Ouch! 12 million per for Colon! How did he swing that?

To qualify my point - I guess he's got some stats and longevity, but isn't his arm about two or three long outing starts away from exploding into a million pieces?

No, that would be his gut.

Hello, third-round draft choice. At least there's still the sandwich pick.

I'm really not sure if the Angels are spending their money very wisely. That's well over $60M tied up in two pitchers (Colon & Escobar) who help define "mercurial." They're in the running for Garciaparra as well, should the unthinkable happen with A-Rod. It's looking like all-or-nothing year in Anaheim.

I'm sure Halladay and his agent were waiting for exactly this kind of signing before making any firm commitments. But I'm sure a mutally satsifactory deal will still get done.

It seems like for the last 3 years they have saying that Colon was due for an arm injury yet he continues to plug along. Anaheim has to be the favorite now in the west with a rotation of Colon, Washburn(for now), Lackey, Escobar and Ortiz. Plus they have a great bullpen in Percival, Krod,etc.

Wow, I think the angels are going to regret this in a couple of years, maybe sooner. This 4 million dollar upgrade from last year is a surprise considering that his numbers weren't as great as it was a couple of years ago. He's still not worth $12 million to me, not even close. Did the Angels learn anything from the Mo Vaughn contract???

OK, let's go there.

At what price would HLH not be worth keeping? And what would you do if he went over it? Trade him? When?

I'd say $11m/y * 5 years is the absolute ceiling. That would actually be overpaying, but I'd be willing to overpay for quality.

The fact that Halladay's still in his arbitration years will serve to lower the amount he will receive relative to the market. He's not a free agent yet.

Barolo Colon has averaged 232.4 ip, 16 wins, 1.28 WHIP, and 174 k's over the last 3 years with Chicago, Montreal and Cleveland. In comparison Andy Pettitte has averaged 204 ip, 18 wins, 1.37 Whip and 156 k's for 2003, 2001 and 2000 since he was hurt for part of 2002. I dont really think that 12 million is that much to pay for a horse like Colon in this marketplace.

All-or-nothing year? It looks like an all-or-nothing three years to me. How much is Escobar getting again? Madness.
I wouldn't go so far as to call them favourites yet, but they certainly will be contenders. I'd say there's a decent chance of the third place team in both the West and East being better than the Central winner....

Well, if there's collusion somebody forgot to tell the Angels about it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think any team has ever won a World Series with more than 25% of its payroll committed to one player. (Include the 2001-03 Jays in this category.)

Something to think about when negotiating with HLH (and Delgado).

salamander - small sample size perhaps (world series champs)?

Young: yes, this is a small (but perhaps not insignificant) sample. It would be interesting to see how many playoff teams fit this description. My guess is that there aren't all that many, in relative terms.

I have received much ridicule for my continued insistence that Roy will get a 4 year deal at 11 million a year. I've been saying it for so long now that people are probably sick of me saying it, but, everything that has happened in the offseason (Cy Young, Colon signing, Escobar moving on...) just strengthens my belief that this is the number. The counter argument has been that he is still in arbitration, but, I am pretty sure the Hendricks brothers don't care too much about that. They've got a great young arm who has won a Cy Young who isn't far from the big bucks of free agency. I don't think they're gonna be generous. If they walk up to JP and say "4 years 44 million or forget it" do you really think JP will "stick to his guns" and take Roy to arbitration? I highly doubt it. Roy has us over a barrell, and I'm pretty sure his agents know that. Argue all you want about the "security of a long term deal", but he's gonna make big bucks in arbitration anyways, and he could be a 15 million a year pitcher on the free agent market if he continues to perform well up until that fateful day.

Prove me wrong JP!!!

http://economics.about.com
JP will "stick to his guns" and take Roy to arbitration?

Why wouldn't he?

Arbitrators can only give out 1 year deals, and given past awards, Roy won't get more than 10.

It'd be great if his agents made an arbitration offer of 25 million a year. When the arbitrators make their decisions, they can only choose between the two offers. So if the Hendricks brothers made a 25 million dollar arbitration offer, the Jays could name pretty much any number and get it.

There is absolutely no reason JP wouldn't offer Halladay arbitration.

Mike

Salamander, I don't think that's a valid stat. Would the Rangers be better if they gave everyone not named AROD a raise so that he makes only 20% of the overall salary? And how long has having one player make 25% of a teams's salary even been an option. 3 years, 5, 10 at most?

I think the more relevant question is how many teams in each season has a player who takes up more than 25% of their team's payroll. In any season, there can't be all that many teams that fit this description (especially pre 1990).

Thanks Young, that is in fact my question. My hypothesis is that a GM/owner may feel pressure to open the vault for a popular player (e.g., Ash offering Delgado a huge contract around the time Green headed for greener pastures), which often turns out to be counterproductive in terms of winning championships.

I wouldn't pay that much for Colon, but it doesn't seem completely unreasonable. Let me put it this way: I don't think the Angels overpaid (like they did for Escobar).

And while I'd prefer a 3 yr deal for Roy, I'd gladly settle for something along these lines.

I agree that World Series winners is likely too small of a sample size, and that playoff teams would be a better bet. However even if the playoff-team sample size is small, this does not necesasrily mean that tying up 25% of your payroll in one player is a bad idea. It just proves that the way teams have structured their payrolls in the past isn't consistant with sucess, with regards to tying up a large portion of your payroll in one player. If the Rangers had spent the money they blew on pitchers like Park, Van Popell and Powell, just ot name a few, wisely, I think they could have been a force to reckon with the past couple of years.

Basically, even if past teams haven't had success with a quarter of their payroll spent on one player, I'd still trust GMs like Beane and JP to be able to buck this trend. If these GMs are going to commit heavily to one player, I suspect they'll have a plan for how to fill the other 24 spots on their roster, especially since they understand the "free talent" maxim better than most.

Well, coming from probably the biggest Angels's fan you'll hear from (40 years + and my Dad's allegience to the PCL Angels before I was born), I can tell you I am thrilled! I share Coach's hesitation about Escobar's maturity, though he has a better arm than any of the Angels' current starters, and now they finally have a horse to be a #1 guy (not since Nolan Ryan could I say that).
Arte Moreno is doing what we fans have always wanted from an owner to bring a consistant winner to the Ed. He is a fan and acts like it, has the money to support his G.M. & bring the players his manager needs, as well as bringing an understanding of the Latin player base that is extremely important in today's game. I couldn't be happier today!

If Roy is demanding, say, 15 million a year, then sure - we take him to arbitration. But I think the closer he gets to free agency the harder it will be to re-sign him. The jury is in: this guy is good and he's worth the investment of a long-term deal. But obviously, he isn't worth the investment at ANY price. Without running all of the numbers, I think the Jays can still field a competitive team with an 11 million dollar pitcher. It would certainly help if they didn't have a 17 million dollar 1B, but Delgado is my favorite player, and apart from being my favorite player, he's one heckuva hitter. Eventually, he'll be a more reasonably priced heckuva hitter. I hope that's with the Jays.

Anyways, I hope I'm proven wrong. I'm in the minority, and to me, that's a good sign.

I was neither sad nore happy that Escobar left for Anaheim earlier this offseason as he's proven to be one of the most frustrating pitchers to ever wear a Blue Jay uniform. I think that he needed a change of scenery and Bud Black is a good pitching coach so maybe he could have some success with Kelvim. Maybe we'll see "Super Kelvim" whenever the Angels play against teams from the East. (cept the Blue Jays of cours)

As for the current signing of Bartolo Colon, the guy sure looks unhealthy doesn't he? You can't fault him for the success he's had in his career but at some point he's going to either have a major breakdown or a few seasons of struggle.

As for Roy Halladay, i'd love to see him be locked up for the long term and 10 mil per over 4 yrs is the most i'd pay for him. Thank goodness JP will never make the mistake that Gillick made in giving Dave Stieb a lifetime contract. BTW what was the story behind that contract?

http://economics.about.com
This goes back to why I'd like to see Phelps and Hudson signed to long-term deals this off season. I could see Phelpsy going nuts one year and hitting 40 or 45 bombs. At that point, the Jays either sign him to an expensive contract, or let him go. I'd say sign him now, while he's still cheap. Sure the Jays would be taking a risk, but I see it as one worth taking.

Branch Rickey always thought it was better to get rid of a guy a year too soon rather than a year too late. The same should hold true for long term deals. It's better to sign a guy before he has a monster year than after. Just look at Jarome Iginla and the Flames.

Mike

Halladay's agents must see him worth 15 per year on the Free Agent market, about 8-9 this year and 10-12 next year in arbitration - the benefit to the 3 or 4 year deal now for them is that it safeguards against an injury in that time - the drawback is that with arb he gets two solid years of pay and then likely another 4/5 years of guaranteed money - the market in 2 years and beyond being the wildcard of course - in the end the benefit probably slightly outweighs the negatives for them (guaranteed at least one multi-year payday) and Roy likes playing here so I'd lop say 5 million off a 3 year deal and 8 off a 4 year deal and say Roy would sign for 3 years 30 million or 4 years 42 million right now

Colon had a .598 SNPct this year (4.5 SNWAR), a .646 SNPct last year (5.5 SNWAR), and a .584 SNPct in 2001 (3.9 SNWAR).

Cashman was wise to go after Vazquez instead, but the Angels got themselves a very good, consistent starter.

Even with this revamped rotation, it's still way too early to call the Angels the favourites in the West.... Oakland still has Mulder, Hudson, and Zito.

Of course, what I forgot to add is that the agents would likely to be agreeable to any division of that money amongst the three or four years - might I suggest 7, 12, 11 for the three year deal and 7, 12, 12, 11 for a four year deal

I agree with Mike Moffatt on the question of Phelps contract. I see him as a decent comparison to Richie Sexson at this stage of his career.

Going back to Mike's comment that the Jays should sign Phelps when he is still cheap to sign--I am in total agreement. For some intangible reason, I think he is very "low-risk", pertaining to his chance of development.

The problem with Phelps has been the same problem all along--"where to play him?" He needs lots and lots and lots of experience at first base to even be considered to be called competent at the position. He looked very awkward there last year. But with Carlos at first, how is he going to get that necessary playing time?

Tough questions, hard answers...

I don't know if I'd consider the Angels favorites yet, in a rare case of me agreeing with Jurgen. Both the A's and Angels need help on offense. If Tejada bolts for Anaheim, that will surely tilt the balance of power southward. Local press up here in Seattle has indicated the M's are also interested in bringing Miguel aboard; in that case, the balance of power would shift north. In other words, if Tejada stays in the AL West, assuming he doesn't sign with Texas, we can declare the team he ends up with the slight favorite.

Halladay after the Colon deal? Smiling brightly, though not as wide as his agents are smiling.

Mike,

I think you may have misintepreted Branch Rickey's quote. The way I remember reading it, he said, "It's better to trade a player a year too early than a year too late." He was referring to the fact it's better to get some value for a player even if he has a good year or two on another team rather than getting nothing for him but having an extra year of his production. Presumably the return in the trade will help makeup the lost production and you can continually recycle players that way. It's similar to the Beane philosophy of getting cheap production then dealing it when it becomes too expensive.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/quotes/quobr.shtml

I don't know if I'd consider the Angels favorites yet, in a rare case of me agreeing with Jurgen.

I'm now predicting the Angels to win the World Series in 2004.