My patience is running out with KW

[bigruss]

Wow, I am glad I didn't notice this discussion when I was at work today...I would have gotten nothing done whatsoever!

 

Great discussion guys, especially Russ...I think you're right on in a lot of your thinking, even though we probably differ a bit in terms of ways to build an effective organization.

 

I agree with a lot of things that people on the "development" side of the fence are saying, but I still maintain that there are blatant inefficiencies in that method which remain unmentioned and unaccounted for. Additionally, there are inefficiencies in the free agent marketplace (due to a tremendous swing towards the develop-from-within philosophy) which can be capitalized upon to the advantage of a team that can sustain an above-average payroll.

 

Yea I had half a day of nothing at work and felt like I was posting left and right. The thing is, no side is fully right, you can't build from FA primarily (Yankees are the prime example) mostly because the pitching level and depth a team needs just doesn't reach the open market enough.

 

The development only side doesn't work because you do have to wait a few years for the prospects to reach the majors, but also really excel in the majors, and we have seen how those 2 can never truly happen in many cases.

 

The best organizations identify this and they strategically split their resources to cover the pros of each side while minimizing the cons. These organizations realize the Law of Diminishing Utility applies to baseball very well. They know that if they invest $3mm in the draft, they can expect to get X quality of players.

 

Im sure teams look at it this way:

 

 

Where Income or Worth is X quality of players. At some point, the amount of money you invest just isn't worth the return you get, but investing a few million more than presently could mean huge returns. Finding that sweet spot of what the team can afford (or in other words not taking so much from the MLB payroll it kills the ability to resign or sign players) and what delivers a large investment return is vital. In other words, subtracting a salary like Teahen and investing $4-5mm more into the draft could be HUGE for the Sox.

 

 

I guess my questions, which I have consistently asked but not really received input on, with the possible exception of qwerty, are the following:

 

a) Have there been studies published which show the economic impact of "A" rated prospects which bust?

b) Have there been studies published, whether using anecdotal evidence or historical salary data, which predict the optimum levels of capital allocation across the different levels of a MLB organization?

c) Can a MLB franchise using the development model sustain attendance in the top third of the League when it will consistently lose homegrown players to FA or trade them away? I know some of you will raise the point that by winning with the development model, you thereby draw more and thus become able to sustain higher payrolls. However, I think this is a dangerous unintended consequence of the develop from within model, as homegrown players become fan favorites, forcing teams to spend to keep them or risk fan alienation, i.e. Joe Mauer. I'll be very interested moving forward to seeing how the Twins fanbase reacts with what might be an underperforming team combined with the luster wearing off a new stadium.

 

Anyways, just some of my thoughts in regards to the discussion that I never really see mentioned.

I am curious if these exist too, and if they are open to the public.

 

In terms of sustaining attendance with a development model, I think that would be extremely difficult if you constantly lose your top players to FA or forced trades (like less than a year left under team control). I think it's possibly but it would be more of an exception to the rule, especially with the draft cap being implemented so teams cant just overspend to get top 5 round talent through the first 20 rounds.

[Jerksticks]

Powerhouse.

[iamshack]

Yea I had half a day of nothing at work and felt like I was posting left and right. The thing is, no side is fully right, you can't build from FA primarily (Yankees are the prime example) mostly because the pitching level and depth a team needs just doesn't reach the open market enough.

 

The development only side doesn't work because you do have to wait a few years for the prospects to reach the majors, but also really excel in the majors, and we have seen how those 2 can never truly happen in many cases.

 

The best organizations identify this and they strategically split their resources to cover the pros of each side while minimizing the cons. These organizations realize the Law of Diminishing Utility applies to baseball very well. They know that if they invest $3mm in the draft, they can expect to get X quality of players.

 

Im sure teams look at it this way:

 

 

Where Income or Worth is X quality of players. At some point, the amount of money you invest just isn't worth the return you get, but investing a few million more than presently could mean huge returns. Finding that sweet spot of what the team can afford (or in other words not taking so much from the MLB payroll it kills the ability to resign or sign players) and what delivers a large investment return is vital. In other words, subtracting a salary like Teahen and investing $4-5mm more into the draft could be HUGE for the Sox.

 

 

 

I am curious if these exist too, and if they are open to the public.

 

In terms of sustaining attendance with a development model, I think that would be extremely difficult if you constantly lose your top players to FA or forced trades (like less than a year left under team control). I think it's possibly but it would be more of an exception to the rule, especially with the draft cap being implemented so teams cant just overspend to get top 5 round talent through the first 20 rounds.

Thanks for the reply, Russ. I'm convinced the development model is more complex than most would admit.

 

Consider Gordon Beckham and Brent Morel, for instance. While we often hear about the benefits of cost-controlled young players, we rarely hear about the opportunity costs involved when they fail to live up to their potential.

 

Secondly, I will watch with much interest some of these franchises that have implemented a heavy develop-from-within model, as I think it will be intriguing to see how their fanbase weathers losing homegrown players to FA or via trade, as this is sort of an unintended consequence of that model.

[bigruss]

Thanks for the reply, Russ. I'm convinced the development model is more complex than most would admit.

 

Consider Gordon Beckham and Brent Morel, for instance. While we often hear about the benefits of cost-controlled young players, we rarely hear about the opportunity costs involved when they fail to live up to their potential.

 

Secondly, I will watch with much interest some of these franchises that have implemented a heavy develop-from-within model, as I think it will be intriguing to see how their fanbase weathers losing homegrown players to FA or via trade, as this is sort of an unintended consequence of that model.

And that's where having the mentality that it's okay to trade homegrown guys for established players when the situation arises. If the Sox had a decent farm system, these holes created by under performing players could be filled by trades.

 

A GM thinking they can consistently produce playoff teams with just homegrown players is living in a delusion, imo.

[caulfield12]

Diamonds are forever: the business of baseball 作者：Paul M. Sommers

 

Try this one...I think you can find extracts/PDF pages or a file by doing a GOOGLE search.

 

 

 

http://www.amazon.com/Baseball-Billions-Pr.../ref=pd_sim_b_1

 

The problem is these books were written in 1992/94.

 

 

 

I wonder, with all the Yalies and QUANTS now studying the game, influx of IVY Leaguer-educated front office guys, the DiPodestas and SABR community, if something like this hasn't been written and distributed internally throughout front offices by the Commissioner's Office but the majority of the public hasn't been offered access to it...or something from Bill James' Red Sox research staff or when he was putting together that preseason Baseball Almanac with projections every year.

Edited January 12, 2012 by caulfield12

[gatnom]

Thanks for the reply, Russ. I'm convinced the development model is more complex than most would admit.

 

Consider Gordon Beckham and Brent Morel, for instance. While we often hear about the benefits of cost-controlled young players, we rarely hear about the opportunity costs involved when they fail to live up to their potential.

 

Secondly, I will watch with much interest some of these franchises that have implemented a heavy develop-from-within model, as I think it will be intriguing to see how their fanbase weathers losing homegrown players to FA or via trade, as this is sort of an unintended consequence of that model.

 

Obviously, predicting which prospects to develop and which to trade away is a judgement call, and continuously picking the wrong ones can get your organization in trouble. I think the most important thing about the costs of these failed prospects is that they don't drag your entire team down with them if they do fail. Let's just say, hypothetically, Beckham officially becomes a bust after another disappointing season this year. He will have only made approximately 7-8% of Adam Dunn's total contract over his 4 years here.

 

 

[Balta1701]

Obviously, predicting which prospects to develop and which to trade away is a judgement call, and continuously picking the wrong ones can get your organization in trouble. I think the most important thing about the costs of these failed prospects is that they don't drag your entire team down with them if they do fail. Let's just say, hypothetically, Beckham officially becomes a bust after another disappointing season this year. He will have only made approximately 7-8% of Adam Dunn's total contract over his 4 years here.

But there's another thing you're investing in them...time. If Dunn starts off the first 2 months of this season with a .575 OPS, he's likely to take a seat on the bench again, and maybe you start looking at buyout options. He should have sat last year. If Beckham does that, you're going to keep playing him because you're trying to develop him. And he'll be taking playing time that could go to potentially developing other guys.

[southsider2k5]

But there's another thing you're investing in them...time. If Dunn starts off the first 2 months of this season with a .575 OPS, he's likely to take a seat on the bench again, and maybe you start looking at buyout options. He should have sat last year. If Beckham does that, you're going to keep playing him because you're trying to develop him. And he'll be taking playing time that could go to potentially developing other guys.

 

Buyout options? Who in baseball does that?

[Balta1701]

Buyout options? Who in baseball does that?

Any time a guy gets his release, there's usually some sort of small savings for the club. He might be the kind willing to sit on the bench to collect his full $54 million, but it can't hurt to ask.

[southsider2k5]

Any time a guy gets his release, there's usually some sort of small savings for the club. He might be the kind willing to sit on the bench to collect his full $54 million, but it can't hurt to ask.

 

I honestly don't remember a team doing that.

[bigruss]

But there's another thing you're investing in them...time. If Dunn starts off the first 2 months of this season with a .575 OPS, he's likely to take a seat on the bench again, and maybe you start looking at buyout options. He should have sat last year. If Beckham does that, you're going to keep playing him because you're trying to develop him. And he'll be taking playing time that could go to potentially developing other guys.

Knowing when to move on occurs in any situation, whether its an acquired player or a developed player, it's not unique to either "in house development" or "free agents only" side.

[gatnom]

But there's another thing you're investing in them...time. If Dunn starts off the first 2 months of this season with a .575 OPS, he's likely to take a seat on the bench again, and maybe you start looking at buyout options. He should have sat last year. If Beckham does that, you're going to keep playing him because you're trying to develop him. And he'll be taking playing time that could go to potentially developing other guys.

 

Good point. However, I think we would be looking at it differently if Beckham were playing on Dunn's level as opposed to capable role player with potential. You could consider sending him to AAA or benching him without the business of baseball aspect getting in your way. This also assumes that there are other players' development are hurt by Beckham being in their spot, but obviously that is not always the case.

 

 

 

 

[caulfield12]

Realistically, the only player who really could play 2B and clearly outproduce him offensively (based on 2011) is probably Brent Lillibridge.

 

Despite Marty's please, we can't trade Alexei and move Brent to SS.

 

But playing everyday at 2B might be his ultimate destination.

 

If only we could have 100% confidence in Rios and, to a lesser extent, DeAza.

 

That lack of depth is another reason (besides his clear inability to stick at 3B) that has had Viciedo moving all over the diamond...but we put Gordon Beckham through the same process, and one wonders if 2 position changes didn't do a number on him?

 

Certainly, it couldn't have helped.

[Eminor3rd]

Realistically, the only player who really could play 2B and clearly outproduce him offensively (based on 2011) is probably Brent Lillibridge.

 

Despite Marty's please, we can't trade Alexei and move Brent to SS.

 

But playing everyday at 2B might be his ultimate destination.

 

If only we could have 100% confidence in Rios and, to a lesser extent, DeAza.

 

That lack of depth is another reason (besides his clear inability to stick at 3B) that has had Viciedo moving all over the diamond...but we put Gordon Beckham through the same process, and one wonders if 2 position changes didn't do a number on him?

 

Certainly, it couldn't have helped.

 

I have seen nothing to make me believe Lillibridge can play competently in the infield.

[caulfield12]

I have seen nothing to make me believe Lillibridge can play competently in the infield.

 

 

SS, that ship has already sailed.

 

But it was his natural position in the Braves' system after coming out of Washington.

 

Based on athleticism and arm strength, 2B should be a position of advantage defensively and 3B just "so-so." It took Gordon some time to adjust as well before becoming one of the best defenders in the game last year.

 

Same with Morel's progression throughout the season.

Edited January 12, 2012 by caulfield12

[caulfield12]

The Twins lost Joe Nathan, Michael Cuddyer and Jason Kubel and except for former Oakland outfielder Josh Willingham, they didn't spend any big money on free agents. There has been criticism from fans and the media about the Twins' questionable offseason moves.

 

"We very rarely get rave reviews in the winter," Ryan said. "The guys that we sign may not make headlines but more often than not, they're people that fit our system. A lot of times we're looking for a guy that's got some versatility, a lot of times we're looking character, a lot of times we're looking to fill holes.

 

"I've never talked too much about how things look on paper, you have to go out and play the games. More often than not, we've done a pretty decent job here of putting together a decent roster that can compete."

 

Ryan considers the Willingham contract a big one.

 

"We gave Willingham a pretty good, sizeable contract here," Ryan said. "I'm not going to say it's $100 million, but it's not too long ago that we gave Morneau a big contract and we gave Mauer a big contract and we just paid Willingham $21 million for three years. I would say that's a sizeable investment.

 

"We needed to get that power righthanded bat and he fit the mold. Depending on what the situation is, you go out and you get the people that you think are right. You don't necessarily have to make a big splash to put a good team together."

 

www.startribune.com/sports Hartman

 

Funny thing is these same comments apply almost equally to KW this offseason.

 

Payroll for the Twins is right around $98-99 million...not so far from where the White Sox are, right?

[Balta1701]

Payroll for the Twins is right around $98-99 million...not so far from where the White Sox are, right?

B-R has them penciling in at just over $110 million when you count arbitration cases.

[caulfield12]

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Ah0t...s_wilpon_011512

 

and Mets fans know frustration like the Duggars know procreation – is a simple fact: The cornucopia of middling free agents the Mets signed this offseason will make more money this year than Jose Reyes.

 

It’s true. Among Frank Francisco ($5.5 million), Jon Rauch ($3.5 million), Ronny Cedeno ($1.15 million) and Scott Hairston ($1.1 million), the Mets handed out $11.25 million in salaries for 2012. The Miami Marlins will pay Reyes $10 million this year. And while one can question both the intelligence and sincerity of a mega-backloaded deal like the one Miami gave Reyes, he will wear a Marlins uniform, not a Mets one, and that alone is damning.

 

Trying to piecemeal together a ballclub like the Mets have done almost never works. Incremental upgrades work for contending teams. They’re wasted money for teams intent on slicing their payroll by one-third as the Mets are. As tough as it would have been to hand the injury-prone Reyes the six years Miami did, the structure of the contract actually made sense for the Mets, who have no money now but, whether under new ownership or a vanity-share-stabilized Fred Wilpon, should a few years down the road.

 

Instead, the Mets – the least-talented team in the NL East by a fairly large margin – spent the winter working on their bullpen. And while it projects as a potential strength, relief pitching is notoriously difficult to peg year-over-year, and the possibility for implosion is almost as strong. Moreover, bullpen strength is almost always an endgame for teams on the upswing. Lock down the starting pitching, fortify the lineup, then bolster the bullpen. The Mets are trying to build from the bottom up, the sort of strategy that works just about never.

 

Fred Wilpon For as long as he has been in his cash-flow muck, Fred Wilpon has received unfailing support from the best ally possible: commissioner Bud Selig. Wilpon is different than Dodgers deadbeat Frank McCourt, Selig says through actions since he can’t through words; the Mets’ owner was worthy, after all, of a $25 million loan from Major League Baseball that he still hasn’t repaid. But pressure is mounting. More bills are coming due. One source says MLB is likely to let the creditors’ squeeze force Wilpon into considering selling, which isn’t exactly imminent – and could set the franchise back even more. If Wilpon wanted what was best for the Mets, he’d sell now and give the club a chance to avoid the wrecking ball barreling toward him. Instead, this is about him and his family and their team, and so he olés the wrecking ball, knowing its target is the team onto which he so desperately wants to hold. It’s sad really, this proud franchise sullied by a man whose greed overwhelmed the greater good of the thing he purportedly loved. Sounds a lot, in fact, like someone with whom Fred Wilpon was intimately familiar: Bernie Madoff.

 

 

Another article that solidifies the argument/s behind the trade of Sergio Santos...they just better be right about Molina.

 

But trading FOR a young/cost-controlled #2-3 starter for 6 years in exchange for a non-elite, relatively inexperienced closer who will be getting more and more expensive in the future...there's a lot of logic to doing that.

 

 

Edited January 16, 2012 by caulfield12

[DirtySox]

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=Ah0t...s_wilpon_011512

 

and Mets fans know frustration like the Duggars know procreation – is a simple fact: The cornucopia of middling free agents the Mets signed this offseason will make more money this year than Jose Reyes.

 

It’s true. Among Frank Francisco ($5.5 million), Jon Rauch ($3.5 million), Ronny Cedeno ($1.15 million) and Scott Hairston ($1.1 million), the Mets handed out $11.25 million in salaries for 2012. The Miami Marlins will pay Reyes $10 million this year. And while one can question both the intelligence and sincerity of a mega-backloaded deal like the one Miami gave Reyes, he will wear a Marlins uniform, not a Mets one, and that alone is damning.

 

Trying to piecemeal together a ballclub like the Mets have done almost never works. Incremental upgrades work for contending teams. They’re wasted money for teams intent on slicing their payroll by one-third as the Mets are. As tough as it would have been to hand the injury-prone Reyes the six years Miami did, the structure of the contract actually made sense for the Mets, who have no money now but, whether under new ownership or a vanity-share-stabilized Fred Wilpon, should a few years down the road.

 

Instead, the Mets – the least-talented team in the NL East by a fairly large margin – spent the winter working on their bullpen. And while it projects as a potential strength, relief pitching is notoriously difficult to peg year-over-year, and the possibility for implosion is almost as strong. Moreover, bullpen strength is almost always an endgame for teams on the upswing. Lock down the starting pitching, fortify the lineup, then bolster the bullpen. The Mets are trying to build from the bottom up, the sort of strategy that works just about never.

 

Fred Wilpon For as long as he has been in his cash-flow muck, Fred Wilpon has received unfailing support from the best ally possible: commissioner Bud Selig. Wilpon is different than Dodgers deadbeat Frank McCourt, Selig says through actions since he can’t through words; the Mets’ owner was worthy, after all, of a $25 million loan from Major League Baseball that he still hasn’t repaid. But pressure is mounting. More bills are coming due. One source says MLB is likely to let the creditors’ squeeze force Wilpon into considering selling, which isn’t exactly imminent – and could set the franchise back even more. If Wilpon wanted what was best for the Mets, he’d sell now and give the club a chance to avoid the wrecking ball barreling toward him. Instead, this is about him and his family and their team, and so he olés the wrecking ball, knowing its target is the team onto which he so desperately wants to hold. It’s sad really, this proud franchise sullied by a man whose greed overwhelmed the greater good of the thing he purportedly loved. Sounds a lot, in fact, like someone with whom Fred Wilpon was intimately familiar: Bernie Madoff.

 

What does this have to do with anything?

 

I guess I don't understand your anti-rebuilding crusade or what you're trying to prove. I don't think anyone is advocating a homegrown only roster. I don't want to follow the Royals model. I want to follow the Red Sox, Yankees, and Rangers. Teams with good to great farm systems that augment the ability to sign free agents and make trades. The White Sox are likely going to go through a down season (or two or three). Hopefully they will be bolstering the farm and setting themselves up financially to make smart signings and jump back in AL Central contention at that time.

Edited January 16, 2012 by DirtySox

[Dick Allen]

Any time a guy gets his release, there's usually some sort of small savings for the club. He might be the kind willing to sit on the bench to collect his full $54 million, but it can't hurt to ask.

Not in baseball. It happens all the time in the NBA, but that's because the contract is the contract and a new contract from another team isn't deducted from the original contract. In other words, if the Bulls released Carlos Boozer and he signed with Memphis for $1 million a year, he just got a $1 million raise. (prorated)

[Balta1701]

Comparing the Free Agents the Mets signed this year to Reyes's salary THIS YEAR is particularly foolish, since Reyes's contract is hugely backloaded, $10 million in 2012 and 2013, $16 million in 2014, and 3 years at $22 million before an option year/$4 million buyout.

[caulfield12]

Anti-rebuilding crusade?

 

Haha.

 

Just tired of the assumption that KW is the worst GM in the major leagues because of 2-3 trades and signings that backfired miserably.

 

To tell the truth, it's far easier to criticize than to defend. At some point in the last 4 months or so, I suppose I made a conscious decision to try to be optimistic rather than to just slam every move Williams makes.

 

And to also point out that there are QUITE a few teams that enter 2012 in worse standing than us.

 

The Rangers went through a rough period there for almost a decade, and where Daniels was learning on the go and putting his front office/scouting/administrative team in place. The fact that they now have the financial resources to sign both Fielder and Darvish in one fell swoop after the team was technically bankrupt under Tom Hicks...a pretty big success story. Nevertheless, the Rangers aren't splitting or sharing a market like the White Sox are....the Metroplex is growing and growing, heck, much of Texas is trending upwards.

 

We can and should look at the Braves, Mariners, Giants/A's, DBacks, Cardinals, Twins, Brewers and Tigers as similar markets to ours. Forget the NY and BOS comps. Even NY now claims they only have $2 million to spend on Carlos Pena or J. Damon...and the Red Sox claim to not have enough guaranteed money for Roy Oswalt.

Edited January 16, 2012 by caulfield12

[DirtySox]

Anti-rebuilding crusade?

 

Haha.

 

Just tired of the assumption that KW is the worst GM in the major leagues because of 2-3 trades and signings that backfired miserably.

 

To tell the truth, it's far easier to criticize than to defend. At some point in the last 4 months or so, I suppose I made a conscious decision to try to be optimistic rather than to just slam every move Williams makes.

 

And to also point out that there are QUITE a few teams that enter 2012 in worse standing than us.

 

The Rangers went through a rough period there for almost a decade, and where Daniels was learning on the go and putting his team in place. The fact that they now have the financial resources to sign both Fielder and Darvish in one fell swoop after the team was technically bankrupt...a pretty big success story. Nevertheless, the Rangers aren't splitting or sharing a market like the White Sox are....the Metroplex is growing and growing, heck, much of Texas is trending upwards.

 

We can and should look at the Braves, Mariners, Giants/A's, DBacks, Cardinals, Twins, Brewers and Tigers as similar markets to ours. Forget the NY and BOS comps. Even NY now claims they only have $2 million to spend on Carlos Pena or J. Damon...and the Red Sox claim to not have enough guaranteed money for Roy Oswalt.

 

I just keep seeing you post articles saying rebuilding doesn't work, or articles highlighting that other teams are bad too.

 

I don't think Kenny is the worst GM in baseball. He's certainly been bad lately though.

 

As far as finances go, it's quite obvious that NY and Boston have more money to play with than the Sox, but the White Sox aren't some poor small market club. The teams you posted are fine comparables, and it exemplifies my point. Teams can have a good farm system that significantly compliments free agent signings and trades. It's what the White Sox should aspire to be, and I hope it comes to fruition in the coming years.

[caulfield12]

I just keep seeing you post articles saying rebuilding doesn't work, or articles highlighting that other teams are bad too.

 

I don't think Kenny is the worst GM in baseball. He's certainly been bad lately though.

 

As far as finances go, it's quite obvious that NY and Boston have more money to play with than the Sox, but the White Sox aren't some poor small market club. The teams you posted are fine comparables, and it exemplifies my point. Teams can have a good farm system that significantly compliments free agent signings and trades. It's what the White Sox should aspire to be, and I hope it comes to fruition in the coming years.

 

I don't think JR and the fanbase have the patience for it....not after 2005.

 

Of course, the argument could be made that with the World Series trophy already safely tucked away, the Sox should look at building a more sustainable model of remaining competitive than gambling/juggling/tinkering and rebooting in July every year.

 

 

 

Edited January 16, 2012 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

I don't think JR and the fanbase have the patience for it....not after 2005.

 

Of course, the argument could be made that with the World Series trophy already safely tucked away, the Sox should look at building a more sustainable model of remaining competitive than gambling/juggling/tinkering and rebooting in July every year.

One thing worth considering though...that model might well be a lot more sustainable than we think. The Sox have managed to stay "Competitive" at some level for nearly a decade with that model, only drafting in the top 10 once. They've overhauled their roster repeatedly, and still wound up close to a pennant race every year. And for most of that time, they've had one of the bottom systems in the big leagues...they've just managed to pull their wins out of a different place, finding undervalued discards that teams were willing to give up for various reasons and turning them around.

 

This model might be a lot more sustainable than you'd think. It might look pretty darn good if we pulled out either the Swisher or Jackson trades, or if 1 of Dunn/Rios/Peavy hadn't fully imploded, or if Quentin could have stayed healthy.