Before for we get to a Platoon in LF...lets go on a Holliday

by JonnyNYC on Oct 23, 2009 11:54 AM EDT Comment 52 comments

Thanks to some of the fine people here on OtM, I've come around a bit to look into UZR, WAR, etc and get a longer view of players value.

That leads me to the position that Holliday should be the #1 priority for the Sox, even if it becomes a bidding war. Holliday is similar to healthier J.D. Drew in that he provides the team with solid all around value for his position.

He can be as dangerous or more dangerous a hitter in the Sox line up then Bay.

He improves the defense in LF.

He is the best LF option this year, and arguably over the next 3 yrs.

There is not a lot of power in the Sox organization right now, and not a lot of power bats in the MLB who play plus OF defense.

So if you can acquire the best LF option for this year and the next few, what is that worth?

Is $18-20m over 5 yrs too much to consider? When you consider Bay likely will be around $13-15m for 4, and that likely his last two years will carry significant decline from an already lesser team value - I'm not sure it is.

If you sign Holliday, your high this year but have a lot coming off the books next year. I believe the Sox can sustain that. You lose draft picks, but would gain them back when Bay signs. You are taking the best bat off the market in a position of need of both the Angels and Yankees.

So I guess the question is at what point does Holliday become too expensive for what he brings?

0 recs | Comment 52 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I agree.

The Sox haven’t made a big splash in the FA market in a while. I think it’s time we spend some money. We can back-load his contract to take advantage of the money coming off the payroll after ‘10, and when it’s really just a few million dollars a year (“just”, oh baseball salaries!) the chance to shore up your defense while getting a guy who honestly looks like a more predictably solid offensive producer in Holliday would be worth it if we accept that Bay’s contract would be acceptable in the range you mentioned.

Then again, I’ve kind of fallen in love with my Granderson platoon idea. Shores up CF, LF defense while providing good bats against righties. Just gotta find the perfect LHP-hitter. But that assumes he’s available based on some meh rumors.

by USG on Oct 23, 2009 5:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The problem is:

that Curtis Granderson is too good of a player to be platooned. He is an elite CF in this league and would be wasted in the corners (though he had a bad 2008 in the field). Basically, he is more valuable to the Tigers than to us.

"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw

by BTLove on Oct 24, 2009 3:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Have you seen his L-R splits?

ALL of his value come from his ABs verse right-handed pitchers (usually 80% of all ABs). As a player against LHP, he’s a negative. His value would increase if he were in a platoon situation not facing lefties. Also, the idea is you put him in CF and move Ells to left when he’s playing. Fixes defense at both positions.

by USG on Oct 24, 2009 12:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I guess it could work.

His contract is more reasonable than I thought. What would it take to get him?

"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw

by BTLove on Oct 24, 2009 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fix Detroit?

The owner put a lot of money into trying to win it all this season than he probably should have, from a business standpoint. It was a cool thing to do for the city, but it’s going to hurt them now.

@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation

by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Oct 25, 2009 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Of course

I agree. The issue I worry about is…Boras. I just don’t see this being an easy road, especially if the Yankees are involved. Unfortunately, they Yankees could very well be in the market for a LF. I would not want to spend 18+ a year for 5 years on Holliday. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

by Buzzy on Oct 23, 2009 5:19 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I agree

I’d rather have Bay at 4 years/$52-60 million than Holliday at 5 years/$90-$100 million. I think this year’s FA market will depend on the MFY. If they’re in, some player will be overpaid. If not, the Sox may be able to dictate things and pay what they deem reasonable.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 23, 2009 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It's only $5m and it's short term savings

I’d say that by age 33, outfielders and power hitters experience a noticeable decline in skills. The are reasonable stats to support 32 is the last real peak year for this type of player. If we can all agree to that, Holliday looks even better even at $5m more per year.

When you consider that into this equation you are sign Bay to 4 yrs, while only expecting true value on that return in the first two years. After that, in 2012 you are looking at a defensive replacement in late innings, possibly a platoon depending on the decline. For the $5m you save from Holliday, you could get a Baldelli type 4th OF, but Bay + Baldelli or a similar does not equal Holliday.

With Holliday you pay more but you get more and get it longer. Holliday would hit 33 in 2013, so you pay for a longer contract, with a longer window of high performance all around for your club.

Also even in post-peak comparision, Holliday’s offensive skill set lends itself to DH/1st base opportunities, even pinch hitting options with much greater value then Bay.

Would we all agree that as Bay’s power production decreases his value significantly declines to his club? This would not be the case with Holliday.

You get what you pay for, they should pay for the best

by JonnyNYC on Oct 23, 2009 7:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Granderson?

I haven’t heard he’s available. What do you give up to get him? Ellsbury?
He’d be a good pick up, but he’s an everyday player and I don’t think he’s the answer in LF – not enough power from him either.

If you move Ellsbury and Bowden perhaps to get him though….I’m interested

by JonnyNYC on Oct 23, 2009 7:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Granderson

actually does have some power. He is, however, a uniquely bad hitter against LHP.

by Buzzy on Oct 23, 2009 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't disagree

I just don’t like the idea of paying this much for a LF who is, and will be more so, past his prime. Holliday has player skills that suggest his decline will be less steep than Bay’s (K rate+fielding) but his defensive numbers did decline for the last 3 years, suggesting he was/is built to sustain a typical prime of 26-30. Depending on Bay’s ability to sustain offensive production, he fits better at DH than Holliday does. By that, I mean that Bay could be our DH in 2011 and we can plug in a decent glove/bat of another source in LF then. Then again, Bay’s bat could be much weaker already by 2011 for all we know. Will be interesting to see what the FO does.

by Buzzy on Oct 23, 2009 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I should add

I don’t like the idea of paying our DH 15 million either ;).

by Buzzy on Oct 23, 2009 7:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

No Arguement there

but $15m for some level of production @ DH is better then $12m for a bench player/pinch hitter

by JonnyNYC on Oct 23, 2009 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Holliday's defensive numbers will take a hit at Fenway

He wasn’t great with St. Louis.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 23, 2009 11:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Might just be sample size though.

Holliday’s got a good arm, and if he can pick up on the concept of playing the wall, he could break even, I would think.

@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation

by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Oct 24, 2009 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, yeah. . .

But not because he’ll have a difficult time in Fenway, just that Fenway skews numbers. The idea isn’t to get the number up as much as it is to get the reality up.

by USG on Oct 24, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The difference between Bay and Holliday in age is 15 months

Which really isn’t much. Bay is the better power hitter, and is more disciplined (25.1% O-Swing career for Holliday, compared to 19.4% career for Bay). In terms of power, Bay posted his best ISO this year.

Bay will be 31 next year. If the Sox are willing to pay JD Drew until he is 35, I don’t think they’ll have a problem with a 4-year contract for Bay.

Holliday is the better player. But, he’ll probably be more expensive and harder to sign. I expect the Sox to be interested in Holliday. However, I expect them to re-sign Bay—without breaking the bank.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 23, 2009 11:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

actually

the age difference is a lot-it is 25% of the contract time we are discussing. And Holliday (a 2 sport college star with better defensive numbers and less Ks/PA) will also likely age better. Drew is more comparable to Holliday in each of those respects. I agree that 4 years on Bay is not an awful risk, but it is legitimate to worry if it is in fact riskier than 5 years of Holliday.

by Buzzy on Oct 24, 2009 7:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A 2 sport college star?

I think you mean high school star. Holliday was recruited by Oklahoma state, but signed with the Rockies instead. He played 121 games in Single-A as a 19-year old.

I’m really not interested in how many sports someone played. Bay comes from an family of athletes. Both are irrelevant.

I don’t think 4 years on Bay is a huge risk. As I said before, I think Holliday is a better player. But I don’t think Holliday is worth $4-5 million more than Bay. I don’t see Holliday as a 5+ WAR player at Fenway because his D will take a hit. I believe the Sox will see what Holliday’s price is—and then sign Bay for far less.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 24, 2009 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think the idea is this:

With Bay, you risk that you’re in a MIke Lowell situation in a couple years. A largely negative contract that you have to wait out due to 0 trade value.

With Holliday, you risk being in a JD Drew situation, where there’s a guy who’s performing around the level of his contract and underappreciated by the fanbase due to expectations. >_>

Anyways, $5 million? Maybe. $3 million is a lot closer to reality, IMO, and I think the benefits of Holliday are worth that—both in reliability and quality right off the bat.

by USG on Oct 24, 2009 12:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I understand what you're saying

However, the Lowell “situation” is due to a hip injury, one that has also affected younger players. It’s not an age-related injury. In 2008, even though he played hurt, Lowell was a 3.2 WAR player. Lowell’s range may improve next year, and he could very easily become a 2.5-3.0 WAR player.

Both Bay and Holliday could have a Lowell-type injury. If you compare the two players, Holliday is better. However, he is a Scott Boras client, which means he’ll get max years and money—and likely won’t sign before mid-December. The only way Holliday doesn’t get $16-$20 million is if the MFY aren’t interested. I think the Sox can get Bay for $12-$13 million and fewer years.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 24, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

MFY interest:

This is key. CasanovaWang seems to think they will not be in on either Bay or Holliday because of the amount they spent last season. They might just bring Damon back for short years. If they win the World Series I think this is even more likely. If the MFY are not interested, I think it will basically be us, STL, Mets and Giants. Of those teams, no one is going to go too crazy, I hope.

"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw

by BTLove on Oct 24, 2009 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The only way you'll know if the MFY aren't interested

is if the re-sign Damon quickly. However, Damon is also a Boras client.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 24, 2009 7:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

God, I hate that guy.

Goddamn that DeMarlo Hale.

by Bloggy on Oct 24, 2009 10:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i can't imagine they wouldn't be interested

but i won’t say why because if yankee executives read this i don’t want to convince them to go for it. i want holliday.

by revived0103 on Oct 26, 2009 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thought

he played in college. Either way he could have, and it is not irrelevant at all-players that are more functionally atheletic age better. That is why middle infielders last longer as a rule. The issue with Bay is his fielding has really declined, he Ks a ton, and he is older. The first things say he will age horribly. The last says he is already older. These are big risks. And while I don’t think Holliday will be a 5 WAR player at Fenway, he does not need to be to justify the greater interest.

by Buzzy on Oct 24, 2009 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"all players that are more functionally atheletic age better"

I’m not sure what that statement really means. There are lots of great athletes who had short careers, just like there are lots of athletes drafted in two sports who flat out sucked. Drew Henson comes to mind.

I think everyone agrees that Holliday is the better player. All I am saying is Holliday will be harder to sign and more expensive. I also don’t think 4 years in the $12-$13 million range is a bad risk.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 24, 2009 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

$12-$13 mil for Bay.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 24, 2009 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

As a rule

guys that are better atheletes age better. I am not talking about injury, and I am not saying that this is a statement about a specific player. But this has been looked at a lot. That is why the Sextons and Fielders fade so quickly. Holliday is a better athelete, better build, and Bay has had horrific declines in fielding numbers and a big increase (even for him) in K rate in 2009. Maybe that is a fluke, maybe not. Those things say-Bay will age like crap. As in-he may be done in 2 years. Do we know for sure? No. But to not acknowledge the great risk in something that has actaully been studied is not a good idea. That is where the term “old player skills” comes from. Bay has ’em.

by Buzzy on Oct 24, 2009 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

BY UZR150, Bay was better defensively this year than he was last year or in 2007. He’ll never be a GG OF. As for Bay’s K%, it has fluctuated throughout his career. Bay walked a ton last year and has good plate discipline. I’m not worried about his K%. His ISO was the best of his career, and his BABIP in 2009 was pretty low for him.

I’m not sure where you get the idea that Bay is not “athletic,” Buzzy. He runs well, isn’t a wide body, etc. Don’t you think the Sox should be more worried about Kevin Youkilis?

I’ll say it again, Holliday is the better player. But, the odds are, the Sox will re-sign Bay for one HUGE reason: Scott Boras. The Sox aren’t going to let Bay sign elsewhere while Boras holds his player out until mid-December.

I think Theo will move quickly to sign Bay to a reasonable 4-year deal. Once Bay signs with another team, the Sox are fucked. Boras will have them over a barrel, they’ll have to overpay Holliday or run the risk of the MFY signing him.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 24, 2009 1:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think we all agree this comes down to financial aspects of the deals, but should it?

So we all seem to agree that Holliday is the best option, but Bay seems like he’ll be more sign-able. End of the day, if the contract terms are equal you take Holliday in a second, yes?

If that is the case, at what point does Holliday’s deal would become bad for the Sox compared to Bay’s? I’m not sure it would.

$3-5m more a year and for an extra year sounds like a lot – but I’m not sure they’ll need that money elsewhere. Sure they could always use it, or don’t need to spend it but really the Sox are reasonably set with their payroll for next year.

The holes to fill on the roster aren’t high priced in the FA market, I don’t see another bidding war anywhere, Theo can get set value without having to up offers much.

After this year, the Sox have significant $$ coming of the books in ‘11, so again the $5m isn’t going to hurt them too greatly.

So when would the higher contract comeback to bite the Sox?

After ‘11 – I think we all have concerns regarding health and long term productivity of both players, so it’s a crap shoot either way and any contact over $10m is a bad deal if the player can’t perform so the $5m difference I think lessened here as well.

So if you can afford the best player on the market, and you are sure he is the best player for your team – go get him

by JonnyNYC on Oct 24, 2009 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well see-

1)http://ussmariner.com/2009/10/08/sorry-jason-we-dont-want-you/

3)And…
http://www.ywacademy.com/2009/10/jason-bay-is-next-richie-sexson.html

4)And see the Carragan comment near the bottom:
http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?showtopic=33430

It is not like these things have never been discussed-and it is not just this offseason (see (4)).

As for Youkilis-he does have old palyer skills. He is helped a bit by the fact that he didn’t start in the majors till he was older (less hardcore wear), but what makes you think he will age well?

by Buzzy on Oct 24, 2009 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And

trust me-the Sox are worried about Bay with “old player skills.” The are reportedly a team that really takes this seriously and was a major issue in the Teixeira contract if you recall.

by Buzzy on Oct 24, 2009 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Sexson-Bay comparison means little, unless you can show more players with a similar decline

What about Jim Thome? At age 29, his K% shot up. He was a high strikeout, high walk power hitter who was also poor defensively (yes I know he was a lefty hitter, but unless you can show that righties decline faster than lefties, it’s a moot point). Thome was a great hitter in his late-20s/early 30s. And aside from one bad year (when he was 35), Thome was very productive into his late 30s.

Again, I think Holliday is better than Bay. But, I think the odds are better that Bay is on the Sox next year because of Boras. I’m also not convinced that Bay’s production is on the verge of a steep decline.

In my opinion, a 4-year $12-$13 million deal is not too unreasonable for Bay. He can always DH when some of the Sox’ young OFs are ready.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 24, 2009 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

pharma

by Buzzy on Oct 24, 2009 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

3 good years after testing

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 24, 2009 8:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was kidding...

by Buzzy on Oct 24, 2009 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 24, 2009 9:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Old Player Skills"

I thought the rule was that these guys tend to last longer. Bay might be unable to play the field in two years, but he should continue to get on base and hit for power for a while longer.

"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw

by BTLove on Oct 24, 2009 6:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

effective for shorter.

by Buzzy on Oct 24, 2009 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

How about Adam Dunn?

Skillwise, I can’t imagine he’s too different from a lefty Bay- which is maybe better for Fenway, but think it would be possible to get him for a year $10 million without giving up too much to the Nationals for what he is since they have pretty much 0 chance of contending in 2010 (I know they’ve said they don’t want to trade him but I have to imagine that can’t reasonably be true)

This is assuming, of course, that we can’t get Holliday or Bay, which I’d prefer in that order. The one year might give our prospects a chance to get ready for MLB. Or maybe that’s optimistic.

by wolf9309 on Oct 27, 2009 12:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Adam Dunn is the absolutely worst defensive player in baseball

He has been a -20+ UZR150 player for the past three years. He is pretty horrific at first base too. Dunn’s defense is so bad that he was only a 1.1 WAR player, despite a .394 wOBA this year. Dunn should only be a DH. Bay is much better.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 27, 2009 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

oh my

oh god, i was looking at his stats very quickly for 2009 and missed a digit on his UZR… I thought i saw -2.5 and was thinking that wasn’t as bad as I’d heard he was. Point taken.

how have they possibly not traded him to an AL team for DH???

by wolf9309 on Oct 27, 2009 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think he wants to DH

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 27, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

He would be a 3-4 WAR player as a DH! lol

"That was a lot of fun… You just keep pounding balls into the gap. The one thing you don’t want to do is hit a home run. That’s a rally-killer." Jeff Francoeur

by radiohix on Oct 27, 2009 10:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Adam Dunn defense

summarized by lookout landing (the great Mariners Blog):

have you ever tossed the ball around with a friend on the beach? Have you ever missed the ball and had to go get it in the ocean? You sprint after it with all your energy, but you’re limited by both the wet sand and the foot or three of water, so while you never really lose sight of the ball, and while it’s not in danger of drifting away, it still takes forever to get there.

Lulz!

"That was a lot of fun… You just keep pounding balls into the gap. The one thing you don’t want to do is hit a home run. That’s a rally-killer." Jeff Francoeur

by radiohix on Oct 27, 2009 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Bay's defense

If you guys want a good laugh, check out this interview of Bay’s agent at WEEI:
Here’s some nuggets:

I think the only defensive statistic that I know for sure that is easily measurable is outfield assists and errors committed, and Jason is just the third outfielder in major league history to lead the league in outfield assists while not creating an error all season, the last guy being Carl Yastrzemski

And this:

If you go back to Jason’s days back in Pittsburgh, he’s all over the map," Urbon explained. “But the one thing that is clear to me is that some of the range on balls over his head he’s gotten worse — of course, because the ball is hitting the wall. But his arm has gotten better and maybe that makes sense because he’s got a shorter throw

Still laughing? How about this:

But I really think that the most important of all of this is let’s not over-focus on the defense. We used to not focus on defense at all as a free agent. Now it seems like that’s all we’re focusing on and there has to be a reason for it.

Last one for the road:

I think the most important thing about Jason Bay is that he is truly the most complete player in this free-agent class. I don’t think, I know,” the agent said. "If you take what we’ve divided into six categories – offense, defense, baserunning, consistency/durability, intangibles, handling the media, and the ability to succeed on a platform like Boston – and you look at them, there’s not a more complete player in this free agent market this year, and arguably last year, as well.

Ah those agents! God bless their soul!

"That was a lot of fun… You just keep pounding balls into the gap. The one thing you don’t want to do is hit a home run. That’s a rally-killer." Jeff Francoeur

by radiohix on Oct 27, 2009 9:59 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

He basically says that he thinks Bay is not only better than Holliday, but better than Teixeira…and should earn more than Teixeira. This guy has been taking some Boras lessons.

"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw

by BTLove on Oct 28, 2009 3:54 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hopefully he's not making his portfolios with errors and assists as the meat of the defensive section.

Else he’s going to be gone soon.

@bs_uf15bosox9be 12 pieces of bacon, a Red Bull, and go get 'em; Learn to use SB Nation

by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Oct 28, 2009 11:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

he doesn't mention teixeira

probably with the 6 categories he chose, Bay IS the most complete player (media loves him, he’s proven to work in Boston, intangibles is a fun category). Of course, they’re 6 ridiculous categories, if he’s trying to say that in terms of a complete player offense=defense=handling the media, etc.

I mean sure, his defensive stats there are laughable, but the agents job is to try to bring up the things that make him look good. Everyone knows the agents will overexaggerate their clients potential.

But hey, it’s his job. He’d be doing a lot worse job as an agent if he said “eh he’s pretty good but have you SEEN that Holliday guy???”

by wolf9309 on Oct 30, 2009 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs