Make Frankie A Relief Ace
It is easy to overlook option years tacked on to the end of baseball contracts. Quite often, these options may be declined by a team, and a small buyout is owed to the player. For instance, Billy Wagner's Mets contract was signed for 4 years, $43 million, with a 2010 club option for $8 million. This option will certainly be declined and the Mets will owe Wagner $1 million. When Frankie Rodriguez initially signed his 3 year, $37 million contract, I didn't pay much attention to the 4th year option. It was only a few months later that I realized how awful that $17.5 million option is. It is not a team option, as it becomes guaranteed if the following criteria are met (all information via Cot's Contracts):
- 55 games finished in 2011, and
- 100 games finished in 2010-2011, and
- doctors declare Rodriguez healthy after 2011
If even one of these is not met, Frankie receives a $3.5 million termination buyout. He has finished 50 games this season with a month and a half to go. Barring injury, these criteria will be met. At that point, the Mets will be on the hook to pay a relief pitcher $17.5 million in 2012. Think for a second how ridiculous that is. He would have to match his bonkers 2004 season or his very good 2006 season to even come close to being worth that amount. He will be lucky to be worth even $5 million this year. With his peripherals steadily declining, I shudder to think what 30(?) year-old Frankie will look like. There is a solution to avoiding paying this option, which will also improve the Mets won-loss record: take Francisco Rodriguez out of the traditional closer role and make him a relief ace.
The idea behind using your best relief pitcher (the relief ace) in the most crucial point in a game, rather than only in the 9th inning with a lead, seems like a simple idea. Who should be brought into a tie game in the 7th inning with the bases loaded? Guillermo Mota or Billy Wagner? Unfortunately, the "closer only pitches the 9th" model is used by most teams, including the Mets.
The concept is hardly groundbreaking, with Bill James a famous proponent. Why hasn't it caught on with most teams? I think part of it is the mythologizing of the closer role. Many closers are actually failed or converted starting pitchers (or, in the case of Mariano Rivera or Jonathan Papelbon, a starter who was never really given a chance). They're generally overvalued by the average baseball fan, leading to Hall of Fame induction for the likes of Goose Gossage and Bruce Sutter, while Bert Blyleven is left out. This past Sunday night, Jon Miller of ESPN's Sunday Night Baseball said this towards the end of the Braves-Phillies game:
There's something about those final outs - they're just tougher to get.
This may be true. I can't definitively say it isn't. However, according to everything I've read and experienced while playing the game, an effective closer is not much different from an effective relief pitcher. This is to say that if a relief pitcher can consistently get people out in the 7th inning, he will probably be able to do it in the 9th inning. Does Heath Bell possess some sort of inner toughness, perhaps from all of his Wii playing, that most pitchers lack? I doubt it. He's just a good pitcher who throws hard and racks up strikeouts. Nevermind the inning.
This takes us back to Frankie. I feel confident in saying he will be the Mets' best or 2nd best relief pitcher over the next 2 seasons. He has strikeout ability and is effective against both lefthanded and righthanded batters. Therefore I would recommend using him as a relief ace. Not only would this improve the Mets W-L record, but an added benefit would be a decreased chance of him meeting his option requirements. Taken out of his current closer role, it would be tough to meet the games finished requirements. This isn't to say he would never finish ballgames or be brought into save situations, but 110 games finished over the next 2 years would not seem likely. The Mets could put that extra $14 million towards a position player or starting pitcher.
Frankie and his agent almost certainly would not be pleased. Closers make more money and hold a certain level of prestige. If actually implemented, I could see point-to-the-sky Frankie become disgruntled Frankie rather quickly. It would probably take some sort of cajoling and convincing that relief aces are more valuable or cooler or something like that to keep him happy. Additionally, I don't think such a move would be illegal, as there is a reasonable justification for it that improves the team. This is not the Pirates allegedly sitting Freddy Sanchez so he doesn't meet his bonus based on plate appearances. It's not Charles Comiskey resting ace pitcher Eddie Cicotte so he doesn't meet the 30-win bonus threshold, as seen in the movie Eight Men Out. It's using the best pitcher in the most important spot.
There are more issues here than I have outlined. Would Omar Minaya go along with this? How about Jerry Manuel? The answer is likely "no" to both questions, but after season's end it may not even be necessary to ask them what they think.
38 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
IT'S NOT A TEAM OPTION???
Oh my God. If we can trade him we better, no relief pitcher is worth that much money without pitching absolute perfect innings every time out. Talk about GM fail.
"We must win and we must know how to win rather than win because we have statistical people."
Oh my God
what a horrible stupid thing to have added to that contract. Who the hell was Omar bidding against?
The mets don't know
what a great idea is.
"We're investigating the investigative procedure of the investigation of Tony Bernazard"---Omar Minaya (he really didn't say it but he would"
by firejerrynow on Aug 20, 2009 7:32 AM EDT up reply actions
Now
I hate to say this because it kind sounds Joe Morganish, but this is where analytical thinking fails(sabre) in baseball. Is this a great idea from a saving money standpoint sure, it may even in theory work on the field if you run numbers, but I guarentee this wouldn’t work on the field. Frankie would either pout and whine so much it became a team issue, and/or flat mail it in. Think about it, you sign a contract to close games and get an incentive that if you are so good at it you get $17.5 backloaded in the deal, remember Frankie is kind being paid less than market value this year, and then team moves you out of that role 1 year in so they don’t have to pay it. It maybe legal and within there rights, but this would be a massive motivation fail and would mean that the next FA won’t sign here and players would take note come extension time. Sometimes the people aspect of the game matters too.
With all of that said. I do support the relief ace concept, and that’s why JJ Putz is here because someone in the Met FA supports it too.
I don't know if it would really deter future FAs
but I do agree that it would probably cause a lot of issues with Frankie’s motivation. He just seems so pumped up when he’s pitching that I could see an unmotivated Frankie firing 86 MPH fastballs in there in the 7th inning.
That's true
And given the terms of the contract, if the Mets suddenly became the only team in baseball NOT using their closer in the 9th inning, I have a feeling the Players’ Union would have something to say about that.
It would look like blatantly trying to swindle KRod out of millions of dollars.
"an incentive that if you are so good at it you get $17.5 backloaded in the deal"
But part of the problem here is that the incentive isn’t actually based on being good at closing games, it’s just about closing a large number of games. You get a “game finished” when you pitch the end of the game, whether you come in to pitch the bottom of the 9th and hold a slender lead or whether you blow that slender lead and give up a massive walk-off HR to Everth Cabrera. I mean, if the option were based on saves or percentage of save opportunities converted, it’d still be a poor way to measure how effectively Frankie has pitched because saves are a stupid stat, but at least it would in some way measure effectiveness. Games finished merely measures situational use.
can't incentivize good performance
only showing up in uniform.
That’s my understanding as to why all the bonuses are for plate appearances, games started, etc… not HRs, Ks, AVG.
I think it’s the players’ union that objects.
"If on-base percentage is so important, then why don't they put it on the scoreboard?"
Really?
I wasn’t aware that that was the case. I mean, there are players who have bonuses based on making the All-Star Game, winning awards, etc. Those are (theoretically) performance-based. Is there some reason why it’s allowable to have bonuses based on poor ways to measure performance, and not based on good ways to measure performance?
yes, it's called
Collective Bargaining Agreement
I couldn’t agree more that it makes the most sense to use your best relief pitcher in the most difficult situations. I couldn’t agree more that Rodriguez would complain, and the situation would become more trouble than that time Adam Rubin lobby for front office job. However, to say that the situation won’t work simply because Rodriguez won’t want it to is a little silly. It’s not the situation, it’s just that he won’t want to comply. He’d be the actual problem. The fact of the matter is the Mets would be better off in all ways if he was used during the most difficult time of the late innings, instead of starting off the 9th with a three run lead, because since he’s supposed to be a “professional” and he’s supposed to pitch just as effectively whether it’s the 7th or 9th inning.
"I was so frustrated [Saturday], I [could have said] anything," ~Oliver Perez
by Lance Johnson on Aug 20, 2009 10:25 PM EDT up reply actions
This
plus everybody knows that Socks! is our relief ace.
You don't cheer for the Mets. You drink for the Mets.
"Omar fixed the bullpen!"
That’s all I heard all last winter.
I can’t to see what problem Omar “fixes” next.
i wish more teams used their best relievers in the most important situations
instead of the contrived “save” situation. I’d rather throw the big gun in to kill a rally (preferably not with a home run against, despite what some players may think), or to knock out the 3,4,5 hitters in the 8th, than have him come in in the 9th with nobody on to get 3 outs against the bottom of the order.
by KeithsMoustache on Aug 20, 2009 9:54 AM EDT reply actions
Cubs used to do that with Marmol
then he forgot where the strike zone was (8.31 BB/9?!?!?!?). Now they’re making him the closer. Should be fun to watch him load the bases then strike out the side.
2012
-Beltran comes off the books but his bat also comes off the team.
-Reyes becomes a free agent
Club option for 2011
11M – still a bargain
by OlStubbleBeard on Aug 20, 2009 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions
This is the kind of idea
that’s good on paper. The real issue is that as a practical matter a team with a bullpen-by-committee approach could easily implement this, and in fairness, reward their pitchers accordingly. On the other hand, “established” closers — that is, guys who are rewarded for saves (no matter how flawed the stat) — get hosed in the short term. Their incentives are typically tied to ending games rather than getting the most high leverage outs, which by the way really aren’t known until after the game is over, right?
I think this sort of approach becomes more likely on teams that move away from the established closer role, where bullpen assignments are more fluid. I’ll say this, conventional wisdom on closers may prove to overvalue the role. But I have some doubts about whether it will be phased out entirely.
"Those who fear disorder more than injustice inevitably produce more of both." -- Rev. William Coffin
agreed
The only way an approach like this works is if a GM comes to a team and establishes it as policy throughout all levels. Players would progress through a franchise knowing that managers are going to ride the hot hand at the most critical moments at every level. Free agents would be aware of this approach when negotiating.
of course
there is the huge chance that the small stature K-Rod gets hurt… thereby forfeiting his option.
Or he loses effectiveness, and is moved out of the closer role… thereby forfeiting his option.
as said above, thats why JJ is here…
i mean we have
jj here for the releif ace role.
just sayin what the plan is…
who is going to back up JJ… Omir? I bet he can pitch too!
He can't even hit or catch, so for his sake I hope so.
"I dunno. I never smoked any Astroturf"
-Tug McGraw
Relief Ace is not a cool enough title
assassin
iceman
fireman
eraser
pretty much any pro wrestling term
Closer Or Best Relief Ace (C.O.B.R.A.)
I think that’s pretty good. If the 3-4-5 batters are due up in the 7th or 8th with a one run lead, call the C.O.B.R.A. Otherwise, he can close as normal.
"If on-base percentage is so important, then why don't they put it on the scoreboard?"
Toliet Paper is still my favorite nickname
but I guess that more applies for RP that come in mid-inning
But you have to come up with a stat of some sort that measures high leverage holds
like a “Kill” or a “Facepunch” or something. Then people will buy in.
i dunno i'd love to lead the league in facepunch
by KeithsMoustache on Aug 20, 2009 4:08 PM EDT up reply actions
well, if the stat is going to be called facepunches
then the reliever who gets them should be called a ninja or something

by 
































