Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
Sure he can but a 270-280 AVG, 15 HR, 70 RBI isnt a cornerstone.
His power needs to improve to become that.
Heyward to Cubs for less than $200M
- Thread starter Enscheff
- Start date
Sure he can but a 270-280 AVG, 15 HR, 70 RBI isnt a cornerstone.
His power needs to improve to become that.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Gordon is not comparable to Heyward.
They've got similar offensive values, But Heyward is vastly superior defensively. And he does it against much better competition.
To compare (poorly mind you) Cespedes is a poor defender in CF but a plus defender in RF. Heyward in CF is an above aveage to plus defender in CF. Cespedes is probably the 3rd best statisitcal defensive LF, not too far behind Gordon. If Gordon played RF. I'd guess he'd not be much better than Say Giancarlo Stanton.
No, he doesn't. My point is that he was the Cardinals' best player this year. And they won 100 games. This idea that you must be a superstar or hit 35 bombs to be a franchise cornerstone is misplaced.
I'll list the guys who are, IMO, the 10 best players in baseball:
Mike Trout
Bryce Harper
Paul Goldschmidt
Clayton Kershaw
Josh Donaldson
Max Scherzer
Miguel Cabrera
Felix Hernandez
Andrew McCutchen
Manny Machado
Those 10 have a combined 0 championships (obviously, a few haven't been around long). Exactly 2 of them even made the playoffs last year.
No, Heyward is not the best player in baseball. He's not in the top 10 and likely not in the top 15 or perhaps even 20. But he's somewhere close to that, and he can absolutely be the best player on a championship team. That is a franchise cornerstone.
How'd that work out???
Everybody understands the age component - you're not alone.
No one's ever going to "win" a Heyward argument. The point many of us are making is that we'd prefer someone shows a history of being able to produce at an elite level offensively before paying elite money to a player.
The Braves need power on offense, and to this point in his career, that's not what Heyward provides. It really is that simple. Call me "old school" or whatever. No matter how one wants to juggle the new numbers, they can't make Heyward into a 25+ HR, 100+ RBI middle of the order bat. Call Bill James and I bet he tells you the same thing.
Better ask the Royals to call UPS and send those rings over right away - they might get there in time for Christmas.
And he's being paid more than everyone on your list other than Kershaw, Scherzer, Miggy, and King Felix.
Yes, that's right - he's going to make more money this year and next year than Mike Trout.
Yes.....so will a whole bunch of guys. What in does that have to do with anything? Most of those guys are still on their rookie contracts...and their teams still can't consistently compete, despite the massive value they provide.
Trout hasn't hit FA and is still in the portion of his contract extension that coincided with his arbitration years. But yeah, Heyward making more than Trout is proof that he's overpaid.
Freddie Freeman made almost 4 TIMES what Bryce Harper made last year. What an overpaid loser, amirite?!
First, the World Series champion is not always the best team in the league. Second, the Cardinals were clearly a contender. And third, I clearly addressed the Royals in the very comment you quoted.
But the Royals are a team who actually perfectly makes my overall point for me. So if you want to talk more about them, I'll be glad to do it.
Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
Alex Gordon is pretty good defensively, regarding his time in RF, that was when he was at 3B and didnt transition to the outfield yet.
He's not as good as Heyward defensively but there isnt a massive gap either.
Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
Most of Heyward's value is in defense/base running.
When that goes and he's still a solid but not great hitter is that still a cornerstone type?
He's a really good player, just hard for me to say that when he's never hit .300 or drove in 100+, and hit 20+ HR's 1 or 2 times in 6 years.
Hard to win these Heyward arguments with some of yall.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
I guess that's the same Royals team that would've signed Heyward if they could have afforded him, but will instead try to sign an older, cheaper player with a very similar, but lesser, set of skills. And that guy will make $20M/year. Are you kidding? That's more than ___________? Are you kidding?
Frankly, man, you sound like Shanks. Would YOU give Jason Heyward $15M a year?
Most of his value is not in defense and base running. He is very good at both, but he is also a good hitter and has an equal part of his value in his offensive ability. He's not a 6 WAR guy on offense alone, obviously. The potential for him to regress defensively while not improving offensively is a risk, sure. But there's also a chance he improves offensively and offsets any losses elsewhere.
It's hard to win the arguments because we both believe different things and will continue to believe different things. You and others think it's a fact that if you don't hit 30 HR, you can't be a franchise cornerstone. I and others believe differently. And the list I gave you helps make the case that you don't need a superstar in order to have a good franchise cornerstone.
Yeah, that relegates that to a straw man argument.
Yeah, baseball salaries have grown so quickly over the past 15 years that it's pretty misleading to compare pay rates on contracts that are even a couple of years apart.
But really, anyone who thinks the Cubs overpaid for Heyward because the value of his defense is overstated - what do you think he would have cost if he were instead an offense-only player putting up the same WAR (i.e. still a 5-6 WAR player, but with awful defense and all of his value tied to his bat)? Do you think $23 million/year would be even remotely close to landing him? I certainly don't; a 5-6 WAR, offense-only player would be someone like Manny Ramirez, and if a 26 year-old Manny Ramirez had hit FA this offseason, I imagine he'd have landed a deal closer to $30 million annually. The point being, I feel pretty sure that Heyward's contract already factors in a "discount" because defense isn't valued as highly as offense; this is just the going rate for 26 year-old free agents who are very good at baseball. It feels bad because the team we pull for has raised payroll by maybe 15% over a period where contracts for star-level free agents have basically doubled, but that's what happens to prices when it's no longer just the Yankees and Red Sox who have $150 million+ to spend. It's also the Cubs, the Tigers, the Blue Jays, the Angels, the Mariners, the Rangers, the Phillies, the Nats, the Cardinals, the Dodgers and the Giants.
But really, anyone who thinks the Cubs overpaid for Heyward because the value of his defense is overstated - what do you think he would have cost if he were instead an offense-only player putting up the same WAR (i.e. still a 5-6 WAR player, but with awful defense and all of his value tied to his bat)? Do you think $23 million/year would be even remotely close to landing him? I certainly don't; a 5-6 WAR, offense-only player would be someone like Manny Ramirez, and if a 26 year-old Manny Ramirez had hit FA this offseason, I imagine he'd have landed a deal closer to $30 million annually. The point being, I feel pretty sure that Heyward's contract already factors in a "discount" because defense isn't valued as highly as offense; this is just the going rate for 26 year-old free agents who are very good at baseball. It feels bad because the team we pull for has raised payroll by maybe 15% over a period where contracts for star-level free agents have basically doubled, but that's what happens to prices when it's no longer just the Yankees and Red Sox who have $150 million+ to spend. It's also the Cubs, the Tigers, the Blue Jays, the Angels, the Mariners, the Rangers, the Phillies, the Nats, the Cardinals, the Dodgers and the Giants.
Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
Maybe not most/all but a good bit of it.
I dont think you NEED to hit 30 HR's to become a cornerstone but it would help.
You do know that Heywards offense alone is worth around 20 million a year, right? And you don't have to be a 25 homer and 100 rbi middle of the order bat to be a good hitter. Those are arbitrary numbers that do not tell the whole story. What good is 25 homers if you hit .200 wit a sub 300 obp? How important is 100 rbi when the 3 people in front of you have 360+ OBP's? It's all about context and baseball card stats rarely provide that.
Heyward could be an average defensive RF and he is a 4 WAR player in 2015. And he would still get paid.
There is a wide variety in players. Some hit 30-40 HR and do nothing else. Some play defense and do nothing else. Some don't do anything spectacularly but do everything well. And some do everything at a basically elite level.
Sure, it would be awesome to have a guy who hits 40 bombs, plays elite defense, runs the bases like a deer, and is a flat-out superstar. But assuming you don't have that guy, your 'cornerstone' player will have to be another type. Heyward is another type, but he can definitely be a cornerstone. Just like a guy who hits 40 bombs at 1B while offering little other value can be a cornerstone.
Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
Would he gave gotten the deal he did if he was 30-31 instead of 26?
No.
His age is a big reason he got the deal he did along with his skillset, players his age rarely hit FA in baseball.