USA Today reported today that the O’s are continuing to negotiate with Adam LaRoche:
Little new information has been learned since we discussed LaRoche last week:
https://baltimoresportsandlife.com/?p=1659
The only new information that has come out, is MASN’s Jen Royle reporting the offer is for 3 years at roughly $7M per.
As I stated in the link above, of available 1st baseman my preference would be Derek Lee. While older, Lee has a slightly higher overall upside, is RH, and walks more. If LaRoche is signed, ideally he would be signed for one year with an option , or to a 2 year deal. I’m not overly excited about a 3 year offering for LaRoche, but I think there is a great deal of hyperbole being made about that offer.
The primary knock against a 3 year deal for LaRoche is that it would be giving multiple years and dollars for league average production, and that it would be better to invest those dollars into Scouting and Player Development. Overall, I agree with this position. However, if the O’s do not sign LaRoche, I do not see them reinvesting those dollars internally. As such, I would rather spend those dollars to acquire a legitimate option for the position.
There was an interesting discussion on Orioles Hangout today about the potential signing, and contract:
http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?t=105524
The poster SportsGuy talking about signing LaRoche for 3yrs, and Gregg for 2yrs:
You could sign several relievers for a few million or less who can give you a 3.8-4 ERA.
We could put Scott at first and Branyan at DH and get close to or better production than Scott + LaRoche and spend a few million.
Its a poor use of resources anyway you look at it.
For years, we have sat back and laughed at other teams for signing contracts like this for players like this and yet, when its time for the O’s to sign it, everyone finds every reason in the book why its an ok thing to do.”
Frobby responding to SG, about SG claiming to learn from Huff’s contract:
At this point, I’ll just wait and see whether we sign LaRoche, and if so, what the actual terms are.”
SG arguing you can be worth the contract, but that it does mean the contract is worthwhile:
Originally Posted by Sports Guy
That may be enough for you but if LaRoche is a 2.5 WAR player in 2010, when we aren’t contending and a 2-3 WAR player COMBINED in the years we are contending, that isn’t a successful contract IMO. He may be worth it in terms of WAR/dollar value but it doesn’t really make us a better team and it could end up preventing them from doing other things.”
Mweb responding to SG here:
However, I would say if you are worth the contract, it’s very difficult for it to be one of the dumbest contracts ever.”
NOW responding to SG’s argument that you can be worth the contract, but not equate to a good signing:
How is a fair contract for value not a “good contract”?
How does an avg or better fielder with 25-HR power not “make us a better team”?
How does a 3-yr contract “prevent us from doing other things” (presumably you mean signing or trading for a better player at 1B in the next 2 yrs) if we can always trade LaRoche if it comes to that? In the meantime at least we’re past the annual trap of below-avg production at first.”
First of all, we have no idea what LaRoche will be worth on the open market.
Secondly, we have a GM that isn’t exactly creative when it comes to these things. I see no reason to think he would make several moves or things like that and replace a player that he just signed, especially if LaRoche comes off of a 800ish OPS/25 homer season.”
A pretty good summation by Arthur Bryant:
1) best estimate of some form of WAR over the life of the contract, times the going rate per win; then…
2) adjust downward to mitigate risk, depending on the team’s risk aversion; then…
3) adjust upward to reflect how much the team actually needs or wants this particular player, and the “loser’s tax” that a team like the O’s must pay.
I think teams probably do some more sophisticated and precise form of this same calculation.
The problem is that WAR can be calculated in different ways, with varying results, so that in LaRoche’s case he has been worth either 6.4 WAR (fWAR) or 3.9 (rWAR) during the past three years, which obviously would influence the expected production over the next three years. What this really comes down to is how you rate his fielding; the offensive level is apparent.
If you believe that he has been worth 2.1 WAR/season over the past three seasons, then something like 6 WAR would be a reasonable expectation through 2013, and that would be $27MM or more.
If you believe that he has been worth about 1.3 WAR/season from 2008-2010, then something like 3.5 WAR total through 2013 would be more reasonable–maybe $16 MM.
Obviously the difference is worth haggling over if you’re LaRoche and the O’s.”
I’m interested in hearing what others think about the offered contract for LaRoche. What is your opinion?
Owner
Chris Stoner founded Baltimore Sports and Life in 2009. He has appeared as a radio guest with 1090 WBAL, 105.7 The Fan, CBS 1300, Q1370, WOYK 1350, WKAV 1400, and WNST 1570. He has also been interviewed by The Baltimore Sun, Baltimore Business Journal, and PressBox (TV). As Owner, his responsibilities include serving as the Managing Editor, Publicist, & Sales Director.