Johnny Damon signs with Yankees

[sublime]

I don't think this is a terrible signing for the Yankees.

i dont either, when you compare it to the chan ho park signing.

its awful. period. you just cant look and say "well he will be good in 2005 and 2006" you have to look at the money he is getting and what he will produce over the life of the contract. its a [censored] signing, and if it was any other team in baseball who did it the laughing would be hard to stop.

[Pudge714]

The Yankess overpaid for a over the hill player with star power I am shocked.

[rwperu34]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think this is a terrible signing for the Yankees.

i dont either, when you compare it to the chan ho park signing.

its awful. period. you just cant look and say "well he will be good in 2005 and 2006" you have to look at the money he is getting and what he will produce over the life of the contract. its a [censored] signing, and if it was any other team in baseball who did it the laughing would be hard to stop.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or if you compare it with the Rafael Furcal signing. Or if you compare it with the A.J. Burnett signing. Or if you compare it with the Hideki Matsui signing. Or if you compare it with the Billy Wagner signing. Or if you compare it with the Washburn signing. Or if you compare it with the Giles signing.

You project him at 33.8 BRAR in 2006 at the age of 32. Let's say 31 BRAR in 2007 at 33. At age 34 project 27 and at age 35 project 23. That projects to 28.75 BRAR at $13M per year, 2.21 BRAR per $M. Definitely not terrible. Then you have to discount the crapiness of the end of the deal, since winning in 2006 is more important than winning in 2009. Any of the six top payrolls could have made this deal. In fact, any team in "win now" mode should have considered it, including your mighty Red Sox.

Then you have to look at the bottom line on this deal. The Yankees and Red Sox tied for the division last season. This deal makes the Yankees better and the Red Sox worse...signifincantly.

[sublime]

You project him at 33.8 BRAR in 2006 at the age of 32. Let's say 31 BRAR in 2007 at 33. At age 34 project 27 and at age 35 project 23.

bernie williams

32 52 brar
33 59
34 23
35 26

so damon loses 12% of his offense from 33 -34, and williams loses over 50%.........right...................

the deal sucks. the red sox didnt do it, becuase they run a team resposibly.

also, i did compare it with all the other signings.

here are my notes on furcal:

[ QUOTE ]
Furcal cashes in at 2.24 expected BRAR per million, However, he plays a premium position and apprently very well.

[/ QUOTE ]

giles:

61.6 expected BRAR @ 10m = 6 runs per million which is a GREAT DEAL, even if you factor in his age.

the fact that you even brought his name into this discussion puzzles me. his deal is the polar opposite of damons.

[Rubeskies]

Sublime: I agree with your statistical analysis about the Damon deal and such, but I would also factor in this.

Damon is a proven veteren, one who has handled the big stage brilliantly, has lots of postseason experience and he can most likely handle the pressure of New York. He will be good in the clubhouse and he was one of the emotional leaders of the Boston Red Sox over the last few years. They will miss at least that much from him on a team that is losing veterans and gaining youth. These are some of the positives that Damon brings over an unproven player or one with no postseason experience (a la Reed).

That said, I don't think it is a great deal, but it is better than you are making it out to be IMO.

[rwperu34]

[ QUOTE ]
You project him at 33.8 BRAR in 2006 at the age of 32. Let's say 31 BRAR in 2007 at 33. At age 34 project 27 and at age 35 project 23.

bernie williams

32 52 brar
33 59
34 23
35 26

so damon loses 12% of his offense from 33 -34, and williams loses over 50%.........right...................



[/ QUOTE ]

Nice to pick one player and compare Damon to him. I choose Tim Raines. He would have been projected at 35.8 going into age 32 and produced 33.5 from 32-35.

I've got a better idea. Let's figure a normal decline. There is a chance that Damon is still producing at his current level at the age of 35. There is a chance he'll be out of baseball. When I say 23 BRAR at age 35, I'm assuming a slow decline. The problem is, there is rarely a slow decline. So 23 would have to be an average of all of the possible outcomes. If you want to provide some stats on the EV of a players decline, I will listen.

[ QUOTE ]
Furcal cashes in at 2.24 expected BRAR per million, However, he plays a premium position and apprently very well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, Furcal is a better signing. But to defend the Furcal signing you can't say the Damon signing is:

[ QUOTE ]
awful. period.

[/ QUOTE ]


or

[ QUOTE ]
by year 3 this deal will be horrific not just bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

or

[ QUOTE ]
"3rd grade math would tell you the 'deal' is horrible"

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
giles:

61.6 expected BRAR @ 10m = 6 runs per million which is a GREAT DEAL, even if you factor in his age.

the fact that you even brought his name into this discussion puzzles me. his deal is the polar opposite of damons.


[/ QUOTE ]

It's about decline. Of course if Giles continues to produce at his current level, this is a great deal for the Pads. I just don't understand how Damon can be expected to decline significantly when he will be 35 at the end of his contract yet Giles will continue to produce when he will be 35 at the begining. In my mind, Giles is a bigger risk at the end of the contract, but a better value at the begining. When you weigh everything together, you can't say the Giles signing is THAT much better. Unless of course you are in "win now" mode and discount greatly the crapiness at the end of the contract [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[sublime]

Or if you compare it with the Giles signing.

lol

wait

Or if you compare it with the Giles signing.

yeah, lol

[Voltron87]

I like the deal, we have a pretty big hole in CF and damon can fill it for 1-2 years. He should have a .800+ OPS and he can cover a lot of ground, he obviously won't be an MVP candidate but he will definitely do a good job. He can be our leadoff hitter and provide some good speed on the bases. Honestly, he can bring speed to CF and hold down the fort defensively, and his OPS the last two years has been over 800 and should stay that way. That works very well.

[sublime]

I like the deal,

no, you like the fact that you get to have a good CF next year.

3rd grade math would tell you the 'deal' is horrible.

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
I like the deal,

no, you like the fact that you get to have a awesome CF next year.

3rd grade math would tell you the 'deal' is horrible.

[/ QUOTE ]

he can hit in a leadoff spot (since jeter is not a true "leadoff hitter") and play defense. that is all the team really needs right now, they dont need him to be as good as Arod or giambi.