Well, it's not official yet, but it seems pretty close - the Blue Jays are going to sign Jose Bautista to a 5 year deal worth $65 million, with a team option for 2016 worth $13 million. There's a press conference at 5 PM.
(Photo courtesty #2JB)
Reaction on the Jays blogosphere seems to be somewhat mixed, between negative and indifferent. I'm puzzled by this, for a variety of reasons relating to both Bautista and the club. The view from the establishment seems slightly more positive, with the caveat that the Jays should have waited til the end of the season to lock Bautista up.
To me, their are two ways to assess this - whether Bautista is going to be "worth" the deal, in the abstract, and whether the deal, right now, makes sense for Toronto Blue Jays.
Looking at the later point first, I have to think that the answer is an unqualified yes. Let's start from a salary perspective. The Jays can definitely afford Bautista. The team was willing (well, contractually obligated) to pay Vernon Wells $86 million over the next four years, and instead will pay him $5m. Clearly this wasn't an either/or decision, but there's money in the budget. Which brings up a second point - is this going to negatively impact what the Jays can do going forward. I mean, what's the point of having all that Wells money if they are just going to blow it on Joey Bats? Well, I suppose this gets a little more tricky, but I would have to think that there won't be a huge change in the Jays' M.O. for a couple of reasons.
Firstly, it's not like the Jays have a huge payroll to begin with. The Jays opening day payroll for 2011 isn't available yet for a variety of reasons, but with Bautista it figures to be in about the $70 million dollar range, including Vernon's going away present and Adeiny's contract (a total of about $8m, which count for accounting but not practical purposes.) Going forward, the Jays have a rather remarkable amount of payroll flexibility. Not counting Adeiny, the team has four players under contract for next year. Four. Obviously a bunch of guys are arbitration eligible, but Bautista, Romero, Lind and Rajai Davis are the only players with guaranteed contracts for next year. Aaron Hill, Jason Frasor, Octavio Dotel, and Edwin Encarnacion all have team options, and Frank Francisco, Shawn Camp and John McDonald are the only guys that are out and out free agents. So, it's not like there are a ton of guys to lock up. I imagine that, based on their performance this season, the team will try to sign several arbitration eligible players to long term deals like they did with Romero. Yunel Escobar and Brandon Morrow have two arbitration years after this one, and Travis Snider and Brett Cecil both will have three, I believe, and everyone else won't be eligible for a while and won't be worth big money. So, I can't really see this move preventing the Jays from locking up their own guys, who probably won't start getting expensive until 2014 and 2015 anyway. (All salary data from Cot's)
Secondly, I don't think this will affect the Jays free agent strategy. The last big money free agent signee the Jays inked was... AJ Burnett and BJ Ryan. The franchise, for better or worse, just doesn't ink big money guys. I tend to think it's for better - the market effiency, if you will, is definitely in signing your own guys. As for next offseason, when Prince Fielder and Albert Pujols are free agents, at least theoretically? Well, I don't really think that this inhibits the Jays here. If they are going to dole out $240 million for Pujols, or $180 million for Fielder, these are decisions for which approval will come above AA's head. I don't think the $13 million average annual value of the Batista contract will have a large impact on that. The complaint that the Jays are in the wrong place in the "success cycle"? Well I think a comparable player is only going to be more expensive, and at this point you have to think the Jays are aiming for 2012-2014, the years Bautista's extension, if you will, kicks in.
Thirdly, Bautista does not look likely to "block" any of the Jays prospects, for two reasons. The first is that Bautista plays 2 positions, 3B and OF, and can presumably learn to play a passable 1B, or if necessary DH. The second is that the Jays best prospects are almost all catchers and pitchers, positions that Bautista does not play. The Jays only have one corner infield prospect to speak of, Brett Lawrie. The outfield situation is a bit better, with three guys that could be considered prospects (there is a chance Lawrie ends up in the OF as well.) Anthony Gose is the most highly regarded, and he is a couple years out and going to play CF. Eric Thames and Moises Sierra are the other two prospects, though neither makes the Jays top 10 list this year. Sierra should start the year in AA and Thames in AAA, so Bautista's presumed return to RF in 2012 probably affects both Thames and Sierra. Neither projects as stars, but both could be decent players. I tend to take the view that it will work out in the long run, and Bautista's positional flexibility probably means something can be worked out. Let's put it this way - it's a good problem to have.
Aside from fit, the Bautista deal is worth considering on the merits of Bautista himself - is he going to suck, be average, or be, well, Bautistian. This question is decidedly undecided, and I don't think anyone can answer it with much certainty. Bautista is 30, the age at which players begin to decline, and his one year spike is unusual in any context, but especially this one. It is extremely unlikely that he will hit as well in 2011 as he did in 2010, but I don't see any reason why the underlying performance in 2010 should be considered a gigantic fluke. Bautista's average on balls in play was .233, nearly 40 points below his career average. It was, in fact, third worst in the majors amongst qualifying players. I think its obvious that Bautista altered his swing to some degree, and in many ways became an all or nothing swing-for-the-fences guy, so he probably isn't going to hit .300 any time soon, but his BABIP should go up. His FB% did also go way up - from 42% to 55% - and his LD% continued to hover around 15%, not an especially great number, so the jump in BABIP probably won't be huge, but it will happen. He will hit fewer home runs - his HR/FB % was 21%, which is high - 11% is, I believe, around average. With this being said, his dingers traveled an average distance of 402 feet last year (8 ft more than the average homer.) It's 328 to left in Skydome, and he's a dead pull hitter. So, I don't think he's completely screwed. I don't know that the league is going to figure him out especially either. He destroyed fastballs, but got a lot fewer of them to hit than in the past. Team's started throwing him sliders and curveballs, both of which he did just fine against. In fact, he was in the top 10 in the bigs against all three of those pitches. He was just about average against the change and the cutter, and didn't especially struggle against anything. He's proven himself more than willing to lay off pitches and take walks, and will almost certainly lead the team in on base percentage this year again, so even if he isn't hitting a ton he will add value at the plate. Basically, I don't think there's any immediate reason to expect Bautista to suck completely.
So if his 2010 wasn't a fluke, what to expect in 2011? I'm not a betting man (ok, I am), but if I had to guess I would pencil in Bautista for 35 home runs, and a .260/.360/.500 line. I don't know what his defense at third will be like, but slightly below average would be my guess. That player is definitely worth $9 million (which is about what the Jays would have given him either way.) From 2012-2015 he will be making 56 million, say. Will he be worth that? I don't know. I think that there's a decent chance he isn't an above average major league player in 2015, in which case he won't be worth the money then. In 2012, 2013? I'm optimistic. His offensive value is as much tied up in his batting eye as his power. He is a competent defender. He isn't reliant on his speed. As Dave Cameron pointed out, guys like Bautista (Adam Dunn, Paul Konerko, Victor Martinez, none of whom are remotely comparable to Bautista as players) got about the same money as Bautista, despite being older, significantly worse defensively, and with no seasons comparable to Bautista (especially in the last 3 years.) If they want to sign someone like him the future, it's going to cost them just as much.
Lastly, there has been some scuttlebutt about waiting for Bautista to play out 2011 before deciding whether to re-sign him. I can't say that I understand this. If Bautista plays really well, the Jays can't afford him or can't re-sign him. If he plays pretty well, the Jays are probably paying out the same amount of money, maybe a bit more, depending on how salaries go. If he plays poorly, the team cuts him loose or pays him a little. For the reasons discussed above, I think the last option is the least likely. If the Jays are going to want to re-sign him after this year, I just don't think there is any way he gets less money, or fewer years.
Ultimately I think this deal comes down to whether you think Bautista's going to be average to good, bad, or great. If he's bad, the Jays are screwed (on the deal, not overall.) If he's average to good, the team has locked up an asset going forward. If he's good to great, the team has captured a lot of surplus value they would not otherwise be able to afford. I think the later two possibilities are more likely, and I think this deal is going to be a winner going forward.
(Photo courtesty #2JB)
Reaction on the Jays blogosphere seems to be somewhat mixed, between negative and indifferent. I'm puzzled by this, for a variety of reasons relating to both Bautista and the club. The view from the establishment seems slightly more positive, with the caveat that the Jays should have waited til the end of the season to lock Bautista up.
To me, their are two ways to assess this - whether Bautista is going to be "worth" the deal, in the abstract, and whether the deal, right now, makes sense for Toronto Blue Jays.
Looking at the later point first, I have to think that the answer is an unqualified yes. Let's start from a salary perspective. The Jays can definitely afford Bautista. The team was willing (well, contractually obligated) to pay Vernon Wells $86 million over the next four years, and instead will pay him $5m. Clearly this wasn't an either/or decision, but there's money in the budget. Which brings up a second point - is this going to negatively impact what the Jays can do going forward. I mean, what's the point of having all that Wells money if they are just going to blow it on Joey Bats? Well, I suppose this gets a little more tricky, but I would have to think that there won't be a huge change in the Jays' M.O. for a couple of reasons.
Firstly, it's not like the Jays have a huge payroll to begin with. The Jays opening day payroll for 2011 isn't available yet for a variety of reasons, but with Bautista it figures to be in about the $70 million dollar range, including Vernon's going away present and Adeiny's contract (a total of about $8m, which count for accounting but not practical purposes.) Going forward, the Jays have a rather remarkable amount of payroll flexibility. Not counting Adeiny, the team has four players under contract for next year. Four. Obviously a bunch of guys are arbitration eligible, but Bautista, Romero, Lind and Rajai Davis are the only players with guaranteed contracts for next year. Aaron Hill, Jason Frasor, Octavio Dotel, and Edwin Encarnacion all have team options, and Frank Francisco, Shawn Camp and John McDonald are the only guys that are out and out free agents. So, it's not like there are a ton of guys to lock up. I imagine that, based on their performance this season, the team will try to sign several arbitration eligible players to long term deals like they did with Romero. Yunel Escobar and Brandon Morrow have two arbitration years after this one, and Travis Snider and Brett Cecil both will have three, I believe, and everyone else won't be eligible for a while and won't be worth big money. So, I can't really see this move preventing the Jays from locking up their own guys, who probably won't start getting expensive until 2014 and 2015 anyway. (All salary data from Cot's)
Secondly, I don't think this will affect the Jays free agent strategy. The last big money free agent signee the Jays inked was... AJ Burnett and BJ Ryan. The franchise, for better or worse, just doesn't ink big money guys. I tend to think it's for better - the market effiency, if you will, is definitely in signing your own guys. As for next offseason, when Prince Fielder and Albert Pujols are free agents, at least theoretically? Well, I don't really think that this inhibits the Jays here. If they are going to dole out $240 million for Pujols, or $180 million for Fielder, these are decisions for which approval will come above AA's head. I don't think the $13 million average annual value of the Batista contract will have a large impact on that. The complaint that the Jays are in the wrong place in the "success cycle"? Well I think a comparable player is only going to be more expensive, and at this point you have to think the Jays are aiming for 2012-2014, the years Bautista's extension, if you will, kicks in.
Thirdly, Bautista does not look likely to "block" any of the Jays prospects, for two reasons. The first is that Bautista plays 2 positions, 3B and OF, and can presumably learn to play a passable 1B, or if necessary DH. The second is that the Jays best prospects are almost all catchers and pitchers, positions that Bautista does not play. The Jays only have one corner infield prospect to speak of, Brett Lawrie. The outfield situation is a bit better, with three guys that could be considered prospects (there is a chance Lawrie ends up in the OF as well.) Anthony Gose is the most highly regarded, and he is a couple years out and going to play CF. Eric Thames and Moises Sierra are the other two prospects, though neither makes the Jays top 10 list this year. Sierra should start the year in AA and Thames in AAA, so Bautista's presumed return to RF in 2012 probably affects both Thames and Sierra. Neither projects as stars, but both could be decent players. I tend to take the view that it will work out in the long run, and Bautista's positional flexibility probably means something can be worked out. Let's put it this way - it's a good problem to have.
Aside from fit, the Bautista deal is worth considering on the merits of Bautista himself - is he going to suck, be average, or be, well, Bautistian. This question is decidedly undecided, and I don't think anyone can answer it with much certainty. Bautista is 30, the age at which players begin to decline, and his one year spike is unusual in any context, but especially this one. It is extremely unlikely that he will hit as well in 2011 as he did in 2010, but I don't see any reason why the underlying performance in 2010 should be considered a gigantic fluke. Bautista's average on balls in play was .233, nearly 40 points below his career average. It was, in fact, third worst in the majors amongst qualifying players. I think its obvious that Bautista altered his swing to some degree, and in many ways became an all or nothing swing-for-the-fences guy, so he probably isn't going to hit .300 any time soon, but his BABIP should go up. His FB% did also go way up - from 42% to 55% - and his LD% continued to hover around 15%, not an especially great number, so the jump in BABIP probably won't be huge, but it will happen. He will hit fewer home runs - his HR/FB % was 21%, which is high - 11% is, I believe, around average. With this being said, his dingers traveled an average distance of 402 feet last year (8 ft more than the average homer.) It's 328 to left in Skydome, and he's a dead pull hitter. So, I don't think he's completely screwed. I don't know that the league is going to figure him out especially either. He destroyed fastballs, but got a lot fewer of them to hit than in the past. Team's started throwing him sliders and curveballs, both of which he did just fine against. In fact, he was in the top 10 in the bigs against all three of those pitches. He was just about average against the change and the cutter, and didn't especially struggle against anything. He's proven himself more than willing to lay off pitches and take walks, and will almost certainly lead the team in on base percentage this year again, so even if he isn't hitting a ton he will add value at the plate. Basically, I don't think there's any immediate reason to expect Bautista to suck completely.
So if his 2010 wasn't a fluke, what to expect in 2011? I'm not a betting man (ok, I am), but if I had to guess I would pencil in Bautista for 35 home runs, and a .260/.360/.500 line. I don't know what his defense at third will be like, but slightly below average would be my guess. That player is definitely worth $9 million (which is about what the Jays would have given him either way.) From 2012-2015 he will be making 56 million, say. Will he be worth that? I don't know. I think that there's a decent chance he isn't an above average major league player in 2015, in which case he won't be worth the money then. In 2012, 2013? I'm optimistic. His offensive value is as much tied up in his batting eye as his power. He is a competent defender. He isn't reliant on his speed. As Dave Cameron pointed out, guys like Bautista (Adam Dunn, Paul Konerko, Victor Martinez, none of whom are remotely comparable to Bautista as players) got about the same money as Bautista, despite being older, significantly worse defensively, and with no seasons comparable to Bautista (especially in the last 3 years.) If they want to sign someone like him the future, it's going to cost them just as much.
Lastly, there has been some scuttlebutt about waiting for Bautista to play out 2011 before deciding whether to re-sign him. I can't say that I understand this. If Bautista plays really well, the Jays can't afford him or can't re-sign him. If he plays pretty well, the Jays are probably paying out the same amount of money, maybe a bit more, depending on how salaries go. If he plays poorly, the team cuts him loose or pays him a little. For the reasons discussed above, I think the last option is the least likely. If the Jays are going to want to re-sign him after this year, I just don't think there is any way he gets less money, or fewer years.
Ultimately I think this deal comes down to whether you think Bautista's going to be average to good, bad, or great. If he's bad, the Jays are screwed (on the deal, not overall.) If he's average to good, the team has locked up an asset going forward. If he's good to great, the team has captured a lot of surplus value they would not otherwise be able to afford. I think the later two possibilities are more likely, and I think this deal is going to be a winner going forward.
