Lookout Landing: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Steve McNair Found Shot to Death


Why Jason Schmidt Is A...Well, I've Heard Worse Ideas, But Still, No

That's a pretty fair and accurate encapsulation of how I've come to think about the whole thing.

Bear with me; I've been toying with the idea of writing this post for what seems like months, but now that the World Series is over and players are beginning to file for free agency I still don't have any particular outline in mind, so I'm just going to go straight ahead and damn the torpedoes.

This is the big thing, here: Jason Schmidt is a guy whose name value rather substantially exceeds what he actually brings to the table on the field. Fans who want the Mariners to pay out the wazoo to bring him in this winter are imagining Schmidt as the pitcher he was a few seasons ago, instead of as the pitcher he currently is. Don't get me wrong, he was still a perfectly acceptable weapon on the hill as recently as a month ago, but he's no longer the bonafide #1 some people have made him out to be. That part of him is gone, and it's unlikely to ever return again.

It really is a situation where the numbers tell the story. Or rather, one particular number, recorded over several consecutive years. Observe:

Jason Schmidt K%

2002-2004: 26.3%
2005: 21.9%
2006: 20.3%

Schmidt's strikeout rate peaked in 2004 and it's dropped by a quarter in the past two seasons, reaching its lowest level since an injury-plagued 2000 campaign. By itself, it was still well above average and in the same neighborhood as Erik Bedard and John Lackey, but statistics don't mean much without context, and for Schmidt it looks like the beginning of a decline. And as a 33 year old power arm with a history of injuries and taxing workloads, it doesn't really come as much of a surprise, either.

The good news for Schmidt is that his other ratios have generally stayed put, but then again, maybe that's not so encouraging after all; he's always been a flyball pitcher, and when you've got a guy whose strikeout rate is decreasing, you'd prefer to see him counter the decline with a drop in walk rate instead of posting the same mediocre BB% he's always had (save for a 2003 outlier). Without missing bats, Schmidt doesn't really have a leg to stand on.

We should probably avoid going too in-depth if we don't have to, though, and in this case I don't think it's necessary. Schmidt's always pitched to his FIP (3.87 career FIP, 3.91 career ERA), nullifying the possibility that he's a Moyer-like exception to the rule, which allows us to make the following comparison:

Schmidt FIP

2002-2004: 3.04
2005: 4.06
2006: 4.00

There you go. That's the issue in a nutshell - for two years Jason Schmidt has been good, but nowhere near the ace he used to be.

Any contract talk should operate under the assumption that, as an aging pitcher, Schmidt is unlikely to exceed his 2006 performance. Have him repeat his season in Safeco and he probably puts up an ERA around 3.80-4.00. Over 200+ innings, that guy's worth up to $10m or so, maybe a little less (I'm feeling generous). So even allowing for total consistency over the next several years, you're looking at an absolute max of $30m/3yr - $40m/4yr. I don't think that's going to get it done (although the latter has an outside shot).

But what are the odds that Schmidt staves off further decline for the life of his contract? Although his PECOTA page hasn't been updated for 2006, his list of Baseball-Reference comps is terrifying (this isn't authoritative by any means, but still). He turns 34 next January, his strikeout rate has dropped 24% in two years, and as a power pitcher with a history of high workloads he carries an elevated risk of injuries causing him to miss time or pitch worse. Plus, his walk rate's already teetering on the edge of acceptability, and any drop in command could make all kinds of bad things happen. Suddenly you're looking at something like (say) $25m/3yr - $32m/4yr, and that's definitely not going to cut it.

I don't want to get carried away and proclaim that the end is nigh for Jason Schmidt's career, because I don't think it is. Even in what looks like the early stages of an age-related decline, he still has a lot to give before he loses his usefulness, and after starting 32 games in 2006 it seems silly to call his durability into question. But at the same time, he and his agent are going to be asking the market for a #1-type contract, and the smart money's on Schmidt not holding up his end of the bargain.

If you want to think about it this way, Schmidt's probably going to get something in the neighborhood of Richie Sexson's contract without Richie Sexson's upside. And you remember how outspoken I was about that thing after it was signed. Sexson posted a park-adjusted .985 OPS his first year in Seattle, and Schmidt just doesn't have the ability to match that kind of impact, not anymore. I think he can still be a perfectly fine pitcher for at least a few years before his body stops cooperating, but he's going to get paid to do a lot more than that, and I don't want the Mariners to be that team who's left crossing their fingers that somehow by switching leagues Schmidt's able to turn back the clock.

Earlier today (prior to USSM's server crash) Dave posted that $30m/3yr would be as high as he goes with Schmidt, and I'm inclined to agree. I wouldn't want to go past $10m a season, and I definitely wouldn't want to tack on a fourth or, God forbid, a fifth year. It just wouldn't be worth it. Sure, it'd be great to pencil in Schmidt ahead of Felix in the 2007 rotation because seeing those two names back-to-back makes for compelling reading, but in the end what you're left with is an expensive name that's worth more to you than it is to the team on the field.

Unless by some unforeseen miracle Schmidt ends up signing for way less than expected, I'm content to let him (and Zito, for that matter) land elsewhere. Gimme Matsuzaka and everyone's happy.

0 recs | Comment 50 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

just my simple 2 cents
Schmidt makes this rotation better, but he's just not worth the BIG BIG bucks, we are in a day and age where every single free angent gets heavily overpaid, heck Meche is going to walk away with a sweet deal this off-season.

So basically, I think Schmidt is a good pitcher, who would make this rotation better(obviously), but hes not worth the 4yr/50 mil that he will probably get, id rather just let a guy like Feierabend have a spot in the rotation making what...300,000?

WIN IT FOR RAFFY!!!

by MFAN on Oct 30, 2006 10:09 PM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

For Me
I don't really care who makes what or how much is paid to who.  If they are the best available options performance wise that is available on the market then that's who I want to go after.  The 3 and 4 year contracts aren't nearly as damaging as they were 4 to 5 years ago because they aren't hanging around the 20mil a year mark.... 10-13 mil is about what players are making on average these days on the free agent market when you have a history of success.

So if Schmidt is production wise one of the better pitchers on the market then sign him... he's going to make the team better and that should be the only focus of this front office.  IMO

by MfaninAlaska on Oct 31, 2006 12:00 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If they do sign Schmidt to a stupid contract
I'd feel alot better about it if it occured AFTER we signed DM.

I'd still be a little annoyed, but not as much.

Aici zace un om despre care nu se ştie prea mult.

by Goose on Oct 31, 2006 12:27 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

It's the right idea
but it can also get you into a lot of trouble when you're going after the best players in a weak market. If and when the Schmidt sweepstakes spin out of control, the front office needs to start exploring the trade market, because they're going to find better values there than they are through free agency.

by Jeff on Oct 31, 2006 5:27 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Better Values
are possible.... but the priority should be better players.  The way I look at it is this... what drop off to you expect from Schmidt thru the length of a 3-4 year contract.  By the end would he still be good enough to be say a #3 pitcher?  The high priced contracts the M's have right now are spread to come off the books in successive years .. starting after the 08 season with Beltre and Sexson.  Signing someone like Schmidt to a 3 or 4 year deal isn't going to hamstring the club for any significant length of time.  Especially when you consider the majority of the bullpen, Felix, Betancourt, Lopez, Snelling, and quite a few others aren't going to be high priced for another couple of years.  Sure it will make the manuevering more important in the years to come, but the club needs to look at the here and now first.... if Schmidt makes you a much better club here and now then do what you can to get him on board.

by MfaninAlaska on Oct 31, 2006 8:29 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Any $10+ million contract will hamstring the team
Beltre is signed through 2009, not 2008.  Washburn is signed through 2009.  Sexson, Ibanez, and Johjima are signed through 2008. That is $45 million spent on five players, and if the M's re-sign Ichiro, that number jumps to $55 million for six players.  Putz, Snelling, and Soriano are already arbitration eligible, so they are no longer cheap.  Lopez will be arbitratin eligible after 2008, and Felix the next year.  As the team commits more money to fewer players, the team loses the flexibility to acquire better players who become available down the road or offer the young players long-term deals.

Schmidt is a good pitcher who will get paid like a great one.  Unfortunately, we already have a mediocre pitcher eating up 10% of the payroll.  With his injury history and decreased velocity and K rates, he is a good bet to be a mediocre (or incapacitated) pitcher within three years.  

As Jeff said, signing him is not the worst idea, especially if his demands become reasonable, but there are better options available to explore first.  But limiting yourself to the free agent market and taking a pay him whatever it costs approach simply because he is the best of a sorry bunch is courting disaster.

by G_ on Oct 31, 2006 9:06 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Thing is
you want to pay a B- player like he's an A+ player.  There's a saying that doesn't quite apply here but the underlying point is a good one: the nicest piece of shit is still a piece of shit.

by Gomez on Oct 31, 2006 9:16 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

You Weren't Lying
his list of Baseball-Reference comps is terrifying

checks

Jack McDowell.  Ramon Martinez.  Hideo Nomo.  Sutcliffe.  Colon.  Todd Stottlemyre.

runs screaming into the night

You want to give this guy 30/3?  After that list, I'd pay him to play for Anaheim.  Or the Yankees.  Or Osaka.  I'd be afraid that he'd be catching on Felix.

by NBarnes on Oct 31, 2006 4:17 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't *want* to give him $30m/3yr
but I'd be willing to if Matsuzaka fell through. Of course, that wouldn't be enough to sign him, so I guess it doesn't really matter in the end.

by Jeff on Oct 31, 2006 5:23 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah, exactly
4/60 will be the baseline.

by Gomez on Oct 31, 2006 9:16 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I think Millwood's deal
...or Barnett's is probably the baseline dollars-wise.

You MIGHT get less years, but 4/48 is probably not too unreasonable.

This is why I'm pissed that we got Washburn at 4/36 instead of Millwood- because, like the Midas commercial goes, you can pay now or pay later. Millwood > Schmidt.

by eponymous coward on Oct 31, 2006 11:59 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

What about Bedard
While he is not a free agent....shipping Richie to the O's for Bedard and someone else would improve the club.  Bedard is 28, keeps the ball in the yard and is three years away from costing the team big money...

Your thoughts...

I killed a 12 pack just to watch it die...

by Dollar97 on Oct 31, 2006 9:10 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

The O's
are a horribly run baseball team so you never know, but I seriously doubt they would trade a talent like Bedard for a 1B making 14 million for the next two seasons.

by Trent on Oct 31, 2006 9:13 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Same cat as Bonderman
basically.

Hell F'in Yes I'd want him.

No F'in Way do I believe he gets traded.

by Matthew on Oct 31, 2006 9:15 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Bonderman
I find it kind of humerous that there are rumors even surrounding Bonderman. Some of the papers and other info I've heard/read make it sound like they think he's peaked and he's not going to get much better than he already is.

Although, maybe it's the fact he sounds like Sloth from the Goonies when he talks.

by Trent on Oct 31, 2006 10:48 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Heh.
Yeah, Bonderman's no Rhodes Scholar.

I don't know which is more remarkable - that Bonderman's name has surfaced in trade rumors, or that Ranger fans don't want to get him for Teixeira.

by Jeff on Oct 31, 2006 10:53 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Bedard's not going anywhere.
Baltimore would love to have Sexson, but not at that price.

by Jeff on Oct 31, 2006 9:41 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

They are so poorly run....
That a couple of drinks at the winter meetings....the mention that they are the class of the east cough and their ownership is better than King George cough, hack, wheeze and you might make it work....got to put your selling shoes on....
I killed a 12 pack just to watch it die...

by Dollar97 on Oct 31, 2006 9:51 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Good thing it's not four years ago.
We would've had twice as many Oriole GM's to get drunk.

by Jeff on Oct 31, 2006 10:09 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

That bar tab...
could have been as much as a posting fee....
I killed a 12 pack just to watch it die...

by Dollar97 on Oct 31, 2006 10:24 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah, seriously
"Here, why don't we give you Rodrigo Lopez instead?  At least then he couldn't own you guys anymore."
Marinerds - a different daily dose of baseblog.

by Deanna on Oct 31, 2006 1:08 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Looks like DOV
took exception to a rational post regarding Schmidt by you Jeff and Dave. Heh.

by Trent on Oct 31, 2006 10:01 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I'm one to see DOV's point
but not on Schmidt.  He's not gonna earn the contract he gets, and that's $15-17 mil a season I'd rather not see on the books for a #2-3 SP.

by Gomez on Oct 31, 2006 10:27 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't see the point.
The whole xFIP thing is an argument against a side that nobody took.

by Jeff on Oct 31, 2006 10:34 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Probably needed something to create an argument
I just want a pair of his rose colored glasses.

by Trent on Oct 31, 2006 10:43 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yeah
Also, that argument completely ignores the 1-2 K's and easy outs he'd lose (and likely a walk or two a game he'd gain) from switching to the AL and not facing pitchers 2-3 times a game anymore, and having to face a DH instead.

by Gomez on Oct 31, 2006 11:10 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well it's not quite *that* dramatic
but yeah, the league adjustment is one of several concerns.

by Jeff on Oct 31, 2006 11:12 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well, yeah
That does ignore any success said pitcher has against said DH.  But facing a slugger DH is tougher than facing a punchless pitcher.

by Gomez on Oct 31, 2006 12:32 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Jeez
Dr. Detecto is starting to sound like Rev Halofan in his old age.
"I'VE GOT BLISTERS ON ME FINGERS!!"
--Stewie Griffin AND Josh Beckett

by Phildopip on Oct 31, 2006 11:42 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

So it IS true...
You and Dave Cameron DO share a brain.  I'm still trying to figure out the other two blind Stygian Witches with which I share the oracle to read this great stuff.
Are we there yet?

by PositivePaul on Oct 31, 2006 11:53 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

We may share brains
But we have different bodies, and mine's 100 times sexier.

by Jeff on Oct 31, 2006 12:17 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Having met you both...
...I plead the 5th.  

But I will say that as much as I think highly of both of you very, very much, I wouldn't go gay for either of you. Then again, I wouldn't go gay for anyone really, either.  

Are we there yet?

by PositivePaul on Oct 31, 2006 12:24 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well, I'm glad.
I don't want to be the one that comes between PositivePaul and PositiveWife.

by Jeff on Oct 31, 2006 12:25 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

'Zactly...
I'm very content with my choice in mates.  I certainly don't need another one.  I don't have any clue how people can become polygamists.  One woman is plenty for me.  Plenty.
Are we there yet?

by PositivePaul on Oct 31, 2006 12:34 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I have this vague impression
that it would be my job to comment here, except that I can't clearly remember what Jeff looks like, and I wasn't really intending to do a blogosphere All-Cute team roster anyway.
Marinerds - a different daily dose of baseblog.

by Deanna on Oct 31, 2006 1:06 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

I don't think a blogosphere all-cute team
would have enough people to fill even a curling team.

by Matthew on Oct 31, 2006 1:28 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Untrue.
I'd actually say that a surprisingly high proportion of the basebloggers I've met have been good-looking.  Of course, it's probably just the case that the non-cute ones don't show their face in public.
Marinerds - a different daily dose of baseblog.

by Deanna on Oct 31, 2006 1:32 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Depends.
It's not a Geordie accent, is it?  There's nothing cute about the screech of a squirrel being passed over a cheese grater.
Nice Guys Finish Third - Hopelessly lost, but makin' good time.

by pdb on Oct 31, 2006 3:31 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Decline Phases
One thing that is very common among statistically-oriented bloggers is discussion of decline phases.  The common assumption is that players careers form smooth bell-curves, with most players reaching a peak and then slowly declining for a few years afterwards.  

That may be true in general, if one looks at a huge sample of players over the course of years.  

But if you look at the track records of individual players, most have a down year every once in a while.  And I am not talking about flukey luck issues.  But genuine declines in performance associated with declines in peripheral stats.  A great example is Roger Clemens.  He had lots of off years, and a few consecutive bad years.  If we restrict the discussion to really elite players, guys like Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez - who do have that bell curve career path - seem more like exceptions.  John Smoltz, Tom Glavine, Mike Mussina, Curt Schilling, etc.  All these guys had some bad years.  

The point is, I am not sure how realistic it is to assume that someone like Schmidt is entering the beginnings of a slow prolonged decline.  While that type of career path may be generally true (if we increase the sample to 100s of pitchers), it doesn't seem to work for most specific cases.  

I think that Schmidt could very well be entering a decline phase.  But it is also possible that he could have a career year next season.  A lot of posts seem to assume that 2006 is the absolute peak we can expect for the rest of his career.  But lots of guy pitch at a very high level well beyond that.  That may not be the case.  

The biggest problem for Schmidt is his BB numbers.  It seems like the guys that age well manage to limit their BBs.  Even Randy Johnson managed to do this.  But Schmidt just doesn't have the control that guys like Pedro and Schilling do.  

I have to admit that I am pretty torn on this whole thing.  I think that Matsuzaka is priority 1, and Schmidt and Zito are 2a and 2b.  But even Matsuzaka has serious question marks.  

by Jerry on Oct 31, 2006 4:33 PM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Fair enough.
You're right - there's always a small chance that Schmidt shakes off this little decline of his and actually improves going forward. It's happened before, and it'll happen again.

The problem is, there's no way to see that coming. The odds are against it, and when it comes to contracts this size you always have to err on the side of probability, because otherwise you'll get burned far too often.

There are worse things than having to live with a very expensive Jason Schmidt for the next 3-4 years, but a smarter front office would be able to find better options that don't cost as much.

by Jeff on Oct 31, 2006 4:48 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well...
...I think it's relevant to point out that player declines are not always smooth and gradual.

It's also relevant to point out that over 3-5 years, someone at Schmidt's age probably isn't going to perform at that super high level.

It may be do-able to gamble on him if it's only three years (particularly if it's your job on the line), but I sure wouldn't be talking about four or five years....

by rtang on Oct 31, 2006 5:08 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Combine one's post-peak career
one that is already beginning to show a slight decline... with a trip to a more challenging league, where he'll face more challenging hitters, and at best you're going to see some dropoff in performance.

I'd expect a decent-to-good performance from Schmidt, that said, and I'm not sure it warrants paying him great-player money.

by Gomez on Oct 31, 2006 5:42 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Basic Summary
Jeff nailed it, but since my blog's server pulled a Julio Mateo, here's my $0.02, with you all knowing full well that you're going to get more than that once our new server comes rolling in.

To be in favor of signing Jason Schmidt to a "market value" deal, you are required to believe that Jason Schmidt is going to perform better in 2007 and beyond than he did in 2005 and 2006.  You cannot - cannot - make the argument that 2005/2006 Jason Schmidt is worth the contract he is going to receive.  

If you want to believe that Jason Schmidt is going to be better in his next 600 innings than he has been in his last 400, well, you're allowed to believe that, and you may be correct.  Since none of us know the future, that's a discussion worth having, though you can probably guess where I stand.

However, if you think that the level of pitching Jason Schmidt has performed at the past two years is worth something like 5 years, $60 million, well, you're got a failure in your pitcher evaluation.  

by davidcameron on Oct 31, 2006 5:43 PM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

By reading a game thread of your own volition you agree to accept all liability for any and all damage done to your delicate sensibilities.
Start posting about the Mariners »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Strip Club Cleared to Open Near Safeco Field

Recent FanPosts

Amy_s_pictures1_042_small
Ichiro's comments on his fake flip at Yankee Stadium
Small
Want to go to tonights game in Boston?  Please?
Small
Top 5 IFA Guillermo Pimentel signs with the Mariners?
Clemente_small
OT 7/2/05-- Flag Waving, Long Weekend, 4th of July Holiday edition
Small
Open Sounders vs. Timbers gamethread
Small
Happy Canada Day
Durer2_small
Who will be heir to the King?
Eyebrows_small
OFFTOP 6/29/09 - Avoiding Work Edition
Dscn1856_small
USA vs. Brazil Game Thread
Small
Anyone meeting up in NYC?

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Sexy People

Hms_surprise_small Graham

Small Matthew

Small Jeff

Official Partner of Yahoo! Sports