Let me preface this article with the admission that I'm really not sure I still believe Shin-Soo Choo is worth 20 AAV for 7 years. Perhaps that's just the market, but it's a lot of money (and would be the first contract exceeding 100 MM for a player never even voted in an ASG). However, I think you can make a compelling argument that it's the case, as long as we are willing to believe some relatively shaky assumptions.
First, let's look at the assumption that players depreciate at half a win a year. This is a nice rule on it's face; as a player moves from his peak (usually age-28 season), the player's ability erodes at a greater and greater rate, taking on a larger portion of his remaining skillset. The idea is that those two weights sort-of counterbalance, resulting in the standard half-win depreciation.
The problem is that it's fairly false, and it's easily proved. Let's take two players: Superstar Sam and Mediocre Mel. Sam is 30 and just came off of a 5 WAR season; Mel is also 30 but just had a season where he was 2 WAR. If Sam loses a half a win off of his value, that's a loss of 10% of his value. That same half a win is worth 25% of Mel's value. Does this seem correct to you? Barry Bonds put up 10.6 WARP in his age-39 season. Should we expect 5.6 WARP from him in 2014?
The "half-a-win" depreciation is a nice shotgun approach to establishing a value for someone, but if we're painting in broadstrokes, let's at least use a proper aging curve (h/t to the inimitable Nate Silver). Shin-Soo Choo is a centerfielder (albeit an extremely poor one). He'll probably move to a corner as soon as instantly, so we'll just use the Corner OF aging curve for him, which is as follows:
| Age | Percentage of Max Talent |
| 31 | 84% |
| 32 | 75% |
| 33 | 68% |
| 34 | 54% |
| 35 | 50% |
| 36 | 41% |
| 37 | 32% |
| 38 | 25% |
| 39 | 15% |
| 40 | 0% |
Pretty damning, right? The average cornerfielder is half as useful at 35 as he was at 26 – and we only get him for the ride down (ages 31-37). These percentages are from his peak value. What is Choo's peak?
Well, it was probably last year. BP had Choo at 6.4 last year (and 5.8 at 26, 5.4 at 27, prime years). Choo was 5.9 fWAR at 27 and 5.2 this year. Choo was 6.3 bWAR last year and 5.4 at 27. I think it's reasonable to Give Choo an implied peak of 6 platonic WAR. If the prevailing market rate is $6 MM a win (and it really is 7, but I'll take 6) and inflation is a tidy 3%, let's look at that table again.
| Age | % of max | WAR | Value | Total Value |
| 31 | 84% | 5.04 | $30.6 | $30.6 |
| 32 | 75% | 4.5 | $27.8 | $58.1 |
| 33 | 68% | 4.08 | $26.0 | $84.0 |
| 34 | 54% | 3.24 | $21.2 | $105.3 |
| 35 | 50% | 3 | $20.3 | $125.5 |
| 36 | 41% | 2.46 | $17.1 | $142.6 |
| 37 | 32% | 1.92 | $13.8 | $156.4 |
It's a 7-year deal, so if you got the "over 3 years" discount, that's $15.6 million off, which leaves us with 7 years, $140.8 million dollars. I'd argue that since his best year just happened, that he might actually age better than the normal person (though you could come at be with old-people vs. young-people skills). I'm not willing to take either side of either argument. All I'm stating is that it's not entirely unreasonable to envision 7 and $140 for Choo.
As a bonus, look how eminently valuable he still is in 2015 through 2019! Those are our "contention years." He's still worth a role at the top of an order until around age-37.
Fucked-Up Quote No. 1
Texas booster (among other things) Red McCombs on if it would it be a mistake to get rid of Mack:
[img]http://i.imgur.com/P4vbmlR.gif[/img]
Like You CareQuote Reply
@ Like You Care:
Maybe he just figures all Texas residents own UT, however little money the state deigns to give it these days. Or just thinks that having his name on one of the end zones makes him a co-owner with DKR (dying laughing)
BerseliusQuote Reply
Fucked-Up Quote No. 2 (from the same article)
McCombs on the lack of success by Texas the last four years:
He’s talking about QB Case McCoy who battled with a form of scleroderma as a child, which left him half scarred.
[img]http://themidnightalliance.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/thats-messed-up.gif[/img]
Like You CareQuote Reply
@ Berselius:
I’m sure it’s the latter. The man has probably invested enough in the university to be able to make that claim. Still…
Like You CareQuote Reply
GBTS wrote:
100% this.
sitrickQuote Reply
I’d probably start Choo at 4 WAR, but I think there’s a strong case he’s worth 7/140 simply because that’s basically what Ellsbury got. I’d prefer Ellsbury, but the two are fairly identical in terms of projected value right now in my opinion.
dmick89Quote Reply
@ Like You Care:
@ Berselius:
I know college basketball is not any better, but goddamn, college football just oozes skeeze.
sitrickQuote Reply
Thanks Myles. I’ll admit, I’ve always been guilty of using the -.5 straight line decrease. Where do you get the aging curves from?
EdwinQuote Reply
[img]http://i.imgur.com/9ENgwQS.gif[/img]
Like You CareQuote Reply
@ sitrick:
[img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_3H1dWtzmZYU/SwbJG-mXGaI/AAAAAAAAB1Y/r5NJytmt8CE/s1600/bluechipswalsh.jpg[/img]
Like You CareQuote Reply
josh wrote:
josh wrote:
josh wrote:
josh wrote:
Gotcha.
WaLiQuote Reply
WE WON THE WINTER MEETINGS!
http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2013-12-12/mlb-trade-rumors-mets-tigers-cubs-phillies-white-sox-winter-meetings?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=jessespector
Aisle424Quote Reply
Edwin wrote:
Right here
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?%20articleid=4464
Should have linked to it in the article. I will, sorry for the oversight.
MylesQuote Reply
One thing that hasn’t been discussed regarding Choo, and obviously has a major effect on his value going forward, is his ability to hit lefties. Looking over his career splits, I see that he really hasn’t hit lefties well for the last few years.
If he gets worse vs. lefties as he ages (a reasonable assumption given how he’s trending, and that his bat speed will only get slower), at what point do you platoon him? Doesn’t this reduce his projected value by, say, 25% given the reduced playing time?
BenQuote Reply
@ Ben:
Playing time would be smaller, but you’d also be eliminating the playing time you could get from elsewhere. Say he’s 4 WAR vs righties and 0 WAR vs lefties to keep things simple. You keep the 4 WAR vs righties and maybe add 1 WAR vs lefties. Can’t attribute that to Choo’s value (he’s still 4 WAR), but the team benefits. It’s why teams should be using platoons more frequently than they do, but probably not as frequently as when they were at their peak.
Managers and GMs have just gotten to the point where they want one player per position and miss out on the additional value you get from platoons. This assumes the player is OK with a platoon, which I suspect a large number of them aren’t, especially free agents like Choo.
dmick89Quote Reply
dmick89 wrote:
Using 4 WAR as the baseline implies that Choo’s maximum worth in his “prime season” would be estimated at 4.76 WAR, a number he’s far exceeded in 3 years of his career including his last one.
MylesQuote Reply
I think you could sign Choo, expect to play him 140 games and give him 22 games off against lefties and I doubt he’d complain a whole lot. I think it’s a concern, but I’m not as concerned by it as some are. There are ways to limit his playing time and even capitalize on sitting him if it’s done right.
dmick89Quote Reply
I assume you’re averaging his Steamer and Oliver projections for 2014 (4.8 and 3.2, talk about disparate projections) to get to 4. I can buy that, but then what are you using for 2015 and beyond?
MylesQuote Reply
dmick89 wrote:
If I were a manager, I’m not sure I would EVER let a player play more than 150 games in a season. I’d be willing to wager that giving a player 12 games of rest a season provides a benefit that outweighs the loss in production from starter to bench guy, especially if you do it in a platoon situation.
MylesQuote Reply
@ Myles:
Given his age, that’s about right. Choo is projected to be worth 3.5 oWAR over 142 games using CAIRO and, as you said, he’s a subpar defender. I think 4 WAR is being somewhat generous to be honest, but I’d be comfortable using it anyway.
dmick89Quote Reply
Then again, 2014 Oliver has him at 4.8 so 5 isn’t as unrealistic as I first thought.
dmick89Quote Reply
I have to ask– How much value does the average cornfielder lose over that time?
SVBQuote Reply
@ Myles:
I’d probably have more off time scheduled than most managers, but if you’re in a situation where your choices are Barry Bonds, a hobbled one at that, or someone like Ryan Theriot, I’m probably going to play Barry Bonds. A situation like that is uncommon though.
dmick89Quote Reply
@ SVB:
And is it less than the average princefielder?
SVBQuote Reply
I agree, Myles. I think giving players more off time is beneficial to the team in the long run.
dmick89Quote Reply
@ Myles:
I tend to stick with CAIRO anymore. Just too many projections to worry about at this point. Plus, I don’t have to make decisions like what to do with such different projections. Still check them out, but personally, 4 makes a lot more sense to me.
However, 5 is clearly more reasonable than I thought.
dmick89Quote Reply
I thought Choo was older for some reason (like 32), which is why I was surprised to hear 7 years being tossed around.
BerseliusQuote Reply
SVB wrote:
I’ll check with the Cedar Rapids team.
sitrickQuote Reply
@ Berselius:
Prior to this offseason, I thought the same thing. I was surprised we were even talking 5 years early on, but once I realized he wasn’t nearly as old as I thought it made sense.
dmick89Quote Reply
Someone found this place by searching “taking a dump at work.” We’re running a real class operation here.
Aisle424Quote Reply
@ Aisle424:
Is it supposed to work differently depending on where you take one?
dmick89Quote Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2_yXUr-YMY
dmick89Quote Reply
@ Aisle424:
Isn’t that when everyone comments on OV?
I assumed sitrick was constipated today and the toilet seat reduces the lumbar compression in dmicks back.
SVBQuote Reply
Aisle424Quote Reply
Coomer!
I have no idea what to feel about this.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Coomer ——-> WGN radio gig
BerseliusQuote Reply
Rice Cube wrote:
It means that PTL they didn’t choose Todd Hollandsworth.
Also that there will be lots of clueless demi-celebs in ridiculous 7th inning interviews that pronounce his name Comber, Cummer, Cooper.
And you can once again say “I prefer to listen to Pat and Ron, rather than the TV guys.”
SVBQuote Reply
MLBTR
The Cubs are asking for Marcus Stroman, Aaron Sanchez and a third prospect from the Blue Jays for Jeff Samardzija, Elliott reports. Anthopoulos recently said he was constantly being asked about Stroman and Sanchez, the Jays’ top two pitching prospects, in possible deals.
I’d take that!
SVBQuote Reply
MLBTR says the Astros might be the favorites to sign Choo. If that happens, I really might go ahead and write the hatchet piece now.
MylesQuote Reply
Bunch of faggots ——————> you all
A. NonQuote Reply
Myles wrote:
Astros? Are you fucking kidding me? Ugh.
WaLiQuote Reply
@ SVB:
Why would the Blue Jays give up two of their top prospects, both of whom may be better than Jeff Samardzija before too long, and an additional prospect for Jeff Samardzija?
dmick89Quote Reply
@ dmick89:
I hope they do it, but this reminds me of the early Matt Garza trade rumors. That’s fine since you have him for two more years.
dmick89Quote Reply
SVB wrote:
(dying laughing). Maybe this was an attempt to save money by recycling old marketing material.
BerseliusQuote Reply
@ dmick89:
I have no idea why they’d do that. I still don’t think the Jays are really that good of a trade match.
On the other hand, if they do, GREAT! And Super-Platinum Stars for THoyer * 1,000,000,000,000 No sense giving up Smardz for a simple Fister package.
SVBQuote Reply
Deaths in Game of Thrones
[img]http://1.media.dorkly.cvcdn.com/40/49/fa41ced59d50f6cd6aaf3c899728d9b6-every-death-in-game-of-thrones-in-one-image.jpg[/img]
SVBQuote Reply
A. Non wrote:
I prefer “faget,” thanks.
MylesQuote Reply
@ SVB:
Spoiler alert!
WaLiQuote Reply
@ WaLi:
(dying laughing). You know I only have seen one episode, two years ago, while in a hotel because you guys talk about GoT so much. Here’s my synopsis:
Game of Thrones: Show featuring hairy guys in dirty clothes with bad attitudes trying to assert their power in a series of dubious plots and questionable family relationships. See also: Duck Dynasty.
SVBQuote Reply
@ SVB:
You missed the part with the sex.
WaLiQuote Reply
Myles wrote:
[img]http://philly.barstoolsports.com/files/2013/03/michael-scott-laugh.gif[/img]
Aisle424Quote Reply
Why is it that when one man bakes a pie, the next man immediately needs to know what’s under the crust?”
EdwinQuote Reply
@ WaLi:
Possibly everyone was so dirty I couldn’t tell if it was sex or fighting
SVBQuote Reply
Back on meds —————————–> me
A. NonQuote Reply
SVB wrote:
Like You CareQuote Reply
Apparently Teddy Bridgewater is thinking of returning to school. Unless people have told him his draft stock isn’t has high as many think it is, that’s crazy. Jameis Winston is a better prospect than Bridgewater right now, and that gap will only widen with another year of experience. Hell, Mariota might jump Bridgewater with another year.
Like You CareQuote Reply
@ Like You Care:
If bridgewater goes back to school, does that make Bortles the best or second best QB in draft?
WaLiQuote Reply
WaLi wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7WeZbRbxwg
uncle daveQuote Reply
@ WaLi:
Best, imo. It’s not really even a stretch to say he’s a better prospect than Bridgewater.
For me, the QB rankings for the next two years goes:
Jameis Winston: Might not declare next year, but it would take a bad year. He’s clearly the best QB prospect in the country right now.
…
Bridgewater: Physical limitations, but he’s there mentally right now. I don’t see how he can boost his stock unless his frame grows in the next year.
Mariota: A tick behind Bridgewater right now, but I think he’d overtake him by next year. I thought he looked first round-worthy as a RS freshman.
Bortles: The dreaded competition argument. Physically better than Bridgewater. Better QB than Mariota at the moment. If he played in a bigger conference, he’d be considered for first overall, imo.
…
Carr: Took major steps forward this year. Footwork and mechanics improved. More consistent. If I knew he wouldn’t revert, he’d be one tier up.
Boyd: I guess I like him more than most. I’ve gone against the “too short” argument for years. Great arm and accuracy. Good runner. Negatives are coachable. I hoped SF would take Russell Wilson in the draft two years ago, and I hope they take Boyd in the next draft.
Garoppolo: Another I probably like more than most. To me, he’s a more raw Bortles.
Mettenberger: See Derek Carr and then add an ACL injury.
…
Manziel: Significantly more athletic Doug Flutie. The scheme he plays in gets guys wide open AND he has an amazing O-Line, but he’s still at his best on broken plays. I just don’t know how he’ll translate.
Murray: I like the Matt Barkley comparison.
Petty: I’ve seen him make some big-time throws, but he drops to this tier because of how he played against top defenses. I thought he was for real, but I’m starting to think it’s more scheme with him.
Like You CareQuote Reply
@ uncle dave:
Maybe SF will draft Bortles and elevate Lamichael James to starting RB next season.
Like You CareQuote Reply
@ Like You Care:
Thank you for your support.
uncle daveQuote Reply
@ Like You Care:
It’s taken a long time for me to write something editable.
SVBQuote Reply
@ Like You Care:
The Clemson crowd’s knock on Boyd is that once his knocked off his game, he doesn’t adjust and then he’s lost. In contrast to Braxton Miller, who will have inaccurate periods in a game or a fumble but will find a way to right the ship.
Maybe, maybe not, but he sure seemed to check out after Clemson fell behind to South Carolina.
SVBQuote Reply
@ SVB:
By “knocked off his game,” do you mean the scheme is well defended (e.g. his WRs aren’t running wide open) or literally hit/pressured?
Unfortunately I don’t have the luxury of watching all of everyone’s games. I wish I did, because my analysis of Texas players has usually been spot on. So when I’m looking at players for the draft, I have to rely on basic athleticism and technique. Then when I find a player I like, I look at more footage.
For QBs, I start with the pocket. How comfortable does he look? How well does he move within the pocket? Does he keep his eyes up while moving? Do his mechanics break down under pressure?
Then onto his throws. Are they decisive (usually comes from an understanding of coverages)? How accurate are they? Does he know where to throw the ball?
By the time a players is draft eligible, those things usually are what they are and they don’t often fluctuate from game to game. In other words, if Boyd displays the good qualities above in 5 of the seven games I’ve watched, I’ll attribute the other two games to external factors that can be coached.
I’m probably wrong, but I gotta be me.
Like You CareQuote Reply
[img]https://scontent-b-ams.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/1497610_582970288424626_888468234_n.jpg[/img]
Suburban kidQuote Reply
@ Like You Care:
Ryno, what’s your background? Are you a coach or something? Because you do know your shit and 90% of the time you are spot on. Not trying to stroke your ego or anything but your analysis on football related stuff is pretty impressive.
MuckerQuote Reply
Mucker wrote:
Suburban kidQuote Reply
new shit: http://obstructedview.net/news-and-rumors/winter-meetings-roundup.html
dmick89Quote Reply
Hi very nice site! Man. Lovely. Great. I am going to search for your site plus grab the feeds also? Now i’m content to come across a great number of beneficial data the following from the create, we want work out added techniques during this value, appreciate expressing.
This Blog is related to natureQuote Reply