The following article is a guest post from Getting Blanked contributor Travis Reitsma. Travis is the creator and operator of Baseball Canadiana.
There has been much controversy this offseason over the signing of relievers. Since the Tigers drastically overpaid for Joaquin Benoit to the tune of a 3yr/$16.5-million, the market for middle-relievers and mediocre closers has gone up dramatically.
J.J Putz (2yr/$10-million), Scott Downs (3yr/$15-million), Jesse Crain (3yr/$13-million), Matt Guerrier (3yr/$12-million), Bobby Jenks (2yr/$12-million), and Pedro Feliciano (2yr/$8-million) have all been signed to multi-year deals for what seems like a lot of coin. This assuredly means Rafael Soriano, widely considered the best reliever on the market, will receive a ludicrously lucrative payday. Have general managers lost their minds this offseason (seems probable) or are we all missing something? Are relievers more valuable than we think?
There has been some great analysis on the subject and most have come to the conclusion that spending a lot of money on relievers over multiple years is a terrible plan that almost never works out. But just how bad is it, really?
How do the contracts of these players stack up to other bad contracts at other positions? What about expensive contracts that most consider “good value deals” such as Jeter’s or Pujols’?
It may be simplistic and it’s probably somewhat flawed, but I did some research on these questions.
I took the ten richest contracts ever given out to relief pitchers (in terms of average annual salary) and divided their total amount of money-made by their WAR rating. This gives a $/WAR number. In other words, how much money did teams have to spend to get one win above replacement player on each of these deals?
This should allow for at least a simplistic look at the best and worst big-money contracts given out to relievers.
A few of these deals are still in progress so in those cases I took the average annual salary of the years completed in the deal so far, rather than the actual dollar figure paid to the player. I feel like this allows for more predictability for the remaining years of the deal and more accurately represents the return value of the players.
Highest Annual Salary for Relievers (Not including deals signed this offseason)
|Player||Team||Annual $||Years of deal|
Highest Guaranteed Contracts for Relievers
|Player||Team||Guaranteed $||Years of Deal|
Just a quick glance at this and you might think that the worst reliever contract ever given out belonged to none other than J.P. Riccardi’s signature signing, B.J. Ryan, but hold on. Here is the $/WAR chart:
Highest $/WAR among the richest 10 contracts given to relievers (Annual Salary)
|1||Brad Lidge||PHI||-0.4||INF ($25-million)|
Given Brad Lidge’s negative WAR rating so far in his deal with Philadelphia, his contracts is infinitely bad. Some of those numbers are pretty interesting, but they don’t mean much until you give them some context, so how do other contracts stack up? Mike Hampton was signed to a huge extension by the Colorado Rockies prior to the 2001 season, a contract that is considered one of the worst ever given out. His $/WAR value for those 8 years is $11.30-million, making his monstrous contract of 8-years and $121-million more valued than 6 of these relievers.
Kosuke Fukudome has a $/WAR value of $6.42-million for his contract to date, making him better than all ten of these deals, including Rivera’s, while the Athletics’ deal with Eric Chavez provided an $8.05-million/WAR value.
Gary Sheffield’s two-year deal with the Tigers prior to 2008 garnered Detroit a $140-million/WAR value and then they released him the next offseason and Julio Lugo’s massive deal with the Red Sox gave a return of $120-million/WAR on a deal the Red Sox are still paying for.
These were all considered bad contracts and some of them are considered pretty good values when compared to the richest reliever deals.
So what then of rich contracts considered somewhat fair? How do they stand up?
Alex Rodriguez’s $252-million contract signed by the Rangers in 2001 (which ended up paying A-Rod $185.45-million after the opt-out) provided a $/WAR value at $3.31-million and Derek Jeter’s $189-million contract provided the Yankees with a value of $4.09-million/WAR.
Manny Ramirez’s $160-million deal inked with Boston garnered a $4.45-million/WAR return.
What are some of the best returns? How about Joe Mauer’s deal from 2007-2010 which provided the Twins with a $/WAR value of $1.5-million, or Jimmy Rollins’ deal with the Phillies from 2006-2010 which provided a return of $1.63-million/WAR. Albert Pujols’ 7-yr/$100-million? $1.73-million/WAR
What does all this mean? You probably shouldn’t pay relievers a lot of money over multiple years, you’re not likely to get a good return on your investment. This makes teams like Tampa Bay look brilliant for letting their two major relievers walk and signing Joel Peralta for $900-k and bringing back J.P. Howell for cheap.
It also tells you why teams are seeking to acquire cheap bullpen help in trades rather than on the market. Toronto, Tampa Bay, Minnesota, Florida, Oakland, Arizona, and Kansas City have all made trades to improve their bullpen cheaply without spending on guys like Benoit and Crain.
For anyone’s curiosity, here’s a $/WAR chart of some of the bigger contracts:
|Player||Years of deal||tWAR||Guaranteed $||$/WAR|
Statistical information acquired from FanGraphs.
Contractual information acquired from Cot’s Baseball Contacts.