Altuve Extended

[CoachAF]

The Astros have reached a massive extension with star second baseman Jose Altuve, according to MLB.com’s Brian McTaggart. If completed, the deal would promise Altuve $151MM over five seasons.
Altuve is already under contract through 2019, a season the Astros control through a $6.5MM club option under the incredibly team-friendly deal the sides struck back in 2013. Of course, at the time, the second baseman was nowhere near the top-line performer he is today. Altuve has since changed representation, joining the Boras Corporation.
 

 
 
Great deal for all sides. Altuve probably leaves some money on the table, but the Astros reward him for his greatness the last 3 years. 
 
More importantly, this deal doesnt prevent the Astros from adding payroll this year or next. Verlander will come off the books when this kicks in. 

 

[catman]

The Astros get cost certainty for one of the best players in the game and Altuve has financial security (not that he didn't have it before).  This sort of deal should be a model for guys like Trout and Correa.

 

[Mexi]

I hate that he's leaving money on the table
He gave them a discount. 30M is no joke, but he gave them a discount

 

[PWNdroia]

30 million a year for any player in any capacity is too much IMO, although it isn't so bad for only a year or two.  But 5 years 30 million?  I know they're not the Marlins, but look what happened to Stanton.  

 

[CoachAF]

gonna be lazy here, but the average value of a Win for a player is 8 million dollars. Altuve has averaged 6.7 WAR the last 4 years of his career. So let's be conservative here and say that he averages 4 WAR until his age 30 season (the next 3 years) and then averages 2 WAR for the remainder of the extension (the next 4 years). That would give him a total of 20 WAR which would come out to 160 million dollars in value. That's right on the bubble (slightly less) than what the Astros will pay him during that time, roughly 163 million dollars. 
 
Now that is a very conservative projection for him. I think a more likely progression would be 
 
2018: 7 WAR
2019: 6 WAR
2020: 5 WAR
2021: 4 WAR
2022: 3 WAR
2023: 3 WAR
2024: 3 WAR
 
Total: 31 WAR  for a total of 248 million dollars in value. 
 
I think there is no doubt that the Astros get their money back on this deal. The only drawback is how will this deal affect their ability to lock in other guys (Correa, Springer) in the future. 

 

[PWNdroia]

gonna be lazy here, but the average value of a Win for a player is 8 million dollars. Altuve has averaged 6.7 WAR the last 4 years of his career. So let's be conservative here and say that he averages 4 WAR until his age 30 season (the next 3 years) and then averages 2 WAR for the remainder of the extension (the next 4 years). That would give him a total of 20 WAR which would come out to 160 million dollars in value. That's right on the bubble (slightly less) than what the Astros will pay him during that time, roughly 163 million dollars. 
 
Now that is a very conservative projection for him. I think a more likely progression would be 
 
2018: 7 WAR
2019: 6 WAR
2020: 5 WAR
2021: 4 WAR
2022: 3 WAR
2023: 3 WAR
2024: 3 WAR
 
Total: 31 WAR  for a total of 248 million dollars in value. 
 
I think there is no doubt that the Astros get their money back on this deal. The only drawback is how will this deal affect their ability to lock in other guys (Correa, Springer) in the future. 

You do realize that the price of WAR has changed considerably as the dollar value went up years and years?  My point is that we now pay too much for WAR than we used to, which leads to being overpriced.  In other words, I still see it overpriced.  Nothing taking away from Altuve, he was great, but he is now overpriced.
 
And I highly doubt he hits 7 WAR and then 6 WAR the next two seasons.  Sure, he had 7 WAR and 8 WAR the last two, but years before he wasn't as high and it's hard to hit consistently at the level he's been hitting consecutively (unless you're Mike Trout).  That being said, even if I'm wrong and he keeps it up, the $/WAR has been inflated and rising considerably.  
 
You can't really predict WAR in the case where you have... WAR is too changeable of a stat.  It's just not that easy to say he'll make 31 WAR.

 

[brett05]

WAR has gone down per dollar not up.  It used ot be 8 now it's more like 4-6 range I think.

 

[PWNdroia]

WAR has gone down per dollar not up.  It used ot be 8 now it's more like 4-6 range I think.

I highly doubt that. As the game has aged, so has big money deals. Five years ago no one had a 30 million dollar per year contract. Maybe A-Roid, but that's all I can think of, and he might not have been. And the actual money he was paid didn't match up to the WAR he put up.

 

[brett05]

I highly doubt that. As the game has aged, so has big money deals. Five years ago no one had a 30 million dollar per year contract. Maybe A-Roid, but that's all I can think of, and he might not have been. And the actual money he was paid didn't match up to the WAR he put up.

If it went up, then ALtuve would be getting say 70 million per year instead of 30.  It's definitely gone lower than $8 million per

 

[CoachAF]

If it went up, then ALtuve would be getting say 70 million per year instead of 30.  It's definitely gone lower than $8 million per

 
 
head over to Fangraphs. At the bottom it will show you the dollars each player earned and the WAR they accrued. Divide the dollars by the WAR and you will come up with ~8 million dollars. That's my source. 

 

[brett05]

I couldn't find that Coach.   I took total batting WAR and Pitching WAR from fangraphs, then found a site for total payroll.  Divided total payroll by total fWAR and got $4 million per WAR.

 

[CoachAF]

So Altuve "earned" 60.1 million last year with a total of 7.5 WAR. Divide them and you get 8.01. If you go back, it has inflated very slightly over the last 4 years (by less than a million)

 

[brett05]

So Altuve "earned" 60.1 million last year with a total of 7.5 WAR. Divide them and you get 8.01. If you go back, it has inflated very slightly over the last 4 years (by less than a million)

And that would not tell you how much it takes for 1 war.
 
The formula is total expenses divided by total war  that is the cost of 1 WAR

 

[PWNdroia]

If it went up, then ALtuve would be getting say 70 million per year instead of 30.  It's definitely gone lower than $8 million per

I don't sere how it could have gone up when talent really hasn't increased yet dollar value has.  5 years ago, no one got 30 million a year.  Yet five years ago, we have players just as good as the best players now.  Game hasn't changed, the value of money has.
 
I'm not using any formula, just logic.

 

[PWNdroia]

So Altuve "earned" 60.1 million last year with a total of 7.5 WAR. Divide them and you get 8.01. If you go back, it has inflated very slightly over the last 4 years (by less than a million)

You can't talk about inflation using just stats from one player.

 

[brett05]

I don't sere how it could have gone up when talent really hasn't increased yet dollar value has.  5 years ago, no one got 30 million a year.  Yet five years ago, we have players just as good as the best players now.  Game hasn't changed, the value of money has.
 
I'm not using any formula, just logic.

That's not logic, that's gut feel with incomplete data.  Total dollars spent divided by Total WAR for a given year is the true cost of WAR.  That's the only logic there is, however I am open to logical correction.

 

[PWNdroia]

That's not logic, that's gut feel with incomplete data.  Total dollars spent divided by Total WAR for a given year is the true cost of WAR.  That's the only logic there is, however I am open to logical correction.

Yeah but that doesn't put into effect up years and down years, and it's easily flawed when you consider inflation and the fact that different teams value worth differently. The Red Sox and Rays would not value WAR per money the same way. I can't look at it standardized.

 

[brett05]

Yeah but that doesn't put into effect up years and down years, and it's easily flawed when you consider inflation and the fact that different teams value worth differently. The Red Sox and Rays would not value WAR per money the same way. I can't look at it standardized.

It's a fact, you can't read into fact.  Other teams may value things differently, but that's not the value of WAR.
 
Inflation has no affect on cost.  4 million gets you x or y, still the same 4 million. 

 

[CoachAF]

That's not logic, that's gut feel with incomplete data.  Total dollars spent divided by Total WAR for a given year is the true cost of WAR.  That's the only logic there is, however I am open to logical correction.

 
Just to clarify: It's the total WAR for ALL mlb players divided by total dollars spent for ALL players? Trying  to understand here. 
 
i read on MLBTR that 1 WAR is 8 million dollars. That coupled with the method I posted earlier led me to the conclusion that it is 8 million per 1 WAR. 

 

[PWNdroia]

 
Just to clarify: It's the total WAR for ALL mlb players divided by total dollars spent for ALL players? Trying  to understand here. 
 
i read on MLBTR that 1 WAR is 8 million dollars. That coupled with the method I posted earlier led me to the conclusion that it is 8 million per 1 WAR. 

WAR is also different on two different websites, so how would you assess it?  Doesn't make sense to me.