Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
The 'per WAR' model is just so out of whack.
It says what the 'market' is but the market also includes absolute albatross contracts. It includes stuff like Josh Hamilton and CJ Wilson giving the Angels absolutely nothing for $40 million/season.
It's the average cost of a win share, sure - but it's not what a players true value should be measured as.
Look at it this way: A 'replacement level' team wins 48 games. If you figure a team were to go to the market and simply buy the additional 40 wins they'd need to be a playoff team then playoff teams would need in excess of a $300 million payroll at the $8.4 million/share level.
In order for a player to actually contribute surplus value to a team, I think they need to be at about $5 million/share. Paying retail isn't how you win championships so the retail market shouldn't be used as the barometer for success.
If the Royals only get 9 Wins out of Gordon over the next 4 seasons, that means he will have been a below average regular over those 4 seasons. An above average regular on a contender should be about a 2.5-3 win player. If you pay $18 million/yr and get a below average regular for your efforts, that's not a good contract, regardless of what the $$/WS model says.
A good target for Gordon should be about 12 wins over the life of that contract. It's attainable but not easy and for $18 million/yr, I don't think that's an unreasonable figure to ask to consider the contract a 'win'. That would make the threshhold for a successful contract about $6 million per win share and that's much more in line with what a successful team would hope to get.
|
Moving a team from replacement level to playoff level in a single season very likely would cost $300,000,000 for that season.