Article: Charting The Competition: Cleveland Indians

[Nick Nelson]

For the past five years, this team has been there, lurking. The Indians have won 80 or more games in four of those seasons, almost constantly remaining within reach of first place, but all that this stretch has yielded is one single postseason game – a loss to Tampa Bay in the 2013 wild card.Cleveland has a good young core entrenched, with a potentially (likely?) elite rotation, but their fans are feeling quite similar to those in Minnesota, waiting for an offseason splash that still hasn't come.

 

The Indians are on the brink – they won just two fewer games than the Twins last year – but their only substantial moves this winter have been the signings of Rajai Davis and Mike Napoli, both to one-year deals. It's a lukewarm approach to addressing an offense that scored only 669 runs last year and ranked third-to-last in the American League in OPS+.

 

Much like Terry Ryan, it appears that GM Chris Antonetti is committed to relying mostly on what he already has in place. In some ways, that's more than understandable. Cleveland's starting pitching situation is the envy of the entire AL, with Corey Kluber leading the way for a young and inexpensive slate of talented hurlers who all possess strikeout stuff.

 

The front of the rotation is filthy with the combination of Kluber, Carlos Carrasco and Danny Salazar leading the way. Each of those three made 30-plus starts last year and held opponents to an OPS below .680, which is pretty ridiculous. If those guys keep rolling and Trevor Bauer takes the next step at age 25, this is a contender for the best unit in the majors.

 

The bullpen is solid, anchored by underrated closer Cody Allen with support from Zach McAllister, Bryan Shaw, Tommy Hunter and old friend Jeff Manship, among others. Like the Twins, the Indians probably could have benefited from a more potent infusion to the relief corps, but instead have opted mostly for gambles on guys like Craig Stammen and Joba Chamberlain through minor-league deals.

 

All in all, though, the Cleveland pitching staff looks promising. This team's fate will most likely rest on what the offense can do, and that's hard to predict. Davis and Napoli aren't high-impact additions, and the unit will be hurt by missing Michael Brantley for at least the first month following shoulder surgery.

 

In the same way that the Twins are hoping that Miguel Sano and Byron Buxton will be transformative figures in their lineup, the Indians are leaning on 22-year-old shortstop Francisco Lindor, who will be in the MVP race if he repeats his rookie production over a full season.

 

And like the Twins, they Indians are hoping that their formerly premier offensive catcher turned ordinary first baseman can once again emerge as a true asset at the plate. Carlos Santana remains one of the best in the game at controlling the strike zone and drawing walks, but last year he batted just .231 with a .395 slugging percentage.

 

Cleveland has a wide range of possible outcomes for the 2016 season. With their rotation setup, they can't be discounted as legitimate World Series contenders, but with an offense that wasn't good last year and displays no obvious avenues for significant improvement, they may not score enough to finally get over that hump.

 

It's surprising that they haven't landed an upgrade over the light-hitting Giovanny Urshela at third base, but it sounds like the Indians are still in talks with free agent David Freese, who would give them a bit of a nudge in the right direction.

 

~~~

This wraps up our series looking at Minnesota's divisional opponents and where they stand heading into the 2016 season. To get caught up, make sure you check out:

 

Chicago White Sox

Detroit Tigers

Kansas City Royals

 

Click here to view the article

[Seth Stohs]

Just posted this on Twitter... but Jose Berrios and Francisco Lindor have been life-long friends in Puerto Rico. The two (along with Javier Baez) held their event for kids in December. In a story I did back then, Berrios said of the two, "We played Little League since (we were) 5 to 6 years old. We are friends. We are family."

 

So... how much fun is it going to be watching Berrios facing Lindor 4-6 times a season for (hopefully) the next decade?!

[Riverbrian]

The Indians pitching... Starting and pen is fantastic and it should keep them contending.

 

They really need a superstar big bat to aid the offense.

 

If I was GM and the owner let me do what I want.

 

I would have been after Chris Davis.

 

And I would have picked up Napoli as well. The Indians have depth issues in the power department.

 

They are a key injury away (Santana or Napoli) from needing to become a speed team and they don't have enough speed to do that.

[Kwak]

 

The Indians pitching... Starting and pen is fantastic and it should keep them contending.

They really need a superstar big bat to aid the offense.

If I was GM and the owner let me do what I want.

I would have been after Chris Davis.

And I would have picked up Napoli as well. The Indians have depth issues in the power department.

They are a key injury away (Santana or Napoli) from needing to become a speed team and they don't have enough speed to do that.

"...need a superstar big bat..."--are there any teams that don't need one of them?

 

"They are a key injury away..."--I'm guessing there aren't many teams that wouldn't be deeply affected by one.

 

In fact, I think the Twins fall squarely in that class that needs a superstar big bat  and most definitely don't need a key injury.

[Vanimal46]

The Indians seem to have been the hot sleeper name in Feb/March the last 2-3 years.. I believe in their pitching staff, and Lindor from my SSS of watching him looks like the real deal. I said it in the White Sox thread, but you can make cases for any team in this division to finish in 1st, and just as many cases for any team to finish in last. Cleveland's no different.

[Riverbrian]

"...need a superstar big bat..."--are there any teams that don't need one of them?

 

"They are a key injury away..."--I'm guessing there aren't many teams that wouldn't be deeply affected by one.

 

In fact, I think the Twins fall squarely in that class that needs a superstar big bat  and most definitely don't need a key injury.

Obviously... every team needs a superstar big bat but some more than others.

 

The Twins are trying to add some power and protection for Sano with the addition of Park. If Park fails or gets hurt we have Arcia and Vargas to try and become that guy.

 

The Indians don't have that kind of power potential.

 

I'd be taking a long look at Pedro Alverez right now if I were them

 

Because they need some insurance.

 

Santana and Napoli and after that... ?

 

With that pitching staff... They need to go for it.

[bluechipper]

"...need a superstar big bat..."--are there any teams that don't need one of them?

 

"They are a key injury away..."--I'm guessing there aren't many teams that wouldn't be deeply affected by one.

 

In fact, I think the Twins fall squarely in that class that needs a superstar big bat  and most definitely don't need a key injury.

Miguel Sano.

[alarp33]

Cleveland seems like a logical landing spot for Dexter Fowler - if they sign him I would go as far as to say they are favorites in the Central

[gunnarthor]

I figure they'll be similar record wise again 79-82 wins but hopefully behind us.  I love Lindor - I think he'll be the best short stop in the majors - and the rotation is good.  Although I'd be surprised if those 4 give them 120+ starts again. 

[TheLeviathan]

I think they finish ahead of us, but how much is going to depend on if that anemic offense can manage to be just a bit better than their talent would indicate.

[nicksaviking]

I am so jealous of that rotation.

[ThejacKmp]

 

Obviously... every team needs a superstar big bat but some more than others.

The Twins are trying to add some power and protection for Sano with the addition of Park. If Park fails or gets hurt we have Arcia and Vargas to try and become that guy.

The Indians don't have that kind of power potential.

I'd be taking a long look at Pedro Alverez right now if I were them

Because they need some insurance.

Santana and Napoli and after that... ?

With that pitching staff... They need to go for it.

 

With that pitching staff they have time to let things develop - their pitching is young and developing.

 

You lost me at Chris Davis. That contract was absurd and you would have had to beat it. If I were to pick one move for the Tribe not to do, that would have been it.

[alarp33]

 

With that pitching staff they have time to let things develop - their pitching is young and developing.

 

You lost me at Chris Davis. That contract was absurd and you would have had to beat it. If I were to pick one move for the Tribe not to do, that would have been it.

 

7 years at $17 million per (w/ deferrals after that) is absurd? I'm sure they would have preferred 5 years, but with the way salaries are trending paying Chris Davis $17 million in 2022 will be nothing. 

[bird]

Cleveland was a darling pick last year, but not mine. This year, they are. Even though serious hitting help from their system is still a year away.

[Willihammer]

They got Brantley, Kipnis, Santana, and Gomes. Those are 4 pretty good hitters. Almonte is an interesting wildcard, he's pretty dynamic when he's on. The lineup has a couple question marks but they could be okay. The starting pitching and bullpen should keep them in most games. I look for Zimmer as a possible mid-season OF call up if he rakes in AA which he easily could.

[tobi0040]

They are going to pay Davis 161 million for 7 years of his services. Deferrals or not, it should be viewed as a 23 million a year deal. That is an awful lot for a DH. Especially one that has been up and down (career OPS of .835) and will be 30-37 for the term.

[BK432]

I'm buying the Indians finally this year. We'll see if they score enough runs to prove me right. I will admit, I have a huge bias to pitching....

[ThejacKmp]

7 years at $17 million per (w/ deferrals after that) is absurd? I'm sure they would have preferred 5 years, but with the way salaries are trending paying Chris Davis $17 million in 2022 will be nothing.

 

 

After seven years you still owe him $42 million.

 

Chris Davis has had two good seasons and is a year removed from a .704 OPS in 127 games. He's played a bit of OF but it is telling the Orioles have mainly kept him at first - he doesn't profile to be able to play OF in three years, let alone the end of that contract. He will be a DH or 1B. He is about to turn 30 and is a very one dimensional player. He's a power hitter with two elite seasons and five average ones. So you're betting that he will continue to be an elite power hitter into his mid 30s. How many guys do that? It's hard of think of anybody besides Big Papi - and he hit for average in a way Chris Davis never has. Pujols had a way better (HOF) track record and that contract looks terrible now. Texiera has been a terrible contract due to health and ineffectiveness - which is the rule rather than the exception for aging sluggers. Power hitting first basemen are not a good gamble in their mid 30s. If his power slips at all and he's hitting 25 bombs he becomes a liability. And the salary makes him untradeable so he will just block young talent.

 

This could be a terrible contract for the last five years of the deal. It's the last thing a developing team like the Twins or Tribe should be doing, especially since first base is a relatively easy place to find power or to stick a young guy with defensive liabilities.

[alarp33]

 

After seven years you still owe him $42 million.

Chris Davis has had two good seasons and is a year removed from a .704 OPS in 127 games. He's played a bit of OF but it is telling the Orioles have mainly kept him at first - he doesn't profile to be able to play OF in three years, let alone the end of that contract. He will be a DH or 1B. He is about to turn 30 and is a very one dimensional player. He's a power hitter with two elite seasons and five average ones. So you're betting that he will continue to be an elite power hitter into his mid 30s. How many guys do that? It's hard of think of anybody besides Big Papi - and he hit for average in a way Chris Davis never has. Pujols had a way better (HOF) track record and that contract looks terrible now. Texiera has been a terrible contract due to health and ineffectiveness - which is the rule rather than the exception for aging sluggers. Power hitting first basemen are not a good gamble in their mid 30s. If his power slips at all and he's hitting 25 bombs he becomes a liability. And the salary makes him untradeable so he will just block young talent.

This could be a terrible contract for the last five years of the deal. It's the last thing a developing team like the Twins or Tribe should be doing, especially since first base is a relatively easy place to find power or to stick a young guy with defensive liabilities.

 

1) It's not $42 million using Net Present Value calculation

2) Pujols was 2 years older when he signed a contract that was 3 years longer and for quite a bit more money. 

3) Fangraphs had him worth $52 million in 2013 and $44.8 million in 2015.  So calling them just good years is a bit of an understatement.  

4) Yes, power hitters generally don't age well, but he's just about to play his age 30 season.  My point is the way this contract is structured, the risk is not nearly as great as it may appear if you just look at "7/$161".  He gives you even 3-4 good seasons it's worth it.

 

It's the exact gamble a team like the Indians who have 3 potentially elite pitchers locked up for the next 3-4 years should be making.  

[alarp33]

 

They are going to pay Davis 161 million for 7 years of his services. Deferrals or not, it should be viewed as a 23 million a year deal. That is an awful lot for a DH. Especially one that has been up and down (career OPS of .835) and will be 30-37 for the term.

 

That's not how many works, they aren't paying him $23 million a year.  Here's an article that explains deferred money for you. 

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-value-of-deferred-money-in-the-chris-davis-deal/

 

30-37 = 8 seasons.  It was a 7 year contract, expires when he is 36. 

[ThejacKmp]

 

1) It's not $42 million using Net Present Value calculation

2) Pujols was 2 years older when he signed a contract that was 3 years longer and for quite a bit more money. 

3) Fangraphs had him worth $52 million in 2013 and $44.8 million in 2015.  So calling them just good years is a bit of an understatement.  

4) Yes, power hitters generally don't age well, but he's just about to play his age 30 season.  My point is the way this contract is structured, the risk is not nearly as great as it may appear if you just look at "7/$161".  He gives you even 3-4 good seasons it's worth it.

 

It's the exact gamble a team like the Indians who have 3 potentially elite pitchers locked up for the next 3-4 years should be making.  

 

1) $42 million is still $42 million. The Natives aren’t the Dodgers or Yankees and that does represent a lost opportunity later on. Don’t get me wrong, I’d have set the contract up the same way but I’m not going to pretend that money isn’t part of the cost.

2) Pujols was also a significantly better player, in the conversation for greatest hitter of all time.  And Pujols contract is actually the perfect example of the downside, no matter the differences in length and when he signed it. Pujols fell off the first year of that contract, in his age 31/32 year. If Chris Davis follows that path with that level of decline (and he’s nowhere near as good as Pujols) he’ll be a replacement level first baseman in two years. With 5 years left on the contract.  Mark Teixeira is another great example, as he fell off at age 32.  Obviously you can’t say, “If A than B” but the comparable recent history suggests bad things. And again, both Teixeira and Pujols had vastly better resumes to bet on – Chris Davis is still relatively unknown.

3) That's true. But you’re ignoring the fact that Chris Davis was worth $5.8 million in 2014. That’s the big key to Chris Davis – he has two big years of playing well but there is equal evidence that the house may be built of sand. I’m not saying he’s for sure going to suck but the lack of a proven track record is a reason to pause. His most similar players on Baseball Reference are guys like Richie Sexton, Glenn Davis, Lee May and Cecil Fielder. All of those were good, even great, players for a few years in their prime but all of them fell off in their early 30s.

4) But will he give you even three years?  And a lot of the issue with these contracts is that you have to play the guy on the back end. This isn’t the NBA where a guy who doesn’t perform but has a big contract rides the bench or sees his minutes reduced. Veteran baseball players who sign huge contracts play out those contracts, expecting and getting to have a regular job. It's hard to find examples of non-pitchers losing their jobs. Mauer isn’t fighting for his job at first, Teixeira wasn’t being pushed out of his position by Byrd, Pujols is years away from any reduction in playing time. The only real example of a huge money position player in danger of losing his job was A-Rod last year and that was for PR reasons more than performance. There is an opportunity cost to having to play Davis the last 3-5 years of that contract and that plays a major role in whether it’s a good signing.

 

That last part is why it’s a bad gamble for the Indians. The Royals have a 3 year window, they can justify going all in with a guy like Chris Davis. With that young pitching and position player talent, the Tribe have an 8-10 year window. You really don’t want to start shutting the back end of that window by tying money up in a guy who will keep you from being flexible when Lindor hits his age-27 season. Believe in your youth movement - don't tie a boulder to the bumper of the bandwagon.

 

Chris Davis’s contract isn’t the worst thing ever but it’s a terrible bet for the Tribe (and in an aside, made no sense for the O’s - who have no window. Davis just makes them an average team hoping to get lucky for 3-4 years.)  He doesn’t have the track record to make you feel sure past performance isn’t a fluke or aberration and guys like him tend to start declining right about now, when he’s signing the contract. It is very believable that the last 5 years of that deal could be pretty tough, with the last few unbearable. It just doesn’t make sense for Cleveland.

[Riverbrian]

1) $42 million is still $42 million. The Natives aren’t the Dodgers or Yankees and that does represent a lost opportunity later on. Don’t get me wrong, I’d have set the contract up the same way but I’m not going to pretend that money isn’t part of the cost.

 

2) Pujols was also a significantly better player, in the conversation for greatest hitter of all time. And Pujols contract is actually the perfect example of the downside, no matter the differences in length and when he signed it. Pujols fell off the first year of that contract, in his age 31/32 year. If Chris Davis follows that path with that level of decline (and he’s nowhere near as good as Pujols) he’ll be a replacement level first baseman in two years. With 5 years left on the contract. Mark Teixeira is another great example, as he fell off at age 32. Obviously you can’t say, “If A than B” but the comparable recent history suggests bad things. And again, both Teixeira and Pujols had vastly better resumes to bet on – Chris Davis is still relatively unknown.

 

3) That's true. But you’re ignoring the fact that Chris Davis was worth $5.8 million in 2014. That’s the big key to Chris Davis – he has two big years of playing well but there is equal evidence that the house may be built of sand. I’m not saying he’s for sure going to suck but the lack of a proven track record is a reason to pause. His most similar players on Baseball Reference are guys like Richie Sexton, Glenn Davis, Lee May and Cecil Fielder. All of those were good, even great, players for a few years in their prime but all of them fell off in their early 30s.

 

4) But will he give you even three years? And a lot of the issue with these contracts is that you have to play the guy on the back end. This isn’t the NBA where a guy who doesn’t perform but has a big contract rides the bench or sees his minutes reduced. Veteran baseball players who sign huge contracts play out those contracts, expecting and getting to have a regular job. It's hard to find examples of non-pitchers losing their jobs. Mauer isn’t fighting for his job at first, Teixeira wasn’t being pushed out of his position by Byrd, Pujols is years away from any reduction in playing time. The only real example of a huge money position player in danger of losing his job was A-Rod last year and that was for PR reasons more than performance. There is an opportunity cost to having to play Davis the last 3-5 years of that contract and that plays a major role in whether it’s a good signing.

 

That last part is why it’s a bad gamble for the Indians. The Royals have a 3 year window, they can justify going all in with a guy like Chris Davis. With that young pitching and position player talent, the Tribe have an 8-10 year window. You really don’t want to start shutting the back end of that window by tying money up in a guy who will keep you from being flexible when Lindor hits his age-27 season. Believe in your youth movement - don't tie a boulder to the bumper of the bandwagon.

 

Chris Davis’s contract isn’t the worst thing ever but it’s a terrible bet for the Tribe (and in an aside, made no sense for the O’s - who have no window. Davis just makes them an average team hoping to get lucky for 3-4 years.) He doesn’t have the track record to make you feel sure past performance isn’t a fluke or aberration and guys like him tend to start declining right about now, when he’s signing the contract. It is very believable that the last 5 years of that deal could be pretty tough, with the last few unbearable. It just doesn’t make sense for Cleveland.

Who knows what these guys will be at age 33 or 36 or whatever.

 

For 2016... In my opinion... The Indians need some power and Chris Davis was the premeire power hitter in free agency. I'd have went for it but it's easy for me to say because I'm typing those words from my living room with no responsibility at all.

 

About Chris Davis... I'll say this... He has easy power like no other in the league. I've seen him flick balls over the wall on multiple occasions. If I had to bet on anyone maintaining his power stroke late into 30's ala David Ortiz. Chris Davis would be the guy I'd put money on.

 

About the Indians... My main point is that they should have done more to acquire some power. If not Davis... somebody else in addition to Napoli. Cespedes? Upton? Someone... Because that pitching staff is to good to wait for youngsters to mature.

[tobi0040]

 

That's not how many works, they aren't paying him $23 million a year.  Here's an article that explains deferred money for you. 

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-value-of-deferred-money-in-the-chris-davis-deal/

 

30-37 = 8 seasons.  It was a 7 year contract, expires when he is 36. 

 

I totally get how deffered money works and the time value of money.  But the initial post said it was $17M a year for 7 years.  That ignored the fact he is still owed $42M.  Even if that is only worth 50-75% less because it is deferred it could still impact future teams.

 

Regarding the Pujols comp.  I am not sure that is helping the case for Chris Davis.   Pujols was on the trajectory of a top 5 or 10 hitter of all time and that contract does not look like it is going to age well.  Granted it is longer and he was two years older when it started.  But Davis has had two good years and been relatively pedestrian outside of that.  Pujols was never pedestrian prior to his deal.

 

[alarp33]

 

1) $42 million is still $42 million. The Natives aren’t the Dodgers or Yankees and that does represent a lost opportunity later on. Don’t get me wrong, I’d have set the contract up the same way but I’m not going to pretend that money isn’t part of the cost.

2) Pujols was also a significantly better player, in the conversation for greatest hitter of all time.  And Pujols contract is actually the perfect example of the downside, no matter the differences in length and when he signed it. Pujols fell off the first year of that contract, in his age 31/32 year. If Chris Davis follows that path with that level of decline (and he’s nowhere near as good as Pujols) he’ll be a replacement level first baseman in two years. With 5 years left on the contract.  Mark Teixeira is another great example, as he fell off at age 32.  Obviously you can’t say, “If A than B” but the comparable recent history suggests bad things. And again, both Teixeira and Pujols had vastly better resumes to bet on – Chris Davis is still relatively unknown.

3) That's true. But you’re ignoring the fact that Chris Davis was worth $5.8 million in 2014. That’s the big key to Chris Davis – he has two big years of playing well but there is equal evidence that the house may be built of sand. I’m not saying he’s for sure going to suck but the lack of a proven track record is a reason to pause. His most similar players on Baseball Reference are guys like Richie Sexton, Glenn Davis, Lee May and Cecil Fielder. All of those were good, even great, players for a few years in their prime but all of them fell off in their early 30s.

4) But will he give you even three years?  And a lot of the issue with these contracts is that you have to play the guy on the back end. This isn’t the NBA where a guy who doesn’t perform but has a big contract rides the bench or sees his minutes reduced. Veteran baseball players who sign huge contracts play out those contracts, expecting and getting to have a regular job. It's hard to find examples of non-pitchers losing their jobs. Mauer isn’t fighting for his job at first, Teixeira wasn’t being pushed out of his position by Byrd, Pujols is years away from any reduction in playing time. The only real example of a huge money position player in danger of losing his job was A-Rod last year and that was for PR reasons more than performance. There is an opportunity cost to having to play Davis the last 3-5 years of that contract and that plays a major role in whether it’s a good signing.

 

That last part is why it’s a bad gamble for the Indians. The Royals have a 3 year window, they can justify going all in with a guy like Chris Davis. With that young pitching and position player talent, the Tribe have an 8-10 year window. You really don’t want to start shutting the back end of that window by tying money up in a guy who will keep you from being flexible when Lindor hits his age-27 season. Believe in your youth movement - don't tie a boulder to the bumper of the bandwagon.

 

Chris Davis’s contract isn’t the worst thing ever but it’s a terrible bet for the Tribe (and in an aside, made no sense for the O’s - who have no window. Davis just makes them an average team hoping to get lucky for 3-4 years.)  He doesn’t have the track record to make you feel sure past performance isn’t a fluke or aberration and guys like him tend to start declining right about now, when he’s signing the contract. It is very believable that the last 5 years of that deal could be pretty tough, with the last few unbearable. It just doesn’t make sense for Cleveland.

 

I'm not sure I'm understanding the Pujols comp at all.  How about looking at it this way.  Pujols is 36, he will make $165 million over the next 6 years.  Davis is 30, he will make $119 over the next 7. When Davis is 36 he will have 1 year and $17 million left on his deal (and a few million/ year in deferrals) That's not a valid comp at all to simply say "Pujols contract looks bad, so does Davis!"

 

I'm not sure any team in baseball, even the Cubs, have a current "8-10 year window".  Let alone the Indians.  Kluber, Carrasco, Salazar all are under team control for 3-4 years I believe.  Lindor is going to be the SS for 6 years.  Where do you get this 8-10 year window?  If I'm a GM and have 3 healthy, front of the rotation starters... my window is right now, because we all know how quickly that can flame out. 

 

 

[tobi0040]

 

I'm not sure I'm understanding the Pujols comp at all.  How about looking at it this way.  Pujols is 36, he will make $165 million over the next 6 years.  Davis is 30, he will make $119 over the next 7. When Davis is 36 he will have 1 year and $17 million left on his deal (and a few million/ year in deferrals) That's not a valid comp at all to simply say "Pujols contract looks bad, so does Davis!"

 

I'm not sure any team in baseball, even the Cubs, have a current "8-10 year window".  Let alone the Indians.  Kluber, Carrasco, Salazar all are under team control for 3-4 years I believe.  Lindor is going to be the SS for 6 years.  Where do you get this 8-10 year window?  If I'm a GM and have 3 healthy, front of the rotation starters... my window is right now, because we all know how quickly that can flame out. 

 

I can only speak for myself.  But simply ignorning $42M because it is deferred is incredibly misleading.  That is #1.

 

But the comp between Pujols and Davis is a bad one, I didn't bring it up.  My point is that I get Pujols is older during the duration of his deal.  But he is a guy with a career OPS of .977, OPS+ of 159.  Chris Davis is a career .835, OPS+ of 122.  Those are two incredibly different players.  Pujols can come down quite a bit as he ages just to fall into the numbers Davis has averaged.

 

Pujols has been battling leg injuries and still put up an OPS+ in the 115-125 range lately in his mid 30's.  He still clubbed 40 HR last year

 

 

 

 

 

[alarp33]

 

I can only speak for myself.  But simply ignorning $42M because it is deferred is incredibly misleading.  That is #1.

 

But the comp between Pujols and Davis is a bad one, I didn't bring it up.  My point is that I get Pujols is older during the duration of his deal.  But he is a guy with a career OPS of .977, OPS+ of 159.  Chris Davis is a career .835, OPS+ of 122.  Those are two incredibly different players.  Pujols can come down quite a bit as he ages just to fall into the numbers Davis has averaged.

 

Pujols has been battling leg injuries and still put up an OPS+ in the 115-125 range lately in his mid 30's.  He still clubbed 40 HR last year

 

 

 

$42 million spread over 20 years is an insignificant amount to MLB owners, so ignoring it is more than fair.  In no way will those deferred payments effect the Orioles future payrolls. 

 

Looks like we're in agreement that there is no comparison to the Pujols contract, but you cherry picked career stats.  

 

You seem impressed by the last 3 years of an injured Pujols putting up 116, 126, 118 OPS+.  But you write off Davis by using his career numbers, which were bad in Texas. His last 4 years his OPS+ is 121, 168, 96, 146.  He has been a significantly better hitter than Angels Albert Pujols.  

[tobi0040]

 

$42 million spread over 20 years is an insignificant amount to MLB owners, so ignoring it is more than fair.  In no way will those deferred payments effect the Orioles future payrolls. 

 

Looks like we're in agreement that there is no comparison to the Pujols contract, but you cherry picked career stats.  

 

You seem impressed by the last 3 years of an injured Pujols putting up 116, 126, 118 OPS+.  But you write off Davis by using his career numbers, which were bad in Texas. His last 4 years his OPS+ is 121, 168, 96, 146.  He has been a significantly better hitter than Angels Albert Pujols.  

 

Pujols through ages 32-35 averaged a 125 OPS.  One of these seasons a scout said his foot was so bad he could barely move.  Outside of this window, he was a top 5-10 hitter of all time.

 

Davis through his prime, ages 26-29 averaged an OPS of 132.  Outside of this period he was not a starter.

[ThejacKmp]

 

I'm not sure I'm understanding the Pujols comp at all.  How about looking at it this way.  Pujols is 36, he will make $165 million over the next 6 years.  Davis is 30, he will make $119 over the next 7. When Davis is 36 he will have 1 year and $17 million left on his deal (and a few million/ year in deferrals) That's not a valid comp at all to simply say "Pujols contract looks bad, so does Davis!"

 

I'm not sure any team in baseball, even the Cubs, have a current "8-10 year window".  Let alone the Indians.  Kluber, Carrasco, Salazar all are under team control for 3-4 years I believe.  Lindor is going to be the SS for 6 years.  Where do you get this 8-10 year window?  If I'm a GM and have 3 healthy, front of the rotation starters... my window is right now, because we all know how quickly that can flame out. 

 

Don't compare where they are now, compare where they were when they were the same age. Pujos went into a significant decline at 32.  The O's committed to Davis for 7 years at 30.  That's the comp - you're getting bogged down in comparing the two in the present which you can't do due to age and salary differences.

 

And yeah, I acknowledged you can't say "If A then B" but it's not like Pujols is an aberration.

 

Have to agree to disagree on the window. When you have multiple pieces come up at the same time, I think you can plan on being competitive for that period of time. Yeah the Tribe only control the pitchers for 3-4 more years but they also have time/advantages in signing the guys who work out - that money, BTW, would be better used that way than paying for Chris Davis's decline.

[Kwak]

Comparisons to Pujols make no sense--he was not available.  Cleveland had need for a proven power hitter and Davis was one of the very few available.  Comparisons are valid against any of those other available power hitters.

[ThejacKmp]

 

Who knows what these guys will be at age 33 or 36 or whatever.

For 2016... In my opinion... The Indians need some power and Chris Davis was the premeire power hitter in free agency. I'd have went for it but it's easy for me to say because I'm typing those words from my living room with no responsibility at all.

About Chris Davis... I'll say this... He has easy power like no other in the league. I've seen him flick balls over the wall on multiple occasions. If I had to bet on anyone maintaining his power stroke late into 30's ala David Ortiz. Chris Davis would be the guy I'd put money on.

About the Indians... My main point is that they should have done more to acquire some power. If not Davis... somebody else in addition to Napoli. Cespedes? Upton? Someone... Because that pitching staff is to good to wait for youngsters to mature.

 

I mean, I think GMs have to make projections about later years so it matters but agree hat you and I are likely not the authority on that.

 

I just don't like Chris Davis's performance going forward (see above). But I do agree that the Tribe could have targeted some of the shorter term talent out there. I like the concept of bringing in some hitting, just not signing anyone on the cusp of 30 for most of a two term presidency. Cespedes would have been much more interesting to me, that's a good target that the Tribe were not in on.

 

That's the difference between the Twins and the Tribe. The Tribe have the hard part set (pitching) and should have been more active with the free agent market. The Twins don't have position player needs (beyond catcher, which they took care of) and the free agent market would be a tough spot to grab the amount of pitching that would make a difference this year. Hopefully next year they will be at the point where one big free agent pitching signing will be warranted.

Edited February 18, 2016 by ThejacKmp