Should the Rockies Again Invest in CarGo?
Carlos Gonzalez is good theatre.
He hit baseball’s most impressive home run last season, according to Jeff Sullivan. The shot left Gonzalez’s bat with a 117-mph exit velocity and 14.2-degree launch angle. That’s baseball equivalent of a 1-iron from an in-his-prime Tiger Woods.
That’s not a snapshot of a player you’d worry about losing it the near term.
He also hit baseball’s fifth-longest home run last season, according to HitTracker. The 475-foot, third-deck shot at Coors Field featured his signature, and aesthetically pleasing, follow-through and bat drop.
For me, Ken Griffey Jr. had the best swing and home-run pose of the modern era, but Gonzalez’s swing is right there among today’s best left-handed batters. It’s the kind of cut to which you could get emotionally attached. The swing has allowed Gonzalez to distinguish himself as one of the sport’s most productive hitters since 2009.
But time catches up to all of us, and looks – and swings – can be deceiving. Gonzalez was once a tools-laden player who could impact the game a number of ways; now he’s more of a bat-only threat with mixed assessments of his defense. He’s entering the final year of a seven-year deal and is owed $20 million by the Rockies. As pretty as that left-handed swing is, 2018 will represent his age-32 season, and he’ll be arriving at a place on the aging curve where mild declines can accelerate in the wrong direction.
He’s become the type of player for whom the market has over-corrected, according to FanGraphs’ Dave Cameron.
So it’s interesting to see the Rockies remain interested in keeping Gonzalez around beyond his current contract. There’s been buzz about an extension dating back to December, and Rockies general manager Jeff Bridich confirmed to MLB.com’s Thomas Harding on Tuesday that the Rockies are open to a contract extension.
Here’s Bridich, from Harding’s piece:
“We’ve contemplated the possibility of an extension with him. We’re hopeful we can at least explore that further. We feel like there’s a good chance we’ll be able to at least explore it further. After that, there’s really not much to say.”
Gonzalez is the rare Scott Boras client who has signed a long-term extension, electing not to test the open market. Given the prospect of similar players available in next offseason’s outfield free-agent market and given the difficulty with which Jose Bautista and other sluggers have contended in finding work this offseason, perhaps Gonzalez is motivated to strike another deal.
He’s the kind of player who can help sell some tickets and drive some ratings in the short term. But with the Rockies coming off a 75-win season and with Gonzalez entering the last year of his previous deal, this seems like the kind of player whom the Rockies should be trying to sell – not invest in.
For starters, he’s produced fewer and fewer wins. He posted 4.7 WAR in 2013, was below replacement level in an injury-shortened 2014 (-0.5 WAR), rebounded to a degree in 2015 (2.4 WAR), only to decline in 2016 (1.9 WAR). The baserunning is on the decline as is the defense in spacious Coors Field. While the bat is still potent, Gonzalez lost nearly 60 points in isolated slugging percentage last season.
Steamer projects Gonzalez to post a 1.6 WAR in 2017, continuing a gentle decline.
From a pure math standpoint, extending Gonzalez doesn’t make much sense on the surface. He projects to produce negative surplus value in 2017. Moreover, the Rockies share a division with the competitive Los Angeles Dodgers and San Francisco Giants.
The Rockies also have a number of internal options like David Dahl, Gerardo Parra, and Raimel Tapia.
Perhaps there are intangible considerations to consider with a Face of the Franchise, but a second, significant contract extension is often a losing investment. The Rockies should know this well, after having traded Troy Tulowitzki to Toronto in 2015 — in the midst of his second extension — partly with a view to getting out from under that contract.
It’s unclear what kind of deal Gonzalez is seeking — and to what type of dollars and years the Rockies are amenable, too. But a lengthy, significant contract would likely produce negative value. Gonzalez’s swing is a work of art, but it’s not an asset that’s likely to appreciate or hold value.
A Cleveland native, FanGraphs writer Travis Sawchik is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Big Data Baseball. He also contributes to The Athletic Cleveland, and has written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @Travis_Sawchik.
If there is anything we know about the Rockies’ plans, it’s that we know nothing about the Rockies’ plans.
I think this is primarily a business move, not a baseball move. For many teams, baseball IS business, but obviously not the Rockies…
The Rockies just shipped out the last face-of-the-franchise, which was a smart move (and it looks even better with Story in the mix), but it was filled with drama and left a bad taste in the mouths of a lot of fans. CarGo took the drama extremely well, and he remains a great clubhouse presence and a joy to watch. Arenado was pretty pissed after the Tulo deal and Cargo took him under his wing and has really helped keep him on track.
Plus, the Rockies are seen to be on a major upswing, especially in Denver’s eyes. If an ex-superstar and fan-favorite is open about an extension right as the club starts winning, and the club elects to ignore him completely (or worse – trade him to recoup value before his contract is up!), a lot of the fanbase will be upset that the Rockies will never pony up and do what it takes to win.
P.S. Keep up the awesome work Travis. I’m loving your blend of hard analytics and traditional journalism.
The problem is, the rockies aren’t yet on a major upswing. They have 2 projected above average players on their roster for next year, and one is a pitcher in Coors. They are not close to competing with the Dodgers and Giants or even the second wild card.
The fanbase may believe otherwise, and shipping out cargo may cost some short-term issues, but that’s nothing a good PR team can’t remediate.
You want a real PR disaster? Win 78 games / year for 10 years in a row.
It doesn’t matter whether they are actually on a major upswing or not. The fanbase thinks they are, and that’s what matters. The fans always think they are on the upswing because they have always had dynamic, flashy, big-name guys – Galarraga, Walker, Helton, Tulo, and now Cargo/Arenado.
That’s a major reason why the Rockies are consistently in the top third in attendance despite severe irrelevance for 90% of seasons the past 2 decades. They get a lot of (deserved) grief, but they are geniuses when it comes to keeping fans engaged.
I can appreciate this. I guess at the end of the day the only scoreboard that really matters to owners is the dollars coming in, and if the rockies have found a way to put a respectable if unspectacular product on the field that keeps the fans coming, then more power to them.
Where on Earth are you getting that the Rockies have only two above average projected players? If you’re going by Steamer, then there are only 90 above average players in all of baseball, which is obviously not true (just mathematically can’t be). And what difference does it make that “one is a pitcher at Coors”? Their SP’s are actually the strength of their team, and park adjustments exist.
With just a league average bullpen, that was a 81 win team last year, higher if Story doesn’t get hurt.
I don’t think it is right that there can’t be 90 above average full-time players (which is what I take to be meant) in MLB. There are, say, 13 full-time players per team (ignoring relievers) and I think its reasonable to project that on average, 3 of them will be above average, with the remainder being average or below average.
I agree that steamer tends to be more conservative on projections, but i’m not sure why you can’t have only 90 above average players in the league? MLB talent distribution tends to skew to the right. Last year if you look at qualified pitchers and hitters, you get 63 hitters and 38 SP who had WAR over the mean. Depth chart projections skew more to the right, because we tend to believe teams won’t actually give alexei ramirez enough PAs to accumulate -2.5 wins.
For context: last season amongst qualified players, the mean was 2.9 wins for position players and 2.8 for pitchers. Only arenado and gray are projected to exceed that.
The rockies do have a bunch of average players who you can dream on – Story chief among them – but it means you’re betting the over on almost all of your aging position players, and coors pitchers. Arenado is the only real safe bet to be above average next year unless you really believe in gray (reasonable). Maybe you believe they can platoon themselves to maximize their potential, but ian desmond, first baseman isn’t the right direction. it’s a fringe team hoping to catch lightning in a bottle. nothing wrong with that, but the worst thing the rockies can do is stretch too early and blow their window before they even have it.
I think he means that by definition half of the players in the league should be above ‘average’ so 300-400 rather than 100.
Is there any reason why the Rockies can’t have Desmond in the OF, and move CarGo to first base? His bat obviously plays there, he won’t be as likely to get hurt, he’s also a lefty.
I have thought that also more than once. Desmond was a pretty good outfielder last season, and Cargo is not. However I feel as if the Rockies roster construction is always wrong. They need to embrace their ballpark and go out and get Chris Carter. Chris Carter at 1st, Desmond playing rover giving the lefties platoon and playing all across the diamond. Tons of tough lefties in that division, and it makes the most sense given their current roster construction.
I think there is a very exploitable market inefficiency created by the park effects adjustments to player valuations. The park effects adjustments are applied uniformly to players but it is certainly the case that the extent to which a park helps or hurts a player is unique to each player. Thus, the error in offensive player valuations is a function of the difference between how a ballpark affects the individual player to how it affects the average player. If you can identify players that are far from the mean you can identify over valued and undervalued players.
I bring this up because the Rockies players have the largest park effects penalty. Is a player that hits the ball as hard as CarGo really helped by Coors Field as much as the average player? If he is helped less, then he is being undervalued.
FYI, In the second to last paragraph there’s a “losing investment” hyperlink to an Andrew McCutchen extension article Travis wrote last year that is absolutely worth clicking.
Great stuff.