There’s Nothing Wrong With Paying Big for Darren O’Day
Darren O’Day is a free agent. Ken Rosenthal reports on what’s going on with free agents. Mild controversy:
Sources: O’Day asking for four-year deal in $28M to $36M range. Most accomplished reliever on open market.
— Ken Rosenthal (@Ken_Rosenthal) November 18, 2015
The argument against: as players go, Darren O’Day is relatively old, and old people wither and die. Also, O’Day is a reliever, and the perception is that relievers are made out of dry spaghetti noodles, subject to break with the lightest pressure. A four-year commitment to an aging reliever? No, sir. Better to find a starting pitcher, or maybe a young outfielder or something. Something you can set your watch to.
The argument for: Darren O’Day is really super good. The best predictor of someone being really super good next year is whether a player was really super good last year. Good players get big free-agent contracts. Really, that’s all you need to know. The rest of the post will only belabor this.
O’Day turned 33 a month ago. So, he’s looking for a guarantee through his age-36 season. That’s nothing weird. Ben Zobrist is 34, and he’s probably going to sign for four years. For some reason I just thought of James Shields, who signed through his age-36 season, with an option. Age is an important thing, but it’s less important than performance, and so let’s talk about O’Day’s performance.
The last four years, 239 pitchers have faced at least 1,000 batters. O’Day ranks tied for 8th in OPS allowed, even with Matt Harvey. He’s right in front of Joaquin Benoit. He’s the only pitcher of the top 14 to spend the whole time in the American League.
The last two years, 253 pitchers have faced at least 500 batters. O’Day ranks alone in 8th in OPS allowed, sandwiched by Pedro Strop and Hector Rondon. He’s no Wade Davis, but he’s ahead of Kelvin Herrera.
Generally, you don’t want to evaluate pitchers just by their overall results, or by their ERA, but O’Day is an exceptional case. Now, there’s nothing wrong with his peripherals. His FIP is perfectly strong. But his ERA is kind of insane. Going all the way back to 1900, nearly 2,400 pitchers have thrown at least 400 innings. O’Day has the very greatest difference between his ERA- and his FIP- (in the good direction), and though O’Day’s career isn’t over, so that could change, the idea is this: O’Day beats his peripherals. There’s something about him, and it’s hard to deny. It’s also easy enough to figure it has something to do with his weird low arm slot. Hitters hate him! One weird trick, and everything.
There’s something neat you can get from Baseball Savant. As a little bit of further evidence that O’Day is hard to hit well: last year, 288 pitchers allowed at least 100 batted balls picked up by Statcast. O’Day ranked fourth-best in average exit velocity. He ranked best by a good margin in average fly ball/line drive exit velocity. He allowed the lowest maximum exit velocity, at 105 miles per hour. It all counts for something. Hitters have trouble squaring O’Day up.
And he’s in no way showing his age. He hasn’t been on the disabled list since 2011. In 2014, he had his career-best velocity. In 2015, he had his second-best velocity. He’s up from where he was in his first year with the Orioles, when he was good, and he just posted a career-low contact rate. O’Day was good, then he started throwing harder, and now he’s more good. It’s hard to imagine a more encouraging sign.
What if we did this: I found 1,500 pitchers who’ve thrown at least 200 innings between the ages of 29 and 32, covering O’Day’s last four seasons. O’Day holds the fourth-lowest ERA-, six points ahead of fifth place. Joe Nathan and Mike Adams are tied for first in the pool, and then you find Jake Arrieta, whose numbers aren’t yet locked in because he’s got some years to go. O’Day has actually been historically effective, even if he isn’t as conspicuous about it as Aroldis Chapman.
For a quick little project, I put together some comps. Over the last three seasons, O’Day has been worth 7.4 RA9-WAR. That’s WAR based on ERA, instead of FIP. Between 1986 – 2011, I found 17 relievers who threw at least 150 innings between the ages of 30 – 32, with an ERA- no higher than 60. Over that span, they averaged an RA9-WAR of 7.3.
Between the ages of 33 – 36, those same relievers averaged an RA9-WAR of 4.0. Robb Nen got hurt and never pitched, but on the other end of things you have Mariano Rivera. Rivera might feel like a silly comp, but it’s not as insane as it sounds. Take O’Day. Say you project him at four years, and that quick and dirty 4.0 WAR. If you estimate $8 million per win, then that gives you four years and $32 million. That’s right in the very middle of the range Rosenthal reported. It makes perfect sense, then. If 4.0 WAR is a decent estimate of O’Day’s next four years, then $28 – 32 million is a solid expectation. You probably wouldn’t love O’Day at the end of the contract, but that’s how most free-agent contracts work. Value at the start, some dead money at the end.
And, you know, what are we supposed to make of O’Day’s injury risk? His stuff is actually playing up of late, and though he throws plenty of breaking balls, he also tops out in the mid- to high-80s. It’s speculation on my part, but if O’Day is less of a risk to break than your average slider-heavy reliever, then that only improves O’Day’s projection. Injuries destroy careers. If O’Day stays healthy, he’s already proven himself with a fastball at 85. Though he’s unconventional, so is Brad Ziegler, and he’s been just fine. That O’Day is unconventional might be exactly what makes him a strong free-agent investment.
It’s a good time for Darren O’Day to be a free agent. The whole industry just saw what the Royals did with a shutdown bullpen, so relievers are in particularly high demand. It’s also a good time to be a team buying Darren O’Day. It’s because he’s really super good. You could’ve quit reading this post a lot earlier.
Jeff made Lookout Landing a thing, but he does not still write there about the Mariners. He does write here, sometimes about the Mariners, but usually not.
Where are the damn gifs Jeff?
Work computers hate ’em!
I wonder how much of O’Day’s success is due to a good infield defense? How important a consideration is that from prospective teams?
The thing is, SP’ers are also made of dry spaghetti noodles these days, or at least their UCL is, and even the best of them don’t often go much more than 6 IP. So with injury risk is equalized, and the IP ratio down to about 3 in SP’ers favor while RP’ers have a 2 to 1 ratio in leverage in their favor. I put the relative worth of a good RP’er to a SP’er at 2/3.
RP’ers are a bargain at todays prices with the best RP’ers making only 40% of what the best SP’ers make. I’d rather pay 25 million for the top 3 RP’ers on the market today for 4 years than pay the best SP’er 25 million a year for the next 7 years. Ideally I would be able to afford both, but only teams that flirt with the LT threshold or have a real solid core of young cheap position players can do that
Jeff, I am really enjoyed the premise of this article, and agree with it 100%!!!!
OPS allowed is relevant in Jeff Sullivan’s tiny mind.
O’Day + Margot + Guerra or Kimbrel.
Who do you pick?
O’Day’s FIP against lefties the last three seasons is over 4. That’s not an elite bullpen arm. He’s death to righties and very good overall. He is not Craig Kimbrel, who is death to all hitters.
Did you skip the article where its explained that O’Day consistently outperforms his peripherals? FIP alone isn’t s good way to judge O’Day, let alone FIP in the even smaller sample size of vs. left handed hitters.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/a-random-walk-with-fip/
Probably O’Day but i can’t really kill the sox for it.
How about the Giants shutdown bullpens of 2010, 2012, 2014? The industry saw those as well.
Giants were 2nd and 5th in MLB in 2010 and 2014 (Royals 2nd in 2015), and in 2012, if you looked only at the relievers on the playoff roster, the Giants would have been in the top as well. And they were probably up there in other seasons as well, Sabean has shown his love for a good bullpen throughout his reign as GM/VP.
And I can’t figure out how to find the stats on the bullpens covering each playoffs, but I do know that Casilla, Romo, Affeldt, and Lopez each had a string of 20+ appearances covering the three championships where they did not allow a run in the appearance. Now that’s shutdown relief spanning 2010 to 2015.
Yet the Giants got nothing but brickbats when they signed all four of them to multi-year, large (for relievers) contracts, as many people, particularly sabers, believe that relievers are fungible and easily replaced.
Furthermore, this stuff is nothing new today. Over a dozen years ago, a prominent saber, Tom Tippett now running Red Sox defensive analysis unit, but back then running Diamond Mind, studied playoff teams and found that it was not enough for a team to be good offensively with good starting pitching, playoff teams also needed good bullpens as well. And BP’s analysis of teams going deep into the playoffs found that the best teams had a shut down closer, also showing the value of bullpen.
These have been out for years, so we sabers should have been aware of the benefit and necessity of having a great bullpen.
I’m glad you emphasize that relievers are not a fungible quantity. I think the biggest fallacy in the “Red Sox way over paid for Kimbrel” narrative is the idea that Kimbrel is easily replaceable. Sure he had a bump in the road early last season and he has come down slightly from the rarified heights he once attained, but he’s still a filthy, dominant closer with a nearly unmatched career pedigree. I look for him to be a big difference maker for the Sox moving forward.
He probably has some FIP Outperformance skill, but he’s basically thrown the equivalent of two starter’s seasons in his career his ERA / FIP / xFIP is 2.31 / 3.36 / 3.59. This isn’t a Johnny Cueto level sample size (1400 innings of being half a run better). He’s also a righty who throws 86 mph fastballs.
None of this is to say he won’t justify the proposed deal, it just strikes me as a simplification of analysis. The reason we use a lot of the data we do in projections is because most players are more similar than dissimilar to each other, so we can use historical precedent of the population of players as a proxy for the future performance of individuals. O’Day is such an outlier though (and given that his career sample is still relatively small), I just don’t see how you can make any projection on him that doesn’t include a massive error rate, and no projection with such a massive error rate can really justify paying him like he’s the pinnacle of the market.
Nothing wrong with giving a 33 year old relievers with a great ERA but meh peripherals a 4 year contract. FanGraphs, where have you gone?
I definitely agree that some pitchers can beat their peripherals, and think O’Day possesses that skill. That doesn’t mean however, we should just accept his ERA. His true talent level is likely in between his ERA and his xFIP.
In my mind, he’s been a roughly 2.5-3 ERA pitcher for the last two years. Not quite as dreary a picture as his xFIP, but still not something you’d want to give a 4 year deal to. I mean we all do realize how great the Orioles defense has been, right? Machado, Hardy, Schoop, and Pearce have all been excellent defenders behind O’Day during his time in Baltimore, and with relievers ERA can fluctuate wildly.
Two knocks on giving O’Day mid-tier closer money:
1) he’s never been a closer, so there’s no guarantee he’d be useful as a closer. He has 16 career saves. Do really good set-up guys get that kind of contract? I guess Andrew Miller got that and became a closer, so there’s that. However,
2) O’Day’s numbers have been artificially enhanced by facing almost twice as many righties as lefties. His splits are not great, especially if you go back as far as 2013, which is not terribly surprising for a submariner. If a team signed O’Day and considered the possibility of using him as a closer, he would certainly face many more lefties, including pinch-hitters, in the 9th inning than he has faced as a set-up guy who could be brought into the 7th or 8th inning when several righties were due up.
So mid-tier closer money for a guy who may be limited to a set-up role. Seems like that would limit his market to big payroll teams who are okay with giving closer money to non-closers, especially since teams that would target mid-tier closers are likely only to have one reliever (their closer) with that sort of salary.