So why is Heywards contract constantly brought up in unrelated topics?
Braves offense and 2017
- Thread starter bravesguy
- Start date
So why is Heywards contract constantly brought up in unrelated topics?
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
I don't know? I didn't bring it up. But no one was laughing at the Cubs for paying him $15M this year.
It's part of his current contract. I just don't see a reason to bring it up when the Braves have a couple of poor financial decisions right now. No team is immune.
Clv brings it up because somehow in his head it justifies his assertion that spending $10M on a 2 WAR player is dumb, while spending $500k on a 0 WAR player and giving him 500+ PAs is a good idea.
Remeber, he lives in the world of high stakes realty. In that world, you have to come up with comps to justify prices of trailers on blocks and double-wides even when there are no real comps available. So he has developed a convoluted way to compare his client's run down bungalow to some rich guy's 5 bedroom 4 bathroom house.
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
Yes, the current contract that jumps a ton and lasts until 2023 (2027 if you include the signing bonus payments). The whole thing was being criticized, not this year.
Cool. I was talking about this current year as it's the year Heyward is currently sucking in. If he goes back to performing at a 5 WAR level there will be no need to criticize it.
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
Cool. You didn't respond to anyone talking about the current year, but responded as if you did.
Southcack77
Well-known member
You are just wrong on this and totally overstating your case.
It's a market inefficiency perhaps but not the sole reason anyone has competed.
So you are saying people aren't constantly ****ting on the contract due to Heywards performance this year?
Southcack77
Well-known member
Would you say you are more like the guys on silicon value or the gals on halt and catch fire?
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
What?
This has nothing to do with what you initially replied to. And I also never made a claim on what you just said.
Leave Jason alone!!!
Are you mad? I don't care if people think he sucks or is overpaid. I just find it funny that's the first thing some people turn to and some even criticize the Cubs FO when the Braves have a very poor track record of overpaying players recently. Now you can go back to trying to defend the Heyward Haters.
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
You obviously do. You respond anytime anyone says anything negative about him.
I still don't know of anyone who hates Heyward or thinks he sucks. If you find them, please source.
chop2chip
Well-known member
Really? From our beat writers and play by play guys to the posters on this board, everyone has taken a little much pleasure in citing how poorly he's played.
And to be honest, I don't think it has anything to do with Heyward personally. Simply a big giant "eff you" to the sabermetric community, since Heyward has turned into a poster child of sorts of when sabermetrics goes wrong.
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
But I don't think anyone hates him or thinks he sucks. The only reason I take a little joy in seeing him hit like Tim Tebow is because of the posters here who had meltdowns when we traded him and then again when we didn't sign him. Otherwise, I really like him as a player/guy and always have. I say I think WAR overrates his defense and suddenly I hate fangraphs, WAR, Bill James, Heyward, and Heyward's grandmother.
Good job taking things literally
Horsehide Harry
<B>Mr. Free Trade</B>
Probably true. But the opposite happens as well. The saber community holds up players and organizations as poster children of when it goes right. It's the opposite sides of the same coin.
I don't think you can point to the Cubs (for example) as a great saber organization and tie their current success back to that without admitting that a lot of their success is due to either good or lucky draft acquisitions (Bryant, Schwarber, Baez), good or lucky trades (Arrieta, Strop, Russell) and good or lucky International signings (Soler, Contreras) where saber statistics likely played only a small part if any.
The same goes for the Red Sox where you can't simply write off the Panda and Ramirez acquisitions as flights of fancy of a rich team while connecting their current success to their saber practices when it's obvious that they are more than a strict saber organization or else they wouldn't have stepped on those expensive land mines.
The original idea of saber metrics, as I understand them, was to identify under-appreciated and under-valued positions and players allowing the team with the special knowledge to exploit that value getting exceptional production per dollar, be it in the form of offense, defense, speed, whatever.
Now, you have agents, teams and fans using saber metrics to justify contracts to players based on their value according to non-traditional stats without regard to the actual team process of baseball. This essentially flips the whole idea of value recognition and exploitation away from the teams over to the agents and players. So, when a relatively non productive bat like Heyward gets almost $200M, based primarily on his defense, baserunning (not even stolen bases) and offensive potential, and gets a player based opt out clause as well putting even less risk on the player and more on the team, it was a clear sign to many that it would be a bad contract. All while the strictest of the saber adherents defend the signing as completely appropriate based on a dollar per WAR basis simply because it is in line with industry dollars per WAR. But, that thinking doesn't break it down to dollars per WAR component - How much of the $200M is going to Jason for his actual production with the bat? How much for his defense? How much for his baserunning? How much for his unrecognized potential? How much for his durability? And how does THAT compare to dollars per WAR component distribution around the league?
IMO, you MUST take into consideration the composition of the team as part of the true value of the player to a particular team. So, a relatively light hitting RF who is great defensively and running the bases will have a different team value on a team that can afford to carry his lack of offensive production as opposed to a team that desperately needs production from that position on the field. But, given that, a team that can afford to carry a non traditional RF bat because they are so good offensively elsewhere should be able to easily find a very cheap defense and baserunning OF option and save the $200M while investing that somewhere else for team value (this is where the Cubs are now).
I for one am glad that it's the Cubs who are paying Jason and not the Braves. The Braves don't have the ML team nor finances to carry that kind of mistake. They don't have the team nor finances to carry the other bad signings they have (or had until recently) and that was a big part of the absolute necessity of a rebuild.
I have no problem with advanced stats as a tool to be used. However, I don't think there is any such thing as a Universal tool. And experience, common sense, intuition, "make up," etc. all play their part because there is always the human element which is part of the equation that cannot be reduced to 1's and 0's.
yeezus
It's OVER 5,000!
Then what exactly is the purpose of saying people hate him and think he sucks? Any critique of him or his contract is taken as saying he sucks. It's just dumb.
Because it's constant bashing which is dumb. Feel free to sue whatever term you want for that.