-
Buy the book
The Cheater's Guide to Baseball
"Derek Zumsteg should be ashamed to have such comprehensive knowledge of the history of cheating in baseball. Pete Rose gave me two to one odds this book would become a classic." -- Allen Barra, author of The Last Coach: A Life of Paul "Bear" Bryant
Richie Sexson: Albatross
I’ve talked about this in other posts the last few months, but never laid out a complete case for it to the point where I feel people actually understand where I’m coming from. Talking with other Mariner fans, I certainly don’t get the sense that very many people agree with me on this issue, so, let me lay it out as plainly as I can and see how many of you I can convert:
Richie Sexson isn’t worth anything close to the $28 million he’s owed the next two years. His contract is an anchor that the Mariners should be actively trying to unload on someone else, and the sooner he’s removed from the roster, the better this team will be. Trading Richie Sexson for a bag of baseballs would be addition by subtraction. If you can con someone into giving you something of value for him, all the better, but just removing his contract from the roster should be a priority.
Let’s take a look at his production and what we should expect the next two years. We’ll begin with the sole strength of his game; hitting.
Sexson’s last three healthy seasons, he’s posted EqA’s of .308, .307, and .280. He turns 32 next month, so he’s likely at the end of his prime and entering the decline phase of his career. That said, his raw power is still among the best in the game, even if its only 90% of what it used to be, so we shouldn’t expect Sexson’s value to collapse over night. A reasonable projection for the next two seasons would be a .295 EqA, or something in that range. He should be better than he was in 2006, but a little worse than he was in 2005.
That kind of offensive performance is worth about 90 to 100 runs, depending on what kind of run conversion formula you want to use. We’ll go with 100 because it makes the math easier, and I always like giving the benefit of the doubt to the side I’m not on. Replacement level for a first baseman is the highest of any position in baseball, and you should be able to find a player who can create about 70 runs with his bat without too much of a problem. That makes Sexson worth something like 30 runs offensively each of the next two years. As we talked about yesterday with Beltre and Ramirez, 30 runs is a pretty valuable player.
But we’re not done with Sexson just yet. He’s about +30 offensively, but he also takes the field and runs the bases. And he does both very poorly. His UZR for 2006 was -7, and most other systems have him in the -5 to -10 range. He’s among the worst defensive first baseman in the game. And he’s also a lousy baserunner. Mitchel Lichtman’s calculations had him as costing a team two runs over the course of a season running the bases, so his defense/baserunning are probably in the -10 range, give or take a couple of runs.
That makes the total package worth about 20 runs. For the next two seasons, the Mariners are going to pay Richie Sexson something like $7 million per win. $7 million per win! That’s one of the worst values in baseball. Based on his actual run production, Sexson should be making something like $6 or $7 million next year. His salary is double what it should be.
One of the common responses to this is “who cares what he’s paid - he produces, and it’s not my money” or something to that effect. But, of course, this argument is foolish, because the Mariners operate on a budget, and every decision comes with an opportunity cost. The $14 million that Richie Sexson will earn next year is about 15% of the entire team’s payroll, and his occupation of first base fills a position where it is easy to find major league quality hitters. The opportunity cost of having Richie Sexson far outweighs his actual onfield value. It’s not even close.
The Mariners need to capitalize on this market and trade Richie Sexson. A first baseman who is worth 20 runs over the course of a season isn’t worth anything close to $14 million, and that money could be easily allocated to any number of other, better players. Take whatever you can get for him. Just trade Richie Sexson.
Comments
126 Responses to “Richie Sexson: Albatross”
While I generally agree with your conclusion, I wonder how easy it would actually be to “just trade Richie Sexson.” Do you have the sense that there are teams out there who would be willing to take on the albatross contract without the M’s paying a substantial portion of the cost? I’ve heard rumors about the Giants, but I don’t see it.
The simple point is, if the contract is so bad, why would anyone else want to take it on?
Just wondering, but where’d you get that replacement level-1B is worth 70 runs above “replacement”?
The simple point is, if the contract is so bad, why would anyone else want to take it on?
Teams are notorious at overvaluing bad defensive sluggers. San Francisco and Baltimore are two teams who have made it known that they want to add high dollar power hitters and are unlikely to win the bidding for the premier free agents.
The M’s could dump him if they wanted to. I just don’t think they want to.
For UZR, does that compare him only to other first baseman, or does it compare him against other infielders? I’d have to think that there are a LOT of lousy first baseman out there when it comes to range and general mobility. Likewise with running the bases.
Part of my personal hesitation with saying “trade this guy away” is I just don’t trust the M’s to effectively replace that production in any sort of value way.
The simple point is, if the contract is so bad, why would anyone else want to take it on?
If anybody wants to go out and sign a big bat, they’re looking at the likes of J.D. Drew, Alfonso Soriano, or Carlos Lee, which will be both big dollars and longterm (5 year) commitments.
Richie Sexson is owed big money, but it’s not a contract that will bite your team in the ass after these next 2 years. 2 years is very minimal risk.
Dave has mentioned multiple times that the Giants are a perfect suitor for Sexson. They have very few players under contract, loads of cash to spend, and need a first basemen.
It’s worth it for the M’s to sign a cheaper, left handed line drive hitting 1B who gloves the position well, and spending the saved money in another department. (Starting pitching, anyone?)
I liked the signing at the time, as the M’s needed to create some sort of impact, although I wish it were Delgado instead of Sexson. His strikeouts killing rallies just kills me.
One wonders if the Tigers would have taken Sexson’s contract off the Ms hands, instead of buying in to three years of Sheffield. One wonders if Bavasi was even trying.
I understand what you are saying and it does make sense if there is the player out there to replace his value. I’m curious, if you trade him, who do you replace him with? Is it an Ibanez to 1B and Drew to the outfield move? Is it Broussard/Perez (more bad defense) and a Frank Thomas type for DH? Can you maximize his value by putting him at DH and find that replacement level/league average guy for 1B? Who is out there for 1B that could be the replacement level/league average guy? I’m not trying to be rude because I honestly don’t know enough to answer any of these questions. Thanks,
6. Agreed. I would have taken the package the Yankees got for Sheffield, for Sexson, in a heartbeat.
I fully agree that his contract is bad– but what about the nature of the market right now?
With guys like Aramis Ramirez getting $14.5m over 5(!) years, it seems like $14m over two years for a ~.300 EqA is actually better than the going rate right now, however crappy it may be.
Getting rid of Sexson is fine, but what better alternatives exist in such a nutso offseason?
…
…
…
…
I recall when Sexson was signed that he was lauded as an above-average defensive player.
He is no Carlos Guillen at 1B, but then, who is?
I don’t see how they could get away with moving him unless they got something in return that was perceived to have value. They would get an avalanche of extremely bad PR for the move which makes it seem very risky.
To put it another way, a lot of jobs would be lost if they traded him for nothing, he put up huge numbers in SF and gate attendance at Safeco plummeted. If I were running the show, I’d be concerned about the risk.
For UZR, does that compare him only to other first baseman, or does it compare him against other infielders? I’d have to think that there are a LOT of lousy first baseman out there when it comes to range and general mobility. Likewise with running the bases.
UZR is position specific. If Sexson was being compared to shortstops and center fielders, he’d be something like -60.
Part of my personal hesitation with saying “trade this guy away” is I just don’t trust the M’s to effectively replace that production in any sort of value way.
It’s really, really hard to spend more than $7 million per win, no matter how stupid you are.
I understand what you are saying and it does make sense if there is the player out there to replace his value. I’m curious, if you trade him, who do you replace him with?
Use Broussard at first base, get a new left fielder, move Ibanez to DH. David Dellucci, for instance, is a comparable player to Sexson and will cost 1/3 of the salary.
6. Agreed. I would have taken the package the Yankees got for Sheffield, for Sexson, in a heartbeat.
The Tigers didn’t want Richie Sexson.
I totally understand and agree with this line of thinking. But I just see the FO saying to themselves, “well he’s a right-handed bat who can hit home runs in Safeco field, so let’s move on to other positions”. It just seems that they think too linearly when it comes to roster construction and filling holes.
With guys like Aramis Ramirez getting $14.5m over 5(!) years, it seems like $14m over two years for a ~.300 EqA is actually better than the going rate right now, however crappy it may be.
Aramis Ramirez is four years younger and a significantly better player.
I recall when Sexson was signed that he was lauded as an above-average defensive player.
Not by me. We explicitly discussed his defense as a liability.
He is no Carlos Guillen at 1B, but then, who is?
Mark Teixeira and Derrek Lee are very good with the glove. Then there are the guys like Casey, Mientkiwicz, and Hatteberg who are good defenders with iffy bats.
To put it another way, a lot of jobs would be lost if they traded him for nothing, he put up huge numbers in SF and gate attendance at Safeco plummeted. If I were running the show, I’d be concerned about the risk.
The status quo isn’t exactly bringing fans to the park in droves. The Mariners should be worried about the risk of continuing to lose ballgames, and Richie Sexson’s contract is going to be a factor in them continuing to lose to the other teams in this division.
“I’m curious, if you trade him, who do you replace him with?”
Replacing Sexson is simple, since the M’s already have at least two options at 1B beyond Sexson: Broussard/Perez and Ibanez. A good left-fielder would be nice to have, but even that may not be entirely necessary, as the Ms could go with the relatively punchless Snelling / Reed / Ichiro outfield. Heck, Wladimir Balentien might even be ready to contribute. The point is that 1B/DH is the easiest position in the lineup to fill - the last thing the M’s should be worried about is spending money on another player to fulfill that roll.
Just wondering, but where’d you get that replacement level-1B is worth 70 runs above “replacement”?
A replacement level 1B is not worth 70 runs above replacement. He is worth 70 runs above a vacant spot in the lineup (and in the field).
Which of course brings to mind Casey Stengel’s comment that if you don’t have a catcher you’re going to have a lot of passed balls.
Teams are notorious at overvaluing bad defensive sluggers
Unfortunately, one of those teams is your Seattle Mariners (see: Sexson, Richie; Sierra, Ruben and Everett, Carl).
To put it another way, a lot of jobs would be lost if they traded him for nothing, he put up huge numbers in SF and gate attendance at Safeco plummeted. If I were running the show, I’d be concerned about the risk.
I strongly suspect gate attendance next year is going to be down anyway, because:
- the team’s still under .500
- they kept Hargrove and Bavasi and pissed off some fans who are tired of hearing “We’re going to contend Real Soon Now™”
The tea leaves are USSM’s traffic falling off after the Hargrove announcement, and this:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/292072_theinsider13.html
http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/sea/ticketing/allstarclub.jsp
I can tell you right now the M’s wouldn’t be converting suites to seating if they were selling them well.
In that light, what’s going to drive Mariner attendance is winning, plain and simple. Either they put a winning team on the table or you’ll see the decline we’ve seen continue:
2002: 3,542,938
2003: 3,268,509
2004: 2,940,731
2005: 2,725,459
2006: 2,481,165
Worrying that trading Richie Sexson might lead to an attendance decline is like worrying that the deck chairs are weighting down the Titanic…
Just wondering, but where’d you get that replacement level-1B is worth 70 runs above “replacement”?
Replacement level, or essentially, the expected value of what you could get from a league minimum player who wouldn’t cost much to acquire, is approximately 15% below average at each position. It’s not exactly 15% at all positions, and it’s probably closer to 10% below average at first base, because the population of guys who can hit but can’t play defense is a large one.
An average major league first baseman creates about 80 to 85 runs with their bat over 600 plate appearances. 10-15% below 80-85 runs is about 70 runs. Since we’re dealing with generalities and not trying to be completely precise, we’re okay with rounding by a run here or there.
Actually, I’ve been persuaded by the trade Richie arguments for a while - I just think there is a very good reason to think that he won’t be.
It seems like they’ve been fairly risk-averse for at least the last few years and it’s hard for me to imagine that the entire organization is going to pivot in the course of one offseason.
Alright Dave, I’ll agree that Richie doesn’t give close to value for his contract. Suppose the M’s trade him for magical beans or something. What do we do then? What is your plan for 1st? Do we put Broussard there and move Ibanez to DH? Get the other parts in place and see who is left around the league?
I know you’ve given some scenarios as part of an overall off-season plan (some of which can no longer happen), but I’d be interested in your thoughts. Maybe you think it doesn’t matter at this point, because we can use the extra salary money to fill more urgent gaps and finding a suitable replacement at first who does give value can be low on the priority list. Just wondering what you’d do if you got your wish here. Certainly, making up for his offensive production (while at the same time erasing the defensive liability) would have to be part of the plan.
20: see post 12.
Alright Dave, I’ll agree that Richie doesn’t give close to value for his contract. Suppose the M’s trade him for magical beans or something. What do we do then? What is your plan for 1st? Do we put Broussard there and move Ibanez to DH? Get the other parts in place and see who is left around the league?
Broussard to first, sign an outfielder, Ibanez to DH. It’s easy, it makes all kinds of sense, and it makes the team better offensively and defensively.
Ramirez (Ibanez would stay in LF in this scenario) or Drew would be fine if you want a big name. Dellucci or Catalanatto if you want to go with a smaller, cheaper impact. There are lots of scenarios where you can find yourself a quality outfielder and get a much better return on investment than Sexson.
There was a discussion about this on LL just recently, spawned by Ramirez’ contract. I absolutely agree. He’s got to go.
I think that Perez/Broussard or Ibanez will have similar production at 1B, for half his salary. And most importantly, having that money would allow the M’s to pursue someone worth it, like JD Drew. I imagine the guy’s looking for a few years at just about 13 mil. Imagine, the DH/1B jam is unclogged, we have a left fielder, and a guy gets on base at a .400 clip, all with no extra money spent!
Trouble is who will take Sexson? GMs aren’t dumb, mostly. I would be very surprised if Bavasi can pull off a Sheffield style trade for him. The only way I can see him unloaded is if Soriano goes with him as the sweetener, maybe with Reed for extra padding.
Where does Lahair fit into this Sexson discussion?
I can’t help but get a little excited (ignoring the K’s) looking at his 2005 and 2006 numbers. I’ve never quite bought in 100%, but he keeps climbing and keeps performing. If he starts out hot in 2007, I don’t see how the M’s could not bring him up? Or is it still to soon to count on him?
I’ve never seen his mechanics, and remeber Dave having his doubts during the year right after his promotion to AAA.
Giving away Sexson and his contract, taking on Manny and his contract, and playing Broussard at 1st would be tres sexy.
I can’t help but get a little excited (ignoring the K’s) looking at his 2005 and 2006 numbers. I’ve never quite bought in 100%, but he keeps climbing and keeps performing. If he starts out hot in 2007, I don’t see how the M’s could not bring him up? Or is it still to soon to count on him?
His ‘06 season was essentially built on his last 50 at-bats. In June and July with Tacoma, he hit two home runs in 146 at-bats, and a whopping 7% of his flyballs went over the fence. Then, August rolled around, and he whacked 8 home runs in 56 at-bats as 57% of his fly balls left the yard.
Basically, he had a two week run where he was Albert Pujols, as he hit .357/.419/.786. The rest of the year, he was a slap-hitting first baseman who just punched the ball into left field for singles.
If he really learned how to pull the ball for power consistently, he could be in the mix for the second half of the season or 2008. If it was just a two week sample size fluke, though, then he’s still just the new Greg Dobbs.
shhh… not to loud Dave. The other teams might hear you and not take Sexson off our hands.
There was no need to sell me on the dump Richie argument. I’ve made nearly the same argument, with probably gotten much the same reluctant reaction, as you have, Dave.
That said, I am surprised that you think Sexson is as bad defensively as -10 (though you’ll get no argument from me about how bad he is on the basebpaths). I agree that he is below average, but I don’t think it quite that bad. For instance, BP’s Rate 2 (which I know you don’t like) shows Richie at 107 and 108 (fairly significantly above average) over the last two seasons in Safeco.
One of the problems with arguments constructed the way you are making it is it is only as sturdy as the value numbers are. The offensive side is a much surer thing than the defensive side, and the people who disagree with us tend to overvalue Richie’s defense even more than you probably think I am. Maybe they think that, instead of a cumulative 20 runs above average/replacement (it wasn’t clear to me which you were using), he’s much closer to 25-28 runs better. Even if that’s true, I still support getting rid of Richie, though perhaps it becomes more imperative to get a bit more in return for him.
The other caveat, for me, is that if the M’s trade Richie, they need to replace him with a semi-”feared” bat somewhere in the line-up. It doesn’t have to be first base. I am old-fashioned this way, but just about no matter how the stats shake out to suggest otherwise, I think a line-up works better with a true power hitter in the MOTO. Of course, you’ve addressed that with your proposed trade for Manny, and I know that you don’t need to pay $14M/season to get somebody who can do that at least as well as Sexson.
Then there are the guys like Casey, Mientkiwicz, and Hatteberg who are good defenders with iffy bats.
In his prime, Mientkiewicz was a criminally underrated player in stats circles. (Though certainly a lot of his value is gone now.) In his age 27 and 29 seasons (28 was hampered by injury), he put up an EQA around .285-.290 and playing some of the best defense you’ll ever see at first base. He was doing this at the same time he cost almost nothing over minimum. Yet he didn’t hit for power, so offense-obsessed folks from all around (you could probably pull up 10-20 references about how much Mientkiewicz was killing the Twins at Baseball Prospectus alone) were talking about how stupid the Twins were to keep him around.
There’s certainly more than one way to get value out of first base–lumbering, overpaid slugger isn’t really one of the best ways.
Good points, Dave.
If Sexson’s going to get dealt, it’ll probably be later rather than sooner, once the big names are off the table, teams are scrounging for big bats and more willing to eat a large salary like Richie’s to get it.
However, I don’t see it happening unless the M’s offer, which is very doubtful given the guy was their leading HR hitter and all, and try to explain trading him for peanuts to the fanbase. I don’t see even the Giants or O’s going out of their way to make the M’s an offer for Richie Sexson.
That said, I am surprised that you think Sexson is as bad defensively as -10 (though you’ll get no argument from me about how bad he is on the basebpaths). I agree that he is below average, but I don’t think it quite that bad. For instance, BP’s Rate 2 (which I know you don’t like) shows Richie at 107 and 108 (fairly significantly above average) over the last two seasons in Safeco.
There aren’t too many ways to get me to disagree with you faster than quoting BP’s defensive metrics. They’re less than useless.
As to the comment that it’s hard to spend $7 million per win no matter how stupid you are, my fear is that the Mariners would spend considerably less for no wins at all. I’m not at all convinced that the front office wouldn’t put a slick fielding “great clubhouse presence” on the field who would give the M’s maybe 60 runs a year.
That probably sounds overly pessimistic, but they signed Everett last year and they still give Bloomquist too many at bats and Rivera some at bats.
I’m not really sure that the Mariner front office (with apologies to Bavasi, who may well be chewing his arms off in frustration behind the scenes) knows what constitutes a win or what puts butts in seats.
I’m not saying don’t trade Sexson. I am saying don’t even be slightly optimistic as to who’s on first if he leaves. Didn’t they give Bloomquist several at bats from the 1B position last year?
Finally, referring to the comment about the dropoff in blog hits–has anybody ever run a correlation between blog hits and (a) attendance or (b) what place the club is in? The latter would be easiest to run if you restricted it to the final standings and the blog data to the off season. If you could get data from other blogs you could decide whether the dropoff is likely your fault or normal bad-club attrition.
Dave said:
“There aren’t too many ways to get me to disagree with you faster than quoting BP’s defensive metrics. They’re less than useless.”
I know that, and acknowledged that. But you really didn’t address the substance of my comment, which is that (even if you hate BP’s defensive metrics) there is a lot of variance and noise in any defensive metric, and framing your argument by insinuating that you can tell Sexson is only +20 instead of +25 or even +28, with such implied precision, leaves the argument open to attack. I’d like to see you acknowledge that (and I know you would), and make the argument that it STILL makes sense to trade Sexson. That argument can still be made persuasively.
I’m also interested in what you think of trading a guy like Sexson if they don’t acquire more power (even in accumulation) to replace him.
Dellucci or Catalanatto if you want to go with a smaller, cheaper impact.
I’m perfectly fine with that, as the Mariner offense isn’t really the problem (in neutral parks, it scored as average last year, and that was with boat anchors in CF and DH), and if enough good things happen to young players (Reed, Doyle, Jones), the M’s actually HAVE sufficient OF’ers, but Dellucci would give you a nice player that would reduce the need for everyone to pan out- you could stuff Reed into Tacoma, make Jones earn his way to Seattle, have a backup plan for Doyle’s annual injury, and so on. Plus the contract’s not likely to break the bank or be excessively long term.
I especially like the idea of signing Catalanotto, because this offense desperately needs guys with good OBP who don’t swing at stuff at their shoetops. He strikes me as a Stan Javier Mk II.
I know that, and acknowledged that. But you really didn’t address the substance of my comment, which is that (even if you hate BP’s defensive metrics) there is a lot of variance and noise in any defensive metric, and framing your argument by insinuating that you can tell Sexson is only +20 instead of +25 or even +28, with such implied precision, leaves the argument open to attack. I’d like to see you acknowledge that (and I know you would), and make the argument that it STILL makes sense to trade Sexson. That argument can still be made persuasively.
I think I’ve made it pretty obvious in the past few posts that I’m rounding and there isn’t much precision in the numbers. I’ve clearly written that Sexson usually comes in at -5 to -10. I gave him credit for the high side of his “90 to 100″ runs created range. I’m not sure what else I could do to make it clear that these numbers are approximations.
But, in both the Beltre and Sexson cases, I’ve tried to make sure I was cautious against my own case. MGL’s calculations had Sexson’s 2006 offensive performance at just +16, yet I’m projecting him at +30 the next two years. If I’ve erred in any direction, it’s probably been in the direction of Richie Sexson.
And as for the variation in defensive evaluations, it’s true among some players, but not really about Sexson. Among the defensive metrics that are useful, none of them rate Sexson well. The only disagreement is to the degree of which he’s bad, but they all agree that he’s bad.
I’m also interested in what you think of trading a guy like Sexson if they don’t acquire more power (even in accumulation) to replace him.
I think an all-star, MVP hitter is important, and certainly can help a team score runs. I’d rather have Manny Ramirez than David Dellucci. But I’m not convinced that a Matsuzaka-less Mariners squad next year is close enough to winning it all that we need to be making long term decisions on that kind of thing. They can acquire an aging slugger when the rest of the team is good enough to be called a contender.
Or, to put this another way…
OPS’s of selected Mariner position players and ranking in MLB (AL for DH, since the other league has Small Sample Size problems):
1B: .847 (17th in MLB)
CF: .656 (29th in MLB)
DH: .667 (14th in AL)
The Mariners could lose 100 points of OPS from dumping Sexson and playing Benuardo, and if they could get DH and CF to .750 OPS combined, still come out well ahead. Our current CF is Ichiro- so the reality is all we have to do is find two corner OF’ers to get us to .750-.800 combined and the offense is in MUCH better shape than last year, even without Sexson.
Well, I hesitate to respond, because you’ve already done your best to make me out as an idiot, but . . ..
Yes, you’ve made it clear you are dealing with round approximations, and I think you’ve also made it clear that you are giving Sexson the benefit of the doubt. Remember, I agree with you. Where I think you lose people is when you give one conclusive number like +20, with false precision - it tends to obscure your previous caveats. It might be better to say “the offensive range is probably legitimately +15 to +30, and the defensive side is probably arguably -12 to -2 or so, which means he is somewhere between barely above league average/replacement, to as high as 28 runs better than average/replacement. He surely falls somewhere in this range, but even at the very highest possble value, it make sense to trade him, because . . ..” I guess I see that argument as much more unassailable. I’m not ignoring all your caveats and Sexson-leaning assumptions, Dave, I’m just trying to offer constructive criticism. [Plus I don't think he is as bad defensively as you do - and don't put nearly as much stock in any defensive metric as you do - even if we both agree he is sub-average.]
. . . Oh, never mind. [frustrated]
Dave - you are pretty bearish on the M’s taking your advice on this one, aren’t you?
I see a good fit with Los Angeles for Richie now that JD Drew has opted out of his contract, and Nomar Garciaparra is a free agent. I know LA has Loney, so I would imagine he might be asked for in return with possibly a minor leaguer as well.
Ship Richie to LA and pay a percentage of the tab.
I think an all-star, MVP hitter is important, and certainly can help a team score runs. I’d rather have Manny Ramirez than David Dellucci. But I’m not convinced that a Matsuzaka-less Mariners squad next year is close enough to winning it all that we need to be making long term decisions on that kind of thing. They can acquire an aging slugger when the rest of the team is good enough to be called a contender.
That’s sort of my argument on why I’m not so hot on JD Drew, except sub “injury-prone” for “aging”.
In my opinion, the M’s have to improve the pitching side of things far more than the offensive side- and it’s not incredibly clear that the free agent or trade markets would let them do that in a manner that would let them stay in budget, or that they have a great grasp on where value exists in the current market. It feels like they’re going to throw a bunch of money in an overheated market and hope that magic fairy dust turns Schmidt and Eaton (or whoever gets signed) into a winning combination.
It doesn’t make me terribly optimistic, but the counter to that is if anyone saw the 2002 Angels, 2003 Marlins, 2005 White Sox or 2006 Tigers winning pennants or championships based on sabremetric projections, they’re probably lying.
39, Emerald - you’re not suggesting that the Dodgers would consider trading Loney for Sexson if the M’s paid some of Sexson’s contract, are you? Because that has less than 0% chance of happening. Loney is very, very good and very, very cheap.
Well, I hesitate to respond, because you’ve already done your best to make me out as an idiot…
Come on Pete, you know me better than that.
It might be better to say “the offensive range is probably legitimately +15 to +30, and the defensive side is probably arguably -12 to -2 or so, which means he is somewhere between barely above league average/replacement, to as high as 28 runs better than average/replacement.
Well, for one thing, I don’t see -2 as a defensible projection.
[Plus I don’t think he is as bad defensively as you do - and don’t put nearly as much stock in any defensive metric as you do - even if we both agree he is sub-average.]
You should. We’re getting to the point where we can make conclusive claims about defensive performance at the extremes. Guys like Adam Dunn are demonstrably terrible defenders, and there’s just no way he’s not bad. Sexson’s bad to a slightly less extreme degree, but we can still show conclusively that he is bad.
Essentially, there’s about a 0.5% chance that Richie Sexson is a good defensive first baseman. He’d have to be incredible at scooping balls in the dirt to make up for his lack of mobility, and having watched him quite a bit the past two years, I’m pretty sure he’s not incredible at scooping balls out of the dirt.
Give defensive metrics another look before you dismiss them, Pete. This isn’t range factor and Rate2 anymore.
Livengood - you never know. Ned Colletti might get desperate enough for offensive production, now that they really don’t have any. I know Loney is a very good young, cheap player, with so much upside it’s makes me sick.
I wouldn’t mind having Loney for Sexson straight up, and paying 5 million to the Dodgers for two seasons if thats what it took.
Part of Sexson’s offensive value (measured by EQAvg) is lost in the homerun. A homerun is an automatic run+ on the scoreboard and it isn’t easy to replace 35-40 in a park that isn’t condusive to dingers. Sexson is one of the most prolific RBI men in the game despite Safeco, and it isn’t an accident; he is an excellent HR hitter.
Also think that part of Sexson’s defensive value is in his wingspan. His range is bad but he makes up for bad throws by the infielders and helps keep them loose on defense. Individually he is bad but he helps the other guys out by nabbing their wild throws. Overall hes probably just a little below average as a defender (and not horrible). I’d edge with fans’ intuition here and the scouting reports (as defensive stats are still unreliable).
All that said, that doesn’t mean Sexson can’t be traded. But you need to find a replacement for his production first; and that isn’t easy in this market.
Dave,
If you don’t like Sexson’s defense at first, you are going to HATE Broussard. He is one of the worst defenders I’ve ever seen at first base. In no scenario should Broussard be at first. If hes on the team, hes the platoon DH.
Part of Sexson’s offensive value (measured by EQAvg) is lost in the homerun. A homerun is an automatic run+ on the scoreboard and it isn’t easy to replace 35-40 in a park that isn’t condusive to dingers. Sexson is one of the most prolific RBI men in the game despite Safeco, and it isn’t an accident; he is an excellent HR hitter.
Not true, Taro. Equivalent Average, Runs Created, Baseruns, whatever you want to use, measures the value of a home run correctly. Go read Tango’s articles on run conversions if you don’t believe me. You can’t argue this. Well, you can, but you’d be wrong. You’re making an unfounded claim on a statistic without the evidence to support it. You do this a lot. It hurts your credibility.
Also think that part of Sexson’s defensive value is in his wingspan. His range is bad but he makes up for bad throws by the infielders and helps keep them loose on defense. Individually he is bad but he helps the other guys out by nabbing their wild throws. Overall hes probably just a little below average as a defender (and not horrible). I’d edge with fans’ intuition here and the scouting reports (as defensive stats are still unreliable).
None of this is true either. The scouting reports and the fans reports on him are not good. He rated as a 36 on the 2006 Fan Scouting Report. That’s terrible.
All that said, that doesn’t mean Sexson can’t be traded. But you need to find a replacement for his production first; and that isn’t easy in this market.
I could name 15 hitters in this market that are better players than Richie Sexson and will sign for less than $14 million per season.
Next year’s attendance will be grim (barring some unforeseen splash in the off-season that will excite the fan base in historic proportions). Sexson’s departure will only make the situation worse from a P.R. standpoint.
I’m not sure how the ticket-buying fans will think the team that can’t score runs will suddenly be better off by trading one of the team’s few power hitters. Maybe the fans will be so distracted by the 600+ innings the M’s have to fill from their starting pitching that they won’t care about scoring runs.
Even if the team somehow plays well and contends in 2007, it will take months before there is any upswing in attendance based on performance, by which time too many home dates will have gone by to see any material change in overall attendance for 2007.
The soonest ticket revenue (luxury box rentals and season ticket sales) will improve is 2008, but that will only happen if the team is fun, exciting and winning by the end of the season in 2007.
I know, I know. I am talking about perceptions of ticket-buyers and not actual performance of the team. But if trading Sexson (who only has two years left on his contract) doesn’t also lead to other moves that will be perceived as improving the team right away and allowing the team to contend soon, then why do it? I have seen the M’s make enough arbitrary decisions about budgets and spending that I have no confidence the M’s will actually spend their money better elsewhere (or spend it at all).
Emerald wrote:
“I wouldn’t mind having Loney for Sexson straight up, and paying 5 million to the Dodgers for two seasons if thats what it took.”
I’d love it too, and it is true that surprising things happen, but I still see this as having no chance of happening. As Dave said, Sexson is a month from 33, coming off a .294 EQA season and probably entering his decline phase. Loney is going to be 23 in May, and is coming off a .299 EQA partial-season in his MLB debut. Despite my skepticism that Richie is as bad defensively as suggested here, he isn’t going to get any kind of boost from defense to offset the fact that anybody who is looking will realize that Loney is a better bet to out-produce Sexson over the two remaining years of Sexson’s contract (not to mention the four years beyond that you’d control him for sub-market-money, and even for 4-6 years after that). I would probably pay almost ALL of Richie’s contract in a trade for Loney straight up just to get him to come here for the next six years cheap and play DH. But you know what? If I were the Dodgers’ FO and the M’s said “we’ll pay $10M of Richie’s $14M next year and $8M the next for Loney straight-up” I’d still decline. Loney’s future value at pre-arb and arb-elig prices, even if you completely discount it over the next couple of years and completey overvalue Richie, is just far too great to even consider it.
Dave,
I’m familiar with runs created and equivalent average and (while they are valuable tools) I don’t think they measure homeruns adequately. A homerun is the the only outcome that leads to automatic runs on the board - everything thing else (2Bs,BBs,etc) can be erased with an inning ending pop up or a strikeout or what have you. A runner from first will usually, but not always, score from first on a double. A homerun ALWAYS puts 2 runs on the board with a runner on first.
I’m not saying that the HRs make Sexson a 50 runs above average offesive player as opposed to the 30 runs that you’ve suggested, but the truth seems to be somewhere in the middle.
I really think you’re devaluing Sexson’s on field value a little here. It isn’t easy replacing 35-40 HRs in Safeco.
Sexson’s 162 game average over his career is 93 runs, 38 HRs, and 119 RBI (876 OPS). J.D. Drew (although he is a tremendous player, a GREAT fit for Safeco, and a player I’d easily take over Sexson for his overall value) is at 102 runs 27 HRs, and 86 RBI (905 OPS).
If Sexson and Drew produced similar OPS’s at Safeco (and Drew could actually manage playing 160 games), Sexson would still make a bigger impact on the scoreboard. And that is SOLELY due to the difference in homerun output.
As Earl Weaver once said, “A Homerun is the greatest play in baseball.”
Not to mention that it isn’t definitive as to whether Sexson is a -2 runs defensive player or a -10 runs defensive player. You could be right that hes terrible (personally don’t think hes that bad), but we don’t know for sure. More likely, once again, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
The issue isn’t as black and white as it seems on the cover.
I’m familiar with runs created and equivalent average and (while they are valuable tools) I don’t think they measure homeruns adequately. A homerun is the the only outcome that leads to automatic runs on the board - everything thing else (2Bs,BBs,etc) can be erased with an inning ending pop up or a strikeout or what have you. A runner from first will usually, but not always, score from first on a double. A homerun ALWAYS puts 2 runs on the board with a runner on first.
Being familiar with them isn’t the same as understanding how accurate they are. Read the following articles sometime, though they’re not light reading, so you might not want to do it all at once:
http://www.tangotiger.net/runscreated.html
http://www.tangotiger.net/rc2.html
http://www.tangotiger.net/rc3.html
http://www.tangotiger.net/bsrexpl.html
http://www.tangotiger.net/lwbymob.htm
Also, this blog post has what Tango calls “the perfect run modeler”.
If you want to look at how these things work, then present an actual criticism of the formula, feel free. I’m sure Tango would love to see it.
Or, you could save yourself the time and just believe me - you’re wrong.
More likely, once again, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
It’s not being balanced to take a number that has actual evidence behind it, regress it towards your opinion that has no foundation in any kind of factual basis, and call that “the truth in the middle”.
As always, feel free to present evidence for your case or some reason why we should take your opinion as an actual data point against the information we have. But I feel like I’ve had this argument with you before. You argue against every statistic that doesn’t fit your preordained view of how baseball works and yet you never present any evidence that your case is right.
Facts are against you. Claiming the facts are wrong, without presenting any of your own, isn’t finding truth.
Actually, on Sexson, it pretty much is. Personally, if I could wave a magic wand and make Dave’s proposed Sexson and (Manny) Ramirez deals happen, I would with no second thought. Then I’d sign Catalanotto on top of it, if I could manage it (bench depth! what a concept!).
Clearly, defensive metrics have improved and clearly there are players at the extremes who the metrics have pegged (Cantu, Dunn, Giambi, Konerko), but what can we really say about the rest? Yes, there’s broad agreement that Sexson isn’t a good defender, and yes, his contract is terrible, but I’m still not comfortable with the volatility in these metrics.
For some, including Sexson, there’s less volatility than others, but when 2000-2003 Jim Edmonds ranked poorly and now, hobbled by injuries, he’s above average, I think something’s weird. When the best metrics put Yuniesky Betancourt at a run or two *worse* than Sexson, I think something’s weirder. This isn’t to say there isn’t value in the metrics, and it’s not to say that more data might improve the picture on Betancourt (I know you’ve mentioned this a few times), but there seems to be a whole more movement than there should be. To take Richie’s possible replacement, what can we say about Ben Broussard? Seems like many of the metrics had him as a substantially above average 1B, but he now seems to be a clone of Sexson. Is he good/bad/average? Is Chris Shelton really the Adam Everett of first basemen? Why *did* Derek Jeter suddenly shoot up the SS rankings this year (or at least not suck as much)?
Finally, if -2 isn’t reasonably within the confidence interval for Sexson, what is? You’ve mentioned -5 to -10; that seems like a fairly tight range. Is there a general rule you use to get an upper and lower bound, or is it way too idiosyncratic to have a general rule?
Dave wrote:
“Come on Pete, you know me better than that.
Yeah, but most everybody else here doesn’t. Go read what I wrote, and how you responded (both of ‘em) and tell me that they weren’t pretty dismissive and unresponsive, not to mention that you lumped me in with a group I wasn’t identifying myself with. I probably didn’t make my point in the most coherent way, but (like your conclusion in this post), your response was far too certain, perhaps in the interest of brevity. Anyway, don’t worry, I’ll get over it.
“Well, for one thing, I don’t see -2 as a defensible projection.”
Fine, whatever (though others - even some smart guys - may, and you come across as perhaps overly sure of yourself if you don’t at least acknowledge that). The exact number is not that important. The point is that concluding with a range is a lot more intellectually honest, and consistent with what you said earlier within your own piece, and IMHO makes for a stronger argument, especially when you can make the argument that it’s a good idea to trade Sexson no matter where within the range he falls. That’s all. Freakin’ minor point that I’ve wasted three posts on, and it probably wasn’t even worth the first.
Can I ask an entirely mechanical question about the cost per win calculation?
I see that the Ms owe Richie $28 million over his remaining contract and $14 million next year. I understand the +20 runs next year conclusion.
What are the steps from those facts to $7 million per win? There is some constant or conclusion I can’t glark.
Clearly, defensive metrics have improved and clearly there are players at the extremes who the metrics have pegged (Cantu, Dunn, Giambi, Konerko), but what can we really say about the rest? Yes, there’s broad agreement that Sexson isn’t a good defender, and yes, his contract is terrible, but I’m still not comfortable with the volatility in these metrics.
The problems with the data are generally tied to one of a couple of issues:
1. Sample size, also known as the Betancourt problem.
2. Teammate influence, also known as ballhogging, where one guy takes all the easy catches and inflates his own rating while driving down his teammates. This has been observed almost exclusively in the outfield. There’s no reason to think that Jose Lopez (who isn’t exactly Bill Mazeroski) is driving down Richie Sexson’s rating.
3. Park effects that we don’t understand. If you can come up with why Safeco might be hurting Sexson in a way it didn’t hurt John Olerud, I’m all ears. I do think there is a Safeco park effect that makes the data for Mariner outfielders less accurate than we’d like it to be, but I can’t figure out how this would apply to Sexson.
4. Subjectivity and scorer bias in determining whether a ball was a GB, LD, FB, or what zone/vector it was hit into. Depending on who you talk to, this is or isn’t a big deal. I think it potentially could be in some circumstances, but we’d be able to identify it in most cases. A few years ago, BIS clearly changed the way they were scoring LD/FBs, where there was a drastic change in the total number of each across the league, and the folks doing the evaluations were able to adjust for this information (or discount it, if they preferred).
But none of these issues apply to Sexson. There isn’t a disagreement across the different systems. We don’t have a sample size or park effect issue. The results don’t run contrary to subjective scouting data. Sexson’s skillset does put him in a category of terrible defensive players.
Basically, there’s no reason to think that the -5 to -10 rankings are incorrect. The issues the defensive systems have don’t apply in this case.
I’m not ignoring the flaws in defensive metrics to argue my case. My case exists because I’ve studied this issue and have become convinced that the flaws aren’t relevant here.
Richie’s a terrible defensive first baseman. There’s no real way around that.
What are the steps from those facts to $7 million per win? There is some constant or conclusion I can’t glark.
Its generally accepted than 9 to 10 runs equals one win. So, a +20 run player is a +2 win player. $14 million divided by 2 wins = $7 million per win.
How/who determines how much $$ per win? Is it add up total player salary for the league for a year and divide it by total wins for the league every year? I sort of remember reading here that it was $2 mil per win. Thanks,
58 - Thanks Dave, that’s what I didn’t understand.
How/who determines how much $$ per win? Is it add up total player salary for the league for a year and divide it by total wins for the league every year? I sort of remember reading here that it was $2 mil per win.
I think various people have used different methods, but usually everyone comes out to around $2-$2.5M per win. So if you’re spending $14M all in one place, you want it to be on something special.
I think various people have used different methods, but usually everyone comes out to around $2-$2.5M per win. So if you’re spending $14M all in one place, you want it to be on something special.
There are a few issues with the $2.5 million figure, however.
1. It includes pre-arb players, who are vastly underpaid due to a complete lack of leverage.
2. Each team has a different payroll, so each team can afford a different dollar per win figure. New York can spend $5 million per win and be fine.
3. MLB clubs are becoming more profitable, so they have more revenue to spend on players. After this offseason, I’d imagine the league-wide marginal win/dollar rate will be closer to $3 million.
4. Wins aren’t equally valuable. Eight one win players aren’t worth one eight win player. The average of all wins across all players are probably worth between $2.5 million to $3 million, but Carlos Beltran’s 7th win is worth a lot more than Richie Sexson’s 2nd win. So you have to pay exponentially for wins in a player, not linearly.
That said, Mat’s conclusion is still right - you don’t drop $14 million on a two win player.
Dave,
You would be better off not assuming that we have near perfect measurements on players; it can limit the analysis. You’ve managed to peg 38 HRs and 120 RBI in Safeco all the way down to $6-7 million despite the current inflated market. Maybe its just me, but thats a tough sell.
I agree that Richie may be overpaid (to what extent is up for debate), but there are certain scenarios in which an overpay makes sense. Maybe this is one of those scenarios, maybe not. Much of it depends largely on what the M’s are able to accomplish this offseason and whether or not they’ll be able to acquire his offensive replacement through FA or trade.
In any case, thanks for the links. I’ll get back to you on that later.
Just curious Dave.
Roughly how many wins is a DH with a .310 EqA worth?
You’ve managed to peg 38 HRs and 120 RBI in Safeco all the way down to $6-7 million despite the current inflated market. Maybe its just me, but thats a tough sell.
#63: I think its been stated pretty clearly that Sexson is worth roughly 2 wins over a replacement level firstbaseman when BOTH his offensive and defense is considered… He’s due $14 million in ‘07 so those 2 wins are roughly 7 mill per (replacement level talent is *freely available at league minimum)… It doesn’t matter what the market is in this context…. $7M is a neutral estimate….
You’ve completely ignored the defensive side of things by quoting Ritchie’s Safeco splits as an M… If Richie was just league average defensively, his contract wouldn’t be so unpalatable..
You would be better off not assuming that we have near perfect measurements on players.
A measurement doesn’t have to be perfect to be the one to use - it just has to be the most accurate anyone has at the moment. If you’re using the most accurate forecasting system of anyone alive, and it only projects correctly 70% of the time, you’re still better off using it than discarding it as flawed because of its 30% error rate. Why?
Because no one else that you’re competing with can do better than 70%, if it really is the most accurate anyone has.
The measures we have aren’t perfect - I’m not claiming they are. But they’re a hell of a lot better than home runs and runs batted in.
You’ve managed to peg 38 HRs and 120 RBI in Safeco all the way down to $6-7 million despite the current inflated market. Maybe its just me, but thats a tough sell.
So look at the total package, then. Below average contact, average walkrate for a first baseman, way below average defense, and below average baserunning. Literally the only thing Richie Sexson brings to the table is the ability to hit the ball a really long ways. It’s a testament to just how valuable that skill is that he’s a +2 win player despite being bad at every other aspect of baseball.
#65
Right, but it is debatable as to how much of a liability he is defensively. And nothing is stopping you from DHing him.
It may not sound like it, but I am very much FOR trading Sexson and signing Drew (5 and $13mil per or whatever) if the M’s can get that done; I just think Dave is undervaluing Sexson a bit. He isn’t a $6-7mil player, most certainly not in this market, and he is an important piece (on a short term deal) if our other options fall through.
If Sexson stays it probably means we couldn’t find a way to replace his offense through FA or trades (despite the heavy price tag).
So you mentioned Catalanatto earlier. I’ve heard plenty about Drew and Delluci but haven’t heard much about Catalanatto. He looks to be average to slightly above average. What are your thoughts about him at LF if Sexson is traded and Ibanez goes to DH while Ben goes to 1B. I don’t know how much he’d cost but he looks to be a better value than some of the other players out there.
Also, is Reed dead to you now? He hasn’t shown much to me but for some reason I don’t want to give up on him yet. If we wanted to fill that LF position, would it be acceptable to fill it with Reed for the first half and the Jones in the 2nd half of the season?
Agreed Dave,
Very little value asides from the long ball. But he gives you 38 a year despite Safeco and the 120 ribbies that come along with it. I definetly look at EqA before I’d look at HR and RBI, but those RBIs change the scoreboard. Its where most of Sexson’s value is, so it is important to the discussion.
I’m not saying Sexson isn’t overpaid (he sure is), but theres no rush to trade him in this market until you’ve found a replacement.
Roughly how many wins is a DH with a .310 EqA worth?
Well, it depends on a few things. Besides the player specific factors like how many plate appearances he gets, there’s a disagreement over how to calculate replacement level for a DH. I don’t agree with the way BP does it.
BP’s BRAR and VORP will calculate runs above replacement against the actual crop of designated hitters in the game currently. However, because of how team’s end up with DH’s (often using it as a spot for an injured guy or an older player who can’t field anymore), doing it that way selectively samples out all-star caliber players who are still good enough to play the field.
In my opinion, the correct pool of players to use when determining replacement level for a DH is every offensive player on the planet. Because it takes no skill whatsoever, everyone in MLB is capable of being the designated hitter. There’s no reason to eliminate guys like Albert Pujols and Carlos Beltran from the sample simply because they also have the ability to be terrific defensive players.
In my opinion, replacement level for DH absolutely has to be the highest of any position in baseball. But if you use the standard 15% below average of actual players as we would for a defensive position, you come out with a replacement level baseline lower than first base and left field. That’s stupid - clearly every left fielder and first baseman could DH if their teams asked them too.
So I’d peg replacement level for a DH at about 85 to 90 runs over 160 game season - a little bit higher than replacement level for first base. Therefore, a .310 EqA that creates about 110 to 115 runs would be about 25-30 runs above replacement.
A .310 EqA is an awfully optimistic projection for Richie Sexson, though, considering it would be a career high for him (excluding 2000, when he played 57 games and had a .313 EqA).
Very little value asides from the long ball. But he gives you 38 a year despite Safeco and the 120 ribbies that come along with it. I definetly look at EqA before I’d look at HR and RBI, but those RBIs change the scoreboard. Its where most of Sexson’s value is, so it is important to the discussion.
It doesn’t add anything to the discussion, though, because those home runs are already being counted for him by better advanced metrics. Whether you want to use RC, VORP, BaseRuns, wOBA, or Linear Weights, it doesn’t really matter - it reflects the value of Richie’s long balls. There’s not some anti-power hitter bias in these metrics.
I’m not saying Sexson isn’t overpaid (he sure is), but theres no rush to trade him in this market until you’ve found a replacement.
Finding a big oaf who can hit and not field is the easiest thing to do in baseball. Just close your eyes and point.
I know it’s way more fun to discuss what the M’s *should* do than what they *will* do, but does anyone seriously believe Bavasi is even considering dumping Sexson’s contract? For a number of reasons (fan perception, poor talent evaluation, etc.), there’s just no way this is going to happen. I like this thread, and I think it helps to have this conversation, but DAMN it’s frustrating to know it’s all in the abstract.
I’m no Bill Bavasi fan, but I don’t think he’s as unwitting or hamstrung as many here seem to think. I would think the irrefutable logic of moving past Sexson has occurred to him, and I think it’s entirely possible he’s quietly examining any number of possible trade scenarios for maximum-return potential.
Richie isn’t such a fan favorite that ownership would be dead-set against moving gim in the way they would somebody like Raul Ibanez. Nor is the team without credible internal options to Sexson. The team knew when it was time to let go of Jamie Moyer, after all, who still had a lot of value to the Mariners in Safeco Field at the time.
I think there’s an excellent chance Richie gets traded in the next few months.
I’m no Bill Bavasi fan, but I don’t think he’s as unwitting or hamstrung as many here seem to think. I would think the irrefutable logic of moving past Sexson has occurred to him, and I think it’s entirely possible he’s quietly examining any number of possible trade scenarios for maximum-return potential.
Well, it’s that return that’s important (and ignored by too many fans–it takes two to tango on these things)…
Seattle Mariners GM Bill Bavasi should attempt to trade first baseman Richie Sexson to the New York Yankees for left fielder Melky Cabrera.
It’d be a win-win trade for both the M’s and the Yankees.
Definetly felt that $6-7mil is too low for a player that is liable to put up a 900 OPS and close to 40 HRs in Safeco while playing average to below average defense at first so I’ve asked SABRMatt from MLBcenter.com to put in his 2 cents.
Here is SABRMatt’s [creator of DNRA for those of you unfamiliar with him :)] analysis using PCA. Here you go:
PCA’s analysis of Sexson (through the 2005 season):
Yr PA Wins PCA-BA
1997 11 -0.2 0.118
1998 183 1.9 0.295
1999 525 2.18 0.257
2000 251 3.74 0.323
2000 356 1.23 0.252
2001 667 6.32 0.289
2002 652 6.58 0.293
2003 718 7.94 0.299
2004 104 1.17 0.301
2005 656 7.04 0.313
A word of explanation of PCA-BA…because PCA is normalized (performance in terms of win created rates per plate appearance is fit to a standard normal distribution with means and standard deviations equal for every league/year) I am able to obtain Z-scores for any win-created rate and then compare it to the batting average that has the equivalent Z-score on the all time batting average distribution for player seasons with at least 400 plate appearances. That’s what PCA-BA is…it’s placing the player’s offensive production on the batting average scale, much like EqA except the REAL batting average scale, not one made up by BP that looks appealing to the inventor. Average is .270 (the all time average for player seasons with at least 400 PA), and one standard deviation is .033 (.303 is the 83rd percentile…a Z-score of 1). Aside from 2006, Sexson has been steadily improving with time. 2006 was an anomaly IMHO and I would expect a return to .300+ PCA-BA offense from him ITF.
How much do you pay players who get you 7 WARP on offense alone?
Defensively, PCA sees Sexson is rock solid steady…though perhaps in a bit of a downward trend as would be expected at this age.
Ps Yr EqG Wins PCA-BA
1B 1997 1 0 0.196
1B 1998 38 0.5 0.29
1B 1999 58 0.89 0.305
1B 2000 57 0.2 0.231
1B 2000 25 0.24 0.269
1B 2001 156 1.55 0.271
1B 2002 151 2.17 0.299
1B 2003 162 2.16 0.292
1B 2004 24 0.29 0.286
1B 2005 162 1.82 0.277
Another explanatory word. EqG is the PCA defensive playing time measure. I find it by taking the games played by a team and multiplying it by the ratio between the player’s defensive claim shares and the claim shares of his defensive position. For first base, a claim share involves estimating the number of unassisted putouts made by the first base position on a team in much the same way Bill James estimates it, counting the first base assists not flipped to the pitcher (as much as possible) and subtracting out the errors while adding an estimate for the number of baserunners gunned down by the first baseman at other bases.
In any event, the defensive metrics work fairly well IMHO…the more player cards I look at, the more I am convinced normalized PCA does about as well as any fielding measure can do using only the data available in the baseball-databank…and it shows Sewxson as above average but unspectacular in his career…and tailing down toward average as he ages…which is not abnormal.
BTW…I don’t recommend trying Sexson in LF…his career defensive PCA-BA at any outfield position (all of which was garnered when he was a young man and much more spry) is .235. Ew. I’d hate to think what he’d do now.
Let’s look here…The players who in 2004 produced about as many wins as Sexson will produce in his typical season…and about how much they made (this is minus 2 years of inflation).
Derek Lee - 6.17 M (and he was really just coming into his own)
Jimmy Rollins - 2.43 M (but the next year he signed a 5 year 40 M dollar deal)
Steve Finley - 7 M
Jim Thome - 17 M
Juan Pierre - 2.4 M (but he was not consistently this effective)
Jason Kendall - 8.6 M (perhaps not as bad a contract as many think…although it is becoming bad now because he’s rapidly losing his hitting ability)
Mike Cameron - 7 M
In 2004, a player worth about what Sexson is worth to a team made (normally) about 8 Million dollars on average or soon after this season concluded. The ones who happened to make those 9 wins happen by hitting longballs earned more…the ones were gold gloves or could run or whatever made less. That was 2004. After establishing that performance level two years later, Johnny Damon (another comp) made 13 million, Jim Thome’s 17 M was heralded as a great deal for the Chisox (granted…they didn’t pay for all of it), Paul Konerko is make 11-12 M, Rollins makes 8 M…etc. The point is…once you establish a Sexson-esque line and account for inflation of salaries, 13-14 M might be a little on the high side, but 6-7 M is definitely way too low an estimate.
Given what he just hit this year…a down year by his standards…I can see how it would be tough to consider him an 8-9 win player (6-7 on offense)…and if you believe he will continue to hit like ‘06…then you would predict more like 5 W on offense and 6.5-7 W total…in which case 13-14 M is too much and I can understand the beef. I don’t buy that he’s going to continue hitting like ‘06.
In conclusion, (SABRMATT uses WARP but it is irrelevant to the core analysis) Sexson is more like an $8-10mil player in real value, which is probably around $10-13mil in the current inflated market.
Hes still slightly overpaid (albeit on a short 2year contract), but it does sound more close to his actual value.
Also interesting that there is a bias towards homerun hitters even in a study as small as this. If you have two players of similar value, GMs want the player that hits HRs.
HRs are ‘automatic’ runs, all other types of non-out outcomes are ‘theoretical’ runs, if you get my drift… This is probably why there is a small disconnect between GMs and sabermetricians.
SABRMatt is wrong. Any formula that concludes that Richie Sexson is a 6 win player should be thrown out on its face for not passing the smell test. I’ll stick with every other established, reviewed, and proven system in the world that shows that is just incorrect.
Dave, when you come out calling Sexson a $6-7mil player you have to make a more convincing argument than “You are wrong”. I have a real tough time getting my head around the idea that a 900 OPS and 38 HRs in Safeco is only worth $6-7 regardless of position or non gg defense. If thats the case give me three of ‘em and I’ll win a pennant.
SABRMatt uses a lower baseline for replacement level, but it is irrelevant to his conclusion, which is based on what GMs actually paid (around 8-9mil) for that type of performance (and this is before inflation).
My case is spelled out above. It’s reaffirmed by guys like Mitchel Lichtman and Tom Tango, who actually gets paid to do this stuff for a living by major league clubs.
If you or SABRMatt want to try to explain to me why his ridiculously low level of replacement level is actually correct, feel free. But there’s no way you can expect anyone to just take his word for it. For Sexson’s offensive value to be worth 6 or 7 wins, you’re talking sixty runs. Sixty runs. That’s… massive. And it’s not real.
Dave, please list some examples of replacement level players.
I understand. Replacement level is set a lot lower (thats a different topic) buts its irrelevant to the current discussion.
Speaking of Tom Tango, I’m pretty sure he is familiar with SABRMatt (if I recall right, both of them help each other out at MLBcenter.com). Both are tremendous sabermetricians. Both are also capable of being (understandably) overly-excited about their discoveries.
If Sexson went on the market at $6-8, I gaurantee you that nearly every team in baseball would jump at the oppurtunity to sign him at that price. Well…maybe not the Marlins.
Even at $8-10mil, thats a pretty nice bargain in this market.
The current (fair) market value for Sexson is probably somewhere around $10-12mil right now. Yes, hes overpaid. But hes also a cleanup bat on a short two year deal. There shouldn’t be an urgency to trade his contract away until we have a adequate replacement in hand.
I understand. Replacement level is set a lot lower (thats a different topic) buts its irrelevant to the current discussion.
I don’t understand how the whole concept of replacement level can be irrelevant to the discussion of a player’s value. If I created a system that set replacement level for a first baseman at .350/.400/.600 and claimed Sexson was a Triple-A player because he was below replacement level, clearly the fact that my replacement level was too high would be relevant. This is just the opposite of that.
Speaking of Tom Tango, I’m pretty sure he is familiar with SABRMatt (if I recall right, both of them help each other out at MLBcenter.com). Both are tremendous sabermetricians. Both are also capable of being (understandably) overly-excited about their discoveries.
Matt very well may be a tremendous sabermetrician. I don’t know, because there’s nothing in the explanation of his formula that gives us any insight into whether its groundbreaking or bunk. The results strongly lean towards bunk, however.
If Sexson went on the market at $6-8, I gaurantee you that nearly every team in baseball would jump at the oppurtunity to sign him at that price. Well…maybe not the Marlins.
Even at $8-10mil, thats a pretty nice bargain in this market.
The fact that major league GMs overvalue first baseman doesn’t make Richie Sexson more valuable. The same goes with Carlos Lee - he’s going to get rich because MLB overestimates the value of his skillset, not because he’s a great player.
The current (fair) market value for Sexson is probably somewhere around $10-12mil right now. Yes, hes overpaid. But hes also a cleanup bat on a short two year deal. There shouldn’t be an urgency to trade his contract away until we have a adequate replacement in hand.
If you want to define fair market value as what GMs are willing to pay, sure. But that’s not what we’re talking about here. His actual value, produced by the results he creates on the diamond, is closer $6 to $7 million. He’s a two win first baseman, and those just aren’t very hard to find.
Dave, please list some examples of replacement level players.
At first base? Chris Shelton, Craig Wilson, Mike Lamb, Doug Mientkiwicz, Sean Casey, Xavier Nady, Shea Hillenbrand, and Travis Lee.
These guys are the established major league players that you guys will have heard of that are pretty close to replacement level. They might be five runs better than replacement, but you get the general idea. That’s the level of production you can expect from a replacement level first baseman.
At the minor league level, there are a ton of these types of players. Kevin Witt, Carlos Pena, Josh Phelps, Ryan Ludwick, Michael Restovich, Paul McAnulty, Justin Huber, Jack Cust, Jon Knott, etc…
Finding a 1B/DH type who can hit .250/.330/.450 in the majors is the easiest thing in the world to do. Guys like Marcus Thames are literally just waiting for someone to give them at-bats.
Market value is what matters here, since thats what Bavasi is going to have to deal with in reality. You can define what you believe Sexson to be worth all you want, but market inflation is what baseball GMs need take into consideration as well.
Still, I’m interested in your definition of replacement level. What is a replacement level first baseman? How would a replacement level first baseman perform in Safeco. Do you have a list of freely available players that could duplicate this performance?
This is a new topic, but its an interesting one to discuss.
Market value is what matters here, since thats what Bavasi is going to have to deal with in reality. You can define what you believe Sexson to be worth all you want, but market inflation is what baseball GMs need take into consideration as well.
Sexson’s market value doesn’t matter since he’s already under contract. The only values attached to Richie Sexson that matter to the Mariners now are his production value (2 wins, about $6-7 million per year) and his trade value (which we can’t really know). His trade value and his “fair market value” might be similar, so if we wanted to calculate what we think he’d get as a free agent, it might give us an idea of what teams would offer for him in trade. But that’s all total speculation, and generally isn’t anywhere close to reality.
Still, I’m interested in your definition of replacement level. What is a replacement level first baseman? How would a replacement level first baseman perform in Safeco. Do you have a list of freely available players that could duplicate this performance?
I posted #85 right before you hit send, so I’ll just say see above, and add that again, I consider a replacement level first baseman to be approximately 10-15% below average. Among the 21 first baseman who qualified for the batting title and using the THT Runs Created formula (originally a Bill James creation), the average runs created was 101 and the mean was 102. Of course, counting only the 21 guys who counted for the batting title eliminates the truly bad first baseman, so the real average is closer to 90 runs created.
85 percent of 90 runs created is 76.5 runs. Richie Sexson, in 2006, created 97 runs. +20 runs is not +6 wins. The first baseman whose offense could be said to be +6 wins in 2006, using RC and not factoring in baserunning, would be Ryan Howard, Lance Berkman, and Albert Pujols. Justin Morneau would come in around +5 wins offensively.
This is why that +6 win figure just blows my mind. For SABRMatt to believe that to be true, he’d have to put replacement level for a first baseman around 40 runs. 40 runs created over 160 games… not even Neifi Perez is that bad.
#86: replacement level is NOT a new topic….its been central to the whole point of the thread…. By the way, for Sexson to be valued at 60-70 runs over replacement, replacement level would have to be set around or below the production you’d expect from a pitcher. If you doubt Sexson’s run creating ability is replaceable, consider the Reds platoon of Hatteberg/Aurilia at firstbase last season (those two would be considered the poster boys for replacement by most saberheads). When considering ONLY their at bats while playing first, the two combined for 114 RC. Most defensive metrics suggest the two are league average defenders or slightly below so i’ll ding them about 4 defensive runs though admittedly this is rough justice. Just for the sake of argument lets assume replacement level for firstbase is 70 RC (like Dave suggests). That means the Reds paid a tad over $2M for 40 runs above replacement or about 4 wins. Using SABRMatt’s definition, well, then we’re talking about 10 wins!!!!!!!!
I see this as pretty straightforward. Market value is not what matters here. Rather, gaining a competitive edge through intelligent roster formulation is what should concern Bavasi. Paying $7M per win is a lousy return on investment. I don’t care if other teams are willing to do it. Payroll could be used more effectively if that $14M was spent in other ways. If Sexson’s market value truly is $10-12M then from my vantage point, Bavasi should be fired if he fails to trade Sexson because not only would he gain payroll flexibility but he also should be able to get useful talent in return….
A point of clarification….when I said this (in #88) “if you doubt Sexson’s run creating ability is replaceable” I was meaning, “if you doubt the Ms could find ways to compensate for the loss of Sexson’s run creating ability from the lineup….”
Morning cofee is a good thing
Sexson, from 2002-2006, is about +2.5 wins above the average league hitter per 150 games, meaning +1.5 win above the average 1B.
According to the Fielding Bible, for 2004-2006, Sexson ranks 31st among 1B out of 36, but he was 10th for 2006. If we were to believe Fans, they see Sexson as a step below the league average 1B. Let’s call him -0.5 wins as a fielder, relative to the average 1B.
So, Sexson would be +1.0 wins above the average 1B. Each win is worth anywhere from 2 million per win to 4 million per win, depending if you look at it from the true open market, to the current MLBPA-imposed limited supply and excess demand. So, he’s worth 2 to 4 million$ more than the average 1B.
The average starting B should be 5 million$, but is likely in this market more like 6 or 7 million$.
Giving him all the possible breaks, treating 2002-2006 as his forecast going forward, with no decline from aging, 11 million$ is the most you can argue for him. In reality, he’s probably worth 7 million$.
***
As for the “guaranteed run” of the HR: yes, it’s true. And, it’s built-in to BaseRuns and the Perfect Run Modeler. The only way to work is to weight every event a certain amount. From 1999-2002, the win value of the HR was +.123 wins. And, as has been shown many many times by me, the run value of the HR is fairly constant at +1.40 runs, regardless of run environment. That’s reality.
If you want to argue that GMs overweight HR, so that instead of +.123 wins, they give it +.160 wins, fine. That doesn’t mean you have to overweight it too.
Ok. So let me get this straight. We have two heavy weights in the statistical community basically agreeing with one another with proven statistical formulas. Both have essentially said that Sexson is essentially a 2 win player. Both have illustrated that his defense at first is below average (despite a decent 2006). Both have indicated that he is overpaid.
Yet, I still can’t believe it. I mean, there’s a guy on another site with some formula that no one has ever heard of advocating keeping him around because his formula pegs him as an 8+ win player and because can hit HR’s in Safeco and that makes his contract valuable. I mean, all the other proven formula’s that are used by the statistical community and even employed by some ML teams indicate that he’s about a 2-2.5 win player but they can’t be right. And I also believe no one else could hit homeruns in Safeco like Richie can. Only Richie can do that and that’s why we pay him $14 million. Because he’s the only 1B (and RH bat) in all of baseball who can hit a HR in Safeco because this guy said so.
Oh, and he also thinks bringing back Gil Meche at $8-9 million for 3 years is a smart decision. He knows what he is talking about.
All I have to say to Dave is AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is about time more people were on this wagon.
To some that think he is not too bad at 1st as a defender, there are plenty of eye doctors doing lasik procedures now days. That should help a little. A freaking tree could defend first better than Sexson. Period.
I have 177 USSM readers who told me that he was a somewhat below average fielder:
http://www.tangotiger.net/scouting/pos2006_1B.html
It really doesn’t matter what I, Dave, or someone else’s single opinion says. A group of 177 hardcore Mariner fans will trump any single one person, unless that person is a pro scout who is focused on watching Richie Sexson make a few hundred plays.
***
As for the park factor for HR at Safeco: according to the 2007 BJ Handbook, there were 487 HR hit in Safeco, and 525 hit on the road when the Mariners were played. The PF was a “93″ (i.e., 7% less HR in Safeco than other parks). And the HR-PF for LHB? 93. RHB? 93.
If you believe the basic premise that 177 untrained people, even hardcore M’s fans, can collectively do a good job of defensive evaluation, based on seeing one player all the time and every other player at that position maybe sixteen times a year, sure.
But go survey 200 people about how many meters in an Angstrom, the result’s going to be wrong even if it’s consistent or clustered or anything.
I was referring to opinions, not facts.
Even “the audience” would be wrong sometimes on “Who Wants to be a Millionaire”.
And, just to be argumentative and irrelevant to my point, I think 200 college chemistry or physics students would give us an answer that is clustered near the truth, and 200 political science students can tell me who was the x-th president of the US.
Are we the only two people with the RSS comment feed?
Here’s the problem with that, though - you’re surveying 200 college chemistry students who every day have bad information drilled into them. One of the things fan surveys unintentionally reflect is the opinions of the broadcasting crews that cover the team. It’s like hearing that an angstrom is 1/10th of a meter every day, over and over, being shown slides that support that opinion (etc).
Maybe some of them manage to work past the bad information, but there’s a massive contamination problem and any survey is going to reflect as much the broadcast team’s beliefs as it does reality.
Dave, tango,
This seems like a case of undervaluing the value of an ‘average’ firstbaseman and possibly overrating the negative effect of Sexson’s defense.
If Richie Sexson were a free agent, which team do you think would pass on himn at $8mil a year (WHich according to the two of you is ‘above’ his market value)?
If 28 out of 30 teams would sign him at that price, don’t you think that you may have approached the question the wrong way?
This seems like a case of undervaluing the value of an ‘average’ firstbaseman and possibly overrating the negative effect of Sexson’s defense.
You consistently tell us we’re undervaluing Richie Sexson, yet you can’t tell us why. We can prove to you that you’re overvaluing Richie Sexson. You don’t care.
If Richie Sexson were a free agent, which team do you think would pass on himn at $8mil a year (WHich according to the two of you is ‘above’ his market value)?
St. Louis, Philadelphia, Minnesota, Chicago White Sox, Chicago Cubs, Texas, Washington, Colorado, Boston, San Diego, Toronto, Milwaukee, Atlanta, Cincinnati, Arizona, Florida, Los Angeles Dodgers, Tampa Bay, Kansas City, Cleveland, Oakland, and the New York Mets.
If 28 out of 30 teams would sign him at that price, don’t you think that you may have approached the question the wrong way?
No. And you’re looking at something like 8 teams, not 28 teams.
taro, if you were to make everyone a free agent, where do you think Richie Sexson would rank among 1B?
There are two arguments:
1 - Is Richie Sexson an average to +1.0 wins above average 1B, or is he a +3.0 to +4.0 wins above average 1B?
2 - How does the market pay for that kind of player?
So, answer the first question first. Go through the 30-40 regular 1B/DH, and tell me where Sexson ranks, and then let’s continue.
I’m sure there’s contamination, and that’s the case for any kind of survey that requires someone’s opinion.
The key is to construct the survey so that the responder focuses on components, rather than an overall assessment. Survey don’t ask you if you are a “Type A” personality, but rather ask you 30 or 50 questions, of which an overall assessment determines if you are Type A or not.
While I would have loved to ask 20 questions instead of 7 for each fielder, that wouldn’t be possible if I want the volunteer readers to participate.
Whether Sexson is truly below average for a 1B, who really knows. But the evidence, however tainted by both observers and the data, does show that. It’s up to the reader to determine whether to convict on that evidence. But, certainly, a single observer’s opinion is almost completely worthless, since I have no way of knowing if that observer was in a sensory deprivation chamber or not (unless that Mariner fan is Michael Jackson).
Hi there, first time poster. I’m an old businessman and Mariners fan, and really enjoy your site and exchange of ideas/opinions. I have a masters degree with a quant background, so I can follow some of the stat talk.
The following comment prompted me to comment:
“If you want to define fair market value as what GMs are willing to pay, sure. But that’s not what we’re talking about here. His actual value, produced by the results he creates on the diamond, is closer $6 to $7 million. He’s a two win first baseman, and those just aren’t very hard to find.”
In my opinion, this is an example of a common mistake that many of us quant types make too often — we allow stats (a very useful tool) to overcome reality. Bottom line, even though the stats may say otherwise, what GM’s are willing to pay is market value. You can respond to that by saying that the GM’s are nuts and that it will come back to bite them in the ass in the future, and that’s possible (Matsuzaka?). However, you can also watch the world pass you by on opportunities as you hold onto your statistical studies showing that they are all crazy to be bidding higher.
In this case, I suspect that we are guilty of the latter when it comes to Sexton’s “value”. Is he worth $12-14 MM? Probably not, but I suspect that he is “worth” more than the $6-7 MM that the pure stats supposedly tell us. I know that this statement has zero factual support, but with all the money being thrown around these days (look at the Meche situation!) it seems that Sexton could easily command $8-10 MM per year over the next couple of years in the open market. How many GM’s would bid more than $6-7 MM? I don’t know but I suspect that it would be more than one, and therefore arguing this point is moot.
So in summary, I say beware of over-reliance on stats when discussing values. In the investment world stats are a very useful tool but not a formula.
a) It’s Sexson
b) The “opportunities pass you buy” is frequently used during market bubbles, runs on tulips, Florida land schemes, and so forth. If you can reasonably show that the market is way out of whack, and it goes further out of whack, that’s not the time to jump in. You don’t want to be the last person to buy an overvalued anything, be it stock, pitcher, or bulb
I am a professional fund manager and am very familiar with market bubbles, having managed investments in cycles over more than two decades. The problem with bubbles is that with few exceptions (the tech bubble in the late 90’s for example) it is not easy to make the call.
If you are saying that the market for the current free agent signings and extensions are a bubble to be avoided at all costs, then I understand your point. In that case the Mariners should boldly take a pass on this market, with the view that prices will eventually fall and we will scoop up values on the downside. In the meantime, we are not players and the team will suffer accordingly. It’s a valid point and approach. In that case what would you do with Ichiro? I doubt that this bubble will “pop” in one short year.
You are right in saying that you don’t want to be the “last person to buy an overvalued anything”, but the trick is knowing when you are in that position. Easy to say, very very difficult to execute.
Bottom line, even though the stats may say otherwise, what GM’s are willing to pay is market value.
Fine. Let’s say Richie Sexson’s market value is $14 million a year. That still does