Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Most Dangerous Division in Sports

MoneyBacks: The Most 'Moneyball' Arizona players

Randy Johnson = Moneyball. Who knew...

Moneyball hits theaters tomorrow, and last week, we discussed the basic principle behind the book, and how Billy Beane had to fight conventional wisdomm in order to apply his model of constructing a baseball team in Oakland. It's relevance in Arizona should be fairly obvious: like the Athletics, the Diamondbacks are not a big-budget outfit, and so need to find 'value' in the market. Who are the biggest successes in this area? Let's look through team history and see who stands out. You might be surprised.[Albeit only if you don't look at the picture above...]

Star-divide

For the purposes of this discussion, I'm discounting players who were drafted by the Diamondbacks. Those are somewhere between a freebie and a crap-shoot: Justin Upton's success probably falls into the former category, while any success by a player like Mark Reynolds - picked in the 16th round - really should be considered a fortunate accident. Giving the team much 'Moneyball' credit for either seems a stretch. So, we're concentrating on players signed as free agents, traded for by the team, or otherwise accrued, and their results. Numbers are bWAR, and I'm valuing a win at a flat rate of $4.5 million.

Position Players

Luis Gonzalez (1999-2006). Salary: $47.56 million. WAR: 25.6. Surplus value: $67.64 million
Speaking to Jeff Summers earlier in the week, he suggested Karim Garcia as the most valuable player in team history, because we traded him for Gonzo and cash. Luis only got to start in 199 because Bernard Gilkey was hurt, and turned into the franchise's gem. Certainly, over his last few seasons, he was paid for past production, but from 1999-2001, he put up a total of 19 WAR, while being paid $8.2 million. That was more WAR than Chipper Jones and Jeff Bagwell over that period, both of whom earned over $19 million - and were well worth that. Definitely exploiting a market inefficiency.

Steve Finley (1999-2004). Salary: $32.75 million. WAR: 18.7. Surplus value: $51.76 million
Just to Gonzo's left in center-field for much of the time, was Finley, who brought us two and a half Gold Gloves [the third was in 2004, when he was traded to the Dodgers mid-season], and an All-Star appearance in 2000. Finley was not exactly cheap, but goes to show that value can be found at the upper end of the price spectrum as well. He was consistently good: 2001 was the only season where he didn't produce at a level above his salary, with a WAR of at least 3.6 in every other full year with the Diamondbacks. 1999 was his best year, reaching 5.1 WAR while costing us a very reasonable $5.375 million.

Craig Counsell (2000-03, 2005-06). Salary: $7.56 million. WAR: 11.2. Surplus value: $42.84 million
Yes, you might be surprised to discover Craig as among the most undervalued players in team history, but he was always very economical, with his biggest salary here barely $2.5m. Three-quarters of that WAR comes from Craig's defense, and he peaked in 2005 with a 3.1 WAR, while earning only $1.35m. We certainly got the best of Counsell: compare his time in Milwaukee, where he also played six years, but earned almost $12 million and posted a total WAR of only 4.7. While that remains decent value overall, it's far short of what he did here, where he still ranks fourth all-time in position player WAR for Arizona.

Chris Young (2006-current). Salary: $11.2 million. WAR: 9.9. Surplus value: $33.35 million
Worth reviewing the trade for Young. We got him, Orlando Hernandez and Luis Vizcaino from the White Sox in exchange for Javier Vazquez. In terms of total WAR, it worked out almost evenly for each team - but the White Sox had to pay Vazquez $36 million over his three seasons. Additionally, Young will be accumulating center-field WAR for us down the road, as he is signed through a team option for 2014. With back-to-back four WAR seasons, even the increasing cost there [the option is for $11 million] would not appear to be a problem, and barring injury, CY should continue to be well worth the money.

Damian Miller (1998-2002). Salary: $4.62 million. WAR: 6.7. Surplus value: $25.53 million
Snagged from the Twins during the expansion draft in November 1996, Miller was the ultimate blue-collar player - except for that whole non-union thing. And, as you'd expect from that, he produced over and above what you'd expect. The surplus value is likely a bit high, since he played at the beginning of franchise history, where one WAR wasn't worth $4.5 million, but there's no denying his surplus value, especially in a season like 2000: Miller had 2.3 WAR, while earning a mere $300,000. Like Counsell, he never barely got above $2.5 million, while giving Arizona at least one WAR every full year he was with the team.

Honorable mentions:
Erubiel Durazo (1999-2002). Salary: $1.095 million. WAR: 4.8. Surplus value: $20.50 million
Ryan Roberts (2009-current). Salary: $800,000. WAR: 4.1. Surplus value: $17.65 million

Pitchers

Randy Johnson (1999-2004, 2007-08). Salary: $104.95 million. WAR: 45.1. Surplus value: $98.00 million
Even Moneyball advocates would likely admit that there is no harm in paying top-dollar for a player - if the return is even more exceptional. That's what we have here, where Randy Johnson, particularly in the first stint which brought him four Cy Youngs [and it should have been five], was the best player in the majors. From 1999-2004, he got us 41.4 WAR; Pedro Martinez and sometime team-mate Curt Schilling were the only other pitchers above 28.4. Paying eighty million to the Big Unit for that level of performance was an absolute bargain. His return - $24.2 million for 3.7 WAR - not so much.

Curt Schilling (2000-03). Salary: $29.75 million. WAR: 20.9. Surplus value: $64.30 million
Slotting in just behind Gonzo comes Schilling, and much the same goes for him as Johnson: paying for quality is fine, when you get quality. Curt was considerably less well-paid than Randy, but would never be described as anything other than living up to his contract. The math is a bit tricky here, as he was dealt from the Phillies at the 2000 trade deadline; I've split his $6.5 million salary that year down the middle. The following season, he earned the same amount, and put up a monstrous 7.3 WAR - no pitcher in the league, except RJ, has matched that since Kevin Brown for the Padres in 1998.

Miguel Batista (2001-03, 2006). Salary: $10.65 million. WAR: 10.4. Surplus value: $36.15 million.
Everyone's favorite philosopher-poet-novelist pitcher has two spells in Arizona, and represented a good signing on both occasions. However, his first year was his most Moneyball-esque: as part of the World Series team, he gave us 2.8 WAR. Not included there, is any value from Batista's 2.49 ERA over six  post-season appearances, culminating with eight shutout innings in Game 5 of the World Series, plus a Game 7 cameo. He earned $400,000 that year. He was also worth 3.6 WAR in 2003 for Arizona, albeit that season earning rather more, at $3.375m, and his return in 2006 was both his best-paid ($4.75m) and least-successful (1.8 WAR) season in the desert.

Ian Kennedy (2010-current). Salary: $826,000. WAR: 8.0. Surplus value: $35.17 million.
Perhaps the most satisfying trade since Garcia/Gonzo for Diamondbacks fans, because sticking it to the Yankees in a deal is always a pleasure, never a chore. Kennedy has only been with Arizona for two years, and is already ranked sixth on our all-time WAR list for pitchers. This is another one whose surplus value looks set to go up significantly in the coming years, since he'll be at league minimum again next year, and arbitration eligible from 2013 through 2015. Even if we don't bother locking him in to a long-term contract, that WAR could be 25+ by the time he hits free-agency. And what did we directly give the Yankees for that? Nothing at all. </glows>

Dan Haren (2008-10). Salary: $15.68 million. WAR: 11.2. Surplus value: $34.72 million
As with Schilling, I've split Haren's salary in the middle, this time for his final year when he was traded to Anaheim. Also not included in the figure for Dan's surplus value is a true market inefficiency: his ability at the plate. During his 2 1/2 years with us, seems he had an offensive WAR of a remarkable 1.9; remarkable. Over those three seasons, that's almost the same as, say, Conor Jackson (2.1). I must admit, given Haren only got to bat every fifth day, I am inclined to wonder about the veracity here, but I also note Arizona's record for great hitting pitchers, and wonder if this is an area being deliberately targeted by the team.

Honorable mention:
Daniel Hudson (2010-current). Salary: $819,000. WAR: 5.7. Surplus value: $24.83 million

It's interesting to note that the players which gave the most surplus value are generally not absolute bargain basement pick-ups. Luis Gonzalez and Randy Johnson are not the first names that come to mind when you think of "bargains" - indeed, they are the two best-paid players in franchise history. But between them, their production was worth over $165 million more than they received during their time with Arizona. Otherwise, the bargains are a mix of mid-level players who regularly outperformed expectations, and prospects obtained in trade from other outfits, usually trading proven major-league players to roll the dice on future potential.

Of course, getting a steady flow of your own cheap, cost-controlled players from the minors should remain the foundation of any smaller-budget operation. But "value" does not necessarily preclude acquiring other players, elsewhere. While there might not be much chance of you picking up an All-Star for league minimum or thereabouts [hence referred to as "going for a Vogelsong"], spending wisely can be done at any level of contract, from the smallest to the largest. The dangers are certainly greater at the high-end, but as we've seen, the rewards are likely commensurate with the risks.

Comment 45 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Who would have thought

that Gonzo and RJ would be our top two “Moneyball” players in the history of the team!

Reading: It's highly overrated!
I <3 Vuvuzelas!!!

by imstillhungry95 on Sep 22, 2011 1:36 PM EDT reply actions  

Beane

All sounds fine and dandy (being economically efficient), but talking money ball: what has Bean really accomplished at the end of the season? Stats, sabemetrics, blah blah blah…. What’s the bottom line you ask?

Oakland WS Championships since he took over: 0

Quantifying “efforts” over results is overrated!

by Augdogs on Sep 22, 2011 2:11 PM EDT via mobile reply actions  

Seven consecutive seasons with 87+ wins

Including five post-season appearances. Never won less than 74 games in his tenure [this year might be the first]. And on a pay-roll that has not once been out of the bottom half of major-league teams…

I think those “results” are pretty impressive.

"We have to resist it. Do whatever you have to. Cross your fingers. Say a prayer. Think of a basket of kittens. But do not give in to the fear..."

by Jim McLennan on Sep 22, 2011 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

But Oakland has always fielded teams stronger than the city itself warrants

Your boy Beane might be riding on the shoulders of a franchise which has historically been a more or less desirable place to play with a great baseball tradition.

"The wise writer, I think, writes for the youth of his own generation, the critic of the next and the schoolmasters of ever afterward." F. Scott Fitzgerald.

by NASCARbernet on Sep 22, 2011 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

The book said that Walter Haas was one of those rich guys that was willing to pay for wins and the guys who took over in ‘95 well, weren’t.

Sounds kinda familiar actually.

by The so-called Beautiful on Sep 22, 2011 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

Right,

Because Connie Mack still makes people today want to play for the A’s….

I wouldn’t be surprised if some guys on the A’s today have never heard of Mack.

Founder and Chairman of the Hire A Body Double For David Hernandez's Right Arm Commission. A non-profit organization.

by Dan Strittmatter on Sep 22, 2011 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

Not at all desirable

Oakland has not been viewed as a desirable place to play for years. Almost every good free agent-eligible players has left, and no top free agent has signed with Oakland in years.

Just last year, the A’s were the highest bidder on Adrian Beltre, and he turned them down. The year before, they had big offers to Aroldis Chapman and Marco Scutaro, but were turned down in favor of the Reds and Red Sox, respectively. They had to overpay to get Ben Sheets a couple of years ago. Aside from that, what big free agent has signed with Oakland? Last year, the team wanted to spend an extra $20M on payroll, and couldn’t find anyone to take it.

by Amit on Sep 22, 2011 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

+1

seriously, i can’t think of a place in the AL that FA want to play less than Oakland, except Baltimore

by blue bulldog on Sep 22, 2011 5:05 PM EDT up reply actions  

In a division with 4 teams

by Augdogs on Sep 22, 2011 3:18 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

With the other three

All spending far more money year-in and year-out.

Founder and Chairman of the Hire A Body Double For David Hernandez's Right Arm Commission. A non-profit organization.

by Dan Strittmatter on Sep 22, 2011 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

i really wonder

how GM rankings would look right now

who would you have as your top 5 GM’s? Andrew Friedman has to be #1 overall right?

by blue bulldog on Sep 22, 2011 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'd say

That 4 of the top 5 are probably in the AL East: Friedman, Cashman, Epstein, and Anthopoulos in some order. Sucks to be an Oriole fan right about now.

2007: Anybody, Anytime
2011: Justin Upton, All the Time

by Zavada's Moustache on Sep 22, 2011 5:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't agree with this

A lot of guys can be great GMs when they have $200 million to spend. It’s almost impossible to tell how good their GM skills are when they can always solve problems with nearly unlimited dollars. In fact, one could argue that Cashman has been a terrible GM. With $200 million to spend every year, one World Series every 10 years doesn’t sound all the impressive to me. I would definitely include the Tampa GM though.

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

by sonic barracuda on Sep 22, 2011 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

It helps to have a large payroll, obviously,

But it doesn’t ensure success. The Cubs, Dodgers and Mets are all evidence of that. The Red Sox and Yankees have both consistently been playoff teams in a very competitive division, and have healthy farm systems to boot. I’d say that they are both among the best-run organizations in baseball.

Just out of curiosity, who would you list in front of them?

2007: Anybody, Anytime
2011: Justin Upton, All the Time

by Zavada's Moustache on Sep 22, 2011 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

World series titles are a silly way of measuring team success because the playoffs are a complete crapshoot

Beane revolutionized how to run a front office efficiently and helped with the movement of how to judge players a lot more accurately.

"If you find a man or woman who sticks around after you tell them "I may be a demented horse, but I know CPR," you marry them. No questions asked." - kishi

by CaptainCanuck on Sep 22, 2011 6:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

+1

Reading: It's highly overrated!
I <3 Vuvuzelas!!!

by imstillhungry95 on Sep 22, 2011 6:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

...but that said

I think the Billy Beane luster is really wearing off now, mainly because people have caught up to stats like OBP. Teams like Oakland really need to keep adjusting and find newer market inefficiencies in order to survive.

"If you find a man or woman who sticks around after you tell them "I may be a demented horse, but I know CPR," you marry them. No questions asked." - kishi

by CaptainCanuck on Sep 22, 2011 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

it's just capitalism

smart techniques eventually win out over dumb techniques because the smart techniques out-compete them…and then everyone adopts those techniques

by blue bulldog on Sep 22, 2011 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

Wrong test

you should be asking what has his teams done in the regular season. After the Big 3 left, a whole lot of nothing. But he freely admitted in “Moneyball” that his “shit doesn’t work in the postseason.”

Tomorrow is another day.

by soco on Sep 22, 2011 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

ALCS

After the Big 3 left, the A’s made it to the ALCS in 2006 with a new Big 3 of Dan Haren, Joe Blanton, and Rich Harden (Zito was still on the team too, but not the ace he was in the early part of the decade).

by Amit on Sep 22, 2011 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well

1 time isn’t exactly a miracle or a system, but it still has the underlying point that those A’s teams relied on great pitching to get anywhere. Obviously Beane had to acquire that talent, but it’s something that was completely ignored by “Moneyball,” which is assumedly the book/movie/movement/boringness that we’re discussing.

Tomorrow is another day.

by soco on Sep 22, 2011 9:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

Still Have Great Pitching

Those A’s teams at the beginning of the decade won because they had the offense to go with the pitching – Giambi, Tejada, Chavez, plus the high-OBP types they picked up to supplement the team – Stairs, Durham, Hatteberg, Justice, Durazo, etc.

Saying they won because of great pitching isn’t the whole story, because their pitching is still very good now (108 ERA+ this year, league-leading 115 last year).

by Amit on Sep 22, 2011 11:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'll probably go to see this movie

for the entertainment value, but don’t expect me to be converted to the notion that a century’s worth of wisdom must be tossed aside because some consultants say that they know more than everyone else.

I was saddened to learn that Brad Pitt doesn’t like baseball.

"The wise writer, I think, writes for the youth of his own generation, the critic of the next and the schoolmasters of ever afterward." F. Scott Fitzgerald.

by NASCARbernet on Sep 22, 2011 3:08 PM EDT reply actions  

He doesnt?

See, that right there can impact me as a viewer. It probably shouldnt, but it does.

I got nothin'.

by Bcawz on Sep 22, 2011 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't think it's intended to be avangelical

Seems less about sabermetrics than the personality clash between Beans and more traditional elements. It’s probably less a baseball movie, than a movie with a baseball backdrop.

"We have to resist it. Do whatever you have to. Cross your fingers. Say a prayer. Think of a basket of kittens. But do not give in to the fear..."

by Jim McLennan on Sep 22, 2011 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

That's kind of what I'm expecting

"The wise writer, I think, writes for the youth of his own generation, the critic of the next and the schoolmasters of ever afterward." F. Scott Fitzgerald.

by NASCARbernet on Sep 23, 2011 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

Nice to see

Damien Miller on this list… he was always a favorite of mine back in the day. I’m looking forward to seeing the movie… the book was enlightening.

by Andrew Meeusen on Sep 22, 2011 3:17 PM EDT reply actions  

fwiw

i do think Upton’s pre-extension years shouldn’t be included, because i agree with your analysis on the draft

but his free agent extension years should be included

by blue bulldog on Sep 22, 2011 5:07 PM EDT reply actions  

"Big market Moneyball" killed the concept.

Thanks Mass#$%es (a common way to refer to someone from Mass). No Theo would also mean no Byrnes.

WAR has caught up in being an overvalued indicator. We are now more post-WAR than 1950’s America.

"Hey, why don't you people watch the game?"-my mom after viewing a wave going around Chase Field.

by Reynolds rapper on Sep 22, 2011 6:35 PM EDT reply actions  

wow

Theo Epstein is an amazing beast

Apparently he said his goal was for the Red Sox to make it to the playoffs eight out of ten times, and then be lucky enough to win it all once or twice. Unless the Red Sox blow a 2.5 game lead in the last six games, then it looks like he’s going to make his goal, as this will be his eighth playoff appearance in his tenth year with the Red Sox.

Yeah he’s made some questionable decisions the past couple of years. The Lackey signing in particular was criticized, even at the time. But still, the guy is an amazing GM.

by blue bulldog on Sep 22, 2011 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

With a ton of money

you need some sense to spend it, but let’s not pretend he doesn’t have a loaded deck to play with.

Tomorrow is another day.

by soco on Sep 22, 2011 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

+1

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

by sonic barracuda on Sep 22, 2011 8:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

but then

where were the Red Sox before Theo Epstein?

by blue bulldog on Sep 22, 2011 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Their

regular seasons in the immediate preceding seasons did not look that much differently. They didn’t have a losing record between 98 and 2002, and missed the playoffs once with 93 wins. So outside of a longer run and a couple World Series, which have a heaping of luck, Epstein hasn’t necessarily created a much better team all while still maintaining one of the highest payrolls. No 100 win seasons and only 1 division flag. If they’re smarter than the Yankees or Rays, it must not be enough to get division wins.

Tomorrow is another day.

by soco on Sep 22, 2011 9:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

I wasn't so much coming out anti-Epstein

as pointing out that he’s made Moneyball obsolete.

"Hey, why don't you people watch the game?"-my mom after viewing a wave going around Chase Field.

by Reynolds rapper on Sep 23, 2011 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Interesting take

I haven’t read the book in a few years and I really should go back over it. I don’t remember there being a reference to WAR in the book (and a quick look at the index confirms this), so it’s interesting to see how the focus has changed since the book came out. The book was all about how to buy runs, how to get runs most efficiently. Part of this might be because Beane didn’t have to concentrate on pitching when Michael Lewis was writing the book. Still, virtually every article about baseball I seem to have read in the past couple years almost uses WAR exclusively.

Tomorrow is another day.

by soco on Sep 22, 2011 8:02 PM EDT reply actions  

isn't WAR the same though?

i don’t think they used WAR back then

but WAR essentially just a runs created/prevented calculation

by blue bulldog on Sep 22, 2011 9:37 PM EDT up reply actions  

If I recall

they essentially were looking at RC only, and trying to figure out the best way to buy runs. So it’s not quite the same as WAR, at least in my amateur opinion.

Tomorrow is another day.

by soco on Sep 22, 2011 9:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

When the majority of the deferred payments come off the books

will the dbacks still be a small market in baseball?

Arizona Diamondbacks: 90-65
New England Patriots: 2-0

by freeland1787 on Sep 23, 2011 1:49 AM EDT reply actions  

Mid-market I think

I believe Kendrick indicated once that when those payments come off the books, they might have some payroll flexibility. But I doubt we will see $100+ million payrolls here. I see $70-80 at our higher end.

I could be wrong though.

I got nothin'.

by Bcawz on Sep 23, 2011 10:34 AM EDT up reply actions  

Maybe yes, maybe no...
Q: Should we expect more growth to the payroll as a result of deferred salaries being paid down?

A: As you may recall, there was a capital commitment we put into the club that covered that, so that extra money isn’t there once the payoff has been made. But those of us who have been putting money in will not have the obligation to do that in the same way that we do now. So there would be some more freedom if we are prepared to go further into our pocket books.

Link

I think it may well depend how attendance goes, and as we’ve seen this season, it depends on the economy as much as anything else. Even an extra half-million – back to the level of, say, 2008 – would be helpful.

"We have to resist it. Do whatever you have to. Cross your fingers. Say a prayer. Think of a basket of kittens. But do not give in to the fear..."

by Jim McLennan on Sep 23, 2011 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah

thats the article I was thinking of. Thanks.

I got nothin'.

by Bcawz on Sep 23, 2011 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions  

Wow

Thanks for posting this again, I was actually just thinking about this earlier today and trying to remember and explain, unsuccessfully mind you, to a friend how payroll may change. Can just send him the link now lol.

Born and raised in Arizona, I am what you may a call a "homer"..get over it ;-)

by Ben Skehan on Sep 25, 2011 12:31 AM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the AZ SnakePit, the SB Nation blog about the Arizona Diamondbacks. "When you think about the past all the time, when you get to the present day you are thinking about the past so it becomes your future again." -- Kirk Gibson.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Avogadro_small
Kirk Gibson Calls a Team Meeting
Jon-stewart-painting_small
"Leading the League in Love"

Recent FanPosts

Me___drums_small
OT: The (Literally) Thankless Job of a Hitting Coach
Hl_small
Recommendations
Small
In which I dispense some amateurish medical advice to Trevor Bauer
Basshat3_small
SNAKEPITFEST TUCSON EDITION....?
Small
My thoughts on Justin Upton
Small
Thoughts on the D-Backs Season So Far
200234_1969418916472_1272934884_2352102_4759893_n_small
D'Hall E-mailed me back!
Small
Hey Gibson ... heard of bunts?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Manager

Lucha_small Jim McLennan

Bench coaches

Madmen_icon_small snakecharmer

My-little-pony-friendship-is-magic-brony-not-the-element-of-efficiency_small kishi

Scarlett_small soco

Avogadro_small Zavada's Moustache

Players

Wailord_by_xous54_small Wailord

Wolfwood_small BattleMoses

Basshat3_small Clefo

Small blue bulldog