How Much Are The Rays Saving On James Shields?
It has been two full seasons since James Shields signed his potential seven year, $44 million dollar contract. In reality, all that is guaranteed is four years and $11.25 million, but the way things look now, an option year or two is likely. The Rays way is all about getting value for dollars. We need value, but lack the dollars.
The Shields extension has been lauded in the sabermetric community as being one of the best deals in recent years. And it really is in terms of real dollars for production. Using WAR dollars, Shields has been worth $37.6 million dollars over the past two seasons while earning just $2.5. That's a fantastic value, but it's not "real" dollars.
James Shields will undoubtedly earn his contract. In fact, he already has. In his career, he has given the Rays $63 million dollars worth of production for $2.9 million dollars. If he maxes out the contract (years and dollars), his WAR value would be somewhere between $100-$150 million dollars.
But how many -- if any -- real dollars are the Rays saving?
I'm not usually one for estimations and assumptions, but for this post I use some simple ones. Let's toss out a few guidelines.
First, estimated WAR. In his full seasons (2007-2009), Shields has posted WAR of 4.5, 4.3, and most recently 4.1. For the first part of the estimation I'll assume the -0.2 WAR trend continues over the next few seasons. In the next portion, I'll use the standard -0.5 WAR adjustment.
Second, estimated salary. A few things for the seasons considered to be arbitration years. I used the 20/40/60% scale to estimate the amount of the raise. To get the salary amount I took the estimated number of WAR and used the 10% WAR escalating scale. Since 2009 actually happened, and we know Shields earned a 4.1 WAR, I'll use that as an example.
Let's take that 4.1 and multiply it by the value of one WAR, which is recognized as 4.4 in 2009. We get an estimated salary of $18.04. Since he would be arbitration 1 this off-season, we'll say that his salary should be 20% of that $18.04 million dollar estimate, or $3.6 million dollars. From there you can figure out the rest of the table.
|
Est1 |
WAR |
WAR Value |
Est. Salary |
Arb Raise |
|
2009 |
4.1 |
4.4 |
18.04 |
3.608 |
|
2010 |
3.9 |
4.8 |
18.72 |
7.488 |
|
2011 |
3.7 |
5.2 |
19.24 |
11.544 |
That's using the Shield trend of -0.2 WAR going forward. Here is the standard -0.5 WAR.
|
Est2 |
WAR |
WAR Value |
Est. Salary |
Arb Raise |
|
2009 |
4.1 |
4.4 |
18.04 |
3.608 |
|
2010 |
3.6 |
4.8 |
17.28 |
6.912 |
|
2011 |
3.1 |
5.2 |
16.12 |
9.672 |
Now that we have the estimated salaries, we can compare them to actual salaries. Another quick note here, Shields' contract maxes out at 2014. For the purpose of this exercise I'm buying out the final two seasons of the contract for the stated $1.5 million dollar buyout.
|
|
Est1 |
Actual |
Savings |
|
2010 |
3.6 |
2.5 |
1.1 |
|
2011 |
7.5 |
4.25 |
3.25 |
|
2012 |
11.5 |
8.5* |
3 |
|
Total |
22.6 |
15.25 |
7.35 |
|
|
Est2 |
Actual |
Savings |
|
2010 |
3.6 |
2.5 |
1.1 |
|
2011 |
6.9 |
4.25 |
2.65 |
|
2012 |
9.6 |
8.5* |
1.1 |
|
Total |
20.1 |
15.25 |
4.85 |
*Includes $7 million dollar base salary for 2012 + $1.5 million dollar buyout of future years.
Because of the extension Shields has earned $2.5 million dollars over the last two seasons. These seasons were team controlled, meaning the Rays basically could name their own price. Let's estimate (conservatively) that he would've earned $800k over those seasons and subtract that from the savings. Even with the conservative estimates of -0.5 WAR decline, and team controlled salary years, Shields's extension should save the Rays in the neighborhood of $4-6 million dollars. Of course, he could easily exceed these projections as well as come short. For most teams, the difference may not seem like a whole lot in terms of real dollars, but the Rays could do alot with an extra $5 million; also keep in mind the value aspect.
All in all, the Shields extension remains just another example of "ball on a budget."
0 recs |
18 comments
|
Comments
After researching the Shields deal and thinking about the ALE
These deals are not a luxury for the Rays but a necessity. Boston signed Smoltz and Penny last season and had the flexibility to drop them when they weren’t effective. Every dollar for the Rays has to count for the team to be successful.
Just read the Red Sox are interested in Kelvim Escobar. They can risk $2 or $3 million and have him not pan out. The Red Sox FO is right on par with the Rays to me, but they have room for error. The Rays on the other hand have to be deadly accurate with their moves.
www.draysbay.com
by Tommy Rancel on Nov 25, 2009 9:15 AM EST via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Thats about it
They have a very different job description than the Rays FO.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Nov 25, 2009 9:37 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He made 750K
The Rays take relatively inexpensive chances. If you go through 3 Isringhausens for the cost of one Escobar, you can probably find what they are hoping Escobar provides. It doens’t always work out that way, but its a likely scenario.
Follow Me on Twitter @FreeZorilla
by FreeZorilla on Nov 25, 2009 10:04 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
They were effective.
The Red Sox’s defense failed and for whatever reason they panicked and cut ship.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 25, 2009 10:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Cause they could afford to do so.
www.draysbay.com
by Tommy Rancel on Nov 25, 2009 10:53 AM EST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
It made their team worse.
Over 40 innings. That front office is too good to make such horrible decisions because of fan and media reaction to small sample sizes.
by R.J. Anderson on Nov 25, 2009 11:03 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Every FO makes some questionable decisions
The good ones learn from those mistakes. Thanks to Percival, Wheeler, Bradford, we’re unlikely to hand free agent relievers anything more than a one yr deal with an option.
www.draysbay.com
by Tommy Rancel on Nov 25, 2009 11:19 AM EST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
I just hope they don't get paralyzed by that
I would love to see J.P. get extended through Arb and a year of FA. I think he’s a real find and would hate to see him get ridic money in arby based on something as stupid as saves. I think it is silly to throw years at a reliever with a bunch of guaranteed money, but through stats and scouting, surely there are opportunities to lock up a stud.
I'm a writer.
by Andy Hellicksonstine on Nov 25, 2009 11:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't mean all relievers
Howell is young and a legit relief ace, but how many of those are available?
I’m talking about the Calero’s of the world. I want Calero to sign but anything more than a 1yr + option is too much.
www.draysbay.com
by Tommy Rancel on Nov 25, 2009 11:46 AM EST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
I know, I read you, I just don't want anyone to take what you are saying out of context that all deals
over a couple of years to relievers is foolish. There is a time and a place for everything.
I'm a writer.
by Andy Hellicksonstine on Nov 25, 2009 12:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just wanted to add that I do love me some James Shields
Underpaid, Underrated, but very good. Over the past three seasons only 2 AL pitchers had a WAR of 4 or greater in each season. Roy Halladay and James Shields. Their K/BB rates are very similar at the same age as well.
www.draysbay.com
by Tommy Rancel on Nov 25, 2009 1:24 PM EST via mobile reply actions 0 recs
You are forgetting to account for one thing though

That was worth at least another 500k in value, even if he missed. =)
by ChiBurbRaysFan on Nov 25, 2009 2:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Legends have been built on less
I'm a writer.
by Andy Hellicksonstine on Nov 25, 2009 4:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We need to get Garza on a similiar deal
Give me a CC long term deal, please!
by joeybw on Nov 25, 2009 7:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Then get him signed up with Shields agent
cause to my mind the credit for this deal (or in the agent’s case, blame) goes equally there.
by nyyfaninlaaland on Nov 25, 2009 8:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A question
The 10% annual bump on WAR value is a hypothethetical, no, thrown in at the development point of WAR?
Because player salaries in total aren’t rising nearly 10% per annum. Even in the numbers MLB provides. Seems to me this adjustment needs adjusting.
by nyyfaninlaaland on Nov 25, 2009 9:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
These WAR value analyses of contracts always drive me nuts
typically on this basis, players only earn around their value, or over, in FA seasons. The structure of baseball compensation rules and the market are what matter. Any good young player in their controlled years is going to look like a bargain absent injury. That’s no credit to mangement skill – it’s simply the rules of the payroll game.
That said, Shields contract was pne great deal. But as I intimated above, it takes 2 to tango. A team needs a willing player / agent team to execute such too. But the Rays FO has taken measured forward looking risks and deserve credit for that. Too few teams – the Indians being the originators of the approach in the 90’s – engage in the behavior. But some of it is also the position of the team – if you’re not contending a young player will get more opportunity to play, thus giving a better feel for the risk involved. The Longo deal was quite remarkable in the earliness of when it was struck – but again, this takes a willing player partner.
by nyyfaninlaaland on Nov 25, 2009 9:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 






















