Fonzie Forever's 2009 Non-Tender Candidates Review

Before I start taking a look at the 2010 non-tendered players and trying to decide who might be a good fit for this season's Met squad, I figured it would be instructive to look at a couple of posts from last year to see who I liked and didn't like from that year's scrap heap. Without further introduction:

INTERESTED:

Matt Capps

He was coming off injury last year, and there are a lot of reasons to believe that he was just unlucky. His fastball last year was the best it has ever been... He allowed only 18.7% of hits against him to be line drives... he may have been a little unlucky with home runs...The Mets should scoop this guy up quick.

Matt Capps was an enormously successful pickup for the Nationals last season. Capps signed for $3.5M, with bonuses that could bump it to $3.95M. He had a fantastic season, posting a 2.47 ERA and 42 saves and made the all star team. To add injury to another injury, when the Nationals fell out of contention, they were able to trade Capps to Minnesota for top catching prospect Wilson Ramos.

Ryan Church

He is a great defensive outfielder. His UZR/150 for his career as a left fielder is +3.7, and as a right fielder is a phenomenal +14.2... His average value from 2006-2008, per year, was around $7 million. I think Church... would make an *excellent* fourth outfielder...

Ryan Church took a pay cut to $1.5M last season but absolutely collapsed, hitting only .201 and posting a .265 OBP. He was an minor asset defensively, but was overall worth -0.2 WAR. Man, what happened to Ryan Church?

Jack Cust

Cust is another guy who would be helpful if he could be had cheaply. He could provide late power off the bench, and might want to come to New York to be part of a contender after spending his career in Arizona, Baltimore, San Diego and Oakland on bad teams.

Cust was great last season! He earned $2.8M for his work and batted .272 with a .395 OBP and 13 home runs in only 113 games. According to fangraphs he was worth $9.6M. You may be surprised to know that defensively he graded out as basically even, but only played 105 innings in the field. For his career, he was a negative fielder. Either way, Cust had a great, cheap season.

Ryan Garko: I'm confused about Ryan Garko - he was terrible last season in AAA. There's got to be something we don't know about that story. He earned just above the minimum salary.
Andrew Miller: The former first round draft pick was also a disaster last season.
Neal Cotts: Cotts signed a minor league deal this year but did not pitch anywhere because of injuries. Source.
Jonny Gomes: Jonny Gomes actually had an entire post devoted to him here at Fonzie last offseason:

The Mets absolutely NEED to be in on Jonny Gomes right now, as he is still a free agent. Gomes hit a great .267/.338/.541 for the Reds last season... his career marks are good for a 109 OPS+... he CRUSHES lefties - hitting .307/.369/.545 against them last season... His best offer on the table now is a minor league deal from the Reds. How come nobody will give this guy a major league contract or guaranteed money?

He plays a poor outfield, but did post a +2.2 UZR/150 in left field last season over 253 innings. Maybe we can slap a first baseman's mitt on him and have him back up 1B, and LF. Either way, he would be a strong option to pinch hit off the bench late in games, could grab an occasional start against lefties, and occupy the last spot on our roster.

He actually had an interesting season, did Gomes, as he got to play almost every day for the first time and posted 86 RBI with a 758 OPS. He had a down year offensively - probably a result of playing every day despite his platoon split - but was atrocious with the glove. Who knows, with these things?

Anyway, he was worth -0.1 WAR, which I believe could have been a decent sized positive WAR had he been used properly -- he actually had a 856 OPS vs lefties last year and a 709 OPS vs righties. He probably has a future career as a part-time DH as a Marcus Thames type. He earned 800K last season.


NOT INTERESTED
Garrett Atkins

For what it's worth, I think Atkins is done. Atkins' OPS has decreased steadily over the last four years, from 965 to 853, to 780, and then bottomed out at 650 last year. His career statistics away from Coors Field have been terrible. He is only 30 years old, but he was never the most physically fit player. Finally, he experienced a drastic jump in walks last season (from 40 in 664 ab to 41 in 339 ab) -- which is usually a bad sign for players at the end of their careers.

Get this - Atkins was the highest paid player on this entire list and was absolutely awful last year. He earned $4M for the Orioles to post a 562 OPS, hit .214, and butcher the ball defensively. He was actually worth NEGATIVE $4.4M.

You may remember that Atkins was a Metsblog obsession for a while -- good thing we dodged that one. And as for the Orioles, well, that's why they're the Orioles. It's interesting to note, however, that Fangraphs actually endorsed the move and that the fans were also wrong, projecting Atkins at $5.8M in value.

-----------

So where does that leave us? Certainly, I'd say there were more hits than misses, and especially big hits on Capps, Cust, and Atkins. Another lesson, if there is any, is that projecting a bounce-back for a hitter who is in a pattern of decline wasn't a good bet last year. Garko, Atkins, and Church were all bad. And those with big platoon splits, which would include Gomes, might not be as valuable as they appear to be on paper before they are exposed as every day players.

All in all, it appears that Capps, Cust, and Gomes, were worth their investments, while Church, Atkins, Cotts, Miller, and Garko were not. All in all, there are some big dividends to be reaped in the non-tender market with relatively little risk. I hope the 2010 Mets take a few chances.

Tune in soon for my review of the 2010 non-tender candidates!

What Would YOU Pay Jeter to Join the Mets?

Over on Amazin Avenue, the epicenter of rational thought in the Mets blogosphere, they had a poll this morning [1]asking readers the following:

Would you sign Derek Jeter to play for the Mets? To my surprise, the responses were overwhelmingly negative. By a margin of 76% to 23%, respondents voted no.[2]


I would most certainly sign Jeter if he was willing to play second base rather than shortstop. The real question, as far as I'm concerned, is "how much would you be willing to pay him?" I imagine that most of the people that voted "no" in the above poll did so because they took ancillary factors into account, such as price.

As far as I can tell, the question breaks down into two parts. One, what is Jeter's on-field value likely to be? And two, what is his off-the-field value to the Mets?

Toby Hyde is Keepin' It Real

I've always enjoyed reading Toby Hyde. Despite being affiliated with the SNY Network of blogs, Toby, the writer over at Mets Minor League Blog, seems to have pretty free reign on his content and does a good job with it.

Yesterday, Toby did a good job calling out Fangraphs on a couple of silly comparisons they made between Mets prospects and current or former major leaguers.

I think Marc Hulet, the author over at fangraphs, does a very good job usually. This is not his best work. The list itself seems pretty poor and disordered, but it's really the comments on the players that make you shake your head.

I don't have the time nor the experience with the Mets minors to take Hulet to task, but Toby does, so if you are interested in Mets prospects, I'd encourage you to click through and take a look at what he has to say. And while you're at it, read the original article as well. Hulet is off the mark a few times, but overall, fangraphs is a great resource and it'll serve as a useful primer on some of our more promising minor leaguers.

Reyes, Beltran, and the One Month Grace Period

When it comes to baseball, I am a strong believer that there is nothing better for you than playing the game. Getting reps, taking swings, making throws, seeing pitches, doing your regular routine - in my opinion, all of those things help more than any amount of working out or mental preparation could ever could. You just need to be near the game and to play.

With that said, I usually like to give players a week or two when returning from an injury before I really start evaluating them. With baseball being a game of milliseconds and millimeters, even the most imperceptible delay can be the difference between a home run and a harmless fly out.

In the cases of Jose Reyes and Carlos Beltran, I was willing to give them longer than that. Not that I didn't hope or expect them to perform well - but I decided before the season that I would not make any conclusions about their future performance based on anything I saw from them in the first MONTH of play. Offensively and on the basepaths, that is. I think that defensively, it's a different kind of evaluation.

I did that for Beltran and Reyes this year the same way I did it for Wright last year. The same way I do that for a player on an opposing team. The same way I do it in fantasy baseball. It's not homerism - it's just an acknowledgement that baseball is a peculiar game and that it's silly to expect someone to come back to playing the game at its highest level on the planet without a delay.

Without any further adieu, I present to you the statistics for Jose Reyes and Carlos Beltran, sans first month of play:

Carlos Beltran: .244/.360/.390, 750 OPS, .254 BABIP, 16 bb, 11 K
Jose Reyes: .301/.333/.461, 795 OPS, .313 BABIP, 19 bb, 36 K

Remember, of course, that the above line for Beltran does not include his double and home run from tonight. For both players, these present significant improvements over their season slash lines.

In addition, Beltran might be a victim of some bad luck -- his career BABIP is .301 and he's been hitting the ball at roughly the same rates as before, if with slightly less authority. Another 30 points of average, and that line is more like .274/.390/.430, which is something I'd sign up for.

As we turn our eyes to 2011, it is important that we do a good job - a smart job - taking inventory of what we have. Particularly of players like Reyes and Beltran, who are under Met control for 2011 but not for 2012.

Everyone who reads here will know where I fall on this topic, and I think it would behoove Mets management to take a good hard look at how Beltran and Reyes finish up this season, rather than how they started it, in making their evaluations going forward.

Bobby Parnell Has Suddenly Become Very Important

Bobby Parnell was very impressive last night. As Gary Cohen noted during the broadcast, Parnell threw over a dozen pitches at 100 mph or faster, as well as a couple at 102. I didn't see it, but the NY Times claims that he threw a pitch at 103 as well.

Putting aside the issue of whether the gun was fast (it was), Parnell was throwing some serious heat last night. The fastball was darting and tailing, and the slider was a wipeout pitch. If Parnell can continue to pitch like that, he is going to be very very good. Very.

Who is Mike Pelfrey?

Metsblog had an entry today asking the above question, and I can understand their frustration. Many Mets fans are confused about Pelf, not knowing who he really is as a pitcher:

Is he the guy who was 9–1 with a 2.39 ERA in his first 14 starts of the season?

Or, is he the guy who is 2–6 with a 7.98 ERA in his last eight starts?

I don’t know the answer. I do know he’s getting roughly the same level of strikes he was getting in the start of the season. However, the opposition is hitting more line drives and less ground balls, and more of those line drives are falling in for hits, compared to the start of the year.

So, it would seem he is making more ‘mistakes,’ be it with command or location… and when he does, he’s paying for it.

Sadly, I think the answer is simpler than people make it out to be.

According to fangraphs, Pelfrey has been almost identially the same pitcher over the last three seasons. His xFIP, by season:

2008: 4.49
2009: 4.52
2010: 4.50

Why am I looking at xFIP? And what is it? According to Matthew Carruth of Fangraphs:

One of the more difficult puzzles to crack has been evaluating pitchers due to how entangled their performance is with that of their defenders. Accepting the move from ERA to Fielding Independent Pitching is probably the single biggest step one can take on the right path of separating the two, and Simmons has made that leap.

Home Runs allowed, an important input to the FIP formula, are not as skill-based as had been thought throughout history. ... xFIP exists to correct those home run rates. It is simply the FIP formula with an expected home run rate based on fly
ball totals, rather than actual home run rate.

xFIP is just a slightly more advanced form of FIP, which is an improvement on ERA because it corrects for luck and the influence of defense, and evaluates pitchers solely on things they can control.

According to FIP and xFIP, Pelfrey has been basically the same pitcher for the last three seasons, with flucutations based somewhat, if not mostly, on random variation. For a guy who allows so many balls to be put in play, this is to be expected.

Is he as good as he was early this year? Is he as bad as he has been recently? Probably neither. A realistic view of the numbers shoudl have indicated all along that his early season improvement was an outlier.

For what it is worth, I believe that part of Pelfrey's early success this year can be attributed to his additional confidence and the addition of the splitter. Because of this, I don't think he's necessarily a 4.50 xFIP pitcher permanently. He's still young, and will improve and learn, but he's certainly way closer to a 4.50 pitcher than a 3.00 pitcher right now.

-----------
[1] Also worth noting, we first discussed Pelfrey, xFIP and tRA back in December right here on Fonzie Forever:

The thing about Mike Pelfrey that confuses me, is why everyone expects him to be good. He's never shown us anything. His best stretch ever was in 2006 in AA, when he posted a 2.71 ERA. The next year, in AAA, he was getting hit around at a 4.01 ERA and 1.35 WHIP pace. There was room for growth, but as a 23-year-old, he didn't have the makings of an ace.

I was glad when [Pelfrey] broke through in 2008, but I wasn't really expecting it. The truth is, he was a little lucky in 2008 and a little unlucky in 2009. His tRA (a metric which is available on fangraphs and is explained here) has his tRA as 4.49 in '08 and 4.52 in '09. And all things considered -- like, with what we saw with our naked eyes -- Pelfrey was very much the same guy. The real difference between that year and this one was that more hits made it through the infield and less guys got stranded on base - his fastball was the same speed, he walked and struck out about exactly the same number of batters.

I see Pelfrey's luck turning again this year, at least back to average.

David Wright's Ever-Increasing Swings-and-Misses

Interesting little thought-provoker on Metsblog today that I wanted to touch on. Perhaps in response to my post from yesterday, Metsblog published a little thoughtful blurb about D-Wright's struggles. In pertinent part, it said:

Yes, he is striking out WAY too much. But, if he puts the ball in play, it tends to fall for a hit – especially against left-handed pitching, and at the same rate from seasons past. I mean, despite all the criticism, the kid is batting .293 and already has nearly as many home runs as he had all of last season.

So yes, good. I agree wholeheartedly. Later on, however, he mentions kind of off-handedly something pretty interesting:

The difference is the swing and misses, which could be because he is getting more pitches outside of the strike zone – evident by his increase in walks, as Ted Berg pointed out to me on Instant Messenger.

Makes sense! The theory jives with what has been happening in real life. However, it takes only a two minute glance at fangraphs to confirm and expand on that little nugget of observation.

This year David Wright is 1) swinging at more pitches out of the zone, 2) swinging at less pitches in the zone, 3) getting less pitches in the strike zone 4) and making less contact on ALL of them. That's.... not good.

So yes, he's getting more pitches out of the zone. In fact, his zone% has decreased from 48.8% to 43.5% (his career rate is over half). But that's not the whole story. His swing and miss percentage has gone from last year's 8.4% and career mark of around 7% to an epic 11.1% this year. He's making worse contact on each and every kind of pitch he is thrown -- and the numbers are at by far the worst rates of his career.

This matches the eye test. He's getting less strikes, he's swinging at more stuff, and he's missing more often. He's missed what seems like dozens of fat fastballs in the strike zone over the last week -- perhaps a side effect of expanding his zone? Who really knows? But Metsblog provided me a little food for thought, and I think it deserved expanding on. David Wright is our best player and these numbers should be cause for concern for everyone, even if he is going well so far this year.

Oliver Perez Loss In Fastball Velocity

I am working up a big post on Oliver, but since his drop in velocity was in the news today, I figured I would excerpt the relevant portion today.

Metsblog relayed an article by Matthew Carruth over at fangraphs today pointing out that Oliver Perez was among the "leaders" in velocity lost off their fastball between 2008 in 2009. Oliver's fastball was 1.2 mph slower in 2009, which was the 15th biggest loss in baseball.

Matt Cerrone had this to say about that finding:

…i have to think that is mostly because of his knee, and not being able to get the right pivot off his front leg…

I could not agree more with this.

Matt Holliday Signs: Compared to Bay and Who Is Left

As most already know, the Cardinals have resigned Matt Holliday to a massive, seven year and $120 million deal.

On the heels of Jason Bay's five year, $83 million deal with the Mets, there are undoubtedly going to be comparisons made between the two. With Bay about 15 months older than Holliday, the Cardinals end up committed to Holliday one year deeper into his career than the Mets are to Bay. The average annual value of the Holliday deal is $17 per season, while the Bay contract averages $16.6 million per year.

Who did better - the Mets or the Cardinals - is something we won't know for a long time. What we do know is that both are paying their players contracts which are near their market value, and for many years. Matt Klaassen over at fangraphs does a good job breaking down the contract, repeats a concept which I think most baseball fans should be familiar with:

It has been said before, but it’s worth repeating: paying average market value for a win isn’t necessarily a “dumb” move, but it isn’t “smart” either. It’s “average” …on average. Moreover, straight market value isn’t the only factor to consider in this particular case. Leaving aside the possibility that the actual value of a win might actually be lower this offseason (dropping it down to $4.4 million, the market value of a 4.5 WAR player over 7 years drops to about $109 million), seven years is a long time for a corner outfielder in his thirties.

Neither team got a discount for guaranteeing many years on their contracts. Both require their players to maintain their level of performance (or close to it) throughout the life of their contracts in order to come out "even". Both will likely lose.

For what it is worth, here are Dan Szymborski's ZiPS projections for Matt Holliday for the next seven years. Once again, this is not a prediction as to EXACTLY how Holliday will perform -- rather, it is a simulation of how Holliday and players like him will age over a given period of time. A look at the progression, and how Matt Holliday is likeliest to perform in 2015 and beyond, is enlightening:

BA OBP SLG OPS+
----------------------------
2010 .308 .387 .528 143
2011 .304 .384 .517 139
2012 .302 .381 .512 137
2013 .296 .375 .504 133
2014 .290 .370 .493 129
2015 .284 .364 .472 123
2016 .280 .358 .460 118
2017 .276 .354 .451 115 (option)

What does this all mean? Well ... for one thing, it might mean that, in a year with no marquee talent and with so much talent available in the middle tier, that it was foolish to pursue EITHER Holliday or Bay. Why pay Holliday or Bay their market value for five or seven years, exposing yourself to the risk they drop off in production or become injured, when you can get Johnny Damon or any other corner outfielder to do almost as well on a very short, safe contract?

Here are some of the remaining free agent outfielders, courtesy of Cot's Contracts:

Rick Ankiel STL
Johnny Damon NYY (A)
Jermaine Dye CWS (A)
Vladimir Guerrero LAA (B)
Reed Johnson CHC
Austin Kearns * WAS
Mark Kotsay CHW
Jason Michaels CLE
Xavier Nady NYY (B)
Gary Sheffield NYM
Fernando Tatis NYM (B)

Not that any of these players are the equal of Holliday or Bay -- but what if they provide half the production at a quarter of the cost? If Holliday is a 5-win player who costs $120 million, would Vladimir Guerrero or Jermaine Dye be a better deal as a 1 or 2-win player if we only committed $10 million to them?

It will be interesting to see how the rest of the offseason pans out, and where the many mid-level players end up -- and what they get.

-------
Other free agents of interest:

Russell Branyan SEA
Carlos Delgado NYM
Adam LaRoche ATL
Orlando Hudson LAD
Felipe Lopez MIL
Miguel Tejada HOU
Joe Crede MIN
Pedro Feliz PHI
Ryan Church ATL
Jack Cust OAK
Ryan Garko SF

Jason Bay is a Colossal Mistake: How Bay-watch became Omar-watch

The News
The Mets signed Jason Bay to a four year, $65 million dollar contract yesterday. It has an easily-attainable option which would push the contract to a staggering five years and over $80 million dollars.

This is it - the beginning of the end for Minaya. This is EXACTLY the kind of move that ends a tenure as a GM. That, while receiving lukewarm approval from the fanbase and newspapers today, will be a complete and utter disaster by the end of the contract.

You do not sign low-average, defensively-challenged sluggers to five year contracts when they are 31.

Bay is not a terrible player. We have analyzed Bay extensively at this site, and many others have done so as well elsewhere. He's been an above average player for a number of years. He is a good complementary piece. But that is NOT the way in which mega-contracts should be evaluated. In my last post on Bay, I asked:

Is this the guy we want to occupy 10% of our payroll with? Is this the kind of player we want to shape the rest of our roster around? Is he a cornerstone for the next Mets World Series team? I don't think so.

He's' a great hitter for the six-hole on a contending team. But he's not getting paid like that. He's getting $16.5 million dollars a year UNTIL HE IS 36. He's being given one of the largest free agent contracts ever awarded by the Mets.

The Folly of Mega-Contracts
Long-term contracts usually don't work out. By definition, signing a guy for five guaranteed years is a huge risk. Five years is a very long time to forecast ANYTHING to happen, much less that an athlete will maintain his phenomenal peak performance.

You wouldn't want to buy a stock that you couldn't sell for five years. You wouldn't want to take a girl on one date and then sign a five-year contract with her --- unless of course, she was Heidi Klum. Some singular talents are worth taking a risk for. Heidi Klum, Brooklyn Decker, Gisele Bundchen, Carlos Beltran. Risks this big should be reserved for superstars.

Cot's Contracts has a list of players, sorted by highest average annual value on their contracts. Here is the list of outfielders who have EVER averaged more than $13 million dollars a year.

Vlad Guerrero: $14M - 5 years
J.D. Drew: $14M - 5 years
Magglio Ordonez: $15M - 4 years
Carlos Lee: $16.6M - 6 years
Alfonso Soriano: $17M - 7 years
Carlos Beltran: $17M - 7 years
Vernon Wells: $18M - 6 years
Ichiro Suzuki: $18M - 5 years
Torii Hunter: $18M - 5 years
Andruw Jones: $18.1M - 2 years
Manny Ramirez: $20M, $22.5M - 7 years, 2 years

This list is occupied by one type of player -- players better than Jason Bay. Above him on the list are generational talents, the guys who we will look back at this era on and remember as superstars: Manny, Andruw, Ichiro, Beltran, Soriano.

Some of the contracts on this list worked out okay. Beltran is one. Vlad Guerrero is another. But half of them did not -- and those were for players who were better than Bay. Does anyone really think that Jason Bay belongs on this list? Should his name be in the same sentence as Vlad Guerrero, Magglio Ordonez, or Alfonso Soriano? Even the Carlos Lee signing, which was broadly dismissed as a mistake, is a better signing than this.

Jason Bay is not one of those players.

If Not a Star, Then What...?
He is a clearly second-tier talent with a profile which indicates that he is a higher than average risk of collapse. So who is Bay actually comparable to? There are some players which come to mind -- here are their stats per 162 games and through their age 31 seasons:

Jason Bay: 33 home runs, 86 walks, 157 strikeouts, .280/.376/.519.
Geoff Jenkins: 29 home runs, 54 walks, 148 strikeouts, .279/.350/.499
Jeromy Burnitz: 30 home runs, 83 walks, 130 strikeouts, .259/.365/.498
Richard Hidalgo: 28 home runs, 60 walks, 120 strikeouts, .273/.350/.497 (through age 30)

Jenkins was out of baseball two years later. Hidalgo was already out of baseball. I don't have to tell you what happened to Burnitz. Jenkins and Hidalgo are high up on Bay's baseball-reference.com list of similar players. Burnitz is a Mets-related example.

Another guy who he really reminds me of is Danny Tartabull.

Jason Bay: 33 home runs, 86 walks, 157 strikeouts, .280/.376/.519.
Tartabull: 31 home runs, 90 walks, 157 strikeouts, .278/.374/.505

His next year, with the Yankees and Oakland in 1995, he hit .236. He bounced back in 1996 to hit 27 home runs while batting only .254. The next season, he was out of baseball. Two years later.

His MOST SIMILAR player -- and this is not a joke -- is Ryan Klesko. Klesko was a legitimately good hitter. He was underrated. Through age 31, Ryan Klesko hit 30 home runs per 162 games, drove in 100 runs, struck out only 103 times, and batted a robust .285/.372/.528. Klesko and Bay had identical OPS+ marks of 131 through age 30. This would seem to be the most helpful comparison Bay could ask for.

From age 32 to 36, Klesko hit only 54 more home runs. He batted .264/.366/.432, missed his age 35 season entirely, and was out of baseball the next year.[1]


The Impact

Metsblog did a great job aggregating the reactions from around the blogosphere:

Ed Ryan from Mets Fever says, “Nice job, Omar.”

According to John, from Metstradamus, “This is a good move. In a vacuum, it’s a great move.”

On the other hand, while Mets Grrl likes Bay, she explains why her reaction was just, ‘ehhh.’

Mike Silva of NY Baseball Digest explains, “When it’s all said and done, the Mets needed Bay.”

I disagree. The Mets needed to use their money wisely and did not. The Mets did not need to give Vladmir Guerrero money to the next Danny Tartabull, Bobby Higginson, or Geoff Jenkins.

Shortly after the trade, my friend texted me this: "Let me know how that expensive DH in a huge NL park experiment goes." He's right. Even setting aside all the talk about Jason Bay's defense for a moment -- Jason Bay is going to need to hit just about as well as he has for the next FIVE years in order to come anywhere close to justifying his contract. And the odds of that are enormously long.

When all is said and done, Jason Bay will own the third largest contract on the Mets.[2] I believe that Jack Moore over at fangraphs nailed it on the head in his short article about Bay:

This deal definitely improves the Mets’ offense for 2010 ... Bay’s bat combined with Jose Reyes, Carlos Beltran, and David Wright gives the Mets a scary top of the order for opposing pitchers. That’s about where Bay’s effectiveness ends.
***
Of course, the real interesting point of the contract is the dollar value...Given the current market, $3.5M per WAR, the Mets are expecting 4.5 wins per season out of Bay. Is Jason Bay the type of tier-2 superstar that deserves this contract?

The Mets can afford to overpay given their place on both the revenue curve and the win curve... [but] this move appears to be one of the more significant overpays of the offseason, and it by no means vaults the Mets into the playoffs. Much needs to go the Mets’ way for this contract to work out as planned[.]

On the field, the Mets are going to be better with Jason Bay than without him. That is not the question. The question is whether they will be more well-positioned to be successful with Bay and his contract than without him, both this year and in the future. I believe that the answer to that question is no.

Mets fans were antsy for a move and they got it. The reaction today is relief. I believe Roger also nailed it when he called his post about Bay "The Sound of Settling." But when history looks back at the Minaya regime, I believe this signing is going to be one of those OBVIOUS mistakes.

I certainly hope not. I will be rooting for Bay.

-----------------

postscript: When we acquired Bobby Bonilla, he had the exact same career OPS as Jason Bay, at 131. He averaged 21 home runs per year, and struck out only half as much. He was a superior player to Bay at the time, and younger. As a Met, he almost replicated those numbers, posting OPS+ marks of 121, 132, 128 and 160.

However, he was so grossly overpaid that the fans reviled him. In fact, the Mets had to trade him in the midst of a season he was hitting .325/.385/.599, for an OPS that would have placed him fourth in the NL ... behind only Bonds, Piazza, and Larry Walker.

Mike Vaccaro actually had an excellent article equating Bonilla and Bay over at the Post a few weeks ago. He is wrong on some of it, calling Bay "a better player than Bonilla," for one ... but generally, his premise is sound. He asks the Mets this:

How many times do you need to have anvils fall on your head before you take a step out of the way? How many times do you have to sign Kevin Appier and Bobby Bonilla before you recognize the difference between attracting the cream of a good free-agent class (see Sabathia, CC, and Teixeira, Mark) and the prettiest homecoming queens of Homely High?

Bay is going to have a huge contract to live up to, and that is going to affect the way that he is perceived.

Dan over at Amazin Avenue asks whether Jason Bay is going to be the Mets' best hitting LF of all time. He may well be. I've also heard him be compared to Cliff Floyd minus the injuries. All these sound good only until you consider the price.

In fact, Cliff Floyd from age 24-31 (the ages Bay has been in the majors) hit a robust 28 home runs per 162 games, with 115 strikeouts and a .289/.370/.515 line and identical 131 OPS+! Sounds great right? Sure ... until you consider that Floyd earned only $6.5 million a year as a Met. Even the world's strongest proponent of Bay cannot come close to justifying investing $82 million guaranteed dollars.


---------------------------

[1] For anyone who worries that I am cherry-picking, others who made his list of comparables include:

Tim Salmon - 60 home runs after age 31, batted .262, out of baseball by 35

JD Drew - In the middle of his contract now but performing well

Bobby Higginson - The poster boy for inexplicable collapses, batted .235 and was out of baseball in three years

Jim Edmonds - Who is not actually comparable to Bay at all in that he was a phenomenal athlete who played center field

George Foster - Who is also not comparable because he was a vastly better hitter than Bay, had three top-six MVP finishes and a 54 home run season before he was 31... though for what it is worth, he proves our point, batting only .258/.316/.434 from age 32 to the end of his career.

Willie Stargell - Another player a universe better than Bay, with an OPS+ of 142 entering his age 32 season and with five years with MVP votes, including a second place finish.

Kevin Mitchell - Similarly to Stargell/Foster, already had an MVP win and a career OPS+ of 142. For what it is worth, the next five years of his career he only had 702 at-bats and only once played more than 65 games in a season.

[2] When they hit free agency, Wright and Reyes will surpass him, but for now, only Johan Santana and Carlos Beltran, two of the best players in the game, were awarded larger contracts. If the contract is backloaded (as is being reported by Metsblog), when 2011 rolls around, our payroll is going to look like this:

Santana $22.5M, Beltran $20M, Bay $21M, Perez $12M, K-Rod $12.1M, Wright $14.2M, Reyes $11M ... that's $113 million committed to 7 players. That is going to be VERY ugly.