Is R.A. Dickey Better Than Joe Blanton?
The headline seems silly, doesn’t it? But how much better is he? I believe I’m asking a fair question, based on the contract Joe Blanton just received from the Angels.
The Angels signed Blanton to a two-year, $15M contract. That breaks out to an average of $7.5M per year, right?
OK, so, if all reports are correct, the Mets are offering R.A. Dickey a two-year extension, worth $20M, to his current contract. As it stands now, Dickey will be paid $5M in 2013 (or, $1.5M less than what the Mets will pay Frank Francisco — but I digress).
A bit of punching on the calculator goes like this: $20M + $5M = $25M. One year plus two years of extension equals three years. So, three years, $25M. When you divide $25M by 3, the final result is $8.3M.
So, if Dickey accepts the Mets’ offer, he’ll be paid an average of $8.3M per year, while Joe Blanton gets $7.5M per year from the Angels. Do you think Dickey is only $800,000 per year better than Joe Blanton?
Answer in the comments.
Even then, the answer to the question posed by the title is “yes” … it’s just by more than the contract would imply.
Of course, getting and keeping someone also results in different calculations and different teams have different needs and abilities so they pay for the same player in different ways etc.
If I was making $800K more than someone else doing my job, I’d be quite happy. If the Mets sign RA to an extension before the season, they will bridge the gap and move closer to 2 yrs/$25 million. I think that is Alderson’s 2nd choice if he can’t get the big controllable prospect in return. I am not buying that they will play him without extending, I think it is just part of the negotiations.
From the fantasyland / Monopoly money perspective of MLB, Dickey’s been grossly underpaid three years in a row, and the Mets want to continue to underpay him for another three years. I wonder what the Yankees would pay if they controlled R.A. right now?
Remember the A.J. Burnett contract? Laughable that Burnett got that ridiculous amount of money/years and yet Dickey is considered “risky.” Go figure.
do you think RA wants to go into this season w/o a contract and roll dice?
i dont think he does. i think he wants the financial security now. in that case he doesnt have the negotiating advantage. mets are daring RA, like yanks dared jeter to find a better deal. because mets know dickey risks pitching out this deal on a bad mets team and numbers can suffer because of it…so maybe being crappy helps the mets in this instance…..
– Athlete outperforms contract.
– Athlete wants extension that not only gives him a raise after the current contract, but also replaces current contract with money that’s in line with performance.
– Team doesn’t wish to buy high, and gives lowball offer.
– Player gets pissed, vows to prove the team wrong, and plays all season with a chip on his shoulder for being underpaid.
– Player then leaves team for the highest bidder in free agency.
Dickey’s said that he completely understands if Alderson needs to trade him to improve the team, but I don’t see any reason why he should be understanding about the team refusing to pay him what he’s worth.
Congratulations on the new calculator! I remember when you told me that you didn’t have one. Have you figured out how to calculate percentages?
Percentages? Easy tiger, I’m just getting used to all the buttons with numbers on them. This is much more complicated than an abacus (and a little slower, but whatever – you can’t carry an abacus in your front pocket, after all).
A solid #2-#3 starter is probably worth at least twice as much. The gap between them and a bargain bin guy (expected WAR, if you like) is more than twice as much. The availability is often less than half as much. So if Blanton is worth $7.5mil, then Anibal Sanchez is probably worth >$15mil/yr; let’s say $18mil.
– If you think Dickey’s 2012 was a fluke (but you don’t think he’ll suddenly die the second he turns 39), then he’s probably worth about $18mil/yr in Blanton Bucks.
– If you think his 2012 K rate represents a sustainable improvement and that throwing knuckleballs will render aging a non-issue for the duration of the contract, then he’s a true ace, and is probably worth another huge jump up in price, perhaps $27mil/yr in Blanton Bucks.
– If you think he’s gonna fall apart due to age and be unable to pitch, then he’s worth less than Blanton.
Personally, I’d ignore that 3rd possibility and split the difference between the first two, concluding:
If Joe Blanton is worth $15mil for 2 years, R.A. Dickey is worth $45mil for 2 years.
I think the Angels overpaid for Blanton. That said, if the Mets were to pay R.A. $50mil over the next 3 years, I’d expect they’d about get their money’s worth. (Not that that would be good business, as they can clearly get him for less.)
These negotiations make me wonder how ugly and embarrassing the Reyes negotiations might’ve been, if the Marlins didn’t sign him so quickly.
Blanton 2010 9-6 4.82 165 inn 134 ks 1.41
Dickey 2011 8-13 (poor offense, bullpen and putrid Defense, bad luck) 3.28 208 inn 134 Ks 22 Quality starts
Blanton only made a few starts and pitched 41 innings 5.01 era
2012 Dickey 20-6 2.73, 208 inning 208 Ks 1.05 WHIP 27 quality starts
Blanton again did not serve as a FT starter. His ERA was hovering at 5 again.
He is consistently worse than Dickey. Pay Dickey and move on.
However, your spelling sucks, so I hope you’re not an editor.
Which part of my argument suggested that I wanted to take money away from players who were overpaid?
Could you elaborate on why the Mets would be bankrupt in 5 years if I were the owner.
Or perhaps, you could explain how my methods would be any worse than the current ownership, which bankrupt the Mets 5 years ago?