Black Betsy

A Funny Thing Happened On The Way to the Trading Block

Pierzynski Back For More

WhiteSox.com reports that the Sox have re-signed A.J. Pierzynski to a 3-year, $15 million contract. The deal is apparently structured to pay AJ $4 million in 2006 and $5.5 million each in 2007 and 2008.

This strikes me as a pretty good deal for the White Sox. These are Pierzynski's age 29, 30 and 31 seasons. As a catcher, he is unlikely to be much more valuable after those three years.

Surprisingly enough, Pierzynski did not put up incredibly good numbers in 2005, even if he hit a career high 18 home runs. His .257/.308/.420 line was a career worst, and he actually wound up behind Gregg Zaun and Jason Kendall in terms of VORP. In fact, he was 20th in VORP among catchers in 2005, down from 17th in 2004 (even though his 2005 VORP was higher at 17.7). Of course, as recently as 2003, Pierzynski was a guy who was the 6th most valuable catcher in the league (offensively speaking).

It's a safe bet that Pierzynski, comfortable in Chicago with a 3-year deal and coming off of an incredibly successful playoff run, will perform better in 2006. One would expect his average, on-base percentage and slugging percentage to rise by 20-30 points each to return to his historical norms. If so, he'll be worth 15-20 more runs on his own for the White Sox. He'll make that $4 million look cheap.

On the payroll side, the trade for Vazquez, in which the Sox gave up Vizcaino and El Duque - who figured to make about $6.5 million in 2006, gives the Sox an estimated payroll of about $88.5 million going into 2006 (assuming Crede and Garland get a collective $8 million in their arbitrations). If Garland breaks the bank in arbitration, one would expect the payroll to exceed $90 million.

That is, of course, until the Sox decide that they do not need six starters.

Young (+ El Duque and Vizcaino) Traded For Vazquez

ESPN, among others, is reporting that the White Sox have traded Birmingham Barons Centerfielder Chris Young, Orlando Hernandez, and Luis Vizcaino to the Arizona Diamonbacks for Javier Vazquez and cash. I hope it's a lot of cash.

The Cheat, for some ungodly reason, would like the deal even if it were Jon Garland + Young for Vazquez.

Me, I hate this deal. Let me tell you why.

First things first. I do not have a problem with trading away El Duque. El Duque had a great start to the season, but tired and finished with a 5+ ERA. For me, El Duque earned every penny of the salary he made last year when he killed the Red Sox bases-loaded, nobody-out rally in Game 3 of the ALDS; he should never have to buy a drink on the South Side again. But he was not a realistic contributor to the 2006 White Sox.

Javier Vazquez has some pretty appealing aspects. He walks very few people, only 46 in 215 2/3 innings last year. He strikes out a lot of guys, too, with 192 Ks last year. But he is very much of a flyball pitcher; his career Groundball / Flyball ratio is 1.09, with ratios of 0.83, 0.85 and 1.19. He gave up 35 and 33 home runs in the last two years, and now he is going to the #1 home run park in the American League. He may have been a bit unlucky last year (.308 batting average against on balls in play), but I think he will be no better next year, and that he may give up 40-42 home runs.

The point that must be emphasized is that US Cellular is a very tough place to play for flyball pitchers. The Sox essentially have two flyball pitchers in their "big four" (Jose Contreras and Freddy Garcia) and two groundball pitchers (Mark Buehrle and Jon Garland). Here are their respective results at US Cellular last year:

Mark Buehrle - 10-2, 127 IP, 13 HR, 2.48 ERA (7 HR on road)

Jon Garland - 10-6, 113 2/3 IP, 15 HR, 3.56 ERA (11 HR on road)

Jose Contreras - 7-5 116 2/3 IP, 17 HR, 3.78 ERA (6 HR on road)

Freddy Garcia - 4-5 109 IP, 17 HR, 4.38 ERA (9 HR on road)

Buehrle and Garland were as good or better at home than on the road, even if they had higher home run rates at home, Contreras and Garcia were worse at home, with much higher home run rates.

The other part of the Vazquez trade is that Vazquez will undoubtedly force Jon Garland or Jose Contreras off of the White Sox. Vazquez is tied up for three more years, while Garland and Contreras are free agents after the 2006 season. Both Garland and Contreras are better pitchers than Vazquez; Garland because he is a ground-ball pitcher well suited to US Cellular and only 26 years old, Contreras because he showed that he can be a dominant pitcher down the stretch and in the playoffs. So, I think the net result is that the White Sox rotation in 2006 will be weaker, rather than stronger, as Vazquez replaces Garland or Contreras. Only if the Sox can get a strong position player in return (say, Bobby Abreu or Miguel Tejada), do I think the Sox will be stronger as a result of Vazquez replacing Garland or Contreras.

Now I come to the worst part of the deal. The Sox are giving up Chris Young, who I think is the one guy in the minor league system that has the chance of being a perennial all-star. He has had two full seasons of minor league baseball, and has put up these statistics:

2004 (low-A Kannapolis) - .262 AVG/ .365 OBP / .505 SLG. 31 2B, 24 HR, 31 SB in 40 attempts

2005 (AA Birmingham) - .277 AVG / .377 OBP / .545 SLG. 41 2B, 26 HR, 32 SB in 38 attempts

You can take away a couple things from this. First, Chris Young skipped the high-A level to go right to the AA level. That is a huge jump, making Young well, young for the Southern League. Second, Young put up these stats in pitcher-friendly parks. As the Cheat noted just the other day, Kannapolis and Birmingham suppress home runs to the tune of 22% (Kannapolis) and 45% (Birmingham). So, in normal parks, Young would have put up something more like 27 and 32 home runs. Third, Young improved after he jumped up two levels, and in nearly every aspect of his games. His batting average, on-base percentage, and slugging percentage all went up, and he was even better at stealing bases as the competition he faced improved. That is amazing in its own right.

But Chris Young's improvement is not told solely by his end-of-the-year statistics. He actually improved each month, walking more and striking out less. So he's even better than his gaudy statistics already show. I find no reason why Chris Young will not hit .290/.390/.550 next year at AAA in the Diamondbacks organization, and put up great numbers in the major leagues. I think he's a perennial .280/.380/.550 centerfielder, who will probably be one of the 15 most valuable players in the league every year. Moreover, Young plays a premium defensive position (CF), and has speed that only Scott Podsednik now has in the White Sox organization. He could be one of the best centerfielders of the 2008-2020 period. I hate giving this kind of prospect up, especially for a league-average pitcher. Young alone is more valuable than Vazquez.

This also puts a lot of pressure on Brian Anderson. Aaron Rowand was cleared out in front of him, and now Chris Young is cleared out behind him. Brian, you better be good.

The Sweetest Link

Buehrle's Second Half Troubles

Way back in June, I had noticed that Mark Buehrle had a very good start to the season, which was consistent with his performance over the last several years. However, it appeared to me that Buehrle was having trouble in the second half of the season.

It looks like the pattern repeated itself this year. After my post on June 18, Buehrle's performance declined, although not terribly.

As of June 18th, Buehrle was 8-1 with a 2.67 ERA in 108 innings with 16 walks and 67 strikeouts.

The rest of the season, Buehrle went 8-7 with a 3.47 ERA in 129 2/3 innings with 24 walks and 82 strikeouts.

There are a couple of potential reasons for this. One is that players simply have hot streaks during seasons; Buehrle's streaks all seem to come in the beginning of the season. The other is that Buehrle tires during the season and needs more in-season rest. Buehrle strikes me as someone who would not admit to needing more rest; but it may be worth giving him some extra days off down the stretch each season.

The Flipside - Moving Uribe Up

The flipside to moving Tadahito Iguchi down in the lineup out of the #2 hole is Ozzie's proposition that Juan Uribe should move up and into the #2 hole. Given that Juan Uribe is not known for, say, getting on base, or, say, being patient at the plate, that idea seemed relatively dumb to me. Why put a low-OBP guy higher in the lineup? It seems like you would only be making a lot more outs over the course of the season.

To be fair, I put Juan Uribe to the same analysis I did in my last post concerning Tadahito Iguchi. I used the same splits for Uribe as I did for Iguchi to approximate "swing away" situations - None on, and Man on, 2 outs. For Uribe, I used his statistical splits since the beginning of the 2002 season (the 2002-2004 and 2005 splits on ESPN.com)

Even more suprising to me than the fact that Iguchi really did hit better when he was in "swing away" situations is that, after looking at the same data, Juan Uribe is not as good in "swing away" situations. You would think a free swinger like Uribe would do well when he is not trying to move runners over or can just swing for the fences, but the data shows otherwise.

Here are Juan's statistics since the beginning of the 2002 season:

1780 AB, 464 H, 96 2B, 15 3B, 65 HR, 249 RBI, 117 BB, 310 K, .261 AVG, .308 OBP, .441 SLG (.749 OPS).

Here is Juan in "swing away" situations:

1400 AB, 349 H, 76 2B, 13 3B, 53 HR, 123 RBI, 91 BB, 256 K, .250 AVG, .300 OBP, .436 SLG (.736 OPS).

Now here is Juan in situations where there are men on and less than 2 outs:

380 AB, 115 H, 20 2B, 2 3B, 12 HR, 126 RBI, 26 BB, 54 K, .303 AVG, .334 OBP, .461 SLG (.795 OPS).

Wow. That Juan is a much better hitter. One might even argue that he'd be worth $13 million per year if he put up those kind of statistics. Of course, the bulk of any player's plate appearances are going to come in "swing away" situations (about half of plate appearances, it seems, are without men on base).

Food for thought, even if the 380 AB in the second set of at-bats is a bit of a small sample size compared to the 1400 at bats. But just maybe Juan will be a better hitter in the #2 hole behind Scott Podsednik.

Iguchi Down In Lineup?

One of Ozzie Guillen's most often repeated wishes this offseason has been to move second baseman Tadahito Iguchi down in the lineup from the #2 hole. Ozzie says:

"Hopefully we can get somebody who can run. I want a second hitter so we can put Iguchi down in the sixth or seventh spot to get more (run production) out of him."

The premise of moving Iguchi down is that he has sacrificed some of his power in hitting second, and that, if allowed to swing away, he would hit for a higher average and have more power, instead of sacrificing at bats for outs in the 2-hole behind Scott Podsednik. At one time, Guillen estimated that Iguchi had given up 50 at bats to move runners over or sacrifice.

Luckily for Ozzie, we can test his hypothesis with Iguchi's own performance. There are two circumstances in which we (as a matter of logic) know that Iguchi was not trying to move runners over or sacrifice: (1) with no one on base; and (2) with two outs. By comparing Iguchi's overall performance with his performance in those situations, we might get an estimate of how much more we could expect (if at all) out of Iguchi when he isn't trying to move runners over or sacrifice all the time.

Here is Iguchi's total performance this season:

511 AB, 142 H, 25 2B, 6 3B, 15 HR, 71 RBI, 47 BB, 114 K, .278 AVG, .342 OBP, .438 SLG (.780 OPS)

Now what Iguchi has done with the bases empty:

288 AB, 78 H, 11 2B, 4 3B, 8 HR, 8 RBI, 34 BB, 62 K, .271 AVG, .354 OBP, .420 SLG. (.774 OPS)

Hmmm. His batting average and slugging were about the same with the bases empty as his overall average.

Now what Iguchi has done with men on and two outs:

81 AB, 24 H, 6 2B, 1 3B, 6 HR, 32 RBI, 4 BB, 17 K, .296 AVG., .337 OBP, .617 SLG (.954 OPS).

Here, his batting average and slugging percentage are better (although he is less likely to walk), even if the sample size is small.

Put them both together, and you get:

369 AB, 102 H, 17 2B, 5 3B, 14 HR, 40 RBI, 38 BB, 79 K, .276 AVG., .350 OBP, .463 SLG (.813 OPS).

Now, here are Iguchi's stats in all other situations:

142 AB, 40 H, 8 2B, 1 3B, 1 HR, 31 RBI, 9 BB, 35 K, .282 AVG., .325 OBP, .373 SLG (.698 OPS).

I have to admit, going into this analysis, I had expected to find that Iguchi was pretty much the same hitting in situations where he could give himself up vs. situations where he could swing away. I had kind of eyeballed his numbers and thought that he was about the same hitter. In fact, it's not true at all; Iguchi is a much better hitter in spots where he can definitely swing away. If moving Iguchi down in the order gets him up to a .350 OBP and a .463 SLG, then it is well worth it. I doubt his improvement will be that dramatic, but it is interesting nonetheless.

Did Konerko Take Less Money?

There are several reports out there that Paul Konerko took less money than he was offered elsewhere to stay with the White Sox. Such reports, of course, tend to make Konerko look very good to Sox fans, who are inspired by his loyalty to the team. Among other things, Paulie said things like:

"It's a simple as where your heart is," Konerko said. "That's what brought me
back."

And his agent said things like this:

Agents operate in a "show me the money" world, and Konerko's was under
instructions to get him the best possible deal. But Craig Landis also understood
a softer side to Konerko's nature, the one that was concerned that if he left
Chicago, as the agent put it, "Kids there would be disappointed."

It's a very good story - a guy shows loyalty towards a team and a city, showing that athletes aren't all about money. Randy Kindred of the must-read Bloomington Pantagraph calls Konerko's decision "refreshing."

I'm not one to get in the way of a very good story. After all, Bloomington really needs a Pantagraph - what else would kids at ISU use for any number of frugal purposes? But Paul Konerko did not take less money to stay in Chicago. In fact, he'll make more money in Chicago over the next five years than he would have made in either Los Angeles or Baltimore.

The common story - from the Associated Press and ESPN - is that the Angels offered "something more" than $60 million over 5 years and that the Baltimore Orioles offered $65 million over 5 years. In both cases, it seems like Konerko chose Chicago over two more lucrative offers.

But contract offers must be reviewed in a greater context. So while the Orioles offer was $1 million more per year, the question is whether, all things considered, Konerko would actually keep more money per year.

There a number of factors to consider (and I thank Doug Gribben on the White Sox mailing list for pointing out one additional factor after I drafted this post): (1) agent's fees; (2) state taxes; and (3) endorsement opportunities.

First, I will start with agent fees. Although I don't know what Craig Landis' specific fee is, I'll assume that it's the same 5% fee that Scott Boras charges. That means the $1 million more offered by Baltimore is only worth $950,000 to Konerko. I'll assume that the Angels offered $12.5 million per year ($62.5 million total). Under that assumption, after agent fees, the Angels offer was worth $475,000 more to Konerko.

Even more important to consider than agent fees is state taxes. Happily for Illinois residents, Illinois is a relatively low-tax state. Illinois has a flat tax of 3% on income. On the other hand, California has a very high income tax rate - it's 9.3% on essentially all of what Konerko's income would be. Maryland also has a relatively high tax rate. Maryland residents pay 4.75% of their income in tax to the state government and additional 1.5%-3% to local governments. Assuming that Konerko would live in the lowest tax area around Baltimore - Anne Arundel county - he'd pay a total of 7.31% of his salary in income taxes.

So what would the various offers look like after taxes and agent's fees? You'll be a bit surprised to see:

Team	Offer	Agent 5%	Fed. Tax	State Tax	Take Home
Orioles	$13,000,000	$650,000	$4,550,000	$950,300	$6,849,700
Angels	$12,500,000	$625,000	$4,375,000	$1,162,500	$6,337,500
White Sox	$12,000,000	$600,000	$4,200,000	$360,000	$6,840,000

So the Orioles' offer of $1 million more per year really is worth only about $10,000 more per season. That difference is eaten up by the cost of 4 round-trip first class tickets between Konerko's Arizona home and the Orioles' Fort Lauderdale spring training facility. And the Angels' offer of $500,000 more was, in reality, the equivalent of $500,000 less for Konerko. Given the difference in state taxes, the Angels would have had to offer $1.5 million more than the White Sox (i.e., $13.5 million per year) to allow Konerko to have the same take-home at the end of the day.

[Ok, I know there are complications to the state tax laws known as jock taxes. In effect, athletes pay taxes in every state where they play. But this is at best a wash for the Angels and Orioles - the Angels play 93 games in California (81 at home, at least 9 in Oakland, and 3 against the Dodgers in LA). At the same time, the Orioles play in the AL East, which has high-tax jurisdictions such as New York and Massachusetts.]

So Konerko's best financial offer was from the Orioles at a paltry $10,000 more per year. Given the fact that the Orioles play in the same division as the Red Sox and Yankees, and have finished no better than 3rd in the last 8 years, Konerko would not be likely to even get a second-place team's share of the playoff pool with the Orioles. The per player to finish second place in your division (and not make the playoffs) came out to about $9,000 per player this year. That $10,000 more and the flights to Florida look even worse now.

That analysis does not even take into consideration the endorsement potential Konerko has in the various cities. The Sun-Times had an interesting article about Konerko's potential for endorsements in Chicago - experts agreed that only his free-agency would tend to put a damper on his endorsements. He's a World Series Hero in Chicago; he is not in either Los Angeles (a city of a lot of celebrities) or Baltimore. Even if he was a big fish in Baltimore, Baltimore is a much smaller market than Chicago, and the opportunities would not be as lucrative.

In the end, I do not think that it could be said that Paul Konerko will make less money in Chicago next year than he could have made elsewhere. In fact, I think he will make more.

This is not to say that Konerko is being disingenuous when he said his heart is in Chicago. In fact I think his heart is in Chicago and with the team he finally brought a World Championship. I'm one of Konerko's biggest fans - I've got a Paulie bobblehead on my shelf and next year I will be sporting a #14 jersey at Sox games. But as much as Paulie is an absolute deity in my book for hitting that grand slam in Game 2, he is not a saint for taking less money to stay with the White Sox.

Sinking In