The 44 Worst Contracts in the MLB

[Fatter than Joey]

I think it's likely that the Astros will have overpaid by $20M, and I think it's highly possible that they will end up overpaying closer to $30-$35M by the end of the deal.

 

That is all very reasonable -- but as it stands today -- Lee's contract has not been a bad one -- you could very well end up being right, but it's all a lot of guesswork and assumptions at this point. I would certainly agree that Lee's contract is "potentially problematic" -- but I don't see it as bad at this point. I'd rather give Lee and the Astros the benefit of the doubt, until things go bad.

 

On the flip side -- I think that the Riske deal has been a bad one for the Brewers -- but it certainly could get better by what Riske does in the next 2 years -- but I don't think it is fair to call it a "good" deal at this point.

 

There are clearly contracts that are bad in the here and now -- Andruw Jones for example... Torii Hunter's is another one that is bad as well.

[bobskube]

Fangraph is wrong on this one. Hall's value was negative last season. He was -5.7 games, the worst on the Brewers. He was overpaid.

From what source? Checking another source(Dial's I think it is) I see him coming out at 4.8 runs above replacement. There is absolutely no way he was -5.7 games, I could buy runs but certainly not games.

My fault, VORP -5.4. Amongst the worst in the league and THE worst on the Brewers.

[kramnoj]

My fault, VORP -5.4. Amongst the worst in the league and THE worst on the Brewers.

 

But that is offense only, so it doesn't represent the total contribution of Hall.

[3Putt]

Hey, we could have used Carlos Lee the last couple years. The guy is an RBI machine. His stats with RISP beat anything we've seen from Braun & Prince. Sure he might fall off as he gets older but so far he's continued to be one of the best run producers in baseball. We should be so lucky as to have his so-called terrible contract.

 

As for Hall, his poor baserunning and lack of hustle cancel out the rare great defensive play. He has a slow first step and doesn't react well to balls hit slowly in front of him. His range was overrated when he was in centerfield and it still is now that he's in the infield.

[endaround]

No his good hustle, good first step and strong arm cancel out the bad throws he makes

[Ennder]

My fault, VORP -5.4. Amongst the worst in the league and THE worst on the Brewers.

Yeah that is offense only. His defense was around 4-5 runs above average for 3B and then when you apply the 3B positional adjustment he ends up with slight positive value. If his offense rebounds even a little bit he will be worth his contract this year.

[endaround]

But thats assuming he plays enough for his defensive value to be realized. If he ends up in a platoon thats not going to happen.

[3Putt]

Apparently errors mean absolutely nothing. He was leading the league in them before being platooned. I realize it's not the only stat out there but it's hard to believe the player leading the league in errors is above average defensively.

[kramnoj]

I realize it's not the only stat out there but it's hard to believe the player leading the league in errors is above average defensively.

 

Errors are only given when a player is close to a ball and the play isn't made. If a player doesn't even get to the ball, they won't get charged with an error. It's not that unusual for a player with a higher error total to be better defensively than other players at the same position (and the converse would be true as well).

 

For a lot of fans, the only thing they know about a defensive player is errors, and they may look at fielding percentage. They couldn't tell you how many plays a player makes in a game, how that compares to other players at their position, and how that may be influenced by the pitcher on the mound.

[Ennder]

Errors dont' mean anything more to me than any other defensive metric. It is all about total plays made, not which missed plays happened to be called an error.

 

Reynolds, Encarnacion and Cantu all had lower fielding percentages than Hall. Aramis Ramirez wasn't much better either. Only 7 3B in baseball had a better UZR/150 than Hall.

[3Putt]

Thanks for the elaboration kramnoj & Ennder. I get it, I really do but behind the Nth degree of stats you cite is a player playing the game. I watched almost every game Hall played last year and before. You'll never convince me this guy is above average defensively. In this case this simplest of stats (errors, fielding %) are right. He was below average defensively in 2008 as he's consistantly been from the start of his career.

[Ennder]

The numbers aren't above average, they are above replacement level. Same with the VORP hitting stat. An average player would get paid more than Hall does. He doesn't have to be average to earn his salary.

 

Having said that I think Hall is an average defensive 3B right now. He struggled early in the year but that is to be expected with a position move. This year I'd expect average or slightly above average defense out of him with most likely below average hitting.

[kramnoj]

He was below average defensively in 2008 as he's consistantly been from the start of his career.

 

Think about what this means. If you are going to evaluate Hall based on your observation, then you have to compare him to all players at his position. That doesn't mean that you can just compare it to the games you watch. You have to compare it to every game that player makes. There is no way that anybody can truly evaluate a player based on the plays they observe and compare them to all players at their positions.

 

You can compare their tools. You can compare the plays that you observed. But at some point, if you want to be fair in your evaluation, you need to rely on objective comparisons of all the plays that are made.

 

Another thing to keep in mind is that one year of defensive data is not defining of a players ability. It only is meant to describe how that player did in that year. Think of it like batting average. BA can vary widely year from year. BA from one year wouldn't encompass the players ability. Just their performance in a single year.

[bobskube]

Did you guys watch Hall last year? I mean, really? His defense was not good to the human eye no matter what stat you bring up. His offense was offensive. He is selfish and does not like to make adjustments except for his stances. One of the coaches told me he was an "excuse maker."

 

I know for a fact that Doug was trying to package Hall in that Yankee trade too. Too bad that Kei Igawa had to be involved in it. I guess Hall is actually better than someone.

[kramnoj]

His defense was not good to the human eye no matter what stat you bring up. His offense was offensive. He is selfish and does not like to make adjustments except for his stances. One of the coaches told me he was an "excuse maker."

 

How can you separate your bias against him as you demonstrate here from your ability to evaluate his defense objectively? You already have the conclusion that you don't like him, so it's only natural for you to frame your observation of him to meet your belief of him.

[TooLiveBrew]

Hall reminds me of Weeks sometimes in that he'll make a play that will have your jaw on the floor, but he olés so many balls hit at him that he's not a great defender (at 3B in Bill's case). I'd guess Hall could handle 2B about as well if not better than Weeks.

[sheetskout]

What's the worst Brewer contract of all time?

 

Suppan? Higuera? Hammonds? Hall?

 

 

I'm sure there's a Gantner in there somewhere too....

[Ennder]

The absolute worst way to judge defense is by a random fans personal opinion from watching the games. There is so much bias in that method that is borderline useless. You want to take 1000 fans opinions than sure it is useful, you want to take the opinion of a scout who gets paid to judge defense that is fine too. But some random fan saying you are an idiot for thinking someone is good or bad defensively is how Jeter wins gold gloves.

[TheCrew07]

Why is observation the worst way? Why should range be rated so highly by defensive metrics when the fewest defensive plays will come at the extremes?

 

In my opinion the team would be much better off with another Hardy type who "turns outs into outs" than Hall. I'm right there with those that believe Hall is a crappy defender, he's the same player everywhere, lots of flash and little substance. 3B was not a new position to him, he had played their in the past. He's my poster boy for the flaws in defensive metrics... he boots way too many routine plays and his arm is too inaccurate to be a plus defender yet he's consistently rated as such due to his range.

[Ennder]

Hardy is a very good defensive SS so yeah I'd rather have another Hardy. My point is just saying I've watched him play and if you think he is good you are being silly is not a very convincing argument. I've watched Hall play defense for 4 years and I think his range makes up for his other gaffes overall, he was below average early in the year and average or above average late in the year. That doesn't make you an idiot, it doesn't make you wrong, it doesn't make me wrong. It just shows that trying to judge these things by opinions of a random fan is not a good way to do it.

 

There are still to this day people who don't think Hardy is good defensively either. Even though most metrics love him and tango's scouting page shows him well above average as well. Perception isn't always reality.

[kramnoj]

Why is observation the worst way? Why should range be rated so highly by defensive metrics when the fewest defensive plays will come at the extremes?

 

Because the observation is made by people who are ruled by emotion, watching an event they care about. It would be incrediby difficult to ignore all the vested emotion from the observation of the play.

 

Also because the average fan watching a game doesn't watch enough other games to truly know what "average" is at that position across baseball at any given time.

 

he boots way too many routine plays and his arm is too inaccurate to be a plus defender yet he's consistently rated as such due to his range.

 

I may be misunderstanding you, but Hall doesn't rate well in UZR because of his "range". He rated as above average last year because, of all players who played 3B last year, Hall made more plays than the average player. UZR doesn't differentiate if those plays are rangy, or if they are hit right to him.

 

It's also important to realize that Hall being above average last year doesn't mean he is an above average 3B. It just means that he performed above average last year. In his career, Hall has played 197 Games at 3B and is rated as 4.6. But people who study defensive stats say that you need 2 full years of fielding data to equal one year of offensive data. And those people would say that you probably want two years of offensive data to get a better picture of a player than one year. So you almost need 4 years of defensive data to get a true definition of a players ability. And then there's the probability that any given player is going to change physically over 4 years. So defensive data is best used to determine their value after the fact.

[3Putt]

I agree that observation alone would not be a good metric. My point is that if you watch the vast majority of games you should have a meaningful sample size so that observation can be included along with hard data as one of your metrics. In the case of Hall hard metrics alone would not tell you that he stands at home plate admiring every ball he hits near the warning track or beyond. As far as viewing other 3B for comparison if I'm watching Hall at 3B I'm also watching his counterpart at 3B. Some players are bad (or good) enough where observation can tell you quite a bit. Again, sample size is important and hard data to avoid complete bias is also. Good discussion!

[cwolf2012]

You'll never convince me this guy is above average defensively.

Not to try and offend you or anything, but this is not a good mindset. You should always be willing to consider an argument. Objective analysis certainly has its merits, and to completely dismiss it based upon subjective observation is willful ignorance.

 

EDIT: For another example of someone who has a lot of errors, but is widely considered one of the best defenders in the world, look at Alcides Escobar. He has had 20+ errors in each of the last 3 season in the minors. There hasn't been a single scout or person who I've seen that said that he was anything but spectacular with the glove.

 

Now, am I saying that Hall is as good as Escobar, of course not. But there's certainly comparisons to be had in terms of range causing more errors.

[3Putt]

You'll never convince me this guy is above average defensively.

Not to try and offend you or anything, but this is not a good mindset. You should always be willing to consider an argument. Objective analysis certainly has its merits, and to completely dismiss it based upon subjective observation is willful ignorance.

I'm not basing it on subjective observation. I'm basing it on the fact that he led the league in errors before being platooned. That evidence is supplemented by visual evidence which stats can't completely capture. Example: Weeks defensive stats look deceptively good because failing to turn double plays isn't reflected. However those that watched the games last year understood it was a weakness (no pun intended). Perhaps "you'll never convince me" was a poor choice of words on my part but I find it hard to watch long stretches of poor play only to have it described as above average. If you read back you'll see Ennder clarified that he was describing "above replacement level" and not "above the major league average". I can stretch enough to buy that.

[3Putt]

What's the worst Brewer contract of all time?

 

Suppan? Higuera? Hammonds? Hall?

 

 

I'm sure there's a Gantner in there somewhere too....

I'd have to say Higuera. Didn't he get injured almost immediately after getting his big contract?