Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

On Friday afternoon, we were discussing major league transaction rules and puzzling over exactly what was meant by \"option years.\"

To make a long story short... Paul D was right, I was wrong.

Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa

We were all in agreement on this much. Once a player is added to the 40 man roster (which must happen in his fourth year as a pro, otherwise he is exposed in the Rule 5 draft), he has three \"option years.\" During these three years, he can be optioned to a minor league team. As often as the major league team feels like, it's entirely a matter of the team's discretion.

What we seemed to keep going back and forth on was whether the option years ticked by, one after the other, once a player had been added to the 40 man roster. In which case, John Olerud's three option years would have been 1990, 1991, and 1992. Or whether an option year was used up only if the player was actually optioned to the minor leagues. In which case, John Olerud still has all three of his option years left, which is surely of interest to someone.

I have been in touch with a Higher Authority, a definitive and reliable oracle... and John Olerud still has all of his option years remaining.

Oops. My bad.

In a somewhat related subject, if a player refuses a minor league assignment and chooses to become a free agent, his team is no longer responsible for his contract. He's on his own.

The team would be responsible if they gave a player with a guaranteed contract his unconditional release. Said player could then sign with any other club for any amount whatsoever (it will always be the minimum) and his original team would have to make up the difference (see Doyle Alexander being paid by the Yankees to pitch for the Blue Jays in 1983.)

Posted by Magpie on Monday, January 09 2006 @ 07:46 PM EST.

Option Years | 43 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

daryn - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 08:09 PM EST (#139339) #

>I have been in touch with a Higher Authority, a definitive and reliable oracle... and John Olerud still has all of his option years remaining.<

Really? I was SURE it was the other way...
I guess you learn something every day (but I tend to fight it!)

Magpie - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 08:17 PM EST (#139342) #

I was sure too. I stand corrected.

sweat - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 08:34 PM EST (#139343) #

I remember hearing something about Olerud possibly being sent down last year. Maybe it was for conditioning purposes? I only remember because there was talk about how Olerud had never spent a day in the minors in his life.

Magpie - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 08:40 PM EST (#139344) #

Olerud made his minor league debut last year. And yes, it was injury rehab. That does not use up one of his option years (as he was not \"optioned\" to the minors.)

Michael - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 10:13 PM EST (#139356) #

Tangent: Primer has the ZIPS projections for Blue Jays up. Some key lines:

Name               P    AVG   OBP   SPC   G  AB   R   H 2B 3B HR RBI  BB   K SB CS 
Glaus              3b  .265  .368  .539 115 419  71 111 23  1 30  87  66 109  4  2 
Overbay*           1b  .303  .390  .476 154 531  81 161 42  1 16  82  77 108  1  0 
Phillips           c   .267  .331  .405 130 420  48 112 25  0 11  60  35  52  0  1 
Rios               rf  .277  .326  .404 148 530  76 147 28  6  9  63  35 103 13  7

and for pitchers:

Name                 W   L    ERA   G  GS     INN    H   ER  HR   BB    K 
Ryan*                6   1   2.80  73   0    74.0   52   23   4   29  105 
Halladay            14   6   3.16  25  25   185.0  173   65  17   28  141 
Burnett             13   7   3.59  28  28   183.0  163   73  14   61  154 
Speier               4   2   3.71  66   0    68.0   61   28  10   20   56 
Frasor               5   3   3.78  63   0    69.0   62   29   5   30   56 
Towers              12  11   4.15  32  30   193.0  214   89  26   30  102 
Chacin*             11  11   4.43  32  32   189.0  193   93  22   71  121 
Lilly*              10  12   4.69  29  29   165.0  161   86  25   70  136

I'll be very pleased if everybody hits those numbers. Note, that the Jays pitching performances don't take into account the decrease to the Jays defense.

HollywoodHartman - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 10:25 PM EST (#139359) #

So every Jays pitcher is going to regress? Drag...

What are the lines on some other Jays position players? (Just wondering about the young guns, Shea, and V-Dub)

CeeBee - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 10:38 PM EST (#139360) #

I'm counting on Roy to make closer to 35 starts :) Could he be unlucky 3 years in a row?

Pistol - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 10:40 PM EST (#139361) #

Here's the ZIPS link:

http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/oracle/discussion/2006_zips_projections_toronto_blue_jays/

Michael - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 10:41 PM EST (#139362) #

All the stuff is at ZIPS at Primer (baseballthinkfactory officially, I still think of it as Primer).

Other lines of interest:

2006 ZiPS Projection - Corey Koskie
---------------------------------------------------------
 AB   R    H  2B 3B  HR RBI  BB  SO  SB    BA   OBP   SLG  
---------------------------------------------------------
402  54   95  23  1  14  53  55 105   5  .236  .336  .403

2006 ZiPS Projections
-----------------------------------------------------------
Player       W   L   G  GS   IP    H   ER  HR  BB  SO   ERA
-----------------------------------------------------------
Batista      8  10  47  22  163  172   84  15  73 103  4.64
-----------------------------------------------------------

2006 ZiPS Projections 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Player      AB   R    H  2B 3B  HR RBI  BB  SO  SB    BA   OBP   SLG 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Hudson     490  63  131  29  5  10  58  43  73   6  .267  .329  .408
Santos     434  52   94  14  3   8  45  22 103   2  .217  .256  .318
--------------------------------------------------------------------

2006 ZiPS Projections
-------------------------------------------------------------
Player         W   L   G  GS   IP    H   ER  HR  BB  SO   ERA
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bush          11   8  31  31  179  177   79  21  40 128  3.97

King Ryan - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 10:45 PM EST (#139363) #

Bush's projection is basically what I expect out of Burnett.

That's a nice line for Overbay, to say the least! Glaus' stats are only for 115 games so if he plays 150 games the counting stats would look better. And let's not forget that Hillenbrand promised us 30 homers.

HollywoodHartman - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 10:45 PM EST (#139364) #

I think the SLG on Hill and Adams are both a little low.

melondough - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 11:29 PM EST (#139367) #

So if I add up the projected wins for the twelve estimated to pitch for the team, I get 86 + Downs. They have projected Downs as a starter so I guess they have him pegged for AAA (am I reading this right?)

The twelve would include: Halladay, Burnett, Chacin, Towers, Lilly, Ryan, Frasor, Spier, Schoeneweisz, Chulk, Walker, and Downs. I assume Marcum, League, and McGowen start off in AAA.

Elijah - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 11:38 PM EST (#139368) #

IIRC, the option years for a veteran player is immaterial because after five years of service time, a player cannot be sent down without his permission - option or outright. So even though Olerud technically still has three options left, I believe the five-year rule would prevent him from being sent down without consent. And like Magpie said, even if he refuses, he can still collect on his guaranteed contract and become a free agent.

But I could be wrong.

Jonny German - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 11:50 PM EST (#139370) #

Am I reading this right?

Not at all. ZiPS projects all players as if they were in the majors, and per Dan Szymborski himself \"Performances have not been allocated to predicted playing time in the majors - many of the players listed above are unlikely to play in the majors at all in 2006.\" Which is to say, none of the playing time projections should be taken too seriously.

Ron - Monday, January 09 2006 @ 11:59 PM EST (#139371) #

For people that are into ZIPS, how accurate are they in projecting performance?

I might have just wasted 3 mins of my life looking at them:)

TamRa - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 12:21 AM EST (#139372) #

There must be something in ZIPS that factors in time missed in previous seasons. I see no reason to project Doc, AJ, or Glaus to miss that much time.

Going down the list:

Increase Glaus' GP, and thus his counting stats, by 1/3 and we can all be happy about that;

I'll take that from Overbay with a smile. Ditto Cat and Wells;

In fact, I don't see any hitter there I'd be disapointed in though I think maybe they have Zaun a bit low.

Roy is not only getting too few starts, but his ERA is at least half a run higher than what I expect;

AJ has too few starts to, and might be a bit low in K's, but otherwise seems fine;

I think Lily will rebound better than that since it's his walk year.

Still, that's not a bad team.

melondough - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 12:33 AM EST (#139373) #

Sorry a bit off topic but had to post this. Just came out an hour ago.

What was Dayn Perry smoking when he listed the Jays needs as 1B/DH? He also gave them a C grade for off-season moves, mainly because of the Troy Glaus deal.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/5234118

TamRa - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 12:52 AM EST (#139374) #

"So if I add up the projected wins for the twelve estimated to pitch for the team, I get 86 +..."

Consider, if you give Doc and AJ 34 starts apeice (and there's no reason not to) and then run it again you get (pro-rated) something interesting. I assumed 34 starts for Doc and AJ and 32 for Lily and tried to maintain both the 162 game total, and the winning precentage ZIPS projected. I also had to go with 11 men since I don't know what to do with all those starts from Downs, and I had to adjust for Walker not getting 6 starts. Here's what i came up with:

Doc 19-9 (34)
A.J.16-8 (34)
Josh 12-11 (30)
Gus- 11-11 (32)
Lily 11-13 (32)
'pen 26-16

that's, um, 94-68 (there was one too many games...an averages thing...so I deducted one win)

I think I can live with 94 wins next year.
;)

(and that's with me thinking Doc and Lily will have better ERA's than they project)

Pistol - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 09:47 AM EST (#139382) #

"There must be something in ZIPS that factors in time missed in previous seasons."

It's entirely objective so if a player missed time in the past he's likely to be projected to miss time in the future (and I assume more missed time after a certain age).

Mike Green - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 09:47 AM EST (#139383) #

The only ZiPS projection I have serious analytical issues with is the Chacin one. The ERA and W-L numbers must be as poor as they are because the system treats both his 2004 performance in double A and his 2005 major league performance as "DIPS flukes", i.e. inconsistent with his W, K, HR and BIP rates. I acknowledge that as a possibility, but the other possibility (that Chacin is one of those pitchers who will consistently allow fewer runs than expected from the raw outcome data) has to be treated as a realistic one too. The reasonable range for Chacin was an ERA of 3.9-4.1, absent any defensive changes.

I had thought that defence was taken into account in the pitching projections. ERA and hits allowed projections are basically meaningless without it.

MatO - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 10:26 AM EST (#139385) #

I really see the Jays defence as being only marginally worse:
Outfield - same (unless Hinske actually sees some time out there)
Overbay-Hinske better
Hill-Hudson worse
Adams - I expect him to be better
Glaus-Koskie/Hillenbrand worse?
Zaun/backup same

Will not a healthy Halladay, healthy Lilly, Burnett, Ryan produce quite a few more K's (100+?) than the players they are replacing (Bush, Batista, Walker, McGowan etc) resulting in a slightly lower reliance on defence in 2006?

Mike Green - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 10:40 AM EST (#139386) #

If one projects Adams' defence to be better, it is logical to project Zaun's and Catalanotto's to be worse simply because of age/health contingencies. I'm not saying that Adams will get better and Zaun/Cat will decline on defence, just that consistency requires a common approach.

I agree that the team should be a little less reliant on defence than last year due to a likely increase in the K rate, but it's still a big deal. The problem is that the Rogers Centre favours the home run. Giving up many flyballs is not generally a winning strategy here (Speier's season last year is a notable exception). That means infield defence and particularly defence up the middle (for the DP) has disproportionate importance.

Pistol - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 11:04 AM EST (#139387) #

Chacin has a high percentage of popups (3rd in baseball last year) which I don't think is factored into the ZIPS projections. If so, that would underrate him.

Jonny German - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 11:09 AM EST (#139388) #

Note, that the Jays pitching performances don't take into account the decrease to the Jays defense.

Is that an assumption, or has Dan specifically indicated that? I don't see anything about in in the Jays thread at Primer, but maybe he said so in an earlier thread.

Wildrose - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 11:11 AM EST (#139389) #

Bryan Smith at Baseball Analysts has started his top 75 prospect ratings. I thought his comments on the two Jays was quite positive.

mcpherv - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 11:19 AM EST (#139391) #

Guys, speaking of option years, Rosario has apparently been granted a 4th option:
http://bluejays.scout.com/2/487453.html
Glad to know that the Jays have some leeway now in how they ease him into mlb duty. It otherwise might have been a rather difficult situation considering all the pitching this team currently has.

Mike Green - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 11:33 AM EST (#139392) #

The most interesting comment from Bryan Smith was that the Jays might very well be wisest to make Lind a DH, i.e. let him focus on improving his core skill. With Hillenbrand entering free agency after 2006 and Catalanotto's contract up after 2006, it looks like there could be openings at both LF and DH.

Mike Green - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 12:53 PM EST (#139396) #

Dan Szymborski has clarified that he does not take into account defensive changes in the off-season but regresses overall defense towards league average. This might result in optimistic results for groundballers Halladay, Schoeneweis and Burnett, and perhaps pessimistic ones for Speier, Lilly, Chulk and Chacin, depending on the manner of regression.

Mylegacy - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 01:14 PM EST (#139397) #

I read Bryan Smith's (Baseball Analysts) report on Lind and McGowan.

I was excited about Lind's report. I've considered Lind as Hill with a bit more pop. He sees Lind as a possible Molitor! Wouldn't it be great if we're both right and Lind is Molitor and Hill is just slightly worse!

Drool drool.

timpinder - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 03:07 PM EST (#139401) #

Mike Green,

I've thought about the departures at DH and LF next year as well. Is there any chance Lind will be ready? (He's starting this year in AA, isn't he?)

I was also wondering what you thought of Griffin.

Carlos Lee is a free agent next year and my guess is that he will be J.P.'s primary target for LF, since J.P. tried to trade for him before. However, that would take up most of the available budget, so maybe an in-house solution for the DH position would be best.

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts.

Pistol - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 03:08 PM EST (#139402) #

As coincidences go BP had an article explaining options today (I believe it's a subscriber article):

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=4700

timpinder - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 03:13 PM EST (#139404) #

A little off topic, but the Hot Stove Power Rankings are up on ESPN and I thought some of you might be interested in casting your vote. It's a poll where the reader ranks the best teams from 1 - 30. Toronto is currently rated as the 8th best team, ahead of such teams as the Braves, Astros, Athletics, Cubs and Twins. Unfortunately, five of the seven teams currently ranked ahead of the Jays are in the AL.

DeMarco - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 03:17 PM EST (#139405) #

If one projects Adams' defence to be better, it is logical to project Zaun's and Catalanotto's to be worse simply because of age/health contingencies

Adams defence will be significantly better do to the human vacuum Lyle Overbay now at first base. The majority of Adams errors last season were throwing errors, which may be a result of Eric Hinske being the first baseman.

I fully expect the number of errors that Adams makes this year to dramatically decrease because of this.

Mike Green - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 04:01 PM EST (#139409) #

There is a chance that Lind will be ready in 2007, although you wouldn't want to count on it. There are a number of budgetary and player availability issues with respect to possible 2007 openings. Carlos Lee is an interesting option, but there are several others. I imagine that we will have lengthy discussions here about this topic in May or June.

sweat - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 05:42 PM EST (#139419) #

I remember most of Adams throwing errors airmailing first base. That said, I think Adams will improve his D just by having a year of experience under his belt.

Dave501 - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 06:06 PM EST (#139423) #

Off topic here, but does anyone have any links where we can find info on Rosario's winter ball stats. I haven't heard anything in like a month, but last i heard he was doing really well.
and speaking of options, how many option years does Rosario have left? I think this topic got brought up recently but i hadn't caught the answer.

Magpie - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 06:46 PM EST (#139429) #

Here are Rosario's winter ball numbers:

                    W  L    ERA   G SV  IP     H   R  ER  BB  SO SO/9
Rosario, Francisco  1  2   2.63   8  0  24.0  20  11   7   8  17  6.4

Earlier in this thread, there'ss a link to a story on how Rosario has been granted a fourth option year (this can happen if a player uses all three option years before completing five years as a professional.)

HollywoodHartman - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 06:54 PM EST (#139432) #

For everyone saying Burnett won't pitch well with the DH, here are his stats in AL parks last year.

Era: 0.00
Whip: 0.44
BAA: 0.71
K/9: 7
BB/9: 2
K/BB: 3.5:1

That my friends is a complete game shutout against the potent offence of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays. I think he'll do just fine in the AL.

VGeras - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 08:07 PM EST (#139438) #

Here is the rosario story

http://bluejays.scout.com/2/487453.html

CeeBee - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 08:28 PM EST (#139441) #

"For everyone saying Burnett won't pitch well with the DH, here are his stats in AL parks last year.

Era: 0.00
Whip: 0.44
BAA: 0.71
K/9: 7
BB/9: 2
K/BB: 3.5:1

That my friends is a complete game shutout against the potent offence of the Tampa Bay Devil Rays. I think he'll do just fine in the AL."

lets see.... 35 starts, should go 35-0 with a 0.00 era. ;)

Cristian - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 09:54 PM EST (#139447) #

Well if there is one thing this team has needed during the past 3 years, it's a Devil Ray killer.

Michael - Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 11:08 PM EST (#139453) #

Yeah, I'll be very pleasently surprised if Burnett can put up a 3.59 or less ERA with 28 or more games started and 183 or more innings pitched.

I think Burnett is dealing with a change in league from NL East to AL East that not only means a better league but also means better hitters since we know the AL is stronger right now than the NL. Also, Burnett is dealing with a team that should have worse overall defense than Florida. Also, Burnett is dealing with a history of bad home/road splits and a home ball park that is more of a hitters park.

DeMarco - Wednesday, January 11 2006 @ 10:40 AM EST (#139467) #

Don't forget Burnett's career record in the Rogers Centre:

- Won 100% of his games started
- Pitched complete games in all of his starts
- 0.33 WHIP
- 1.00 ERA
- .069 batting average against

Option Years | 43 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.