Ryan Madson: So Long, and Thanks for All the Wins
Since erstwhile Phillies closer Ryan Madson signed with the Reds earlier this month, coverage has focused primarily on the great bargain Cincinnati got, and secondarily on how dumb the Phils were to sign Jonathan Papelbon to an eight-figure deal soon after the free agent market opened for business. Lost in the argument over their respective contracts and the back-and-forth over Ruben Amaro’s learning curve in the GM chair are a couple simple facts: in terms of both performance and season-over-season consistency, Madson has a strong case as the greatest reliever in Phillies history, and he delivered the team astonishing value above and beyond what he was paid for in his eight seasons with the team. In fact, by one analysis at least, the Phillies could have doubled Madson’s compensation over that span and he still would have been a significant bargain.
The table below attempts to quantify what Madson gave the Phillies. WAR, of course, is Wins Above Replacement; these figures are taken from Baseball-Reference.com. Salary is self-explanatory. The Nominal Value per WAR is derived from a recent Fangraphs article that starts from the premise that a marginal win in 2012 is worth $5 million, and posits a five percent annual nominal increase in how much a win is worth. Using that starting point, I worked back to determine how much a win was worth in each of Madson’s pro seasons. Madson’s Value is a simple multiplication operation, and then I subtract his actual salary to derive the difference. All numbers other than WAR are in millions of dollars.
| Year | Madson WAR |
Nominal Value per WAR |
Madson Value | Madson Salary | Difference |
| 2004 | 2.1 | 3.32 | 6.97 | 0.3 | 6.67 |
| 2005 | -0.1 | 3.49 | -0.35 | 0.35 | -0.7 |
| 2006 | -0.6 | 3.68 | -2.21 | 0.4 | -2.61 |
| 2007 | 1.3 | 3.87 | 5.03 | 1.1 | 3.93 |
| 2008 | 1.4 | 4.07 | 5.7 | 1.4 | 4.3 |
| 2009 | 1.5 | 4.29 | 6.44 | 2.33 | 4.11 |
| 2010 | 1.4 | 4.51 | 6.3 | 4.83 | 1.47 |
| 2011 | 2.2 | 4.75 | 10.45 | 4.83 | 5.62 |
| TOTAL | 9.3 | n/a | 38.34 | 15.55 | 22.69 |
Madson delivered value in excess of his compensation in six of his eight seasons as a Phillie, including his last five when he moved to working progressively higher-leverage innings out of the bullpen. (I didn’t attempt to measure that aspect of his tenure; this is quick-and-dirty stuff, after all.) It’s not surprising or particularly noteworthy that his biggest "bargain" year was his first season; that’s kind of the point with young players. What might raise an eyebrow is that his second-biggest value season was 2011, when he finally emerged as a top-shelf closer. In all, Madson’s performance for the Phils reflected nearly $23 million of value beyond the $15.55 million he actually received. And of course, none of this includes Madson's postseason performance for the Phils from 2008 through 2011, when he pitched to a cumulative 2.31 ERA in 33 games.
Like many if not most superior relievers, Madson progressed through the minors as a prospective starter and moved to the bullpen first from expediency and finally after he failed to stick in an extended try at the rotation during the 2006 season. Oddly, most of the Phillies’ better relief prospects—Justin De Fratus, Phillippe Aumont, Jacob Diekman, Joe Savery. Michael Schwimer—have spent most if not all their minor-league careers working out of the bullpen. Of course, the team is also pretty deep in rotation prospects, among whom considerable attrition from injury and ineffectiveness is a certainty. It’s unlikely that there’s another Ryan Madson in that bunch—after all, the guy is coming off the best five-season relief stretch in club history (another analysis for another time), and I’m not even necessarily saying that the Papelbon signing was a mistake (though I’ll be very surprised if he delivers above his generous compensation in multiple seasons). But the lesson shouldn’t be lost altogether: the way to build a bullpen is from within, especially on an aging team with other significant pending needs.
49 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
the way to build a bullpen is from within, especially on an aging team with other significant pending needs.
testify
This might be the most obvious statement in all of sports, yet front offices do the exact opposite time and time again.
by Michael Levin on Jan 17, 2012 8:47 PM EST up reply actions
When you realize that in 2012 if we carry 11 pitchers, as it stands assuming Blanton and Worley are in the rotation, well pay a minimum of 19.5 mm for our bullpen. A bullpen made up of contreras, Kendrick, Papelbon, and likely bastardo, stutes and dontrelle Willis…
That really hits home.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
I’m pretty upset by this loss. I’d rather have kept him over Papelbon, but I’m in the minority amongst people I know. Cult of the Proven Closer™.
"I wouldn’t run if there was a fire. I wouldn’t run anywhere. I hate running." - O. Munn
Especially with the draft picks we’re getting for Madson, I’d have rather kept Madson and used that money on someone.
But to be honest, I think the Phillies are done with moves. I don’t think they know what moves to even make. This indecisiveness is going to lead to trouble. Hopefully Brown is in Left and Mayberry at 1B and the Phillies end up looking like geniuses, but I don’t think they’re smart enough to pull THAT off.
It's in his wheelhouse!!
Carlos Ruiz, My Nickname is Chooch.
I wouldn’t hold your breath for Brown in left- Amaro sounded pretty adamant that he was spending the year in AAA. Looking at the 25 right now, I think until Howard returns we will see some sort of a split of Mayberry/ Wigginton/ Thome at first with Mayberry and Laynce Nix splitting time in left. Is it a great solution, no. But even in a monied organization, there are limits to how far that money will go. The bench, at least on paper, looks stronger than last year, and while replacing hot Raul may be tough, replacing ice cold Raul (as he was in alternate months last year), is a bar that the players on hand should be able to handle with no problems. I challenge you to find me a team in the league who lacks a weakness. Good luck, because it does not exist. The Phillies will be fine.
"Valdez can pitch, Lee can hit... and pigs can fly."
Among people you know, maybe. I doubt there are many here who wouldn’t prefer Madson at a lower cost (even one much higher than the deal he finally inked with Cincy, on which the Phillies obviously couldn’t have retained him).
The unanswered question of course is whether there was ever going to be a lower cost. At the same cost and terms, I think you’d find most folks here leaning towards madson, but most national types and non phillies fans would take papelbon.
As much of a fan of madson I am, I’m more at odds with the length/terms for papelbon than I am that we chose him over Ryan.
For me, if it’s even money for either, or say, Cordero on a one year deal, I think I’d rather have Cordero.
But I always felt like we didn’t need to sign any closer also.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
I totally agree with you as to being more aghast at the terms of the deal than the actual choice (although I much preferred Madson, the amount they paid for Papelbon sent me into complete and utter shock).
That being said- if the even money you are talking about is Papelbon’s deal, than I agree that I would rather have Cordero for a year and then figure it out. If it was the rumored deal Madson wanted, I would take Madson and know that I have a gifted pitcher and cost certainty for four years.
I disagreed with you then, and now about not needing a closer. Now if anyone could explain the Dontrelle Willis signing to me, that would be great.
"Valdez can pitch, Lee can hit... and pigs can fly."
Yeah it was a nice little gamble that could pay off, but not hurt us.
by Cole_Hamels_Can on Jan 19, 2012 12:22 AM EST up reply actions
The unanswered question of course is whether there was ever going to be a lower cost.
Mr. Nash, Mr. Coase and Mr. Williamson suggest that the situation and transaction costs would be different and the opportunism that might have been available for Mr. Papelbon might also have been available for Mr. Madson
/Just saying
GMAT verbal section question, Philadelphia sports version.
In 2015, which one of the following will prove to be a better investment?
(a) Ilya Bryzgalov's contract (b) Ryan Howard's extension (c) Mike Vick's extension (d) Greek bonds from 2009 (e) Papelbon's bloat deal
super rec'd
Phils’ all-time appearance leader for relievers…
“Thanks for the memories, no further negotiations needed, were vociferous the douchey guy from Boston a truck load of money. See ya….”
Really nice work, dajafi.
Rube… not so much.
by Chutley's Impressed by Mac's Speed on Jan 17, 2012 9:20 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Just realized that I was once again predictatext’d by my droid.
Seriously, though, HTC – “offering” to “vociferous”?
by Chutley's Impressed by Mac's Speed on Jan 18, 2012 12:14 AM EST up reply actions
I was wondering about that.
But, we were pretty vociferous about the deal when it was signed. Maybe your Droid is into Sabremetrics?
by Phrozen on Jan 18, 2012 12:17 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
“vociferous”? You use that often enough to have it in AutoComplete? I’m alternately impressed and appalled.
Bob.
If I ever do anything in life worth immortalizing in a biography (highly unlikely), your last sentence could very well be the book’s given title.
by Chutley's Impressed by Mac's Speed on Jan 20, 2012 12:33 AM EST up reply actions
I know that the sentiment around here is that Boras is “just another agent.” Nevertheless, I wonder if Madson had another agent if he would still be here. RAJ goofed here, but IMO so did Boras, and maybe more than RAJ.
GMAT verbal section question, Philadelphia sports version.
In 2015, which one of the following will prove to be a better investment?
(a) Ilya Bryzgalov's contract (b) Ryan Howard's extension (c) Mike Vick's extension (d) Greek bonds from 2009 (e) Papelbon's bloat deal
There’s no maybe about it. Perhaps for the first time in his career, Boras looks like he’s a little behind the curve this offseason.
It’s like he’s still living in the 90s with his silver binders while very gm and other agent is carrying an iPad and has all that data at their fingertips.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
obviously Boras way overestimated what Madson would get on the market, but also it’s been a really rough Winter for FA pitchers.
All things considered, I'd rather be in Philadelphia
by Veni Vidi Vici on Jan 17, 2012 11:46 PM EST up reply actions
What I don’t get is why his Cincy contract has the option for the 2nd year? The 1 year deal makes perfect sense – he performs, succeeds, and enters next year’s weak closer class as a free agent once again.
So why the option?
by Chutley's Impressed by Mac's Speed on Jan 18, 2012 12:16 AM EST up reply actions
I would bet someone 100 bucks that he turned down at least one 3 year 30mm deal from someone after we passed. Heck, I’d be shocked if the marlins didn’t turn to Heath bell because boras wanted more than what they eventually paid bell, for madson.
"Sometimes, the balls that fall in are jam shots"...Hunter Pence, on BABIP
If so, it probably means Madson’s less disappointed with Boras than we suspect. I’m sure Boras would have advised him of the downside risk of turning down an offer like that, and that Madson turned it down with both eyes open.
the alt-universe Madson negotiation strategy
Now you guys have me thinking about this again.
Clearly the Phillies couldn’t have kept Madson for anything remotely approaching his deal with the Reds. It’s not even clear they could have had him for 4 years/$44 million (though it sure seems likely)—at least not in November.
Could Amaro have waited out the market with Madson the way he did with Rollins? I don’t think so. Remember that a bunch of teams who figured to be looking for closers via free agency instead got their guys through trade (e.g. Red Sox/Bailey); presumably they did that after checking in on Madson and finding his price too high.
Myself, I would have either waited out Madson and tried to get him for something like 3/$34m or let the kids fight it out for closing duties, with Contreras (if healthy) and/or a vet like Francisco Cordero as fall-backs. But that’s just not Amaro’s style, and it’s possible that Madson/Boras might have spurned any deal with the Phillies on “respect” grounds. They probably feel, not without reason, that they gave their hometown discount before the 2009 season—hence that excess value I talk about in the piece.
“Madson Would Still Be a Phillies if His Agent Wasn’t Boras”
You tell 'em, Mitch Williams!
Some people don't think it be what it is, but it do.
I’m gonna miss people wiffing (falling over) at that change-up
by Cole_Hamels_Can on Jan 19, 2012 12:32 AM EST reply actions
bridal websites
Does the anagram thumb sports? The weekday slice rails. Sports pats the meal below the style. A kiss tools a recipe opposite the irrational slash. The honey plays with the foreseeable sample.
by shalimlonim@gmail.com on Feb 4, 2012 7:57 AM EST reply actions

by 



































