The Miguel Tejada Signing & Different Roster Permutations
January 23rd, 2010 | by Daniel Moroz |[I wrote this before it was announced that the Orioles had signed Miguel Tejada to a one year, $6 M contract - I was at FanFest when I found out and they didn't have WiFi - but the post already contains my thoughts on the (potential) signing towards the end. I don't like it, but if one assumes that the team was 100% assured to make the mistake of playing Atkins at first instead of third, then it's OK. Tell me how you think Tejada will do for the O's next year here.]
I keep hearing these days that the Orioles are looking for a third-baseman – possibly Joe Crede or Miguel Tejada – with the intention of having Garrett Atkins play first-base. I have to say that it doesn’t really matter all that much, as they’re just mainly buying time until Josh Bell and Brandon Snyder are ready, although it does indicate to me a less than fantastic thought process behind the team’s off-season actions. It’s also been reported that Nolan Reimold has been named the starting left-fielder.
For a team that really needs to squeeze every advantage out of the roster that they can, these things raise a couple questions. (I realize that the numbers I’m employing are all relatively small and close together, so the lack of precision can change the outcomes. Like I said; it doesn’t really matter much. It’s more the principle of the thing.)
So first up; why would you sign Akins specifically to play first-base?
There were several other (better) first-basemen on the market, so to jump on Atkins so quickly after he was released would have been not the best way to go about it in any case. Also, if Atkins is supposed to be a first-baseman then his contract looks even worse. At $4.5 M I could have lived with him at third. I wasn’t really happy about it – especailly given the way the market has turned out, with teams generally paying $3.5-4 M per Wins as opposed to $4.5 M – but fine. At first though, things (namely, Atkins) get worse.
For his career, Atkins has a -5.0 UZR/150 at third-base and a -6.3 UZR/150 at first. Jeff Zimmerman’s UZR/150 projections for 2010 has Atkins at -7 at third and -3 at first. Since the positional adjustment is +2.5 runs (at third) to -12.5 runs (at first) – a difference of 15 runs in a full season - Atkins would lose about 9-10 runs (~1 Win) off his value. That would make him less than a 1 Win Above Replacement player – closer to 0.5 WAR - which would be worth (in this market) probably only $1-2 M. His contract suddenly looks pretty horrible, and that’s without even thinking about the other better players the Orioles could have gotten instead.
If Andy MacPhail signed Garrett Atkins with the intent to use him as a first-baseman all along, then he made a mistake.
Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt though, and say that Andy’s plan was to pick up, say, Carlos Delgado for first, but it didn’t work out. Delgado apparently hasn’t recovered well from the hip injury, and it looks like he won’t be able to take the field all that often in 2010. So Plan A fell through. It happens; you can’t control everything; etc.
Plan B (sign a 3B and make Reimold the starting LF) is to use the roster suboptimally AND at greater cost? That should be Plan E (for extremely dumb*). Plans B through D should look something like:
* Clever!
D: Signing a guy like Hank Blalock or Russell Branyon for $2 M to give you something like 1 WAR of production at first. Then you have Atkins at third (~1.5 WAR) and come in at around 2.5 WAR from the two positions for ~$6.5 M. Decent.
C: Letting Michael Aubrey and Ty Wigginton (and whoever) split the time at first with probably about replacement level work. Then you have ~1.5 WAR for $4.5 M (basically just the original Atkins signing, but it frees up a roster spot and does less to block Bell/Snyder once they’re ready).
B: (My preference, if Scott isn’t traded – which is really my preference)
Letting Luke Scott and/or Nolan Reimold play first-base. I understand that it’s unclear how good either could be over there, but if you assume the alternative is the replacement-ish level work of Aubrey/Wiggy then you get the following scenarios for 1B, 3B, LF, and DH:
Plan C:
1B: Aubrey/Wiggy (0 WAR)
3B: Atkins (1.5 WAR)
LF: Reimold (say, 2 WAR with -3 run defense)
DH: Scott (say, 1.2 WAR).
Total: ~4.7 WAR (at +0 dollars relative to now)
(Pie fills in a little in left and in center, but in the other scenarios he has that playing time anyway)
Plan B:
1B: Scott – Say he can play league average first-base. Given that he’s an average-ish left-fielder you’d expect him to actually be a plus over there, but let’s just say +0. Then his value goes up to about 1.6 WAR.
3B: Atkins (1.5 WAR)
LF: Pie – Say 2.0 WAR with +7 defense, though we only count 1.5 of it here since he would have gotten the other 0.5 WAR in any case as the fourth outfielder.
DH: Reimold – Around 1.4-1.5 WAR. He loses about 8.5 runs due to the positional adjustment (from -7.5 to -17.5 going from LF to DH, but then multiplied by 85% for playing time) but gains 3 runs back since his glove won’t be a minus (it’ll be a zero).
Total: ~6 WAR (at +0 dollars relative to now)
You could do Pie in LF with Scott and Reimold switching just as well. It doesn’t really matter – you go with whoever is the better first-baseman of the latter two in the field, and I might be inclined to go with Scott there. He might have an easier time adjusting since he’s been in the big leagues longer; he played the position at least a little last year; it would build up his value for a trade (showing that he can still use his glove somewhat); and it might allow Reimold to heal from his Achilles injury easier by not having to run around on it so much. Obviously he (really, either guy) can fill in in left sometimes but Pie is easily the best left-fielder on the team (amongst guys that aren’t already in entrenched position in the outfield*). That’s something to take advantage of, given that Felix can hit a little too.
* Zimmerman’s UZR projections have Felix at +4 in LF and +2 in center, with Adam Jones at +1 in center. If Jones could put up at least a +3 in left – and I feel pretty confident saying he could – then it might actually make sense to put the him there and Pie in center where I think everyone can agree he is better, relatively speaking (that is, he’s a better CF than you would expect given his abilities in LF).
What you basically gain is not Reimold vs. Pie or Scott vs. Reimold or Scott vs. Pie, but Pie vs. Aubrey/Wiggy. And that is a deal I’d like to make; it’s basically free production!
Instead, the team sounds like it wants to go with Plan E:
1B: Atkins (0.5 WAR)
3B: Crede/Tejada (say, 1.7-2.0 WAR)
LF: Reimold (2 WAR)
DH: Scott (1.2 WAR)
Total: ~5.6 WAR (at plus $4-8 M, relative to now)
This improves the team over doing nothing and also not playing Pie more by only 0.9 Wins, at the cost of at least a few million bucks. In that case – if you’re already going to be making a mistake - it’s not terrible. I’d prefer Crede if you can guarantee* the three months for which he’ll be healthy will occur at the beginning of the year before Bell is ready. Otherwise, Tejada might be fine at $6-7 M.
* Through magic of some sort, perhaps.
On the other hand, this is still worse than letting Reimold, Scott, and Pie all start and at added cost as well.
The signing a cheap 1B one (Plan D) comes out as:
1B: Branyon/Blalock (1 WAR)
3B: Atkins (1.5 WAR)
LF: Reimold (2 WAR)
DH: Scott (1.2 WAR)
Total: ~5.7 WAR (at plus $2 M, relative to now)
That’s only better than signing another third-baseman by 0.3 WAR on the higher end, but it’s probably a couple million dollars cheaper at least. It’s also better than sticking with what they have but not playing Pie (which is the worst permutation), but worse than sticking with what they have and playing Pie (which is the best – and at this point, the cheapest – alternative).
The moral of the story is: Felix Pie has shown he can play a little, and he might be able to do even better than that. Let’s find out.
—————————————————————–
Just as a quick hit on something Chris at Baltimore Sports and Life said about this whole kerfuffle regarding signing Tejada to actually take Cesar Izturis’ place at short:
Tejada’s something like a -5 defender with an average-ish bat (maybe around .295/.330/.430). That makes him around a 2 WAR player.
Izzy can’t hit (around -20 runs offensively), but is more like a +10 defender. That makes him about a 1.5 WAR player in a full season, but only maybe a 1 WAR guy since it’s expected he’d miss some time.
If you assume that Cesar’s salary ($2.6 M) is already a sunk cost then you really shouldn’t pay Tejada more than $3-4 M or so for that upgrade from 1 to 2 wins at short (so you’re paying $6-7 M overall for the two wins). On the other hand, if Izzy could be dealt somewhere for something decent then giving Tejada that whole $6-7 M for one year wouldn’t be terrible. I don’t see who would have real interest in Izturis though, so while it would be an improvement to the team it’s probably not worth the cost.
Tags: Adam Jones, Carlos Delgado, Cesar Izturis, Felix Pie, Garrett Atkins, Hank Blalock, Joe Crede, Luke Scott, Michael Aubrey, Miguel Tejada, Nolan Reimold, Russell Branyon
By Andrew @ TLC on Jan 23, 2010
Whew.
You know, it’s funny because I thought Atkins was an okay pickup to get half a season at third and see if he could rebuild his offensive value at all. I thought it was smart to go for the low-risk, mid-to-high reward dude to play third. You assume you get nothing out of him, but its only a half-season commitment and the Orioles are still in optimal position for rolling the dice.
But now, with signing Tejada…well, I just get the feeling like the idea at the beginning of the offseason doesn’t reflect the truth at the end. Because we have Garret Atkins to provide Michael Aubrey’s production for 5 million dollars. Ouch.
By Daniel Moroz on Jan 23, 2010
Yup. I really am a little confused as to what Andy was thinking this whole time.
By Andrew @ TLC on Jan 23, 2010
If we had never signed Atkins (or Gonzalez, because I still abhor that deal), I’d seriously be ready to call the offseason a win. As stopgaps go, Tejada’s not a horrible choice IMO. It just feels like a cohesive offseason plan wasn’t in play – or got terribly ruined.
What’s really bugging me, though, is why are the O’s so down on Luke Scott as a first baseman? Did they really see something in just ten games to give them strong reason to think he can’t function over there? A ten game span during which he seemed to be doing okay (if perhaps a little odd looking). That’s the real question here – what about Luke Scott the first baseman don’t the Orioles like?
By Daniel Moroz on Jan 23, 2010
I agree. Signing Tejada to play third and not signing Atkins at all would have been fine. I though Luke looked OK at first – not anywhere near, for example, the mess that was Jay Gibbons – and with a Spring Training to work on it I’d think he would do pretty well. The only real thing I can of is that maybe Andy is going to be trading Luke sometime soon (which I would like done), and then Pie in LF and Reimold at DH works and there isn’t a problem (except that Atkins at first still kind of sucks).
By Sean on Jan 23, 2010
Wait, why would Russel Branyan sign for $2 million?
Also, the O’s front office really wants all of their players to be able to play more than one position, preventing injury from making a big impact on team performance.
Orioles Depth at each position:
1B – Atkins, Wigginton, Scott
2B – Roberts, Andino
SS – Izturis, Tejada, Andino
3B – Tejada, Atkins, Wigginton, Andino
RF – Markakis, Nolan Reimold
CF – Jones, Pie
LF – Reimold, Pie
DH – Scott, Reimold, ect.
Branyan and Blalock can only play first and DH, plus they are both susceptible to injury. I’d take Atkins and Tejada over injury-prone Crede and Branyan because an injured (and therefore useless) stopgap is worse than an overpaid one.
One more thing:
4 (Pie in left) + 1 (Jones in center) = 5
2 (Pie in center) + 3 (Jones in left) = 5
So I am confused as to the reason that Pie in center is better.
By Daniel Moroz on Jan 23, 2010
Sean,
Branyon or Blalock or someone like that. Garko, maybe. There are several first-basemen still without jobs that are of relatively similar value, so I assume one of them will sign that cheaply just to have a job.
The flexibility issue is certainly real, but I thought that’s why they have Wigginton – to fill in at a bunch of positions if need be. I take Tejada over Crede as I said, for the reason you mention (though in a joking manner). It is a valid point though, and I don’t know how you would really value that. I wouldn’t pay $4-6 M for it though (Atkins or Tejada; just one – more Tejada – would have been perfectly fine).
For the Pie/Jones thing, I said at least +3 in LF for Jones. That’s the break-even point as you showed. Really, he should be closer to +5 to +10, so that would net the team 2 to 7 runs. Also, if Pie is better than Jones in just CF, then it makes some sense to play him there since he’ll get more opportunities.
By Sean on Jan 23, 2010
Alright, I get the Jones-Pie thing now. But I have to be that jerk who points out that it’ll never happen because Jones makes cool catches and he just won a gold glove. The general public would want Trembley’s head if he moved Jones to left. Good observation though!
I still think that flexibility is huge, maybe even worth $4-6 million.
Allow me to go off on a short tangent: Wiggington is not a bad player, but he is also not necessary. If the O’s maintained their level of flexibility and traded Wigginton, they would have an extra roster spot, which could be great for helping bring up the young guys. But Wigginton negates that benefit. Damn.
Something to note with Atkins: Crowley seemed pretty confident that he can bring Atkins close to where he was from 2005-08.
Sorry, I don’t mean to sound disgruntled in my ramblings. I disagree with your opinion but I completely respect it.
By Daniel Moroz on Jan 23, 2010
Oh, I agree that it won’t happen. I was just pointing at that it might be worth a look.
I don’t think you can trade Wiggy, because he’s not really worth anything. He would just be a body when they need one at some position.
I’d be a fan of the flexibility if it didn’t indirectly result in Felix Pie potentially losing playing time. He’s a guy – unlike Atkins or Tejada – who might actually have a future with the team.
I do think Atkins will bounce back offensively, but his bat plays better at third than at first, considering he’d be below average defensively at either position (though worse at the former).
I don’t mind at all with the disagreeing; I greatly appreciate the manner in which you do so. I like to argue*, and have no problem trying my best to defend my positions.
* In the “reason” or “discuss” way, not the yelling way.
By Chris on Jan 24, 2010
Dan, apologies as I was a bit slow on the up-take today. I did not really catch your name, or at-least directly associate you with Camden Crazies. In any event, glad to meet you, and wishing you continued success.
Cheers,
Chris
By Daniel Moroz on Jan 24, 2010
No worries. I’m not exactly the most outspoken guy in the world. And same to you.
By math_geek on Jan 24, 2010
I honestly think it was the Atkins signing that was a mistake. He’s just not a good player for either 1st or 3rd. Tejada could be quite a good 3rd basemen. He’ll certainly be better than Atkins at 3rd, and if we could play Tejada at 3rd and Reimold/Scott at 1st, that would be the best option.
By Alex B. on Jan 25, 2010
You basically said here what I’ve been feeling about the whole situation, and backed it up with actual numbers. Nicely done.
I especially want to echo the Luke at 1B talk in the comments; I can’t understand why they won’t just put him there, either. He could’ve worked on it all offseason if they thought he looked a little too awkward there (and likely would’ve — he supposedly has a strong work ethic and keeps saying he wants to play the field). I can’t think of any other reason why they won’t try it again.
By Daniel Moroz on Jan 25, 2010
I agree that between Atkins and Tejada for 3B, I would take Tejada. If they don’t sign Atkins then the Tejada deals looks fine; it’s just that given when it happened it wasn’t so good.
By Tim Anderson on Jan 25, 2010
Personally, I think when Andy MacPhail signed Garrett Atkins, he had a specific thought process in mind. He knew he needed corner infielders, one for each corner. Garrett Atkins was available and at a low price because of his nasty .229 batting season last year. Atkins was a player who was a top quality player a few years ago, has been slumping (price reduction), and can play both first and third base. MacPhail obviously liked the value and the upside that IF (big if) Atkins works with Crowley hard during the season, he can get back to that year he had with Colorado when he finished 15th in the MVP voting. The fact that Atkins could play both 3B and 1B gave MacPhail the option to sign him first before anyone else could, then be able to shop around for either another 1B or 3B and Atkins could move accordingly.
Say if the Orioles had made a move to sign a pure 3B, one who could not play first. They would have to limit themselves to only look for a first baseman. And if they couldn’t find one to their liking, they would be screwed and Ty Wigginton and his iron glove would be over there.
MacPhail got one of his corner infielders early with Atkins and still kept open both the first base and third base market. Thats why there were rumors flying around with Delgado, Crede, then finally Tejada.
Finally, here are my complete thoughts on the signing -
http://isportsweb.com/2010/01/24/baltimore-orioles-sign-miguel-tejada-1-year-six-mill-thoughts-and-reactions/
By Daniel Moroz on Jan 25, 2010
Thanks for the comment Tim. Also, it was very cool to hear about Wieters’ grandma having the “He Sees You When You’re Sleeping” MWF shirt – that’s quite amusing.
I understand your point about the flexibility, but Atkins isn’t worth $4.5 M as a first-baseman so if they were going to consider him as a starter there they shouldn’t have paid him so much. I actually would have been okay with Tejada at third and Wiggy/Aubrey at first, since you’d be getting a little less production for a lot less money. Really, I would have liked Scott at first and then you actual gain production for less money.
It makes sense for Andy to have kept his options open, but given that there were a bunch of guys at either corner available I think he could have done a better job mixing and matching without having to jump and overpay Atkins so quickly.
I would be shocked if Atkins can approach his 2006 or 2007 numbers again – if he gets back to 2008 then I think we should eb happy.
By Nic on Jan 29, 2010
What I can’t figure out is why so many Orioles fans are convinced than Reimold should be made a first baseman or DH. The kid did an alright job in left especially since he was playing hurt. Pie did not shine in Left and sometimes looked as if he was lost. Pie so far has not proved that he can live up to his potential. While he plays a solid center and had a few good games at bat he hasn’t proved that he is any more than a 4th outfielder.
If Atkins regains his batting stroke and several of the youngsters build on what they did last year then maybe the O’s will at least play competitive baseball but unless the Jays slip badly (which is very possible) the O’s have a tough time to get out of the basement.
By Daniel Moroz on Jan 29, 2010
Nic,
Reimold was indeed hurt, but I don’t think he did an OK job in left. It looks like he didn’t do a very good job in left, and it’s hard to say how much of that was the injury. Pie, on the other hand, did quite well in left – as you would expect from a center-fielder (which Pie is).
This might help you out: http://camdencrazies.com/2009/12/29/felix-pie-is-probably-a-better-left-fielder-than-nolan-reimold/
“LF UZR/150
Pie: +19.4 runs in ‘09, +15.3 career
Reimold: -17.3 runs (in ‘09/career)
CF UZR/150
Pie: +5.3 runs in ‘09, +8.3 runs career
Also, judging by what I said at mid-season, Pie was at +7.5 UZR/150 at that time so it’s not like he started out the year really struggling…
Don’t like stats? How about the Fan Scouting Report then? Pie was not only rated better overall – by the fans, using their own eyes – but he was rated better in every single aspect of fielding from reactions/instincts to speed to hands to release/footwork to throwing strength and accuracy. That doesn’t differentiate between positions, but I have a hard time believing someone who is “atrocious” in half of his time on defense would be rated so highly.
CHONE projects Pie as a +8 defender next year, and Reimold as a -2. Felix is very probably a better fielder than Nolan. He’s a better center-fielder, and he’s a better left-fielder.”
Pie playing a plus LF is as valuable (or more) than Reimold playing a below average LF. Pie would start on a number of teams, and is a fine (though not star) player. He isn’t a 4th OF. Reimold should be able to handle LF OK (hopefully), but given who the Orioles have on their team the most efficient use of resources is to use Pie’s glove while also making sure to find a spot for Reimold’s bat.
Your other point I agree with. If things go well, then the team might be competitive, but I still am not sure they can make it to 4th place. Should be relatively close though.
By Peter on Jan 29, 2010
WOW is this a real article. How are you people real orioles fans?! We have so much better talent this year by adding the great veterans like atkins, millwood, and tejeda. Who cares about the stupid WAR. That was last years stats. Atkins had a horrible year, but he said at fanfest that he looks to rebound and even though batlimore hasnt been the best place to rebuild your career, it is worth a shot. he can play great defense and he does hit the big homeruns. Tejeda is a great sign because he had a great batting average year. the homruns and rbis were down but obviously when youre with the Astros, you wont have the best numbers. Also tejeda knows how the orioles plays, he is lookin to bat in his old 2,3, or 4 spot and that is a great for the Os. Honestly i do think scott should be traded for a package of players. then we put reimold at dh and let pie and reimold share lf. wiggy can maybe play first base and then let atkins take dh and let pie and reimold share lf. so many possibilies for a team on the rise.
By Daniel Moroz on Jan 29, 2010
I’m not going to respond to the content of Peter’s post because refuting each point would take too long.
I do want to thank him for stopping by though, and if someone else wants to take a crack at what he said, be my guest.
By Ryan Burton on Jan 30, 2010
I don’t care what anyone says Atkins hits 20 homers this year and everyone will be amazed
By Daniel Moroz on Jan 30, 2010
It’s certainly possible Ryan, but I think it would require a bit of luck. The difference between the 15 or so HR that I’m expecting and 20 is only about an extra home run once a month. I don’t think it would be especially amazing. Now, if he hits 25-30 like he did in his best years in Colorado, then I would be surprised.
By Josh on Jan 31, 2010
I think what they did for this season is perfect. Its not long term at all and we don’t have to rush Bell and Snyder up. MT was great to pick up and if anything we to happin to Izzy he can move to SS. If Crow can’t get Atkins back then we still have Aubry and Scott. 4 mil isn’t a lot in baseball standards anymore. Delgato can’t walk let alone run right now. Blalock is always hurt and I don’t have the stats but Ks a lot. Os don’t have much of a power threat so a guy with a lot of Ks will hurt the team A LOT. We need guys to put the ball in play and that can hit with runners on. I’m not one bit worried about our hitting or D. I worry about the young arms being consistant enough to get us over 500 (which I do think we will be 5-10 games over 500 this year)
By Ken Francis on Feb 13, 2010
Daniel, I’m coming to this article a couple of weeks after the fact, but enjoyed it. The signings of Atkins and Tejada have problematic elements to them to be sure: a third baseman being moved to first (albeit to his better position defensively) and a shortstop sliding over to third–not necessarily what you think of first when you think of stability at the corners.
I’m not so sure they’re going to be as awful with the glove as many seem to think. Atkins has called first his natural position and was only pushed to third because the Rockies had Helton. I believe the bigger issue with him is going to be his bat.
Even if Crow can fix his swing, he’s moving to a new league and into a divison loaded with tough starters. If he can do an even halfway good impersonation of the hitter he was in Colorado, then the Orioles should be happy.
Tejada, on the other hand, should have more issues, at least initially, in the field, though two Hall of Fame third basemen–Brooks and Cal–believe he should do all right over there once he gets his bearings. And I tend to agree, since two of Miggy’s strongest defensive attributes are quick reflexes and a stong arm, and if you’ve got those you can play third.
The one place I disagree with you is on Tejada the hitter. You call him “average,” but I think you’re short-changing him, Daniel. He was eighth in hitting among NL players, while leading the league in doubles and BB/K ratio (48 strikeouts in over 600 plate appearances isn’t too shabby and shows the O’s will be able to count on him to put the ball in play consistently). I also believe that returning to the more hitter-friendly OPACY he has a realistic chance to top 20 HR if he plays a full season with the team.
In any case, I think the one thing you can say about MacPhail’s choices are that they leave him with considerable flexability, perhaps more than he’d have had with other corner infield choices. If Miggy has a big year and Bell and/or Snyder look ready to be called up, the Orioles should be able to spin him off to a contender for a prospect or two. Atkins, in the meantime, can stay put if Bell gets the call or move back over to third if it’s Snyder.