The 5.5 Hole

When a team has money, evaluative methods seem to go out the window.  The Phillies are proving this theory once again with the Jonathan Papelpon signing.  The reported deal is worth $50 million over 4 years.  It could be worth more after incentives, but we'll analyze the contract based on the $50 million figure.  That's $12,500,000 a year. 

While a contract this huge for a player who pitches one inning every game or so seems insane, it is not all that uncommon.  $12,500,000 a year makes Papelpon the second highest paid relief pitcher, but there were 4 other players who made over $10,000,000 a year in 2011.  The fact is, though, saves can be bought for much less. 

Last season, the average number of saves for all of baseball was right around 27 (rounding up).  Based on the 2011 contracts of the closers earning these saves, the average salary was $3,840,129.  The average cost of a save in 2011 was $143,021.  

Based on Papelbon's $12,500,000 yearly contract with the Phillies, he would have to save 88 games to be worth the money.  Anything less, the Phillies overspent.  Anything more, they got a bargain.  Anyone willing to bet the Phillies got a bargain?

Using the 2011 figures and our calculation of $143,021 cost per save, let's take a look at who over spent and who got a deal. 



As you can see, 25 of the 40 players analyzed exceeded their value based on saves.  You'll notice there are players on this list with only single-digit saves, players who were injured, and players who lost their closer roles.  This may skew the list slightly if we are thinking about players like Joe Nathan who made $11,250,000 and only saved 14 games.  However, I think it balances out with players like Craig Kimbrel and John Axford. 

The fact that 25 players exceeded their expected value indicates a greater need for contract analysis when signing closers.  Jonathan Papelbon is just the most recent big name, but there are others.  Heath Bell is going to be commanding a raise even with his "home town discount."  Once Kimbrel and Axford reach their arbitration-eligible years, they will be making quite a bit more.  I think if teams were operating a lot closer to the league average yearly salary for a closer, they would get more bang for their buck. 

I understand the formula I'm working with here is more simplistic than the reality of finding decent closers for a proper salary.  But the idea behind it is sound.  $12,500,000 a year for a closer is far more than any team should pay.  Anything over $10,000,000 is far more than a team should pay.  In the grand scheme, saves only account for about half a teams wins.  And remember, saves are just the last few outs (or last three innings depending on the circumstance) of a game.  To pay a player as much as Papelbon will be paid is insane.   Teams should spend their money elsewhere, like offense.

Jose Valverde's season is hanging on by a thread. The Tigers season is hanging on by a thread. This all because of an 11th inning meltdown in which Valverde allowed a 4-spot to the Texas Rangers. Many casual fans argue that a closer shouldn't be brought in to the game in a non-save situation, while many writers and analysts argue that theory is completely bogus. What's the truth?

This is a debate based as much in opinion as in fact. Let's start from the opinion side of things and see if we can get an idea as to which side this debate may be leaning. Fans argue that the closer role (i.e. coming into the ninth inning with a slim lead and slamming the door) is a pressure cooker type role that can't be duplicated in any other in-game scenario. Thus, as the theory goes, when a closer is thrust into a non-save situation the mentality of said closer is different. This is likely not a conscious choice by the closer to go in with a different mindset, but the theory argues it happens nonetheless. If you flat out disagree with this theory, I caution you. It may hold more weight than many give it credit.

Take, for example, two separate projects at work. One has a tight deadline with a lot riding on it. The other is not nearly as important, has a longer deadline, but still needs to get done. When working on the stressful, tight deadline project, your focus and mentality will probably be much different than when working on the project with a lengthier timeline. Now imagine your only job is a continuous slew of important projects with tight deadlines and lots of stress, but you have just been asked to work on the other type of project. Think there'd be a change in your approach whether you mean there to be or not?

Writers and baseball analysts assume that a pitcher is a pitcher. If they make their pitches, the scenario shouldn't matter. That's sound logic too. Forget the inning. Forget the score. Any pitcher, at any time can succeed as long as he makes the right pitches. Yet, is it really that simple? The mental aspect to playing baseball is fascinating and often overlooked.

Let's take Jose Valverde for example. As of August 18, 2011, Jose Valverde's stats in save situations looked like this:

35/35 in saves, 0.51 ERA, 0.971 WHIP.

In non-save situations?

21 games, 2-4 record, 17 runs, 6.88 ERA, 1.80 WHIP.

Pretty remarkable difference, right? Yet, these numbers are so often brushed aside it's startling. The argument many will make is, who would you rather have, your closer or someone else? Well, let's look at some other closers around the league. These are all career numbers as published by The Closer News.

Heath Bell:
Save situation - 2.13 ERA/1.05 WHIP
Non-save situation - 3.60 ERA/1.53 WHIP

Brian Wilson:
Save situation - 2.63 ERA/1.43 WHIP
Non-save situation - 4.50 ERA/1.60 WHIP

Jonathan Papelbon:
Save situation - 2.08 ERA/0.86 WHIP
Non-save situation - 4.03 ERA/1.03 WHIP

J.J. Putz:
Save situation - 2.08 ERA/0.98 WHIP
Non-save situation - 4.91 ERA/1.00 WHIP

These are just a few closers around the league, but the change in performance is drastic. I understand that there are sure to be closers who perform the same in save situations and non-save situations as there are also probably closers who perform better in save situations, but when you have so many closers who clearly struggle in non-save situations, it's time to stop brushing off the possibility that closers should not be brought in in non-save situations.

After all is said and done here, I give the edge to fan theory. Writers and analysts can be as condescending as they'd like when shooting down these theories, but fact supports at least a closer look.

Apparently the world is going to end in 2012. Something about calendars, and Mayans, and maybe giant Arks. Could be a John Cusak movie, I'm not sure, but hopefully it doesn't happen before we get to see the results of the Padres off-season.

With the news from Padres brass that they intend to increase payroll and hope to operate at a consistent average of $70 million within a couple years, it's easy to get excited about what might be. Regardless of General Manager Jed Hoyer's mantra of "building within," the Padres will be active in the off-season and should be pulling in talent from outside their minor league system. With that said, I thought I'd take a look at the team and address some of the most important moves that need to be made.

1) Cameron Maybin

Currently making $429,000 and signed through the end if this year, the Padres are in a perfect position to extend Maybin's contract, throw a little money at him, and lock him into a long-term deal. My suggestion: 5 years, $20 million. A tiered contract would work best with the Padres plan. For example, offer Maybin $2 million for 2012, $3.5 million for 2013, $4.5 million for 2014, $4.5 million for 2015, and $5.5 million for 2016.

Maybin's mix of speed and defense will serve him well for years to come at Petco Park. He has the makings of a constant .280/.350/.400 hitter.

2) First Base

If Anthony Rizzo is the first baseman of the future, bring him up and leave him in the show for long enough to evaluate him as a Major League talent. Though his numbers at Triple-A Tucson should be largely discredited due to the hitter-friendly nature of the Pacific Coast League. If he's not the guy for the Padres, they need to go out and get someone. The problem is, the only viable free-agent candidate at first base would be Xavier Nady. With him making only $1.75 million during this injury-shortened 2011 season, the Padres may be able to scoop him up in a short-term, discounted deal. I'd imagine something like two years, $3.5 million could get the deal done. A second time in a Padres uniform may do both the Pads and Nady well.

3) Pitching

To have a chance at contention, the Padres pitching staff will need to continue on the path carved the last few years, and will likely need to improve even more. Tim Stauffer is a quality start machine, so I expect the Padres to offer arbitration or sign him to a long-term deal this off-season. But they will still need to grab a free agent arm this off-season.

After reading a suggestion on Fangraphs.com about Edwin Jackson to the Padres, I began analyzing the possible move. Jackson has decent stuff and would benefit from pitching in the pitcher-friendly Petco Park, but he is making $6.275 million in 2011 with Scott Boras as his agent. I don't see Jackson and Boras taking a pay-cut, so if the Padres went this route, they'd need to shell out anywhere from $6.275 million to $7 million a year for him. Still, the move could be worth it. Jackson, even when his control was way off, managed a no-hitter with Detroit.

Then there's Heath Bell. Understandably, the team doesn't want to lock up a large percentage of payroll on a reliever. But to have any chance at competing in the near future, the club needs to maintain their shut down bullpen. Bell brings a number one closer talent to the park every game. He's willing to take a discount to stay with the club. I'm not sure what that discount is, but if we are talking $10 million a year, it's worth consideration. Bell can groom Gregerson, who I think is the heir apparent for the closer role. While doing so, he will provide that much needed insurance for the onslaught of close games the Padres will surely be in if they are competing for first.

That's about $20 million out of the supposed $50 million the Padres plan to spend next year. And those are the big ones. I'll leave the smaller contracts up to Jed Hoyer.

Regardless of what happens, this should be one of the most active off-seasons for the Padres in a long time.