Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Forecasting Johan Santana through 2014
In the last thread, yup said:SG, if you have time, i would LOVE to see a 6 year projection for Santana (a la the one you did for A-Rod) and say, Cano..
I'll save Cano for later on, but i guess I can take a look at Santana. Before I do, let me say that I am still not very happy with my pitcher projections for 2008 but I don't think any forecaster ever really likes projecting pitching. It's an exercise in frustration. So if projecting 2008 is going to be that much of a crapshoot, just keep in mind the error bars as we try to project out further than that are going to be that much bigger. But an educated guess with some reasonably informed assumptions is probably better than nothing at all, so here goes. If we assume Santana gets traded to the Yankees for 2008 and then signs a 6 year extension, here's a rough stab at the possible shape of his contributions over that stretch.
| Year | Age | G | GS | Sv | W | L | IP | H | R | ER | HR | BB | K | ERA | RSaA | RSaR | HR/9 | BB/9 | K/9 | WAA | WAR |
| 2008 | 29 | 33 | 32 | 0 | 16 | 9 | 220 | 168 | 86 | 80 | 28 | 56 | 230 | 3.26 | 26 | 53 | 1.1 | 2.3 | 9.4 | 2.6 | 5.3 |
| 2009 | 30 | 31 | 30 | 0 | 17 | 10 | 207 | 160 | 83 | 76 | 26 | 53 | 214 | 3.33 | 23 | 48 | 1.1 | 2.3 | 9.3 | 2.3 | 4.8 |
| 2010 | 31 | 30 | 28 | 0 | 15 | 10 | 194 | 152 | 80 | 74 | 25 | 50 | 199 | 3.43 | 20 | 43 | 1.1 | 2.3 | 9.2 | 2.0 | 4.3 |
| 2011 | 32 | 27 | 26 | 0 | 14 | 10 | 181 | 145 | 77 | 71 | 23 | 47 | 181 | 3.53 | 16 | 38 | 1.2 | 2.4 | 9.0 | 1.6 | 3.8 |
| 2012 | 33 | 26 | 25 | 0 | 12 | 9 | 168 | 139 | 74 | 68 | 22 | 45 | 165 | 3.64 | 13 | 33 | 1.2 | 2.4 | 8.8 | 1.3 | 3.3 |
| 2013 | 34 | 24 | 23 | 0 | 11 | 9 | 156 | 133 | 70 | 64 | 21 | 42 | 149 | 3.71 | 11 | 30 | 1.2 | 2.4 | 8.6 | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| 2014 | 35 | 22 | 21 | 0 | 10 | 9 | 145 | 130 | 66 | 61 | 19 | 40 | 133 | 3.78 | 9 | 26 | 1.2 | 2.5 | 8.2 | 0.9 | 2.6 |
| Total | 193 | 186 | 0 | 95 | 65 | 1272 | 1027 | 536 | 495 | 163 | 333 | 1271 | 3.50 | 117 | 270 | 1.2 | 2.4 | 9.0 | 11.7 | 27.0 |
RsaA: Runs saved above average
RsAR: Runs saved above replacement
WAA: Wins above average
WAR: Wins above replacement
Have I mentioned that projecting pitching is a crapshoot? Anyway, Santana's probably going to be worth about 5 wins above a replacement pitcher over the next two seasons, followed by a slow but steady decline. Historically pitchers pitch fewer innings as they enter their 30s so we'd expect his innings to decline, which cuts into his value. Santana could certainly do better than that, but the logical progression says to expect fewer innings each year, especially given his relatively small frame and stature. We'd also expect him to become a little more hittable and to strike out fewer batters going forward. He's good enough that even with decline he'll be an above average pitcher through this hypothetical extension, but that ignores the fact that as a pitcher he's an injury risk, and he's likely had his best seasons already.
An aging pattern like this would mean Santana would be worth about 27 marginal wins over the seven years he'd have been signed for hypothetically. Santana's owed $13.25 million for next season, in which he projects to be worth about 5.3 wins above replacement so for 2008 he's a pretty good value. How about going forward?
I have no idea what Santana would take for an extension, but let's assume something like $157.5 million over six years. In present day value that's probably closer to $115 million or so. Overall he'd end up costing the Yankees around $5.2 million per marginal win in present-day value from 2009-2014. So while Santana's not a bargain, he should be worth his contract over the bulk of it. By the time Santana's decline makes him no longer an ace, the hope would be that the Yankee rotation will be fronted by Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes, Dellin Bettances, or Andrew Brackman anyway.
Santana's been great, but he's not going to be as great as he was. Factor the likely upcoming decline in with the cost it's going to take to sign him and I really hope the Yankees are smart and don't end up overpaying for him. I'd love to have him, but only at a reasonable cost. To me, Hughes, Chamberlain, Jackson and Cano are off-limits. Any other combination of bits and pieces and I'd probably be pretty happy with it.
Page 1 of 1 pages: