Should the Royals have traded for Gonzalez?

The Nats were able to sign him to a 5-year, $42 million extension, with a couple club option years in 2017 and 2018. Gonzalez has posted fWARs of 3.2 and 3.5 the past two years. His new contract seems like it could be an absolute steal if he can keep that up. Or were his numbers just an Oakland-aided mirage? Maybe there is something special about DC for Gio (cherry blossoms?), but you would think he would have accepted the same sort of deal from the Royals.

4 months ago Sweep_the_Leg 8 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I think his numbers were a bit of a mirage

And the walks are very concerning. And it was a high price to pay. I’m not terribly upset the Royals passed on him.

But this does give me hope that maybe in a year if we do splurge on a young pitcher, they’ll be amenable to signing an extension. Its not likely, but its possible.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jan 16, 2012 12:02 PM EST reply actions

I thought this contract looked pretty risky for the Nationals

I just am not sold on Gio Gonzalez yet as a truly good pitcher. I thought committed this type of money to him was a bit risky. If I had been Washington’s GM I would have waited until after this year and see how he performed during his first year in the NL and in the new park.

He has three more arbitration years after 2012 so the Nationals were in no risk of losing him anytime soon. The only reason to sign this contract at this time was to potentially save money in upcoming years and buy out one year of free agency at something in the neighborhood of market rate. It looks to me like the Nationals took on a big load of risk and did not set themselves up to save more than $5-10M if all goes very well in his career. The options might make this a much better contract for the Nationals, but those are a long way off.

www.rockchalktalk.com for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on Jan 16, 2012 12:26 PM EST reply actions

No

A team with limited financial resources cannot afford a big money contract with a pitcher because so so much more is likely to go wrong than with a position player.

The Royals cannot afford to have 1/8th of their team payroll in the form of one player who is out for the year, years, or their career.

Because Pitcher success is highly volatile, we have to successfully develop our own at a much much lower cost and deal guys away as they age.

Add that to the large concerns about Gio’s control and true talent level outside of the AL West, it wouldn’t be worth trading the prospects we will need to lower our payroll in 2013-2015 when we will hopefully be in contention.

by WURoyal on Jan 16, 2012 12:28 PM EST via mobile reply actions

The Oakland effect seems to be overstated with him

His FIP and xFIP on the road are better than at home for his career. His home runs allowed per nine is lower on the road than in Oakland for his career.

by BeauJackson on Jan 16, 2012 2:09 PM EST reply actions

Neither his FIP or xFIP are great

4.15 home FIP v. 3.97 road FIP
4.05 home xFIP v. 3.90 road xFIP

The big difference is in the BABIP — 278 BABIP at home v. 309 BABIP on the road — which explains the pretty big difference in ERA (3.56 home ERA v. 4.32 road ERA).

Gonzalez is a pretty decent pitcher but just not close to an “ace” that some suggest he is. Of the good, relatively young pitchers traded this offseason, Gonzalez is well behind Latos and Pineda.

by Gopherballs on Jan 16, 2012 3:16 PM EST up reply actions

right, neither one is great

and the big dimensions of Oakland probably helped him some at the Coliseum, but I don’t think he is purely a product of playing in Oakland.

I’m interested to see how he does in Washington, seems the idea that he is overrated might’ve made him a little underrated at this point.

by BeauJackson on Jan 16, 2012 3:31 PM EST up reply actions

agree he is not solely a product of Oakland

He is not a pitch to contact type, so his approach on the road versus at home should not differ much.

The other point about pitching for Oakland (which WU Royals mentioned) is that with the unbalanced schedule, he has faced the AL West a disproportionate amount of the time. Over 25% of his road innings have come at Seattle or Anaheim, where he has (not suprisingly) pitched very well.

by Gopherballs on Jan 16, 2012 3:56 PM EST up reply actions