2009 clearly comes out as the winner, and I think I'd go with 2007 in second and 2008 in last, although it's really close between the last two.
Thoughts?
Pat Andriola is a student at Tufts University currently working for Bloomberg Sports. You can contact him at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) or follow him on Twitter @tuftspat.
Comments
Ryan said...
I agree. 2008 is the very definition of replacement level while 2007 has a few players who could approach average in a good year (Olivo, Ensberg, Everett). 2009 is vastly superior. These types of exercises are fun off-season filler.
Posted 12/20 at 07:26 PM
Scott said...
2009 looks best *now*. What about a year from now? There is usually a reason players get non-tendered - sometimes reasons we don’t know about.
Posted 12/20 at 07:48 PM
The A Team said...
Just based on where these guys have/are looking to sign makes it obvious that this class is better regardless of the “maybe we don’t know something” argument. Capps, Wang, and Johnson are stirring up widespread interest and have jumped ahead of most pure free agents on teams’ wish lists.
Posted 12/21 at 10:44 AM
Nick Steiner said...
I think it’s a little hard to judge 2007 and 2008, given that we have 2009 in our minds. Perhaps you could show the Marcel’s for each player by year?
Posted 12/21 at 06:11 PM
Chip said...
That 2009 team is incredibly awful defensively. Enough that its still pretty close.
I agree. 2008 is the very definition of replacement level while 2007 has a few players who could approach average in a good year (Olivo, Ensberg, Everett). 2009 is vastly superior. These types of exercises are fun off-season filler.