The case against Contreras

DMZ · August 18, 2007 at 3:37 pm · Filed Under Mariners 

In which I disagree with Dave’s argument that the M’s should take him even if they munch the whole salary.

The argument for Contreras is, is I may, essentially this: he’s moderately better than HoRam, the team needs him, and his contract is not that outrageous.

The first point, that Contreras would be better, is pretty much inarguable.

And I’d further argue that I entirely agree that at this point in the season, whatever helps them get into the playoffs is justified. The additional cost of his salary this year is negligible, and those remaining starts he picks up from HoRam could well be the difference.

My issue is essentially this — he’s in his mid-30s, and will be 36 and 37 in the next two years of his deal. His long-term outlook even before this year wasn’t that great: PECOTA’s five-year valuation, for instance, ran
Year VORP
2007 18.2
2008 13.2
2009 10.9

And that was based on him holding up a little better this season no less.

I’ll engage, in a way, in a logical fallacy here and appeal to authority, on several fronts:
– The White Sox chose to put him in the bullpen while Danks has been horrible for stretches this year
– In a year where several teams were hunting for pitching help (where Matt Morris moved!) no one took Contreras
– Contreras, as much as Dave’s now convinced that his contract would be easily movable at the end of the year, cleared waivers. No other major league team wanted to risk having the Sox give them Contreras with that contract. Not the dumb ones, but not even the smart ones. Not the ones with great pitching scouts who saw the same things we have.

I’ll also make the appeal to anti-authority. The M’s have shown repeatedly just this season (Davis, Parrish) that they aren’t any good at evaluating pitchers. If they trade for Contreras, we’re all hoping that for once, their crazed, ineffectual methods agree with Dave’s endorsement. That’s unsettling.

Moreover, I wonder how easy it really would be to move that deal at the end of the year. This seems a lot like the old fantasy lie (“I’ll throw in player x even though you don’t need him, and you can move him yourself- you’ll get a draft pick at least, right?”). If Contreras is good for the rest of the year, he becomes easy to move – but if that’s the case, how likely is it that he’s moved? Then the team’s paying $10m for a season with a 36-year old pitcher with declining stuff, and trying to move him for… for what? And if he sucks, the M’s end up eating a lot more salary if they want to move him.

For all the insanity over starters, who (besides the Mariners) would hand Contreras a two-year, $10m/year deal after this year?

On the other hand – and I don’t mean to argue for it here — given their recent track record, it’s likely if the M’s had $10m to spend, they’d only find some 36-year old starter to sign to a four-year deal. We might be better limiting the damage to two years.

And, again, you have to weigh that risk against the chance they miss the playoffs, 5th-starter upgrade or not. As much as it might be a huge PR boost for the team, the M’s are still neck-and-neck with two teams (Yankees and the gestalt Indians/Tigers) for the wild card and would have to catch the Angels for the AL West title. If they gamble and miss the playoffs, they’d have picked up that weighty contract on the chance that (again) this guy who cleared waivers, who no one else was willing to take on at that cost, is movable. And then the question becomes “how much salary do we have to eat to get him out of here?”

I don’t care about all of this: the M’s have tons of money to burn, and none of the salary stuff makes any difference in the team’s pursuit of a pennant this year, or the team on the field. But that’s the tradeoff we’re looking at: it’s a large gamble that Contreras gets the team to the promised land over the Yankees/Indians-Tigers, and they don’t have to eat too much money, against something we don’t know. I, as Geoff Baker’s argued on his blog, think the M’s have to have some backup plan: they’re going to throw some other pitcher into the rotation, use relievers L/R/L on one-inning stints, something. The trade is “Trade for Contreras and wager huge money” versus “M’s unknown option with unknown chance of working out”.

Baek’s not healthy and there don’t seem to be any other suitable internal options, but I don’t know that I’d give up on the unknown option that early: the M’s have had good success going to their player development guys and saying “who can we pluck out of the minors and bring up now?” I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Fontaine & Co. have a list of guys they think will be an upgrade over HoRam, and who wouldn’t expose the team to nearly as much risk. And at this point, given the track record of pitchers like O’Flaherty to stock the bullpen over the Davis/Parrish pickups, that option doesn’t seem so bad.

Comments

28 Responses to “The case against Contreras”

  1. terry on August 18th, 2007 3:47 pm

    Pecota has a lot to say about pitchers. Unfortunately, what it says isn’t as trustworthy as what it says about hitters. I’m leery of using Pecota and VORP (of all things) as anything more than anecdotal evidence at best to support an argument for or against a pitcher.

  2. Dave on August 18th, 2007 3:50 pm

    Yea, me too.

  3. JI on August 18th, 2007 4:02 pm

    PECOTA long term projections are less than worthless, too.

  4. lailaihei on August 18th, 2007 4:06 pm

    If it gives us a 2% better chance at getting to the playoffs, it might be worth it.

  5. gwangung on August 18th, 2007 4:07 pm

    Hey, cool….diametrically opposed viewpoints argued with strong, cogent arguments!

    Gee, you don’t see that around SoDo….

  6. Mr. Egaas on August 18th, 2007 4:15 pm

    To me it comes down to this. I see Contreras’ upside much higher than that of Ho Ram. You can’t really do much worse than what we’re getting out of Ho Ram right now. If it comes down to a marginal prospect or two, you pretty much have the take the chance.

  7. joser on August 18th, 2007 4:20 pm

    Well, I think you have to acknowledge there are only a handful of teams who are buyers at this point in the season, and how many of them need a starter more than the M’s? Sure, starting pitching is always in demand, but how many teams in the hunt for the playoffs have a 5th starter as bad as HoRam? How many teams have a fourth starter worse than Contreras? (Because for teams looking towards the short series that start the playoffs, that’s the only upgrade where taking on Conteras makes sense). Whether or not Conteras is unloadable after the season, he may have cleared waivers simply because no one else with a shot at the post-season is as desperate for starting pitching as the M’s. And clearing waivers shows that even the M’s didn’t think then they were as desperate as they now appear to be.

  8. DMZ on August 18th, 2007 4:21 pm

    Less than worthless? Really. Please.

  9. joser on August 18th, 2007 4:50 pm

    And, to reiterate something I said in the “pro-Conteras” post: what has happened to him that caused his flyball rate to soar the past 6-7 weeks? And is it fixable? Safeco might punish him less than US Cellular, but that appears to be the root of his problems and his value both now and in the offseason would appear to turn entirely on the answer to that question.

  10. terry on August 18th, 2007 5:23 pm

    Baek’s not healthy and there don’t seem to be any other suitable internal options, but I don’t know that I’d give up on the unknown option that early: the M’s have had good success going to their player development guys and saying “who can we pluck out of the minors and bring up now?” I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Fontaine & Co. have a list of guys they think will be an upgrade over HoRam, and who wouldn’t expose the team to nearly as much risk. And at this point, given the track record of pitchers like O’Flaherty to stock the bullpen over the Davis/Parrish pickups, that option doesn’t seem so bad.

    I’d suggest the bar for plugging in arms for the pen is substantially easier to overcome than the one for plugging in arms for the rotation. While the Ms have built a good pen largely from within, they don’t really have a similar track record with their rotation.

    And, to reiterate something I said in the “pro-Conteras” post: what has happened to him that caused his flyball rate to soar the past 6-7 weeks? And is it fixable? Safeco might punish him less than US Cellular, but that appears to be the root of his problems and his value both now and in the offseason would appear to turn entirely on the answer to that question.

    I understand where you’re coming from but basically Contreras went from having slight GB tendencies to basically being neutral in the splits you’re referencing. Basically that’s only roughly 200 TBF so it’s not impossible for the trend to be more randomness than a reflection of something in his mechanics or approach.

  11. Spanky on August 18th, 2007 5:26 pm

    I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Fontaine & Co. have a list of guys they think will be an upgrade over HoRam, and who wouldn’t expose the team to nearly as much risk.

    Derek…this seems a stretch in reasoning. Wouldn’t they have tried Plan X if they had one? I think all the alternatives (Baek, O’Flaherty, Feierabend) have been tested and failed. Unfortunately Plan Z seems to be Contreras.

    I’m not a big fan of picking up 2 years and $20 Million. This is why Vidro hurts so much. I wouldn’t care as much about picking up the money if we already hadn’t wasted $15 Million on a DH when we have one on the bench. But I digress…

    If they do the deal…Contreras get’s 8 starts? How much impact does he have in those games? 3 wins above HoRam? Does that get us over the hump? Mmmm…I say it’s not worth the risk and just play the hand we have and shoot for next year.

  12. Spanky on August 18th, 2007 5:29 pm

    Sorry…screwed up on the italics.

  13. DizzleChizzle on August 18th, 2007 5:34 pm

    I am already against trading for Contreras, but your argument/analysis makes it much more clearer why the M’s should stay away from him. Honestly if McLaren keeps making the same boneheaded decision I don’t think it’s going to matter who they pick up to replace Horam. Watching the Angels beat supposedly the best team in baseball in Boston is even more demoralizing. I think the difference is going to be who wins more games on the road between Anaheim and Seattle while maintaining their dominance at home. I’m wary that the M’s are headed towards another collapse (ie 7 game losing streak). In then end do we really want the M’s stuck with another aging pitcher with a ridiculous contract as DMZ has stated?

  14. DAMellen on August 18th, 2007 5:37 pm

    I’m pretty on the fence about this, but I tend to agree more with your argument, DMZ. Unfortunately, if saving money or preparing for the future was any kind of priority for the Ms, they would’ve let Sexson go when he got claimed off waivers so I’m pretty sure neither of those things will be factors in this decision. I don’t think any team should ever stop planning for the future no matter how in the pennant race they are. Maybe Sexson will bat .280 and hit 15 homers from here on out. Maybe not. I’m inclined to think he will heat up some, but it doesn’t matter. Freeing $15 million for next year by letting him go was too big an opportunity to pass up. I have so little faith in this front office.

  15. terry on August 18th, 2007 5:40 pm

    How much impact does he have in those games? 3 wins above HoRam? Does that get us over the hump? Mmmm…I say it’s not worth the risk and just play the hand we have and shoot for next year.

    At this point in the season if Bavasi failed to pull the trigger on a three win upgrade that essentially involved only taking on payroll risk, he should not only be fired but he should also be banished to the Florence Freedom.

  16. OppositeField on August 18th, 2007 5:50 pm

    I know this is TOTALLY unrelated, but [deleted, totally unrelated]

  17. Mere Tantalisers on August 18th, 2007 6:06 pm

    This will get me laughed off the site, but I actually quite like his contract. The Mariners have, at the end of the season, two rotation spots to fill as Ho Ram is dropped and Weaver returns to the NL (my guess). Two years at 10 mil is a lot better than many of the contracts out there (as Dave pointed out) and I think that if they are unable to find suitable starters for those two spots this winter I would much rather have Contreras and his ten million than send, say, Lowe away for another Ho Ram.

    In a sentence, I suppose I would be happy about his contract for the same reasons I was happy about Weaver’s – he’ll do, and it could be a lot worse. Yes, it’s two years not one, but then he’s got much better stuff.

    Finally, I don’t think he’s as done as you do, and not merely thanks to Dave’s thorough scouting report. While his K rates have been steadily dropping, so has his BB rate, and he’s still about league average with the Ks. His FIP, just under five, is nothing to brag about but not too shabby either. Finally, what I think has hurt him the most this season is exactly what made Washburn look so good his last year in LA. His BABIP is a staggering .340, despite a 19% LD rate. He has a 60% strand rate to go with that. Both of these factors, and his home park on top of it all, make him seem older than he truly is. So that’s my two cents

  18. Corey on August 18th, 2007 8:58 pm

    My analysis will not delve as deep as either Derek or Dave, but I cannot help but throwing up in my mouth w/t/r Contreras.

    This guy is garbage, and the fact that no other team has felt he was worth the risk reinforces my belief that the Dodgers with their obliterated rotation would be the best fit. Can any of you imagine losing Felix, Washburn and Batista all in one year, let alone retain their standing in the wild card?

    I know by saying what I’m about to say will get me vilified, but I can’t help but thinking that the pennant race at “all costs” argument is total crap. I don’t want another awful pitcher for 2+ years.

    How many people honestly felt that Batista would result in the pitcher we thought he would?

    Sigh, since the M’s have disappointed me on so many other poor FO decisions, I am bracing myself for reading that this retread is now our hope for the playoffs for 2007.

    How pathetic.

    /end rant.

    I mean, how old is this guy, really???

  19. flippy on August 18th, 2007 10:35 pm

    To quote DMZ:

    The first point, that Contreras would be better, [than HoRam] is pretty much inarguable

    A tee ball stand would be more effective than HoRam.

    The more I think about this the more I agree with this arguement. I still think that if you can get Chicago to pick up a good chunk of the salary, it’s worth it, if not, it’s not.

  20. Walrus on August 19th, 2007 12:09 am

    If I understand DMZ correctly, I believe he actually agrees with Dave if you can ignore the money. Thus, just as flippy and others are saying…come on Billy Boy, convince Chicago’s FO to kick in $5 mil or more and get Conteras!!!
    Please don’t make us suffer another Horam start.

  21. Colm on August 19th, 2007 6:42 am

    Yeah, I think Derek is suffering Percy Thrower syndrome.

    Percy Thrower was the gardening correspondent on the BBC Kids’ show Blue Peter when I was growing up. He always seemed to be pruning off fresh crisp buds and blossoms just as they started to color the garden on the grounds that it meant better growth next year.

    Contreras is hardly fresh or crisp but overlooking him on the grounds that things will be better without him next year doesn’t seem like a good enough reason to forego a crack at the playoffs.

    8 or 9 starts out of Contreras vs HoRam could be worth 2 or 3 wins (I’m just guessing, but I’m stunned when the M’s win any game HoRam starts) and that could easily be the difference.

  22. JI on August 19th, 2007 9:24 am

    Re: #8

    Maybe we’re thinking of different things. But the 5-yr projections on the player pages are basically the same line repeated 5 times over with variations for playing time.

    For example:

    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/pecota/pujolal01.php
    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/pecota/cabremi01.php
    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/pecota/rodrial01.php
    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/pecota/thomeji01.php
    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/pecota/jonesad01.php

  23. DMZ on August 19th, 2007 10:45 am

    No it isn’t. I don’t know where you got that. The five-year forecast is PECOTA using the same methods to push more than one year ahead.

    See this definition

    The Five-Year Forecast is a player’s weighted mean PECOTA forecast, taken over his next five seasons.
    The process for generating a player’s weighted mean line for a season some number of years into the future (e.g. 2008) is fundamentally identical to generating his forecast for the season immediately upcoming (e.g. 2006). The exception is that some players may have dropped out of the comparables database, in which case their performance cannot be considered.

  24. Tropics iRE on August 19th, 2007 11:55 am

    DMZ… You have made a great argument for not signing Contreras. Initially i was totally on-board for going after this guy, but after doing a little extra reading… i am not so sure anymore… evaluating talent, and making so called educated guesses as to the talents future performance can be a painful, and time consuming endeavor. Anyways… if it were up to me (thank goodness it’s not) i would still make an effort to get Contreras, but would definitely not break the bank. That being said i am sure that the F/O will definitely sign the guy even though the White Sox will most certainly not absorb any meaningful amount of his contract.

    I am starting to think we could just as successfully put some electric shock therapy tools on Ho Ram and just buzz him whenever he makes mistakes… at least that way we can have some fun watching him squirm when we buzz him 😉 (just kidding i would never do this during a game)

    (yes that was a lame attempt at a joke.. it will be better next time)

    -Ti

  25. Gomez on August 19th, 2007 6:14 pm

    The dissenting viewpoints inter-blog are refreshing, especially when both sides are clearly researched and outlined.

    Would we have our answer on what the M’s do by now, given the ChiSox series has concluded and both teams are now boarding jets to head out for their next series? Or does the possibility remain up in the air beyond this series?

  26. Tropics iRE on August 19th, 2007 8:20 pm

    after reading the article in the paper today about Santana wanting out of Minnesota… i say we focus on a guy like that. I hope my Contreras infatuation has passed.

    http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=stone19&date=20070819&query=santana

  27. Wishhiker on August 20th, 2007 4:15 am

    Are there guys like that that you’re hoping are available right now, because they’re not. To get Santana you’d have to trade away more than the M’s should be comfortable trading right now. The position the Twins are in makes it hard for them to trade away Santana, raising the price higher. To make it worthwhile (and see if this doesn’t sound contradictory) the M’s would want to lock him up long-term as a condition of the deal which would likely take 20M per year. Besides all that, Ryan would fleece Bavasi, don’t allow that conversation to take place.

    Where Santana plays in 2 years doesn’t help replace Ho-Ram since he’ll be long gone before then. The fact that there’s a year and a couple months for the Twins to repair the rift makes it difficult for me to start hoping now, though I’d obviously love to read that headline…

    I don’t like the idea of the overall Contreras situation and it’s not just the money. I’m thinking that Campillo could be a better option without the team losing players and locking up payroll in future seasons. There’s a definite need for a couple starters next year and I see it nearly as likely that Campillo is serviceable in that role as Contreras. I have always had a preference for pitchers who don’t give up many walks though.

    I know Campillo isn’t what any of us would like as a starter, but really I’d take my chances with him over Ho-Ram. By the time you know for sure it’ll be too late to make the mistake of Contreras even possibly worthwhile, making Campillo that much more appealing.

  28. Tropics iRE on August 20th, 2007 7:46 am

    yes i read the article… and yes santana is tied up until after next season starts… I am saying i would be happy to see the mariners wait for better talent than a marginal upgrade … a bareley better than Ho Ram pitcher is not worth 10mill a year.

    Santana IS worth 20mill. we probably wont get him, but we need somone that can at least draw comparison to him.

    -Ti

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.