Figgins to M's for 4 years and wait for it...

$36M!! We sign Guillen for same money and one less year two years ago, and now you're telling me we could have had Chone Freakin Figgins this year instead of Guillen. Why do I care anymore?

about 2 years ago AxDxMx 16 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

No way he was coming here

I refuse to believe Figgins would have signed here and if he would have, it would have been for more than that.

THat’s one element that never gets mentioned, the desire to play in Kansas City and right now there aren’t many that have that desire.

by Royal from Queens on Dec 4, 2009 6:02 PM EST reply actions

Never said there was a chance

Just that our team pays for crap, and we could have had actual production for that money.

by AxDxMx on Dec 4, 2009 10:07 PM EST up reply actions

what is this "production" you keep going on about?

veteran leadership? knowing how to win? grittiness? is that what you mean?

"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell

by buddyball on Dec 5, 2009 12:43 PM EST up reply actions

I've never actually seen it.

It’s like dry land in Waterworld.

by AxDxMx on Dec 5, 2009 4:07 PM EST up reply actions

interesting...

is Figgins worth that price?

by Freneau on Dec 4, 2009 6:20 PM EST reply actions

Using 2010 projections from Chones, 4.4 Million per WAR and -0.5 WAR/year for aging he is at:

37.7 Million

Link to spreadsheet

Not too bad for either side.

Jeff Zimmerman - Protecting the world from RBI's and Wins from my mom's guest house.

by Jeff Zimmerman on Dec 4, 2009 6:27 PM EST up reply actions

interesting...

but its not quite a bargain either

by Freneau on Dec 4, 2009 6:34 PM EST up reply actions

exactly... not seeing a whole lot of the crazy contracts so far this winter...

aside from the Polanco deal from the Phils, it seems GMs are not really overspending yet.

The Alex Gordon era - www.number4thesmirk.com

by CollininCalifornia on Dec 4, 2009 7:37 PM EST up reply actions

Polanco wasn't an overspend, either

On my chart, 3/$18 implies a guy who is 1.5-2 WAR in 2010

Question on defense… Jeff has him at +5/150 defense at 2B. Let’s say that he’s gong nto be just average at 3B (that’s conservative, but let’s go with it

P0lanco per 150.
-4 hitting (CHONE and I both have him at -4/150) + 2 position +0 average +23 AL replacement = 2.5 WAR player. And again, that assumes he’ll be a lot worse at 3B than 2B.

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 4, 2009 9:46 PM EST up reply actions

doing $4.4/WAR with 7% inflation and -0.5 per year decline, the Ms are paying for a 2.5 win player. I’d say Figgins is probably more like 3, so this is a decent deal. Hard to believe we’re saying this after him being the butt of so many jokes at FJM back in the day (but not too many, otherwise that woudl destroy their facade of “the media is racist and only celebrates white guys as gritty.” You know, when they weren’t writing a show that appeals across the color line like The Office.)

As I tweeted, Jayson Bay shouldn’t get any more than what Figgins gets. He’s certainly not substantially more valuable than Figgins. On my chart (which is adjusted to be pretty conservative), a guy expected to be 3 WAR in 2010 would be estimated to be “worth” $47M over 4 seasons. So arguable the Ms did get a pretty good deal. CHONE has Figgins at +4/150 offense (I have him at +7). Jeff has him as a +6 defender. Even with CHONE, add in +2/150 positional, and he’s a great baserunner, so another +2 there. +23/150 AL replacement. +4 hitting + 6 defense +2 positional +2 baserunning +23 replacement = 3.7 wins/150 games. Round that down to 3.5, or even 3, and the Ms are making a good bet. It will be interesting to see what Beltre gets.

I'm not a sabermetrician, but I do play one at FanGraphs.

Can't get enough of me? Check out my Twitter feed.

by Matt Klaassen on Dec 4, 2009 9:41 PM EST up reply actions