Choo and that albatross Rangers contract

[757690]

The thread was about Choo, Jocketty and bad contracts from the very first post. Go back and read it. Honestly, it is like facts don't mean anything to you. You hijacked it into a Bronson Arroyo thread.

My comment about Arroyo being "drastically overpaid for his mediocre production" was very clearly directed at the 3-year contract extension, not his entire career as you misconstrued it. The facts show that Bronson Arroyo did not return value equal to the money he was paid with that final three year contract. It is indisputable. His good years prior to 2011 are irrelevant to that discussion. Arroyo was quite valuable as a league-average innings-eater before that, but after that he was clearly overpaid.

Again, the contract extensions and free agent contracts for pitchers around baseball over the last 20 years have overwhelmingly turned out poorly for the teams who signed them. The Arroyo and Bailey extensions were examples from recent Reds history. Just because a pitcher was healthy before the new contract does not justify signing him. Almost every pitcher is going to get hurt eventually, and history shows us very clearly that free agent pitchers who sign long contracts either get hurt or underperform their salary approximately 90% of the time. So if you advocate signing a pitcher to a big money, long-term contract you are making a reeeeeaaaaaaalllly stupid decision. The facts of history are very clear on this issue.

I don't like to look at a free agent signing strictly from a WAR/salary perspective. It leaves out a bunch of context.

You need to consider many factors, such as:

How valuable was the players production to the team?
How replaceable was that production?
What would be the cost of that replacement?
How would the money spent on their player be better spent?
Would the savings from signing a cheaper replacement be enough to improve the team?
Was the players contract preventing the team from making other improvements to the team?

And so on.

I don't like paying older pitchers market value, and I wasn't happy with the extensions at the time. But I think a more detailed analysis of the extensions and their context is needed before calling them a bust.

[wheels]

I brought s'mores, but the fire is out and the camp smells funny.

[Tracy Jones]

In other words, you've got nothing and aren't able to do the thing you wrongly accused me of not doing.... uh huh. A simple search is all you'd have to perform. How about a little thought and some research? It seems to be the thing youre craving...why not actually do it then?

I just showed you, and you don't have to go to the archives to look for it.

He was an above average pitcher overall for 8 years. That's indisputable.

"Not much production"

[Old school 1983]

I brought s'mores, but the fire is out and the camp smells funny.

Waft the stench of humiliation. How old are you again?

[jojo]

I just showed you, and you don't have to go to the archives to look for it.

He was an above average pitcher overall for 8 years. That's indisputable.

"Not much production"

He was average to backend as arms go and your opinion of him was totally dependent upon the defense behind him. Yay! He threw alot of below average innings.

[Tracy Jones]

He was average to backend as arms go and your opinion of him was totally dependent upon the defense behind him. Yay! He threw alot of below average innings.

lol

A guy with a Reagan era fastball had to rely the fielders behind him? You don't say!!!!

There's no art to that or anything. Yep. All about the K's. And xFIP. Gotta have xFIP.

"No production"

[757690]

lol

A guy with a Reagan era fastball had to rely the fielders behind him? You don't say!!!!

There's no art to that or anything. Yep. All about the K's. And xFIP. Gotta have xFIP.

"No production"

The problem with the argument that Arroyo was a product of the Reds defense, is that it can't explain why Harang, Bailey, Belisle, Wood, and for a few years, even Cueto didn't benefit similarly from that same defense. And that's not even looking at relievers.

Arroyo was the only one, until Leake, to figure out how to take advantage of the team'a defense. He deserves some credit for that. If you do of looking at the archives, you will see this point being made by numerous others posters, over and over again.

[AtomicDumpling]

I don't like to look at a free agent signing strictly from a WAR/salary perspective. It leaves out a bunch of context.

You need to consider many factors, such as:

How valuable was the players production to the team?
How replaceable was that production?
What would be the cost of that replacement?
How would the money spent on their player be better spent?
Would the savings from signing a cheaper replacement be enough to improve the team?
Was the players contract preventing the team from making other improvements to the team?

And so on.

I don't like paying older pitchers market value, and I wasn't happy with the extensions at the time. But I think a more detailed analysis of the extensions and their context is needed before calling them a bust.

Those are all good points. The team certainly has to weigh all those factors when making their decision. It is a lot easier to look back on it with 20/20 hindsight and make a ruling on whether the team made a good decision or not. We have that advantage on the Arroyo decision because we already know it turned out poorly.

I think the biggest factor with the 3 year $36 million extension for Arroyo was that the Reds did not have to make that decision when they did. They still had an option to keep Arroyo for $7.5 million in 2011, but they opted to turn it into a 3 year extension instead. They should have exercised the low cost one year option. If they had done that they certainly would not have given Arroyo the extra $29 million for two more years after his diastrous 2011 season. They could have extended him at that point for a tiny fraction of that cost or let him walk. The lesson to take away from that fiasco is to not give pitchers a contract extension a year early, especially if he is coming off a career year. It is best to wait and make a decision until as late as possible so you have the latest, most accurate information available regarding his health and performance.

[jojo]

lol

A guy with a Reagan era fastball had to rely the fielders behind him? You don't say!!!!

There's no art to that or anything. Yep. All about the K's. And xFIP. Gotta have xFIP.

"No production"

Give me an E! Give me an R! Give me an A! ERA! ERA! ERA aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l the waaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!! Talk about evoking Reagan.

Now I post this realizing that it would be completely unfair to have expected you to have read this because it was in the archives and it's completely unfair to expect anyone who accuses others of not having done research while acting like a current thread exists completely in a vacuum to have actually done research. But here goes anyway (and again, I know this is voodoo magic):

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...=1#post3067384

[jojo]

Arroyo was the only one, until Leake, to figure out how to take advantage of the team'a defense. He deserves some credit for that. If you do of looking at the archives, you will see this point being made by numerous others posters, over and over again.

And even more importantly you'll see some of those posters ignoring over and over again the compelling reasons, in posts like below, for why that position doesn't fly:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...=1#post3067384

[757690]

And even more importantly you'll see some of those posters ignoring over and over again the compelling reasons, in posts like below, for why that position doesn't fly:

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...=1#post3067384

That post was shown over and over again, to be full of flaws, like including Arroyo's numbers in the Reds pitching staff numbers, and not accounting for the fact that the Reds pitching staff changed in teams of personnel over the years you quoted.

What you need to do, is to explain why Arroyo benefited from the Reds defense so much, but Harang, Bailey, Wood, Belisle and Cueto, and many Reds relievers, did not. Until you answer that question satisfactorily, this debate is over. It was over years ago. You remind me of Civil War re-enacters, who year after year, re-live battles they lost.

[fearofpopvol1]

Since it's often suggested to check the archives, this is probably a thread worth revisiting...

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...=choo+hamilton

[jojo]

Since it's often suggested to check the archives, this is probably a thread worth revisiting...

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...=choo+hamilton

It's a boring thread but, sure. Why not.

[jojo]

That post was shown over and over again, to be full of flaws

Actually, it has unequivocally not been shown to be full of flaws. Essentially a single poster has obfuscated it time and time again.

BTW, it was shown that Arroyo and the staff outperformed FIP similarly. It's in the part, you didn't read, again.

[Tracy Jones]

Give me an E! Give me an R! Give me an A! ERA! ERA! ERA aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllllllllllllllllllllllllllll l the waaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!! Talk about evoking Reagan.

Now I post this realizing that it would be completely unfair to have expected you to have read this because it was in the archives and it's completely unfair to expect anyone who accuses others of not having done research while acting like a current thread exists completely in a vacuum to have actually done research. But here goes anyway (and again, I know this is voodoo magic):

http://www.redszone.com/forums/showt...=1#post3067384

LOL As was said above, that post is junk.

It's not just about "eeeeeee rrrrrrrrrr aaaaaaaaaaa" it's about him being above league average in base runners allowed, in innings pitched, in the quantity of quality he took to the mound compared to the league average. And yes, so was his "eeeeeeeee rrrrrrrrrrr aaaaaaaaa" I guess Arroyo was just lucky for 8 years. How dare he rely on fielders! What an abomination to the pitching profession!

"No production"

"Not dogmatic"