A Tale of Four Free Agent Closers: Were They Worth It?
An elite, shutdown closer is a luxury for many noncontenders, but is a seemingly essential component for a championship ballclub (see Rivera, Mariano). Closers in general command a premium in the free agent market, but for many teams, their investment can go horribly wrong. Let's take a trip back to the 2008-2009 offseason, where four closers: Francisco Rodriguez, Brian Fuentes, Kerry Wood, and Trevor Hoffman, were free agents selling their services to the highest bidder. These are their stories, after the jump.
Rodriguez
As a Mets fan, the 2008 season was a heartbreaking disappointment that put the disgusting taste of 2007 back in my mouth (but looking back, wouldn't you rather be in the Mets position at the end of the 2008 season than now? That's another story, I digress). The Mets offense ranked 2nd in the National League with 799 runs, thanks to stellar production from David Wright, Jose Reyes, Carlos Beltran, and Carlos Delgado. The starting pitching in general fared well, with both Johan Santana (2.53 ERA) and Mike Pelfrey (3.72 ERA) each going over 200 innings for the year. Even now-pariah Oliver Perez (4.22, 194 innings) and injury prone John Maine (4.18, 140 innings) turned in solid years.
The Achilles heel of the 2008 team, however, was the bullpen. When Billy Wagner was lost to Tommy John surgery in August, no one stepped up and filled his shoes. Luis Ayala was the only rabbit that Omar Minaya was able to pull out of his hat, and he failed in epic fashion, pitching to the tune of a 5.50 ERA in 18 innings. The bullpen debacle was only magnified in the last game of the season, when Ayala and his partner in crime, Scott Schoeneweis, gave up back to back homers to the Marlins that effectively killed the Mets run at the postseason. It was obvious that the bullpen needed a major makeover, with arguably the only reliable piece being Joe Smith. In typical fashion, Minaya fixed only the most glaring issue by signing Francisco Rodriguez, the premier free agent closer on the market that year, without doing much else to improve the team (left field, second base, etc. But that's another story).
Coming off a record setting season of 62 saves, Rodriguez signed a contract for 3 years/$37 million, with the vesting option of doom that may possibly kick in for 2012 that is worth $17.5 million. Fangraphs tells us that his 2009 WAR was .3, and his 2010 WAR was 1.4 (even with an abbreviated 2010 season that ended in August). This production, according to Fangraphs, was worth $1.3 million and $5.5 million, respectively. This is a far cry from the $12.3 million dollars on average that the Mets are paying him per year. Currently, Rodriguez has produced a .6 WAR in 2011, which figures to rise to about 1.8 if extrapolated over the course of the season. However, it is easy to say that the money spent on Rodriguez could have very easily been spent somewhere else with more bang for the buck. It is also important to note that during Rodriguez's record setting 2008 season, he was being overpaid by $2 million according to Fangraphs, and his 1.8 WAR that year was worth $8 million. Rodriguez actually posted his best WAR in 2004, with a 4.0, which would have been worth $12.3 million. That was the only season in his career that would have been worth Minaya's contract, and there would have been no surplus value whatsoever. But maybe, in Minaya's defense, the overpay was justified for the higher probability, certainity, and security that Rodriguez would be better overall than the others on the market. As we will see, even being overpaid and with a declining fastball velocity, Rodriguez was the most productive out of relievers who received multi-year, eight figure dollar deals.
Verdict: Overpay (-$17.8 million, 1.6 WAR, 2009-2010)
Fuentes
The Angels were unwilling to overpay Rodriguez, despite his record setting walk year. Rodriguez's saves were a direct product of the Angels playing in numerous close and late games, and Angels management knew this best of all. Instead, after the Mets signed him on 12/10/08, the Angels went after and overpaid for what they thought was the next best thing: Brian Fuentes. Fuentes first became a full-time closer in 2005 for the Colorado Rockies, and made the All Star team that year, the first of three straight. However, in June 2007, he lost the closer role to Manny Corpas after blowing four saves in an eight day span, a role that he would not regain until April 2008. After a very good 2008 season, he was signed by the Angels on New Year's Eve to a 2 year/$17.5 million contract, with a vesting option for $9 million for 2011.
However, his 2009 was a disappointment, compiling a .3 WAR, which was worth $1.5 million according to Fangraphs (coincidentally, the same WAR as Rodriguez that year). Even though he led the majors in saves with 48, his ERA went up over a full run, to 3.93 from 2.72 in 2008, and his WHIP was a dangerously high 1.40. As stated earlier, the copious amount of saves that Angels closers seemed to earn were more a product of the team playing in late and close games than anything else. Realizing that Fuentes was a shaky option and appeared to be reverting back to the ways that cost him the closer's job in Colorado back in 2007, the Angels signed Fernando Rodney in the 2009 offseason for 2 years/$11 million as an insurance policy and to split up the saves.
The early part of 2010 saw Fuentes struggle with a declining fastball velocity and strikeout rate, and a rising walk rate. However, Fuentes still had an aptitude for getting out left handed batters. In August 2010, Fuentes was put on waivers and traded to the Minnesota Twins for minor leaguer Loek Van Mil, who is more famous for being the tallest player in the minors at 7'1'' and being from The Netherlands than anything else. Fuentes put up a .4 WAR in 2010 between the two ballclubs, only a marginal improvement that was still worth $1.5 million according to Fangraphs. The vesting option for 2011 did not vest, and Fuentes signed a contract worth $10.5 million over two years with Oakland, where he currently plays. Was he more of an overpay than Rodriguez in the end? No. But, his production was less than Rodriguez's, so pick your poison I guess.
Verdict: Overpay (-$14.5 million, .7 WAR, 2009-2010)
Wood
Alternating between periods of dominance, injury, and freak accidents as a starting pitcher, Wood returned in 2007 as a reliever, and became the full-time closer in 2008 for the Chicago Cubs. He amassed 34 saves for the NL Central Champs, and parlayed this comeback season of sorts into a 2 years/20.5 million dollar deal with the Cleveland Indians. The deal also came with an 11 million option for 2011.
This was a foolish overpay from the jumpstart. Wood had only one season under his belt as closer, and even that was marked by a 15 day DL stint. His last full healthy season was 2003. Regardless, it was apparent that the Indians thought Wood was better than Fuentes, because they signed him earlier (12/13, as compared to 12/31 for Fuentes) and gave him more guarenteed money ($20.5 million for Wood against $17.5 million for Fuentes).
In 2009, Wood put up a .4 WAR, which was actually better than both Rodriguez and Fuentes, even with the two DL trips Wood made that year. Fangraphs pegged his production as being worth $2 million dollars. Wood put up a terrible 6.30 ERA with the Indians in 2010, before being traded to the Yankees at the deadline for two prospects and cash. Wood then proceeded to be lights out, putting up a .69 ERA with his new club. His final ERA split between the two clubs stood at 3.13, however, due to the limited number of innings he pitched that year due to injury, his total WAR was only .1. Fangraphs puts that production as being worth $500,000. Wood's contract option was declined by the Yankees, and he came home to the Cubs for 2011. Wood's inevitable DL stints, in addition to his dreadful first half of 2010 with the Indians, make him more of an overpay than both Rodriguez and Fuentes, even though Rodriguez was guaranteed $16.5 million dollars more than Wood. That's pretty bad.
Verdict: Overpay (-$18 million, .5 WAR, 2009-2010)
Hoffman
The Major's all-time leader in career saves was slighted by the Padres and their GM at the time, Kevin Towers, with a lowball contract offer after the 2008 season ended. The Brewers seized the opportunity, and signed Hoffman to a 1 year/6 million dollar deal on January 13th, 2009. After missing almost the first month with a strained ribcage muscle, Hoffman had a stellar first season with the Brew Crew. He won an All-Star selection, and was also named NL Pitcher of the Month and MLB Delivery Man of the Month for May. With a 1.83 ERA in 54 innings pitched, Hoffman compiled a 1.5 WAR that year, which was worth $6.7 million dollars, a surplus value of $700,000.
He resigned with the Brewers for $8 million in 2010 with a mutual option in 2011. However, Hoffman lost his closer's spot, and retired at the end of the year. We will only count his first contract with the Brewers, because we are only comparing contracts signed in the 2008 offseason.
Verdict: Underpay (+$700,000, 1.5 WAR, 2009)
Conclusion
So what does this all tell us? Looking back at articles from that 2008 offseason, the mainstream media proclaimed that the glut of free agent closers that year made for a buyer's market. However, as demonstrated, three out of the four closers got more money than their production actually dictated they should. This is due primarily to the heavy reliance on the save by many teams, which is a near useless statistic. Saves are what closers live for, which in turn deliver them the big paycheck when they hit free agency. However, saves are more beneficial to the closer and his wallet than they are to the team and the greater goal of winning. So the answer to the question posed in the title "Were They Worth It?" is no, most of the time. Giving multiyear deals to free agent relievers is a bad idea. Only Trevor Hoffman, who was paid the least, and only received a one year deal that offseason, had the highest WAR of the four, and even contributed surplus value.
Billy Beane had the right idea in Moneyball when he took a somewhat above-average pitcher, put him in the closer's role, let him accumulate a ton of saves, and sell high on him in a trade. I propose going one step further: developing so-called "relief aces" in the farm system, for cost effectiveness with more production. They will be able to pitch in any high-leverage close situation, regardless of the inning, and be able to go 2-3 innings at a time. It will lead to a higher WAR for the player, and will allow the team to maximize their pitchers' win potential. Sooner or later, teams will realize that the money that they have been spending on closers that only provide marginal WAR is better used elsewhere.
This FanPost was contributed by a member of the community and was not subject to any vetting or approval process. It does not necessarily reflect the opinions, reasoning skills, or attention to grammar and usage rules held by the editors of this site.
33 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I had no problem signing K-Rod.
Even with the vest. Who knew all this financial stuff with the Pond was going to happen?
by SFloridaMetsFan on May 30, 2011 1:38 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
i dont know if WAR value is the best way to evaluate closers
especially considering the (dumb) mystique that they carry with them. They just don’t get enough IP to possibly have a reasonable WAR. Mariano’s best season by WAR came as set-up man in 1996 when he had 5 saves, and he was worth 4.4 WAR; he was able to do this because he pitched 107.2 innings and partially because he only gave up 1 HR. Was this his most valuable season for the Yankees? By WAR yes, but one could argue that he has been more valuable every season since as the teams primary closer (he has an amazing health record, the most amazing thing about Mo).
Closers don’t pitch as many innings, but the innings they pitch are given more value by teams because when they finish an inning, the game is usually over. Whether it takes a certain pitcher to close out games is another question.
I LIKE IKE!
.
They just don’t get enough IP to possibly have a reasonable WAR
That’s the point. A closer’s role is by definition limited, which therefore limits his value.
the innings they pitch are given more valueThe 9th inning isn’t necessarily the one with the highest leverage.
Save Jenrry Mejia!
Keep Reyes, Trade Wilpon.
Fangraphs WAR takes into account the leverage for relief pitchers.
They are given partial credit for it, because of the concept of chaining. If the closer gets hurt, everyone moves up a spot and his replacement becomes the last option. The replacement doesn’t take up the closer spot.
In lobby for: Jaime Cevallos, Zack Lutz, orange unis and Rickroll as the 7th inning song.
The Unwritten Rules of AA
How much is it weighted?
It would be interesting (not saying accurate) to look at Closer’s WPA over their careers, being at that is a direct measure that is essentially based around leverage.
50%
In lobby for: Jaime Cevallos, Zack Lutz, orange unis and Rickroll as the 7th inning song.
The Unwritten Rules of AA
With Beato and Parnell and Alvarez, Carson, De La Torre, Merritt, Holt, and Armando Rodriguez on the way
there’s a decent chance we have a good opportunity to implement a leverage-orientated bullpen.
Save Jenrry Mejia!
Keep Reyes, Trade Wilpon.
Yeah I would love that
Finding a good bullpen from within our system- it would not only be cheaper but would likely be as effective as the average MLB ‘pen- and also implement a leverage-orientated bullpen. Instead of padding the stats of some overpaid ’closer’ by only put him in save situations, we should be using our best reliever in the highest leverage situations regardless of inning. Having multiple guys who can do that is even better. I’m reminded of the section in “moneyball” that discussed Chad Bradford. If I remember correctly Beane told Howe to use Bradford in the highest leverage non-save situations. He was the essentially the ace of that bullpen. My guess is that Beane didn’t use Bradford as his “closer” because he wanted to hold on to Bradford and instead used someone else who was more expendable, like Izzy, so he could raise his market value by putting him in situations to accumulate saves. I wouldn’t mind Sandy using this model either. Make a good pitcher a closer, let him collect a bunch of saves and then trade him for someone more valuable.
Izzy was already gone, by that point
That was one of his like 15 draft picks.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
AA Gamethread Embiggening Record Holder- 453 posts (10/03/10)
3rd Place- 2011 AAOP Contest
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on May 30, 2011 6:57 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Right Isringhausen was traded earlier
I think it was keith Foulke that year. Oakland had a different effective young closer (or older pitcher new that role) every year around that time showing that you don’t have to sign or trade for estabilished closers, its better to make closers and trade them.
And, it's crazy that nobody really has caught on yet, either.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
AA Gamethread Embiggening Record Holder- 453 posts (10/03/10)
3rd Place- 2011 AAOP Contest
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jun 1, 2011 9:37 AM EDT up reply actions
signing any closer to a long term contract is risky at worst, dumb for sure
especially based on one historical season.
"Fantasy, reality, science Fiction. Which is which? Who can tell?"
I agree relievers
seem much more volatile year to year than starters. The handfull of consistent closers like Mariano are the exception to the rule. I think this goes back to the point of finding a closer from within. Much less risky is he fails. There are also always also starters coming off of surgery looking for jobs as well as good set-up men whom in somecases are as good as your average closer. Signing a “reclamation project” or good middle reliever to a short, cheap contract may be another way to find a productive closer for bargain.
Pitcher fWAR is very dubious as far as I'm concerned
Check out fWAR vs rWAR for some closers:
Rivera – fWAR: 37. rWAR: 57.
K-Rod – fWAR: 15. rWAR: 21.
Hoffman – fWAR: 23. rWAR: 30.
Wagner – fWAR: 25. rWAR: 30.
Pitcher fWAR is founded on FIP, but many elite pitchers, and especially elite relievers, out-pitch their FIP year after year. If rWAR is more accurate over the long haul for pitchers with unusual hit-prevention skills, then all these guys are worth 20-60% more than Fangraphs would have you believe, regardless of any leverage issues.
I hate to bring this up again, but this
Rodriguez signed a contract for 3 years/$37 million, with the vesting option of doom that may possibly kick in for 2012 that is worth $17.5 million.
is simply incorrect. Once again, it’s 37/3 plus a vesting option worth $14 million. The 3.5 million buyout is just the last installment of the (backloaded) 37/3.
Also, it makes little sense to compare closers’ contracts to the WAR concept. You either believe in WAR completely and then no closer is worth the big FA money, or you buy into the “closers are special” theory and then you have to compare Frankie’s deal to similar ones: Mo 45/3, Mo 30/2, Lidge 37.5/3, Nathan 47/4, Cordero 46/4, Wagner 43/4.
this is what I was trying to say
I LIKE IKE!
At the end of the day, Omar made the right move by signing K-Rod
The choice was between him, or Brian Fuentes, in the Mets’ case. Fuentes, his career came crashing down pretty quickly, and he was making almost as much as K-Rod. Omar paid way too much money for him, and the looming vest looks worse now than it did even a year ago, because of the team’s financial woes, but I’d still rather have K-Rod than any of those other guys that we were seriously looking at.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
AA Gamethread Embiggening Record Holder- 453 posts (10/03/10)
3rd Place- 2011 AAOP Contest
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on May 30, 2011 1:42 PM EDT reply actions
I agree
Taking the money out of the equation, KRod was the best availble relief pitcher and Omar made the right decision. He just paid way too much.
Didn't the Mets do something similar to what you propose in 1986?
I like what is proposed in the conclusion of the fanpost; that instead of overpaying for a closer have a few very good young relievers who can go multiple innings and pitch in high leverage situations. I think the Mets did something similar in 86 with Orosco and McDowell. McDowell pitched 128 innings in 75 appearences and Orosco pitched 81 innins in 58. And these were the “short men” on the staff! They had Sisk as well who was capable of coming in as a long reliever. I was only six years old in 1986 so I can’t remember how the bullpen was used during the regular season but by looking at the stats and from having recently re-watched that postseason it seems that instead of having a set-up for the 8th and a closer for the ninth making around 65 one inning appearences each they alternated Orosco and McDowell who could pitch multiple innings at a time. So in a sense they had two different guys who were set-up guys and closers in one. I think, like you propose, you could do something similar today; maybe have three very good pitchers who can go multiple innings at a time and only put them in a third as many appearences as a typical short reliever goes to keep them rested.
Yes
they had two so-called relief aces, as you mentioned, in Orosco and McDowell. The concept of the modern day closer developed in the ’80’s I believe during this time. Dennis Eckersley was the first of these closers during his time in Oakland with Tony La Russa. I mainly focused on the marginal WAR and the foolishness of signing free agent closers in this post, but if expanded further, it really shows an argument of why there should be relief aces over closers.
It's unfortunate the Mets threw out this model afterwards in favor of the traditional "closer"
I really like the idea of having multiple guys, both righties and lefties, capable of coming into the game in high leverage situations and getting outs. In 87 they had Orosco, McDowell and Randy Myers for these situations. By 88 they traded McDowell and were using Myers in a way more typical of modern closers. Its about pitchers collecting a meanlingless, made-up stat. I like how Beane used the league’s fetish of saves to his advantage by letting a pitcher collect a bunch and then trading him off after his percieved value increased.
I was in favor of pursuing Brian Fuentes this past off-season for exactly this reason
He’s not a LOOGY by any stretch of the imagination, but being a lefty with a funky delivery, he has much better numbers against lefties then K-Rod does. He has the valued “closer mentality” that the baseball establishment is convinced late-innings relievers need. He also would of given the team a valid reason to not use K-Rod in save situations, delaying the vest, citing Fuentes’ superior numbers against lefties.
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
AA Gamethread Embiggening Record Holder- 453 posts (10/03/10)
3rd Place- 2011 AAOP Contest
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jun 1, 2011 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions
I would of loved a Fuentes/KRod Platoon for late inning work
And delaying the Vest would be a great bonus
And coincidentally (or not),
the ’69 team also had a right and lefty relief ace in Ron Taylor and Tug McGraw.
What's the score, boys?
What did Bugs Bunny do?
What's with the Carrot League baseball today?
Relievers
Moreso than closers, free agent veteran setup relievers almost never work out.
Recent examples being Bobby Jenks, Pedro Feliciano, Hisanori Takahashi, Rafael Soriano, to a lesser degree Fernando Rodney, Scott Linebrink and Scott Downs as well among others.
The Mets have their own “experience” with Mike Stanton, David Weathers, Scott Schoeneweis or Mark Guthrie among several others (re-signing Turk Wendell being another prime example).
While 2008 and Braden Looper´s follies show that it´s important to have an above average – and possibly highly paid – closer, the rest of the bullpen should be making near the league minimum.
The Mets do have several arms at the upper levels of the system like Robert Carson, Brad Holt, Josh Stinson and Jenry Mejia who may not have the stuff or physical stability (Mejia) to succeed in a SP role. However, all 4 could provide the Mets with inexpensive bullpen arms within the next calendar year and join Pedro Beato and – if he ever learns how to pitch – Bobby Parnell. Not sure that anyone besides Mejia and possibly Beato has closer / top notch late inning power reliever – though Carson does have some similarities to Jonny Venters in terms of being a LHP with a power fastball but rather pedestrian results in the minors as a SP.
Imagine Mejia = Craig Kimbrel, Carson = Jonny Venters in a couple of years….
Actually, Weathers and Stanton were pretty good for us.
Weathers outpitched his already low xFIP during his first two seasons, and was worth 1.2 WAR during those two seasons. He regressed some the next season and was traded. Stanton had a -0.1 WAR his first season, apparently due to a rise in his HR/FB, but his rate stats were back to normal the next, and he was worth 0.6 WAR. Guthrie was pretty good, too: his xFIP was 3.33, he had his highest WAR in 5 years, and his K rate was 8.25. Though a step down from the previous year, it was still above his career rate. No, they shouldn’t have been paid as much as they were, but they worked out a lot better than any of the guys you mentioned from this season.
"And that's why anybody who invested with Lenny Dykstra should really call that number. Lawyers are standing by."
by BobbyV_Incognito on Jun 1, 2011 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions
good lord, and this is the problem with free agent closers that we've signed in the past
let’s just try and develop our own. ugh Braden Looper….ugh ugh ugh.
"Fantasy, reality, science Fiction. Which is which? Who can tell?"
I was quickly scrolling through the thread, didn't really read what you wrote,
and when I was scrolling back up, I realized I thought you wrote ‘bin Laden’, instead of Braden Looper. I could make some jokes in poor taste about their similarities…
"Blinding ignorance does mislead us. O! Wretched mortals, open your eyes!"
Gil Hodges IS a Hall of Famer.
AA Gamethread Embiggening Record Holder- 453 posts (10/03/10)
3rd Place- 2011 AAOP Contest
by Brooklyn Dodgers Mets Fan on Jun 2, 2011 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions
hah.
"Fantasy, reality, science Fiction. Which is which? Who can tell?"

by 






























