Melvin/Attanasio lessons learned from Suppan/Hall

[adambr2]

Okay, I don't expect Mark A. and Melvin to publicly admit that these contracts were a mistake. But the fact of the matter is, we have over $20M tied up next year in 2 guys, one that is a #5 pitcher at best, and one that probaly wouldn't even have a roster spot if it weren't for his contract. Most teams have a bad contract or two, but a franchise in Milwaukee cannot afford to have 25% of their payroll tied up to it. Again, I don't expect any public regret, but I do expect that Melvin and Mark A. have or will sit down, talk, and say, "Okay, we messed up. How can we avoid this in the future?"

 

Lessons learned:

 

- If a franchise is going to make a big long-term signing just to make a move to put themselves on the radar, it needs to be a worthwhile signing. It would be easier to stomach Suppan's struggles if they were very unforeseen, but the fact is that he has not drastically underperformed his career averages. We bought high, and his regressions weren't all that surprising. They came with age and playing in front of a worse defense than he had in St. Louis. Big-time FA deals like this are fine, but the Brewers can't afford a big one for a mediocre starting pitcher like the Yankees or Mets could. When they pick their spots, they need to count. If you're going to shell out a big deal for $10M+ on a starter, go ahead and spend the extra $3M a year or so for one that is a very good bet as a #1/#2 starter, not just an innings eater. It'll be worth it in the long run.

 

- Let Melvin do his job, Mark. I know as the owner, it's tempting to intervene, but it's pretty well assumed that Melvin would have been reluctant at best to pull the trigger on a Suppan deal if Antanassio had not gotten involved. Don't be easily wooed by the mirage of a great playoff performance. If the pitching market is down that offseason and you're going to have to overpay as a result, maybe it's not a good offseason to try to make a move for that area.

 

- Be wary of a good sporadic single season performance. I have less of a problem with the Hall signing, because Hall had a good 2005, and improved in 2006. Still, the numbers suggested that he was probably overachieving a bit and was due for a bit of a falloff in '07 and beyond. I'm sure none of us thought it would be this bad, but again Hall is a guy where we gave him a big deal at his peak and are forced to bite the bullet now.

 

Bottom line, you're never going to be able to get it right 100% of the time. But you do your best to avoid buying high. Long-term contracts for young guys are a great thing for a franchise like this one, but pick and choose your spots wisely. Braun was a fantastic signing. Gallardo would be a much safer bet than Hall was, with his proven talent in the minors and very established likelihood as an up and coming ace. I don't think anybody thinks Gallardo is overachieving at this point, but many thought Hall was in '06. Even Weeks, at this point, I wouldn't have a problem with, because we'd be buying low and the deal wouldn't kill us if it didn't work out.

 

We'll be okay, and we'll be sitting much better after 2010. I just hope that we take a look at obviously two of the problems that are plaguing us right now and how we can avoid mistakes on this large of a scale in the future.

[adambr2]

Also, the lessons learned are the exact reasons why I didn't include Riske in the list -- I don't think he was a bad signing and don't blame Melvin for that one. At the time, Riske was a very established AL reliever with a track record of success. He had 5 prior years of proven success. There was no reason at the time to believe that we were getting anything but a good reliever for less than closer money. Also, the Riske signing was not one that would be very detrimental to the franchise if it didn't work out. Sure, it sucks that we owe him $4.5M next year, but it's not an overwhelming problem, nothing that really hinders us from making a big move somewhere. $4.5M is just a little painful, $12.5M and $8.4M alter the scope of your planning.

 

Basically, the Suppan signing had a ton of red flags. The Hall signing had a few. The Riske signing really had none. That's why I don't really consider it a big mistake, even though it hasn't worked out so far.

[JoeHova]

Fangraphs has Suppan as below replacement level for the past 2 seasons, and that's before Monday's debacle. They surprisingly have him being worth almost $11 million in the first year of his contract, so at least he earned his money for 1 year. $11 million or so of value in exchange for 4 years and $42 million is not what you want to see though, and he's at work rapidly deducting value from that $11 million he earned in 2007.

 

In fact, Fangraphs has Suppan and Looper as the 2 worst (qualified, which is .3 innings pitched per team game) pitchers in baseball this season. Signing guys who you hope to be average at best to full value contracts does not appear to be smart.

 

Suppan will be paid $14.5 million next season ($12.5 million in salary and a $2 million buyout of his 2011 option). At least Looper's deal is up after this year and he only requires a $750,000 buyout for next year. Hall is on the hook for $8.9 million next year (including 2011 buyout) and Riske is owed $5 million (including 2011 buyout). That is a lot of totally wasted cash, but even the best GM's will end up wasting some money. $30 million in wasted money out of an $80 million payroll is a higher proportion than you would like to see though. Hopefully the team plans on bumping up the payroll a little next year to try to compensate a little for these mistakes. At least all the bad contracts are over after 2010 (actually, all of the team's contracts except Braun's are over after 2010).

[SoCal Brew Crew Fan]

The likely have insurance on Riske. Not so lucky on Hall or Suppan.

[PeaveyFury]

They surprisingly have him being worth almost $11 million in the first year of his contract, so at least he earned his money for 1 year. $11 million or so of value in exchange for 4 years and $42 million is not what you want to see though, and he's at work rapidly deducting value from that $11 million he earned in 2007.

 

Yeah, those here that said that Suppan would be ok early in the contract but horrible later on were absolutely correct.

[TracyThom]

What scares me is that there are people on this board who want to trade for Jarrod Washburn, and then sign him to a 3-4 year deal worth 7 million a year. Washburn is 106-106 with a 4.03 ERA for his career. That's almost identical numbers as Jeff Suppan when we signed him a few years back.

[brewmann04]

Suppan was Mark first Big SplASH that he wanted to show the Fans he was a serious owner. It did blew up in his face especially the Length of the deal but i understand why he did that. Hopefully lessoned learned.

[Invader3K]

It's hard to blame Melvin that much for Hall. He had two good years in a row, and he had improved each year. It's hard to imagine that a guy in his mid 20's (at that point) was going to regress so badly in just a couple years. I mean, he's not even 30 yet and has just completely fallen off as far as production. Plus, while I realize his contract is somewhat of a handcuff from making moves, it's not like it was the most abysmal contract ever. Only owed $8 million or so next year, so I don't think you can really blame that for lack of future moves this off-season.

 

As far as Suppan, they needed a steady pitcher badly at that point. I don't know how much influence Attanasio had...I'm sure some, since he wined and dined Soup before the signing. However, if Melvin really thought it was going to turn out this badly, he should have edged Attanasio away. I admit I liked the signing at the time, as it was nice to see the Brewers going to free agency to address a serious need. However, in retrospect it's obvious they should not have made the move.

 

The prospect of Soup being on this staff again next year is down right scary. I seriously wonder if they might either trade him for next to nothing, or just DFA the guy. He just isn't keeping the team in games on any consistent basis anymore.

[naivin]

There is no question those two contracts pretty much crippled Doug Melvin, bot in th eoff season, and when it came to looking for ways to improve the team before the trade deadline this year. But, he made his own bed and is lying in it now. They've got ~ $20M, or roughly 25% of the total payroll tied up in two guys who produce nothing, this year, and again next year. They have negative trade value, and that money is on the books no matter what.

 

There may have been legitimate reasons for making those mistakes, but they were mistakes none the less, and they have hamstrung this team's ability to make changes/improvements.

[fondybrewfan]

Well heres hoping they don't make the same mistakes after the 2010 year because they are going to have boatloads of money to spend. And (Fingers Crossed) we should get a nice wave if prospects in 2011 so they might be able to go big on a good FA or extend Fielder.

 

The only signings I haven't liked are Suppan and Gagne. I didn't hate the Suppan signing but I didn't exactly like it either. I didn't mind that we took a risk on Gagne but $10M seems like a bit much.

[Invader3K]

Yeah, but at least Gagne was only for one season. They had to overpay a bit to get him to sign a one year deal. It was a gamble that didn't pay off, but I think it was worth the risk, even though he didn't pan out.

[jeffy]

$20 million per year was what they offered CC and he signed for, what, about $25 million per year? So money wise we are throwing away nearly enough for a CC Sabathia...not to say that signing him for 7 years would have been a good idea, just putting that $20 million in perspective.

[RyDogg66]

If anyone should have learned a lesson from Hall it is Corey Hart and other arby and pre-arby players. Hall accepted a longer deal buying out his arby and some FA years and he struck gold now that he stinks. Hart decided he didnt want the security and wanted to go year to year and it looks like it is going to bite him in the backside. I know players dont expect to fail or decline, but it is possible, Hall and Hart have shown that. Perhaps people like Braun and Longoria arent as crazy as some think for signing those quick long term deals. Gallardo should take notice, as one arm injury would pretty much ruin his chance for a big payday.

[MJLiverock]

The problem with Hall was there was no position for him if the team planned on the Braun, Hardy, Weeks, infield. He was the one extra piece who may have had value in a trade to improve the pitching situation rather than lock up to keep around.

[jeffy]

If anyone should have learned a lesson from Hall it is Corey Hart and other arby and pre-arby players.

 

Perhaps people like Braun and Longoria arent as crazy as some think for signing those quick long term deals. Gallardo should take notice, as one arm injury would pretty much ruin his chance for a big payday.

This is very true, players are taking a big risk when they turn down a certain fortune in the hopes of an even bigger fortune later. Another example is Ben Sheets, back when he signed his contract and this was followed by multiple injuries.

 

Not many of these guys are smart enough to realize that there is not much that $45 million, for example, can not buy, as Braun put it and that the big money is all just projections as Braun also said.

[brewmann04]

Thankfully Hart did not take the Brewers Offer.

[TuesdaysWithRillo]

Just about every team has dead money on their payroll, and a simple solution to the issue would be to imitate the NFL's policy: If you don't perform, you get cut and your base salary is gone.

[adambr2]

It would be a helpful solution for sure, but not one that the powerful MLBPA would ever agree to.

[monty57]

Good post adam, and I too hope our organization learns from all of its mistakes (and its successes, too). One point on Suppan's contract; many posters who were against the Suppan signing at the time were against it because it would likely mean that we wouldn't have money to re-sign Sheets when his contract was up. They were right. However, if we hadn't signed the deal we did, would we have signed Sheets to and extension, and now be stuck paying Sheets $17-18MM to sit home and nurse an elbow that may never be the same?

 

Don't get me wrong, I wish we had $12-14MM to find a replacement for Suppan next season rather than paying him to pitch, but I understand why the deal was done at the time, and it's possible we'd be in worse shape as a franchise if we hadn't done the deal. Hopefully, the young pitchers coming up will allow us to not have to overpay for "average-ish" pitchers on the FA market in the future.

[jazzytrav]

The problem with Hall was there was no position for him if the team planned on the Braun, Hardy, Weeks, infield. He was the one extra piece who may have had value in a trade to improve the pitching situation rather than lock up to keep around.

Wasn't he given the contract before the year he moved to CF? Maybe that was the following year. Even so, what he had shown was the ability to play any infield position and still put up decent numbers. I never really liked the Suppan signing, but I still think the Hall signing was decent (at the time).

[monty57]

Just about every team has dead money on their payroll, and a simple solution to the issue would be to imitate the NFL's policy: If you don't perform, you get cut and your base salary is gone.

This would lead to the mammoth signing bonuses NFL players get, and also to players sitting out the season to re-negotiate their contracts. I used to grumble about the guaranteed contracts in MLB, but in real life a contract's a contract, and both sides that sign it should live up to it.

Signing more incentive-laden contracts would be an alternative, but every team in baseball would have to do it, and that would lead to the goofy collusion rule.

 

[joepepsi]

When Hall was 25 he had an OPS of .837 in 546 plate appearances. When he was 26 he posted an .899 OPS in 608 PA. (Higher than Braun's OPS in 2008!) After that season he was eligible for arbitration. Although I had suspected he was a hacker, it was difficult to deny that level of performance. Scouts always like his "tools", so it was reasonable to see him as a very good maturing player. Signing him to a 4 year/$24 million deal didn't seem wild at the time. In fact it was the exact move that posters in other topics criticize Melvin for not doing enough: he locked up one of the best core young players to a long term deal.

 

We can't have it both ways. We can't say Melvin needs to lock up the core players and at the same time criticize him for signing Hall because after the fact things turned sour.

[dlk9s]

Yeah, but at least Gagne was only for one season. They had to overpay a bit to get him to sign a one year deal. It was a gamble that didn't pay off, but I think it was worth the risk, even though he didn't pan out.

I agree. Plus, at least Gagne was pretty solid for the last month or two (I'd have to look at the game logs to remember for how long), so it wasn't like he was completely useless.

[Invader3K]

I agree with joepepsi's sentiment. No one could have reasonably predicted Hall's complete collapse as a useful everyday player. At the time it seemed like a very solid signing. Hindsight is always 20/20 though, right?

[Ennder]

When Hall was 25 he had an OPS of .837 in 546 plate appearances. When he was 26 he posted an .899 OPS in 608 PA

 

To be fair the age 25 OPS was while protecting him against RHP and was heavily BABIP driven and the age 26 OPS had an unsustainable spike in HR/FB%. If you had asked me what to expect out of Hall I would have predicted an OPS of .800 as a cap most likely given his peripherals. I didn't expect him to put in the .700 or whatever he has so far since then though.