Lohse, Arbitration & Great Expectations
We all know Kyle got the better end of arbitration, as he was awarded $3.95 million to play in 2006. Is it too much?
Minnesota had offered Lohse $3.4 million in arbitration. Had you asked me at the time what I thought, I'd have told you one of two things: Kyle Lohse isn't worth $3.4 million or it doesn't matter we'll be trading him anyway. Now I'm thinking that getting Lohse for less than $4 million suits me just fine.
American League #4 Starters by salary
Name Salary Age
Carl Pavano $9,000,000 29
Jose Contreras $8,500,000 33
Jarrod Washburn $6,550,000 30
C.C. Sabathia $5,250,000 24
David Wells $4,075,000 42
Gil Meche $2,535,000 26
Kyle Lohse $2,400,000 26
Ryan Drese $550,000 29
Erik Bedard $330,000 26
Doug Waechter $330,000U 24
David Bush $327,000 25
D.J. Carrasco $320,500U 28
Jeremy Bonderman $320,500 22
Kirk Saarloos $320,000E 26
U=2005 salary unavailable; 2004 salary listed
E=No salary information available; Estimate
These are your American League #4 starters in 2005 based on statistical performance. I'll follow this table with statistical and objective analysis, but I wanted to introduce you to the list first. Looking through the list, there aren't a whole lot of appealing options. Pavano is too expensive; Wells is too old; Carrasco is lucky to be around; Drese is running out of chances; Sabathia's throwing motion will shorten his career and is still pissed about LeCroy beating him to the post-game buffet.
Out of the 14 men listed, there are only three I like. One is Jarrod Washburn, but he's too expensive. There's no way the Twins are dishing out over $6 million for a fourth starter. Two is Jeremy Bonderman, but he's had a rought start in Detroit and may still be a year out from living up to his potential. Three is Kyle Lohse.
When you're a crazy-nuts fan, like most of us are, it's hard to be as close and familiar with a team as we can be and still not judge players subjectively. If we were to subjectively review Kyle Lohse, we're basing our judgements against not only a strong Minnesota pitching staff but also against our expectations for Lohse himself. That will bring up a laundry list of criticisms: there seems to be no poise on the mound; potential we saw in 2001 and 2002 has turned into little growth or maturity; superb stuff that hasn't been harnassed; unmet expectations; the ability to be amazingly inconsistant. Everyone has their own grocery list, and I know I've had mine.
Below is the same list, this time with select statistics to give you a broad view of each pitcher's performance in 2005.
American League #4 Starters by 2005 Statistics
Name IP ERA K/9 WHIP OPS
C. Pavano 100.0 4.77 5.04 1.47 .864
J. Contreras 205.2 3.61 6.77 1.23 .678
J. Washburn 177.1 3.20 4.77 1.33 .749
C. Sabathia 197.2 4.03 7.37 1.26 .682
D. Wells 184.0 4.45 5.23 1.31 .765
G. Meche 143.1 5.09 5.21 1.57 .788
K. Lohse 179.2 4.18 4.33 1.43 .798
R. Drese 129.1 5.78 3.20 1.61 .815
E. Bedard 142.2 4.00 7.94 1.38 .694
D. Waechter 157.0 5.62 4.99 1.46 .843
D. Bush 136.1 4.49 4.95 1.25 .780
D. Carrasco 115.2 4.79 3.85 1.57 .786
J. Bonderman 189.0 4.57 6.91 1.35 .761
K. Saarloos 160.2 4.17 2.99 1.40 .736
AVERAGE 158.2 4.48 5.25 1.40 .767
In 2005, if you look at this list and consider them all #4 starters, the mean average salary was just a hair under $3,000,000. If this is correct, then last year the Twins had a #4 starter at $600,000 below market value. In positive return you received 20 extra innings of work, an ERA 0.40 lower than average, and WHIP is roughly a push. On the downside Kyle's strikeout numbers are a little low and his OPS is 30 points above the mean.
A lot of the dilemma in giving Lohse a break is that he came on as a youngster in 2001 at the age of 22. In 2002 he put together a decent year, and it set up the fan base to believe they had a brash, young right-hander who could become a number two starter in time. But did he ever truly show that potential, or were our expectations just based on the flawed logic that he was a young gun at The Show? Kyle's minor league numbers aren't bad, but they didn't necessarily fortell the most promise either.
Did Kyle Lohse deserve to win arbitration?
Basically, arbitration breaks down like this. If you've had at least 3 years, no more than 6 years experience, and do not have a contract the following season, you are eligible for arbitration. If you're in the top third of players at your position statistically, you're also eligible. Both sides determine figures they deem fair, and go before 3 arbiters. Organizations can offer no lower than 80% of the player's salary the previous year and no lower than 70% of the salary two years prior.
Relevant Salary
Year Salary
2004 $395,000
2005 $2,400,000
2006 $3,950,000
Over the past two seasons, Lohse has gone to arbitration twice and has won twice. In each case the Twins were offering him a raise, but the two sides couldn't agree on a number. In 2005 each side couldn't close a $250,000 gap, and in the end Kyle got a $2 million dollar raise instead of a $1.75 million dollar raise. This season he'll get a $1.5 million dollar raise instead of a $1 million dollar raise. This tells me that while Minnesota recognizes the significance of Lohse's role in the rotation, they obviously didn't think he did as well as Kyle and his agent thought he did.
There's a reasonable man inside me somewhere insisting that paying Kyle $3.4 million would have been more than enough, but mostly that's the voice of a guy who thinks all athletes are overpaid. Then there's the baseball man inside me who, the more he looks into it, thinks that paying $3.95 million for Lohse is very fair. All things considered he did a very average job as the 4th man out of the rotation last season, and asking for what will be roughly $300-400K above average for a #4 starter in 2006 (with the abilities of Kyle Lohse) makes perfect sense.
He's 18-26 the past two seasons. His innings pitched have declined the past two seasons. Strikeout rates have dipped as well. But at the back end of the rotation, for the talent you're getting and the numbers you're getting, you can't go much more inexpensive. If you want better numbers, you'd have to overpay to get them. C.C. Sabathia's numbers were better across the board, but the Twins couldn't afford that salary. Erik Bedard performed on the cheap, but he's the diamond in the rough from 2005.
Does Kyle Lohse deserve to win his second consecutive arbitration? I believe he does. He'll throw 180 innings, he'll have an ERA in the lower 4's, and there will be plenty of quality starts to bring on an air of "strokey beards" in all of us. He's being paid more, and I expect him to improve accordingly. Why can't we see this Kyle every game? we'll ask while scratching our chins. There won't be any answers, but in that moment we'll be happy.
If Luis Rivas was the "Twin Most Likely To Get Ripped On" of 2005, who will get the nod in 2006?
Tony Batista - 56 %
Torii Hunter - 2 %
Jesse Crain - 0 %
Justin Morneau - 8 %
Michael Cuddyer - 10 %
Shannon Stewart - 6 %
Jason Bartlett - 1 %
Kyle Lohse - 14 %
I posted this poll a few weeks ago, and Lohse came in second. In the heat of the moment, there's no doubt I'll be up in the mix. But right now, while I can still be removed from the game, I'm objective. Lohse ain't so bad.
[EDIT: If you do want to go more inexpensive, then you're probably forcing Liriano into the rotation early. This post is quite officially long enough, but it's an interesting question. Would you be willing to possibly rush Liriano to save the extra money? Lots of upside, lots to lose. IF he's put into the rotation and handles himself fine, do you get average numbers in 2006?]
35 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Not surprised
by Jlubby on Feb 19, 2006 12:04 PM EST reply actions
How did you decide who the #4 starters are?
Team- #4 pitcher - SNLVAR
CWS - Jose Contreras 5.0
OAK - Rich Harden 4.8
ANA - Paul Byrd 4.1
MIN - Kyle Lohse* 3.8
MIN - Brad Radke* 3.7
CLE - Jake Westbrook 3.1
BOS - Bronson Arroyo 3.0
BAL - Daniel Cabrera 2.9
TOR - David Bush 2.6
NYY - Chien-Ming Wang 2.1
DET - Mike Maroth 2.0
SEA - Aaron Sele 1.7
TEX - Kameron Loe 1.1
TBA - Mark Hendrickson 0.8
KCA - Mike Wood 0.8
So, by this measure, Lohse was actually the Twins' 3rd best pitcher last season, with Radke coming in 4th. But even if we consider Lohse the #4, he was something like the fourth best #4 starter in the league last year, which is pretty darn good, and the difference between someone like Lohse and someone like Wang or Maroth is about 3 wins, which was the difference between the Twins being over .500 rather than under .500 last season. (Or, the difference between Lohse and Arroyo would've been enough to push the Red Sox over the Yankees last year.) But clearly, my list seems to differ from your list by a lot.
But what's a #4 starter anyway? Lohse was the 30th best starter in the AL by this measure last season. If AL teams drafted new rotations just to play one season, I have no doubt that Lohse would be drafted as the #3 starter for some team, and there's a slim chance he'd manage to slip in as the #2 starter for a team picking late in that hypothetical draft.
Would you pay Lohse more if he was the third best starter on the team? Would you pay him less if he was the fifth best starter on the team? Because no matter what his title is, he's going to be giving you the same value on the mound.
4th starter cirteria
It's a subjective list, but I tried to be as fair as possible and give room for judgement when there wasn't an obvious choice. There certainly weren't any motives in choosing these particular pitchers to prove a point, but I wanted something to compare Kyle against subjectively.
I like your last paragraph, a lot. It's a great point. It doesn't matter which slot he ends up in because you're paying him for his performance, not where he falls in the rotation.
My response is that I wouldn't pay Lohse more if he were the #3 starter, because I'd expect more of our third starter. But of course we've been spoiled by pitching over the last 5 or 6 seasons, and like you said, he'd be a #3 guy for a lot of clubs. Regardless, the point I wanted to make was that looking at Lohse objectively (as much as possible) should shed a little light on the premise that he's not as bad as advertised (except in 2004).
Agreed on Lohse
Ranking the pitchers selected
#16 Wells 99.919
#17 Sabathia 98.172
#20 Washburn 97.521
#25 Contreras 94.046
#29 Bonderman 90.532
#32 Bush 89.085
#36 Pavano 87.469
#39 Lohse 86.606
#43 Bedard 85.238
#44 Saarlos 83.434
#54 Waechter 77.933
#61 Meche 68.483
#63 Carrasco 68.394
#69 Drese 59.379
This places Lohse as the 8th best of this group.
by roger @ Twinkie Town on Feb 20, 2006 8:40 AM EST up reply actions
Inside the numbers
The formula
by roger @ Twinkie Town on Feb 20, 2006 4:25 PM EST up reply actions
The #4 starters in my study...
Washburn Angels 97.521
Wakefield BoSox 94.324
Contreras ChiSox 94.046
Westbrook Cleveland 91.098
Bonderman Detroit 90.532
Bush Toronto 89.085
Pavano Yankees 87.469
Lohse Twins 86.606
Bedard Baltimore 85.238
Saarlos Oakland 83.434
Waechter Tampa Bay 77.933
Meche Seattle 68.483
Carrasco KansasCity 68.394
Park Texas 66.685
Lohse also ranks 8th on this list of #4 starters, yet, as the 39th best starter in the AL, he would be good enough to be the #3 starter for several clubs. He is also a bit better than the average #4 starter as his 86.606 rating was slightly better than the average 84.346 rating of the 14 #4 starters in my study.
His performance in 2005 doesn't tell us how he is going to pitch in 2006...yet it was a major factor in his arbitration win!
by roger @ Twinkie Town on Feb 20, 2006 4:48 PM EST up reply actions
Contreras
by roger @ Twinkie Town on Feb 20, 2006 4:51 PM EST up reply actions
Pavano better than Lohse?
I really don't see how Pavano could have been more valuable than Lohse last season when he pitched so many fewer games and gave up more runs per game in the games that he did pitch.
Innings
Innings
Lohse Pavano
ERA 28.708 25.157
Innings Pitched 14.106 7.895
K/9ip 7.220 8.400
BB/9ip 20.303 27.778
HR/9ip 2.256 1.634
WHIP 14.013 13.605
Bonues Pts 0 3.000
(Pavano had 1 cg and 1 shutout)
Total 86.606 87.469
Lohse earned significant points for innings pitched, however, Pavano was better with less BB as well as earning 3 points for a complete game and a shutout.
by roger @ Twinkie Town on Feb 20, 2006 7:40 PM EST up reply actions
Innings
So, let's go through a little calculation on how many runs 178 innings of Lohse plus 22 innings of a replacement pitcher gives up compared to 100 innings of Brown and 100 innings of a replacement pitcher.
Pitcher - IP - ERA - Runs
Lohse - 178.2 - 4.18 - 83
Replacement - 21.1 - 5.50 - 13
Total - 200.0 - 4.32 - 96
Pitcher - IP - ERA - Runs
Pavano - 100.0 - 4.77 - 53
Replacement - 100.0 - 5.50 - 61
Total - 200.0 - 5.13 - 114
That's a difference of almost 20 runs. A good rule of thumb is that 10 runs is about one win, so by this rough calculation, Lohse is about two full wins better than Pavano. Using the support-neutral stats at Baseball Prospectus, Lohse rates out as about 4 wins better than Pavano, so this estimate is pretty conservative as to how much better Lohse was than Pavano. And two wins is a big enough gap by itself, that no reasonable metric should have these two guys anywhere near each other.
Those innings make a huge difference, because more often than not, when you have to call someone up from the minors as a starter, he's going to be pretty bad. Plus, if you start to get multiple guys in the same rotation who can't pitch many innings, you wind up having to call up even worse substitutes to fill in. Innings matter a lot more than you're giving them credit for.
My formula
by roger @ Twinkie Town on Feb 21, 2006 8:57 AM EST up reply actions
Okay then...
The point
But if the point is to rate pitchers according to the value they bring to their respective teams, then an arbitrary scale is not good enough. You need to demonstrate that your scale measures the value pitchers bring to their team by weighting the variables correctly.
We are merely pointing out that it doesn't jive with conventional wisdom as to the weight of the variables. The most obvious one is innings pitched. But it wouldn't hurt to review the state of the art in pitching analysis for the other variables as well.
It all began
I later revised it and used it to compare starting rotations, thus, compare the 70 starters in the AL. You don't have to agree with it or like it...the fact is with spring training starting now is not the time to go back and make changes to something in which I invested 30-40 hours of time last fall.
by roger @ Twinkie Town on Feb 21, 2006 2:28 PM EST up reply actions
Wha???
Well that doesn't make any sense at all. Your formula is admitedly quite imperfect. As we said, the numbers are completely arbitrary. If you want it to be respected, you are going to need to fix that.
Frankly, I would much rather see VoRP than your arbitrary numbers. YOur scale is fun to discuss, but you use it every time we talk about pitchers, and it just isn't acurate enough to warrent submission as evidence.
by AdamOnFirst on Feb 21, 2006 10:48 PM EST up reply actions
I agree
The problem with that formula is it assigns arbitrary numbers. For such a formula to work, the coefficiants of multiplication would have to be proven to actually relate to results. At current, they are arbitray and do not.
Pavano had an ERA four fifths of a run higher and and OPB 80 points higher. He pitched 70 less innings. Regardless of any other stat, allready Lohse is a significantly superior pitcher.
I think Lohse was a hell of a fourth starter last year, putting up an above average ERA (league average 4.35) from a back-end rotation position. Furthermore, he comes at a reasonably modest price. Compareable pitcher, Jeff Weaver, who had a slightly worse ERA last year in a much better pitcher's league recieved twice Lohse's contract this year. Lohse provides great value for his rotation spot and cost while he pitches, and he allows Liriano, perhaps baseballs most highly regarde dpitching prospect, to finish his development properly with a few more months in teh minors. When Liriano is ready, the Twins can choose to trade Lohse if the right deal appears.
In short, Lohse is a valuble player to the team because he has a good price tag, good value over other like pitchers, and he provides the Twins with a great deal of pitching depth.
by AdamOnFirst on Feb 20, 2006 11:43 PM EST up reply actions
Double value to innings
Wakefield 99.187 94.324
Washburn 98.302 97.521
Contreras 97.833 94.046
Westbrook 94.791 91.098
Bonderman 92.399 90.532
Lohse 88.034 86.606
Bush 85.276 89.085
Saarlos 84.888 83.434
Bedard 84.254 85.238
Pavano 78.903 87.469
Waechter 77.243 77.933
Meche 70.400 68.483
Carrasco 68.377 68.394
Park 65.331 66.685
Is Pavano better than Lohse? If you put an emphasis on innings pitched and era, yes. If you put an emphasis on other factors, they are about equal. Anyway, the major difference in these changes was to promote Lohse a few spots at the expense of Pavano.
by roger @ Twinkie Town on Feb 21, 2006 7:40 PM EST up reply actions
The List
I think Lohse is a hell of a deal this year. Just look at Paul Byrd. Lohse and Byrd had identical ERA's last year (Byrd's was actually a bit the worse) and Byrd is getting 8.5 million to pitch for the Angels this year.
I used to absolutly hate Kyle Lohse, and while I dont love him now, I want him here. I dont think he'll have a Garland like breakout year, But I think if we get the same or close to last year's production from him, which we should, he is very valuble and well worth the money.
expectations
I don't know how the list was formulated...
I don't know whether we should deal Lohse or not (if the right deal comes along, I guess we should if Baker/Liriano are ready), but he IS a bargain in this market.
by djskilbr on Feb 21, 2006 4:44 PM EST reply actions
Bedard & Bonderman
Baltimore Top 4
Name Inn Starts
R. Lopez 209.1 35
B. Chen 197.1 32
D. Cabrera 161.3 29
E. Bedard 141.2 24
Detroit Top 4
Name Inn Starts
J. Johnson 210.0 33
M. Maroth 209.0 34
N. Robertson 196.2 32
J. Bonderman 189.0 29
This is just an example, using the two names you specifically disagreed with, of how I rated pitchers on their teams. On a team like Detroit, it's hard to pick any of these guys to be a one or a two...but this is how I did it. You're right about Bedard--he could build upon a solid 2005 and become a top-tier pitcher for his team in 2006; but these judgements were made for 2005
Again, it's a subjective list used to compare Kyle against. Whether you used my list, Roger's or Ubelmann's, I imagine the results would be pretty similar.
Bedard
Point being, while Bedard certainly might not be the #4 this year, he's as likely as any number of guys on their staff.
by Jlubby on Feb 22, 2006 1:33 AM EST up reply actions
Huh? What?
For arbitration? This is gibberish. Also, the home run leader each year is declared a free agent. LOL.
by statman on Feb 22, 2006 2:05 AM EST reply actions
Re: gibberish
"An un-signed player who has at least 3 years of service time is also eligible for arbitration. The top 1 third of players as determined by their statistics are also be eligble for arbitration. Players are arbitration-eligible again in their 4th and 5th years of service, if they do not have a multi-year contract and meet requirments."
If this is incorrect you're welcome to enlighten all of us.
I think you are talking about Super 2s
The top 1/6 of players with more than 2 years experience and less than 3 full years are considered Super 2s and are eligible for arbitration. This is how Cuddyer became eligible this year.
by snuessle on Feb 22, 2006 11:15 AM EST up reply actions
Determining a #4 starter
Most statistical fallacies start with an incorrect basis such as this.
by statman on Feb 22, 2006 2:08 AM EST reply actions
Not if you carefully state what you're measuring..
Yes...
So I tend to agree, we can't just arbitrarily pick "4th starters." Bonderman was clearly Detroit's #1, for instance.
by djskilbr on Feb 22, 2006 1:44 PM EST reply actions
How about...
According BP's VORP rating, Lohse was ranked 57th amoung all pitchers last year. That had mim sandwiched between Mark Prior and Jamiee Moyer. He was worth only 1.2 VORP less than Brad Radke, a player the Twins are paying ten million dollars (with no one questioning the logic). He was worth 5.5 VORP less than Josh Beckett, a player who just recieved a HUGE, long-term contract. He ranked higher than pitchers such as Jeff Weaver, Greg Maddox, Jeff SUppan, David Wells, Mike Mussina, Kris Benson, and Javier Vasquez, all of whom are payed significantly more, some over double, what Lohse is.
Once again, bargain.
hello,
by cortalekanak on Jan 16, 2007 6:50 PM EST reply actions

by 






















