Schadenfreude wrote:Yeah, the $5m per likely WAR in free agency back-of-the-napkin calculation is done, that much is clear. I've seen estimates of $6m-$7m, and that's about where you need to peg it to assume that Cincy is pricing in some possibility of Bailey's 2013 not becoming his new normal. Otherwise, it's all downside.
There's a reason that we stockpile arms, and this is it. The biggest change in the market isn't the marginal price of #2/#3/#4 starters relative to each other, it's their price relative to a $500k minimum salary and three years of below-market arbitration to follow. Pitchers tend to hit their stride faster than hitters, while hitters tend to be more consistent year-on-year (and less prone to career-altering maladies) and slotting one of those minimum contracts in rather than a $15m/year mid-rotation guy is a massive, massive savings; manage to slot in two and you can apparently buy a whole new **** team around them.
Buy the bats, raise the pitchers...hasn't worked out quite that way for us, but that seems like it has been the goal in the draft, and frankly it's the only way forward that I can see. I was bemused that we kept taking nothing but arms, but goddamn does this offseason have me thinking that we need to go out in June and draft another thirty high-upside high school pitchers.
What freaks me out about the escalation beyond 5m/war is that we're not seeing the 10% escalation or anything close to that. I think these deals only make any sense for GMs if a majority of them see it at 6 or 7 or whatever now, but more importantly on its way well beyond that in the near future. They're building in the idea of 10m/war return not being an absolute disaster in a couple years. Guaranteeing Homer Bailey 20m 6 years from now today only makes sense if you're okay settling for 1.5-2 war at that point and that's not even close to the worst case.
If a GM can reasonably gamble on 10m/war by the end of currently signed deals, then who the **** knows what anybody's worth anymore. I hate beyond recognition the idea giving Ubaldo 4 years given his recent past, but if he's anything above replacement level at all at that point he might be a total bargain compared to people getting signed that offseason. I wouldn't make that bet, but I think I've underestimated the upside of even a marginally functional 4th year for Ubaldo or Garza or Ervin if he gets the term too. I appreciate a GM not willing to risk his team's future finances on a player with so little potential impact more than most do here, but I'm willing to admit a year from now the deals signed this offseason for the humdrum crop of UFA starters may end up looking like value.
As for the draft, the arms are just the most fungible commodity outside of pure cash in Baseball and a GM's easiest way to develop assets is in player value, might as well have it in the thing that's always in demand by everyone.
The point about the cash savings between developed and paid for SPs is well stated. If one successful SP can save you something like 40-60m just in his pre-arb years compared to a UFA solution the inevitable next step is team's get way more conservative about what they offer in prospects for vets.
