Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2154
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 9:04 am Post subject: 2007 Roster and Payroll revisited
Now that a few questions have been answered, I thought this could use some updating and fine tuning. In a recent interview, JB indicated that he had a little less than 20 million to work with this offseason. My numbers happen to jive with that statement. Here is how the roster and payroll shake out as of now. I will be eagerly awaiting the offseason to see how JB uses the flexibility. Numbers first, then the breakdown below
Payroll Budget.-- 60,000,000
Estimated here-- 42,430,000
Available dollars 17,570,000
Overview:
Starting position players:
This looks pretty set to me. They have made it clear that Estrada is gone, so Snyder is penciled in as starter. There is of course the possibility that some of that payroll flexibility will be used to upgrade at third base, or perhaps even left field. This will be an area to keep an eye on.
Bench Position Players:
Montero could end up taking over as the "full time" catcher from Snyder. He is left handed, so if he hits, he will get more of the starts because there are more righties. But for dollar purposes, it does not matter which guy I put where.
Callaspo COULD be traded for pitching. He is a very desrireable commodity, but hopefully they won't have to use him as a trade Chit.
Andy Green? Well, he wasn't given much playing time, and he seems like a guy that is not going to excel if not playing every day. But after Callaspo, who is the next best utility candidate on the team?
Davanon of course has his option and will certainly lock it in. Clark is on the payroll for 1 million whether he plays or not. He has ZERO trade value, and they will probably keep him around so Bo Mel has a PV he can count on . If he does not recover from shoulder surgery, or totally sucks, they'll just DL him and bring up Carter. It won't hurt to give Tony one last chance, and delay Carter's clock a little bit. Either way, they are definitely going to need a lefty "power" bat off the bench.
Rotation:
Here is the 64$ question of course. Will they sign a FA pitcher? If not, will they trade for one? God only knows what pitcher they can trade for and what the cost would be in terms of players/prospects. If neither of the above, will they trade for a minor league pitcher on the cusp of major league readiness? Or will they choose to just keep cycling in their own almost ready for primetime players....i.e., En. Gon, Ed Gon, Nippert, & Owings and see who sticks?
I left Vargas in there becuase it is not a given that he will be traded. He should not cost more than 2 million, and they may reason that it's better to keep him at that cost, as a #4 guy, depending if they sign or trade for another guy to fill the#3 spot.
Bullpen:
The guys I list are the guys I would keep, and the rest would be traded. Julio and Lyon are GONE in my book. They are not that good, and will be getting too expensive. I realy wouldn't mind trading Valverde either. But that stupid slump, and subsequent high ERA killed his trade value for now.
I would not be averse to giving Cruz a crack at the closers role.
Misc Callups and Shawn Green:
I am sure during the course of the season there will easily be half a dozen guys shuttled back and forth on the I-10, all making pro rated minimum salary contracts. 1 million was a nice round number for estimate purposes. And of course there is Shawn Green...the gift that keeps on giving.
Not much change from the previous overall picture, but slightly clearer in focus, IMO.
I still favor using prospects to pick up young pitching with upside, and then use the large bulk of the money for one more bat. I just think you get more return on investment on higher priced position players than pitchers most of the time.
Other than Ramirez, there are no attractive free-agent bats, so a trade for a left-fielder or a third-basemen in a salary dump might be the way to go there, too.
Assuming that they go the younger pitching route, then I trade Vargas for whatever I can get, and let the internal guys fight for the four and five slots in the rotation. If we are picking up a position player, I prefer left field, since I think there is still a chance for Tracy. If we are going for the third basemen, then I would try to trade Tracy and keep Conor Jackson, whom I think has more upside on offense than Tracy.
If there is any money left, another arm in the bullpen would be useful, too, but Byrnes was pretty adept last year at adding bullpen arms without giving up much or taking on much salary (until Julio), so he might be able to come up with someone on the cheap.
As for actual names, I will leave that to the board scouts and saber crowd. I have no idea whom they should actually pursue.
Joined: 13 Aug 2006
Posts: 354
Location: worm factory
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 9:16 am Post subject:
I wouldn't, I'd put Tracy in left field, Save the money, make Hammock/Callaspo/Barden the starting third baseman bring up Owings and Ohledorf. We have the players, here, they're just not in place.
_________________
My wife is always trying to get rid of me. The other day she told me to put the garbage out. I said to her I already did. She told me to go and keep an eye on it
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2154
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 9:28 am Post subject:
Among 3rd baseman, besides Aramis Ramirez, there is Aubrey Huff & Pedro Feliz.
Here is a primer thread you should read that discusses Ramirez.
I asked some questions in post # 9, and there were some informative answers. Make sure you get at least as far as post #33 in the thread.
Maybe trading Byrnes for pitching, moving Tracy to LF, and Callaspo to 3b is the way to go. If they don't want to try Callaspo at 3b, they should still try to get a "glove man" for 3b. I think Tracy's defense is killing that infield.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1313
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 11:20 am Post subject:
Shoe, I don't want to challenge your numbers, which look right to me. Rather, what needs to be questioned is the assertion that the payroll is fixed at $60 million -- because this is what Josh Byrnes has reported as the limit.
Why? That's a question that somebody needs to ask of the FO.
This has been posted on another thread (by me)("Acquiring a Big Name"):
Revenue source/amount:
MLB revenue sharing: $35M
sale of broadcast rights: $25M
ballpark advertising: $20M
ticket+concession sales: $70M*
TOTAL: $150M
* based on an attendance of 2M; with an average ticket price of $20, and an additional $20 in concessions/ticket, less a "fudge factor" of 12.5%. This does not include revenue from parking, or the sale of luxury suites or the swimming pool (which goes for $5,900/game -- just in case you didn't know!) According to one source, these suites/pool are 90% sold...
Another important point: No team with a payroll on the level with that of the Diamondbacks ($60M) is going to the playoffs. On the level of payroll, it takes a payroll of $70M-$75M to make the playoffs. Given revenues of $150M, a payroll of $70M to $75M doesn't appear to be out of line.
This changes the dynamics of your question, of course, and of what the team might be able to do...
So: is the $60M figure really the limit? Or is that all that the owners are going to make available? That is an important question.
Here's hoping that Kendrick/Moorad/et al are not going Bidwell on us...
_________________
Is It Next Season Yet?
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2154
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 11:25 am Post subject:
My sources tell me those "other numbers" are not accurate.
The 60 million number is where they are at for this season, and there have been several comments from Nick Piceoro at AZ Republic, who is very dialed in with the F.O. to the effect that payroll is NOT going up until they have paid the debt down further.
In addition, as mentioned above, Byrnes was recently quoted as saying he had under 20 million to spend....and simply looking at the dollars committed and likely to be paid, (low 40's) and taking into account the "less than 20" statement, puts you right at about 60.
That could change I guess....but don't count on it.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1235
Location: Researching my theory that a lime hat is more effective than tinfoil
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 12:22 pm Post subject:
First, I want Tracy OUT. Screw moving him to LF. I'd much rather have DaVannon as the LH corner OF guy.
Callaspo doesn't have the power to be a traditional 3B but he can hit and he'll play good defense. If we go the FA route for any position players I'd rather it be LF, too bad JB has already gone on record that the gymnast is the starting LF next season. He should have just avoided the question. Sure, Byrnes will give better defense but he doesn't have the bat to play LF.
I hate to be cliche, but this team will NOT have nearly enough HR power. Q will lead the team but I doubt he hits that many (~30). He has a HR/AB of 16.7. That projects to 36 HR, do you think his AB/HR will get better or worse? I think he'll hit HRs at a lower rate but get more singles and doubles.
I think these might be reasonable HR estimates for our team next season, If anything, I think they will exceed these:
Code:
1B Jackson 20
2B Hudson 12
SS Drew 15
3B Callaspo 7
RF Quentin 30
CF Young 25
LF Byrnes/DaVannon 20
C Snyder/Montero 20
Pinch Hitters/Others 10
159
That is basically the same as this year and we are 25th in MLB.
Even though I'm excited about Callaspo, I can't get rid of the feeling that he's going to be a faster Cintron with a better glove. If he doesn't have a high batting average his OBP will be terrible.
matt... i agree with everything except the Cintron comparison.. Callaspo takes alot of pitches, walks, and is extremely hard to K. (at least that was his record in the minors).
Stats - please look at BB, K, OBP
Whether or not that continues in the majors, i dont know... but i dont remember cintron having that high a BB/R ratio, and OBP....
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2154
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 12:46 pm Post subject:
Crede:
He will be a FA after 2008, so you have 2 years of control if you trade for him.
With incentives, he made close to 3 million in 2006. He will get a nice big bump based on this past season, I figure to 5 million minimum, perhaps more. Conservatively, figure he will cost minimum 12 million over the next two years. Plus of course a couple of pretty good prospects to get him, or more likely, actual major leaguer(s). I'm not sure what Chicago is looking for.
He would be a HUGE upgrade over Tracy with the glove.
So I think no matter which metrics you look at it, common wisdom is confirmed. Crede is really good with the glove, and Tracy is pretty bad.
There is not as much difference in their offensive value, although Crede has an edge there too.
EQA
Crede .268
Tracy .259
Crede only has 28 walks and 21 GIDP, and no speed, and is 28 years old.
His offense was better than Tracy's this year, but his Career EQA is only .252
Honestly I would expect Tracy to be BETTER than Crede with the bat next year, but Tracy's defense is really bad. He is not going to cut it as a thirdbaseman.
The choices for Tracy are
1.) Trade him
2.) Move him to first and trade Jackson
3.) Move him to left and trade Byrnes.
I think the cost for Crede will likely be too high however, to justify just two years of control.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2154
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:02 pm Post subject:
Thinking about this further...Maybe it's just better to stick with Tracy one more year and see if he can improve. Although I am obviously extremely skeptical that he will improve much with the Glove, 2007 is most likely NOT our year.
Tracy is still cheap at 2.75 million next year. He does not get expensive until 2007. Maybe he has a better year at the plate and increases his trade value a bit more.
1.) Trade him
2.) Move him to first and trade Jackson
3.) Move him to left and trade Byrnes.
Gotta move him out to LF and trade Byrnes. This is Tracy's first sub-par offfensive season, and I would expect him to improve dramatically next year. Just seems like he's not quite there defensively at 3B, and needs to be at 1B or in LF. I'm not opposed to moving CJ either - think the Marlins are interested?
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 2154
Location: In front of my computer
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:20 pm Post subject:
Wow...thats a bad contract. Burrell is better than folks in Philly give him credit for. But he is going to make 27 million over the next two seasons. OUCH!
He seems to have found his level.
.253/.379/.488 this season vs. .258/.361/.478 lifetime
.288 EQA vs. .286 Lifetime
Pretty so so glove, and only 4.2 WARP1
I'd rather trade Estrada for a pitcher. But if the Phillies kick in 15 million and the D Backs only have to pay 12 over two years...MAYBE he is someone to consider.
Yeah, Estrada should be moved for two relievers that are better than the ones we gave up to get him.
_________________
The pen is mightier than the sword, if that pen is shot out of a gun
I would love to see a trade for Crede.. what would that cost?
I'd like to buy a vowel, Alex. E!
I'd rather have Creed than Crede on the team.
Are we having a "let's bash our 3bman" day?
[edit]
I have to say that I don't mind Crede, but I do think he's a bit overrated. 2005 WS intangibles and all.
More to the point, he'll be a free agent after 2007, iirc. And his agent is Scott Boras. 'Nuff said.
_________________
Old school Hollywood baseball,
Joe Girardi is ten feet tall,
Old school Hollywood baseball,
Me and Frenchy walk a ton.
First, I would bargain shop and look for good deals via FA and trades. In the FA SP department, Mark Mulder and Kerry Wood are both coming off of injuries and could potentially sign cheap deals to pitch at home (yes, I believe they are both Phoenix residents).
I wouldn't give either of them more than a 1-year incentive-laden contract (THE KEY), similar to the one that Wade Miller signed with the Cubs, but there could be a great risk/reward with either of them. Base contract would be 2 to 3 million with 5-6 million in performance incentives. The issues with Mulder's shoulder is a concern, but the REAL reason I sign him is to bide the fans looking for that "name" over until '08, so I don't have to trade prospects for someone, and will still have all that money left in '08 to go after one of those bigger and better FA names.
The irony is that it would actually work out better for us if they remained injured and didn't hit their performance thresholds, because that would mean 6M more from 2007's payroll available for pitching in 2008.
I would also look at beneficial trades where we deal from positions of strength, and see those positions as Catcher (i.e. Johnny Estrada) and OF (Byrnes, Hairston) but wouldn't dump anyone because they want to be traded.
If a great pitcher is available at the right price I would pounce, but I would not trade more than one of our blue chip prospects (Quentin, Jackson, Upton, Gonzalez, Young, Drew, Callaspo, Montero) for ANY pitcher, including Bonderman.
Well, I would trade 2 of them for Johan but that's about it (and the Twins would be crazy to give Johan up for 3 of them).
I also wouldn't waste Andy Green's time with another bench role. Let him go and let him play everyday somewhere if he can, even if it's some AAA team. Aquire a PV bench who isn't going to be hurt by sitting on the bench, and then make him sit there (note to Melvin).
I think Easley might be a good fit again because he's a righty would be a good platoon candidate to spell Tracy and Drew.
I would use the rest of the money to shore up the bullpen.
As far as trading Tracy, I was a proponent of it a year ago but now I think we need to hang on for a while longer, unless the FO feel that something other than his knee is hurting his numbers, and want to dump the contract while it's still cheap.
Otherwise I stand pat and continue planning around '08...and think that Shoewizard's roster looks about right.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1275
Location: (i'm like a pretty ballerina in my fuzzy slippery socks)
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 3:13 pm Post subject:
trading tracy now is trading him at his all time lowest value ever. unless a) this team is going to make a WS run next year, and b) chad tracy is all that stands in the way of that happening, i give him 07. see if the bat comes back, see if he can regain the decent d he gave us the first month or two.
he was an okay 3bman for a little while there. why is everyone so pessimistic he can't perhaps do that again?
'sides, trading kids at their lowest value is what the old group did. it didn't work out so well. i'm sore enough from kicking myself over patterson and capuano, i don't need to add a chad tracy bruise.
(and... my gf won't have sex with me if they trade him.)
_________________
i threw out my back, and i'm on a shitload of painkillers. so the above post is probably either "i love you guys" or "go die in a fire," depending on when my last dose was.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 234
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 3:17 pm Post subject:
shoewizard wrote:
Quote:
and... my gf won't have sex with me if they trade him
We always knew your real motivation.
I can't help but think of scene in Bull Durham when Nuke and Annie are having sex and she calls out Crash's name: "Would you rather I make love to you using his name or make love to him using yours?"
Joined: 10 Aug 2006
Posts: 1275
Location: (i'm like a pretty ballerina in my fuzzy slippery socks)
Posted: Wed Sep 27, 2006 3:29 pm Post subject:
was my motivation that obvious from the first line? really? dammit.
well, sex or no sex, i still believe they need to give tracy another year. i just really hate giving up on someone at their lowest point. it isn't right.
and DK, i know her pretty well. if she was sleeping with tracy, she'd be bragging about it. she just LOVES that boy. you should see the glares i get as she reads the gameday over my shoulder and sees the FU tracys.
_________________
i threw out my back, and i'm on a shitload of painkillers. so the above post is probably either "i love you guys" or "go die in a fire," depending on when my last dose was.
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
If he does not recover from shoulder surgery, or totally sucks, they'll just DL him and bring up Carter. It won't hurt to give Tony one last chance, and delay Carter's clock a little bit. Either way, they are definitely going to need a lefty "power" bat off the bench.
