Best and Worst Free-Agent Signings In the Infield

by GeorgeQUAD on Feb 8, 2012 2:44 PM EST

I saw this sport column on the Los Angeles Times. It details the best and worst free-agent signings based on infield positions. Quick segue, I strongly suggest fans of all four major sports to read the Los Angeles Times every day.

Player I would love to have is Carlos Pena(best) at $7.5 million as our first baseman. Also, no platoon. Anyone agree? José Reyes(worst) for $116 million with the big pressure to fill the seats at Florida's new fish tank park. Anyone agree? The worst catcher got chopped off in the column. I did research and found our new catcher Rod Barajas as the worst free-agent signing. Hardly a surprise.

Please comment on any player signing not listed you would have as best and/or worst.

http://articles.latimes.com/2012/feb/04/sports/la-sp-0205-baseball-free-agents-20120205

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of the managing editor (Charlie) or SB Nation. FanPosts are written by Bucs Dugout readers.

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Hardly a surprise.

There were only 3 catchers to sign a contract worth +$2MM this off-season, and one was Doumit. Hernandez and Barajas were the others. I guess its hardly a surprise that there were basically 2 C contracts that have any legitimate size and that the Pirate’s signing was the worst. If you look at it another way, it was 2nd best. I don’t love the signing, but you paint it as if its awful. They signed a 1 year contract with a catcher in the hopes that their #1 pick will be ready next year, or they will need another stop gap. Don’t see much to complain about here.

by Wizard of Woz on Feb 9, 2012 10:00 AM EST reply actions

ditto

by white angus on Feb 9, 2012 4:38 PM EST up reply actions

I also

don’t think it’s completely fair to compare the Hernandez deal and the Barajas deal because Hernandez was signed AFTER the CBA had bumped him out of Type A status, which means that the Rox didn’t have to give up a pick for him. You can say that the Pirates should have waited to see what would happen but if they truly believed that there were only two FA catchers worth signing (if Doumit is excluded) they had to act quickly. I can’t really fault them for that one.

I also thought it was a little dumb for the LA Times to trumpet Pena as a great FA signing for Tampa because he signed for less with them than he was offered by other teams (namely the Indians). Now you can say that Tampa put themselves in that position by being a contender, but that price is still not something every team could have gotten with Pena so it’s not like the Rays were just especially sharp and identified an undervalued player. They found a good player who was willing to take less to play for them.

by KentuckyPirate on Feb 10, 2012 1:00 PM EST up reply actions

as I said on another thread

probably the worst free-agent acquisition was Jeff Mathis (who doesn’t cost much but just can’t hit), but that was a trade so it doesn’t count. Otherwise, Woz is right that there just isn’t much of a comparison class. I’d rather have had Hernandez but the Pirates couldn’t have signed him when they signed Barajas without losing a draft pick, and I think it was reasonable of them to try to jump on a catcher quickly so they didn’t wind up having to go with Ronny Paulino or Kelly Shoppach or someone like that.

(BTW, I think you’re not getting many comments because after the recent SBNation troubles the FanPosts have disappeared from the front page.)

Not actually affiliated with whygavs.

by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 9, 2012 1:08 PM EST reply actions

Zane Smith

What SBNation troubles?

by GeorgeQUAD on Feb 9, 2012 4:04 PM EST up reply actions

All the sites on SBNation (that’s the network of blogs that includes Bucsdugout) were only intermittently available for a day or so, and when they came back I noticed that the links to the FanPosts weren’t showing up on the side of the page in the normal place. They’re back now, at least on BucsDugout.

Oh, and when I said “worst free-agent acquisition” I meant “worst catcher acquisition,” and I didn’t mean “free-agent” at all.

Not actually affiliated with whygavs.

by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 9, 2012 4:28 PM EST up reply actions

I noticed that a thread which I tried to start disappeared completely. Since I had seen only a couple of replies (indicating little interest), I didn’t inquire.

by magnumo on Feb 9, 2012 5:07 PM EST up reply actions

HERE

http://www.bucsdugout.com/2012/2/4/2771957/best-and-worst-free-agent-signings#90805190

by karreemofwheat on Feb 10, 2012 7:33 PM EST up reply actions

thanks

Not actually affiliated with whygavs.

by WHYG Zane Smith on Feb 10, 2012 8:13 PM EST up reply actions

Furcal worst SS signing, Reyes best. Betemit as worst 3B is silly. Prince/Pujols should be tied for worst.

by Mr. E on Feb 9, 2012 5:17 PM EST reply actions

Prince's deal is bad

Pujols’ deal, while still risky, I’m not sure can be classified as the worst deal in the offseason. He’s the best player in baseball. He hasn’t seemed to age at all. He plays a position where loss of range doesn’t hurt him. He signed with a team that can use him as a DH down the road. His signing helped that team land a MASSIVE television contract (actually, I’m not sure if the TV deal came before or after the Pujols signing so that might not be entirely fair).

In any case, if you had to bet on a guy to live up to that contract Pujols would be that guy. At least for the first few years, he is likely to play up to that level if not exceed it (~5 WAR/year) and I can see his bat keeping him at that level until his late 30’s. Also, let’s remember that in a deal this long, the approximate market value per win is likely to change. While today it’s roughly $5M per added win, it’s not impossible to think that 7 or 8 years down the road, it could be $7M-$8M per added win. In this case, Pujols would only have to produce 3.5-4 WAR to be worth his contract.

by KentuckyPirate on Feb 10, 2012 1:06 PM EST up reply actions

worst at 1B only. They both incredible hitters but 5 years is a long time in any sport and they both got about double that. It’s purely risk based for why I think they are the worst

by Mr. E on Feb 10, 2012 5:58 PM EST up reply actions

Depends on how "bad" is measured

For teams (and owners) who have a lot of money to play with, the contracts of both Pujols and Fielder might be “worth it,” depending upon results during the next few years.

If Pujols helps the Angels win a couple of World Series early in his new contract, they might consider the contract to be “good,” even if Pujols falters significantly in the contract’s later years..

Same holds true for the Tigers and Fielder. In fact, based on reports I’ve read about Ilitch, it appears that he might have been willing to commit a LOT to Fielder, just in hopes that Fielder gives him another shot at a World Championship before he dies.

Obviously, this kind of thinking is unfamiliar to Pirate fans.

by magnumo on Feb 11, 2012 11:41 AM EST up reply actions