Long Live Frank Fixaris!

Well, today's the official report date for pitchers and catchers. Plenty of players already reporting in along with the pitchers.

We've got the JD Drew piece from Amalie Benjamin in last Sunday's Globe. Pretty solid attempt by Amalie to show Drew's value to the team regardless of what popular opinion is. I found this line in particular pretty telling of what those in the organization think of him.
Clearly they see him as a clutch post-season performer on a par with 2003-2004 Ortiz, and I can't argue. He's gotten a lot of clutch hits in his three years in Boston, but perhaps they get overlooked because they've been overshadowed by the team's eventual elimination in those post-seasons.

And then there's Dice-K's back that has him on the sidelines for a few days, but it isn't considered serious. Guess this is a good sign, since he's actually telling the team he's hurting rather than pitching through it like he did last spring.

Mike Lowell is in good spirits despite having a cloudy at best future with the team. At least he's being honest about the situation and taking the professional high road rather than being petulant. He knows getting healthy and showing he can hit with that thumb is the key to getting himself out of town and perhaps into a starting role elsewhere.

The Red Sox brass clearly value JD much more highly than the Red Sox fans do. I listened to an interview with Theo on one of the Boston radio stations last fall, and the hosts were flabbergasted when Theo insisted that JD was one of the Red Sox' most productive hitters. The hosts couldn't get past the fact that JD has only knocked in 60-odd runs per year since coming to Boston. They also were somewhat surprised that Theo thought Drew's defense was a big part of the his value to the team.

Now having read the article written by RedHawk's girlfriend, I'll confirm that the radio interview that I heard is the one referenced in the article.

Girlfriend? Ouch. I'm not saying I'd say no to her, but I didn't think I gave off that Amalie-stalker kind of vibe.

It's just a shame that this article has to be written, or that Theo has to give those kind of interviews. Stats aside, I think the fact that Theo feels that he needs to be out there "defending" Drew just illustrates how under appreciated he really is. Reading some of the comments on that article, critics Theo is so proactive defending Drew because he's trying to cover his ass for the "mistake" he made in signing him. Thing is, he wasn't out intentionally broaching the topic of Julio Lugo's value or Eric Gagne's value trying to justify those deals. Those guys sucked, he knew it, and he lived with the criticism without defending himself. Drew's different, because he's actually been extremely good. He's worth the effort Theo makes to promote how value a player he is.

JD Drew hit "the slam." He will always be worth it to me.

Apparently, after gaining 15 pounds this winter, Clay Buchholz decided to counter-act the effect with a slimming new uniform number.

Love this time of year...I almost mowed my dead lawn today (I can see the whole thing in February!) just so I could hopefully smell the fresh cut grass.

I was a big Drew defender for a long time, but I've soured on him starting last year. Theo may spin it to the best of his ability that Drew was worth every penny (and more???), but I don't think so. OBP and one playoff changing grand slam isn't worth $75M IMO.

Out of curiosity, what was it about last year that started to sour you on him? I can understand, to a degree, the ones that haven't gotten over his rough start in 2007. But since about September 2007, he's been exactly as advertised (including a DL stint). And last year, he was the best hitter on the team after the all star break (.316 BA, .414 OBP, .584 SLG, .999 OPS, 12 HR), not to mention pretty much the only clutch hit of their short post-season.

I don't see what Theo has said about Drew as "spin". He's not trying to make something out of nothing, he's pointing out something that is either being overlooked or pointedly ignored by a lot of media and fans.

Pedroia's already getting into mid-season form:

IDK Hawk, I guess I was in that frame of mind earlier than last season but I decided to keep defending him. His ABs aggravate the hell out of me. If the ball is one millimeter out of his "zone" he doesn't swing. With men on base I'd like to see him a tad more aggressive at the plate instead of thinking walk first. His numbers are in no way worth $15M per season, but that is my opinion. OBP isn't worth as much as they paying him. It's hypocritical for a GM that preaches fiscal restraint when Exhibit A is the elephant in the room at 5 years/$75M.

Bleah! You're picking on this signing as an example of a guy not showing the proper "fiscal restraint"? Edgar Renteria and Julio Lugo were both much worse signings in terms of dollars/expected return.

When you look at the dollars given to Alfonso Soriano and Carlos Lee during the offseason that the Sox signed Drew, you'd have to conclude that Theo didn't overspend at all for Drew. JD's actually returned some value for the dollars spent, as compared to those two guys. There's no "elephant" around this contract.

I disagree. They bid against themselves for both Drew and Lugo and still overpaid dearly! I don't care what Soriano and Lee signed for; they weren't signed by Theo. Straw man.

If the following numbers had no name attached to them would you still justify $15M per season for this output?

2007: 140 G, 11 HR, 64 RBI, .270/.373
2008: 109 G, 19 HR, 64 RBI, .280/.408
2009: 137 G, 24 HR, 68 RBI, .279/.392

It's not a straw man. How can you determine if a player is "overpaid" if you don't consider what other people who do the same thing are being paid? $15 million is a lot of money to you and me, but if every other RF in the AL was getting paid $20 million, then JD's $15 million would be a bargain, would it not?

The Sox needed a right fielder heading into the 2007 season. Options included retaining Trot Nixon for $3 million or so, signing Drew for 5/$75M, or Soriano for 8/$137M, or Lee for 6/$101M, or maybe someone else, or making a trade. Considering that Lee and Soriano were signed before Drew, and that Boston is a high-revenue team, how can you look at that and say, "man, whose idea of fiscal responsibility is this?"

I wouldn't make any sort of judgment, because there is not enough context. How does he compare to other players at his position? How is his defense? How is his base running? What other options are available?

I am only focusing on what Theo has done with contracts as GM of the Red Sox and comparing Drew's to other free agent contracts Theo negotiated regardless of position. You chose to introduce what I deem as strawmen when they are not relevant to my point. I'll play along anyway. So Soriano and Lee signed prior to Drew and that provides more proof that Theo overpaid. With those 2 players off the market and no other team in the market for a RF then Theo had to know he was bidding against himself. Why not wait it out and get the price to come down?

Of course there isn't enough context because you already know it's Drew and you won't back down from your assessment that he has been worth every penny. Take a look at Geoff Jenkin's stats over his career. Not too far off from Drew. Would you pay him 5 yrs/$75M?

The ONLY way you can say that JD's contract is a "bad" contract is to ignore all the context that you have ignored about the market and Theo's other signings. You're trying to hold JD up as an poster boy for Theo's lack of fiscal restraint, but it doesn't make sense to me when I can easily find examples of much worse contracts offered by other GMs and Theo himself. Maybe Theo could have waited Drew out and gotten him for less, but that by itself doesn't mean he got a bad deal.

And no, Geoff Jenkins isn't worth JD Drew money. And it's all about OBP. You might not care about it, but in the age-30 comparison, Jenkins's OBP was about 50 points lower than JD's. That's one extra out every 20 times up. It's actually a pretty big difference. JD's also a much better base runner than Jenkins. Jenkins has a pretty good defensive rep, I think. Certainly a great throwing arm.

I'm curious why you would have looked at those career comps and skipped right by Jason Bay, who is actually a closer fit to JD Drew in terms of OBP and OPS+. Bay, at the same age as Drew was when he was a FA, in a market that has gone down since Drew signed, got more dollars per year than JD from a team that also had no competition. And while Drew and Bay have similar offensive numbers, JD is a much, much better defensive player than Bay. That is another indicator to me that JD isn't grossly overpaid.

If the alternative to letting a pitch he doesn't like go by is for him to swing at a bad pitch (meaning one he can't hit as solidly as one in his "zone"), I'd prefer he watch it go by and take the walk if that's what they're giving him. The notion that if he's more aggressive and puts more bad pitches in play, he'll be of more benefit to the team is a false one. A walk will always increase the run expectancy in an inning. An out always decreases it.

Assuming that he does not swing at any pitches in a given at bat (the ultimate passive AB) and walks, the maximum number of pitches he can possibly see is six (4 balls + 2 strikes). So to eschew a walk in favor of swinging away to put the ball in play in that plate appearance, there's at least a 66% chance of the pitch he swings at being one that by definition is a bad one (a ball). The 66% figure doesn't even take into account that a called strike isn't automatically a hittable pitch either, so the odds that he'd be swinging at a bad pitch to hit could be 83% or 100% as well.

In his career, 68.3% of the balls Drew has put in play have resulted in an out (1.000 - his career BABIP .317). So as he is, he's making outs on about two of every three pitches he swings at and puts in play. That's taking as a given that every pitch he made contact on was one he deemed hittable (ignoring that some of those balls in play were probably either protective swings with 2 strikes or ones on which he was simply fooled). If you add in more swings and contact on pitches outside his "zone", I would think his BABIP would surely decrease as a result. I can't see that as a preferable choice for any hitter.

Which brings me to the assumption that he's consciously thinking "walk first" when he goes to the plate with runners on (or anytime for that matter). It isn't as though Drew is choosing between walking and knocking in a run (by being more aggressive). He's choosing between making an out and not making an out. I don't think changing his approach to one in which he becomes less proficient at not making outs is beneficial. In fact, I'd argue that would ultimately make him a less valuable hitter and his salary would be even more of an overpay than people think it is now (obviously, I'm firmly in the camp that his contract is not an overpay).

Up to that point Theo had never offered a contract as long as 5 years to any player. Knowing Soriano and Lee were off the market and no other team was looking for a RF bat, and contract that Drew would command, meant that Theo was in the driver’s seat. He then proceeds to offer the most years he had ever offered any player for more money than he had ever signed a player to. There was no need for it because there was no reason to rush, bid against yourself, and then overpay. All in the name of OBP? Please. Take a look at the following 5 year stretch that Nixon put up in his prime:

15 HR, 52 RBI, .270/.357
12 HR, 60 RBI, .276/.368
27 HR, 88 RBI, .280/.376
24 HR, 94 RBI, .256/.338
28 HR, 87 RBI, .306/.396

The most he ever made in a season was $7.5M and his career earnings are less than half the entire contract Drew was given. The career 162 games averages for Nixon and Drew are as follows:

Nixon: 20 HR, 82 RBI, .274/.364 – 12 seasons
Drew: 26 HR, 85 RBI, .283/.392 – 12 seasons

Nixon played a pretty good RF as well so you’re going to tell me that Drew is twice the player that Nixon was and is therefore worth twice the money? I’m not saying that Drew is a bum or that he isn’t a good player; I’m saying he’s overrated and not a great player.

At the risk of offending you, jalbs, this is about the worst argument I have ever heard from you.

2006:

Drew (age 30): 146 GP, 283/393/498, 20 HR, 126 OPS+
Trot (age 32): 114 GP, 268/373/394, 8 HR, 96 OPS+

2007-2009:

Drew: 386 GP, 276/390/485, 54 HR, 124 OPS+
Trot: 110 GP, 243/337/330, 4 HR, 77 OPS+

One player was done, and the other player remains productive. Yeah, I'd say Drew was worth 2x Trot Nixon.

Obviously my point went way over your head. I wasn't comparing Nixon's final years to what Drew was doing at that time. Obviously Nixon was done and Drew was in his prime. That would be an outrageous comparison. Try reading it again. I was saying that for Nixon's 12 year career that he pretty much averaged what Drew has done to this point in his 12 year career in looking at their 162 game averages, yet Nixon made half in his career of what Drew will make in just 5 years with the Sox (once the contract is done). Nixon played in the same era as Arod's, Hampton's, Mussina's, Manny's, etc bloated contracts. So how is it that Nixon was worth a mere $7.5M per year at his peak while Drew is worth double for pretty much the same production? Capiche? Drew should run for office when he is done playing because he seems to have the gift of making people think he is something he isn't.

I will freely admit I did not do this research, I am borrowing it from an astute poster at sonsofsamhorn.


Player A: 33 yrs old, 120 G, 497 PA, 67 R, 19 HR, 69 RBI, .288 AVG (2009 Salary = $14.4 M)

Player B: 33 yrs old, 123 G, 500 PA, 65 R, 16 HR, 60 RBI, .280 AVG (2009 Salary = $14.8 M)

Player C: 34 yrs old, 114 G, 400 PA, 57 R, 13 HR, 50 RBI, .272 AVG (2009 Salary = $14.2 M)

Player D: 33 yrs old, 137 G, 539 PA, 84 R, 24 HR, 68 RBI, .279 AVG (2009 Salary = $14.0 M)
----

Player A is the average of all 50 MLB position players who earned $10 million or more in 2009.

Player B is the average of all 19 MLB outfielders who earned $10 million or more in 2009.

Player C is the average of all 9 MLB outfielders that earned $10 million or more in 2009, who have played some right field.

Player D is J.D. Drew in 2009.


That doesn't even show OBP...it addresses some of the more "traditional" stats for which Drew usually gets criticized, and he stacks up in all of them with his peers in terms of position and salary. I think it puts the contract into perspective as well as, if not more so than more advanced and clunky stats like Fangraph's value figures based on WAR.

We can quibble over whether Theo could have or should have pulled the same move on Drew that he pulled on Varitek last winter and Beltre this winter and waited him out. But the fact remains that Drew was one of the best available players on the market that year, and teams were spending (in contrast to the last two years where most weren't). He was going to get a deal somewhere. It's not as though his alternative if the Sox changed their mind was a Abreu-like 1/$5M type deal. I know the prevailing opinion is that the Sox bid against themselves, but if they did wait him out and try to brow-beat him into a shorter or cheaper deal, how do we really know another team wouldn't have stepped in and sniped him out from under Theo's nose? Thing is, we can't ever know that.

I think it's a bit unfair to compare what Nixon made to what Drew makes. First, because the majority of Nixon's career with the Sox came before Theo was the GM. Theo only signed Nixon to one contract (his biggest too). Second, it was just a different era in general. Sure there's overlap, but there is a huge contrast between the way Theo and other "modern" GMs do business compared to most GMs just a decade ago. We're not even eight years removed from Billy Beane's A's exploiting the undervaluing of OBP being documented in Moneyball. That was sort of a watershed moment, shifting the paradigm a bit...of course hirings like Theo's and sabermetrics going a bit more "mainstream" helped that shift far more. But Nixon's career straddled that shift...with his prime coming on the wrong side of it.

That said, I think you're making less of an argument that Drew is overpaid and more of an argument that perhaps Trot Nixon was underpaid. Nixon did have some of the skills for which JD Drew is valued. However, he played the prime of his career for a GM that didn't appreciate those skills the way Theo does. Heck, he played the prime of his career in an era in which few to no GMs appreciated those skills the way Theo does. You probably could make the case that the 2001-2003 version of Trot Nixon would be a $12-14M a year player in 2010. I don't see how that is a clear indictment of JD Drew's contract though.

Your point did not go over my head. Your point was so far off topic that I didn't recognize it as a valid argument. We were talking about whether or not Theo overpaid for JD Drew. Believe it or not, career 162-game averages have less to do with it than recent production and projected future production. And comparisons to how much other, similar players were paid are far more meaningful than the ratio of (Contract)/(Trot Nixon Career Earnings).

If, in the winter of 2006/07 Trot Nixon still had a viable future as a starting major league outfielder, he would have gotten a much larger contract, and your ratio would have been much smaller. But, as good as he was from 2001-2003, Nixon was toast by the time he became a free agent, which is why he didn't get the big bucks. Capice?

OK so I'm off topic. Typical. Data from those that support either of your arguments is astute. Typical. Let's look at 2009. Is that on topic enough? Is it relevant; in the now???? I just want to make sure it’s valid and fair for our discussion.

JD Drew was his usual OBP-centric self in 2009 and amongst all OF with at least 400 AB he was 5th in OBP. According to his defenders there is great value in that. Let’s see how that shook out.

The value of his high OBP resulted in him being 40th in RBI amongst all OF with at least 400 AB and 29th in RS amongst all OF with at least 400AB. In 108 AB with RISP he hit .213. He had 452 AB, so a fourth of the time he had a chance to knock in at least 1 run and he hit just .213 with just 46 RBI. He did have a .399 OBP with RISP so all was not lost!

When forced to swing, i.e. the bases were loaded, let’s see how he did. He had 15 AB with the bases loaded and hit .133 with a .235 OBP. So basically what we have is an OFer who we don’t want swinging with RISP or the bases loaded (or coming to the plate for that matter) and it’s better if he looks for the walk when he’s in those situations because putting the ball in play wasn’t very fruitful.

Oh and for his career in late & close situations he hits .245 with 87 RBI…for his career. His OBP is .379 in those situations. Phew, thank goodness he is an OBP-centric player and is true to form.

Just for comparison Jack Cust had almost the same year as Drew in 2009 especially in the situations I highlighted above (RISP, late & close) and in final overall numbers (except for BA). He made a fifth of what Drew made last season ($2.8M). I will never be convinced that Drew’s minutely better production over Cust was worth 5 times more in salary.

Fine. You value RBI over OBP. You value the 15 PAs with bases loaded more than the 524 without.

You believe that Jack Cust, who is a DH/butcher, is directly comparable to JD Drew, who is a very good fielder, so all we need to do is look at their stats. You believe that 146 games (96 at DH) with the line of 240/356/417-24-70, 105 OPS+ is "almost the same" as 137 games (1 at DH) with the line of 279/392/522-24-68, 133 OPS+. And because that's so close, we should be comparing his salary as negotiated such as to avoid arbitration to that of JD Drew, who was on the open Free Agent market.

I don't only value the data that supports my argument, but I certainly only value data relevant to the argument. Sure, I think it's appropriate to look at what Trot Nixon did in his career, but I'm not going to do that and ignore the fact that his career was basically over in 2006. That fact is much more important to the discussion. "Hmmm, who do I want to sign for my right fielder? This guy who's still pretty good, or this guy who can no longer play baseball?" Why the F would I even continue considering Trot Nixon in this discussion? I bet Dwight Evans (24 HR, 85 RBI, 272/370 per 162 games over 20 seasons - basically the same player!) could have been signed for even less than Nixon, but I really don't think he was a viable option for the 2007 Red Sox, so I didn't bring him into the discussion.

Baseball economics are effed up enough as it is without comparing apples and oranges.

Jack Cust? That's the comparison now? Cust absolutely sucks defensively...he's horrendous. Defensively alone Drew's worth twice what Cust is. Also, Cust can't run well...he's a station to station baserunner at best. Drew is considered one of the best baserunners in the game. And I don't know what you are looking at to say he had almost the same year as Drew...Drew was far superior in all the slash stats last year, not just BA.

Cust 2009 .240/.356/.417/.773 - 25 HR - 70 RBI - 88 R - 185 K - 612 PA
Drew 2009 .279/.392/.522/.914 - 24 HR - 68 RBI - 84 R - 109 K - 539 PA


I just don't understand why or how you can portray being "OBP-centric" as something negative, regardless of situation. A high OBP means fewer outs recorded. If he has a high OBP with RISP, that means whether he's driving in runs himself or not, he's often giving someone else an opportunity to drive in runs too. In fact, he's giving the next guy in line a better opportunity, since he's on base too. That's a fundamental element of team scoring, isn't it? Keep the inning going, keep the line moving, etc. Opportunity "lost" by Drew walking creates more opportunities, better opportunities.

Edit: corrected Drew's 2009 K total. Thanks for the heads up Roaddie...too much jumping between tabs, I was bound to eff up something.

109 K's for Drew last year. 82 walks.

1. I never stated that they should have signed Nixon over Drew or that it was even a possibility. Obviously you still don't get what I was trying to convey. What I am saying is that Trot Nixon was deemed to be worth around $30M in his 12 year career which was played in the same era as Drew. To this point Drew has been deemed worthy of around $80M in his 12 year career. I say that over their careers they have been a similar player with Drew having the edge. Nixon may have been underpaid, but Drew has been overpaid IMO and isn't worth $50M more than what Nixon was worth.

2. Yes I value run production. Coupled with pitching and defense that's what wins ballgames. For all of the hype surrounding his high OBP it resulted in him being 40th in RBI amongst all OFers...not all batters... only OFers. For all of the value surrounding his high OBP and "giving the next guy in line a better opportunity, since he's on base too", he was 29th in RS amongst all OFers...not all batters...only OFers. Both similar numbers to Cust.

3. Drew was far superior to Cust? Drew accounted for 152 totals runs in 539 PA or .28 runs per PA. Cust accounted for 158 runs in 612 PA or .26 runs per PA. I'll take Drew over Cust every single time but fielding, base running, and OBP doesn't compute to 5 times more salary to me. Both of you think so and that's your prerogative.

4. Drew has obviously benefited from the draft hype he generated and more power to him for that. Had he been someone who was drafted in the middle to late rounds with no Boras, no pre-draft hype, no hold out, etc. he would be an after thought. He has had an injury riddled pretty average career with a high OBP. That's about it.

There are very good reasons for this:

1) Scott Boras negotiated a major league contract for Drew when he was drafted, therefore he was getting paid $1 million plus in his early career, wheras Trot was making minimums.

2) In 2004, Nixon signed an extension with the Red Sox for 3 years/$19.5 million that bought out the first two years of his Free Agency. Drew went to free agency after that year and got a 5/$55M with an opt-out clause. Had Nixon chosen to ride into free agency after the 2004 season like JD did, he likely would have gotten closer to Drew money. But probably less because a) he missed 2/3 of the 2004 season with injuries and b) he's two years older than Drew.

3) When both hit the market at the end of the 2006 season, Drew was coming off a season where he was healthy and productive, whereas Nixon was coming off a season where he was neither, and didn't look like a guy who had much of a future in the game. (Ref. the stats I showed above).

Timing has a lot to do with how much money a guy makes in baseball. Trot delayed free agency and wasn't a good ballplayer when he finally got there. Also, Trot's "12-year career" is really a nine-year career as a regular player, with two years as a rookie callup and one year as an emergency mid-year acquisition, for a total of 26 games. Drew's 12 year career includes one year as a rookie callup and 11 years as a regular. JD's got 250 extra games under his belt. Not truly equivalent.

And FWIW, when the two guys were comparable, when they were both arb-eligible, Trot came did OK:

2002 Trot $2.7M, JD $3.1M
2003 Trot $4.0M, JD $3.7M
2004 Trot $6.6M, JD $4.2M (Trot's arb contract prior to signing the extention, per Cot's)

Boo hoo for Trot Nixon, but I really don't think his career earnings have anything to do with whether or not JD Drew is overpaid.

Take a look at this chart. It is a list of all major league hitters who had at least 100 baserunners on in front of them in 2009, ranked by percentage of those runners that were driven in by the hitter.

JD Drew falls pretty much in the middle of the list, with a rate of 13.88% runners scoring out of 317 total runners on. Jack Cust, since he's been brought up in this, comes in well below Drew on the list at 12.16% of 370 total runners. So in fewer RBI opportunities, Drew drove in a higher percentage of runners on than Cust did in 2009.

Some other notables that fall below Drew on the list include: Vlad Guerrero (13.57% of 258), Derek Jeter (12.90% of 372), and Alfonso Soriano (12.68% of 276). I note Vlad because he's the epitome of the free-swinging, put the ball in play rather than settle for a walk style, and has been abnormally successful at it in his career. Jeter I include because he has always had a rep as a "clutch" hitter who comes through with the timely RBI. Soriano I throw in just because he's the one who got the biggest free agent contract when Drew was signed, and whether you want to acknowledge it or not, it had an influence on the negotiations of Drew's deal.

I don't point out this stat to say that Drew is excellent at driving in runs. He's decidedly average when it comes to plating existing base runners. He ranks 181st of 375 players on that list, so in the 51st percentile. I point it out to say that he's actually not bad at it either. Like in a lot of other skill areas, he's just average. That, IMO, is a good thing when it comes to putting a value on him as a player. He doesn't really do anything poorly. His "weaknesses" are still about average when compared to his peers around baseball. Where others players have weaknesses that actually detract from their overall value, like Jack Cust and his defense, Drew's weaknesses don't detract. At worst they're neutral in any value equations you want to create.

I think Jalbs is going to calculate Drew's DHOPE next.