2015 Trade Value: The Bottom Five
Last week, we ran through our annual Trade Value series, chronicling the 50 most valuable assets in baseball — at least according to me. To no one’s surprise, Mike Trout remained at the top of the rankings. The rest of the list was dominated by the young stars who have flooded into baseball during the past few years.
But just as there are some players who are valuable both on the field and because of their discounted contracts, there is a flip side to the Trade Value coin: guys who are taking up significant portions of their team’s financial resources without providing enough value to justify their expense. As you’d expect, these types of players are mostly on the downsides of their careers, having been successful enough early on to earn big paydays, only to decline quicker than their current organizations hoped or expected.
Today, we’re going to look at the five players who I estimate to have the least trade value in baseball. Put another way, these are the players who would cost their team the most cash (or equivalently valuable talent) to remove from their rosters. We’ve actually seen a decent number of negative-value asset trades this year — the Rangers taking Josh Hamilton back, the Braves using Craig Kimbrel to dump Melvin Upton on the Padres, and the Diamondbacks dangling prospect Touki Toussaint to get out of the remainder of Bronson Arroyo’s contract, for instance — as more teams with financial flexibility have begun to use that resource to acquire talent that wouldn’t otherwise be available in trade.
Taking on Upton or Arroyo is small potatoes compared to what it cost to move the five guys listed below. These guys are all much bigger liabilities than either of those, and the amount of negative equity is so large that it’s difficult to imagine what deals for these players might actually look like now.
I will note that, when considering the amount of dead money a contract carries, I only considered the amount due by his current organization beginning with the 2016 season (calculating remaining 2015 salary is annoying), excluding amounts already being covered from prior trades. For instance, Josh Hamilton’s contract isn’t going to appear here because the Angels are already on the hook for almost all of the remainder of the deal. A team trying to trade for Hamilton would only be assuming the small portion Texas agreed to take to complete that deal. The same goes for Matt Kemp, whose contract is being somewhat subsidized by the Dodgers. He would have been a stronger candidate for this list if not for the fact that Los Angeles has already paid down some of what it is left on that deal.
And for the estimates of how much of the remaining contracts opposing teams would take, those figures come solely out of my imagination. They aren’t based on any algorithm or formula. I’m spitballing, mostly, and giving a figure in the range of what I’d expect if it were announced that a team had made a deal for one of the five players below. Since these guys are all so far underwater, it’s extremely unlikely any of them gets traded, so this is more a mental exercise than any kind of prediction of upcoming deals.
With those caveats out of the way, let’s get to the list. This is my take on the five players who would require the largest subsidies in order to get another team to take them off their current organization’s hands, plus a few guys who were in consideration but have short enough or cheap enough deals to not quite make the bottom five.
Dishonorable Mention
Homer Bailey, Joe Mauer, David Wright, Matt Kemp, CC Sabathia
#5: Albert Pujols, 1B, Anaheim
Controlled Through: 2021
Guaranteed Dollars: $160 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +2.8
Five year ZIPS WAR: +7.3
Estimated Market Value: $90 million
Dead Money: $70 million
At 35 years old, Pujols has rediscovered his power stroke, posting a .271 ISO that is exactly equal to his career average. With 26 home runs already this season, he’s only two more dingers from a season-high since joining the Angels, and he’s got a pretty decent chance at hitting 40 on the season. Clearly, if the Angels wanted to move him, there would be teams interested in the short-term production, assuming the Angels paid down his salary enough to make it interesting.
But even with Pujols hitting for power again, we’re still talking about a first baseman headed into his late-30s with a .320 OBP. This is as one dimensional as value gets, and teams aren’t going to just ignore the fact that he’s another power decline away from being a pretty average player. Victor Martinez and Nelson Cruz look like instructive comparisons in the most recent free agent market, and they pulled in between $17 million and $15 million per year for four years repsectively. You could point out that Pujols has more defensive value than either — and a very good health track record — so maybe he tops both, and pushes up towards $20 million per year over that same term.
But the problem is that he’s under control for six more years, not just four, and it’s hard to see many teams wanting to pay the freight for all six years. Even in the best case scenario, I can’t see anyone taking more than $90 million, which would leave the Angels with $70 million remaining. Given their status as contenders and their lack of a supporting cast around the game’s best player, there’s no reason for the Angels to make a move like this, so Pujols will very likely be around unless the Angels enter some kind of rebuilding process. His resurgence has definitely increased his value, but he’s worth more to the Angels as a player than a trade chip.
#4: Shin-Soo Choo, OF, Texas
Controlled Through: 2020
Guaranteed Dollars: $102 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +1.7
Five year ZIPS WAR: +4.7
Estimated Market Value: $25 million
Dead Money: $77 million
Few free agent contracts have gone wrong as quickly as Choo’s deal with Texas. Coming off a year where he posted a 151 wRC+ and +5.5 WAR, Choo has now posted the two worst seasons of his career, putting up a 97 wRC+ since joining the Rangers. For a guy with no defensive value, league average offense makes him a replacement level player; Choo is only worth playing if he hits, which he now hasn’t done for a couple of years.
This contract was always going to end poorly, given that the Rangers were buying Choo’s 31-37 seasons, but they were hoping to get enough value in the first few years to justify the long-term cost. Now, though, Choo is an underpowered 33 year old who doesn’t make enough contact to offset his flaws, and his problems with left-handers make him a part-time player at best. Realistically, he’s not much better than a guy like David DeJesus or David Murphy at this point, and the going rate for these kinds of players has been $5-$6 million per year on a two year deal.
Maybe we bump that up to $7 or $8 million due to inflation and Choo’s superior past performance record, but teams aren’t signing up to pay much for more than a few years, given his age. I’d estimate that you could maybe get someone to take $25 million over three years, but that would still leave the Rangers responsible for $77 million over the remainder of the contract. And amazingly enough, Choo isn’t even their least tradable asset.
#3: Justin Verlander, SP, Detroit
Controlled Through: 2019
Guaranteed Dollars: $112 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +2.1
Five year ZIPS WAR: +7.3
Estimated Market Value: $30 million
Dead Money: $82 million
A few years ago, Justin Verlander was the best pitcher in baseball, but the decline from his peak has been swift and sudden. These days, Verlander looks like a back-end starter at best, and it probably won’t be too long before the Tigers start having serious considerations about trying to revive his career as a reliever. With his diminished stuff and inability to get strikeouts via the high fastball, Verlander doesn’t profile as anything more than a role player for the remainder of his contract.
But unfortunately for the Tigers, he’ll be getting paid like he’s still one of the game’s premier players. At $28 million per year for the next four years, a team would realistically expect something like +15 WAR from a free agent signing for a comparable amount; the Tigers will be lucky to get more half of that from Verlander. For the Tigers to get someone else to take the rest of this contract, I’d estimate that they’d have to pay him down to $7 or $8 million per year given the four years left on his contract.
Deals like the Justin Masterson contract show that teams will still take flyers on broken former aces, and the potential for Verlander to move to the bullpen would create a little bit of a market for him, but the Tigers would likely have to pick 75% of the salary in order to get another team to bite.
#2: Elvis Andrus, SS, Texas
Controlled Through: 2023
Guaranteed Dollars: $118 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +1.6
Five year ZIPS WAR: +5.8
Estimated Market Value: $30 million
Dead Money: $88 million
When Andrus signed this extension back in 2013, he was coming off a 97 wRC+ as a 23 year old, and had just put up his second straight four win season; he looked like one of the best shortstops in baseball, and a pretty easy guy to bet on given his age. And then, almost overnight, Andrus fell apart. He’s put up just a 77 wRC+ since the deal was signed, and he’s gone from an elite defender to a below average fielder in a couple years time. Andrus now looks like someone who might better fit as a utility player on a good team, or a stop-gap starter on a team not really trying to win in the short-term.
Except he’s still due another $103 million in guaranteed money over the next seven years, and even worse, if he’s traded, the team option for 2023 becomes a player option, essentially guaranteeing him another $15 million. So any team attempting to acquire Andrus would be on the hook for $118 million in future commitments. He’s still young enough that you could squint and see a change-of-scenery candidate here, but how much would teams really pay for a no-hit infielder with diminishing defensive skills?
I’d put his floor around $5 million per year — that’s what Stephen Drew got from the Yankees last winter — but the length of the commitment would be a problem, and I can’t see anyone signing up to pay for more than five of the eight years they’d be on the hook for. I could see someone taking something like $30 million over those five years, figuring that they’d get only a slightly overpaid bench piece if he keeps struggling and a potential bargain if he bounces back at all, but that still leaves $88 million for the Rangers to absorb in order to trade him. Given that they could just pay him $103 to keep him for themselves — since the 2023 option almost certainly won’t be picked up if they don’t trade him — there’s no real incentive for Texas to make a deal like this. So both sides are probably stuck with each other, whether they like it or not.
#1: Robinson Cano, 2B, Seattle
Controlled Through: 2023
Guaranteed Dollars: $192 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +3.6
Five year ZIPS WAR: +13.2
Estimated Market Value: $100 million
Dead Money: $92 million
During his long run as baseball’s premier second baseman, Cano thrived due to his rare ability to hit for power while posting elite contact rates. During his first season in Seattle, the power predictably fell off, but he kept his strikeouts to a minimum and created a lot of value by spraying line drives around the field. This year, though, Cano’s power has remained absent but now his contact rate has also regressed, leading to his highest strikeout rate of his career. While you don’t want to overreact to a bad half season, this looks like a 32 year old whose skills are beginning to atrophy.
Cano will likely rebound some and should still be expected to be an above average player in the short-term, but with nearly $200 million left on the $240 million deal he signed with the Mariners, this a huge commitment to a guy who probably isn’t a star anymore. Like with Pujols, I could see a team convincing themselves there’s still a $20 million per year player here based on expected short-term production — especially with the Yankees still having a glaring hole at second base — but the age and length would mean that they aren’t going anywhere near all eight remaining seasons. I think a best case scenario for the Mariners would be that someone takes $100 million, looking at him as a slightly better alternative to the Pablo Sandoval tier of free agents.
But even that might be optimistic, especially if the Yankees decided to pass on a reunion. Sandoval was heading into his age-28 season when he got $95 million, and has the same basic offensive skillset, even if he’s not as good at getting value from it as Cano has been. Given that 2016 will be Cano’s age-33 season, it’s probably unrealistic to expect too much of his power to come back, so perhaps the market tops out in the $85-$90 million range. At that point, the Mariners would still be on the hook for over $100 million, making this deal pretty clearly the contract with the most negative equity in baseball.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
Just amazing how quickly these contracts turned sour. These guys fell off a cliff quicker than anybody could have imagined.
Well, Cano went and got himself an intestinal parasite, so there’s that.
Hey! No name calling!
And…the best fangraphs comment ever award goes to….
The 32 year old who’s on the disabled list for six weeks and has 8/250 left on his deal has to be on this list.
Realistically, if Miggy was a free agent this winter, I can’t see him getting less than 8/$200M. He’s still that good, and +5 WAR players aren’t signing for $1xx deals anymore. Signing him to an extension two years ago wasn’t a good idea, but he’s aged well enough that it’s probably not more than $50 million in dead money right now, and might be even less than that.
They’re both going to be 2-win players in a couple years, so why pay Cabrera the extra $150 million?
1. It’s his first ever DL appearance. If you think it’s the start of a pattern, fine, but I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt.
2. I would imagine he’s projected for as much 5-year WAR as everyone on this list combined. $250 million is a lot of money, but there’s still a reasonable expectation that Cabrera can be worth that.
@suicide squeeze:
As random internet commenter, I will also give him the benefit of the doubt.
If I were a person taking on the obligation to pay him a quarter of a billion dollars, I might not be so forgiving.
May be his first DL stint, but he has a history of lower body injuries that he’s either played through or intermittently kept him out of the lineup; hip, ankle, foot, now a calf strain. Not saying he wouldn’t get 200mil, just saying I wouldn’t give it to him. The final years of his contract are gonna be rough.
I can understand defending Miggy (I myself wouldn’t have him on this list), but projected as much as everyone combined? Come on. That’s 38.3 WAR over the next 5 years, which comes out to a cool average of 7.66 per year. Doing that once would be the highest season of his career, and you’re suggesting he average that for ages 33-37.
184 wRC+
147 last year, 400 PAs this year. This is what getting old and not being great anymore looks like. Next year it’ll likely get worse.
“147 wRC+” “this is what not being great looks like”
…
It looks like you did the math wrong on Elvis Andrus’s deal — he’s guaranteed $105M after this season, not $118M.
That’s if the Rangers keep him; if he’s traded, it goes up.
Dave beat me to it!
Cot’s link: https://www.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/al-west/texas-rangers/
Andrus is owed an additional $103 million between 2016 and 2022, but if he’s traded, an additional $15 million in 2023 becomes a player option – hence the $118 million total.
That option also becomes fully guaranteed if he gets at least 550 PA in 2022.
“That option also becomes fully guaranteed if he gets at least 550 PA in 2022.”
That’s strange clause. “If you get 550 PA then you lose your ability to decline your option. If you don’t get hurt you can’t leave.”
Is there is a more player-friendly contract in baseball?
If traded, that option is de facto guaranteed plus he gets full no-trade rights?? wow.
“8 years/$120M (2015-22), plus 2023 vesting option
signed extension with Texas 4/4/13
$2M signing bonus.
15:$15M, 16:$15M, 17:$15M, 18:$15M, 19:$15M, 20:$15M, 21:$14M, 22:$14M, 23:$15M club option
2023 option guaranteed with 550 plate appearances in 2022 or 1,100 PAs in 2021-22 combined
2023 option becomes player option with trade or waiver claim
limited no-trade protection (may block deals to 10 clubs beginning in 2016)
if traded, Andrus receives full no-trade protection with new club
may opt out of contract after 2018 and 2019 seasons”
The opt-out is a real killer. If somehow he were to regain his value to the point where the back end of the contract seemed like a good deal, the team wouldn’t get to keep him.
I think part of the moral is that extreme groundballers whose value is entirely in their legs can’t be expected to improve into their mid-20s the way most other players can.
I suspect you are a bit pessimistic about Cano. He has had some medical issues associated with intestinal parasites, and lack of energy. I’d be surprised if he doesn’t bounce back quite a bit. ….that said, even if Cano hits like himself again, it is still a bad contract. Maybe just not the very worst.
Which is a bit odd considering how optimistic Dave was when Cano was approaching free agency. I do think there is a lot more upside with Cano than Pujols, but Dave has them as almost having equal positive value ($90 million v. $100 million). Of course, Pujols is playing about as well as one could imagine currently, and Cano is the opposite. By the end of the year, it would not be surprising to see their names flip flopped on a list like this.
Yay, no Ryan Howard!!! Small Victories!!
I suppose you can’t be that terrible a contract (at least in total “dead money”) when you only have $35M left in guaranteed money after this season.
Though you’d think if Sabathia makes honorable mention, Howard should, too.
let him have his small victory. Phillies fans don’t get many victories regardless of size.
ARod and Howard must have been 1/2 on this list for quite awhile
I know Porcello is 26, but man doe sthat extension looks terrible. 20 million for arguably one of the worst SPs in baseball this year.
Definitely a broken season. Those happen (e.g. Jon Lester a few years back), and if he stays broken that would go down as perhaps Boston’s worst contract. If it’s a one-year deal, then it’s a blip and a clean slate. Not putting money on the latter outcome, though.
A pessimist could absolutely put Porcello’s deal on here. But, I have a hard time believing he won’t squeeze 1.5 wins out in the next 4 years. Even as a mop up guy, he should get this. He’s owned 82.5 million starting in 2016. That’s 12.5 million more than the dead money on Pujols. A win is worth $8 million, so if he gets a bit over 1.5 wins, his deal is less worse than Pujols. He has been terrible, but I got to think he’s good for at least 2 wins over the life of the deal.
While I don’t think he’s bottom 5 given Dave’s list, I would have given him an honorable mention. I don’t think he’ll be much better than Homer Bailey, and as of right now, I’d trade him straight up for CC Sabathia and his deal ($25m in 2016, $25m in 2017 if he avoids DL).
That deal is too small to be ranked, but man, in sum the Red Sox’s recent moves have been arguably the worst in the major leagues. It’s a good thing that they have an exceptional collection of young talent to make up for it. Speaking of which, I watched Rafael Devers and Yoan Moncada yesterday. Devers is incredible. I realize the absurdity of suggesting that an 18 year old in Low-A is one of the top ten prospects in the minor leagues, but he is.
lol Dave loved that deal…loved the entire Red Sox offseason…what a dolt.
I wanted the cubs to sign choo when he hit free agency, after 2013 he had posted 5 of 6 seasons with an OPS over .800
WHEW!
A bottom 5 trade value list with no Yankees, no Dodgers and no Phillies on it? What a bizarre, confusing world we’re suddenly living in.
Yeah, the Phillies only avoid the list because their bad contracts are finally playing out. They’re still hurting, though, e.g., they still owe about $23M to Cliff Lee, who is probably done.
Most informed people thought the Andrus extension was a bad over pay at the time. Except for this guy, because, you know, he’s always smarter than everyone else. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/elvis-andrus-texas-ranger/
Trust me, that was considered a good, safe bet of a contract at the time.
And that opinion was proven wrong.
That’s…not how it works
Not according to Dave Cameron:
“You’re going to hear a lot of people talk about how $120 million for a below average hitter is crazy.”
The upshot is this: If you try to project production for many ballplayers, you will sometimes land on your face, even when you are generally astute, as Dave certainly is.
“The upshot is this: If you try to project production for many ballplayers, you will sometimes land on your face, even when you are generally astute, as Dave certainly is.”
exactly. This is a very probabilistic game. Very project-able, but also very probabilistic, and the combination makes baseball analysis incredibly interesting.
While I’m not Mr. Cameron’s biggest fan, when you write about nearly every major deal and transaction then you’re going to get a lot of them wrong. It’s fine to point out that he whiffed on Andrus, but at the same time he did say at the time that Choo’s deal was one of the worst of that off-season. It’s interesting that your link also mentions Profar given that I and so many others have been wrong about his future stardom.
The lesson to learn, I think, is that $#!+ happens. Analytics and the data available to us provide a better ability to predict the future and to assess the likely outcomes of a deal or a trade, but it’s important to always keep in mind the potential downside as well, especially when projecting several years into the future. Mr. Cameron has a tendency to view contracts as favorable to the team, especially with regard to young players, when he might be better served to place more consideration on the risk the teams are assuming given that it’s much easier and more likely for a player to get worse than to get better.
A lot of the projections from early 2013 ended up not panning out. Not sure you and others can be considered wrong yet on Profar. He was 20 when he played in the majors in 2013, and then injured. He may well end up a star still.
Andrus fell flat in almost exactly the way that link hinted was possible. The fielding deteriorated, as Dave said it would, but at a faster pace. The hitting stagnated instead of improving, as his no-power line was more unsustainably babip fueled than appeared at the time.
And of course the Kinsler analysis was off. He ended up being worth far more than his contract. Looking back I’m a little surprised how down everyone was on Kinsler in the Spring of 2013, but I was probably in the same boat. Then he got dealt for Fielder the next year. The Rangers would have been better off if somehow that deal could have been keeping Kinsler and getting Fielder for Andrus.
I would take your snark more seriously if you would link to at least one of these informed people who thought the extension was a bad over pay at the time.
Yep, because it was totally predictable that his defense and base running would drop off so dramatically by his age 26 season. There are easier bones to pick with Dave.
There are many bones to pick with Dave. He’s wrong more often than he’s right.
3 out of 10 gets you in the Hall of Fame.
Have any data to support your assertion?
Yay, the Mariners came first in something!
Is there a team heading in the wrong direction as fast as the M’s?????
Players is top 50 trade value: 1 (Felix)
Players in Keith Laws Top 50 Prospects: zero (including honorable mentions)
Players on Least Valuable list: Robinson Cano #1!!!!!!
Playoff odds: 4.1 % Division, 9.2 % Wild Card
The M’s are well on their way to a losing season after being picked as a chic pick to contend. The Robinson Cano contract is looking like a potential huge albatross, and Nelson Cruz probably isn’t far behind.
But its not just the ML team that is disappointing. Their farm system has been decimated by injuries and bad performance, with practically every good prospect in the organization have a disappointing season, being traded, or both. Guys who were supposed to be foundation players – like Zunino, Ackley, Smoak, and Montero – have failed to develop into even average players. And the team seems to think that adding more guys like Mark Trumbo is the answer.
The M’s are completely fu$ked!
The Tigers. The Tigers are worse.
They have two players controllable past this year that look like they’re great (Miggy and Martinez), one of whom is old and expensive. Prospects? Lol, what’s a prospect. They’re old, expensive, under .500, with no good young guys on the way up and two of their four best players are leaving this offseason for free agency. By this time next year, it’s very possible that the mediocre Jose Iglesias could be the 3rd best player on the poor team.
Yeah, but consider things in a longer-term perspective. At least the Tigers are coming off a good run of contending. The Tigers are just hitting the backside of a significant period of being one of the better teams in baseball. The Phillies are in the same boat: they suck, and will for a while, but at least they had a good run for a bit.
The M’s are supposed to be just starting a run of contending for the playoffs. They’ve essentially mortgaged their future for one 87 win season. Now, it looks like they’ll need to at least retool for a bit – hopefully under new leadership – without any tangible benefits.
This is also what I keep saying about the M’s. And even the manager is done. McGrimmis, sacrificed in front of MIKE ZUNINO yesterday. 100+ strike outs on the year and they gave up an out to get to Zunino. Pitchers intentionally walk the guy in front of Zunino.
The farms system has worst winning percentage. They put in a power line up in a pitcher friendly park. The worst contract ever was Chone Figgins (sp).
I could sit here and write about everything that has gone wrong in the past six years. They had TWO managers quit on them. And that is not even the worst of it. It is time to clean house. Admit the good effort (MEH) and move on.
To add insult to injury, the President and CEO of the parent company to the Mariners’ ownership group (Nintendo of America) unexpectedly passed away recently. R.I.P. Satoru Iwata
Probably not. He’s on pace for 3.5 wins this season, assuming he doesn’t get rip snorting hot again and push that to 4. At $5m per win, he’ll have earned 30-34% of his total contract in a single season. However, I think we’re seeing the cost of wins increasing annually. At $6m per win, it’s 35-40%. At $7m per win, it’s 42-48%. I don’t think there’s any way that Cruz ends up on this list. Even if he craters after this season, you’re looking at only 30-40 million in dead money at best.
The M’s are where they’ve been for the past three years- they need a starting pitcher, catcher and two outfielders, preferably with contact and OBP skills. The core of the M’s is in no need of blowing up. Seager, Miller, Cano and either Trumbo/Montero/LoMo are an infield that will produce for the next 2-3 years. Okay, 3/4 of it will produce. Cruz is set at DH/part-time RF for at least another year or two before he takes a dump down his leg. Seth Smith is a 2.5-3 win player with another two years on his contract. The reason the farm is depleted is all those guys are in the majors now. What is killing the M’s is the bullpen, which is volatile from year to year, and the lack of timely hitting/hitting with RISP/and OBP/contact threats. Plus Cano’s super crappy parasite filled 1st half. They have a young core of pitchers- Felix is still only 29, Paxton, Walker, Elias, Montgomery are all cost controlled.
Isn’t someone still paying Bobby Bonilla a bunch of cash?
If they didn’t backload the deal (at an interest rate in line with the market at the time), they wouldn’t have had money to trade for Mike Hampton. If they didn’t trade for Hampton, they wouldn’t have made the World Series that year. And if Hampton hadn’t left the Mets, they wouldn’t have drafted David Wright, since they got him with the compensation pick. So despite the narrative, the Mets made out just fine with that deal.
Always somebody tryin to put a positive spin on things.
SIGHHHHHHHH…………..
That’s like saying it was really great that I got into that car accident, and the injuries got infected and my legs had to be amputated, and while in recovery I was ritualistically abused by the hospital staff, but if it weren’t for all that I would never have met my wife.
It’s not anything like that.
http://i.lvme.me/tq3zy2p.jpg
Except instead of getting into a car accident, you made the World Series, and instead of having your legs amputated, you drafted David Wright and went back to the playoffs 6 years later.
Good analogy!
This Bonilla thing is way overblown.
If you value what he’s being paid in 1995 dollars, it’s a pretty small amount of money in baseball salary terms, like $350,000.
Leaving the Madoff thing aside, because that’s really a separate issue, interest rates were a lot higher back then, so whatever they set aside for Bonilla would be growing pretty fast, even using Treasury Bond rates.
You can rag on the Wilpons for a bunch of things, but deferring salary over the course of 40 years is not really that ridiculous.
Inflation makes his $5.9 mil buyout worth a little less than $10 mil by today’s standards, so that yearly payment in 1995 terms is more like $800k. But at 8% interest you get 25 years of payments at $1.19 mil per payment = almost $30 mil. So yeah, it really is that ridiculous, unless you thought inflation and interest rates were going to go through historic increases during this stretch, in which case you might have broken even.
At the time (1999) plenty of people thought interest rates would remain high. The stock market was at an all-time high, the economy was booming, and a lot of people didn’t think it would end anytime soon. 8% wasn’t considered a high rate, especially since the prime rate was 8.5% at the time. Factor in that Madoff had been bringing in much higher and consistent returns, and it wasn’t a bad deal until a) the economy tanked, and b) Madoff was found to be a fraud.
Justifying bad financial decisions by saying they’re offset by money coming in elsewhere is flawed, I don’t know why people continue to push this argument.
It’s like saying it’s ok that you burned a $20 bill because you got paid $100 that day– it doesn’t matter how much you make in other arenas, the deal on it’s own is a bad one.
Your analogies are awful, and offsetting money elsewhere is part of the financial decision. If I owe you $100, and tell you I’ll pay you $105 next year instead of $100 today, then is that a bad financial decision? Most people would say something like “it depends on what I can do with the $100”. If I can turn it into $110 next year, then it’s a wise decision. If I can only turn it into $101, then it’s not a wise decision. You can’t just ignore all other facets, and say it’s bad because they’re paying him a million bucks to not play for them today.
Teams defer money all the time, and usually at an interest rate in line with the time-period. Most GMs would rather pay their players 20 years from now, instead of today.
Bobby Ayala,
You’re not thinking about this correctly. Given the info at the time (high interest rates, large returns on various investments), the deferred money made sense for the Mets. They get to keep some money to give to Bonilla later, in the meantime that money would make even more money.
That was the idea at least.
Unthought…
The Bonilla decision was bad, justifying it is stupid and your analogies are terrible…
You realize that your argument effectively can be summarized as “If I can take $105 or $110 I’d rather take the $110… but I’d I’d rather take $105 than $101” NO SHIT SHERLOCK!
The point is that the Mets DID NOT KNOW what rates would be (duh, how could they) and they should have know that paying $1m was more than paying nothing… so I really don’t get your point.
Money Man:
“That money would make even more money” — you know, like Gremlins
Oh Jesus… this is like the worst financial message board ever…
“they should have know that paying $1m was more than paying nothing”
What you’re missing is that they saved $5.9MM in 1999. The decision wasn’t “paying him $1MM/year in the future, or pay him nothing”. The decision was “pay him $1MM/year in the future, or pay him $5.9MM now”. That decision is based off of the rates that they thought they could realistically get.
Based on your understanding of how this works, no team in their right mind would ever defer money. After all, why would they pay future dollars to a player if they can pay $0 in the future?
As for your comment to Money Man, do you really not understand that money can make money? The $5.9MM they saved in 1999 would have been worth more than that in 2010 with a decent investment strategy.
umm, yea — and clearly the Mets should be in the business of running a baseball team AND arbitraging 20yr forward interest rates… I mean, they have the baseball thing licked, why not expand the empire!
“The $5.9MM they saved in 1999 would have been worth more than that in 2010 with a decent investment strategy”
They assumed 8% compounded interest rates… coming off the biggest bull market in some time… and with long-term rates and risk premia collapsing… what could possibly go wrong!!!
By assuming your basic financial knowledge is greater than everyone else’s on the this board I think your are missing the key points here: 1) the Mets made bad assumptions; 2) these bad assumptions led them to make bad decisions; and 3) these bad decisions were ancillary to the business of running a baseball team.
To argue that it was a wise move is just plain dumb.
Not only are you wrong on a basic level, you are coming off as a massive jerk while doing it.
Unthought_Known, I recommend you don’t bother with this person.
All the Mets did was increase the total amount paid by paying it in future years. They owed Bobby a nearly equivalent amount anyway in the 90’s. It does make sense to look at what they were able to acquire with that money. An awesome pitcher to improve their chances of making the WS and a #1 pick. We now know that #1 was worth more than the aggregate additional $ paid to Bonilla by deferring payment. The Mets definitely made out like Bandits (especially considering who the #1 became [Wright] and that they *did* make the WS that year!).
Probably an insurance company (I am assuming that the Mets bought an annuity to cover their obligation to Bonilla).
So what? Some people on another baseball web site discussed this recently. Some believed that Bonilla could have done better by taking the money up front and investing it, albeit at higher risk than taking the deferred payments. At any rate, the the sum of the deferred money was not an egregious overpay when you consider the time value of money.
I mean, I agree with the comments above to the extent that the tradeoff (money now vs. money for decades) was reasonable at the time. And that in fact it worked out fine for the Mets in terms of baseball assets acquired.
But IIRC the Mets’ insurance policy was in fact to “pocket that unpaid obligation, and send it with all our other excess revenues into the Madoff caverns, to be increased at 10% plus annually?”
Anyway, it provides a good snark metric: Which players would you gladly trade straight-up for Bobby Bonilla right now? The top five and honorable mentions are all on the list, methinks.
No mention of A-Rod or Mark Teixeira, jesus. Wasn’t that long ago that they were considered dead weight. I didn’t realize that Tex is a FA after 2016, and once you toss out the incentives, A-rod’s only owed $40 MM through 2017. If you assume Sabathia’s 2017 option vests, you’re still talking about $50 MM through 2017. Yankees are gonna have a lot of salary room, right as two very strong FA classes hit the market.
2015-2016 offseason FAs: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/09/2016-mlb-free-agents.html
2016-2017 offseason FAs: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/03/2016-17-mlb-free-agents.html
Rodriquez is only owed $40 million through 2017, and now he might actually be worth that.
It leaves a bad taste in my mouth that the Yankees seem to have benefited twice-over from Rodriguez breaking the rules. Not only did they get to take advantage of any increased performance he might have been experiencing, but they managed to parlay that into saving tens of millions of dollars and getting him a year off to revitalize his career.
I don’t know about this.
If he’s this good at 40 years old, maybe the PEDs weren’t helping him so much at 35. Maybe he’s just that good.
Or maybe he’s still taking stuff. That’s a different story. I would guess he’s tested pretty thoroughly: if he’s got stuff that they can’t test for, then maybe that’s his trick.
I am also of the opinion that sometimes the effects of PEDs on performance is overblown, but at least we can say that they were not detrimental.
I don’t think the Yankees planned for things to play out this way, but if they had, they couldn’t have drawn it up any better than:
1. Land Rodriguez by offering him huge deal
2. Enjoy his ridiculous production for the first half of the deal, win World Series
3a. On the onset of his decline, MLB suspends him for PEDs, nullifying financial commitments
3b. Simultaneously give him a year to rest and get healthy
4. Welcome back his near prime level production on his return
When Andrus signed his deal, it seemed like everyone was saying it was a terrible deal, and I did not see why–I thought it was a fine deal (As much as any super long-term deal like that can be fine–they’re all difficult.).
Apparently there is a reason I do not have a job as an analyst, executive, writer, etc.
I don’t know that anyone has investigated exactly what happened to his defense. That precipitous decline seems so bizarre at his age.
Cano being number one was rather a surprise, but that’s a lot of late 30s seasons to pay a guy.
When a team outbids the Yankees by $65m, is it really a surprise to find that contract at the top of a worst contracts list?
No Prince Fielder?
The Tigers are paying part of Fielder’s deal so it is down to only 5 years 90 million plus he is hitting again. (wRC+ 148) not a good deal but better then these
Fielder is currently a 4+ WAR offensive player and looks like the last couple years might be written off to the injury. At that the 5/120 is not bad at all and 5/90 has a lot of surplus value. Looks pretty good to me.
No way. First, he is on pace for closer to 3-3.5 WAR and that is with a .350 BABIP. He’s more of a 2.5 WAR player. But he’s only going to get worse. He’s 31, and he’s – how do I say this nicely – extremely obese. The Rangers should do cartwheels if someone were willing to take him off waivers and just let him go.
He’s fat, but baseball player fat. He can bench 400 pounds and leg press the max on most machines. He’s not Mcdonald’s drive-through fat, he’s BJ Raji fat/.
I agree with Dave. He has always been fat, and actually has a healthier diet then ever. Bat speed is still there, and moves decent for how fat he is.
Surprised no one has said anything about Verlander. He could end up getting paid the most per war for the remainder of his contract. I feel like the 2.6 WAR prediction for last year is pretty optimistic.
Hes not even really that fat. I know its a bit old, but:
http://onmilwaukee.com/sports/articles/princefieldernude.html
Kind of hard to believe that Mauer’s not in the top 5, but you might have convinced me. Maybe.
Re: Andrus – that’s the risk of speed as a carrying tool. The floor seemed high because solid speed allowed him to contribute across D, BSR & BABIP. I’d venture that gradual speed declines have caused all of those numbers to drop slowly – nothing drastic – and you’re left with a replacement level guy.
isn’t 26 a bit young for his speed to noticeably decline? You’d think he could continue to leverage above avg. speed all the way to 28 or 29, right?
So weird not seeing ARod on this list.
i know he has had a bounce back year but what is the 5 year forecast for Votto? dont the reds owe him something like 8/200 after this year still?
Yes, he is guaranteed 8 / $199 million. Maybe someone would take most of that because he is an elite hitter on pace for 5+ WAR this year, but he is 32 in September. The out years could be ugly. He does derive a lot of value from an elite walk rate, but so did Pujols through 2010. I would think that he is honorable mention.
Surely Rusney Castillo deserves a Dishonorable Mention? He’s a 28-year-old AAA player due another $60 million.
Castillo is a guy that needs a new team. His NL equivalent is Alex Guerrero.
I guess it’s better to keep these guys down rather than let them go and have some other team make them look bad.
In Guerrero’s case the provision that he becomes a free agent at the end of the year if traded makes him basically untradable if he’s any good.
As rentals go, Guerrero is a better deal than Ben Zobrist.
I think LA will just sit on him as insurance and a highly paid postseason pinch hitter. Maybe there will be a spot for him at some point.
Great article, thanks as always. I have one minor complaint.
I’m not sure I agree with how you’ve calculated the dead money. Take Choo for example, he has 5 years @ $102 million. You assert out that he’d only get 3 years at $25 million total, implying $77 million in dead money and that teams wouldn’t be willing to add a 4th or 5th year at no cost.
Given that Choo is controlled for five years, I think you should be valuing the full five years. Maybe the fourth and fifth years are discounted, but you don’t think teams would be willing to pay him for 5 years @ $35 million instead of 3 @ $25 million?
I believe the assumption is that by year four he is a replacement level player at best, so he has no value after that.
Why should anyone make this kind of money with so many people starving?
You could say that about every successful entertainer, most company CEOs, and myriad other people.
If all players were paid the MLB minimum, how many fewer people would starve? Approximately zero. What would happen is that the billionaire owners would get even richer.
Your point is a good argument (IMO) for bringing back the 90% marginal tax rate.
Boy, someone got bored with trolling twitter today.
log off
It seems like NL teams are smarter than their AL counterparts.
particularly their AL WEST counterparts
Well…
Hi.
Because of 5 contracts?
Homer Bailey should have gotten more than honorable mention. A guy is who is severely overpaid and then gets hurt, and you have to dump better pitchers this year because of salary constraints.
Wow, 4 out of the 5 are in the AL West, and Josh Hamilton just switched teams in the AL West.
David Wright and his $87M don’t look so great doubt now, but I guess insurance can cover a lot of if the worst case scenario comes to pass.
Dave – great article.
I’m curious – what are your thoughts regarding Carlos Gonzalez and Troy Tulowitzki trade values (or lack thereof).
What would happen to these contracts if the player died? Would the team be exempt from paying the rest of the contract? I’m looking for potential plots for a mystery series I’m writing.
Why do you ask? Are you a Mariners employee?
It’s probably pretty obvious to everyone, but the MLB baseball agreement with the MLBPA pretty much makes bad contracts like these inevitable.
MLB teams are, in the aggregate, awash in money. Enough teams care enough about being competitive that a lot of that money is going to be spent. Where can they spend the money? Not on young good players. Teams that don’t have young good players can’t spend money of them and teams that do have them don’t have to spend the money.
The only place left that teams can spend money to get ML talent is free agents. Again, due to the agreement with the union, these players are almost always on the down side of their careers. The cost of this talent has been bid up by competition to the point the even the best contracts are usually expected to be dead weight by the end, with the often forlorn hope that surplus value in the early years will compensate.
Enough of these contract do work out, more or less, to keep optimistic GMs and owners bidding on free agents. Beside, where else are they going to buy talent?
(The recent frenzied signings of international players is an exception to paying huge amounts for players on the down side of their careers, but it also serves to demonstrate how badly young talented U.S. players are getting screwed by a union that shouldn’t have had the right to sign away their rights, since they were not members of said union at the time.)
Good points, and don’t forget the short term financial boost of season ticket sales as a driver of the optimism for big name free agent signings. There also something of an incentive problem for a GM at risk of his job. If he needs to show results within the next year or two, better to take the risk on free agents even if that’s not the optimum strategy fir the team over the medium term. It takes a GM with a lot of job security – often someone newly hired such as Luhnow in Houston – to carry out a true rebuild based on young players. And the owner needs to live through a few years of low revenue (though also low payroll costs) and bad press while that happens.
Can we add the contract Ian Desmond turned down into Honorable Mention somewhere on here? Nats dodged a bullet on that one.
lincecum reportedly was offered 5 years for $100 mil from the giants before he turned into a pumpkin
he said he wanted to ‘stay in the moment’ and signed a 2yr deal instead. maybe he didn’t like watching barry zito get booed as he struggled while making big money.
A guy like Albert Pujols drives the math boys crazy. Because he simply brings things into the equation that can not be measured with numbers.
The affect he has on a game, how teams compete against the Angels, and the way he improves the other players on his team. Can’t whip up formulas for that.
Ok Ruben Stewart, trade for him then.
Yeah the Cardinals really fell apart without him improving their players.
Sure you can, they just involve imaginary numbers.
“how teams compete against the Angels”
This is so true. It’s great to see the Astros run Red Right 88 when they see Pujols lined up on the left side.
That pretty much has to explain Jeff Francoeur too.
I’ve always been skeptical that there are guys out there who would ever dare adopt the attitude of “I’ve got my 9 figure guaranteed contract, so I’m done putting in any effort.”
And then Elvis Andrus showed up.
i’m suprised Wright is an honerable mention. His health has been poor this year, but he’s expeted back at the very least by opening day next year, and his performance is enough that he made the top 50 trade value list last year.
Yeah, but considering the spinal stenosis diagnosis, how much would the Mets be required to eat in a trade? There is A LOT of risk now.
is this a list that Dave updates every year? It would be interesting to go back and see which players on this list actually did get traded and how that turned out for the players and the two teams involved.
Last year:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/fg-on-fox-the-anti-trade-value-guys/
Where was Andrus last year? With no dishonorable mentions not enough room in the bottom 5?
What’s it going to look like next year? Cano seems a lock. Same with Pujols. I would imagine Joey Votto (signed through 2023) has to make an appearance at some point. Cabrera’s $248mm starts next year. David Wright definitely if insurance doesn’t mitigate.
Funny how much can change over a year. Two of the 5 guys on list might actually provide value.
What’s Sandoval’s projection for his remaining 5 years?
This year will come out to about 0.0 WAR using ZIPS ROS, putting him at 1.9, 3.0, 0.0 the past 3 years, which would be something like 1.5, 1.0, 0.5, 0.0, 0.0, = 3 WAR over the life of the $95m contract.
That seems at least worthy of an honorable mention with ~$70m in dead money.
Cano’s return to the Yankees is an interesting proposition. Yes, he is in the decline phase of his career and signed past 40, but with some expected bounce-back, would it be worth it to the Yankees to take him back if Seattle paid 100 million of the remaining money owed? Assuming he’s traded in 2016, the Yankees owe him 8 years/~90 million from age 33-41. As Dave points out, that is a Sandoval-type contract, with Cano being older but also extracting more value from his skill-set. Grant it, that Sandoval contract doesn’t look so great right now, but that deal would not break the bank for at team like the Yankees, while solving a glaring weakness.
Cano back to the Yankees is interesting. I think Cano still has a couple of good years left but to do that, the Mariners must clean house in the front office as well. Dave is right because you can’t dump the contract without paying some of it as well. And you are not going to get a good prospect. It was a desperate move by a desperate GM.
Yeah, especially since the Sandoval comparison is bullshit, as Cano has hit for more power this year than Sandoval has since 2012.
Cano’s skillset is what people who don’t know anything about stats think Sandoval’s skillset is.
Think you are underestimating recency bias when evaluating Albert Pujols and his trade value.
And two other biases, actually: the bias of a very successful person to maintain that success. Not for as long as possible, which might lead to wisdom, but for as long as possible without immediate danger. This is like a jealous man who destroys his relationship through jealousy, but in the short term eliminates the sense of danger created by competing suitors. A winning season with a chance at a World Series today may cost a team dearly in the future. But the immediate sense of safety is substantial, and the potential for future calamity is well at arm’s length.
And of course: the bias for championships as the ultimate indicator of success. World Series titles, analytically speaking, are not the best measure of a general manager’s ability. Consistent contention is, and relative to the means of the team itself. (perhaps corrected for luck, but I digress) Consistent contention, to some extent, is how a team does win a title or titles. But only on the macro level, because in-season and especially in-postseason, winning a title is a singular achievement, accomplished through a series of singular achievements. The projected WAR of a player in 2018 is so remote it’s Pluto.
Which is a prolix way of saying: titles protect jobs; titles make resumes.
Pujols, being as good as he is today, could have a great deal of marginal value to a team that trades for him. And that marginal value for the team, creates value to the general manager. Value, if that value contributes to contention or postseason success, beyond his absolute value today and well beyond his absolute value tomorrow. No one on this earth measures tomorrow evenly with today. Nor should they.
Putting a player of recognized greatness and in the middle of a good season, and a season punctuated by those skills that are most valued, on a list of players with the least trade value, is to me ignorant of human nature. Dozens of players with far less onerous contracts have not a fraction of the value that Pujols has, because though they may not make you suffer as much in the future, they benefit you not at all today. For today’s happiness you can sacrifice my whole year when I’m 65, if I am ever 65.
The problem with that view is that he isn’t dominant. He’s put up 2 WAR so far in slightly over half the season. That’s the same as Adam Lind this year. That’s a valuable contributor, but it’s below All-Star level. It’s not even close to MVP level performance.
And his contract isn’t just carrying a bit of payroll – it would be the largest guaranteed contract on most teams in the league. The per year amount is enough that it isn’t just a consideration out in 2018 and beyond. It meaningfully impacts the budget of a team every year it’s on the books.
And even if a GM isn’t thinking about out years, just about every owner in the league is.
The way that players get huge albatross contracts is that they are coming off years of great performance, then teams get overoptimistic about aging curves and/or performance drops off more than average aging curves would predict. Once the decline sets in, teams don’t take on these long contracts for a year or two of solid – but not great – performance.
AL West dominating the list
I hated the Andrus contract the day they signed it
No one’s saving more dollars in the long run for the Steinbrenners than Rodriguez. The Yankees will never sign a 30 year old for 10 years again.
Until they do.
At least 4 out of the 5 are still currently at least decent players, which is more than you can say in a lot of years of modern baseball mega contracts.
It appears you really pissed off Albert with your article today.
By the way, to one of the previous posters, Pujols walked off the field his last game with the cardinals a world champion. They have done nothing but choke in the biggest moments since he left.
They sure choked their way to the world series in 2013.
Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval signed for a combined 183 million and have been worth -1.4 WAR so far.
Don’t forget Rusney Castillo and his $72.5 million for -0.5 WAR.
Ramirez -0.8 ($22m ’15, $110m total)
Sandoval -0.8 ($20m ’15, $95m total)
Ogando -0.6 ($1.5m ’15, $1.5m total)
Castillo -0.5 ($10.5m ’15, $72.5m total)
Craig -0.5 ($5.5m ’15, $26.5m total)
Breslow -0.4 ($2.0m ’15, $2.0m total)
Mujica -0.3 ($4.75m ’15, $4.75m total)
Moncada 0.0 ($31.5m ’15, $63.0m total)
Masterson 0.1 ($9.5m ’15, $9.5m total)
Porcello 0.2 ($12.5m ’15, $95m total)
Total: -3.6war ($120m ’15, $479m total)
half a billion dollars invested in the last year for massively negative war. (that doesn’t even include ortiz/nap/shane.)
absolutely staggering.
nothing wrong with the andrus trade when made. he was an elite defender at the time and was being signed for an
average of slightly less than $15m per year through his prime years. noone cried about it when it was signed but
they are all geniuses now that the result sare coming in. who, at the time, projected his defensive skills to diminish in his prime years ? want a dumb contract? stay with the rangers and think about shin sin choo. the best possible projection was .300 and 20 hrs. the best! he is a terrible defensive player , an atrocious base runner and his baseball
IQ is non existent … and the rangers will owe him $21m in the year he turns 38. a candidate for the worst free agency contract ever.
i pay no attention to the WAR stat. even the analytic dedicated sites can’t agree on a definition… and the replacement is seldom ” average “.
You are complaining that people’s opinions changed as the facts changed, as a rule do you always stick your head in the sand?
I’d be very hesitant to include Albert Pujols on this list. Sure he’s going to be overcompensated to some degree, but it would be foolish to overlook the man’s pride and work ethic. The contract is too long, thus I doubt he will be worth his full salary towards will but I promise you Albert Pujols will not go quietly into the night.
I should have doubled Andrus’s contract
If I’m the Yankees and you’re offering to eat 90 – 100 million $ of Cano’s remaining 8 year contract its a no-brainer they’ll take him. They would probably take him if the Mariner’s only ate 60-70 mill.