Diamond Dollars Case Competition Presentation 11-10-15

The 2015 Free Agent
Pitching Market
Diamond Dollars Case Competition
Columbia 2015
Syracuse University
Willie Kniesner | Brandon Lane | Olivia Lavelle
Jeremy Losak | Evan Weiss

Table of Contents
1. Methodology
2. Player Pages
3. Final Rankings
4. Contracts andYears Pre Qualifying Offer
5. AfterThe Qualifying Offer
6. After Accounting For Market Depth

Definitions
• fWAR used in all references ofWAR. Steamer used for allWAR projections of
2015 FA.
• Aging Curve: -0.4WAR per year
• FA Score: 




ARaWeightedW
wWAR
Age
aAge )(

Value Model
y =ValueVariable
x1 = Projected WAR Per Season
x2 = Age
x3 = QualifyingOffer
x4 = Past Injuries
x5 = PitchesThrown InThe Majors
x6 = PitchesThrown/Season
x7 = ConsistencyVariable (season to season)
ValueVariable:
• 1-10 rating where the higher the
rating, the better you are
compared to the other individuals
on this list.
• Model uses free agents who made
over $10M AAV dating back to
2010.
• $10M cutoff to analyze a subset of
top quality free agents.

Value Model
y =ValueVariable
x1 = ProjectedWAR Per Season
x2 = Age
x4 = Past Injuries
ProjectedWAR Per Season
• WAR per season throughout the
contract.
• For 2015 FA, Steamer WAR used.
0.4WAR is subtracted per
projected year of the contract.
• For previous year FA where
projected Steamer WAR is not
available, projectedWAR is
calculated as part of a projection
model using the two previous
seasonWARs.

Value Model
y =ValueVariable
x2 = Age
x4 = Past Injuries
Age:
• Age entering the season you
signed the contract.

Value Model
y =ValueVariable
x2 = Age
x3 = Qualifying Offer
x4 = Past Injuries
QualifyingOffer:
• Yes/No variable.
• For players under theType A/B FA,
Yes/No dummy variable if the player
was designated aType A FA.
• For 2015 FA:
• Average free agent score
calculated for all free agents 2010-
2014 receiving a qualifying offer.
• A free agent that has a FA Score
greater than one standard
deviation below the mean is
projected to receive a qualifying
offer for this analysis.

Value Model
y =ValueVariable
x2 = Age
x4 = Past Injuries
Past Injuries:
• Yes/No variable used to determine if a
player has a history of chronic injuries.
• Player has the same injury two times in
a three year span prior to free agency.

Value Model
y =ValueVariable
x2 = Age
x4 = Past Injuries
PitchesThrown:
• Used to measure mileage on arm
leading up to free agency.
• Pitches thrown measures total mileage
while pitches thrown per season
measures how much of a workhorse
that player is.
• Total pitches only available since 2002.
• Pitches thrown per season only
includes player seasons with at least 15
starts.

Value Model
y =ValueVariable
x2 = Age
x4 = Past Injuries
Consistency:
• WARVariance between seasons.
• How consistent is a player? Do you
know what you’re going to get?

Value Score 8.82
ProjectedWAR 3.7 (1)
Age 30
QualifyingOffer No
Injury Risk No
PitchesThrown In Majors 22,725 (10)
PitchesThrown/Season 2,840 (2)
Consistency 2.79 (13)
The Good:
• Consistent workhorse
• MultipleTop Pitches
• High K’s low BB’s
The Bad?:
• Mileage?
• The PriceTag

Value Score 8.44
Age 30
QualifyingOffer No
Injury Risk Yes
The Good:
• Consistently top pitcher
• Top production for relatively
lower contract
The Bad?:
• Delivery raises health
questions
• Kansas City Struggles?

Value Score 8.31
Age 32
QualifyingOffer Yes
Injury Risk No
The Good:
• Command makes up
for average velocity
• Has elite movement on
his pitches
• Limits baserunners and
contact
• He can hit
The Bad?:
• Wrong side of 30
long-term contract
• Will continuing
decrease in velocity
be an issue down the
line?

Value Score 7.13
Age 29
QualifyingOffer Yes
Injury Risk No
The Good:
• No lingering effects from
2009Tommy John surgery
• Low BB%
• Fastball sets up breaking
pitches
The Bad:
• Fastball was not particularly
effective last season

Value Score 6.95
Age 29
QualifyingOffer Yes
Injury Risk Yes
Name Team ERA FIP GB% K% BB% HR/FB
Jaime Garcia Cardinals 2.43 3.00 61.20% 19.00% 5.90% 7.10%
Dallas Keuchel Astros 2.48 2.91 61.70% 23.70% 5.60% 13.60%
The Good:
• Low risk/high reward
• Lives and dies (but mostly
lives) on the ground ball
• Slider as a potential out pitch
The Bad:
• Injury history
• Waiting for a
complete season

Value Score 6.86
Age 30
QualifyingOffer Yes
Injury Risk No
PitchesThrown/Season 2829 (3)
The Good:
• CONSISTENT
The Bad:
• CONSISTENT

Value Score 6.86
Age 34
QualifyingOffer Yes
Injury Risk No
PitchesThrown In Majors 9428 (1)
PitchesThrown/Season 2357 (9)
The Good:
• Consistently above
average pitcher
• Finesse stuff
• Lowest BB% on this list
The Bad:
• Age (but with low
MLB mileage)
• High contact
percentage against

Value Score 5.98
Age 31
QualifyingOffer Yes
Injury Risk No
The Good:
• Workhorse
• Four pitches, each with above
average movement and velocity
• Clear value
The Bad:
• Significant decrease in K%
• Allows plenty of HRs

Value Score 5.87
Age 28
QualifyingOffer No
Injury Risk No
The Good:
• Age
• Low mileage on arm
• Consistent
The Bad:
• Too much contact
• Low strikeouts
• LowVelocity

Value Score 5.71
Age 30
QualifyingOffer Yes
Injury Risk No
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Yovani Gallardo Decreasing K%
The Good:
• All of his pitches have
above average
movement
The Bad:
• K% decreasing
• Allowing plenty of
baserunners

The Good:
• All of his pitches have
above average
movement
The Bad:
• K% decreasing
• Allowing plenty of
baserunners
Value Score 5.71
Age 30
QualifyingOffer Yes
Injury Risk No

Bottom Four: Scott Kazmir, Ian Kennedy, J.A.
Happ, Marco Estrada
Scott Kazmir Ian Kennedy J.A. Happ Marco Estrada
Value Score 5.46 5.38 4.16 3.48
ProjectedWAR 2.1 (6) 2.1 (5) 1.6 (10) 0.2 (14)
Age 32 31 33 32
QualifyingOffer No Yes No No
Injury Risk No No No No
PitchesThrown In Majors 26,835 (13) 20,469 (9) 17,643 (8) 11,866 (4)
PitchesThrown/Season 2,440 (7) 2,274 (10) 1,960 (12) 1,483 (14)
Consistency 0.16 (2) 2.60 (11) 0.83 (6) 1.94 (10)

Rankings And Contract
Projections

Final Player Rankings
1. David Price (8.82)
2. Johnny Cueto (8.44)
3. Zack Greinke (8.31)
4. Jordan Zimmermann (7.13)
5. Jaime Garcia (6.95)
6. Wei-Yin Chen (6.861)
7. Hisashi Iwakuma (6.857)
8. Jeff Samardzija (5.98)
9. Mike Leake (5.87)
10.Yovani Gallardo (5.72)
11.Scott Kazmir (5.46)
12.Ian Kennedy (5.38)
13.J.A. Happ (4.16)
14.Marco Estrada (3.48)

Initial Contract Projections
Rank Name Years Total Dollars AAV
8 Jeff Samardzija 4 $78.0 M $19.5 M
9 Mike Leake 3 $42.0 M $14.0 M
10 Yovani Gallardo 3 $45.0 M $15.0 M
11 Scott Kazmir 3 $49.5 M $16.5 M
12 Ian Kennedy 2 $22.0 M $11.0 M
13 J.A. Happ 3 $39.0 M $13.0 M
14 Marco Estrada 2 $15.0 M $7.5 M
1 David Price 7 $227.5 M $32.5 M
2 Johnny Cueto 5 $115.0 M $23.0 M
3 Zack Greinke 6 $165.0 M $27.5 M
4 Jordan Zimmermann 5 $122.5 M $24.5 M
5 Jaime Garcia 2 $23.0 M $11.5 M
6 Wei-Yin Chen 4 $66.0 M $16.5 M
7 Hisashi Iwakuma 3 $43.5 M $14.5 M

Contract Projections After Qualifying Offer
9 Mike Leake 3 $42.0 M $14.0 M
11 Scott Kazmir 3 $49.5 M $16.5 M
12 Ian Kennedy 2 $20.0 M $10.0 M
13 J.A. Happ 3 $39.0 M $13.0 M
1 David Price 7 $227.5 M $32.5 M
2 Johnny Cueto 5 $115.0 M $23.0 M
3 Zack Greinke 6 $162.0 M $27.0 M
6 Wei-Yin Chen 4 $63.5 M $16.0 M

Contract Projections After Market Depth
9 Mike Leake 3 $39.75 M $13.25 M
11 Scott Kazmir 3 $45.75 M $15.25 M
12 Ian Kennedy 2 $19.0 M $9.5 M
13 J.A. Happ 3 $38.25 M $12.75 M
1 David Price 7 $196.0 M $28.0 M
2 Johnny Cueto 5 $105.0 M $21.0 M
3 Zack Greinke 6 $141.0 M $23.5 M
6 Wei-Yin Chen 4 $61.0 M $15.25 M
8586.0)( 




WARpaWeighted
awWAR
aAge
paAge

Change In Contract AAV After Adjustments
• David Price $32.5 M  $28.0 M
• Johnny Cueto $23.0 M  $21.0 M
• Zack Greinke $27.5 M  $23.5 M
• Jordan Zimmermann $24.5 M  $21.25 M
• Jaime Garcia $11.5 M  $10.0 M
• Wei-Yin Chen $16.5 M  $15.25 M
• Hisashi Iwakuma $14.5 M  $13.25 M
• Jeff Samardzija $19.5 M  $17.0 M
• Mike Leake $14.0 M  $13.25 M
• Yovani Gallardo $15.0 M  $13.25 M
• Scott Kazmir $16.5 M  $15.25 M
• Ian Kennedy $11.0 M  $9.5 M
• J.A. Happ $13.0 M  $12.75 M
• Marco Estrada $7.5 M  $7.5 M

Diamond Dollars Case Competition Presentation 11-10-15

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (15)

Similar to Diamond Dollars Case Competition Presentation 11-10-15

Similar to Diamond Dollars Case Competition Presentation 11-10-15 (8)

Diamond Dollars Case Competition Presentation 11-10-15

Editor's Notes