Evaluating the Red Sox Spending Spree
The Red Sox came into the winter with a clear need for starting pitching, and a lot of money to spend. Yesterday, they spent a big chunk of that money, adding $41 million in AAV to their payrolls for the next four or five years. And yet, today, they still have the same glaring need for starting pitching. Evaluating the wisdom of the Red Sox spending spree is an interesting challenge, because unlike most free agent signings, these feel like half of the transaction.
We can still evaluate the signings of Pablo Sandoval and Hanley Ramirez based on the production the Red Sox should expect going forward and the money that was surrendered to acquire that future production, but we don’t really know the whole picture here. The signings of two of the winter’s premier free agent hitters very likely mean that Yoenis Cespedes is getting traded, and I think Mike Napoli might be on his way out of town too. What the team gets back in trade, and how they choose to reallocate money that could be saved through those trades, will affect what else the Red Sox can choose to do this winter. They know they need pitching, and it seems essentially impossible that they won’t make further moves to address that need; moves that were made possible by these signings.
So without those pieces of information in place, I’m hesitant to draw any strong conclusions about the new contracts given to Sandoval or Ramirez. If the team trades Cespedes and Napoli for young arms, then spends the $25 million in savings on Max Scherzer, then these moves start to more clearly address the team’s need for a frontline starter. But we don’t know if they’re going to do that. We don’t know what they’re going to do, so we can’t be too strongly convicted about whether these signings were a wise use of resources.
But that doesn’t mean we can’t say anything about the prices the team paid, because while the Red Sox have done a very good job in signing free agents of late, these deals did not come cheap. Ramirez’s deal is shorter than expected, but if he plays well and the option vests, this is a 5/$110M deal, $15 million more than the $95 million that Sandoval was guaranteed. The fact that the fifth year is a vesting option protects the Red Sox to a degree, but there’s probably not a scenario where this contract works for them and they don’t have to pay the full $110 million; they only pay $88 million if Ramirez is a bust.
And while both Ramirez and Sandoval are talented hitters who appear to be a very good fit for the team’s ballpark, projecting their future performance is not such an easy task. Both have struggled with injury problems, and probably shouldn’t be looked at as 150 game per season players. Ramirez is changing positions, and we really don’t have any kind of idea what he’ll be as a defender in the outfield. Sandoval is oddly shaped, and his weight presents some additional risk beyond what is normal for other players.
There are probably more variables here, and more places to make differing-but-reasonable assumptions, then there are with most free agents. But let’s start off by looking at the projections, and seeing what Steamer’s expectation is as a starting point.
Both players project at essentially +3.5 WAR per 600 PAs, though that was forecasting Ramirez as a shortstop. To maintain his -5 projected DEF, he’d have to be a slightly above average defender in left field, since the LF positional adjustment starts him out at -7.5 DEF per 600 PAs. Ramirez seems athletic enough to be an above average corner outfielder, but there are plenty of good athletes who take poor routes or get lousy jumps and aren’t actually assets in the field despite their speed. So, perhaps after moving to left field, Ramirez projects more reasonably as a +3 WAR player, though if he takes to the OF well, that could easily go up.
Sandoval doesn’t have the positional issue to contend with, but he does have durability concerns, given his injury history and his size. He’s averaged just 563 plate appearances per full season during his younger years, so forecasting him for 600 PA as he ages seems too aggressive. If we project the Panda as more of a 500 PA per year guy going forward, then his +3.5 WAR Steamer600 forecast goes down to around +3 WAR as well. In other words, we can say that the Red Sox probably bought something like +6 WAR for 2015, and probably quite a bit less than that as the contracts get older.
If you start out at +3 WAR and apply the standard half-a-win-per-season aging curve, then you end up with +10 WAR over five seasons. At $95 or $110 million, that would put the pair at $9.5 and $11 million per win respectively; even if we just do 4/$88M for Hanley, assuming the option doesn’t vest, that still puts him at $9.7 million per win, and there probably aren’t a lot of scenarios where Ramirez is worth +2 WAR in the fourth year but doesn’t get enough playing time to guarantee the fifth season. In other words, based on the standard calculations, these deals look like they’d cost the Red Sox about $10 million per win, well above the prices we’ve seen other teams pay for talent of late.
But, as we said, there are a lot of places to make adjustments to the assumptions. If you start at +3.5 WAR apiece, then the five year projection comes out to +12.5 WAR, and almost exactly equals the pay scale that we’d expect based on $7 million per win with 5% inflation.
| Year | WAR | $/WAR | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 3.5 | 7.0 | 24.50 |
| 2016 | 3.0 | 7.4 | 22.05 |
| 2017 | 2.5 | 7.7 | 19.29 |
| 2018 | 2.0 | 8.1 | 16.21 |
| 2019 | 1.5 | 8.5 | 12.76 |
| Total | 12.5 | 7.6 | 94.8 |
If you don’t think Sandoval’s past health problems are particularly predictive, then this deal looks very much like what the model would have predicted. It still looks a bit high for Ramirez, but again, we don’t really have any idea what kind of defensive value he might offer as an outfielder. If you wanted to project him as a +3.75 WAR player based on the expectation that his athleticism would translate well out there, then the contract looks reasonable, and that’s not really a point I think we have enough evidence to stridently argue against.
And, again, there are just too many other variables here to know whether or not these prices make sense. If Cespedes lands a high quality pitcher at a better price than the free agent pitchers are going to go for, then signing the hitter and trading for an arm could make sense even if you somewhat overpaid for the bat. It’s also quite possible that none of the premium arms on the market would have taken four or five year deals, so these contracts will leave the team with fewer long-term obligations, since they can trade for shorter-term pitching upgrades as well.
Neither Ramirez nor Sandoval came cheap, and if you think Pablo is injury prone and Ramirez is likely going to be a meh defender even in the outfield, these deals might look like pretty significant overpays in the not too distant future. The Red Sox signed two good players with flaws, neither of whom look likely to be great players even after adjusting for Fenway, and both come with significant risks. Whether these deals work or not is probably dependent on what the team gets for Cespedes, and what the price of acquiring pitching via trade is going to be.
If they end up paying through the nose for Cole Hamels too, then they’d likely have been better off just using their free agent dollars to sign starting pitching, rather than going through the process of buying more bats to setup hitting-for-pitching trades. If they know they can land some good pitching at a good price in trade, though, then perhaps overpaying slightly for these two will make sense in the long run.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
Redundancy can be good, but it seemed really strange to sign two players who both profile best at 3B. Automatic loss of value on one of them, likely Ramirez, to move him to a new position of lesser value (or to move Panda to 1B if Napoli goes). On their own the contracts may be justifiable, just seem like a strange fit for the roster, and banking on trades to adjust that is risky.
Even for the Red Sox/Dodgers/Yankees, redundancy at $22 mill per year is way overpriced.
Ben Cherington just was never told that you can’t do sign-and-trades in MLB. The plan was to corner the 3B market and then trade these newly-signed free agents (along with cash) for prospects, who they’d then in turn trade for pitching… As we speak, the Red Sox are in negotiations with Chase Headley’s agent.
Either that, or Cherington just thought that, like in Canadian football, he was allowed to field 12 players at a time. Though even then, he still has a few extras.
To be serious, what’s weird about this plan is how much they’ve painted themselves into a corner. They can’t trade the newly-signed guys (Sandoval/Ramirez/Castillo); Ortiz and Pedroia are faces-of-the-franchise who aren’t going anywhere (even if they agreed to be traded); and then there are six guys (Bogaerts, Victorino, Nava, Craig, Middlebrooks, Bradley) who are coming off of bad seasons and shouldn’t be sold low.
And they’re going to have to end up trading away the guys on 1-year deals (Napoli and Cespedes) in order to fit the guys they’ve signed to 4-7 year deals for big bucks (Ramirez, Sandoval, Castillo). That seems unnecessarily risky for the long term.
The entire enterprise does have the characteristics of a robbing Peter to pay Paul scenario.
I think they’re just looking at the now and figuring if a bunch of these deals go sideways later, the Dodgers will bail them out. I mean, that plan worked the last time, right?
I don’t think Cheri pulled the trigger on these signings. They scream Henry Werner Lucchino.
Meh, I am not at all convinced that playing a 3B elsewhere matters much.
It’s going to be funny watching Ramirez learn to play the OF in LF of Fenway.
Hanley being Hanley out there in LF.
I think the plan is to invent a new position for him: Deep third. Sandoval plays shallow third. They will go without a LF, but the wall is so close the deep 3B can still make plays off it.
I remember Manny playing ‘deep 3B’ a lot, sometimes comically far in. He liked to gamble.
Manny played a shallow left at Fenway……unless his bladder was full or he needed to take a toke behind the wall during a pitching change. No beer, fried chicken or video games back there though.
Great analysis — but could you go into a bit more detail about how this is disrespectful to the Phillies?
No, each move in isolation is a bad move. If you have to project optimism on signing a free agent away from another team (see Schwartz, Matt) in order to justify the deal, the deal’s not justifiable. Like hitting on 17 in blackjack, it could work out just great, but is just undeniably a bad percentage move.
Signing the other after already signing the first one? Just awful. That’s like hitting on 19. Unless they have a Bogaerts deal in the works, or have decided after watching him for a full season he actually doesn’t have it. Even then, I shudder at the idea of watching Hanley play shortstop for a full 4 years.
I’m not in love with these deals, but I think it’s important to remember that this is part of a larger offseason.
Just consider:
What if Cespedes, Napoli and others got traded for pitching first? We’d still be waiting for Sandoval to sign, and then wonder where the power was and who was going to play left field.
As Dave’s analysis showed yesterday, as currently projected, the Sox stand at the highest WAR in the league by a hair. They don’t want to lead by a hair in November – they want to be comfortably in front by the time spring training rolls around.
So if the pitching dominos fell first, we’d say “The Sox have the highest projected WAR by a bit, but it’s not enough to hold off other challengers.” Then they go out and sign Hanley and Pablo, and they’re up.
Except in that instance, maybe those two didn’t wait around long enough and play for another team because the Sox were concerned that not clearing space for the hitters before getting the pitching would confuse people on the internet.
It doesn’t take Ramirez and Sandoval to make Cespedes expendable, it just takes a couple of corner OFs or platoons who don’t torpedo the team’s chances.
Yeah, but the likelihood of Sandoval and Ramirez “torpedoing” the team’s chances is pretty low.
I mean, let’s say they each put up 1.0 WAR in 2015. That’s extremely unlikely, but if it happens, it’s pretty much a disaster, right? But that’s only 2 positions. If the Red Sox are at 95 wins (give or take variability) with Sandoval and Ramirez producing as expected, and everyone else does what they’re supposed to, they’re still at 90 wins. And this isn’t a Yankees-style deal – they’re for 4-5 years.
Put another way, a lot has to go wrong BESIDES these two for the future to be torpedoed. And the bottom line is that the Red Sox have the farm system and money to rally from it. It’s not as if Cleveland or Atlanta did this.
An OF that they already had. A Castillo,Betts,Victorino looked like a glorious defensive OF.
It’s not “undeniably” anything, your certainty notwithstanding. I can understand your certainty, too, considering all the evidence you provided to support your guarantee.
It’s like in poker, when you don’t have the best hand but you pretend that you do. It could work out, but chances are someone on the message board will undeniably call your bluff.
Ah, but check out *this* list of baseless conclusions. Now the shoe is on the other table.
What a fun way to argue.
This guy thinks it’d be better if they dealt Bogaerts. Good grief Charlie Brown.
You can argue about the wisdom of the deal, but it’s got nothing to do with Bogaerts. Nobody with half a brain is going to give Hanley a five year deal to play short.
Anyone else think they move Bogaerts for a SP and put Ramirez at SS? Don’t think they will, but it certainly seems like an option.
Beatcha to it. I win, I win!
Forgot to mention, good article Dave. About the most analysis one can reasonably provide without seeing what other moves they make. Hard to evaluate at this point, although I don’t love Ramirez at that price to play LF for the entire contract.
They should make Panda the SS! That would be fun to watch.
I don’t see why people assume he should go to 3rd base as soon as this year though. He’s a good defender. If I’d have to bet on it, barring the arrival of some Brooks Robinson type, I’d say that day won’t come until the final 2 years of the contract.
and by 3rd base, I meant 1st base.
Eh, Panda plays SS when the shift is on anyway.
What the Sox should really consider is moving him back to C! As Jeff pointed out on Twitter, Sandoval had some decent framing numbers back when he caught.
Pretty sure that ship sailed for good a few years ago. It’s too bad though. Sandoval was a good catcher and could have had a lot more value if he stayed there. Buster Posey probably cost him a lot of money.
Hah that’s true, I wonder if Farrell might be best off putting Pedroia in short right, bring Hanley into second, leave Bogaerts as the SS-3B and putting Panda in left when shifting?
Sandoval was moved off catcher before Posey arrived. I really don’t see how a body like his could stand up to the wear of that position.
Or until his knees go. Or if he reacts like he did the last time he got paid, in 2010, and becomes grotesquely overweight since he no longer has any incentive to be good at baseball.
Huh? Sandoval was pre-arb and barely making more than MLB minimum in 2010. So what are you talking about?
Well, remember, you’re responding to a guy who thinks Gary Sanchez is still a top 100 prospect. And as we all know, there’s no reasoning with a man who thinks Gary Sanchez is a top 100 prospect.
Lol? No serious list doesn’t have him in the Top 100. I’d say “go back to Over the Monster,” but you’re not smart or informed enough to be a good fit with those guys.
Apparently BA isn’t smart enough either because they think more highly of Bird and Mateo at this point. Maybe it’s the fact Sanchez’s best case defensively is a passable 1B, maybe it’s his well documented questionable makeup, or maybe it’s the pedestrian offensive numbers. Whatever it may be, he ain’t top 100 material. Sorry bud, but hey, McCann already gets on base 28% of the time so no need or worry about a future C anyway!
HA, what a moron! Considering every major scouting publication had Sanchez in the top 100, with most having him ranked among the top 50, then you must think everyone is crazy . Yes some of the luster has come of, but he still profiles as a solid defensive catcher who has the potential to hit .250-.260 with 20 or so bombs.
Who is he?
Oh, sorry, I was talking about Sandoval. Yeah, between that and the typo where I said 3B instead of 1B, that was some bad posting. And how can he move to 3B if he’s already there? That probably made you think Hanley. My bad.
No. Boston likes pitchers with groundball tendencies, and both Buchholz and Kelly (and Lester, if he re-signs) fit that profile. Hanley’s only an option at short on a team with fly-ball pitchers. They got Hanley to play left, like they said. He’ll only play short if Bogaerts were to get hurt.
Of course, Farrell could get creative like Davey Johnson used to do with the Mets, when he’d play Howard Johnson at short anytime he started a fly-ball pitcher. Don’t know how applicable that would be here, though, because even at 2014 levels, Xander is a better hitter than the shortstops Johnson had.
I thought the Ramirez talk was just a fallback option for 3B in case the Sandoval trade fell through. Sandoval made a lot of sense since Ortiz was the only LH bat in the lineup. He’s also a better defensive 3B than Ramirez. Moving him to LF when he’s never played there is crazy. Just look at Kemp as an example of a brutal athletic OF. I have a weird suspicion that they will play Ramirez at SS and that Boegarts will be a centerpiece in a deal for a SP. Not that I agree with it. Just a gut feeling. I think they are a little down on him and view Betts and Swihurt as more untouchable.
I think it’s reasonable to think about moving Ramirez to LF, given his skillset. To your point, there are plenty of athletic guys who aren’t great outfielders, but there are also success stories – Soriano, Biggio, Gordon, and Braun come to mind as examples.
Anyone who can play shortstop in the majors, even an abjectly mediocre shortstop, can learn to play a decent left field. Hanley signed for less than he probably could have gotten elsewhere knowing the outfield was his destination; under those circumstances, I expect he will do what is needed to make it work.
The Red Sox signed him because he was the best hitter on the market, moving from one of the worst hitters’ parks in baseball into one of the best. The fact he’s right-handed doesn’t mean much; he hits all pitchers (.860 OPS vs. RHP, .913 vs. LHP).
But shortstop isn’t a realistic option in Boston. The Red Sox love pitchers who throw ground balls. Buchholz and Kelly fit that profile, and so does Lester if he comes back. The Dodgers and Marlins played in pitchers’ parks with fly-ball pitchers. Hanley’s mediocre defense at short didn’t matter much behind those guys, but it would matter in Boston. I think the only way he plays there is if Bogaerts were to get hurt.
“The fact that the fifth year is a vesting option protects the Red Sox to a degree, but there’s probably not a scenario where this contract works for them and they don’t have to pay the full $110 million; they only pay $88 million if Ramirez is a bust.”
Maybe not. Case: Carlos Beltran and Victor Martinez. If Ramirez plays healthy and plays well, it’s quite possible that he’ll get a solid 3 year deal that he’ll take over the option.
i think we need to see the next steps before we judge. I’m also wondering if they are looking at the end of Ortiz’s time. If he has 425 pa, his option vests for 2016, but there’s no playing-time vesting for 2017. One of those two new signees will be doing some DH time.
Great point. I think it’s easy to forget that, for as much as he’s been ageless and beloved, Ortiz could fall apart at any second. Cherington knows this, and he’s also aware of the fact that using the DH slot to spell guys from the field throughout the lineup hasn’t been an option for over a decade. At some point soon, Ortiz will be gone and you’ll see guys like Hanley and Pablo getting PAs at DH, especially as they get older.
Yeah, I’m really liking the idea of the Red Sox having Pablo at DH, considering that he’s declined each of the last 3 seasons and is starting at a 111 wRC+.
Nobody’s saying he’s gonna be the full-time DH. Just that he’ll get some time there, as could Hanley and anybody else who needs a spell.
Yeah I was thinking the same. I’m surprised Dave mentioned it as a protection mechanism. Vesting options for great players are almost always related to playing time and are generally easy to attain. All it really protects them from is if Hanley’s production goes off a cliff or he suffers a catastrophic injury. In other words it offers little protection compared to a team or mutual option.
You mean it protects them if something goes badly wrong? They don’t really mind if they have to pay him $22 million in 2019 for 1.5 WAR or whatever. What they don’t want is to have to pay him if he turns into the next BJ Upton.
“the Red Sox have done a very good job in signing free agents of late”
really? how do you figure?
Here’s their free agent signings the last few years:
S.Drew: ’14 $10.0m, 0.2war
A.Pierzynski: ’14 $8.25m, -0.1war
G.Sizemore: ’14 $0.75m, -0.6war
E.Mujica: ’14 $4.25m, 0.4war + ’15 $4.25m, ???war
M.Napoli: ’14 $16.0m, 2.6war + ’15 $16.0m, ???war
R.Dempster: ’13 $13.25m, 1.3war + ’14 $13.25m, 0.0war
J.Gomes: ’13 $5.0m, 1.0war + ’14 $5.0m, 0.0war
S.Victorino: ’13 $13.0m, 5.6war + ’14 $13.0m, 0.0war + ’15 $13.0m, ???war
M.Napoli: ’13 $5.0m, 3.9war
S.Drew: ’13 $9.5m, 3.4war
D.Ortiz: ’13 $13.0m, 3.8war + ’14 $13.0m, 2.4war
K.Uehara: ’13 $4.6m, 3.3war + ’14 $4.6m, 1.4war
D.Ortiz: ’12 $14.8m, 2.9war
N.Punto: ’12 $1.75m, 0.2war
C.Ross: ’12 $3.0m, 2.3war
K.Shoppach: ’12 $1.35m, 1.2war
C.Crawford: ’11 $20.5m, -0.2war + ’12 20.5m, 0.3war + 5 more years
B.Jenks: ’11 $6.0m, 0.1war + $6.0m, 0.0war
D.Wheeler: ’11 $3.0m, 0.4war
H.Okajima: ’11 $1.8m, 0.1war
J.Varitek: ’11 $2.0m, 0.4war
Total ’11: $33.3m, 0.8war
Total ’12: $41.4m, 6.9war
Total ’13: $63.4m, 22.3war
Total ’14: $88.1m, 6.3war
that doesn’t seem like a “very good job of signing free agents of late”.
Um, because by your own math, in that timeframe, they’ve paid $6.23 million per win, and none of those contracts that’s still on the roster are guaranteed past 2016?
so they paid the expected $/war.
that would be considered an average performance at best, no?
But $/WAR broadly refers to all players on all rosters, not to free-agent signees. So it’s fair to say that getting surplus value out of free agents is great, but most surplus value comes from homegrown talent that’s barely making anything.
So I suppose we can quibble about what constitutes “very good” performance for a front office in terms of free agent contracts, but if most of them break even and you get talent from the farm system and trades (in your window, Ellsbury, Lester, Pedroia, Youkilis, Papelbon, etc.), I think it’s great.
no, the $/war figure of $6-7 mil refers only to free agent spending.
OK – my bad. The @/war is for free agents. I still hold that breakeven is still all right for free agents so long as there’s surplus value elsewhere, but I’ll concede it’s not the slam dunk I thought.
That may be the expected $/war now but it certainly wasn’t when they were signed. Inflation in the market over the last 5 years has made it what it is now. Additionally, teams positioned where the Sox are in terms of wins should be willing to pay more per win sine their wings are more valuable.
The fact that there has been significant inflation shouldn’t really be a surprise to anyone. I’m sure teams take it into account when they make these offers – that’s why they backload deals even when they know the player will be pretty bad by the end of the contract.
Agree with Nerf, except for Crawford who they miraculously got out from under they have done ok. Not great, but ok.
I’m actually surprised Sandoval didn’t get 6 or 7 years given his age, teams must be a little scared off given his weight issues or is this more of a trend for shorter term contracts?
And I’m surprised Sandoval got 5 years because of his build.
@ CLS – Seriously? In a world where 51 year old Carlos Beltran and his robotic knees gets 3 years guaranteed you’re somehow surprised a 28 year old Sandoval got 5 years?
Surprised is the wrong word.
Glad the Red Sox were the ones dumb enough to do it is a better articulation of my feelings.
Well, the two orgs who have won 6 of the last 10 rings felt 5 years was fine. So I guess no one knows what they’re doing. Only you and your internet tough guy self.
@Franz – You didn’t see the other Sandoval article where CLS showed that he is a Yankees homer. Just try to ignore him.
Hahahaha, you’re a joke, Stevie.
Your argument is that “If Sandoval is better and healthier from 28-30 than he was from 25-27, and declines at a league average rate, it’s only a slight overpay, so it’s a good signing.”
An idiot with access to a couple advanced stats is a dangerous thing.
It’s a shame that you can’t do basic math, CLS. Let me perform that for you: Sandoval was worth 2.6, 2.3, and 3.0 WAR over the past 3 years. Sandoval missed over a month with surgery on his hamate bone. (In case you didn’t know, he has already removed both of them so there cannot be a repeat of the surgery.) If we prorate his 2012 season out to his 584 PAs that he reached in 2013, he would have produced 3.4 WAR. Now here’s the scary math that I’ll do for you, CLS: 3.4 + 2.3 + 3 = 8.7 / 3 = 2.9 per season.
He’s entering his age 28 season. If he keeps up his pace and produced 2.9 WAR over the next 3 years, then 2.15 WAR, and then 1.4 WAR (using a very aggressive age regression rate), he would have amassed 12.25 WAR. That’s quite a conservative estimate (not including homers like you, CLS!). At $6.5 million with no interest (I’m hoping you can comprehend interest, CLS, because I’m not explaining it here!), he would have been worth $80. If he was that bad, he would be paid $100 mil with the $5 mil buyout. That’s not a good contract, but it’s not horrible either for a team like the Red Sox. AND that’s assuming a very conservative estimate of his production and ignoring $/WAR interest.
@Franz – Like I said before, try to ignore him. You can try to reason with him, but I think his homerism may have permanently corrupted his brain.
So, what you’re saying is, if he stops declining and is healthier from 28-30 than he was from 25-27, and manages to stick at third, the Sox will have only overpaid him by $20m?
I’ve been arguing with idiots like you on Yankees sites about this for two months, kiddo. You’re not going to win.
What you think of as “of late” is important, too. Throw out 2011, which I think anyone would agree was a disaster, and you get to $5.4M/win
and if we throw out 2012?
sorry, meant 2013.
Looking at the numbers I posted, that’s 3 years of awful spending sandwiched around 1 year of awesome spending. and we can question how much luck was involved in getting 12+war out of Uehara, Drew, and Victorino that year.
When people say they’ve been good at signing free agents, I think they’re primarily looking at 2013. They seemed to make a conscious effort to avoid going after big contracts, and focusing on smaller contracts to fill out their roster with solid (but not elite) players. They hit big on that strategy, and it brought them a championship. Their track record hasn’t been nearly as good in other years though.
As for Dempster, didn’t he retire before this year? You list him at $13.25m for 0 WAR, but I thought he retired and didn’t take the cash. Or at the very least, he sat out the year to be with his family, but didn’t fill out the retirement papers yet. I could be wrong, but we all know that’s a rarity.
I think he took the year off.
I don’t believe they had to pay Dempster’s 2014 salary. Also, the Victorino, Napoli, Drew and Koji acquisitions helped lead them to a title. Making that many signings and only paying 3 million per WAR seems like a huge get.
Your numbers on Dempster and Napoli are wrong. If you’re going to give Dempster a 0.0 WAR then it’s only fair to acknowledge Dempster forfeited that 13 MM salary upon voluntarily walking away and giving no production. It’s partially offset by Napoli reaching 8 MM in incentives in 2013. They also parlayed some of these contracts – which, yknow, ended up producing further value with other teams – into other assets.
There’s also the not insignificant fact that they’re achieving 6.2 MM/ WAR on these contracts while keeping them short term. Except for Pedroia and now these two signings I don’t believe anyone is under control past 2016. Breaking even on actual value for a large market team and maintaining long-term flexibility is, IMO, a massive win.
While ‘of late’ is open to a lot of interpretation, I would assume that Dave at the least is excluding 2011 signings because the front office changed between then and 2012 which I think is a fair point.
If you exclude Jenks and Crawford’s cost against 2012 and the 2011 contracts then it is a lot more promising.
Ryan Dempster also did not get paid his 2014 salary. While that doesn’t make that a good signing, there probably should be some * on that as far as counting his 0 WAR against that full amount.
I agree with you that across that four year window the numbers are mediocre, but I think that if you slice it at 2012 with the front office change it is more promising.
There’s a pennant in Fenway Park that says “2013 World Champions,” and it’s there because of how the Red Sox signed free agents. That’s all that they need to say on the matter.
Dave,
You’re using price/WAR to conclude that the Ramirez deal was not cheap, but that’s kind of in a vacuum isn’t it? Doesn’t the dearth of right-handed power (I’m including OF here, because Boston did) and Ramirez’s positional flexibility (even if he’s not that good a defender at any one of them), mean there’s a premium? Or are you saying, even given that premium the deal was still “expensive” for Boston?
My reading of it was that they were courting both players in the alternative to each other, but when they saw the price they could get Hanley for, decides the asset acquisition at that price was good enough to change their plans.
Also, any thoughts on trading Panda at 1B (and trading Napoli)? Seems like Panda’s hands might make that transition better than Ramirez learning both OF generally, as well as the monster. Then keeping Cespedes. Makes the offense very powerful (if still righty-heavy) and SP is still and issue, but there’s savings on Napoli to spend…
Panda doesn’t have the bat for 1B. His value is predicated on his being a pretty good defensive 3B who’s also a pretty good hitter.
If his BABIP improves due to Fenway the way AGon’s did he might hit enough to be a good first baseman.
He certainly does have the bat for 1b and the Sox doubtless figured his ability to play 1b down the road (or even this year) as a factor in their offer. He’s certainly a better fit at 3b because of his defensive skill there but it’s possible that Hanley ends up at 3b with Sandoval at 1b.
Why didn’t they just sign Adam LaRoche if they were thinking of replacing Napoli.
No, I doubt they put Sandoval at first, he DOES NOT have the bat for 1st base. The last 3 seasons, he hit for a 115 wRC+. That’s worse than guys like LaRoche. He’d be at best a 2 WAR player at first. I doubt that’s what the Red Sox are hoping to get from him, at least at the beginning of the contract.
lolwut? Since when is a 111 wRC+ (115 over the last three years) enough bat for a $20m 1B?
They didn’t sign Adam LaRoche because they can just play Daniel Nava at first base and get the same production, based on wRC+ over the last three years, that’s why.
Which if they trade Napoli, is probably exactly what they’ll do, at least against right-handed pitching.
If not for the broken hamates that cost Sandoval a combined 76 games in ’11 and ’12 and that cannot physically happen again since he has no more hamates to break, I don’t see how anyone can say he’s been injury prone. If Dave, Eno or any other FG contributors believe that he will be injury prone going forward due to his weight they should say that. Becuase saying that his actual injury history to date paints him as being injury prone going forward is an assertion that I don’t believe anyone would make if he was a player of average build.
I agree, FG is being overly ableist and thin priviledged lately.
My only comment on what is a good analysis is that not all wins are created equal. A win to an 82 win team is more important than a 50 or 95 win team. Right now, the Red Sox appear to be grouped very tightly with the rest of the AL East as far as talent. So for them, those six wins are probably worth more than to teams in other, less tight divisions. Which may explain why the Sox seemed willing to bet on upside, as long as they get at least 6 wins out of those two.
Additionally, those few last place finishes seem to have sapped viewership more than the World Series winning year brought in. The Red Sox probably can gain even more money by fielding an excellent team than a recently successful franchise.
How about that the Sox needed some hitting and got the best that was available. Having too many good– even if not great– players around is never a bad thing and they have tons of money. So why not buy some bats and then deal from strength for pitching? The Sox don’t need Cherington to be Billy Beane. And for him too try and be too fine might be penny-wise and pound-foolish considering the huge financial windfall making the playoffs some time in the next year or two would represent.
Considering the predicted prices for these two given by the author (110 for Sandoval and 140 Ramirez), I expected this to be an article talking about the Red Sox getting bargains. Especially Sandoval, who was predicted to end up in Boston.
My day is complete now that I know what your expectation was before reading this article.
Seriously, why would you leave this comment?
In evaluating a spending spree, it seems relevant to consider whether the purchaser has received a bargain.
The Sox don’t care about the luxury tax anymore; what they want is to be good enough to get back to selling out Fenway regularly, so as to restore their pricing power, and rebuilding their TV audience for ad revenue. They’ll spend a ton if they think they can avoid dead money, which means no seven-year deals for aging players.
I don’t think you should be looking at whether they are good deal. But should be looking at whether they are the most efficient way. You would have to literally upgrade every member of the starting rotation before you start upgrading the OF.
In 2015, I’m not even convinced a HanRam,Betts,Castillo OF is any better than a Castillo,Betts,Victorino(with some Nava) OF. And you don’t spend $100M on an insurance policy.
But why do the Red Sox need to be completely efficient? That’s sort of the luxury of having a huge financial base to start with.
Billy Beane and (formerly) Andrew Friedman HAD to be efficient. We gave them credit for brilliant moves, but they sort of didn’t have a choice.
So sure, these signings are brilliant – but they don’t have to be.
Just because you can have a payroll of a $185M, doesn’t mean there aren’t more efficient ways to spend that money than other ways.
Be rich is good. Being efficient is good. The goal of being rich AND efficient is why Friedman is with the Dodgers.
Sure! I guess the point I’m trying to make is that yes, the Red Sox could be more efficient. But they might be slightly worse. I mean, these deals aren’t great, but they aren’t a trashfire. The complaint is that we expect 6+ WAR from the both of them to start, and their projected decline makes this barely breakeven, rather than an amazing display of efficiency.
But it’s only sorta efficient, rather than super efficient.
So in 2015 you think Victorino ~= Hanley? Disagree.
No one should underestimate the terror that the FO felt when the truth of the ’14 lineup became apparent. And then it gets worse if Napoli does not rebound and the the Ortiz show ends not with a wimper but a bang. So they are stocking sticks, and they have several places in which to move them about. Not ideal, but terror is terror. Now on to pitching, and with the left side of that infield, a lot more of it.
Yes, Panda is huge, but can somebody, anybody tell me of a fat player in the last ten years who lost the ability to hit or pitch due to weight? Just because you have a ton of fat, doesn’t mean you lose your skills or aren’t strong as hell.
Many, many people blame Andruw Jones’ early decline on becoming overweight. Jones declined at 30, and Mo Vaughn not much before. Bartolo Colon fell off the face of the planet in his early 30s before miraculously ‘rediscovering’ it and then promptly being suspended for steroids. CC Sabathia, a far superior player to Sandoval in actual talent, is essentially cooked as an MLB regular and has been for about two years. Prince Fielder’s power has evaporated and he looks like a shell of his former self at just age 30.
It’s not entirely clear that the players you listed declined BECAUSE they were fat. And there are players like Josh Hamilton and Albert Pujols who fell off a cliff and WEREN’T fat.
I know that Pete Martin asked about fat players who declined, and you answered – I just don’t think it’s very compelling evidence.
If that list isn’t compelling, perhaps a better question is then, “who are some very large players who have maintained their productivity into their 30s in recent years?”
David Wells, Curt Schilling and Tony Gwynn all managed to put up ~4 WAR seasons into their thirties when they were pretty chunky. Not much less so than Sandoval.
The point being, saying Sandoval will fall off a cliff tomorrow because he’s fat (or is already declining due to fatness) isn’t scientific. We can’t say for sure that Prince Fielder and everybody else mentioned above wouldn’t have gotten injured if they weren’t fat.
You’re using two pitchers and a guy who stole 40 bases when he was 29 as comps for Sandoval?
Hahahahahaa
@CoolLesterSmooth you don’t think Tony Gwynn is a decent comp for Panda? We’re talking about decent defenders whose primary offensive skill is contact who were balloons.
Gwynn was pretty damn fat by 1990 or so.
Tony Gwynn stole more bases in 1997, at the age of 37, than Sandoval has in his career to date.
They’re not similar athletes.
Mo Vaughn busted his ankle falling into the dugout, and was never the same. CC is generally considered to have declined slowly from the ridiculous amount of overuse and Andrew Jones is fat?
Have you seen Andruw Jones after he left the Braves? His conditioning was always a huge issue.
I thought CC attributed his decline to a loss of balance because he lost weight, not because he’s fat…
That may explain the decline, but I’m guessing the myriad knee problems came from his weight.
Prince Fielder?
That’s almost as silly as arguing, “Sure, (name of player) may be a cyclops, but can somebody tell me of a cyclops in the last ten years who lost his ability to hit due to being a cyclops? Anyone?
I don’t know why you included fat pitchers in your query. But Pablo Sandoval is an extraordinary – almost unique – fat positional player. The only other player with a similar physique had his spine fused about five months ago.
And what is more troubling is Sandoval didn’t just get fat. He’s been fat for at least as long as he’s played professional baseball. I suspect Sandoval was fat in utero. And so poor Sandoval’s joints have been carrying far too much weight for a long, long time.
Yeah, I love watching Sandoval play, but his knees are not going to be alright in two years, and I doubt they’re alright now.
Seems like people are overlooking Hanley’s upside. This guy was worth 5 WAR in 336 PAs in 2013. Dave mentions that these are two good players with flaws.
But Hanley’s bat could very well elevate him to being a great player during the next 2 years. If Hanley has two more 4+, maybe 5 WAR seasons, would anybody be surprised?
Hanley’s a fucking stud, and the Sox got a steal on this.
I’m just glad they balanced it out by getting Sandoval.
Yes. I would be very surprised.
Since 2011 he has been worth 4+ WAR exactly 1 time. His 2013 season was fueled by 293 ISO (previous CAREER high was 239 with other recent years clocking in at 165, 180, 136, and 175). Seems like a fluke, no?
So yes, I’m not betting on an oft injured 31 YO to suddenly stay healthy and hit at levels that he has generally not hit at since 2011.
it’s not the ISO as much as the unsustainable babip in 2013. Hanley is far closer to the ’14 player than the’13 but 22M per is closer to what you’d expect the ’13 version would get and moving to LF is undoubtedly going to be all sorts of entertaining. given their investment and how he obviously plays up at SS, the Sox should really just go ahead and use the unproven but still valuable Bogaerts to obtain young arm(s) before his value diminishes.
Hanley was injured in 2011 and his shoulder probably hadn’t healed completely in 2012. He was worth 3.4 WAR in 2014, so it isn’t a stretch for him to get to 4 WAR. If he plays LF, maybe he’ll stay healthier. If he hits for a 140wRC+ and gets 600 PAs then he’ll easily get to 4 WAR.
Kudos to Boston for not factoring HanRam’s past attitude issues. I’m sure the Boston faithful will just fall in love with him.
I think anybody who gets saddled with the “attitude issues” tag gets a pass if they played in Miami. That’s gotta be rough for even the most well-adjusted player.
I don’t like the linking of the goodness of these deals to a potential future trade. There are too many variables to account for.
– Could they have made that same future trade without signing Sandoval and/or Hanley?
– Could they have gotten someone in FA (instead of a trade) with the ~20mil; this is complicated to evaluate even in hindsight as there is no “force sign” option
It’s one thing if are trying to evaluate the whole offseason to look at Ben C’s performance (and if that’s the case, this article is about 3 months premature), but a bad deal doesn’t become good because a good move is made later on. Similarly if these are considered good deals and they make a bad trade later on, it doesn’t mean these deals are suddenly bad.
If you are evaluating the recent spending spree, I think it’s a basic “how much value did they get for the money they spent”. Whether they make a good/bad trade later on doesn’t make these deals better/worse.
It’s like a couple of offseasons ago when Jeff Baker was considered one of the top 10 signings because of the “loyalty factor” and some crazy assumption/projection that he was more likely to sign another contract the following year (and I guess further assume the terms of that unknown future contract were going to be favorable?). So as a result the current contract was deemed one of the best offseason deals at the time?
You know, the entire premise behind these defensive adjutsmnets are that players who play SS for example are these superior talented beings who can easily shift to the lower end of the defensive spectrum and be defensive studs, Going from SS to LF means a 15 run advantage, so a -5 run fielding SS should be a +10 fielding LF’er, yet we hear doubts about Hanleys ability to transition there. Even giving him an adjustment period to learn the position, he should be at least league average, so the premise behind the defensive adjustments say.
Anyways,this is not a huge investment for a team like the Red Sox. These are like 70-80 million a year deals a few years ago. Payroll inflation has to be taking into account when judging the size of these deals, yet we don’t do this much.
So a +25 run SS is essentially a +40 run LF?
One thing I haven’t seen examined by any pros is Pablo’s dip in BABIP from the right side last year. His RH average was .199, and his RH BABIP was .210. These are well off of his career marks (.270 avg and .298 BABIP).
Was he unlucky last year, or did he develop a new hole in his swing?
Wow, lot of comments. Has anyone pointed out that the Red Sox can easily afford to over pay players and that they may not care about maximizing stat-du-jour per dollar?
Maybe the Red Sox can ship them to the Dodgers after a season or so? I guess that CTL/ALT/DEL option only works once.
Seriously, though, the cost of a win across baseball is one thing, but broken down to an individual team level it can be meaningless. As you noted, we have to see the Red Sox’s additional moves. If collectively they push the Red Sox back into the postseason, then the equation is quite different. There comes a point where the cost of one or two additional wins is worth substantially more than $6 or $7 million each. TBD.
Whatever happened to the evil empire?
Usually forcing yourself into a position where you HAVE to make some big trades doesn’t do wonders for your bargaining position.
With the current trend of using advanced defensive shifts, LH power hitters have been losing a lot of hits and RH power seems to be more valuable.
It is more difficult (though obviously not impossible) to use a profound shift against a RH hitter b/c the 1Bman cannot play too far off the bag.
Hanley is a RH power hitter, and Panda switch hits (and when batting from the left side of the plate he often hits to LF), so these guys might see their relative value escalate as LH hitters continue to see more shifts.
As FG has already documented, Hanley and Panda’s spray charts look great when overlaid on Fenway Park. Their handedness should help the Red Sox avoid losing hits to more advanced defensive shifting as well.
Neither signing was for too many years or too much money. These look like good signings to me.