The Bernie Madoff effect?

Interesting piece. Basically, the Mets went cheap after the Madoff thing, even though the Wilpons had denied that that had any effect on their spending habits. Any thoughts on the matter?

almost 3 years ago meigs1414 17 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Meh some of that seems like a stretch

like the part about Castillo, I’m pretty sure they decided they were going to keep him once they realized they couldn’t trade him without taking back an even worse contract.

And even prior to Madoff/through out the season at no point did we ever show interest, at least according to most reports, in any left fielder other than ibanez, for reasons unknown to anyone. So it seems more like once he signed they didn’t like the other options, which isn’t unsurprising considering Bradley is a walking injury and Burrel/Dunn are “unathletic masher types”

Plus we still pursued Lowe and supposedly would have gone as high as 14 million per for him, and there’s not really much proof that Omar didn’t just prefer Perez.

by Gina on May 4, 2009 2:49 PM EDT reply actions

He also missed Murphy's struggles in the Fall league.

The ownership wanted to get him at-bats in 2009, and once they saw he was struggling at second base in the fall league, I’m sure that dampened their pursuit on any LFer that would be available. So, it wasn’t like they pumped up Castillo because he was cheap, they did it because the “Murphy at 2B” thing was not working out.

by meigs1414 on May 4, 2009 3:15 PM EDT up reply actions

Not very interesting at all

The Perez-over-Lowe thing is obviously indefensible and the only act that could somehow be perceived as being cheap. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Mets brass decided to stay away from that kind of commitment to Lowe based on their experience with Pedro and to a lesser extent, Glavine. Still, the Mets will have egg on their face for this one because they failed to identify that Lowe’s skillset and profile are much more favorable to aging than that of the previous to pitchers.

I can’t blame any ownership group for refusing to eat $18M for a player to go away (Castillo). Also, it’s been stated many times that the Wilpons refuse to go over the $160M luxury tax threshold, so signing Manny or Dunn was always out of the question. That’s not to let Omar and the front office off the hook for their allocation of resources. They paid a premium for K-Rod, Alex Cora and Tim Redding while the rest of the non-Yankees were bargain shopping. The Wilpons weren’t cheap. They went on a shopping spree, maxed out their credit card and forgot that there were bills to pay.

by All Shook Down on May 5, 2009 12:20 AM EDT reply actions

just out of curiosity

what about Lowe makes him a better candidate to age well than Glavine? Despite his last few starts (and especially his very last start) as a Met, Glavine actually aged pretty well, I think.

by cjmulrain on May 5, 2009 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions

Yeah

I’m not sure I agree with the idea that Lowe will continue to age well. He might, but he’d be sort of an oddity. I made this point a while back: how many righties can you think of that pitched well deep into their 30s and maybe even 40s that rely on so much contact? The responses I got were generally that older pitchers relying on contact is okay, because it limits their pitch count, and while this has generally been true for lefties (Glavine, Moyer, ::shudder:: Rogers), I’m not so convinced with righties. Think about righties that have aged well and pitched deep into their 30s and perhaps beyond. You get names like Clemens, Smoltz, Schilling, guys that miss bats. Lowe doesn’t really fit into that group.

Anyway, this is hardly a scientific case study or anything like that, but I felt like it was worth mentioning in this context.

by Mark Himmelstein on May 5, 2009 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions

All about the sinker

He’s a strike thrower and predominately a ground ball pitcher, so as his stuff declines, he won’t kill himself with walks and as he K rate and "stuff’ declines, he’ll be able to rely on his sinker to convert additional balls put in play into outs.

by All Shook Down on May 5, 2009 6:22 AM EDT reply actions

But that's the thing

It seems to me that lefties can get away with that, but righties have a tougher time. I can’t honestly think of a great comp for Lowe, he’s kind of an oddity already, but as his “stuff” declines, maybe his sinker loses a little “heaviness” and becomes easier to elevate. Lefties can better get away with that because LHBs have such a tough time with them anyway, and they can especially get away with it if they rely on changeups to help them out against righties. I’m not necessarily saying your wrong, I’m just not as convinced that Lowe is going to be able to continue to pitch at this level for the next four years. I’m not saying he wouldn’t have been a better option than Ollie, but I don’t think its quite so clear exactly what/where Lowe will be in three years.

by Mark Himmelstein on May 5, 2009 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions

The BR comps

aren’t particularly instructive, either. Danny Darwin?

by jasondg on May 5, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions

There are some interesting PECOTAs

The most encouraging is his top comp actually, Gaylord Perry, who pitched deep into his 40s without missing many bats. The other one that looks pretty instructive is Orel Hershiser, who did not remain effective as he hit his late 30s/40s. Then you have a bunch of lefties (Andy Pettitte, Tommy John, Kenny Rogers) and righties that didn’t last much beyond where Lowe is now (John Lieber, John Burkett, Rick Rhoden).

But again, his overall similarity index is 22, which is just about bordering on historically significant.

by Mark Himmelstein on May 5, 2009 1:01 PM EDT up reply actions

Also feel obligated to point out

Lowe’s #2 PECOTA comp is Andy Pettitte’s 2008 season. So the #2 most comparable season to Derek Lowe’s 2008…..was Andy Pettitte’s 2008. Why do I care? Because I made a huge point of this all offseason (before the PECOTA cards came out), that when Pettitte initially turned down the Yankees offer, the Mets should have been all over it, since he was basically a cheaper, lefty version of Lowe. I know he’s a Yankee and we hate him and he did drugs and had a bad ERA, but he also wound up signing for one year $6 million. For the Mets, maybe that would have had to be two years and $14 million. IMO, that would have been preferential purely from a baseball standpoint than the Ollie contract OR the Lowe contract. He had an atrocious defense behind him and pitched in perhaps the toughest division in baseball history, and though maybe he’s a bit more of an injury risk than Lowe, he also has a history of durability.

by Mark Himmelstein on May 5, 2009 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

Guhh I just had a bunch of stuff written and the window closed on me

Lowe’s been pitching to a BB/9 in the mid 2’s, a K/9 just below 6 and a GB% of 60%. That’s a long way to fall. Even if he diminishing to a sub-5 K/9 and a GB rate of 50%, it’s hard to see him regressing to the level of even an average starter in the fourth year of his deal. Take into consideration that Tom Glavine, who performed at an above-average level in his Mets tenure, had a mildly lower walk rate, a K/9 in the high 4’s and a GB% of 46%.

I think it’s hard to come up with a comparable for Lowe, because more players in this generation are active in their late 30’s and 40’s than in previous era. (I’m not sure about that, but it really seems this way.) But, how about Greg Maddux as a comp? It’s not perfect, but he’s a right hander who pitched into his 40’s and for the infinitesimal walk totals Mad Dog posted, Lowe has bettered him slightly in GB% and struck out about one more batter per nine innings in recent years.

by All Shook Down on May 5, 2009 6:54 PM EDT up reply actions

I don't disagree all that much

I could see Lowe being an average pitcher or worse by his fourth year. I mean, if I had to guess I’d say he’ll hold up pretty well through the deal. But there is an element of somewhat “uncharted waters” here. It is a long way to fall, I don’t necessarily disagree with that, but pitching attrition isn’t always a linear progression. Small changes can have big consequences.

The Maddux comp is interesting, I thought of that too, he’s a decent one, but even Mad Dog sort of regressed from “dominant” to “very good” to “above average” as he passed through his mid 30s, late 30s, and early 40s. And Lowe doesn’t have Maddux’s command. No one does. These things can cascade in a hurry.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on May 5, 2009 7:37 PM EDT up reply actions

yea

Lowe has had a nice career. Greg Maddux is one of the 5 greatest right-handers of all time. Slight difference.

"This is the beauty of baseball. In basketball, at the end of the game, you want to put the ball in your best scorer's hands. But in baseball, it's up to a rookie like McGlinchy and a journeyman like Franco with the entire season on the line. Baseball history is dotted with names like Al Weis and Brian Doyle, men who have taken their name out of the agate type and placed it into the headlines, because it was simply their time."

by cjmulrain on May 5, 2009 10:55 PM EDT up reply actions

Exactly

And that’s part of why Lowe’s such an outlier. Not many righties who just had “nice careers” really pitched well deep into their 30s and into their 40s, and the ones who did, to the best of my knowledge, were more often power/strikeout guys than contact/groundball guys. It does seem counter-intuitive that’s that the way it is, but that’ll just make Lowe even more interesting to watch as he plays out this contract.

"All energy flows according to the whims of the great magnet

What a fool I was to defy him"

-HST

by Mark Himmelstein on May 5, 2009 11:07 PM EDT up reply actions

madoff scandel is coincidence, not cause

the wilpons may be belt tightening but its more the overall economic climate. also if they lost money on the madoff scam it’ll be because the feds go after them because they originally made money off madoff. as long term investors, the wilpons almost defintiley knew that madoff’s returns were bullshit, but because they were making boatlaods of cash they just shut up and cashed the checks. madoff made plenty of money himself but he also dispersed the vast majority of it. when he could no longer find new clients it collapsed, but not before the early investors had their deposits. of course now the feds are going after these guys so it could be the wilpons are planning on giving back millions to the IRS and the DOJ.

its ironic that pelfrey was big madoff investor too. coming in at the end, he probably paid most of his signing bonus back to the that scumbag madoff who then gave it to people like the wilpons. interesting stuff, though. the real story was totally missed by most of the bloggers and msm rushing to write headlines about the wilpons and the other names on the madoff investor list losing billions. thats was nonsense, some of them made billions. thats how pyramid schemes work.

anyway, i think the real reason we got OP instead of lowe is maybe 10% money and 90% omar minaya being too loyal and a miserable talent evaluator.

HELLO HELLO MR WILPON. WE WANT THE MANSION NOT THE CONDO.

by kendynamo on May 5, 2009 2:46 PM EDT reply actions