Darren Oliver Contract

by Tom Dakers on Jan 5, 2012 12:46 PM EST in Toronto Blue Jays Analysis

Apparently, Darren Oliver is getting $4 million from the Jays plus an option year, which is more money than I expected. It is the most Alex has given a free agent for a season. It seems like a fair bit of money for a 41 year old reliever that might pitch 60 innings, but I guess that's the way of the world.

Oliver got $3.25 last year, and had a really good season, so I guess if he was younger I wouldn't be surprised he got that much money. I know, really, it isn't that much money, it just surprised me that he'd get that much from Alex. Yeah, I know, everyone else is on Alex's case about not spending enough money and I'm complaining, about $4 million. I'm not complaining really, I am glad we have him, it's just I figured it to be a million, or so, less.

Boy, you can tell there isn't much for news this week when this is something that I care about at all.

Tweet Comment 61 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I guess we can also look at this as progress

It’s reasonable based on WAR if $5 Mil/WAR.

In honor of the Jays 2nd Baseman who played with fire in more ways than one.

by Damaso's Burnt Shirt on Jan 5, 2012 1:00 PM EST reply actions

yup

it’s a fair deal. was expecting less but the guy’s been worth over 5 WAR since 2008

I tweet.

by benk on Jan 5, 2012 1:02 PM EST up reply actions

This bodes well for a quality starter. AA doesn’t seem adverse to overpaying a bit for a one year deal so maybe this is the route he will take.

by hoodlum99 on Jan 5, 2012 1:15 PM EST reply actions

Oliver's ERAs over the past for years

2.88, 2.71, 2.48, 2.29. That pretty remarkable to keep getting better when your in your late 30s and early 40s. It might just be the way teams have used him though.

by Chris McC on Jan 5, 2012 1:15 PM EST via iPhone app reply actions

Not surprised

Considering his first preference was probably to stay in Texas, we would have had to overbid the Rangers to get him.

It’s still a good deal, and frankly, I’d be fine with $6-million on a one year deal – at the end of the day, it doesn’t change anything about the long-term payroll strucutre, which is what I worry about.

Also, I believe this ties AA’s record for biggest free agent contract given out.

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 1:18 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

IIRC

Rauch’s $3.75 + $.25 buyout, was the biggest to date. So, depending on if their is a buyout for Oliver’s 2013 option, it could be the biggest.

@VagabondBansal

by Vagabond13 on Jan 5, 2012 1:43 PM EST up reply actions

So he got Rauch’s money basically… I guess that’s kinda sorta maybe fairish. A fair bit more then I was hoping.

by Parallex on Jan 5, 2012 2:37 PM EST up reply actions

A fair bit more then I was hoping.

Why? It’s a one year contract, so it doesn’t matter. It’s not going to prevent any other moves, either this year or in the future. So who cares if it’s an extra million or so, it makes the team better and potentially gives us a trade chip at midseason

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 3:03 PM EST up reply actions

This is probably about .5M more than I would have guessed

I was thinking it was likley to be 3M + .5M buyout. Really, it’s hard to assess this contract without the breakdown of this years contract, the buy-out, and option value.

by Playoffs!!!!1 on Jan 5, 2012 3:07 PM EST up reply actions

I disagree that it’s hard to assess with just the broad framework we already have. We know it’s 4M over 1 guaranteed year, so we know if doesn’t affect the payroll next year. We know it makes the team better. We know, within reason, that it doesn’t stop them from doing anything else to make the team better this year.

It’s a win.

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 3:12 PM EST up reply actions

“so we know if doesn’t affect the payroll next year”. Just to be clear, I’m taking 2013 and beyond in this phrase

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 3:12 PM EST up reply actions

OK, it's hard to fully assess this contract then

Buy-outs typically affect the next season payroll, don’t they? I mean, it really is all semantics and if the buy-outs are applied to that season’s payroll then my point is moot, but a 2M contract this year + 3M option + 2M buyout is not the same thing as a 4M contract this year + 0M buyout and a 1M option (just showing some extremes here, no way that is the reality).

For the record, it really doesn’t matter to me the breakdown, I am very happy with this signing and what it means going into next season.

by Playoffs!!!!1 on Jan 5, 2012 3:17 PM EST up reply actions

I’m not sure exactly which season you’d count it against, but like you say, it’s really semantics. If you do the buyout, the cash is probably paid according to the contract terms which may call for it being paid the following year (tax reasons?), but the decision has to be made in November so it’s still the current year.

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 3:28 PM EST up reply actions

I believe it is 4M guaranteed

meaning this year’s salary + buyout. I don’t think the breakdown has been released though.

by Playoffs!!!!1 on Jan 5, 2012 2:18 PM EST reply actions

Fair amount

But funny AA pays market value. After robbing Escobar maybe he felt bad?

by Mike Andrew on Jan 5, 2012 2:41 PM EST reply actions

He didn't rob Escobar

Escobar freely agreed to a contract extension with the Jays at a mutally agreeable price.

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 2:43 PM EST up reply actions

Fine

He robbed his agent.

by Mike Andrew on Jan 5, 2012 2:49 PM EST up reply actions

This doesn't even make sense

Agents work for the players, to rob from an agent is to principally rob the player.

It’s really simple. Robbing implies coercively taking something from someone. Escobar had options and leverage – going through arbritration, and potentially free agency. He freely chose the option that presumably most greatly effected his happiness, which was to sign an extension through his arb years with options on further years. Could he have got more money through another option? Probably, but that also involves more risk. In his situation, would others do differently? Most likely, I probably would. But he freely chose to make the trade-offs he did, so to imply that was “robbed” is ridiculous.

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 3:00 PM EST up reply actions

I think you're reading way too much into his glib statement

Escobar is on a ridiculously team friendly contract for what he is worth (in the sense that there is a very good chance he will be worth all 4 years next year alone). I don’t think Mike is implying that AA held a gun to his head to get him to sign.

by Playoffs!!!!1 on Jan 5, 2012 3:06 PM EST up reply actions

A glib statement is one that is made once, not one that is repeated.

I completely agree it’s a very team friendly deal, but there is world of difference between that statement and the implication that he was robbed. It’s a win/win deal – Jays get good value, Escobar presumably got what he wanted – security, etc

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 3:09 PM EST up reply actions

I'm pretty sure I said it once, then you replied and i changed what I said

Then you replied and wasted 200ish words trying to make me look dumb and people caught on?

by Mike Andrew on Jan 5, 2012 3:13 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

You used the word rob twice, which is ridiculous.

And the second time you said he robbed the agent instead, which is not right, because the agent is just a hired gun. The player is the one who suffers the consequences.

If the agent presents an offer to the player, and says, I think we can do better, and the player says, I don’t care, I’m happy with this, let’s take it, it’s not the agent can refuse. He can quit, I suppose, which just means he doesn’t get paid for doing the work, but that’s it.

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 3:15 PM EST up reply actions

All I was saying is AA got a ridiculously team friendly contract

And here he didn’t. (Get a ridiculously team friendly contract) It was market value. I highly doubt Escobar took less money to stay here, either way it looks good on AA. This move doesn’t. (It was just your typical signing)

I was just making a loose comment jokingly and then you rolled right in and tried to tear it to shreds. I was clearly not looking for a fight with my first post, I don’t see why you need to turn it into one.

by Mike Andrew on Jan 5, 2012 3:19 PM EST up reply actions

I highly doubt Escobar took less money to stay here

I think he did precisely that. Having escaped from a miserable situation in Atlanta, he found happiness here in Toronto. He decided to forgo millions of dollars in the future to sign a contract that gives him security and likely means that he will play in Toronto, where he seems to be happy, for the duration of the contract.

by siggian on Jan 5, 2012 3:27 PM EST up reply actions

Yea, I think this is it

I think it is the combination of him getting very good money compared to what he has made in the past, and being in a situation he is happy to be in. With that said, his agent should probably be fired for not getting more money, at least on the options.

by Playoffs!!!!1 on Jan 5, 2012 3:34 PM EST up reply actions

Here’s the thing though. Let’s say that negotiation were opened up on an extension. If AA made a final offer, the agent can make a recommendation in terms of whether or not to accept, but he can’t stop the player from taking it.

In my thinking, AA made a shrewd assessment of what the player wanted, and made quite a nice deal for the team. If he knew the player wanted to stay and wanted the security, then essentially the player handcuffed his agent

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 3:39 PM EST up reply actions

it's funny to think of it like that

but is probably exactly what happened

I tweet.

by benk on Jan 5, 2012 3:47 PM EST up reply actions

I don't mean this is a derogatory way at all

But coming from Cuba and having $10MM guaranteed to you is a lot. That’s a lot of guaranteed money for anyone, actually.

Growing up here I think we sometimes forget that in cultures outside of our own money isn’t as important (in the sense that we try to get as much of it as you can and question anyone who doesn’t). Getting to play the game he loves in a great situation + security was probably more important to him than trying to make as much money as he could.

by Aidin on Jan 5, 2012 3:53 PM EST up reply actions

I dunno, considering the changes in the CBA I’d think that Oliver (and FA relievers in his position in general) ought to be less valuable now. I mean the Rangers got a year of Oliver + 53 overall pick for his last year for 750K less then what just 1 year of (an even older) Oliver will cost the Blue Jays.

Unless he was just that much under-valued in his 09 contract?

by Parallex on Jan 5, 2012 2:58 PM EST up reply actions

Not sure what you mean by 09 contract – he was on a 1+1 covering 2010-11 (with option picked up).

I think the important thing is to not analyze with hindsight. Oliver outperformed the expectation over that contract (considering the age), so Texas ended up with a good deal, and the draft pick is gravy.

The new CBA probably does mean relievers are less valuable, at least for getting draft picks. But, because the new CBA will result in more playoff teams, and therefore more teams in the hunt, it changes the ratio of buyer/sellers, so it means fewer selling teams, which drives the price up for upgrading a bullpen (a common upgrade) at the deadline. So I guess, I want to see how it works out before judging how exactly the new CBA affects the dynamic

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 3:22 PM EST up reply actions

Yeah, I got the year wrong… should have wrote 10-11.

by Parallex on Jan 5, 2012 4:14 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t buy into the draft pick being “gravy”. I have a hard time imagining that the probability of any player turning into a pick at the conclusion isn’t factored into their valuation at all.

by Parallex on Jan 5, 2012 4:16 PM EST up reply actions

that's not what MjwW meant I don't think

I think he meant the contract was worth it even without considering the draft pick, so the pick was pure surplus value

I tweet.

by benk on Jan 5, 2012 4:22 PM EST up reply actions

Yes

And, you can’t have counted on the pick – if he tanked they don’t get it. So let’s say they had figured on a 50/50 chance when they signed him (purely for an example), if a pick is $2M in value, that’s an expected value of $1M, and to actually get the pick is an outperformance of the expectation

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 4:35 PM EST up reply actions

right

I tweet.

by benk on Jan 5, 2012 4:38 PM EST up reply actions

I agree wholeheartedly re: the news situation

Boy, you can tell there isn’t much for news this week when this is something that I care about at all.

Hey, AA! I’m parched!

"Words ought to be a little wild for they are the assaults of thought on the unthinking." (J.M Keynes)

by HESS2479 on Jan 5, 2012 3:11 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

Oliver was paid fair value

Oliver had a great regular season, for the innings pitched, Francisco paid 6 million by the Mets
Rauch paid 2.5 million dollars for his work. Somewhere in between , and 500,000 either way is not significant in the scheme of things. It is not like the Jays are paying 50% above market. Frasor is receiving 3.75 million as a set up man to complement Oliver.

His whole bullpen cost is 15.5 million dollars for a 7 man solid relief corp.

You should concern yourselves with what AA is looking to do next

by jensan on Jan 5, 2012 4:15 PM EST reply actions

really

since the Rays got a potential closer for $2 million in Rodney, I think the Jays got the wrong guy at the wrong price. Fact since AA has been GM the bullipen has been disapointing at best no reason for that to change!!!!!

by dmon on Jan 5, 2012 4:43 PM EST reply actions

You mean a potential closer who has walked almost 5 guys per 9 innings for his career, and walked more than he struck out last year?

Rodney’s a reclamation project, maybe he works out. Oliver is a known entity, and if age finally catches up to him, no biggie, off the books after 2012

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 5:00 PM EST up reply actions

You mean the guy who was so loathed by Angels fans?

The guy who helped the Jays win one of their more exciting games of last year?
http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/TOR/TOR201108140.shtml

In honor of the Jays 2nd Baseman who played with fire in more ways than one.

by Damaso's Burnt Shirt on Jan 5, 2012 5:04 PM EST up reply actions

not to pile on

but Rodney’s WAR over the last 4 seasons is 0.1, 0.5, 0.5 and -0.3, while Oliver’s has been 1.7, 2.2, 1.6 and 1.5. So if anything Rays overpaid for what is a 35-year old replacement level reliever.

by voislav on Jan 5, 2012 5:13 PM EST up reply actions

That's funny

Because people are wondering how Rodney even got a major league deal, let alone at that price. The two aren’t really comparable at all

by Aidin on Jan 5, 2012 6:04 PM EST up reply actions

The bullpen should be better than 2011

Biggest problem with the Jays is their starting rotation. I am really dissapointed with what AA has done so far to improve this. There is still time before the season begins, however this team will not compete until we have 2 more veteran starters, who can provide at least 15 wins each.

by mugisha2009 on Jan 5, 2012 10:05 PM EST up reply actions

Do they have to be veteran?

Or can they just be good

@EthanDR

by EthanDR on Jan 5, 2012 10:09 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs

veterans are like obviously better than non-veteran pitchers

duh

His 2011 wRC+ is 26

by Pikachu on Jan 5, 2012 10:11 PM EST up reply actions

They know how to win

and that’s what counts.

by Playoffs!!!!1 on Jan 5, 2012 10:14 PM EST up reply actions

You forgot these @@

Do you have a young, talented cost controlled player having a down year who's "attitude" has cased problems with an aging player or manager?

Don't worry, I Alex Anthopoulos will take him off your hands, I'll even give you some moderately useful veterans that will "help you make a playoff run".

I tweet sometimes

by jaysfan100 on Jan 5, 2012 10:24 PM EST up reply actions

I'd rather let our young pitchers get starts than use resources on 2 guys capable of 15 wins

by STZ513 on Jan 6, 2012 1:13 AM EST up reply actions

would love to see that too

Just dont have alot of faith that any of our young SP’s will turn into that. We really need a veteran in a mentor role. Maybe someone like Garza or Oswalt could fill that role.

by mugisha2009 on Jan 6, 2012 1:50 AM EST up reply actions

Garza is 1 year older than Morrow and Romero

How much veteraniness can he really provide over what we have? Also, I think we just signed one of the best at veteraniness in Oliver, since the dude could probably be the father of some of our players (and almost certainly calls AA that young whipper-snapper).

I mean, could we use a pitcher that is going to consistently throw 200 innings with a sub 4.0 ERA. Definitely. I just don’t see what age has to do with that, and don’t think it makes much sense if the price is that steep since we have a ton of options, with a couple young guys looking to make their break towards the end of the season like Alvarez did last year.

by Playoffs!!!!1 on Jan 6, 2012 8:18 AM EST up reply actions

Not every prospect becomes a star

You are lucky if 1 out of 3 of your prospects even becomes an everyday player. Trick is knowing, which ones to keep and then developing a competitive team around your younger players. Hope I am wrong, but I don’t see any number 1 or 2 SP’s in the farm sysstem.

by mugisha2009 on Jan 6, 2012 2:58 PM EST up reply actions

ceiling? there are a couple

doesn’t mean they’ll turn out, of course

I tweet.

by benk on Jan 6, 2012 3:11 PM EST up reply actions

could we use a pitcher that is going to consistently throw 200 innings with a sub 4.0 ERA. Definitely

Tell me 1 team that couldn’t if it was the right price. The problem is pitchers are being ridiculously overvalued lately, especially via the trade route. We have lots of depth in pitching prospects, wait a year+ for some of them to develop, because we would need really bad depth for all of them to fail. Not to mention that our major league options this year are far from bad, just regression, and a better #5 in DMc should improve us immensely.

Do you have a young, talented cost controlled player having a down year who's "attitude" has cased problems with an aging player or manager?

Don't worry, I Alex Anthopoulos will take him off your hands, I'll even give you some moderately useful veterans that will "help you make a playoff run".

I tweet sometimes

by jaysfan100 on Jan 6, 2012 5:48 PM EST up reply actions

The rotation is the weakest part of the team

In any sport you can ruin a prospect by rushing him to soon. Once you get past Romero you never know what the rest of the rotation will do. Too many questions, hope they prove me wrong. I just dont see the Jays competing for a playoff spot until we can say that we have 3-4 starting pitchers who routinely give the Jays 7 good innings.

by mugisha2009 on Jan 6, 2012 10:27 PM EST up reply actions

Dodgers got Mike MacDougal for 1 million with a club option

he had a 2.05 ERA, 60.9% groundball rate

Basically wondering why AA didnt go for him. I mean I dont think we really need another righty but even for 2 or 3 million I’d gladly take him. Granted this is the first time I’ve heard of him so there could be factors I’m not aware of

by STZ513 on Jan 5, 2012 5:37 PM EST reply actions

2.05 ERA last year. But 6.5 K/9 and 4.5 BB/9 suggests the he’s unlikely to repeat.

Basically, seems like a lesser Shawn Camp

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 5:47 PM EST up reply actions

On second thought

Lesser isn’t the right word. But similar to Shawn Camp

by MjwW on Jan 5, 2012 5:48 PM EST up reply actions

Same response voislav gave about Rodney applies here

but MacDougal’s WAR over the last 4 seasons is 0.1, -0.3, 0.0 and 0.0, while Oliver’s has been 1.7, 2.2, 1.6 and 1.5. His 2.05ERA last year seems to have been heavily driven by an 85% LOB%, even though nothing in his peripherals suggest he should be able to achieve that.

by Playoffs!!!!1 on Jan 5, 2012 6:14 PM EST up reply actions