Instead of going team by team this off season, I will review the divisions as a group. And whereas last year, I used a version of BaseRuns, with some modifications for strength of schedule and the like thrown in, to determine the ranking of teams’ true talent levels, this year I will use WAR as provided here on FanGraphs.

Part Two: The NL West

The ranks last year were Las Angeles (9th), Arizona (14th), Colorado (21st), San Diego (25th) and San Francisco (27th). Like their Western counterparts in the American League, the NL West teams were largely poor and the Dodgers took the division with just 84 wins.

The Dodgers captured the division title once again in 2009, but it took a lot more work to do so, as they finished with 95 wins, three games ahead of Colorado. They stayed atop these rankings as well, with 43 WAR to land them in 5th place. Matching the close finish in the actual won-loss records, the Rockies, at 42 WAR, were just behind the Dodgers, 6th overall in baseball.

Now comes the first curve ball. While in actuality, the rest of the division went Giants (88 wins), Padres (75 wins) and Diamondbacks (70 wins), the WAR rankings have the Giants, then Arizona and finally San Diego. Now that’s not a huge surprise. The interesting part comes in how close San Francisco and Arizona are. The Giants, with 34 WAR, are 16th in baseball, while Arizona, at 33.5 WAR, are 18th. Separated by 18 wins, the Giants and Diamondbacks are just 0.5 WAR apart. The Padres accumulated 22 WAR, for 28th in baseball.

The Rockies’ high rating came as a result of their pitching staff, which graded out by WAR as the best in baseball, just barely ahead of the Red Sox. The Giants also had a strong pitching staff and were generally great at the whole run prevention deal with really good defenders as well. It’s a good thing they could field because the Giants could not hit a lick. Their -121.1 runs to average ranked as baseball’s worst group.

Here’s a summary of the ranks for the NL West teams, with 2008 first.
LAD: 9, 5
ARI: 14, 18
COL: 21, 6
SDP: 25, 28
SFG: 27, 16

Baltimore may not be thought of as the class of the AL East, but that’s not stopping them from making some additions. Last week they dealt reliever Chris Ray for starter Kevin Millwood and now it appears likely that Mike Gonzalez will join the fray on a two-year deal worth at least $12M and up to as much as $16M. The deal is currently contingent on Gonzalez passing a physical – usually a given, although as we witnessed with Brett Wallace, not always without blips.

Gonzalez is a lefty with a low-to-mid-90s fastball and ridiculous slider. His fastball has some riding action in to left-handed batters, but only resulted in 8% swinging strikes. The slider, though, that’s the money pitch. He threw it 423 times last season and 17.1% resulted in empty swings. He occasionally tosses a non-fastball/slider, but those are his bread and butter. Above average strikeout rates are nothing new for the 31-year-old. Since coming over to Atlanta his walks have been kept in check as well. That means the only question is whether he can remain healthy.

Bobby Cox rode Gonzalez pretty tough this season; using him in a career high 80 games (previous high: 54) as he pitched 74.1 innings (54) and threw 1,307 pitches. This from a guy who threw just over 1,830 pitches in the previous three seasons combined – most of which he missed with injuries. As for the money itself, it’s no slam dunk. Gonzalez has never been worth $6M in free agent dollars throughout his career and while he should receive a boost from increased leverage, I guess I’m more concerned about Gonzalez’ health than anything. Factor in the loss of next year’s second round pick and I’m not sure I completely approve of giving decent – not great, mind you – cash to a injury prone reliever coming off his heaviest workload.

Gonzalez figures to be the Orioles’ closer which raises the question: do the Orioles really need a closer? There’s some nice talent in Baltimore, and sure, they have the cash, so why not, right? Plus, there’s an outside chance the Orioles could really make a run in 2011, which would make all of this butter.

Make sure to add your projection for Gonzalez in 2010 here.

In other news, Brandon Lyon has the best agent in baseball.

The Chicago White Sox have pulled off another of their trademark surprising trades by acquiring Juan Pierre from the Dodgers for two players to be named later [as of this writing, I’m reading that they are John Ely and John Link]. The Dodgers will also pick up $10.5 million of the remaining $18.5 million on the horrible contract given to Pierre seemingly centuries ago. The White Sox get Pierre for eight million dollars over two seasons, roughly the market rate for a 1 WAR player.

Primarily relegated to a bench role the last two seasons, Pierre seemingly “reemerged” in 2009 while filling in for a suspended Manny Ramirez, putting up an above average seasonal wOBA (.338, 109 wRC+, .308/.365/.392) for the first time since 2004. That may seem promising, but it’s still only 425 plate appearances against several previous years of less-than-scintillating offensive performance. For 2010, CHONE sees a return to pre-2009 form, .282/.327/.363, 11 runs created below average per 150 games. My own projection is also pessimistic: .280/.328/.360, .309 wOBA, -10 runs/150. Pierre has been a good baserunner in the past, although that has also dropped off the last couple of seasons. Let’s add one run to the CHONE projection and call him a -10/150 offensive player.

Evaluating Pierre’s defense is trickier. While he sports a good UZR for 2009, that was primarily in left field. Apparently he will be playing center field in Chicago. His last few seasons in center have been below average. While his numbers in left are good, they don’t suggest average center field defense. CHONE has him at +6 in left, suggesting he would be below average in center. The 2009 Fans Scouting Report points in the same direction: good in left, below average in center. For defense, then, let’s call him “neutral” — +7/150 in left, -2/150 in center — good enough to overcome the left field positional adjustment, but not good enough to gain the advantage of the center field adjustment.

The arithmetic is easy enough: neutral defense, -10/150 offense, 1 WAR player. So the White Sox are getting what they paid for. Straightforwardly, yes. But:

White Sox General Manager Kenny Williams follows his own muse, and has had enough success that I’m leery of doubting him, even when I don’t understand a move he makes. Still, I don’t understand this move.

[Author’s update, Wednesday, December 16, 11:00 P.M. EST: As noted by numerous commentators below and in my own comment, it turns out that I misunderstood/misread the Sox’ plan for Pierre — he’s apparently slated to play left field rather than center. I apologize for my confusion; not sure how that happened, as I was surprised when I (mis)read that he was going to play center. I’ll leave the original as a testament to my late-night silliness, with this note as an correction/addendum. Having said that, the analysis isn’t really affected. The point about “neutral” defense is that being as much above average in left field and as much below average in center) around 10 runs/162 games is the standard adjustment between LF/CF) as Pierre is amounts to the same thing — a “0” for positional adjustment + projected defense. As a whole, the projected outfield consists of the same players as in my original analysis — Pierre, Rios, and Quentin. I still see Pierre as a 1 WAR player — decent for the bench, not so much as a starter. The same players that mentioned as better alternatives for RF could also play LF (and one could possibly add Kelly Johnson to that mix for LF over Pierre). Thanks for reading, understanding, and (hopefully) forgiving.]

General Manager: Doug Melvin
Farm Director: Reid Nichols
Scouting Director: Bruce Seid

FanGraphs’ Top 10 Prospects:
(2009 Draft Picks/International Signees Not Included)

The organization has three nice hitting prospects right at the top of the system – and all three are not that far away from helping out Milwaukee. In fact, both Escobar and Gamel could break camp with the big club in 2010. There are some arms on the Top 10, as well, but the majority of them are in A-ball and their ceilings are modest (No. 3-4 starters).

1. Alcides Escobar, SS, Majors
DOB: December 1986 Bats: R Throws: R
Signed: 2003 non-drafted international free agent (Venezuela)
MLB ETA: Now 40-Man Roster: Yes Options: 2

Escobar’s rookie status survived the ’09 season as he fell one at-bat short of being ineligible for the 2010 Rookie of the Year award. As it stands, he projects to be one of the better impact rookies in the year ahead, thanks to his solid bat and defensive skills at shortstop. This past season, Escobar hit .304/.333/.368 in 125 at-bats. He’s shown the ability to hit for a high average in the minors, but he sacrifices power and he posted an ISO of just .064 at the MLB level. The Venezuela native does have a fair bit of speed and he nabbed 42 bases in 52 attempts in 109 triple-A games in ’09 prior to his promotion. Escobar does need to be more patient at the plate, as he walked just 3.1% of the time in his debut, and his 6.9% at triple-A was his highest mark in four years. The trade of incumbent shortstop J.J. Hardy has cleared the way for Escobar to play everyday in 2010. He won’t provide the power that Hardy did, but the 23-year-old infielder will add an exciting element on the base paths.

2. Brett Lawrie, 2B, Double-A
DOB: January 1990 Bats: R Throws: R
Signed: 2008 1st round – British Columbia (Canada) HS
MLB ETA: Late-2011 40-Man Roster: No Options: 3

The club’s top pick from the ’08 draft, Lawrie has flashed a potent bat but serious questions remain about his defensive home. The club originally wanted to move the Canadian behind the plate, but he changed his mind and ended up back at second base, where his defense was not pretty. He’s not a big guy (5’11’) but Lawrie possesses some pop in his bat, as witnessed by his .180 ISO in his debut season of ’09. Despite not playing in his draft season (due to contract negotiations), Lawrie reached double-A in ’09 at the age of 19. At low-A ball, where he spent the majority of his season, the right-handed hitter batted .274/.348/.454 (.308 BABIP) in 423 plate appearances. He also stole 19 bases but was caught 11 times. If he can clean up his base running, Lawrie could develop into a 20-20 player.

3. Mat Gamel, 3B, Majors
DOB: July 1985 Bats: L Throws: R
Signed: 2005 4th round – Chipola Junior College
MLB ETA: Mid-2010 40-Man Roster: Yes Options: 2

The club had hoped for more from Gamel in ’09. Given a shot at everyday duty in the Majors, the third baseman hit just .242/.338/.422 in 148 plate appearances. He did show some pop with an ISO of .180, and he also did a nice job of getting on base with a walk rate of 12.3%. He had a lot of trouble making contact though, and posted an alarming whiff rate of 42.2%. In 75 triple-A games, Gamel struck out at a rate of 32.6%. He definitely needs to make more contact, especially considering that his power potential is good, not great. A high BABIP in the Majors of .377 helped to keep Gamel’s triple-slash line respectable. For a guy who was supposed to be near-MLB-ready in ’09, he still has a fair bit of work to do (His contact rate was 14% below the league average)… and we haven’t even discussed his defense, which is below-average at third base (although his range is not bad).

4. Zach Braddock, LHP, Double-A
DOB: August 1987 Bats: L Throws: L
Signed: 2005 18th round – Burlington County College
MLB ETA: Late-2010 40-Man Roster: No Options: 3
Repertoire: 88-93 mph fastball, slider, change-up

A former starter, Braddock moved to the bullpen in 2009 due to durability and injury concerns. Although his overall value takes a bit of a hit from the move, the southpaw thrived in the new role and posted some video-game-like numbers. With a FIP of 1.74 in 24.2 innings in high-A, Braddock then moved up to double-A where his FIP was 2.82. His strikeout rate at high-A was an eye-popping 14.59 K/9 and it remained strong in double-A at 12.64 K/9. He also showed solid control with a walk rate of 1.50 on the year. Normally strong against left-handed batters (.174 average, 11.54 K/9 in his career), Braddock was even better against right-handers in ’09 and held them to a .178 average with a strikeout rate of 14.73 K/9. On the downside, his 36.3% ground-ball rate needs to rise a bit to help with the gopher balls (1.15 HR/9 in double-A). Braddock isn’t overpowering, but he has a solid fastball-slider combo and good deception.

5. Jonathan Lucroy, C, Double-A
DOB: June 1986 Bats: R Throws: R
Signed: 2007 3rd round – U of Louisiana-Lafayette
MLB ETA: Mid-2010 40-Man Roster: No Options: 3

A catching prospect with a solid offensive reputation, Lucroy had a nice year in ’09 despite suffering from a low BABIP at .299. Overall, his triple-slash line was .267/.380/.418 in 506 plate appearances. His BB/K rate of 1.18 (15.7 BB%) helped to offset the low batting average, and Lucroy also showed gap power with an ISO of .150 and 32 doubles. Defensively, he did a nice job of throwing out base runners (40%) but he’s still working on his receiving skills. The right-handed hitter has a good shot at being the club’s long-term answer behind the plate. The acquisitions of Gregg Zaun and George Kottaras will buy Lucroy some more development time.

6. Jake Odorizzi, RHP, Rookie
DOB: March 1990 Bats: R Throws: R
Signed: 2008 supplemental 1st round – Illinois HS
MLB ETA: Late-2013 40-Man Roster: No Options: 3
Repertoire: 88-93 mph fastball, curveball, slider, change-up

One of the more advanced prep arms in the ’08 draft, the organization has been cautious with Odorizzi and he has spent the past two seasons in rookie ball. He had a solid year in ’09 by showing good control (1.72 BB/9) and the ability to miss his fair share of bats (8.23 K/9). He allowed a few too many hits – 55 in 47.0 innings – but he was hurt by a .367 BABIP. He did not get a lot of breaks in the field, either, and his ERA of 4.40 was much higher than his FIP of 2.90. Odorizzi should move up to low-A in 2010 and he has the ceiling of a solid No. 3 starter.

7. Cody Scarpetta, RHP, Low-A
DOB: August 1988 Bats: R Throws: R
Signed: 2007 11th round – Illinois HS
MLB ETA: Mid-2012 40-Man Roster: No Options: 3
Repertoire: 89-94 mph fastball, curveball, change-up

An ’08 draft pick, Scarpetta has posted solid minor-league numbers and he had a nice year in low-A ball. The right-hander allowed just 83 hits in 105 innings, while also posting a strikeout rate of 9.94 K/9. He needs to polish his control, though, as he had a walk rate of 4.71 BB/9. Scarpetta performed particularly well against left-handed hitters, who managed a batting average of just .197. He did struggle with his control in those situations, though, and posted a walk rate of 5.32 BB/9. The right-hander is raw, but he has the potential to develop into a No. 2 or 3 starter down the road.

8. Evan Anundsen, RHP, High-A
DOB: May 1988 Bats: R Throws: R
Signed: 2006 4th round – Colorado HS
MLB ETA: Late 2011 40-Man Roster: No Options: 3
Repertoire: 87-91 mph fastball, cutter, curveball, change-up

Anundsen is not flashy, but he gets the job done. The right-hander has a fringe-average fastball but he gets good sink on his pitches and he posted a ground-ball rate of 52% in ’09. In his first three seasons, he averaged a ground-ball rate around 60%, which is well above average. Anundsen, 22, allowed just 101 hits in 130.1 high-A innings in ’09 and he showed solid control with a walk rate of 2.83 BB/9. His strikeout rate was a career high of 8.15 K/9 and he allowed just two homers. Anundsen was aided by a low BABIP of .284. If he can maintain a healthy ground-ball rate in the upper minors, along with his good control, the Colorado native should make a nice No. 3 or 4 starter for the Brewers.

9. Wily Peralta, RHP, Low-A
DOB: May 1989 Bats: R Throws: R
Signed: 2005 non-drafted international free agent (Dominican Republic)
MLB ETA: Mid-2012 40-Man Roster: No Options: 3
Repertoire: 89-95 mph fastball, slider, change-up

Peralta’s career has been slowed by injuries (Tommy John surgery caused him to miss all of ’07) but he’s still young and he posted solid numbers in ’09. The hard-throwing right-hander has a good fastball-slider combo, which allowed him to post a strikeout rate of 10.24 K/9 at low-A ball. He also allowed just 91 hits in 103.2 innings of work and did a nice job of keeping the ball in the yard with just five homers allowed (0.43 HR/9), thanks to a respectable ground-ball rate of 46%. The right-hander projects as a late-game reliever, but he made 15 starts in ’09, mainly to help him get added experience. Peralta is still working on his control/command and he posted a walk rate of 3.99 BB/9.

10. Angel Salome, C, Triple-A
DOB: June 1986 Bats: R Throws: R
Signed: 2004 5th round – New York HS
MLB ETA: Early-2010 40-Man Roster: Yes Options: 2

Salome lost his title of “Catcher of the Future” to Lucroy in ’09, but he still has a lot of potential. The catcher hit a solid .286/.334/.413 at triple-A but he hasn’t played more than 101 games in the past three seasons. At just 5’7”, durability has been a long-standing concern at Salome is probably a back-up catcher at the MLB level, if he wants to avoid the DL. Despite his size, the catcher has shown solid pop in the past, although he’s likely to provide more gap power at the MLB level. He’s a .300 minor league hitter, but he’s been helped by very high BABIPs, which is unusual for catchers. Defensively, Salome has a strong arm and he threw out 30% of base runners in ’09.

Up Next: The Houston Astros

In the last four months, I’ve written two posts with a similar point – a team traded Cliff Lee and got a mediocre return at best in terms of prospects. First, Cleveland’s Mark Shapiro made the decision to trade Lee to Philadelphia at the deadline for an uninspiring package of players, a decision that looked even more questionable given how well Lee pitched for the Phillies. But now, Ruben Amaro has followed in his footsteps, trading Lee away for a trio of okay-but-not-great prospects.

So, I have to wonder what is going on here? It’s impossible to believe that both Shapiro and Amaro failed to do their homework, trading Lee away without surveying the market and weighing available offers. They obviously are both interested in making the best deals they can, and with a player of Lee’s stature, I have to believe they did significant due diligence before pulling the trigger.

So, our options here are believe that two General Managers are lazy/incompetent and failed to extract the best return possible for their team when trading him, or that the market for Cliff Lee is just not very good. Let’s just agree to reject option A out of hand, as neither Shapiro or Amaro are lazy or stupid. That leaves the second option – that this really was the best both teams could do.

What, then, is wrong with Cliff Lee in the eyes of major league GMs? Over the last two years, he’s third in baseball in innings pitched, sixith in ERA, third in complete games, has issued the third fewest walks, and allowed the sixth fewest home runs. His 2.96 FIP is third best in baseball since the beginning of 2008, better than Roy Halladay’s 3.02. Even his 3.62 xFIP, which adjusts for his low HR/FB rate, is 3.62 – the equal of Felix Hernandez.

He’s spent most of the last two years pitching in the American League, so there’s not a worry about the adjustment coming over to tougher competition. He destroyed the post-season, pitching one of the best games in World Series history against a great Yankee line-up. He’s left-handed and has three good pitches, including a devastating change-up that is among the best in the game.

I don’t get it. The Brewers gave up more for two months of CC Sabathia than the Phillies gave up for 1 1/2 years of Lee or that the Mariners gave up for 1 year of Lee. Lee is Sabathia’s equal, or really close to it. Yet twice, he’s been put up for trade and the response has been fairly blah.

You can’t argue that this is what pitchers of this quality go for. The difference in prospects that it required to acquire Lee and Halladay is staggering, and is not all explained by the $6 million in cash Toronto sent to Philly or the extension that Halladay agreed to. The Angels were reportedly willing to give up the moon for Halladay, but apparently had no interest in making a similar offer for Lee, letting him go to a division competitor while surrendering nothing that would help them in 2010.

The only thing that makes sense to me is that teams are still a bit skeptical of Lee’s rapid rise to greatness. And while we’re the first ones to point out that you want to make decisions on large samples, Lee’s thrown 450 innings over the last two years and racked up +13.8 wins in that time. You can’t fluke your way into that kind of performance.

It will be interesting to see what happens when Lee hits free agency next year. He is clearly expecting to get paid like a top tier starting pitcher, but major league GMs apparently do not see him as one. They should. He is.

Atlanta non-tenders Ryan Church

The Braves acquired Ryan Church last year by unloading Jeff Francoeur on the Mets. Church has seen a large power drain since 2006, as his ISO has steadily fallen from .250 down to a meager .111 in 2009. Church still showed average on base abilities, and his 4.0% HR/FB rate is unsustainable. His power will likely partially rebound in 2010, and thanks to his above average fielding in the corners, he could be an above average player in a starting role. Church has had an unfortunate injury history, but many of his injuries have been of the freak variety. He could be this offseason’s version of Ryan Langerhans.

Seattle non-tenders Ryan Langerhans

Well, that is, except for Ryan Langerhans. With Ken Griffey’s return and Michael Saunders and Bill Hall on the roster, there just wasn’t room for Seattle to carry another outfielder. His primary value comes from fantastic defense. In only 39 games, Langerhans posted a +5.5 UZR in LF – normally a sample that is too small to draw conclusions, but this is only slightly higher than his career mark of +17.6/150. He won’t hit for average – his .232 career batting average has kept him out of the major leagues, but he has decent power and walks enough that his 29% K rate doesn’t make him an offensive liability. Langerhans can play any OF position, and any team that needs an OF should have him on their radar.

Oakland non-tenders Jack Cust

Jack Cust is the model of the “Moneyball” type of player that makes certain traditional types froth over with rage. He’s slow, can’t play defense, and strikes out a ton. Yet somehow, he’s managed to put up wRC+ numbers over 100 each of the last three years, thanks to high BB and HR rates. However, defense does have value, and the Athletics would have actually had to pay Cust to play for them this season. Cust has declined steadily, as his HR/FB rate dipped to 17.7% in 2009, the lowest of his time with Oakland. A slight bounce back may be possible, but it is also possible that age may be catching up to him, as his skillset does not age well historically. It’s hard to imagine Cust not catching on somewhere, but he’s strictly a DH at this point, and is a below average player.

How do you think Church, Langerhans, and Cust will perform? Project them here!

Today’s projections involve a little alliteration: Carl Pavano, Juan Pierre, and Nick Punto.

Pavano, of course, returned to the Twins after slyly testing the free agent waters.

Pierre was traded to the Chicago White Sox yesterday, where he figures to play center and bat near the top of the order.

Finally, Punto. Because why not?

Of all the potential landing spots for Hideki Matsui, the Angels seemed unlikely. As one of the teams with wallets thick enough to afford a Matt Holliday or Jason Bay, their willingness to bow out and settle on Matsui seems fairly odd. The money (one-year, $6.5M) is similar to the deal signed by Bobby Abreu last off-season but the circumstances vary wildly. Nevertheless, the Angels have their replacement for Vladimir Guerrero.

Matsui will turn 36 in mid-June and bats from the left side of the plate. Over the last three seasons he’s posted wOBA of .368, .348, and .378. That 2009 mark wouldn’t seem the least bit suspicious if not for a .235 ISO. That marks a career best from Matsui and it happens to come the year he spent in the Yankees new wind-aided launching pad. The odds of him repeating such a display of pop are unlikely. Without adjusting for park, league, or age, a 5-4-3-2 regression has Matsui with a wOBA around .360 next year. That looks remarkably like a projection for Abreu and it’s an upgrade over Vlad’s 2009.

There are hints that Matsui will get a chance to play the field occasionally. That’s not going to cost the Angels much in terms of runs unless he’s playing the field quite often, which is something he did not at all in 2009. The more pressing concern might be health-related. Matsui has had some issues in the past staying healthy and their starters wouldn’t appear to be the most reliable options either. Barring some new additions, the Angels are looking at a starting outfield of Abreu (36), Torii Hunter (34), and Juan Rivera (31). I can’t think of too many outfields currently in place with an average age of 34 years as of late outside of the 2004 Giants and 2001 Yankees.

I’m not saying age is going to guarantee injury or that Abreu will lose a limb sometime soon, it’s just peculiar that the Angels went this route with their history of making a splash on the market and the chance to get younger.

Instead of going team by team this off season, I will review the divisions as a group. And whereas last year, I used a version of BaseRuns, with some modifications for strength of schedule and the like thrown in, to determine the ranking of teams’ true talent levels, this year I will use WAR as provided here on FanGraphs.

Part One: The NL Central

The ranks last year had the Cubs as one of the better teams in baseball, at third overall. The Brewers followed at a respectable 7th place with the Cardinals also above average, in 12th. The dregs of the division were Houston in 22nd, the Reds at 26th and the Pirates a lowly, but not quite lowliest 29th.

For all the preseason talk about the western divisions being boring and lacking good teams, it turned out to be the two central divisions that were the real purveyors of lackluster baseball in 2009.

The Cardinals tied the Twins for 11th place overall at 38 WAR and after them, much as in the real standings, nobody appeared for quite awhile until the Cubs show up with 31 WAR, in 20th place. Then comes the rest of the division; Milwaukee at 22nd with 29 WAR, Cincinnati at 24th with 25 WAR, Pittsburgh at 26th with 22 WAR and the Astros at 27th, also at 22 WAR.

For the Cubs, the collapse was hitting and fielding based. Just 13 wins out of their position players had them near the bottom in baseball as outside of Derrek Lee, they had no player above three wins. It was the opposite for the Brewers, who had the sixth best collection of hitters and fielders in baseball but the absolute worst group of pitchers. Loads of innings to Braden Looper, Jeff Suppan and Seth McClung did them no favors and as a group the Brewer pitchers amassed a staggeringly low three wins. Yeah, three wins total.

Here’s a summary of the ranks for the NL Central teams, with 2008 first.
CHC: 3, 20
MIL: 7, 22
STL: 12, 11
HOU: 22, 27
CIN: 26, 24
PIT: 29, 26

It’s been a big week for Toronto Blue Jays General Manager Alex Anthopolous. Obviously, I’m referring to the bonanza earlier in the week in which Anthopolous filled out his 2010 catcher corps by signing John Buck for one year and two million dollars moments after he was non-tendered by the Kansas City Royals (all set with Jason Kendall), veteran Ramon Castro for one year and one million dollars, and Raul Chavez to a minor league deal.

[NB: I usually prefer referring to multiple projections, but since I’m discussing more than one player, I’ll keep things simple by sticking with CHONE for both offense and defense. When I averaged various different projections, the overall values I came up with were about the same, anyway.]

On CHONE’s original list of free agents, Ramon Castro rated as the best catcher per 150 games. His projected offensive line is .230/.292/.412, or 10 runs below average per 150 games. His defensive projection is two runs above average. Adding in the positional adjustment, per 150 games Castro projects as a 2.4 WAR catcher. However, Castro also comes cheaply because not only do catchers almost never play 150 games, but the 34-year-old Castro has never played 100 games, and has only played more than 2009’s 57 once, in 2005.

Although I’m personally excited that I might get to see John Buck play in-person, many Royals fans hate him for being part of the return in the 2004 Carlos Beltran trade as much as for his numerous strikeouts and poor defense. The latter is reflected in his -5 defensive projection. As for the former, his offense looks a lot like Castro’s — low average, decent walk rate, above-average power. CHONE projects Buck at .227/.296/.398, or -9/150 for 2010. Together, this puts Buck just below average at 1.8 WAR. Again, catchers typically play much less than that, and Buck spent time on the DL in 2009.

Raul Chavez is a veteran defensive catcher who actually lives up to his reputation with the glove. Offensively, CHONE projects him at .226/.262/.319; -37/150. However, Chavez avoids being replacement level due to his glove (+9). He projects at 0.4 WAR per 150.

The Blue Jays are at the beginning of a rebuild. Before Buck signed, Toronto had zero catchers on their 40-man roster. Someone has to play catcher, and according to CHONE, the only free agent catcher in the same league with Castro and Buck is departing Blue Jay Rod Barajas, who’s seeking a much bigger deal. While neither Buck nor Castro is an iron man, if they each play half of the season, that still projects as around a league average player (2 WAR). Given that the cost of one marginal win on the open market is likely at least four million dollars, the Jays are paying three million for at least eight million dollars worth of (projected) production. Well done by the Jays.

In a way, Chavez’s contract is the most interesting, and not because he’s good. Rather, it’s because Toronto, unlike other clubs this winter, gave a near-replacement level catcher a contract appropriate to his likely contribution rather than six million dollars over two years. It’s a Festivus Miracle!

If you want to enter your own projection for Toronto’s 2010 catchers, click here.