Dodgers sign Kazmir 3 years deal

[Boxcar]

Does it? He's still really good.

 

Lol and he was pitching ridiculously well prior to injury, too. Contract looked like a steal before he got hurt.

[saskjayfan]

Does it? He's still really good.

 

really good is over stating it....he is a mid to back of the rotation starter with injury issues.

[Boxcar]

really good is over stating it....he is a mid to back of the rotation starter with injury issues.

 

Here we go

[saskjayfan]

Here we go

 

I know. i know. No one is allowed to disagree with you. He's got a career 4.05 FIP and he's aging and injury prone. He's a ho hum pitcher getting paid what he's worth.

[L54]

I don't understand how this works. If he opts out, they can qualify him for slightly more? Then if he turns that down he's a FA with a draft pick attached, making it harder for him to get paid more then the 2 years he would have made anyways? What?

 

If he opts out the Dodgers would extend him a QO offer which is the average salary of the top X number of players (don't know the number off the top of my head). Any team who signs a QO player forfeits their first unprotected pick.

 

What Dinger is saying is if this was the market for him without a draft pick attached, he's not likely to be anymore enticing to teams next year a year older with a draft pick attached to him, so he likely won't opt out.

[Boxcar]

I know. i know. No one is allowed to disagree with you. He's got a career 4.05 FIP and he's aging and injury prone. He's a ho hum pitcher getting paid what he's worth.

 

Why would you bring up his entire career? McCarthy had a jump in velocity which led to increased performance. Dodgers signed him short term for not a huge amount and he proceeded to pitch like an ace until he hurt his arm.

 

For whatever reason, this new fastball is a recent thing. Ignoring that in favour of career results which have little bearing on his current performance is about as ignorant as I'd expect from you.

[Boxcar]

I don't know if ace is the right term. He did give up 9 bombs in 23 IP. You can say he probably had some bad luck but if you give up 9 in 23 IP it's not all luck.

 

He had a .288 BABIP with almost a 50% hard hit rate.

 

Yeah, a 37% hr/fb is pretty much the definition of unlucky. Hard hit is also not very relevant.

 

Both of those things would have evened out over time.

[Spanky99]

LAD get Scott Kazmir for 3 years, will update $ when released. Felt this deserved thread rather than sticking in Around Baseball thread, like the Chapman deal

 

$48 million (16 mill average per)

Optout after year 1

 

Nice deal for both parties involved.

[Stangstag]

People assuming we would have been able to sign Kazmir for the same money. No way. If the jays come out and offer 3/52, Dodgers probably come out and offer 3/54.

 

We WERE NOT outbidding the Dodgers. Come on guys.

[RealAccountant]

People assuming we would have been able to sign Kazmir for the same money. No way. If the jays come out and offer 3/52, Dodgers probably come out and offer 3/54.

 

We WERE NOT outbidding the Dodgers. Come on guys.

 

The Dodgers wouldn't need to outbid us. Given the choice between pitching in the AL East and NL West he surely would have picked the NL West especially If his goal is a bigger contract

[saskjayfan]

Why would you bring up his entire career? McCarthy had a jump in velocity which led to increased performance. Dodgers signed him short term for not a huge amount and he proceeded to pitch like an ace until he hurt his arm.

 

For whatever reason, this new fastball is a recent thing. Ignoring that in favour of career results which have little bearing on his current performance is about as ignorant as I'd expect from you.

 

a sudden jump in velocity and you're not at all concerned with the arm....doesn't velocity usually decline in pitchers as they age? The dodgers signed him into his mid 30s, so the velocity jump in his age 29 and 30 season might not play so well at age 33 and 34. You googling fangraphs and looking into the past is about what I'd expect for you. I get it, all the hits Mccarthy gives up is just bad luck.

[Cyborg]

.288 BABIP is above average.

[JFD]

Kazmir would get wrecked in the AL East at this stage of his career. thank god we dodged that bullet.

[Grant77]

Does it? He's still really good.

 

He might be, but 33 year old pitchers don't always rebound well from serious injuries. My point was that he is worth much less than 3/36 on the open market right now and they are already 12 million in the hole.

[Grant77]

Why would you bring up his entire career? McCarthy had a jump in velocity which led to increased performance. Dodgers signed him short term for not a huge amount and he proceeded to pitch like an ace until he hurt his arm.

 

For whatever reason, this new fastball is a recent thing. Ignoring that in favour of career results which have little bearing on his current performance is about as ignorant as I'd expect from you.

 

Four years is short term? 23 innings of a 6.22 FIP is pitching like an ace? I know the K/BB was nice, just pointing out the absurdity of your argument.

[GD]

Does it? He's still really good.

 

We really need to trade for him.

 

.288 with 47.5% hard hit is pretty much best case scenario. Highest qualified hard hit% last year was Kennedy at like 35%. Yes, McCarthy was unlucky with the HR/FB% but there's no question he was piping meat at times.

 

He's a fine pitcher but wasn't "pitching like an ace".

 

Hard hit% isn't a useful barometer of what you're trying to measure here. It's not as reliable as you'd like. I'll quote the sabermetrics thread:

 

Update 08/22: Here's an article on the new BIS data that's being heavily misused.

 

http://www.hardballtimes.com/offensive-batted-ball-statistics-and-their-optimal-uses/

So how can we use the BIS contact data?

• Not for BABIP. This is seriously the wrong data to use if so-and-so has a low BABIP. Don’t say, “But he’s making hard contact (Hard%).” These stats do so very little to predict BABIP—in part because “hard contact” can be deep fly balls, and fly balls have the worst BABIP of all non-infield-pop-ups. And typically, weak or medium contact results in ground balls, and those have a higher BABIP. But ground balls can be hit hard too. Just stay away from BABIP with these stats.
  

 

• For ISO and SLG variations. Is your team’s prized slugger no longer lashing doubles and homers? Check the BIS data. Major fluctuations there might indicate he’s declining. Otherwise, give it some time.
  

 

• And to a degree, wRC+ variations. But a lot goes into a total-offense metric like wRC+. I’d be more inclined to look at a contact rate than a contact strength measurement. Contact is a clearly delineated event. Contact strength has a lot of noise. But in bigger samples, it can be useful. For instance: Nobody has even hit below 100 wRC+ when his Hard% is 35.5 percent or higher. In fact, very few hitters over 33 percent have been bad hitters—as a group, they average a 121 wRC+. Look at this:
  

[TABLE=width: 1504]

[TR]

[TH=bgcolor: #8E001C, colspan: 2, align: center]WRC+ BY HARD-HIT RATE QUARTILE[/TH]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

[TABLE=class: sortable, width: 1504]

[TR]

[TD=bgcolor: #D4D4D4, align: center]Quartile[/TD]

[TD=bgcolor: #D4D4D4, align: center]wRC+[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]Max (43.2%)[/TD]

[TD=align: center]118[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]Q3 (31.4%)[/TD]

[TD=align: center]102[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]Q2 (27.8%)[/TD]

[TD=align: center]94[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]Q1 (24%)[/TD]

[TD=align: center]82[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

• So fellas hitting under 24 percent Hard-rate are probably not doing well. But remember: there’s a lot of volatility here. The standard deviation in that bottom quartile is 13.6—meaning about 68 percent of the data lies between 68 wRC+ and 96 wRC+. It’s a wide swath.
  

 

[TABLE=width: 1504]

[TR]

[TH=bgcolor: #8E001C, colspan: 6, align: center]BATTED BALL CORRELATIONS[/TH]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

[TABLE=class: sortable, width: 1504]

[TR]

[TD=bgcolor: #D4D4D4, align: center]Statistic[/TD]

[TD=bgcolor: #D4D4D4, align: center]LD%[/TD]

[TD=bgcolor: #D4D4D4, align: center]GB%[/TD]

[TD=bgcolor: #D4D4D4, align: center]FB%[/TD]

[TD=bgcolor: #D4D4D4, align: center]IFFB%[/TD]

[TD=bgcolor: #D4D4D4, align: center]IFFB/PA[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]BABIP[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.15[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.11[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.20[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.36[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.43[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]wRC+[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.01[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.08[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.07[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.07[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.02[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]OBP[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.06[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.01[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.00[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.11[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.08[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]SLG[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.00[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.18[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.19[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.01[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.00[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]HR%[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.07[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.32[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.40[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.01[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.05[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]ISO[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.04[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.32[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.39[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.00[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.03[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]BA[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.11[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.04[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.09[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.11[/TD]

[TD=align: center]0.07[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

What it tells us:

Taken together, these stats can give us a good feel for a hitter’s style—especially when it comes to groundball or flyball tendencies. Andrew Koo found a few years ago that the Oakland Athletics were leaning heavily on flyball hitters—and doing so to great effect at the time. A hitter’s GB/FB ratio might very well inform us how a hitter will perform in given stadiums or against given pitchers. The problem with these data, though, is that we are far to quick to look at line drive percentage and make bigger conclusions.

 

1. We can’t use LD% to rationalize a BABIP. You know, good for Dee Gordon that he is setting a career high in LD% during the 2015 season. That’s no reason to think he can keep his BABIP above .400 or above his career norms. Change “Dee Gordon” to “Starlin Castro” and “2015” to “2014” and we will see why LD% is a fickle master.
   
2. We can’t use LD% to rationalize a wRC+. Yes DJ LeMahieu has an enormous LD%, but he had an even higher rate in 2013—back when he also had a 68 wRC+.
   
3. We can build some strong xBABIP tools. These contact data fill out a lot of the gray area of “in play.” It helps differentiate duck snort doubles from scorched, near-homers. And so, unsurprisingly, it can pair nicely with other PA outcomes—walks, strikeouts and homers—to make a decent model for predicting BABIP.
   

[FrozenRopes]

The Jays accurately predicting the market for SP's in November saved them a whole bunch of money, short and long term. No way they could have gotten into bidding wars with teams like the Dodgers, Giants, Cardinals, etc, for the 2nd/3rd tier free agent SP's (Kazmir, Shark, Leake types).

 

They could, but they don't. Their wealthy owners won't let management spend 'that little bit extra'. ;-)

[burlingtonbandit]

Lets not forget with the CBA expiring, QO might go away. Especially for the guys like Kazmir.

[Brownie19]

a sudden jump in velocity and you're not at all concerned with the arm....

 

Hope not...didn't Happ have a velo jump?

[Boxcar]

Your approach of not researching the players and concepts you discuss and instead insulting those who do is peculiar.

 

This is just the best

[TheHurl]

I guess this effectively takes the Dodgers out of the Maeda sweepstakes.

 

or not effectively

[P2F]

or not effectively

 

Ha! You would.

[JaysFan4Ever]

Why can't we just call this a 1 year deal with a 2 year player option?

 

They used to word it that way. "Team X signs player Y to a 3-year deal with a player option for a 4th."

 

Or when the Jays acquired Troy Glaus they gave him a player option to waive his no trade clause.

 

Maybe it's just a technicality since it's a guaranteed deal from the team unless the player decides otherwise, but that's still the player's "option" to leave.

[Grant77]

They used to word it that way. "Team X signs player Y to a 3-year deal with a player option for a 4th."

 

Or when the Jays acquired Troy Glaus they gave him a player option to waive his no trade clause.

 

Maybe it's just a technicality since it's a guaranteed deal from the team unless the player decides otherwise, but that's still the player's "option" to leave.

 

I'm probably just getting old and don't like new things, but I just don't understand the impetus for the sudden change. The player option way described it perfectly in the first place.

[rydermike]

They used to word it that way. "Team X signs player Y to a 3-year deal with a player option for a 4th."

 

Or when the Jays acquired Troy Glaus they gave him a player option to waive his no trade clause.

 

Maybe it's just a technicality since it's a guaranteed deal from the team unless the player decides otherwise, but that's still the player's "option" to leave.

 

I think it's a tecnicality based on the way it's structured.

 

Ex 1 - A two year deal with a player option for year 3

Ex 2 - A three year deal with an optout after year 2.

 

In Example 1, after the first two years, if he does nothing/fills out no paperwork, he's a FA for year three.

In Example 2, after the first two years, if he does nothing/fills out no paperwork, he's under contract for year three.

 

They are exactly the same thing, but differs in the paperwork part. Maybe there's a rule that player options can only be one year, so they get around using optouts? I don't know the CBA that well

[Grant77]

I think it's a tecnicality based on the way it's structured.

 

Ex 1 - A two year deal with a player option for year 3

Ex 2 - A three year deal with an optout after year 2.

 

In Example 1, after the first two years, if he does nothing/fills out no paperwork, he's a FA for year three.

In Example 2, after the first two years, if he does nothing/fills out no paperwork, he's under contract for year three.

 

They are exactly the same thing, but differs in the paperwork part. Maybe there's a rule that player options can only be one year, so they get around using optouts? I don't know the CBA that well

 

Is this a contract structure thing, or is this a media creation? If there is no difference, why would teams change the way they sign contracts?

[TheHurl]

Is this a contract structure thing, or is this a media creation? If there is no difference, why would teams change the way they sign contracts?

 

I think that there was some thoughts that there would be confusion that wording it a "One year deal, with a two year player option" would look like this

 

Year 1 $12M

Year 2 Player picks up option

Year 3 player opts out.

 

Which is of course not what it the contract is. I think in this case assuming the media and fans are dumb isn't that far of a stretch.

[Cyborg]

I think that there was some thoughts that there would be confusion that wording it a "One year deal, with a two year player option" would look like this

 

Year 1 $12M

Year 2 Player picks up option

Year 3 player opts out.

 

Which is of course not what it the contract is. I think in this case assuming the media and fans are dumb isn't that far of a stretch.

 

It really is a two year player option. Just that player must exercise all options at one time.

[TheHurl]

It really is a two year player option. Just that player must exercise all options at one time.

 

thanks for clearing that up...