was about the smallest per-year contract of the ones in this article, and even at that it didn't make either the Top-15 *or* the [dis-]Honorable Mention. If one buys the truism that there's no such thing as a bad one-year contract, a corollary would be that putting yourself on the hook for a single $5M contract in year two can't be a soul-killing burden on the future of a team. And with no mention of Mauer at all, the inflammatory headline of "Re: Mauer's Contract" doesn't make sense at all.

Return on investment often follows an S-shaped curve. Because of the collective bargaining agreement, MLB's curve has the lower part of that S truncated - I would play for $1 and the team would get no benefit, while someone better might demand $50K, but neither of us is allowed to sign for those amounts. The upper part of an S-shaped curve reflects a decreasing return to scale - beyond a certain level of skill, to get a slightly better player means paying proportionately more and more. The Twins tend to stay far away from that part of the curve. In the rare cases like Mauer where they found it basically inevitable to pay at that level, I have a hard time faulting them for it, if that's the purpose of this headline.

#6 gunnarthor

gunnarthor

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,707 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:33 PM

I wonder how much money Mauer would have got if he left as a FA after 2010. That same offseason saw Werth and Crawford get their big 20m/per contracts. Mauer was younger than both, played the harder position, was the better player and the Tigers, Red Sox and Yankees all needed a catcher. 8/200 seems likely.

#7 fairweather

fairweather

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 253 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:40 PM

I disagree. The contract is terrible. It's possible that Doumit could drive in more runs while playing catcher for a 100 games than Mauer could in the same number of games. Doumit would be as good and maybe better throwing out runners and he costs pennies in comparison.

#8 FrodaddyG

FrodaddyG

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 536 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:43 PM

I disagree. The contract is terrible. It's possible that Doumit could drive in more runs while playing catcher for a 100 games than Mauer could in the same number of games. Doumit would be as good and maybe better throwing out runners and he costs pennies in comparison.

1.) If RBI is your be-all, end-all stat, Mauer probably isn't for you.
2.) No.

#9 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:54 PM

1.) If RBI is your be-all, end-all stat, Mauer probably isn't for you.
2.) No.


Exactly...

Mauer drove in 18.1 percent of the runners on base for his plate appearances. Not only did that rank eighth-highest in the entire league, it topped Willingham's mark of 16.3 percent. Mauer converted a higher percentage of his RBI chances than Willingham (even though Willingham had a career year), but Willingham had 45 more runners on base in 26 fewer plate appearances because Mauer was on constantly in front of him.

#10 BCTwins

BCTwins

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 22 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:59 PM

And with no mention of Mauer at all, the inflammatory headline of "Re: Mauer's Contract" doesn't make sense at all.


Inflammatory headline? The headline contains no pathos at all--how can it inflame? And might the headline be regarding the overall point about Mauer from my post, not about Keri's article?

But thanks anyway for slamming the headline.

#11 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,020 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:03 PM

I disagree. The contract is terrible. It's possible that Doumit could drive in more runs while playing catcher for a 100 games than Mauer could in the same number of games. Doumit would be as good and maybe better throwing out runners and he costs pennies in comparison.

This post is stupid. Please leave.

#12 FrodaddyG

FrodaddyG

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 536 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:03 PM

This post is stupid. Please leave.

Tell us how you feel, Dave.

#13 sorney

sorney

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 134 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:19 PM

Just read Jonah Keri's assessment of the 15 worst MLB contracts fully expecting to see Mauer's name on the list. It wasn't. There was, however, some discussion of one Mr. Correia, in connection with John Danks.

Jonah Keri on the worst contracts in MLB - Grantland


Agreed. The was my initial thought....but then when I sat back and looked at it, it isn't nearly as bad as some of the contracts listed there. Mauer still produces at a high level at a premium position. Most of the contracts listed there were positions where you need to be an elite hitter for the length of the contract to make it not an albatross.

#14 edavis0308

edavis0308

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 576 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 04:09 PM

This post is stupid. Please leave.



Principal: Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Billy Madison: Okay, a simple "wrong" would've done just fine.

#15 SpiritofVodkaDave

SpiritofVodkaDave

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,020 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 04:20 PM

Tell us how you feel, Dave.


Oh I am all for idiotic statements, but at least put some flare (or in the case of dankind) mullets and Megadeath t-shirts behind them.

#16 spideyo

spideyo

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 603 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:16 PM

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The value of signing Mauer long-term is far greater to the Twins, and baseball in general, than just his on-field performance.

He will likely go down as one of the best offensive catchers in the history of baseball, and he did it cleanly, with not even a whiff of a rumor of any PED use or anything like that. He is a clean-cut, quiet individual who does NOT make headlines for stupid off-field stuff. He was a number one draft pick, signed by the team he grew up rooting for, and will likely never wear another team's uniform. He's made millions and is internationally known, but his mom still answers his fan mail and he married a girl he knew from high school.

You couldn't invent a character that better represents the brand the Twins have tried to cultivate over the years, and he is the epitome of Baseball as "The American Past-time" and he's exactly the kind of role model that Major League Baseball wants to have to encourage youths (and to a great extent, their parents) to pursue baseball instead of other major sports.

#17 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,121 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:29 PM

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The value of signing Mauer long-term is far greater to the Twins, and baseball in general, than just his on-field performance.

He will likely go down as one of the best offensive catchers in the history of baseball, and he did it cleanly, with not even a whiff of a rumor of any PED use or anything like that. He is a clean-cut, quiet individual who does NOT make headlines for stupid off-field stuff. He was a number one draft pick, signed by the team he grew up rooting for, and will likely never wear another team's uniform. He's made millions and is internationally known, but his mom still answers his fan mail and he married a girl he knew from high school.

You couldn't invent a character that better represents the brand the Twins have tried to cultivate over the years, and he is the epitome of Baseball as "The American Past-time" and he's exactly the kind of role model that Major League Baseball wants to have to encourage youths (and to a great extent, their parents) to pursue baseball instead of other major sports.


Despite being very different players, he's sort of like the next Killebrew. There's really nothing bad you can say about him as a person. He's a genuinely good guy, and that's valuable to baseball in general, and to the Twins in particular.

But beyond that, I completely disagree that his contract is bad. All major free agent deals overpay to an extent when you're comparing WAR/$ to a league average that includes cost-controlled guys in their first few years and arbitration years. But if they were really overpriced, I doubt they'd actually get such enormous amounts of money consistently.

Now, there are people who have gotten enormous contracts that put them in Mauer territory that I don't think are deserving. The most recent one that springs to mind is Zach Greinke, but I would guess that Pujols and especially Prince Fielder are going to look pretty silly when they're still getting more than Mauer when they're 40 years old and/or 800 pounds. But let's not forget how ridiculously good at baseball Joe Mauer is. If we're reducing it RBI, we're cutting out the most important parts of Mauer's game (OBP is the most prominent example), which incidentally are those parts of the game that correlate far more positively to runs and wins produced than does RBI.

It still blows my mind that we are watching a future hall of famer (barring constant injury or sudden, inexplicable ineffectiveness), and all some of us can think to do is bitch about his paycheck. I for one am glad to sit back and watch him swing.

#18 josecordoba

josecordoba

    Member

  • Members
  • 84 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:36 PM

Guys like Keri, Keith Law, or Dave Cameron will always point to the tremendous risk with long-term contracts at high dollar amounts even for the best of players.

In Mauer's case though when the contract was signed he had 1. MVP 2. Three Batting Titles 3. 3 All-Star Games. This says nothing about him being a local product. Basically if you don't resign Joe Mauer a Hall of Fame Type Talent considering these factors there is no point in having Professional Baseball in Minnesota. The Twins will rarely come across assests with Mauer's value. Even if Sano or Buxton are perennial MVP Candidates they won't be able to match Mauer's Drawing Power.

#19 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Moderators
  • 46 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 06:00 PM

But thanks anyway for slamming the headline.


Happy to be of service.

Take out the word if you don't like it. This still leaves the observation, And with no mention of Mauer at all [in the cited article], the headline of "Re: Mauer's Contract" doesn't make sense at all. You could as well have titled the posting "Re: Butera's contract".

#20 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Moderators
  • 46 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 06:03 PM

Mauer drove in 18.1 percent of the runners on base for his plate appearances. Not only did that rank eighth-highest in the entire league, it topped Willingham's mark of 16.3 percent. Mauer converted a higher percentage of his RBI chances than Willingham (even though Willingham had a career year), but Willingham had 45 more runners on base in 26 fewer plate appearances because Mauer was on constantly in front of him.


Could it be that a double by Mauer scores someone like Revere from first ahead of him, while a double by Willingham leaves Mauer on third waiting to be driven in? This is a reason I don't trust RISP statistics very much.

#21 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Moderators
  • 46 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 06:25 PM

but I would guess that Pujols and especially Prince Fielder are going to look pretty silly when they're still getting more than Mauer when they're 40 years old and/or 800 pounds.


People will think you are exaggerating, but if anything you are underestimating. Pujols will actually be nearly 42 when his contract ends.

#22 70charger

70charger

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,121 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:23 PM

People will think you are exaggerating, but if anything you are underestimating. Pujols will actually be nearly 42 when his contract ends.


I agree. By comparison, the Twins are pretty well protected against age and gross obesity when it comes to Joe Mauer. I think that Pujols is easily one of the best baseball players not only of our generation but of all time - an inner circle hall of famer when he's done. But that doesn't mean that he won't be today's A-Rod when he's at the end of his contract. Sucking up dollars, producing little on the field.

#23 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:58 PM

Could it be that a double by Mauer scores someone like Revere from first ahead of him, while a double by Willingham leaves Mauer on third waiting to be driven in? This is a reason I don't trust RISP statistics very much.


Um, seriously? First, the first sentence was just about runner on base...not in scoring position. And I'm sorry...if you don't trust RISP stats, there's really nowhere to go from there. Might as well just say I don't trust any stats that doesn't back up my view. You are, absolutely, the first one I've ever seen to blow off RISP numbers...so you have that going for you...

Edited by ThePuck, 11 February 2013 - 08:00 PM.


#24 ashburyjohn

ashburyjohn

    Twins Moderator

  • Twins Moderators
  • 46 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 10:20 AM

You are, absolutely, the first one I've ever seen to blow off RISP numbers


You need to get out more.

#25 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,451 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:41 AM

You are, absolutely, the first one I've ever seen to blow off RISP numbers


Holy balls, really? The vast majority of the sabr community discounts them entirely.

#26 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,451 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:43 AM

This post is stupid. Please leave.


Dave, come on. I know you're frustrated with the negativity around here but that is a direct violation of the forum rules and it brings nothing to the conversation (and usually, only helps fan the flames). I just shook my head when I read that post but there's no reason to tell the guy to leave.

It's that kind of posting that sent BYTO's traffic numbers from "extremely strong community" in 2008 to "circling the drain" in 2012. You often state how much you miss BYTO but the general attitude of that site is unsustainable over the long-term and posts like that were a large reason for its slow demise. If you tell enough people to leave because you think they're stupid, guess what happens?

They leave and you're left arguing with yourself.

#27 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:44 AM

Holy balls, really? The vast majority of the sabr community discounts them entirely.


I thought they've blown off RBI numbers...not numbers with RISP. Two different things there. I haven't ever heard of SABR people blowing off what a player does with RISP, and why would they? That would make no sense.

Edited by ThePuck, 12 February 2013 - 11:46 AM.


#28 ThePuck

ThePuck

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,232 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:45 AM

You need to get out more.


If you say so

#29 Brock Beauchamp

Brock Beauchamp

    Owner

  • Administrators
  • 8,451 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:49 AM

I thought they've blown off RBI numbers...not numbers with RISP. Two different things there. I haven't ever heard of SABR people blowing off what a player does with RISP, and why would they?


Because it's been proven time and time again that a player hits the same with RISP that he does with the bases empty. Any fluctuation above or below that career norm is a temporary blip in an otherwise consistent arc. Give a guy enough ABs with RISP and he'll end up in the same place as his non-RISP numbers.

There are a few outliers to that "rule". I think Molitor was one. Maybe Gwynn was another. There were 3-4 guys over the course of 30+ years that didn't revert to career averages with RISP. Such a small fraction of players that it's essentially a given that a player will be the same with or without men on base.

#30 snepp

snepp

    Curve Hanger

  • Twins Moderators
  • 4,141 posts
  • LocationSioux Falls

Posted 12 February 2013 - 11:50 AM

and why would they?


Because it's been shown that players will, over time, perform basically the same w/RISP as they do as a whole. Dramatically cutting the sample size, for little (or no) benefit, doesn't serve much purpose.