Can a Contract Still Be "Bad" if You Win the World Series? Examining Some High-Profile Cases

I saw an interesting discussion the other day that got me thinking about things; in this case, it was people wondering if Patrick Corbin is the worst contract in the Majors at this point.

For those who haven’t followed the Nationals outside of their trade deadline sell-off, Corbin has had an extremely rough 2021, with 14 losses and a league-worst (among qualified pitchers) 5.98 ERA in 155.0 innings. If you go by Baseball-Reference’s Wins Above Replacement, Corbin has cost his team 1.5 Wins this season, the fourth-worst mark for a pitcher behind only Jake Arrieta, J.A. Happ, and Matt Shoemaker. Of course, Arrieta, Happ, and Shoemaker are only making a combined $16 million this year; Corbin, meanwhile, is signed through 2024 and will make roughly $108 million from 2021 through then.

Of course, position players Eugenio Suarez (-2.7 WAR) and Hunter Dozier (-2.9) have been even worse, and both are signed to longer term deals, albeit still for less than Corbin (and Cody Bellinger and Jarred Kelenic have also been slightly worse, although neither made it beyond arbitration). And another complicating factor is that it’s debatable if Corbin is even that bad, as Fangraphs’ version of WAR places Corbin at a much better 0.0 WAR, thanks in part to a much better FIP (5.47) and xFIP (4.34) rates. And none of this is getting into whether Corbin can rebound, as it wasn’t that long ago that he was making All-Star Teams and picking up Cy Young votes.

Of course, I think the single biggest argument against Corbin being the worst contract is his key role in winning the 2019 World Series. He finished eleventh in Cy Young voting that year, finishing with 202 innings of 135 ERA+ (or a 77 FIP-*, if you prefer) before becoming a key cog on the eventual champs as they leaned heavily on their rotation to avoid exposing a weakened bullpen. Even if he never returns to that form, Corbin played a key role in bringing home a flag that will fly forever (and for a franchise and a city that were both in long World Series droughts, at that).

*A reminder, since I don’t always use it; FIP- works like ERA+, but inverted; so a 77 mark would mean a FIP 23% better than league average, since 77 is 23 points lower than the 100-average.

I’m not sure if there’s a set quantity of “value” that a World Series championship brings in evaluating how good a contract is, but my gut says that if a player played a crucial role in bringing home a title, at the very least, any “WAR shortfall” over the course of their contract should be forgiven. For a long time, my test case for this idea was Barry Zito and his seven-year, $126 million deal* with the Giants, which ran from 2007 to 2013.

Retired Number Quiz Series: The National League East

Part two of my retired number quizzes is out, this one featuring the NL East teams! The quiz can be found here, with an article explaining the results (and including spoilers) included after the break. If you’re looking for part one, featuring the AL East teams, the quiz can be found here and the article can be found here.

(Also, like last time, players must have worn a uniform on said team for three or more seasons to qualify. And as far as bonus answers go, for those searching, the Braves and Nationals each have three focusing on their days in Atlanta and Washington, respectively.

Good luck!



----

The 2020 Astros Look to Follow a Tradition of Slow-Starting Pennant Winners

(Also up over at The Crawfish Boxes)

One thing I mentioned in my ALCS Prediction is that, while the Rays had a better 2020 season than the Astros, and are more than likely the better team this year, that doesn’t quite mean as much as it seems. Obviously, short series in baseball are already much more random than they are in other sports (see, for instance, the 2006, 83-win Cardinals upsetting teams with 88, 97, and 95 wins). But the other part of the issue is that the Astros likely aren’t as bad as their record indicated, and the shortened season likely helps obscure that. 

Yes, the Astros finished the abbreviated 2020 season with a losing record, at 29-31. On the other hand, there’s a reason most seasons go longer than 60 games. In fact, if they win the ALCS, the Astros would make for the third straight pennant winner who didn’t have a winning record through the first 60 games of the season, after the 2019 Nationals and 2018 Dodgers.

In fact, since 2000, seven out of the forty teams to appear in the World Series carried a .500 record or worse at the 60-game mark, with a quarter of the 2010s pennant winners in that club. I wanted to look a little more at that bunch of teams, and how their full season unfolded for a sense of what might have been. Those teams in question are (all stats from Baseball-Reference):

Year         Team             W L     Final W Final L WS Result

2019         Nationals   27 33     93         69         W

2018         Dodgers       30 30     92         71         L

2014         Royals        29 31     89         73         L

2012         Tigers         28 32     88         74         L

2007         Rockies       29 31     90         73         L

2005         Astros        25 35     89         73         L

2003         Marlins        27 33     91        71        W

The actual World Series results of this group aren’t necessarily ideal, but then again, two World Series wins in seven chances is better than not making it at all. Either way, the 2020 Astros are pretty comfortably within this group’s range, well ahead of the 25-35 2005 Astros. And they’re tied for second with the 2014 Royals and 2007 Rockies, and just a hair behind the 2018 Dodgers, who needed a 4-game win streak just to reach .500. Those Dodgers would immediately lose their next game, and they had only one day above .500 until game 63.

Which brings me to the next question: what did the path to the pennant look like for those teams? And how does this year’s Astros team compare? 

The End-of-the-Season Post Round-Up

With the final week of the season now behind us, here's a collection of all my newest things, including everything from the World Series:

-I linked to it last time, but for the sake of including everything World Series-related, here's my look at what was baseball's second-ever all-expansion World Series.

-I followed that up with a look at the mismatch in the Astros' and Nationals' records. As it turns out, it didn't matter too much!

-In preparation of his Game 6 start, I looked at Justin Verlander's World Series history. Unfortunately, he just didn't have it that night.

-I did a pair of recaps during the series as well. Naturally, they were both losses: here's Game 2, and here's Game 6. World Series MVP Stephen Strasburg was pretty good, as it turned out! Given my luck in recapping Astros games, maybe I deserve some credit there?

Seriously though, this team went 107-55 in the regular season, a .660 winning percentage, then fell just one game short of winning it all. In total, that's a 117-63 record, still a .650 winning percentage. In my 32 game recaps this season, Houston went exactly 16-16. That...doesn't look great.

-Over here, I wrapped up with my yearly Best Active Players Without a World Series quiz on the night of Game 7.

-And finally, in non-baseball writing, I published something over on Out of Left Field reviewing one of my favorite video games of 2019.

2019 World Series Trivia: Best Active Players Without a World Series

I had this year's version ready to go right when the series ended: Can You Name the Best Active Players Without a World Series, 2019 Edition? Spoilers below the break for some very brief discussion.

The Big Playoff Post Round Up

It's been a while since I've collected all the things I've posted lately, so I have a bunch to catch up on. Going from oldest to newest:

-My final recap of the season was, perhaps fittingly, a loss to the Angels.

-Next, I got to do a round-up on trivia from the 2019 Astros season, and let me tell you, there was a LOT of it!

-Towards the end of the Division Series, I did a round-up of how all of the ex-Astros in the playoffs were doing.

-For some reason, despite my luck in recaps, I was allowed to do an ALCS recap. It was, unsurprisingly, the Game 5 loss. Counting the postseason, the Astros have gone 114-59 in 2019 (a .659 winning percentage), but despite that, they went 16-14 in games I recapped (a .533 mark). I might get asked to recap a World Series game, but uh, maybe I should decline...

-And finally, I got to bring my interest in expansion teams to The Crawfish Boxes, writing about how this year's Astros-Nationals matchup is just the second All-Expansion World Series, and all the history and trivia that entails!

My Issues With the Nationals Letting Dusty Baker Go

I’m going to be honest: I’m not sure that I see the logic in the Washington Nationals letting go of Dusty Baker.

I mean, I’ve heard the arguments for it; that Dusty is a “bad tactical manager”, that his teams can’t win in the postseason, and so on. I’m just not sure that I totally buy it. Arguing that being a “good tactical manager” is necessary to win a World Series seems like a specious argument, given that three of the last four World Series were won by Joe Maddon (who has repeatedly come under fire for his strange bullpen management the last two years as well as his other “quirkier” habits), Ned Yost (no one’s idea of a stat-head), and John Farrell (who just found himself let go). In fact, just in the past decade, we’ve seen Yost and Ron Washington, two of the managers traditionally thought of as the least statistically-minded, each win back-to-back pennants; Yost with a title, and Washington a misplayed Nelson Cruz flyball away from his own.

That’s not to say that being bad at tactics is a benefit or anything crazy; just that there are many things to being a manager, and while tactics are the only one we can really traditionally measure at this time, they clearly aren’t everything. And really, we know this; most studies on lineup optimization have found that it can save maybe a win or two a year, which is nice, but also not enough that a team can’t win 95 games and a World Series while batting Alcides Escobar and his .257/.293/.320 triple slash line leadoff.

This is something that I’ve sort of changed my mind on over the past few seasons, that managing is easy and can be done by anyone willing to listen to their front office. Over the last few years, we’ve seen teams trying to hire inexperienced managers who apparently take orders pretty directly from their front offices, and the results have been…mixed at best, I would say. Guys like Mike Redmond, Robin Ventura, Walt Weiss, and Craig Counsell haven’t exactly done anything to impress (and the first three were all fired before 2017). Even the ones who have made the playoffs for the most part haven’t exactly set the world on fire; Brad Ausmus was just fired and Matt Williams’ tenure in Washington came to a pretty miserable end. The most “successful” manager of this type may be Mike Matheny, which…as a Cardinals fan, let me just say that I have many, many issues with his tenure. Viva El Birdos has a summary good enough that I don’t feel like I need to write my own.

2014 Predictions: NL East

I’ve fallen a little behind for this to be a true “prediction” I guess, but I want to finish this, so I’ll try and keep what’s occurred this year so far out of it. Also, to save time, I’ll try and cover all the NL together. As a reminder, I look at the team’s records and Pythagorean Won-Loss records (based on runs scored and allowed, a better predictor of future success than actual won-loss records) from last year, then what should be different this year. So, onward: (Previous predictions: AL East, AL Central, AL West)

NL East
Braves-96 wins/98 Pythagorean wins
Nationals-86/84
Mets-74/74
Phillies-73/66
Marlins-62/64

Has Bryce Harper Been a Disappointment This Year?

I feel like I write about Bryce Harper a lot. At least he’s an interesting player to write about. Actually, that’s probably why I write about him so much. Anyway, today’s question: Has Bryce Harper been a disappointment this season?

I haven’t really seen many serious articles on this topic, which is really good (because it’s a dumb question). However, I feel like some fans are starting to have doubts about how good he is after this year. I’ve seen people point out a number of ways that he hasn’t “lived up to the hype” so far, though.

Again, it’s usually more from commenters than writers (I have long speculated I would be a happier person on the whole if I refrained from reading internet comments). But I’ve still seen the gamut of complaints, from people criticizing his selection to the All-Star Game (already his second, mind you) to “only” hitting .273 with 49 RBIs.

Do Yasiel Puig and Bryce Harper Belong in the All-Star Game?

Bryce Harper and Yasiel Puig have been stirring up a lot of discussion lately with regards to the All Star Game. They make for an interesting discussion on the meaning of the All Star Game, whether it’s for the best players this season, or the best players for the last calendar year, or the most notable players, or something in between.

From one aspect, if your goal is to make the best team possible for the purpose of winning the game, doesn’t taking Harper and Puig (injuries aside) make the most sense? They’re some of the most talented players in the game. But if you are talking from a standpoint of performance, can you still justify taking them?

Three Ideas on the NL and AL East

Some quick ideas on the NL East playoff race and a related idea.

First, the Nationals: they need all the help they can get catching up to the Braves right now, especially in the lineup. They currently have a team weighted runs created+ of 83, twenty-eighth in the league (and remember, it works like OPS+; 100 is league average). They need all their bats they can get. They should be getting their best hitter (Bryce Harper, 166 wRC+) back soon. Their next two best are Ryan Zimmerman (127 wRC+) and recent call-up Anthony Rendon (149), so those two need to stay in the lineup. However, they’re both third basemen.

2013 Predictions: NL East

For Round 2 of my 2013 predictions, we’ll stay on the East Coast and jump leagues to the Senior Circuit. I would say the NL East is right there with the AL East and West in the running for best division in baseball, in part due to the strength at the top. The bottom is weaker than in either of those two, which probably drags it below them, but I would still say it’s the cream of the crop in the National League. So, starting with last year’s division winner, what can we expect in 2013?

More on Stephen Strasburg's Shutdown

I didn’t really intend to write more about Stephen Strasburg. I already covered the issue once, and that was going to be it. But, even with the shutdown upon us, more information on the decision has come out.

First is the interesting one: Dr. Lewis Yocum, the surgeon who repaired Strasburg’s ligament last year, originally claimed that he wasn’t consulted when determining the (approximately) 160-inning limit. Even though he later clarified that he agreed that Strasburg should be limited in some way, there isn’t any real indication that he provided them with an actual number.

Yocum mentions that there’s been no study on the correct way to handle pitchers returning from Tommy John surgery which is technically true. But Rany Jazayerli, one of the foremost researches on the subject of young pitcher injuries, has a very interesting new piece up at Grantland. I would definitely recommend reading the whole thing.

Stephen Strasburg's Inning Limit and October

I know the topic has been beaten to death. But I have some sort of interest in the Nationals (even if I don’t fully understand why), so I might as well weigh in on the Stephen Strasburg inning-limit story.

I can understand the desire to keep Strasburg healthy. I trust the Nationals have looked into the topic. But I think there are plenty of problems with the “keep pitching him until he hits 180 innings, then shut him down for the year” plan.

Re-Run: Can NL MVP Ryan Zimmerman Get Some Attention?

I'm already posting one article about an underrated player, why not post one of my older ones on the subject? It's a completely different player, but still, any excuse to talk about Ryan Zimmerman is good. You know what else is good? Ryan Zimmerman. I need to write more about him soon.


Anyway, this piece was originally from the 2010 season.

The race for Most Valuable Player in the AL looks to be dominated by Rangers outfielder Josh Hamilton. But what about in the NL?

As you may or may not know (depending on whether you’ve read any of my articles), I’m pretty found of a stat called Wins Above Replacement, or WAR. WAR is is a stat that takes a players offensive and defensive numbers and determines how many wins a player has been solely responsible for over a replacement player. Conceivably, we can use this stat to get an idea of who should at least be in the running for NL MVP.

Ryan Zimmerman: The Contract Extension, and Other Thoughts

So, there are a lot of things that I’ve wanted to write about as of late, but general, all-around business has kept me busy (go figure). So, I’ll try and condense some of them into a single meandering post.

One of the two stories I really want to address is the big extension that Ryan Zimmerman just signed with the Nationals. I really care about both the Nationals and Ryan Zimmerman, for some reason. Neither is on par with my actual fandom for the Cardinals or Orioles, but if I had to construct a hierarchy of favorite teams, the Nationals would probably be a solid bronze medal winner. I really don’t have any clear explanations for this. Part of it might be that I used to live in the D.C. area (granted, it was before the Nationals were a thing, which is why I’m an Orioles fan instead; but maybe some residual feelings for the area?). Part of it might have been sympathy for the Expos that carried over and multiplied when they were moved. Part of it might be because Peter Angelos didn’t like them. But I think Ryan Zimmerman is also a large part of it.

Retired Numbers Series: Washington Nationals

After the first two articles in my Retired Numbers Series, I decided to continues on with a team common to both of them: the Washington Nationals.

As I said in the Orioles articles, I am an Orioles fan from when I lived in the D.C. area-that was obviously before the Nationals existed. I know the two teams are supposed to be rivals, and maybe it’s just because I haven’t lived in the area for a while, but I’m definitely sympathetic towards the Nats. They aren’t my favorite NL team-my two teams are the Orioles and Cardinals. But I do follow the Nationals somewhat, and I guess I care more about them than most other teams in the league. I don’t feel like there’s enough of a history between them yet to be full on rivals; maybe frenemies instead? They did just partner together in an effort to get their final vote candidates elected, so there is some cooperation. Besides, if Wikipedia has it, it must be a word, so I’m sticking with that one.

Anyway, onto the numbers.