Why I Wouldn’t Have Signed Matt Cain

A couple of hours ago, the Giants announced that they reached an agreement with Matt Cain on a five year deal worth just over $110 million. Wendy Thurm has already recapped the contract and why this is probably fair market value for a quality pitcher with no health problems headed into his age 27 season. And, she’s probably right – if the Giants wanted to keep Cain, they weren’t going to be able to do it for less than this. This isn’t a situation where they just overpaid irrationally. Their options were either to sign him for this price or watch him get more money from another team next winter. They chose the former.

I would have chosen the latter.

Matt Cain is a good pitcher. How good he’d perform in another set of circumstances – different ballpark, different division, different pitching coach, etc… – isn’t quite as well determined, but we’ve got a pretty good idea that Cain is good at preventing runs in the context he’s currently in. Over the last six years, he’s thrown 1,300 innings and posted an ERA- of 80, meaning that he prevented runs at a rate of 20 percent above average. Quantity and quality is a good package. It just doesn’t predict future success as well as you might think.

Starting in 2002, here are some rolling six year windows where pitchers threw at least 1,000 innings, the examples of pitchers around Cain’s age that performed in a similar manner, and how they did going forward.

2002-2007

Carlos Zambrano, ages 21-26: 1,186 IP, 75 ERA-, 87 FIP-, 92 xFIP-

While Cain has better command than Zambrano, both got significantly better results than their BB/K/GB rates would have suggested for a long period of time. Like Cain, Zambrano was extremely durable, and had shouldered heavy workloads while still taking the mound every five days. However, 2007 was the last year that Zambrano managed 200 innings in a season, and he’s been a significant disappointment ever since.

Jake Peavy, ages 21-26: 1,087 IP, 83 ERA-, 86 FIP-, 82 xFIP-

Peavy and Cain have a lot in common. Lots of success in pitchers parks in the NL West, got better as they aged, and showed a strong track record heading into their age 27 seasons. 2007 was Peavy’s best year, and marked the third consecutive year he’d topped the 200 inning level. He hasn’t gotten over 174 since, struggling with both health issues and diminished performance.

Mark Buehrle, ages 23-28: 1,357 IP, 83 ERA-, 91 FIP-, 95 xFIP-

Finally, some good news. Buehrle’s another guy who has consistently beat his peripherals and showed extreme durability early in his career. That hasn’t changed at all in the last four years, as he’s still the exact same 200 inning workhorse he’s always been.

2003-2008

CC Sabathia, ages 22-27: 1,269 IP, 78 ERA-, 80 FIP-, 84 xFIP-

Sabathia was another young workhorse who has managed to both stay healthy and stay excellent, but it’s worth noting that he succeeded with a more traditional skillset of limiting walks and getting a ton of strikeouts. He’s always been excellent at the three things a pitcher has the most control over, so for him, it was more of a question of staying healthy rather than sustaining abnormal run prevention skills. He stayed healthy and has been fantastic since.

Josh Beckett, ages 23-28: 1,057 IP, 86 ERA-, 80 FIP-, 82 xFIP-

Beckett couldn’t match Cain’s track record for health and durability, but he was one of the best pitchers in baseball in his mid-20s, and strung together four consecutive seasons with at least 175 innings pitched. Yet, his three years since have brought declined in performance and durability, and he’s regressed somewhat from his prior form.

John Lackey, ages 24-29: 1,216 IP, 86 ERA-, 88 FIP-, 90 xFIP-

Like Cain, Lackey’s value was built through quantity rather than just sheer dominance, and he provided the Angels with a long run of solid but unspectacular performances. His last three years have been a weird mix of good, bad, and ugly, and now he’s going to spend the 2012 season rehabbing from Tommy John surgery.

Brandon Webb, ages 24-29: 1,315 IP, 71 ERA-, 75 FIP-, 75 xFIP-

Webb was the total package, combining elite performance with the ability to throw 200 innings year in and year out. He was in the running for the title of the best pitcher in baseball. Then, he blew out his arm, and he’s thrown just four innings in the Major Leagues over the last three years. His career, at this point, appears to be over.

2004-2009

Dan Haren, ages 23-28: 1,154 IP, 80 ERA-, 82 FIP-, 81 xFIP-

Another success story, and another guy with a lot of similarities to Cain – extreme durability, began as more of a good innings eater, and then steadily improved into a legitimate frontline guy. He’s sustained his excellence even after moving back to the American League, but like Sabathia, it’s been built on a foundation of low walks and high strikeouts.

These eight guys represent a pretty mixed bag of future performance after being identified as durable, quality starters early in their careers. Haren, Sabathia, and Buehrle all show that Cain isn’t destined to turn into a pumpkin, but Zambrano, Peavy, Webb, Lackey, and Beckett suggest that past success doesn’t guarantee future success either.

In reality, Cain’s future is something of a coin flip. He may or may not stay healthy. He may or may not continue to prevent hits on balls in play. History is littered with similar pitchers who have gone either way, and when you’re betting $100+ million on a guy, you should get better than 50-50 odds that he’ll continue to perform reasonably well going forward.

At $22 million per year over the next five years, Matt Cain essentially needs to avoid all problems and continue to pitch as well as he has previously. He might do just that, but there’s a real risk that his arm is going to fall or that his performance will head the wrong way sooner than later. There’s just too much risk here for a team like the Giants to take on this kind of contract, especially with so many other pressing needs in the organization.

The Giants have a built-in pitching factory with AT&T Park and Dave Righetti in place, and given that they’ve had a lot of success maximizing the returns they get on importing pitchers from other organizations, they’re in a unique position to avoid paying market rates for pitching and instead invest that capital in getting some quality position players instead. It might not have been the popular thing to do, but letting Cain walk at the end of the year and throwing $22 million at a guy who swings the bat for a living may have been a better use of funds.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

170 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Will
12 years ago

I am not sure how you come to a 50/50 proposition. Either/or outcomes aren’t split down the middle. Unless you are arguing that pitchers should never be paid fair value because the risk, in general is high, this argument seems a little weak.

Also, risk is a two way street. Can the Giants afford to let a pitcher with the potential to be one of the game’s best leave via free agency? Is the risk of not finding a suitable replacement higher than his chances of being injured? That is another question that needs to be considered.

joe bananas
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

They’ve also had no luck luring good hitters, since no one wants to play in that ballpark. I get your point though; I don’t know why Sabean continues to pinch pennies on offense when it’ll sell tickets.

jp_on_rye
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

You’ve said this a lot but I don’t really think it’s true. I have no idea why you’d even bring up Ramon Ortiz, who hasn’t pitched an inning in the majors thus far for the Giants. Brett Tomko was slightly better in SF than he was elsewhere, but he was nowhere near Matt Cain. Other than that, I’m not really seeing this magical “Giants bring in scrub, he’s magically a good pitcher” thing other than Vogelsong, who made it work for one year.

On the other hand, you have the following guys who sucked before coming to SF and sucked after: Wellemeyer, Russ Ortiz, Jamey Wright (plus a number of mediocre prospects who weren’t very good for the Giants – Correia, Hennessey, Matt Palmer, Ryan Sadowski etc.) I don’t really agree with the idea that the Giants shouldn’t spend money on pitching because they can turn any scrub into a useful guy. It’s really not true.

Adam
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Pretty sure he meant Russ Ortiz. Which is a good example.

Jack Nugent
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Well, how long is the list, really?

Jack Nugent
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Russ Ortiz: 4.01 ERA, 4.40 FIP in his first stint in San Fran. came back in ’07 and was dreadful. Only eclipsed +3 fWAR in one season with the Giants (4.6).

He was durable. And I suppose he’s a decent example. But a great example he isn’t, and Matt Cain he wasn’t.

Jack Nugent
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Dave, the link you provided provides evidence that some pitchers have been able to sustain low HR/FB rates in San Francisco.

But Dave, Jerome Williams hardly pitched for the Giants. I mean, his rookie year he threw 131 innings, which was his career high as a Giant, followed by 129.1 in 2004, and 16.2 his last year there.

Ditto Matt Morris, who was neither a pumpkin prior to landing in San Francisco, or terribly effective his one year with the Giants; his ERA was two ticks south of 5.00– his FIP 4.50, SIERA 4.86… nothing special.

Both Hernandez and Tomko are somewhat better examples, but I’m not convinced that a lot of these guys can mostly credit being a Giant for their success. And I definitely don’t buy that this cast of characters undermines the notion Matt Cain is both a worthy and prudent investment.

jp_on_rye
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

I wasn’t talking about last year either. The list of mediocre pitchers who came to the Giants and pitched mediocrely was from the last six years or so. Of course there have been some success stories, but I imagine that most teams have a few of those as well. I’ve watched plenty of crappy pitchers pitch crappily in San Francisco over the past ten years. For every Ryan Vogelsong, there is a Jamey Wright or a Todd Wellemeyer. Or there are mediocre prospects who turned out to be mediocre in the majors. I went back through their pitching history over the last ten years before responding to you AND I watched or listened to most of those games.

I don’t know exactly how we’re defining useable pitcher here (your link would seem to suggest judging them by HR/FB, which isn’t what I would do), but I would not be at all comfortable with the Giants deciding they can “turn any pumpkin into a useable starter” and not investing in pitching as a result. I’m still not really seeing it as being something they’ve done with success consistently. I don’t have any problem with thinking the Matt Cain contract is a mistake, but I just can’t agree with this argument that they can find useful pitchers anywhere.

Sabean Wannabe
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Great point, JP. By the same logic, any team in a hitter’s park should simply sign top flight pitching and then just throw any ol’ hitter out there because the park will magically make them great hitters. I don’t see that happening anywhere.

jmonkey
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

D. Cameron said the Giants were good at turning “pumpkins” into “usable starters”, not “good pitchers”. There’s an enormous difference.

Moreover, his point is more about comparative advantage. Yes, the Giants aren’t magicians. But they are maybe 15-20% better at developing pitchers than league average, and maybe 10% worse at developing hitters. With that kind of differential, Cameron argues it makes sense to target hitters during free agency, not pitchers.

You can disagree with his assertion, but don’t make him out to be claiming that the Giants could take Brett Tomko and turn him into Matt Cain.

bstar
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Isn’t a lot of that the ballpark doing it, and not the Giants themselves? Obviously, what great hitter is going to want to come play there? Why not stay pitching-strong in a pitcher’s ballpark?

Feeding the Abscess
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

The best pumpkin to useable starter example is Jason Schmidt.

The Real Neal
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

The Cubs should sign hitters and not pitchers, becaues Ryan Dempster turned his career around there.

Baltar
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Dave, you won the argument on this being a bad extension.
(1) The risk is too great.
(2) If they were willing to spend that much, they could have reduced risk by waiting a year.
Your alternative of overpaying on hitters, however, is even worse.
For $22M a year they could probably pick up a pretty good pitcher and a pretty good mid-infielder (their worst weakness) instead, more improvement with less risk.

Paul Sporermember
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Not quite, Feeding the Abscess. More like turning a failed star level prospect into the guy he was supposed to be for 2-3 years. He was a two-time top 45 prospect including 11 in 1996.

Sabean Wannabe
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Russ Ortiz is not a great example because he pitched for no teams before the Giants. He also had one pretty good season and one decent season with Atlanta after leaving the Giants before completely imploding with AZ. Maybe it was steroids….

Matt
12 years ago
Reply to  Dave Cameron

Ramon Ortiz never pitched for the Giants in a ML game,