Forecasting Prince

The Detroit Tigers shocked the baseball world by signing Prince Fielder to a nine-year, $214 million contract earlier this offseason. The public opinion on the deal seems to be that: 1) it makes the Tigers really good in the short-term; 2) nine years and $214 million is a lot of money over a long period of time; and 3) that’s a particularly large sum of cash to guarantee to a man of Prince Fielder’s size and stature.

We’ve discussed the Fielder signing in detail here at The Hardball Times, but this time around I wanted to specifically focus on item number three listed above; Fielder’s size and how it may impact his performance over the length of the deal. I should first note that the Internet is a big place, and naturally this topic has already been explored by Ryan Campbell and Jeff Zimmerman at FanGraphs. Further, I know there have been numerous size/aging studies over the years published at various locations. That said, I still believe it’s worth it to continue down this path and see if we can uncover anything new with regards to how productive Fielder will be in his mid-30s.

With that in mind, and with help from my colleagues at THT, I set out to find a group of players similar to Prince Fielder. The specific traits desired in a Prince Fielder comp:

{exp:list_maker}The player must have been productive through his age-27 season.
The player must have been really big, preferably not only in weight but also in Body Mass Index.
The player should have played on the left side of the defensive spectrum, getting most of his value from batting/home runs.
The player must have turned 27 by 2002, giving at least nine years of performance post age-27. {/exp:list_maker}

I figured that, with help from Baseball Reference’s Play Index, the task would be easy enough. I was wrong. Great players of Prince’s size, somewhere in the neighborhood of 5-foot-11 and 275 pounds, simply don’t exist. According to Baseball Reference, only 31 non-pitchers have weighed in at 250+ pounds. Out of that 31, only five posted a career WAR over 15, one of which is Prince Fielder. The other four are Jim Thome, Frank Howard, Adam Dunn, and Carlos Lee. Dunn and Lee are viable comps, but have not logged nine years since age-27. Frank Howard checks in at 6’7”, 255 pounds*, an altogether different body type from Fielder. Thome made the cut.

*Now is probably as good a time as any to mention my concerns with size data, specifically weight. The data I’m using is from Baseball Reference and I’m simply not sure how reliable it is. Further, a player’s weight obviously fluctuates throughout his career, and I don’t know when these weights were recorded. Some players, like an Andres Galarraga, looked entirely different early in their career as compared to late.

With concerns in mind about a lack of potential comparable players, I attempted to widen the thresholds for inclusion, lowering the weight and performance standards. The subsequent list is larger and includes a number of potential options. Still, putting together a final list of comps isn’t easy. For instance, number one on the list in terms of Body Mass Index (32.5), is Miguel Tejada. At age-27 Tejada was playing 162 games at shortstop for the Oakland A’s, deriving much of his value out of his ability to (adequately) defend at short. Not exactly Prince Fielder-like. Other guys high on the list are players like Scott Rolen, Hack Wilson, and Bobby Abreu. While these players have similarities to our subject, they gained too much value out of defense/base running to compare directly to Fielder.

I settled on eight players of which to examine, balancing the above-listed traits to best identify good candidates. The players:

image

On average, the eight players stand at 74.4 inches tall and weigh 231 pounds. They averaged 22.3 WAR through age-27, similar to Prince’s 19.6. Over the next nine seasons they averaged 24.7 WAR, highlighted by Jim Thome and Manny Ramirez who aged very gracefully into their mid-30s. I’m using Rally’s WAR, located on Baseball Reference in this article. Let’s look at a couple of other graphs:

image

If you can’t make too much of that, I don’t blame you. Here’s the average aging curve of all eight players:

image

You can see here that the group peaks, perhaps as we’d expect, at age-27. However, they remain productive over their next five seasons, averaging yearly WAR totals of 4, 3.9, 4.3, 3.5, and 3.5. The next four years are more of a struggle. While some players remain productive, a number of guys put up near-replacement level performance or begin to drop out of baseball altogether. Let us just assume, for kicks, that Prince Fielder ages exactly as his comps over the next nine seasons. How much would he be worth?

image

I came up with $142 million over the next nine seasons, accounting for a five percent increase in dollars per WAR each year. It’s a far cry from the $214 million the Tigers paid for Fielder’s services, but is it realistic? Our own THT Forecasts, which only project performance six years into the future (how dare they), actually project Fielder to be worth 18.5 WAR over the next six seasons. That’s nearly three fewer WAR than the above-listed projection for Prince over six seasons.

Tangotiger looked at 10 first basemen with at least 10 WAR from age-25 through 27 and got a more favorable value projection of nine years, $183 million.

There are likely very few long-term valuations out there that will forecast Fielder to be worth $214 million over the next nine years. There’s a reason most of the baseball world was in shock following Fielder’s signing in Detroit. That level of years and dollars simply wasn’t anticipated. For example, on average, FanGraphs readers expected Prince to sign a 6.5-year, $136 million deal.

Anyway, I don’t want to give the impression that the long-term forecast derived here will be (or should be expected to be) accurate over the next nine seasons. Anybody who thinks they can accurately predict player performance over a nine year span should probably be selling their projections on an infomercial for $19.99. While I believe the eight players share similarities with Fielder and can perhaps shed some light on how he’ll perform in the future, this method is riddled with any number of potential pitfalls, some of which I’ve already mentioned. Hopefully, though, you get an idea of how similar players have performed from age-28 through age-36.

For Tigers fans holding their collective breath, there is some reason to be optimistic regarding the signing. First, you get to watch an exciting power hitter play out his near-prime years in Detroit. Second, with Miguel Cabrera and Fielder hitting back-to-back, Detroit will have one of the best one-two punches in all of baseball. Finally, the Tigers are a good team right now and Fielder should put up very productive numbers in the short-term. In a winnable American League Central, the addition of Fielder to the Detroit lineup has a chance to win them a couple of divisions, if not American League pennants. You can make an argument that the Tigers are in prime position to overpay for a superstar caliber player and they made sure to do just that.

Still, there’s no reason to sugur-coat the deal from the Tigers perspective. Fielder, a great player, simply isn’t great enough to get paid nearly $24 million a year for nine years and earn it, whether he ages like his estimable group of large comparables or like an average player. Even if you consider Fielder to be a five WAR player right now and shave his WAR by a mere .3 WAR per year, he’d still fall $10 million short of his contract. Of course, if he was able to do that you would probably consider the signing a mild success. It would outperform all of his comps performance after age-27, except for Jim Thome, Manny Ramirez, and Johnny Mize, all of whom were better than Fielder up to age-27. Considering that Fielder has only posted two seasons above four WAR through his age-27 season, the idea that he’ll do it four times over the next nine years is stretching it.

In the 1982 Bill James Baseball Abstract, James discusses the breadth of a player’s skill-set and how it may effect aging. Joe Morgan, he mentioned, experienced a particular late-peak and graceful aging period thanks in part to his ability to do a lot of things well. He was a solid contact hitter, possessed good power, was an excellent base runner, and a solid defender at second base. Morgan’s peak years were from 28 through 32, where he posted nine WAR or better five straight seasons.

Fielder’s skill-set, on the other hand, is more narrow. He’s great at hitting for power, drawing walks, and staying on the field. His contact ability appears to be improving. However, he provides no speed, little base running ability, and no positive defensive ability. If Fielder’s central skills decline, mostly his propensity to hit home runs, he’ll be left with little baseball value. Still, we don’t know what is going to happen to Fielder’s specific skills. He could remain a productive power source, while hitting between .270 and .300 for the foreseeable future, retaining much of his current value while declining, if only slightly, in his speed and defense. After all, how much further can Fielder’s speed and fielding ability decline.

Overall, we’re left in a familiar situation when trying to project a player’s performance years into the future. We simply don’t know what’s going to happen and whether Fielder stays productive through age-36 or suddenly falls off a cliff in three or four years is largely a mystery to us. The Tigers will hope for the former, obviously, but perhaps more importantly Dave Dombrowski and company will try to assemble a World Series winner in the short-term. It’ll be a lot easier to deal with Fielder’s potential albatross contract with flags already flying.

Print Friendly
« Previous: The Homestead exemption act of 1992
Next: A dynasty ranking follow-up »

Comments

  1. David Wade said...

    I think you did a good job with this, given the problems with how player’s height and weight are listed. 

    But, those problems are significant.  Mo Vaughn listed at 225?

    The eye test confirms that there aren’t many like Fielder- if we saw more players like him we’d be able to think of some.

    However, we might be able to find a few more valid comps throughout history if player weights were anywhere near true.  Maybe one reason Prince is hard to compare is becasue his listed playing weight is actually somewhere close to his actual weight.

    Unless, of course, he really weighs over 300 lb.

  2. Ray said...

    As you describe this type of analysis has been done several times for the Prince siging, and similar analysis has happened pursuant to just about every major signing over the lase several years.  One thing I have never seen accounted for in any of these projections is the increasing maginal value of WAR from a single roster spot.  Every analysis assumes a consistent value for each win in a given season. However this seems disingenuous as the nature of limited roster spots creates an environment of increasing marginal wins.  A 4 win player is inherently more valuable than two, 2 win players simply because he only takes up one spot in the lineup.  I think to accurately analyze the value of these long term contracts to exceptional players we need to quantify the inherent value of a roster spot.

  3. Dave Studeman said...

    I think the increasing value question is a good one. Many, but not all (maybe not even most), baseball analysts agree that a four-win player is worth more than two two-win players.  However, you hardly ever see contracts reflect that distinction.

    Instead, you see four-win players being given long-term contracts and two-win players being short-term contracts.  It’s as though there is an implicit ceiling among baseball folk, and the way to get around it is to offer longer-term deals to the Fielders of the world.

    So, when proposing value in articles like this, virtually everyone will use a standard WAR price and then vary the length based on the player’s projection and starting point.

    It does beg the question—does Fielder perhaps “deserve” that longer term deal because he is an elite player, even though his projection doesn’t appear to support it?

  4. Paul E said...

    Nice job, Myron. I remember Frank Howard being quite immobile and at 6’7”,had to weigh more than the listed 255#‘s. According to b-r, he had 37.7 oWAR from age 28 through age 36, and still close to 30 WAR (28.9) after they hammer him for his defense. Maybe if Prince DH’s for the last 4-5 years of the deal, you eliminate his negative dWAR and it turns out bettter for the Tigers

  5. slideric said...

    Nice piece, I think all bases were covered.  How much is a division title worth?  How much would a world series be worth?  What can do done to assist the player’s longevity? There are lots of variables and unknowns.
    I think that’s what Dave Dombrowski is counting on.
    He is rolling the dice looking for a winner. 
    As a fan I am with him can’t wait to see how it turns out.  I would bet attendance will be up. A winning Tiger team would also help Detroit and that would be good for lots of folks.

  6. David said...

    @Drew-

    On an individual level, yes, but not on a team level.  The DH “penalty,” on the team level, is the same no matter who’s playing there.  If they get a new 1B who’s a defensive stud, however, they go from a liability at 1B to an asset.  And if that 1B is as good a hitter as the current DH situation in Detroit, they’ve actually made an upgrade without any sacrifice in any way.  Obviously, this is not guaranteed, and it involves players’ abilities remaining constant rather than variable, but I’m sure you get the idea – while it may make no difference to Prince’s statline, it’ll look great for the Tigers.

  7. Drew said...

    Yeah, I was talking about how substituing the DH-penalty for a negative dWar wouldn’t really have any affect on Fielder’s career WAR accumulation/overall value, but you’re right – from the Tiger’s perspective, it’s probably better that he plays DH anyway.

    Good logic.

  8. dominion said...

    his value is his offense.  he’s making headway making better contact, according to the article…and, his power may show a fairly normal bump into his early-mid thirties…

    the final years of his contract are going to hurt, probably..

  9. Myron Logan said...

    Good discussion, guys. Wish I had answers to all of the questions posed.

    One of the things I didn’t discuss here is the presence of Miguel Cabrera and Victor Martinez (probably not until next year). You could argue that all three of those guys should probably DH, but two are going to have to play the field if they’re all in the lineup. The Tigers infield D could be really bad.

    @David Wade: The size/weight data was certainly a concern. I decided to run with it anyway, trying to select guys that were really big and really good, though the process ended up being more subjective than I would have liked.

    @Paul: I looked up some photos of Frank Howard, among other guys, and he didn’t pass the “eye test,” if you will, as being comparable size-wise to Prince.

    @Ray: Yeah, there is always more research that can be done on player valuation and how teams spend on free agents. As Dave points out, however, it appears that teams generally pay a similar yearly salary to a two and four WAR player.

  10. Larry Faria said...

    The paucity of players who fit Fielder’s, um, profile might be due to the fact that you insisted on players who played nine years after age 27. There had to be others of Fielder’s size, including his own father Cecil, who just couldn’t play another nine years after age 27 (gulp!). The inclusion of guys who couldn’t go nine after 27 might give you a good idea of Fielder’s future productivity.

    Speaking of size, the official measures of weight are problematic. As David Wade pointed out, Mo Vaughn at 225? Boog Powell at 240? Baseball Reference is great, but the stature numbers come from teams’ press guides, and are basically what the players wanted.

    Tony Gwynn was listed at 199 lbs. for 14 years, a number first used in 1988. By 1993, he finally admitted he was about 235, and he was obviously heavier when he retired in 2001, but still listed at 199. He’s now listed at 185, what he weighed as a rookie in 1982. If you knew Tony’s real weight, Gwynn might actually be a good comp for Fielder, in which case Prince’s HRs will go down drastically, but he’s got six batting titles ahead of him.

    Great effort, Myron, but you may have been sabotaged by baseball’s dark dirty secret of bogus vital statistics.

  11. Myron Logan said...

    Larry, thanks for the comment, but check the comps:  Cecil is included!

    I didn’t use only players that played nine seasons post-27—I simply made sure they had the *opportunity* to play nine seasons by using the cut off point of 2002. It may have been poorly worded on my part, though.

  12. Southpaw said...

    Most players peak between 28-32.  Throw in 33, and you’ve only got three years—34,35,and 36—that are dodgy for Prince’s contract.  Call it a cost of doing business.

    Trust me, when all is said and done, with Fielder’s and Pujols’ contracts running roughly in parallel (Albert’s being one year longer), when Fielder’s contract is done after nine years at 36, and the millstone of Pujols’ contract hanging around the Angels necks at Albert’s age of 36 with 5 MORE YEARS YET TO RUN—the Tigers management looks like chess masters in comparison.

  13. Myron Logan said...

    Southpaw, a player’s peak—at least on average—is generally a little younger than that, more like 26-27. That said, Fielder shouldn’t be expected to fall off too much until he approaches his mid-30s.

  14. Websoulsurfer said...

    Once you made the comparisons in size to Thome, Thomas, Dunn and Lee you should have just stopped.

    The plain and simple fact is that Fielder has been spectacularly durable for ANY 1B so you have to throw size out as a factor in determining whether he can continue to play at this level.

    You also do not take into account inflation at the baseball scale to establish value.

    And to use WAR in any conversation about relative worth is simply not worthy of discussion. The defensive metrics used WAR are so far from reality that WAR is a joke in either representing value or predicting performance.

    An article based SOLELY on offensive production would have merit. But one based on WAR tells us nothing. Especially in a league where Fielder could very well spend more than half his contract at DH AND still give full value to his tam in terms of wins.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Current day month ye@r *