12-17-2009, 12:30 PM
<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->This is my argument, BT. Players who hit .274/.298/.383 don't earn $2.5M. They earn 400k. Or...at least they should.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have a few problems with this statement. First of all, you can't flatly judge any player based solely on his offensive stats. A right fielder with those numbers is an atrocity beyond belief. A shortstop with those numbers, while not ideal, is far more acceptable. You understand, if you show me those numbers, and flatly declare a player with those number isn't worth 2.5 million, you are stating that in at least 7 of his years in which he appeared in the All Star game, Ozzie Smith should have earned 400k. He also had a total of 12 years in which his OPS was roughly the same, or worse than Neifi's 2005 season.
I'll also add that Perez was paid ONE million dollars in 2005, not 2.5. Since he was given 2.5 in 2006 (some of which I assume the Tigers picked up when we traded him, but I can't be sure), and was awful, I gave you the benefit of the doubt, and averaged the two. But if you want to go by specific salary, Perez was a freaking bargain at one million.
Before I bothered to look any of this up, I was more than willing to concede Perez's contract was a terrible one. But using every metric I can find to try and prove it, resulted in the opposite.
I have a few problems with this statement. First of all, you can't flatly judge any player based solely on his offensive stats. A right fielder with those numbers is an atrocity beyond belief. A shortstop with those numbers, while not ideal, is far more acceptable. You understand, if you show me those numbers, and flatly declare a player with those number isn't worth 2.5 million, you are stating that in at least 7 of his years in which he appeared in the All Star game, Ozzie Smith should have earned 400k. He also had a total of 12 years in which his OPS was roughly the same, or worse than Neifi's 2005 season.
I'll also add that Perez was paid ONE million dollars in 2005, not 2.5. Since he was given 2.5 in 2006 (some of which I assume the Tigers picked up when we traded him, but I can't be sure), and was awful, I gave you the benefit of the doubt, and averaged the two. But if you want to go by specific salary, Perez was a freaking bargain at one million.
Before I bothered to look any of this up, I was more than willing to concede Perez's contract was a terrible one. But using every metric I can find to try and prove it, resulted in the opposite.
I wish that I believed in Fate. I wish I didn't sleep so late. I used to be carried in the arms of cheerleaders.