Word 'round the campfire is that Dunn is still looking for a Carlos Lee-sized contract, despite some of his comparables signing for much less than expected. Pat Burrell, for example, signed a 2 year, $16 million contract with the Rays. Let's look at Pat Burrell quickly:
CHONE has Burrell projected at +13 RAA/150g and 85% playing time, which projects to ~28 RAR. Defensively, Burrell projects to be terrible: -14 RAA in a corner outfield slot, which also incurs a -7.5 runs/season penalty due to being a weak defensive position. Overall, that puts him at -21.5/season on defense, or -18 runs/season given the playing time estimate. Alternatively, if you rate him as a DH, he gets a -17.5 runs/season penalty * 85% playing time = -15 runs/season. Given that he signed as a putative DH, let's go with the latter estimate.
So, total value on Burrell is +28 RAR on offense and -15 runs on defense = +13 runs above replacement in 2009 (and +8 runs above replacement in 2010, given 5 runs/season aging). If free agent contracts are continuing to increase at 10% per season, that puts a two-year contract for Burrell worth 1.3*4.85 + 0.8*5.3 = $10.5 million. So, given this, even in a normal economy (and this probably isn't a normal economy), Burrell's contract seems like it might be a slight overpay. Tango came up with a slightly higher estimate of his value, but even then, in a normal economy, the contract comes in at even value.
Now, let's look at Dunn. CHONE has Dunn projects as a +16 runs/150g hitter and an excellent 90% playing time, which puts him at +32 RAR on offense. That's quite a dropoff from where I had him last season, which was closer to 40-45 RAR after aging. Why? I think it's because CHONE downweights home runs substantially when they happen in GABP, more so than my rough runs-based park adjustments do. If you think it's too dramatic, we can add 5 runs to the CHONE estimate...
Defensively, Dunn's -13 runs/season in a corner slot, + 7.5 run penalty for playing an easy position = -20.5 runs/season * 90% = -18 runs in 2009. Or, as a DH, he gets -17.5 runs/season * 90% = -16 runs/season.
So, overall, we get +32-37 RAR on offense minus 16-18 runs for defense depending on which figure you use. That equals somewhere between +14 and +21 runs above replacement in 2009. I'm going to split the difference again at put him at +17.5 runs above replacement.
Assuming 10% increases in free agent value, that puts his value at:
2009: 1.75 * $4.85 = $8.5 m
2010: 1.25 * $5.3 = $6.6 m
2011: 0.75 * $5.9 = $4.4 m
2012: 0.25 * $6.5 = $1.6 m
So, that puts his value at 1/$8.5, 2/$15.1, 3/$19.5, or 4/$21.1.
My guess is that the offers he's seeing are right around these values, or maybe slightly better than this.
Update:
I've been thinking about this more today, and I think I undervalued both Burrell and Dunn above. The reason is that I was using CHONE's R150 numbers as their full season contributions, and then calculating a percentage of that based on an estimate of playing time. The problem with doing this is that R150 is already 92% playing time (otherwise it'd be R162!), so I can't use that as a full season estimate. It's designed to just be a good, optimistic estimate of full season production for most players (few if any players are projectable for over 92% playing time that aren't named Cal Ripken).
I also probably should be using a runs/9.4 conversion instead of a runs/10 conversion to get runs into wins. Offense isn't at 5 runs per game per team anymore.
So, with that in mind, here are revised estimates for Burrell and Dunn's values:
Pat Burrell
+13 RAA/150g / 0.92 = 14 RAA/162 g + 20 runs = 34 RAR * 85% = 29 RAR. Fielding is still -15 runs/season for DH. So, 29 RAR - 15 RAA = 14 runs above replacement total value.
2009: 14 RAR / 9.4 = 1.5 WAR * $4.85 M/WAR = $7.2 M
2010: 9 RAR / 9.4 = 1.0 WAR * 5.3 M/WAR = $5.3 M
2 year value = $12.5 M
Not much different, but this is closer to being accurate, I think. And a little closer to what he got and what Tango came up with.
Adam Dunn
15 RAA/150g / 0.92 = 16 RAA/162g + 20 runs = 36 RAR * 90% = 33 RAR hitter. If you want to be biased and think Dunn's better than that (I think he probably is, but I'm biased), you can add 5 runs and make him a 37 RAR hitter. Fielding remains -16 to -18 runs/season. So we're now at 15 to 21 RAR. Splitting the difference puts us at 18 RAR.
2009: 18 RAR / 9.4 = 1.9 WAR * $4.85 M/WAR = $9.2 M
2010: 13 RAR / 9.4 = 1.4 WAR * $5.3 M/WAR = $7.4 M
2011: 8 RAR / 9.4 = 0.85 WAR* $5.9 M/WAR = $5.0 M
2011: 3 RAR / 9.4 = 0.3 WAR * $6.5 M/WAR = $2.0 M
That puts a 2 year deal worth ~$17M, a 3 year deal worth $22M, and a 4 year deal worth $24M. As I said in the comments below, you'd probably spread the money evenly across the years, but it should sum up to these totals.
Again, not a huge difference, but the small adjustments net him an extra $1 million or so a year.
Adam Dunn at these rates would be a nice improvement for the Reds. He's better than Willy Taveras. If he wants more than that, given that he won't singlehandedly get the team into the playoffs, it's probably the right move not to sign him.
I don't think he'd see contract offers that would drop in per year value over time. Major league teams are still bad about backloading contracts too much and not recognizing aging curves. I think the $8.5M is probably right, but if he's getting offers for 4-year deals, I'd guess they are more likely in the range of $30+M than the $21M you suggest.
ReplyDeleteI'm not suggesting that the contract should be frontloaded. Just that those are what he'll probably be worth in those years, and so you build the total contract offer around that (maybe you pay the same each year, for example, but have it total those amounts).
ReplyDeleteI'd probably offer a two-year deal like Burrell's so that the per year amount is something closer to what he can stomach. The economy helps justify that kind of offer, even if it's not the reason for it. I might also add a team option to the offer for an outrageous amount ($12? $15?) that I'd plan to buy out and not pay...makes the deal look better even if it's unlikely that you'd choose execute it.
-j
I must confess I'm not familiar with this stat system so i can't take much exception to what i consider a gross underestimate of Dunn's worth. I do know that any reduction in value for home runs hit in GABP is rather absurd when Dunn's home runs average 409ft. No park can hold him at this point in his career.
ReplyDeleteHe's projected as a very good hitter, and I even added an extra 5 runs into the mix because I'm biased and think he's better than what CHONE thinks. It's his defense that kills his value. That's always been the problem with Dunn--something that many of his detractors and many of his supporters don't really appreciate. If he was just an average defensive player at his position (which is loaded with weak fielders), he'd be worth $14 million per season. Surely that doesn't seem like a gross underestimate?
ReplyDeleteCHONE still projected him to hit 33 home runs next season, which is a pretty reasonable projection to my eye. I know he's done 40 home runs 4 years in a row, but expecting some dropoff due to aging, changes in parks, regression to the mean, etc, doesn't seem unreasonable to me. He may outperform the projection, but he might also underperform it--especially if he gets hurt (his back was acting up a bit last season).
And while it's true that Dunn hits monster blasts with regularity, not all of his home runs go 400+ feet. Hittracker shows 13 of his home runs under the 400 foot mark. If half of those don't make it out in a different ballpark, we're right at CHONE's projection.
-j
Justin, my point was more that I think teams think more along the lines of "This player is worth $8.5 million this year, so if we give him a 4 year deal, we'll have to put some gradual raises in there" and then the deal ends up over $35 million or so. I don't think that teams look at players and say, "what will he be worth for the entire contract?" and then divvy the money up.
ReplyDeleteMaybe they'll be smarter now that money is tighter, but I just don't see Major League teams being that forward thinking. And I definitely don't see players being willing to take that kind of annual paycut.
But I think you are right, Dunn will likely sign a shorter deal - one or two years - though I think he'll likely get somewhere around $10M a year. He does have age and 40 HR seasons on his side over Burrell.
I think you're right that he can expect to do a bit better than Burrell in the real market. Someone out there will pay him $10m, and it won't be an insane overpay. Dunn also does have better durability, historically at least. Assuming his back problems don't escalate.
ReplyDeleteI think it is the case that players typically make less per year on longer contracts in MLB. I think it's often described as trading in a bit of extra money per season for financial security. But as a team, you can also treat it as recognizing that players do tend to decline over the course of their contracts...
-j
Brad, i don't think the average length of Dunn's (or anyone's) HRs is the right way to measure how much a park will "hold him." i think it's better to look at what percentage of his HRs are over a certain length (i.e. the minimum length needed to get a ball out of a certain park), or more specifically, what number of HRs are over a certain length to each field. for example, if he hits an average of 7 HRs per year to LF but those HRs are generally under 370ft, the a park with a deeper LF corner might reduce his HRs. it might not serve to improve his HRs either. for instance, if Dunn were to play in Fenway, the short porch in RF might not improve his HR numbers b/c his dingers to that field are all over 390ft or something like that.
ReplyDeleteMy latest player of the day is the new guy the Reds signed to a minor league contract. If given a chance to play he's not that much of a dropoff from Dunn, has the same strengths and weaknesses, and is quite a bit cheaper.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.baseballprojection.com/
ReplyDeleteAnd a link.