Contreras to Cardinals - 5 years, $87 million

[wallus]

The first contracts signed are usually terrible and this off-season has been no different.

[Lathund]

$17.5m AAV, not too bad for the Cardinals even if 5 years it took to bring the AAV down isn't ideal. Thing is, it's hardly a bargain though. He has shiny hitting stats for a catcher, but his baserunning and defense (Framing in particular, but also game calling) brings down his overall value a ton. Using the two WARs that factor in framing he put up 15.5 fWAR or 12.6 WARP over the 7 seasons he played for the Cubs. Even with 2020 in there, that's not particularly impressive, Still, paying $17.5m for the 2-3 WAR a year you'd expect from the first few seasons isn't too bad on it's own, but I'd expect the last couple years to be rough.. But we'll have to see how it affects the pitching staff.

[StearnsFTW]

Yeah, I personally think it's going to become obvious how valuable Yadi was when their pitching staff plummets back to earth.

 

[Hopper]

Trying to talk everyone into the fact that the Cards getting Contreras is a good thing and won't do us any damage is kind of humorous.

Once again, they have gone out and gotten some more offensive fire power while we have done nothing.

Who won the division last year?  Who just made an offensive improvement?

I get it, downplaying every move the Cardinals make falsely makes some feel better, but the fact is, we have to do something to catch up to them, and they just got better.

It is what it is.

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

12 minutes ago, Hopper said:

Trying to talk everyone into the fact that the Cards getting Contreras is a good thing and won't do us any damage is kind of humorous.

Once again, they have gone out and gotten some more offensive fire power while we have done nothing.

Who won the division last year?  Who just made an offensive improvement?

I get it, downplaying every move the Cardinals make falsely makes some feel better, but the fact is, we have to do something to catch up to them, and they just got better.

It is what it is.

Is anyone actually *happy* the Cardinals got a good player?

All I'm saying about that contract is that I'm glad no team I follow or like signed that deal. I don't think it will work out well for them over the course of the contract.

[Axman59]

2 hours ago, Lathund said:

I don't mind this at all. Contreras is a big downgrade to Yadi when it comes to the defensive side of the game (Particularly when it comes to handling a pitching staff, and framing),

Pitch framing will soon be an irrelevant art. As in 2024.

[Brock Beauchamp]

5 minutes ago, Axman59 said:

Pitch framing will soon be an irrelevant art. As in 2024.

I don't see this happening and especially not in 2024. I think the most likely outcome is a hybrid challenge system, which MLB has been trying out in testing leagues. Basically, it works like the standard challenge system: the ump's call stands unless the manager (or maybe batter/pitcher? not sure on details) challenges a specific call. Then it automatically defaults to the already-generated computer strikezone call. If you win the challenge, you keep the challenge. If you lose the challenge, you lose the challenge.

And in that situation, framing will still be very relevant.

[MrTPlush]

2 hours ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

Huh. Less overall money than I expected considering it's five years.

I really don’t think this deal is that bad. $17.5mil a year for around a .800 OPS…behind the dish? If he can hit another three years that’s a good deal. 
 

The risk is the fact all his value comes from his offense. If his offensive disappears he is worth $0. It isn’t like with Yadi where if his offense takes a dip he still brings a ton of value catching and leading the pitching staff.

I wouldn’t call it a bad contract at face value. This could end up a nice deal much like Cain did for us. Just needs to hit the next 3 years…then it won’t matter what he does the last two in all honesty.

[Brock Beauchamp]

2 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

I really don’t think this deal is that bad. $17.5mil a year for around a .800 OPS…behind the dish? If he can hit another three years that’s a good deal. 

The risk is the fact all his value comes from his offense. If his offensive disappears he is worth $0. It isn’t like with Yadi where if his offense takes a dip he still brings a ton of value catching and leading the pitching staff.

I wouldn’t call it a bad contract at face value. This could end up a nice deal much like Cain did for us. Just needs to hit the next 3 years…then it won’t matter what he does the last two in all honesty.

The defensive aspect is primarily why I didn't want Contreras. If you move him to DH, his career 118 wRC+ is pretty mundane and given his age, he's likely to start tailing off.

I simply don't trust non-elite defensive catchers once their age starts with a "3".

[wntrtxn21]

14 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

I don't see this happening and especially not in 2024. I think the most likely outcome is a hybrid challenge system, which MLB has been trying out in testing leagues. Basically, it works like the standard challenge system: the ump's call stands unless the manager (or maybe batter/pitcher? not sure on details) challenges a specific call. Then it automatically defaults to the already-generated computer strikezone call. If you win the challenge, you keep the challenge. If you lose the challenge, you lose the challenge.

And in that situation, framing will still be very relevant.

From what I have read and if I understand it, in almost all cases the ump doesn't make the ball/strike call.  The automative system determines balls and strikes and the ump just makes the call that was relayed to him by the system. If the batter or pitcher disagree with a particular pitch they can challange (I think they get a total of 3 challanges per game) and a review is done. Framing becomes irrelevant.

[monty57]

44 minutes ago, Hopper said:

I get it, downplaying every move the Cardinals make falsely makes some feel better, but the fact is, we have to do something to catch up to them, and they just got better.

It is what it is.

 

No, that's not a fact. Making moves, especially big money, long-term moves, simply to "keep up with the Joneses" is a bad way to run a franchise.

They should keep running the team the way they have, which has produced the 9th most wins since 2010, and 9th most wins since 2015 while sitting in the smallest market in baseball.

I think that in the long-term, St. Louis is a good team for the Brewers to emulate. But that is operating with a long-term plan, not making a short-term, emotionally-charged move that could greatly hamper the long-term strategy.

[Brock Beauchamp]

3 minutes ago, wntrtxn21 said:

From what I have read and if I understand it, in almost all cases the ump doesn't make the ball/strike call.  The automative system determines balls and strikes and the ump just makes the call that was relayed to him by the system. If the batter or pitcher disagree with a particular pitch they can challange (I think they get a total of 3 challanges per game) and a review is done. Framing becomes irrelevant.

There are a few different systems being tested. One is fully automatic, we've all heard about that. But the challenge system lets the umpire call most of the pitches, at least from what I've read and heard. Only when challenged does the computer come into play and has the final word on the call.

Having an official "review" wouldn't really work, as the game would grind to a halt and become really cumbersome. Whereas if the computer has the challenge call, it has already spit out its answer before the challenge even happens.

If I have time, I'll dig around and see if I can find the original source I read/heard about it.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

1 hour ago, Hopper said:

Trying to talk everyone into the fact that the Cards getting Contreras is a good thing and won't do us any damage is kind of humorous.

Once again, they have gone out and gotten some more offensive fire power while we have done nothing.

Who won the division last year?  Who just made an offensive improvement?

I get it, downplaying every move the Cardinals make falsely makes some feel better, but the fact is, we have to do something to catch up to them, and they just got better.

It is what it is.

 

Trying to find a silver lining in an opponent's move isn't "humorous". It is simply an alternative viewpoint that fans have. Perhaps some are choosing not to go totally "gloom and doom" on the 2023 season when we haven't even reached 2023 yet.

[monty57]

6 minutes ago, Brock Beauchamp said:

There are a few different systems being tested. One is fully automatic, we've all heard about that. But the challenge system lets the umpire call most of the pitches, at least from what I've read and heard. Only when challenged does the computer come into play and has the final word on the call.

Having an official "review" wouldn't really work, as the game would grind to a halt and become really cumbersome. Whereas if the computer has the challenge call, it has already spit out its answer before the challenge even happens.

If I have time, I'll dig around and see if I can find the original source I read/heard about it.

This sounds like they're just trying to find a way to be stupid.

There is a system that should be 100% accurate, and they are admitting that by accepting the challenge that is spit out by the computer as absolute.

They are currently accepting a model that has proven to be far less than 100% accurate, and has had some effect (oftentimes significant) on the outcome of every game ever played.

Per your description, they would stick with the inferior model for no apparent reason, and use the far superior model only sporadically, when the umpires made such an egregious error that a team decides to use the superior model to trump his bad call. If the superior model were to be used, there would theoretically be no need for challenges, which only serve to lengthen games, which according to the current commissioner is the biggest problem in baseball.

[Hopper]

It's really just kidding yourself, but I'll stop now.

[Brock Beauchamp]

1 minute ago, monty57 said:

This sounds like they're just trying to find a way to be stupid.

There is a system that should be 100% accurate, and they are admitting that by accepting the challenge that is spit out by the computer as absolute.

They are currently accepting a model that has proven to be far less than 100% accurate, and has had some effect (oftentimes significant) on the outcome of every game ever played.

Per your description, they would stick with the inferior model for no apparent reason, and use the far superior model only sporadically, when the umpires made such an egregious error that a team decides to use the superior model to trump his bad call. If the superior model were to be used, there would theoretically be no need for challenges, which only serve to lengthen games, which according to the current commissioner is the biggest problem in baseball.

I don't necessarily disagree - I don't have any real issue with fully automated balls and strikes - but there are some convincing arguments to keeping a human element.

The best I've read so far is that, unconsciously, humans tend to prolong intrigue. In critical situations, an 0-2 borderline pitch is slightly more likely to be called a ball. The inverse is true for a 3-0 pitch being called a strike.

Is intentionally putting your finger on the scale a better system? Eh, I'm skeptical of that being true... but it does increase intrigue when it happens.

I simply don't feel that strongly about automation or a challenge system. The one thing I don't want to see is humans continuing to make 100% of the calls, that much I know.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

7 minutes ago, Hopper said:

It's really just kidding yourself, but I'll stop now.

The idea that a soon-to-be 31-year-old catcher with a lot of wear on him will struggle to live up to a 5-year, $90 million deal is hardly "kidding yourself". In fact, I would imagine the odds of that happening are pretty good.

But if Contreras becomes a key cog in a World Series winning team in the next couple years, it is probably money well spent.

[endaround]

Yes, thank god the Brewers didn't do this.  Otherwise they could never afford the next McCutchen.

[SF70]

4 hours ago, StearnsFTW said:

Yeah, I personally think it's going to become obvious how valuable Yadi was when their pitching staff plummets back to earth.

 

Not sure that’s going to happen. The Cardinals defense is incredible and helps that staff more than any catcher could or would.

[Hopper]

[StearnsFTW]

12 minutes ago, SF70 said:

Not sure that’s going to happen. The Cardinals defense is incredible and helps that staff more than any catcher could or would.

I don't believe this at all.

 

Edit to clarify:  I believe the defense matters but I believe a catcher of Yadi's quality makes a huge difference. 

 

 

 

[SF70]

3 minutes ago, StearnsFTW said:

I don't believe this at all.

 

Edit to clarify:  I believe the defense matters but I believe a catcher of Yadi's quality makes a huge difference. 

 

 

 

Agree C defense matters, and they will miss Molina’s D, but I just don’t see their staff falling off a cliff and it’s because of their defense around the diamond.

[rickh150]

7 hours ago, Brewcrew82 said:

Anyone expecting the Brewers to compete with the big boys and build their roster through free agency is just going to be perpetually disappointed. This is how it always is and always will be…

I no longer expect them to make a trade that will help the mlb club….. even in a playoff race!

[Brewcrew82]

11 minutes ago, rickh150 said:

I no longer expect them to make a trade that will help the mlb club….. even in a playoff race!

So you don't think acquiring Winker for Wong will help the mlb club? I would question that. You seem to be one of the people that the Josh Hader trade has broken....It's all you ever bring up. 

[tmwiese55]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not denying Molina is a good D catcher and likely was like a coach on the field.  But, let's not forget he barely played last year, i think he was less than half the games and was even gone from the team for a while.  Of course he's a factor, but the overall STL system is probably the key here. 

Still, my take on this is of course it helps them next year which is bad for us.  But the last few years of this deal will likely be bad, which I'm sure they realize too.   Maybe it's just me being a Cubs hater but I also wouldn't be surprised if Contreras ends up with some effort/attitude issues going forward now that he's been paid.