Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
He's a pretty good player but not the superstar some on here think he is.
Mainly because of his defensive value/metrics.
Sherman: Braves offered Heyward 80M after 2013
- Thread starter chop2chip
- Start date
He's a pretty good player but not the superstar some on here think he is.
Mainly because of his defensive value/metrics.
Mad Dog Murph
Well-known member
Never said he wasn't a "good" player...I just don't think he is worth what people think he is worth. At this point in his career, he is an average hitter and a great defensive player. That is not worth 100+ million a year...in any universe. Unfortunately, there are people with to much money for their own good that will pay a slightly above average (at this point) player, superstar money. It's sickening. Yes, that is my opinion, maybe your's is the one that's wrong? Nah, zito is never wrong. Just ask him.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
No one has ever advocated paying Heyward 100 million A year
Fair enough. But if actual MLB front offices offer him that then I would think that's his true value.
Ozzie Smith was once the highest paid player in baseball. Average hitters/great defenders have been paid a lot before.
Were Brooks Robinson or Ozzie Smith superstars? They were average or worse offensive players when looking at their whole careers but seemed to do ok since they got put into the HOF, for their defense.
I don't know where this idea came from that defense doesn't matter or you can't be an elite player if you have elite defense. I just think it's funny that advanced stats support guys like Smith and Robinson for the hall of fame but for current players they just must not add up. There is a reason that so many people believe in these stats. It's because it makes sense.
NinersSBChamps
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br> 2015 (Co-Winner)</BR>20
Comparing Ozzie Smith and Jason Heyward is really unfair to Ozzie.
Sure. Ozzie did it for like 2 decades and is among the career leaders in defensive war. But the point stands that crap hitters with elite defense have been paid a lot of money. It's not like this is a new thing.
I think what some people are upset about is the amount of money Heyward will likely get. But in reality it's not that much when comapred to the state of baseball right now. Replacement level to league average players are getting paid 12 million a year.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
That's the part people aren't grasping. Any good player we go after is gonna cost us a chunk of change. We are off an offseason that saw Jed Lawrie a 30 year old who hasn't done much of anything get a 3/23 contract. Billy Butler who's extremely one dimensional signed for 3/30. Jason who's young and still really good isn't signing for a super bargain.
You mean like Frank Wren giving 75M to Melvin Upton for a .243 ML average with less than 20 HR per season?
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
And Upton was older and lesser of a player. And player values have gone up.
Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
SO we should pay Simmons 20+ mil a year when his deal is up by this logic?
Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
Who said he was?
Some on here said they dont think he's worth the deal he may get.
Heyward
<B>Voted Worst Poster <br>'13, '14, '15 (Co-Winner
Not really, just because some team may offer him a ton of money doesnt mean he's worth that.
Sure. If he's a league average bat and saving 25-30 runs per season with his glove then he will most certainly be worth that once his contract is up. Will the Braves pay that? Doubtful since the Braves are cheap. But he would be worth that and would get it once he's on the market.
So you are a better judge as to what a player is worth? Worth is determined by the market and and right now the going price is like 6 million per WAR. You don't have to believe in that stat. It doesn't matter. But that is what MLB front offices believe in for the most part. They may have better formulas for offense and defense then is what readily available but I guarantee you they all use some sort of baseline of each players WAR. History has shown that elite defenders get paid. It's also shown that elite defenders have been rewarded with baseballs highest honor. Some here may not value that but it's real.
chop2chip
Well-known member
I don't necessarily believe that market rate = player worth. This is relying on the economic principle that wage = marginal revenue product (or the value that player contributes). It's fine and dandy, but has never been proven to be actually quantifiable. $/WAR is a good baseline to attempt to do that, but the mere fact that two versions of WAR exist for the general public (and likely 30 different version for each team) shows how incredibly difficult that process is. This isn't even accounting for the fact that different players provide different values to different markets (for example, Russell Martin is more valuable to Toronto than any other team because he's Canadian and Canadians are weirdly loyal to other Canadians).
The reality is that the "winner's curse" paradox essentially guarantees that all free agents are overpaid since typically only the team that signs that player values them that much. If I was a betting man, I would bet that the average free agent contract is going to be an overpay for that exact reason, meaning there's a really good chance Heyward gets paid a lot more than his actual worth.
jpx7
Very Flirtatious, but Doubts What Love Is.
Sure, but the fact remains that all 32+ of those formulations are almost certainly and substantially more accurate than [MENTION=154]Heyward[/MENTION]-the-poster's arbitrary valuation.