As we get closer to deals for Manny Machado and Bryce Harper, the time has come for warnings about mega-deals gone bad. You know about Albert Pujols, Chris Davis, Miguel Cabrera, and Jacoby Ellsbury as prime examples of why guaranteeing big money long-term to players on the wrong side of 30 is a bad idea. Robinson Cano’s current contract is not one of those examples. There were alarm bells when Cano signed his 10-year, $240 million contract with the Mariners five years ago, but he has more than held up his end of the contract by averaging more than four wins per season. If Cano hits his projections next year and continues a normal age-related decline, he could easily live up to the $240 million contract he signed.
Over the past five seasons, the Mariners have paid Cano just over $108 million and Cano, in turn, has delivered 20.7 WAR. According to our values at the bottom of Cano’s player page, his play has been worth around $160 million. He’s currently projected by Steamer for three wins next season. With standard aging curves, here is what Cano’s production and value are expected to be over the next five years.
Robinson Cano’s Contract Estimate — 5 yr / $81.1 M
Last month, we talked about the potential conflicts of interest raised by the New York Mets hiring former CAA super agent Brodie Van Wagenen, who used to represent several high-profile Mets, as their new General Manager. Since then, we’ve gained additional information regarding the terms of Van Wagenen’s contract and how he and the Mets have attempted to address those conflict of interest concerns.
It’s worth noting that at the outset, the Mets didn’t offer a terribly specific answer to the question of how Van Wagenen had avoided breaching the fiduciary duty he owed to clients like Jacob deGrom and Yoenis Cespedes (among several others) when he accepted the Mets’ GM job. The day after my initial piece on the subject, John Delcos noted for Forbes that reporters asked Van Wagenen about the conflict of interest.
That was the subject of one of the first questions asked of him this afternoon, and before Van Wagenen could answer, Wilpon interrupted and said he had spoken with the commissioner’s office and Major League Players Association chief Tony Clark, adding, “We have provisions in Brodie’s contract to deal with any conflicts of interest.”
What those provisions are, neither Wilpon nor Van Wagenen would say. Van Wagenen, who, as expected, appeared polished and highly professional, said, ‘The goals between players and management are more in line than people think.'”
That answer doesn’t adequately address the issues attendant with Van Wagenen’s hiring. As I explained on Flipping Bats and Winning Games, agents have knowledge teams don’t, ranging from players’ medical conditions to their desired salaries. And even if players and management were to have similar goals, they’re still adverse negotiating parties. When we found out more about the contractual provisions that addressed conflicts, the details also left something to be desired. Per the New York Post:
Though he is no longer their agent, the 44-year-old is privy to information regarding his former clients that could give the Mets an advantage over a player. And that could also include negotiations for a long-term deal, because Van Wagenen might know their final asking price.
“We didn’t discuss specifics on any one player like that,’’ Wilpon said of deGrom’s future. “I think [deGrom] is to be determined and Brodie is going to have to recuse himself from some of those discussions. He will have to set an overall tone for the organization, which way he wants us to go, and then we’ll have to have some others be responsible for doing the actual contract.”
There are two problems with this approach. First, remember that, as we discussed last time, Van Wagenen was legally required to obtain a waiver of conflict of interest, with informed consent, from each player separately. Based on Jeff Wilpon’s comments, that didn’t happen. We do know that Van Wagenen kept his clients informed.
Van Wagenen said he discussed the move with clients, including deGrom, as it progressed. Said he would like to keep him for a long time.
Wilpon said the Mets have "money put aside" to improve parts of the team, such as player development and analytics departments.
But based on the available reporting, it appears unlikely those conversations included informed consent waivers. For instance, Jacob deGrom told MLB.com that Van Wagenen’s “transition was ‘a little confusing,’ adding that he’s still trying to ‘wrap my head around it.'” And deGrom told the New York Post that “I don’t really know how to feel” about the “conflict-of-interest stuff.” MLB.com relays a conversation between the two that illustrates just how confusing this can get.
Shortly after Van Wagenen became GM, divesting himself of all interests in CAA and forfeiting the chance to represent deGrom in contract negotiations, he chatted again on the phone with his ex-client.
“Have you talked to my agent?” deGrom recalled asking him.
“I don’t know who that is,” Van Wagenen deadpanned.
“Yeah, me neither,” deGrom said, laughing.
For now, deGrom is still working out that detail, as he tries to determine how Van Wagenen’s move to the Mets’ front office might affect him.
That doesn’t sound like someone who provided informed consent for Van Wagenen’s new job, and there have been no reports confirming that deGrom – or any of Van Wagenen’s other ex-clients – signed any such written waivers.
Now, Van Wagenen did say that he would recuse himself from dealings with his former clients, which is good. But Wilpon suggested something else.
“The GM gives some guidance, but he’s not totally involved with every last detail,” Wilpon said. “[Van Wagenen] can give us direction. He just can’t be involved in the negotiation. Is it something we are worried about? No. We gave it a lot of thought and obviously I went through the process of making sure that everybody was OK with doing this kind of arrangement, of bringing an agent in to our side.”
For legal purposes, if Van Wagenen is providing “guidance” or “direction,” it really doesn’t matter if he is or isn’t in the room for negotiations. A true recusal would require him to have nothing whatsoever to do with his former clients’ contract negotiations. Direction and guidance creates the possibility – or at least the appearance – that he could disclose private information to those doing the negotiating. Avoiding that possibility would require the Mets’ General Manager to be absent from dealings regarding the Mets’ biggest stars, which creates a host of practical problems, as Phil Mushnick correctly notes.
Exactly how is that going to work? When, for example, deGrom’s future is discussed and determined, Van Wagenen will leave the room or, to be extra cautious, leave the country? Or will that determination be a quick process completed while the new GM, with no say whatsoever, is out to lunch?
His input won’t be solicited, known, weighed or, at the very least, fully suspected? Or are we to believe that the Mets hired a GM whom they’ll gag and handcuff when it’s time to make big decisions? Van Wagenen seems too smart to not know better. But we’re not?
So far, we haven’t seen Van Wagenen recuse himself from Noah Syndergaard trade talks, even though he represented the ace right-hander before taking the Mets job. And Van Wagenen raised eyebrows when he said that ex-client Tim Tebow, who this year posted a 106 wRC+ (along with a 34.6% strikeout rate and an unsustainable .418 BABIP) in Double-A, would nevertheless get promoted to start the 2019 season.
““I reject the notion that I’m going to be in a conflict of interest now or that I’m going to compromise my own reputation, past behavior and my own integrity,” Van Wagenen said to the New York Times‘ James Wagner. But that’s sort of the problem – Van Wagenen doesn’t appear to give the possibility of conflicts of interest its due consideration. And there are potential issues on the other side of trades, too. As Wagner notes: “Some G.M.’s may be leery of what inside information Van Wagenen has if he, say, offers a Met who is a former client of his in a trade.”
So the concerns now go beyond internal conflicts of interest. Can Brodie Van Wagenen run the Mets as he needs to with such significant limitations? Or will he circumvent those limitations in order to get the best deals for his team? At this point, we just don’t know. It would be a relatively simple fix, too; if the parties did follow the law, they could confirm they had written conflict waivers from all involved. But the fact that the Mets and Van Wagenen have allowed the situation to percolate suggests they may not have taken that step – and now, for better or worse, every move Van Wagenen makes will be viewed through that lens moving forward.
Locations: Flushing, NY; Syracuse, NY; Binghamton, NY; Port St. Lucie, FL; Columbia, SC.
Summary:
The New York Mets are seeking individuals to work in Baseball Operations, both in Flushing at the major league level and at their minor league affiliates. This is an entry-level, yearly position intended to gain exposure to a variety of responsibilities within Baseball Operations. Location will be determined based off fit. Applicants should be available to start in January.
Responsibilities:
Compile advance scouting reports.
Assist the amateur scouting department with information gathering in preparation for the Rule 4 Draft.
Support players and coaching staff with video and player-tracking technology.
Assist front office with administrative needs.
Data collection and entry.
Those at the minor league affiliate level will travel with the club on all road trips, filming and charting games, and operating the Trackman radar while the club is at home.
Qualifications:
Bachelor’s degree.
Familiarity with baseball concepts, strategy, rules, recent developments, etc.
Confidence in verbal communication skills with front office, coaching staff, and players.
Proficient with Microsoft Office.
Comfortable learning and operating new technologies.
Organized, attentive, and accountable.
Available to start in January.
To Apply:
Interested candidates should apply using this Google form with a resume by November 30, 2018.
Position: Associate, Baseball Research & Development
Department: Baseball Operations
Location: Citi Field, Flushing, NY
Summary:
The New York Mets are seeking individuals with a background in data analysis to work with the club’s Research and Development team. This is an entry-level, yearly position in which associates will analyze baseball data and use their findings to provide insight within the different areas of Baseball Operations. These may include player development, amateur and international scouting, and major league advance scouting. Applicants should be available to start in January.
Responsibilities:
Conduct research in the field of baseball analytics and communicate insights with others in Baseball Operations department.
Research, develop, and test predictive models to support Baseball Operations decision-making (i.e., player evaluation, roster construction, player development, in-game strategy).
Create data visualizations that integrate into Baseball Operations web application.
Collect and manage large data sets. This may involve writing scripts for automation as well as manual data entry.
Qualifications:
Bachelor’s degree or equivalent experience in Statistics, Data Science, Mathematics, Physics, Computer Science, or similar quantitative field.
Strong experience querying and managing data with SQL.
Demonstrated experience using statistical tools and packages in R or Python.
Familiarity with baseball specific datasets (i.e., Trackman, Statcast, PITCHf/x) and knowledge of current baseball research.
Preference for candidates who have demonstrated experience building web applications in Python, Java, PHP, Javascript, etc. Please provide a link to the application and/or codebase (Github) if possible.
Available to start in January.
To Apply:
Interested candidates should apply using this Google form with a resume and a sample of a past research project, preferably in sports analytics, by November 30, 2018.
This post is part of a series concerning the 2019 Today’s Game Era Committee ballot, covering executives, managers and long-retired players whose candidacies will be voted upon at the Winter Meetings in Las Vegas on December 9. Use the tool above to read the introduction and other installments. For an introduction to JAWS, see here. Several profiles in this series are adapted from work previously published at SI.com and Baseball Prospectus. All WAR figures refer to the Baseball-Reference version unless otherwise indicated.
2019 Today’s Game Candidates: Davey Johnson and Charlie Manuel
Manager
G
W-L
W-L%
G>.500
Playoffs
Pennants
WS
Davey Johnson
2443
1372-1071
.562
301
6
1
1
Charlie Manuel
1826
1000-826
.548
174
6
2
1
AVG HOF Mgr
3648
1961-1687
.546
274
7
5
2.6
SOURCE: Baseball-Reference
Nearly 15 years ago at Baseball Prospectus, I introduced a means of using player value estimates to compare Hall of Fame candidates to those that are already enshrined at their positions — the system that soon became known as JAWS (Jaffe WAR Score). There is no similar comparison method for managers, but a few months ago, when news of Mike Scioscia’s pending retirement broke, my former SI.com colleague Cliff Corcoran made an interesting attempt to figure out the Hall of Fame standards for managers. Cliff calculated the averages above based upon 21 enshrined managers, excluding three 19th-century skippers (Ned Hanlon, Frank Selee, and Harry Wright) as well as the Negro Leagues’ Rube Foster. While the shorter careers of modern managers — shorter relative to Connie Mack and John McGraw, at least — and the ever-expanding playoff format make cross-era comparisons a bit more complicated, the numbers do help as guideposts when it comes to discussing Hall of Fame managerial candidates
Davey Johnson
Like Billy Martin before him — albeit with far less drinking and drama — Johnson was renowned for his ability to turn teams around. He posted winning records in his first full season at four of his five managerial stops and took four of the five franchises that he managed to the playoffs at least once. However, after six-plus seasons managing the Mets, he never lasted even three full seasons in any other job and never replicated the success he had in piloting the 1986 Mets to 108 wins and a World Series victory.
Pitchers learn and develop different pitches, and they do so at varying stages of their lives. It might be a curveball in high school, a cutter in college, or a changeup in A-ball. Sometimes the addition or refinement is a natural progression — graduating from Pitching 101 to advanced course work — and often it’s a matter of necessity. In order to get hitters out as the quality of competition improves, a pitcher needs to optimize his repertoire.
In this installment of the series, we’ll hear from three pitchers — Ron Darling, Jack Morris, and Tyler Thornburg — on how they learned and developed their change-of-pace pitches.
———
Ron Darling, Former All-Star
“When I first started throwing a split, I was one of those pitchers who could never develop a changeup. I was in the minor leagues with Al Jackson, who was a crafty left-hander in his day, and he taught me a screwball. He used to throw one. I got very adept at it, but it made my arm hurt. I had to develop a change-of-pace pitch that didn’t hurt my elbow, and that’s how the split-finger came to be.
“It was an era where the pitch was popular. Roger Craig taught it to a lot of pitchers, but it was a split-finger fastball for those guys. For me it was more of a forkball. It was something soft that I could combine with my fastball and hard curveball.
Art imitates life, and vice versa. I wouldn’t presume to call the words I scribble on these electronic pages “art” — and yet they, too, seem to imitate life. You see, way back in February, back before 26 of baseball’s 30 teams had been eliminated and hope still sprang eternal, I wrote about former Mets and Phillies outfielder Lenny Dykstra and his fantastic claims of extorting umpires. Dykstra, it should be noted, took a surprising amount of pleasure in what was, if true, undoubtedly an illegal exercise.
Now, on the topic of the former illegal exercise, one finds the following recent reprot:
Former #MLB star Lenny Dykstra facing 10 years in prison after being indicted on cocaine, meth and terroristic threat charges https://t.co/ZMTllITryJ via @usatoday
To be fair, this isn’t Dykstra’s first run-in with the criminal justice system.
Since retiring from baseball, Dykstra has served prison time for bankruptcy fraud, grand theft auto and money laundering, and he declared bankruptcy in 2009, claiming he owed more than $31 million and had only $50,000 in assets.
Cocaine and methamphetamine charges don’t represent new territory for an ex-ballplayer: Esteban Loaiza pled guilty to the same this past August. A so-called “terroristic threat” would appear to be something altogether different, though.
Under Section 2706(a) of Title 18 of the Pennsylvania State Code, the crime of “terroristic threats” is defined thusly:
Pitchers learn and develop different pitches, and they do so at varying stages of their lives. It might be a curveball in high school, a cutter in college, or a changeup in A-ball. Sometimes the addition or refinement is a natural progression — graduating from Pitching 101 to advanced course work — and often it’s a matter of necessity. In order to get hitters out as the quality of competition improves, a pitcher needs to optimize his repertoire.
In this installment of the series, we’ll hear from three pitchers — Seth Lugo, Collin McHugh, and Ryan Meisinger — on how they learned and developed their sliders.
———
Seth Lugo, Mets
“I’ve pretty much developed my pitches through repetition, especially my breaking pitches. My sinker, as well. I didn’t have them coming out of high school. I didn’t learn my sinker until Low-A. All of my pitches really came after that season.
The Mets had expectations coming into the season, but they whiffed on most of them. (Photo: Arturo Pardavila III)
Some fanbases regard themselves as the best in baseball. Others pride themselves on their ability to hate anything, including Santa Claus. Still others are just a group of eight people cowering in the shadows of a creaky, nightmare-inducing home-run feature. But no fanbase does self-immolation like Mets fans, whose experience is one mostly of mind-numbing frustration peppered by only the occasional highlight.
That staring-into-middle-distance sadness is, of course, justified given the team’s history — and, more relevant to this post, the ups and downs and ups of 2018.
The Setup
New York’s 70-92 record in 2017, during which almost everything went wrong, was bleak enough to obscure the club’s recent success, including a World Series appearance in 2015 and return to playoffs in 2016.
This is not the official FanGraphs position. FanGraphs doesn’t have an official position on any awards. This is a company of a bunch of different writers, and any bunch of writers will possess a bunch of different opinions. These are my thoughts, and my thoughts alone.
My vote this year is for the AL Cy Young. I do not have a vote for the NL MVP. If I did have a vote for the NL MVP, I wouldn’t be allowed to write this right now! As far as this race is concerned, I’m an outside observer.
Reasonable people can conclude that Jacob deGrom shouldn’t be the NL MVP. In such an event, I imagine the support would go to Christian Yelich. Yelich has been amazing, especially of late. Every number has error bars, and Yelich has an argument. This case isn’t open and shut.
You’ve probably read much of my argument before, written by different people in different places. This is the “best player” argument. It’s the Mike Trout argument. I’m just going to make the argument with different words.
So we can get into it, then. Last week, I wasn’t sure who I supported. I’ve never voted for the league MVP, so I’ve never given it all that much thought. But now I’ve come around, and I can say that, if I had a vote for the NL MVP, my first-place choice would be Jacob deGrom. My second-place choice would be Christian Yelich. deGrom, of course, is done for the year, because the Mets were bad. Yelich’s Brewers are playing literally right now, and for all I know, he’ll provide the winning hit that sends the Brewers straight to the NLDS. For so many voters, that’s likely to be a factor. Perhaps that’s likely to be the factor. I don’t believe that it should be. I believe that deGrom made a winning case.
Pitchers learn and develop different pitches, and they do so at varying stages of their lives. It might be a curveball in high school, a cutter in college, or a changeup in A-ball. Sometimes the addition or refinement is a natural progression — graduating from Pitching 101 to advanced course work — and often it’s a matter of necessity. In order to get hitters out as the quality of competition improves, a pitcher needs to optimize his repertoire.
In this installment of the series, we’ll hear from three pitchers — Ryan Borucki, and Jacob deGrom, and Yefry Ramirez — on how they learned and developed their changeups.
———
Ryan Borucki, Blue Jays
“When I was 12, I hurt my arm. I had ‘Little League elbow’ from throwing too many curveballs at a young age. Because my elbow didn’t feel so good, my dad canned my curveball. He was like, ‘Alright. You’re just going to throw a fastball and a changeup.’
