Brandon's arm "red flag" nixed Webb/D-Backs deal

Concerns from multiple insurance companies about Webby's right arm caused Arizona to withdraw their three-year, $54 million dollar contract extension. When's the last time B-Webb hit the DL again?

[Expanded and FrontPaged] Ken Rosenthal reports this morning, "Concerns raised by insurance companies over Brandon Webb's arm caused the Diamondbacks to withdraw their offer of a three-year, $54 million contract extension to the right-hander last June, according to major-league sources. Webb passed a team physical, sources say, but insurance companies use a higher standard when assessing risk. Multiple companies raised concerns, creating a "red flag" for the Diamondbacks, sources say. The contract was contingent on the club securing an appropriate insurance policy for the pitcher."

This does tie in with rumblings I've heard previously regarding the reason why the deal was pulled, but is the first time I've heard specifically the insurance company were the ones who blocked it. It may or may not be meaningful - the story goes on to say "Webb, despite the insurance companies' concerns, might pitch 10 more seasons without injury, one source said." But it doesn't help my sense of foreboding this morning...

10 months ago Elway4Prez 55 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Well

at least we finally have a reason for why the contract was pulled. Come on though he has been one of the best pitchers in all of baseball, got to get him signed long term.

by Pyromnc on Apr 9, 2009 11:31 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Key word there is "has been".

There’s no guarantee that he’ll continue to be — and as with the RJ and Eric Byrnes situations, you don’t offer somebody a contract based on how good they HAVE been, but rather, based on how good you think they WILL be.

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 9, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Indeed

especially when we’re talking about the money involved here. Baseball is filled with pitchers that were amazing at one point in their career, but completely forgotten after a serious injury, fatigue, or simply losing “it.”

What? neh-are you se-no! No! I hh I I don't even't know what you're sayinhow whatdoyou whatdoyou talking about you want me to go away? I I I I can't no! I can't I can't just leave I - ...you can't leave me!

by soco on Apr 9, 2009 8:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What I'm trying to figure out is if we HAD to listen to them. I certainly wouldn't...

"I'm very important. I have many leather-bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany." - Ron Burgundy
"I'd rather hit than have sex."- Reggie Jackson
"Obviously your not a golfer." - The Dude

by Elway4Prez on Apr 9, 2009 11:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

If the FO hadn't listened to them, and had signed him anyway,

they could have been out the entire deal.

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 9, 2009 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I dont want to sign him long term

After signing Haren long term already, it is unwise to commit so much of your pay roll to 2 players. Id rather lock up Drew/CoJack/J-Up and sign a free agent with the money that would go to Webb.

by J Up on Apr 9, 2009 12:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I disagree and have a hard time understanding

this POV. Webb is our first home grown ace, our own star. Why wouldn’t you want to lock hm up?
I’m not keen at all about the chance of losing him, no matter what we got back. Just my ½¢ (depression era pricing)

"If you'd need to know, you'd know. but they decided that you don't need to know,so you don't. So stop thinking about what you don't know because you don't need to know what you think you need to know about!"

by unnamedDBacksfan on Apr 10, 2009 8:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is the guy that has finished in the top 2 in the Cy Young the last three years.

Can any other pitcher say that. If he pitches bad again in his next start then I would be worry, this is probably just a precaution and won’t happen multiple times again this year.

Because this is Arizona.

by damdrs1717 on Apr 9, 2009 12:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

The problem is,

we don’t even KNOW when his “next start” will be.

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 9, 2009 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The issue

isn’t and never will be what he has done in the past. It is simply about whether these are indicators for a similiar future. If there are red flags about durability or a long term future, then the club has every right to be concerned.

by soco on Apr 9, 2009 8:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was talking about this year,

which I think he’ll be mostly fine, but if Jarrod Parker and Scherzer become the aces that they can be, then I wouldn’t be against trading him knowing that we have guys that can step right in for him.

Because this is Arizona.

by damdrs1717 on Apr 10, 2009 12:51 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What if

Parker stays a starter, but Scherzer becomes a closer?

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 10, 2009 4:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Nice question, um,

I would then want to sign Webb, assuming he’s healthy, but whatever Arizona decides to do with Webb, I trust that they will make the right decison.

Because this is Arizona.

by damdrs1717 on Apr 10, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Okay, okay, yeah....

did I NOT float this very possibility yesterday when Webby’s arm troubles came out??

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 9, 2009 2:22 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I do recall that

Primarily because I got the same sick feeling in my stomach then that I did when I saw this article this morning.

"You're no help," he told the lime. This was unfair. It was only a lime; there was nothing special about it at all. It was doing the best it could.

by kishi on Apr 9, 2009 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sometimes

I hate being right all the time…

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 9, 2009 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Stop it!

by soco on Apr 9, 2009 8:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What? Being right?

Well, it DOES come in handy sometimes.

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 10, 2009 12:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You sure did. We were all in denial. And by “we”, I mean I was.

by Bcawz on Apr 9, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Don't worry.

I think we all have been. It’s tough to imagine us being able to sustain above-average success without Webby.

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 9, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oy.

by Azreous on Apr 9, 2009 2:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Realistically

If we decide not to extend him long term (which seems likely at this point), I wouldnt be surprised if he was traded during the offseason or at next years trading deadline. We would probably bring in a better haul if we traded him during the offseason though.

by J Up on Apr 9, 2009 4:37 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I've sorta already assumed

this was going to happen, since the FO now seems resigned to not re-sign Webby. (Very bad pun intended)

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 9, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Insurance

It would be interesting to find out what exactly the insurance companies standards are comprised of. I know very little about risk management, but what are they looking for in an arm? Medical stuff? Mechanics? Weight/Age?

by Bcawz on Apr 9, 2009 4:56 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Knowing secondhand how intricate many insurance companies' risk evaluation methods are,

I wouldn’t be surprised to find out it involved all of the above and then some.

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 9, 2009 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The number of innings pitched over the last 5 years have to be involved as I believe he is near the top in the league.

by Bcawz on Apr 9, 2009 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Most innings pitched in the Majors

since 2005.

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 9, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What if

we did decide to trade him. Which teams do you think would bit and what could we get for him?

by J Up on Apr 9, 2009 9:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I think

Just about any team would welcome Webb in the rotation. I’m pretty sure we could get a good haul, most likely from a team with a good bunch of prospects, who feel that one more pitcher would take them over the top. Would probably be someone with a sizable payroll, unless they only want Webb as a one-yearr rental. I’d rather he was traded outside the NL, and certainly outside the West.

"I coulda been better. I coulda broke every record in the book... And then when I walked down the street people would've looked and they would've said there goes Roy Hobbs, the best there ever was in this game."

by Jim McLennan on Apr 9, 2009 9:55 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

It

probably will also depend on what position the Diamondbacks are in. Let’s face it, if the Baby Backs II aren’t performing this year, and the team isn’t being competitive to the division, that’s probably going to influence the type of player the FO is going to go after.

by soco on Apr 10, 2009 12:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Texas needs a number 1,

but I don’t if they have the salary. Same thing with Baltimore, once they call up that catcher they got they’ll have an offense, but no number 1. With a big name guy, the Red Sox and Yankees will always be interested in that player.

Because this is Arizona.

by damdrs1717 on Apr 10, 2009 1:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And Texas has the prospects to pull it off.

by J Up on Apr 10, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Our farm system would be right near the top if we traded Webb and hit on this years draft.

Because this is Arizona.

by damdrs1717 on Apr 10, 2009 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Man....

would THAT ever be an impressive infusion of talent all at once….

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 10, 2009 6:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

What I'd Like to Know

is did the Dbacks word their insurance contingency in a manner consistent with other MLB teams? Or did they structure in a harsher insurance contingency because maybe they’re unusually tentative about paying Webb “market-ish” money in the first place?

Let’s be clear. There’s no indication these insurer’s refused to cover Webb. All Rosenthal has is an unnamed source, saying there were “concerns raised”. Well, hell – what $50+M pitcher policy doesnt raise concerns? They’re intrinsically high risk propositions.

Are these the kind of “concerns” that would give most organizations cold feet – or just a select few?

If the FO is the focus of anything, something is seriously wrong with the picture ! - unnamedDBacksfan 2/20/09

by Diamondhacks on Apr 10, 2009 12:38 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

.....

Only you….

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 10, 2009 4:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

by Bcawz on Apr 10, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Surprised

at your +1, since I’m mostly piggybacking on the question you raised above – about how insurance works – I just probed a little deeper into how the Diamondbacks might utilize insurance relative to other clubs.

If the FO is the focus of anything, something is seriously wrong with the picture ! - unnamedDBacksfan 2/20/09

by Diamondhacks on Apr 10, 2009 2:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, I suppose you are right. I guess I was just thinking the same thing (as DSkins was) when I first read your comment. Your comment just seemed to take it to the FO conspiracy theory stuff right away. In re-reading it, its not that bad.

by Bcawz on Apr 10, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Only you….

What’s the purpose of this, other than a thinly-disguised, ad hominem barb utterly devoid of substance?

When most people arent interested in given subject matter, or are unable to intelligently engage it, they simply move on. They ignore it. That’s what I do. That’s what everybody on this site does.

….
Only you

If the FO is the focus of anything, something is seriously wrong with the picture ! - unnamedDBacksfan 2/20/09

by Diamondhacks on Apr 10, 2009 2:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

….
Only you

Fair ’nuff.

I was merely expressing my utter lack of surprise that your first comment on this FanShot seemed to immediately attempt to paint the Dbacks’ FO in a negative light, by implying that they refused to spend the money on Webb if there was any remote risk, but that this sort of stinginess is exclusive to the Diamondbacks. I’m not quite sure why you don’t just accept this explanation at face value; it seems to make perfect sense to me. But, you probably are correct in your assumption that the Diamondbacks must necessarily be more risk-adverse than a wealthier team or a deeper team. If the Yankees get absolutely nothing out of Carl Pavano, they shrug their shoulders and pitch somebody else. If the Dbacks burn all that money on a pitcher who never pitches, they’re handicapped for years. Just look at the Colangelo days.

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 10, 2009 6:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was offering two independent underlying scenarios

1. The Dbacks innocuously extend their risk aversion in the FA market to insurance analysis & interpretation (ie they’re more cautious by inclination and, as you noted, by need)

2. Their aversion (and resulting contingencies) are so extreme as to render the $54M “offer” more of a public relations tool than an executable contract (ie the “conspiracy” theory).

Offered, because some here had jumped to a third conclusion, the “face value” one, that is totally unsubstantiated:

3. Webb suffers physical “red flags” more than other pitchers in his peer group.

Look. Someone out there, an unidentified insider, is trying very hard to sell Ken Rosenthal on #3. And Ken is throwing it out there. But it’s incredibly vague, leading information presented with precious little balance or context.

This notion that insurance doctors “found stuff” that eluded Arizona’s team doctors, or were unusually concerned about Webb (relative to other pitchers) is completely unsubstantiated.

Picture it. The athlete goes in for the $50M physical. This isnt our ten minute, $20 co pay, with the tounge depressor and latex glove. For pitchers, they probably have a battery of sophisticated tests, assessing upper body movement and strength. I promise you they’ll find something. Maybe Webb’s elbow is slightly crooked. Maybe Lincecum’s ulna is “too short” and Sabathia was “fat”. In this kind of environment, where waving thru a $50M contract with a perfect bill of health can be seen as not doing one’s job, there will always be “red flags”.

The only current context we have to judge how significant these flags are (if at all) are the AZ team doctors, and Dr James Andrews, the world’s foremost authority on the subject. I’m not saying they’ve pronounced Webb “risk-free” – I’m certain they found flags of their own. But they dont sound nearly as gloomy as Rosenthal’s source, do they?

Subsequently, yesterday’s MRI showed no long term scare.

If the FO is the focus of anything, something is seriously wrong with the picture ! - unnamedDBacksfan 2/20/09

by Diamondhacks on Apr 11, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The entire article

is “completely unsubstantiated”. It’s based on an anonymous source. You can’t substantiate something if nobody will speak on the record — but that’s just a straw man. Mark Felt’s accusations were unsubstantiated, too. It didn’t mean they were wrong.

Are you personally going with the “black helicopter” theory, #2?

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 12, 2009 1:36 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

All Rosenthal has is an unnamed source, saying there were "concerns raised".

Just want to say that it was not me nor was it a relative of mine. from all my research, unnamed is a fairly common name, maybe not quite on par with “Smith” , but it is up there….

by unnamedDBacksfan on Apr 10, 2009 10:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Ahahaha

well played, good sir.

by soco on Apr 10, 2009 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm sure it's a solid source

in the sense Rosenthal wouldnt use one who wasnt privy to the insurance results. But the fact it’s unnamed leaves questions open as to that source’s potential motivation – as to how they frame the information to Rosenthal.

Is it a disinterested leak straight from the insurer, or is it a baseball person who might benefit from the public devaluation of Webb?

If the FO is the focus of anything, something is seriously wrong with the picture ! - unnamedDBacksfan 2/20/09

by Diamondhacks on Apr 10, 2009 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

"public devaluation of Webb"

What did you have in mind? A Dbacks official trying to lower his price in order to re-sign him, or an official from another team that plans to make a push to trade for him?

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 10, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Baseball people

privy to this insurance info and credible enough for Rosenthal to run with, in exchange for no attribution?

That’s a very short list. Four at the most. They’ve all disparaged others publicly from time to time, but one has a longer, almost ingrained penchant for this type of thing. Almost like he cant hep it.

If the FO is the focus of anything, something is seriously wrong with the picture ! - unnamedDBacksfan 2/20/09

by Diamondhacks on Apr 11, 2009 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I honestly am not sure who you're referring to.

Are you agreeing with Jim’s idea, that it might have been Moorad? Or are you (this is my assumption) referring to Hall?

Insert witty and/or humorous signature here.

by DbacksSkins on Apr 12, 2009 1:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Steve Gilbert talking about this on Gambo and Ash

Webb’s doctors said one thing, the insurance doctors said another – Webb went down to Dr. James Andrews, the well-respected arm specialist, to get a third opinion, who gave him a clean bill of health. He said pitchers with so many innings were not going to have a perfect shoulder – it’s just not a natural motion – and Webb’s was normal based on the workload. He says that issue is entirely separate from the current problem, but the word out of the organization is that this skipped start isn’t a big deal. Full audio will follow around lunchtime.

by Jim McLennan on Apr 10, 2009 11:18 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Nice piece by Nick P

Link. Points out it doesn’t make any real sense for the Diamondbacks to be behind the leak. Interesting suggestion floated in the comments: “I wonder if a certain ex-owner who recently bought a rival NL West club has anything to do with this?”

by Jim McLennan on Apr 10, 2009 5:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Interesting idea

Particularly if, six months from now, the DBacks are looking to trade Webb, possibly competing against said NL West team that’s rumored to be trying to trade off their former Cy Young winner…

"You're no help," he told the lime. This was unfair. It was only a lime; there was nothing special about it at all. It was doing the best it could.

by kishi on Apr 10, 2009 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs