Mad Money

Jason Michael Barker

Some deals make sense -- others, not so much. Two deals went down this week that were more towards the "not so much" end of the spectrum. I'm speaking of a pair of four-year contract extensions, one given to Trevor Hoffman, the other to Kevin Young. Let's look at Young's deal first because, well, it happened first, chronologically speaking.

Originally drafted by the Pirates in the seventh round of the 1990 amateur draft, Kevin Young was, for a time, considered part of the future in Pittsburgh. In his first full season in 1993 he played 141 games, primarily at first base, and hit .300/.343, truly horrible numbers for his position. After part-time play in 1994 and 1995 with zero improvement, the Bucs released Young during spring training before the 1996 season. He caught on with Kansas City, where he played one season before, you guessed it, being released.

Young returned to Pittsburgh in 1997, and worked his way into a starting job. It was a banner year for him, as he delivered 18 home runs and hit .332/.535 in 97 games. His OBP wasn't great, but the power made up for it (my general rule: if your OBP is in the .320-.330 range, you'd better slug .500+ to be useful). He was 28, however, an age when players are prone to career seasons.

Last season, Young slipped to .328/.481, to the point where his SLG no longer was enough to offset his OBP, particularly at a very strong offensive position. In terms of OPS, Young ranked #20 among regular first basemen in the majors last season, well behind McGwire, Olerud, Thome, Vaughn, Bagwell and Thomas.

Kevin Young will turn 30 on June 16, and he's signed through the 2003 season at an average of $6M per season. Kevin Young isn't the type of player you should be building your franchise around. He might be a perfectly nice guy, but Kevin Young isn't all that good a baseball player, to be brutally honest.

Even with salaries escalating the way they are, by no stretch of the imagination will $6M per season be a bargain (or even reasonable) for an aging first baseman who's among the worst in the league, even three years from now. There are players sitting in AAA who could step in and do at least as good a job for a fraction of the cost. Roberto Petagine jumps to mind, but he's off in Japan this season.

Then there's Trevor Hoffman, the Padres' closer who saved 53 of 54 games last season and finished second in National League Cy Young balloting. Although he's 31, as a pitcher who only throws 75 or 80 innings a year, he's not quite the age or injury risk of say, Kevin Brown. Hoffman has been a marvelous closer throughout his career, saving 188 of 216 games (87%) with a 2.77 ERA.

After losing much of their core following the season (Kevin Brown, Steve Finley, Ken Caminiti, Greg Vaughn), there is the issue of assuring the fans that ownership is still interested in winning. Locking up Hoffman for four more years is a step in the right direction in that regard (and he's now the first player locked up in 2002, when the Padres will move into their new stadium), but in terms of spending wisely, it doesn't really make sense.

Hoffman will make $8M next season for pitching around 80 innings. Wouldn't similar money have been better spent on a starting pitcher who would log 250 innings? For whatever reason, I don't buy all the hype surrounding closers. To borrow a line from Baseball Prospectus, saving games is not a skill -- pitching is. For years, Mike Jackson toiled in anonymity as a setup man. Then he was pressed into the closer's role in Cleveland, and presto! He's a good closer.

Take a good look at the closers in the major leagues. Most of them are former starters or AAA-fodder who've finally gotten a chance to show what they can do. Grooming closers in the minors, particularly the low minors, is a waste of resources because such projects have produced poor results.

It's nice that the Padres have a great closer, but now they're overpaying him to what another player could do at a fraction of the cost (where have we heard that one before?). OK, so perhaps not exactly what Hoffman can do, but as long as the results are similar, it would be more cost-effective. Given that they're not going to win the division this season, and given the market for "proven closers," the Padres would have been better off trading Hoffman while his value is at its highest and spending the money elsewhere.

Sounds harsh, doesn't it? Perhaps. Answer me this, though: You always hear about how baseball is a business, and sometimes your hometown team can't afford to keep the players they love (I was first subjected to this when the Mariners traded the great Omar Vizquel for a bag o' balls). If cost is the bottom line (and it is) why is it, then, that GMs sometimes make such stupid business decisions? You wouldn't see a major corporation pay $8M for a copier when they could get a similar product for $150K, or whatever the Major League minimum is this season.

about the author

Jason Michael Barker isn't always this bitter, he just gets upset at Major League General Managers. Particularly Herk Robinson, who wouldn't know a prospect from Tony Womack. Tell Jason to chill out when you interrogate him at jmb@strikethree.com.