There exists a roughly 10% chance that Matt Tuiasosopo out-produces Adrian Beltre in 2010 (some of the runs are from defense too, y'know) and another 15% chance that their value is comparable...with 3/4 of the odds going against Tui...possibly strongly.
I would put my midline bet at something like:
BELTRE - 2.0 WAR (.270/.330/.460, +10 defensive runs)
TUI: - 0.5 WAR (.250/.310/.420, 0 defensive runs)
I also think the odds of Beltre accepting arbitration depend entirely on how happy he was as a Mariner in 2009 vs. how much he wants a multi-year contract right away. Accepting arby means he gets a 1-year deal, which is always stressful, but maybe in Beltre's mind, he's still only 31 and will get another crack at that second multi-year deal in a year and a shot at playing the whole season healthy and pumping up his value. If I were in Beltre shoes...having just had one of the most fun seasons of my life despite being hurt for most of it, I would be weighing how muchh Safeco hurts my future vs. how much joy playing for the Mariners is bringing me. I would probably think rather confidently that I had other years to get the multi-year contract signed. I would accept arbitration. But Beltre's agent is (gulp) Scott Boras. Which changes the equation. Boras doesn't care about happiness. He's pure evil incarnate.
So what are the real odds that Beltre accepts arbitration? That would depend on what you think the odds are that Boras gets hit by a flaming meteorite.
In that universe...where Beltre and Tui are very uinlikely to be even particularly close to even in value and where Beltre is unlikely to accept arby...it's stupid NOT to offer it to him.
=== John Benson Dept. ===
Benson, a CPA, started running the $4.5m / WAR type calculations in the 1980's, but he always emphasized a key principle: "don't estimate inflation. Calculate it."
What he meant is, if your specific keeper-roto league had 100 wins in the winter FA pool and $1 billion* to spend, then FA wins that year were not worth $4.5m. That year, each win was worth $10m.
The Mariners, with Lackey and Scutaro and Bay and Crawford and a ton of guys available, have to be more specific than to figure a WAR as being worth $4.5m. If Lackey is $15m and they project 4.5 WAR, wins are not worth $5m apiece to them. They're worth $3.5m apiece.
For Benson, the $4.5m / WAR figure is useless until you've calculated it for that year's player pool, and dollars available.
Right now, I think that figure will be a lot lower than $4.5m per win this winter.
.
=== Dr's Diagnosis ===
The second opinion here is: the starting point that the article provided -- the paradigm -- is extremely valuable.
I personally would plug in different numbers -- a $4 to $10m possible loss, vs. a Tuiasosopo or Scutaro or Lackey or Pena (-prospects) scenario, vs. $1m assets lost on the draft pick (since I'll spend the #40 pick money on my other top-10 guys).
So from where I sit, the ROI on a Beltre offer is overwhelmingly against offering. Flipping a coin, my $4-10m against your $1m, isn't exactly an Amarillo Slim edge in my favor.
........
Not that this paradigm would be my main one. I'd want to be aware of it, but wouldn't prioritize it.
It is interesting that real GM's (as far as I can tell) seldom offer arbitration to players they genuinely don't want on their teams, unless that coin flip is more like 5% than 50%.
In my opinion, most fans seriously overvalue #16-#45 draft picks. They're worth something, but not as much as fans believe.
.
=== Beltre His Ownself ===
Jemanji sort of scratched his beard thoughtfully when Bill James comp'ed AB to Hall of Famer Brooks Robinson. Bill had a point.
As a general rule, I don't think a nice mitt means much compared to 40 homers. But Brooksie and Adrian are such amazing fielders that in their specific cases, you're glad to have them.
I just think that Safeco is a terrible field for Beltre, and that if he stays here, it's only going to get worse.
In Texas or Wrigley or Fenway, the guy might make the HOF for all I know. In Safeco, he's just a liability. Move on, for his sake and ours.
.
=== Comeuppance Dept. ===
Remember, we all have 700 or 800 or 900 of the 1,000 Total Knowledge light bulbs off. :- )
As solid as my math looks to me personally -- that it would be absolutely foolish to offer Beltre arbitration -- it won't surprise me in the least if Capt Jack turned around and offered it.
Maybe Zduriencik -- who knows Beltre personally -- estimates a 5% chance of Beltre accepting, rather than our 50%. Maybe he sees something wrong with the figures I plugged in. Or with my assumptions about the outside-the-box considerations.
Maybe Zduriencik will offer Beltre arbitration. But the opposite decision sure looks like a forced variation to me.
My $0.02,
Dr D
Comments
Then of course you offer him arb.
Boras is canny enough to put off FA one year, if Beltre's horrible 2009 is going to slash his FA market value.
....................
It doesn't do us any good to simply gauge Tui's chances to be better than Beltre. We're talking about win-per-DOLLAR.
If Tui's worth 0.5 wins, free, and Beltre's worth 2.0 wins, $13m, then Beltre is costing you $9m per marginal win.
I was discussing value (absent of monetary concerns) because the club has the money to spend regardless and needs to find offensive wins from somewhere. If you play Tui, Moore and Saunders all year, the club is not going to win ANYthing and they're also not going to be able to spend all 35 million they'll have after they re-sign all of their arb-eligible guys including Felix.
Well this comes from one of the few Beltre fans left, so FWIW...
AB's defense will be there, as we all know. Much of the agruement comes down to whether you believe that Safeco has gotten into AB's head, or if the injuries will continue...OR if AB can finally have a healthy year. The $4 mil loss Dave was a worst case, not his guess at what he believed AB would be worth.
Also, the Mariners have a LONG HISTORY of apeasing MLB, and thus the M's normally draft players according to the slot money - not towards talent. For example, one of the reasons that the M's passed on Miller and Linecum was that Morrow was roughly the same talent but would be an easy sign for the slot money. While we can name a couple of exceptions, like Tui, there are many more examples of highly talented players the M's passed over in the past drafts. Thus I highly doubt the M's would spread out the extra money of not having a supplemental pick on signing better players in the draft.
1. I agree with that 100% -- that Beltre's defense locks in a huge fraction of his value as a given.
2. Perhaps you're right. Maybe the -$4m was offered as a worst case.
2a. Although it was still used as the basis of an argument that offering arb is the 'correct' decision.
3. Point well taken that the Mariners don't like to do things that the commish's offer frowns on.
3a. But remember that the Mariners don't have to do that, to get better players in the draft.
..................
You don't have to take a Matt Tuiasosopo in the 3rd round, possibly annoying the powers-that-be, in order to spread money around. No need to take a 'splash' signability slide to leverage the draft with extra money.
................
The difference between guys like Nicholas Franklin, Stephen Baron, Kyle Seager -- and alternatives to them -- are subtle. In many cases in the top ten, $100,000 or less can be the difference in signing a superior alternative.
Many times, at the #113 overall, a small difference in money is the difference between getting the #80 guy on your board or the #102, and the Commish's office doesn't care about that.
.................
All that said, do we really think that Zduriencik & co. would pass on a signability slide if they thought they could sign him?
Good post Rain!
Doc,
You are completely right when it comes to the 2nd round and beyond. A couple $100K here and there can make a huge difference in who you can sign or not sign. However, I do not think the M's would ever in the past have spent an extra $500K+ on a 1st or sandwich pick. Further, I'll agree that none of us know what Howard will let Z do in the next draft when it comes to any sliding player asking for more than slot money.
As far as AB, I want the M's to offer ARB to AB so we may keep him. Obviously reading many others on many sites - USSM, LL, Brock & Salk, etc..., I really doubt that Boras will allow AB to even consider signing a 1 year deal since Boston and Philly are already kicking the the tires.
I don't think Boras will perceive the feared outcome that Doc mentions...I don't think he'll perceive that Beltre can get more in 2010 for sure. I think Beltre is already being OFFERED 3 year deals worth 10 mil per by big market teams that need a 3B. So...offering arb at that point is a no-brainer.
Once you have that information, that Beltre will be offered large deals elsewhere, then the chance of his accepting drops way down and you can offer arb.
Offering it when you see his chances of accepting as 50%, as was the case at Fangraphs, is one thing; offering it when you assess the chances at 5% is a different conversation.
Supp picks are valuable, no doubts there.
I'd lean towards not offering arbitration.
Its more likely that Beltre signs elsewhere (due to Safeco and other interested buyers), but the risk of Beltre accepting arbitration vs the reward of the supp pick isn't worth it in my mind.
$10mil is going to buy a lot this offseason. Even a 30% shot at Beltre accepting wouldn't be worth it for me.