Loading ...« Peter Answers Bowman’s Mailbag | Main | The Best Few Paragraphs I’ve Read Today »
Another Case Study on Perception and Reality
By Capitol Avenue Club | November 18, 2009
One of the recent poll questions was: If you had to trade one of the two (Jair Jurrjens, Yunel Escobar), which would you? The response was almost exactly 50/50. I assume that if I’d substituted Kris Medlen for Jair Jurrjens it would’ve been a landslide win for Medlen. I think most fans would rather part with Medlen than Jurrjens. Take a look at the comparison of their performances in their age 20, 21, 22, and 23 seasons:
| Kris Medlen | Year | IP | BB | H | R | HR | K | WHIP | RA | FIP |
| 20 | 2006 | 22.0 | 2 | 14 | 2 | 0 | 36 | 0.727 | 0.82 | 0.20 |
| 21 | 2007 | 47.0 | 12 | 39 | 14 | 2 | 63 | 1.085 | 2.68 | 1.84 |
| 22 | 2008 | 120.3 | 27 | 121 | 47 | 8 | 120 | 1.230 | 3.52 | 2.74 |
| 23 | 2009 | 105.3 | 40 | 85 | 39 | 5 | 116 | 1.187 | 3.33 | 2.75 |
| Totals | 294.7 | 81 | 259 | 102 | 15 | 335 | 1.154 | 3.12 | 2.41 |
| Jair Jurrjens | Year | IP | BB | H | R | HR | K | WHIP | RA | FIP |
| 20 | 2006 | 140.7 | 31 | 124 | 53 | 11 | 112 | 1.102 | 3.39 | 3.29 |
| 21 | 2007 | 143.3 | 42 | 136 | 59 | 11 | 107 | 1.242 | 3.70 | 3.58 |
| 22 | 2008 | 188.3 | 70 | 188 | 87 | 11 | 139 | 1.370 | 4.16 | 3.60 |
| 23 | 2009 | 215.0 | 75 | 186 | 71 | 15 | 152 | 1.214 | 2.97 | 3.74 |
| Totals | 687.3 | 218 | 634 | 270 | 48 | 510 | 1.240 | 3.54 | 3.58 |
RA is “Run Average” and FIP is “Fielding Independent Pitching”. Granted, Kris Medlen was at lower levels for most of the time, but still, there’s not much evidence that Jair Jurrjens will be a better pitcher than Kris Medlen over the next 4 years and there’s quite a bit of evidence to the contrary. Additionally, Medlen is under team control for 5 or 6 more years whereas Jurrjens is under team control for only 4 more years.
I don’t support trading Jurrjens unless the right package comes around. And I’m not trying to sell Jurrjens short, he is what he is, a reliable, cheap, quality, mid-rotation starter, which is immensely valuable. But Medlen has the chance to be that plus some, a fairly good chance, plus a more favorable contract. Some GM’s might view Jurrjens as the more valuable commodity because he has more of a track record (albeit not nearly as big of a sample size as you’d like) in MLB, but the smart GM’s should be targeting Medlen, rather than Jurrjens.
Topics: Atlanta Braves | 8 Comments »
November 18th, 2009 at 3:59 PM
I wonder if there is emerging a consensus among SABR sorts of howlong of MLB exposure is long enough “for the scouting reports to catch up with a player”? It seems to be a real phenomenon that many minor league players have better performances for half a season to a whole season and then never again reach that level (Francoeur, Craig McMurtry, Langerhans, Joe Charbonneau, although injury was in on his as I remember).
This is crucial to several Braves decisions. How good will Prado be? Is Jurrjens really established as a pitcher who will consistently have a low BAPIP (Maddux reached 230 BA for about the best 4 years of his career)? Is Yunel really a 300 / 380 hitter? And, of course, Medlen. Just how good is he or will he be?
I actually believe Jair has established himself long term as a solid #2 starter despite what the peripherals seem to say. I would obviously be a dumb GM because I would not value Medlin as highly as Jair. With Medlen you are only looking at 105 ML innings. And of those, more than half were relief innings. And FIP is basically .5 runs lower for a same pitcher when acting as a reliever than when acting as a starter. And, the shortage (and therefore what drives value when trading for pitching) is much greater in starters and Medlin has defintely not proven himself able to go to the post 30 times a year at 6 innings per start.
As to a “fair trade” I believe Jair one up for Adrian Gonzalez would be fair (4 years of #2 starter for 4 one year contacts [at end of a pre FA season the team can release a player with career taking injury or major drug problem or whatever soit is more like a series of 1 year contracts with club options] totaling 25 million when the market would have been 55 million versus 2 years of premier 1B worth $40 million at cost of 11 million). Jair and a small piece for Ryan Braun would be. I don’t think anybody is going to do what I think would be a “fair trade.”
And, I certainly don’t think anybody would give my idea of “fair value” for Medlin as I see him as 99% guaranteed to be as good as a # 2 bullpen righty, 90% guaranteed to be as good as a solid #4 starter, and 30% likely to be as good as a #2 starter.
November 18th, 2009 at 4:39 PM
I always say 4 years is the minimum you want when evaluating a player. Also, when converting starter numbers to reliever numbers and vice versa, use the rule of 17:
difference in BABIP is 17 points higher as starter. K/PA is 17% higher as reliever. And HR per contacted PA is 17% higher as starter. Walk rate is FLAT.
November 19th, 2009 at 1:33 PM
Cliff,
I think you’re underestimating the supply/demand value impacts on JJ, Adrian Gonzalez, Braun.
There are alot more pitchers in the pool who are likely to perform at a level around JJ for the money than there are 1st basemen or outfielders who can produce like Gonzalez or Braun, especially at the price.
Also, Jurrjens is about to become unknowingly expensive through several years of arbitration, whereas both of those players are locked into a known cost structure.
November 19th, 2009 at 6:25 PM
Nevin,
Depends on how you see Jair. if you see JJ like P. W. (he’s really a medicore #3 who luckily has performed better than that) then I agree with you.
If he is a solid 2, then to get him for the next 4 years would cost a 60 million guaranteed contract O. Perez didn’t project as a solid 2 or 3 last year, Lowe only solid 2). If he is a medicore 3, then 3 years at 12 and a good shot at getting more than 12 in the 4th year. He will cost about 20 million (P. W.’s estimate 25). P. W. has him at surplus value of 43 million. If A. Gon surplus value is 20 million a year (and I think it is a little less), that is a match.
Where potentially I think you may be right is that you only have so many innings to pitch (around 1450). You only have so many innings to play the field and hit(although PA’s go up on strong offensive teams). Elite players seemingly should get a premium because of that (I think they also get one for “more proven”, “veteran leadership” and other such stuff). However, I think that premium shows up stronger in the trade market than in the FA market because so few teams are willing to commit the large percentages of their budgets to just 1 player.
So, if you already have the pitchers the Braves have and then go get Jason Marquis, he has no value (because we have right now 6 as good or at least a little better before counting Medlen). So, calling Marquis a (don’t know the number, just throwing this out) “3 win player” means nothing. He is not worth 3 wins to the Braves.
Similarly if the Braves signed Troy Glaus (and he is say a “3 win player”) to cover having a right handed bat and penciled him at first with back up possibilities at third if his shoulder comes out o.k. and then signed LaRoche (and he is say a a “5 win player”) and figured they would platoon aRoche the two of them together are clearly not worth as much as A. Gonzalez, even if A. is only a 7 win player.
And, if the Padres are looking at moving A. Gon, they will value having a lot of pretty good players more than say the Cubs if they were dealing Derrek Lee (and I know he has said he doesn’t want to be traded, but follow with me.) Because the Cubs need to improve at a few specific spots and can’t just wholesale turn over the team. the Padres don’t have as many “above average” players to begin with and would rather have (I suppose) 6 years of Medlin than 4 years of Jair.
November 19th, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Also as to supply and demand on pitchers, I sense that the good starters replacee (bad word) is much more likely to be significantly lesser of a player, even on a good team. So, that somewhat explains the strong market in FA for starting pitching compared to almost anything else.
In other words, the new pitcher replaces the 5th best pitcher you have in your rotation. Is there any team in baseball that has 5 pitchers better than JJ? Lowe? So, there are always 30 potential buyers (if they can afford the price in players or dollars). The upgrade effect will vary, but there is always an upgrade.
But, for 1b’s are there 30 teams for whom LaRoche (almost as good of a 1B as JJ is of a pitcher) would have value? No way. Strike out Red Sox, Yankees, Cardinals, Padres (for now), Astros, Rockies, and I am sure a few more, just based on the quality of their existing 1B. They aren’t buyers for LaRoche unless he goes really cheap.
November 19th, 2009 at 6:47 PM
Supply equals demand. There are 29 teams that would benefit adding Jurrjens to their rotation, but there are 5 SP’s on a team. Obviously you can’t dedicate all of your resources there because you’d do so at the expense of other areas.
November 19th, 2009 at 7:16 PM
P. W. at 6,
I am not sure what the point of “supply equals demand” might be. Because, it doesn’t in hardly any market. Elasticity is different for every good. And usually the supply elasticity and the demand elaticity are not equalfor any particular good or for replacement goods.
The supply of ML pitchers is limitless. They form a vast “right shoulder half curve.” As quality of pitcher demanded increases, there are fewer and fewer that meet the standard. However, there are only about 360 ML roster spots. And only about 150 starters and only about 50 who are as good or better than the theoretical #2 starter.
My point was to start a discussion maybe leading to those with vastly better credentials and experiences in this field than I, who could take the obvious higher value that starting pitching seems to bring (in trade and in FA) despite pitchers’ much greater fragility (how many position players have ever tanked contracts from injury like Mike Hampton or Kevin Brown or Denny Neagle or Mark Prior. Position players usually continue to have value and return from injury quicker or can be adapted to other positions with their new physical limits) and explain why the market is as it appears to be to me and many others (valuing proven ML starting pitching much higher than what would otherwise seem appropriate for position players).
My position (subject to the comments going to the substance of that position by those with greater economic skill) is that because starting pitchers at least as good as a #2 (slightly above average FOR A STARTING PITCHER) have at least SOME value for EVERY team, then there are more possible buyers than for slightly above average position players who may legitimately only have 20 or so potential buyers.
November 19th, 2009 at 7:33 PM
The distribution of major-league starters follows the “right shoulder half curve” you mention, making the average pitcher’s value lower than that of the median. A league-average SP (by definition, a 2-2.5 win pitcher) gets ~$10 million/year on the open market. But a true #2 gets closer to $15 million.