Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 102: Josh Hamilton and Whether a Potentially Bad Contract is Worse Than No Contract at All

Episode Date: December 14, 2012

Ben and Sam are joined by Ian Miller and Riley Breckenridge, the heroes behind Productive Outs, to talk about the Angels, Josh Hamilton, and whether fans should worry about bad contracts anymore.

Well, since there's no time like the present, sound effect. Good morning and welcome to episode 102 of Effectively Wild, the daily podcast from Baseball Perspectus. I am Sam Miller in Long Beach, California. Ben Lindberg is in New York, New York. He is blind. He had LASIK surgery today. He can't hear.

He can't see a thing. I can hear perfectly well. His ears have gone blind. The cackling you hear, in addition, is Ian Miller of Baseball Perspectives. We are joined today by a true treat. We have both halves of Productive Outs, one of Ben and I's favorite podcasts, one of Ben and I's favorite podcasts, one of Ben and I's favorite Tumblr accounts, one of Ben and I's favorite Twitter accounts. So that would be Ian Miller and Riley Breckinridge.

How are you guys doing? I'm swell. Thank you. Super. Is this a crossover episode or is this more like a super group? It's like a mashup. It's like an aliens versus predator sort of thing? No, I think it's more like foreigner. It's like a super group like Riley said. Okay.

But it's a super group with something with actual value and then two jackasses who aren't very good at what they do. Hey, that's no way to talk about sam and ben i know wow all right okay so uh one of the reasons that we have uh productive outs on tonight uh is that riley is an angels fan uh r is close to the Angels, follows them closely, and the big news of the day, of course, was the most shocking news of the day, was the Angels coming out of nowhere and landing Josh Hamilton, considered by most to be the premier position

player free agent on this year's market. I think that, well, Riley, I guess the question is, what's your reaction to this? I mean, I know that it always feels good to add a good player to a team. Do you have any sort of sense of doom over this? I definitely do. I mean, I was shocked like everybody else was. I was working this morning for SB Nation doing my boring news writing stuff and then all of a sudden on Twitter, Joe McDonald threw out the, you know, the angels are in serious, serious in all caps negotiations with the angels.

And this was like at 930 Pacific time. And I wrote a quick, quick thing for SB Nation. And then within two hours hours it was a done deal and then my phone exploded and email exploded and it was done and it seemed like most of my friends who follow the Angels were pretty excited about it and I was kind of on the fence about it

because I don't know how I feel about five years, $125 million for Josh Hamilton, who's 31 and has some off-the-field issues and staying healthy issues and everything else. I guess I like it in the short term, but long term, I'm not sure how that works with what the Angels are doing, even though I guess they're trying to build to win immediately. But with their rotation, I'm not sure that that's what they're doing.

So I guess in the last five years, the Angels, it seems, have made bad move after bad move when it comes to the most expensive ones. And Ian is a Giants fan. I'm a Giants fan. Ben is a Yankees, or was, I guess, at least. I don't know how closely he follows the now. Yeah, he's a lapsed Yankees fan. And so all of us sort of have experience with this phenomenon, which is that you will watch the GM make a terrible move, or what you think is a terrible move, or maybe what you think is a good move but it turns into a terrible move. And it feels like that's the end of life as you know it. And yet those moves don't actually end up hurting you. The Giants won two World Series with Barry Zito, one of them with Zito and Rowan. The Yankees were able to outrun bad contracts for years,

although it's sort of debatable how much those contracts caught up with them or will catch up to them. And the Angels, you know, they have not made the playoffs in three years, so you could argue that they're in sort of a cycle of failure, but they have not ever lost their ability to spend. I thought when they traded for Vernon Wells that that was going to be it, that that was the last move they'd make for three years. Since then, they've managed to add Pujols, Wilson, Hamilton, a slew of relievers and supporting parts, extend just about every part of their team into 2016 or beyond,

extend just about every part of their team into 2016 or beyond, and trade for Zach Granke. So, I mean, I guess my question for all of you is when these moves happen, should we just quit worrying about the money? Is that an old way of looking at things? You know, I guess I have a slightly different way of looking at it And that that way of looking at it is that this is the new normal. And I think I said this to Riley when we were talking about it before we came on the show, is that you pay for, you know, what you hope is a guy's if not peak production, you pay for premium production in the first two or three or four years of his deal. And then on the backside, you're paying for the rotting corpse of that guy of whose premium production you hopefully got. I mean, I'm looking at deals like Ryan Howard. You could say we're already looking at the corpse of Ryan Howard. I feel like the same thing is going to happen with Pujols. He's got like nine years left on that crazy deal. I think you will, if all goes according to plan, you'll get two to three years maybe of premium production of just eat it and you get, um, you know, you have a declining aging superstar on your bench. I mean, is that, is that literally the only way to do this? Is

this the only way to build a team is to always carry two or three horrible contracts? It does seem like that's becoming more and more prevalent. I mean, I'm sure there's another way, but this seems to be a thing that teams are doing. Well, which one is worse, I guess, from a back end of the deal perspective or a dollars per win perspective, I guess. I mean, compared to Pujols, who signed forever, even though Hamilton was, I guess, I mean, compared to Pujols, who signed forever, even though Hamilton was, I guess, older when he signed the deal than Pujols was, or not that much, a little bit.

I mean, this one at least isn't a decade long deal. I think, I mean, when I wrote about Hamilton and his aging and all the concerns and everything, I guess it was last week. And I wrote about our 10-year Pocota projections for him. And I think he was projected to be at least an average player, I think, through the fourth year. So, I mean, it's too much if you break it down dollars per win-wise still, but it's not a situation where, whereas with Pujols, maybe you would project him to be a replacement-level player by the end of the deal with Hamilton. Maybe he doesn't quite sink to those depths by then.

Maybe it's not quite as much a drag as Pujols will be or as Wells has been potentially. And again, I don't know that it's a great place for Hamilton to hit. And there's so much concern about his lack of contact last season that now that he's in a place where he can't hit as many home runs, if he's not hitting any signals or anything other than home runs. I don't know. That might hurt his value disproportionately, I guess. Yeah, I think one of the things that's been fun about this free agency period is that all of the players have sort of significant strikes against them. It's a kind of a weird group of players who you can really have legitimate debates

about how good they actually are. And I saw Angels fans who probably, I would say, well, actually, just to back up, one of the most amusing things today was during the hour or two when this was happening, seeing Angels fans on my Twitter feed gleefully saying, ah, the Angels are

just jacking up the price, so the Rangers will have to pay more. Like, ah, we're going to trick those Rangers into overpaying for Josh Hamilton. And then like an hour later, it's like, oops, what a lineup. What an amazing lineup we have. So anyway, yeah, I mean, I saw people referring to him as the second or third best hitter in baseball. And I mean, clearly he has shown that at times in his career, but he's also been a three or four win player the last couple of years. In a way, you could say the same thing about Granke, where there's a disagreement about whether he is an ace or whether he is just a pretty good pitcher who is underperformed. The Angels were reportedly going after Granke all offseason and bowed out because they claimed they did not have the money to sign him. They now turn around and sign Hamilton for more per year than he signed with the Dodgers. Did they make the right choices? Hamilton more reliable than Granke because he's a position

player? Is he a better player than Granke? Is he shown more than Granke? I don't know that you can call Hamilton more reliable than anybody. I mean, just, you know, as Riley alluded to earlier, there's the off the field stuff, which I think, which concerns me less, but his, you know, as Riley alluded to earlier, there's the off the field stuff, which I think which concerns me less. But his, you know, his durability certainly concerns me. Will he be able to stay on the field for 140 plus games? So I don't know. your line of questioning made me wonder if, uh, if you guys thought there was anything to the, uh, Artie Moreno ego situation and that he thought that the Dodgers were giving all the press and, uh, he got petulant and signed Hamilton because of that. Do you guys think there's

anything to that or that's just a narrative that we're applying after the fact? narrative that we're applying after the fact? I don't know. I mean, I guess it doesn't have to be just petulant so much as it can be competing for attention in a market or competing for a fan base or just the fact that he's invested so much money in this roster already

and probably doesn't want to see it finish just short of a playoff spot for another season. So, I mean, I don't know. I think probably they need pitching more than hitting, although as Sam has pointed out, runs are runs, whether they are scored or prevented. So, I mean, you look at the cluster and you kind of think that they could have gotten more benefit maybe over over the over the alternative with granky than they do with hamilton as as you wrote it's kind of maybe a two win

upgrade or something over the alternative to ham, unless they then go out and sign one of their surplus young outfielder types for a pitcher. And people have proposed RA Dickey, for instance. I, I, I wouldn't maybe use the word petulant, but,

um, I also would probably not necessarily separate the, what the Dodgers are doing from what the angels did.ant, but I also would probably not necessarily separate what the Dodgers are doing from what the Angels did. Because in a way, the Angels on the field is really inextricably linked to their business side right now. They kind of went through a little bit of a push where they were going to take Los Angeles from the Dodgers. The Dodgers were in such a bad state. They outdrew the Dodgers in attendance for the first time ever in 2011. They got their big TV contract.

They had their huge offseason last year. And then that momentum kind of faded away. Their attendance actually dropped last year after signing Fools and bringing up Trout. away. Their attendance actually dropped last year after signing Fools and bringing up Trout, and the Dodgers, you know, have sort of retaken the city, are going to get a bigger TV contract. And that actually is all kind of relevant, because I think there's a non-zero chance that the Angels are planning to move to Los Angeles in a half decade or so when their contract with Anaheim comes up, or their lease, I guess it is, comes up. And I think there is certainly a fight for the Angels to establish themselves as part of Los Angeles' team. They don't just want to be Orange County's team.

They want to be Los Angeles' team. They want to be the Inland Empire's team. And this is all kind of part of that struggle. Missing the playoffs three years in a row with the budget they have is pretty, I think, humiliating. And missing it a fourth year in a row would not actually be that much more humiliating than three years, but there's a sense of desperation that grows every year. I think that sense of desperation probably first appeared when they traded for Vernon Wells. And a lot of the moves they've made since then are pretty easily viewed through that lens, including the total disruption of the front office last year.

They replaced almost everybody in the front office. And the Thursday when they signed Pujols and Wilson. So, Sam, you wrote about that there's probably a Rangers front office official somewhere heaving a sigh of relief that they kind of didn't have to overpay for Hamilton. And yet, do you really think that the Rangers are relieved right now? Because, I mean, they certainly would have preferred for Hamilton to sign somewhere else. they certainly would have preferred for Hamilton to sign somewhere else. I mean, right now, this kind of, I don't know, how do you see the balance of power in the division? The Rangers didn't end up with Granke, didn't end up with Hamilton,

and are kind of, I mean, certainly in off-season additions, are lagging well behind. I don't know. I think that there's a sort of a feeling you get when you're playing against an opponent where you sort of lose track of what's actually good or bad, and you just focus on what your opponent is trying to do. And if your opponent does what he's trying to do, it feels bad. And if you disrupt what your opponent is trying to do, it feels good.

And in this case, the Angels essentially got what they wanted, and they disrupted what the Rangers wanted. But there's got to be some perspective in it. I mean, that's not a contract that they were, I don't think that they wanted anything to do with. Much was made about Hamilton's inability to let the Rangers match, but it's really hard to imagine that the Rangers were going to match that any more than they would have wanted to match CJ Wilson's contract last year. I think they're probably happy to let that walk out the door. Would they have rather signed Hamilton for a reasonable deal? I think yes. And I think at this point, they probably feel like a lot of us do, where you don't know where the Angels' money dries up. And I think at this point they probably feel like a lot of us do where you

don't know where the angels money dries up. And so it's hard to know exactly how much this would hurt them. It might be the case that the angels are sitting on vast reserves of money and could spend forever and ever and even notice this. So I don't know. I mean, I doubt that it's the worst news that they've ever had. I think that they can probably spin it as a positive thing. But yeah, the balance of talent shifts a little bit. I think the Rangers are still in a good place, and I think both teams are among the best in the AL next year. For what it's worth, I sat next to a Ranger scout at a game last year,

and we kind of got to talking. And I brought up Hamilton because he was a free agent, and he kind of sounded like the organization had soured on him, especially for the money he was reported to be looking for at the time. And then with the off-the-field issues and the focus issues and the playing through injuries and stuff like that. So if I had to guess, I would say the Rangers are probably kind of happy to get rid of them at

that, that price tag. So you guys are very familiar with the angels and you have angels on your podcast. And what do you think the angels do now you think there is definitely another move coming and if so uh which of the sort of expendable ish guys will it be goes somewhere i would say they have to make a move um just because they have a surplus of outfielders. I don't know if you can move Wells because of that contract.

You'd have to flip it for an equally bad contract. Maybe the best move, I read a piece that Dave Cameron from Fangraphs wrote earlier today saying that possibly Borges is the most valuable piece they have because he's like a three to four win player because of his defense and his position. So maybe that's the guy that you move to try to grab like a Dickey or Ricky Nolasco or somebody along those lines, I guess. I guess you could move Trumbo or Morales,

but it would be a little bit more difficult because the defensive value is not there. But I feel like they have to make a move, and by signing Hamilton in a way, even though they're taking on a ton of contract, a huge contract, maybe it frees them up to move a piece in Morales or Trumbo or Borges that can get them some help for a rotation that pretty obviously needs some help still.

I mean, I feel like Borges is the obvious piece to move as well. He hasn't had the chance to fail at the major league level, so you're probably selling high on him. I don't know that his value will ever be higher and he's essentially blocked and it doesn't seem like he has a future with the angels. So, so why not? It seems like a perfect storm of value. I, um, I, I mean, I, I felt like there was just as much incentive to trade somebody after they signed Pujols last year. And I was probably just as sure then that they would make a move before the season started. Because remember, not only did they have basically the same guys they have now,

but last year there was some optimism about Wells going into the offseason, going into the season, because he had really only had one bad year, not two. He was still in good shape. There were some indicators that suggested he had been unlucky. So there was still some hope that they were going to get a season out of Wells. And they also had Bobby Abreu, who was, before spring training started, was going to be a big part of the lineup. So they were arguably more crowded last year than they are this year, and I was surprised they didn't trade from that surplus. And it ended up kind of paying off,

because I thought that the natural thing to do would be to trade Trumbo or Morales, and both those guys were pretty key parts of the offense. Borges, though, just has more value to a team that needs a center fielder, and I think Socha has made it pretty clear. I mean, Borges can hit not at all and still be a very valuable major leaguer, much more valuable than a guy like Wells, for instance. But Socha made it pretty clear last year that he's not going to play Borges unless he hits, that the defense alone isn't enough.

And I think there are plenty of teams that would play Borges just based on the defense. And so, yeah, I mean, I would think that there's probably a trade there. The other thing is that the Angels last year at this time, you really had to look hard to try to find a need. I mean, the only place you could really find a hole on their roster was the fifth spot in the rotation, which is not a place you put that much time into filling, or maybe the bullpen, although the bullpen had, I think, the second best ERA in the league the previous year. This year, they really do have a weakness in the pitching staff. They've been kind of desperately seeking pitching all offseason. So there's a lot more incentive to flip a guy like Borges now

than there might have been a year ago. I liked what you wrote about how DiPoto has kind of combined the ability to seal the enormous deal with the ability to find undervalued assets or just pick up cheap parts or make a trade for Ionetta or pick up some spare bullpen parts who turn out to be good. And I wonder, I mean, you wrote about how the Pujols deal

kind of came together last winter, and that happened really after DePoto, at least publicly, said that the Angels probably weren't going to make any big move. And then a month later or less, they signed the biggest free agent and the biggest free agent pitcher as well. So, I mean, I wonder whether he goes into an offseason just sort of looking for the value pickups, and then Moreno just comes to him and says,

oh, by the way, here's $150 million. Go crazy. I mean, because it doesn't take skill, or it doesn't take the same sort of skill to just sign the best player available just sign the best player available in the way that it does to find a guy who's, you know, not paid appropriately or who's better than he looks. I mean, a guy like Hamilton, no one is saying that the Angels exploited an inefficiency here. They just threw a ton of money at a really big free agent. But I guess that is sort of a skill in its own way. You have to sell a guy on coming to a place,

even if a large part of the sale is just, here is how much we're going to pay you, and it's a lot. Yeah, my guess, I don't know anything about the Hamilton move, but Hamilton doesn't really fit in the same way that Pujols didn't really fit last year. And my guess is that DiPoto wasn't really thinking at all about either of those guys. And it was really just the case that he's going about his business, building the best team he can, and then all of a sudden Moreno gives him permission. And a GM's not going to, I mean, if you give a GM the budget, he's probably never going to turn that money down. So he makes it happen. And not every GM can do that. I think that Tony Riggins would not have been able to bring in Albert Pujols.

I don't know if he would have been able to bring in Josh Hamilton. I don't know if you would want him to bring in Josh Hamilton at this price. But it is definitely something that DiPoto has an ability to do. All right. price but it is definitely something that DePoto has an ability to do alright anyway you guys good are we good I'm feeling pretty good I'm feeling good I appreciate you both being on the show

and I guess we'll have you on another time that would be grand it was a pleasure alright we're gonna end it right now