In 2012, when Justin Verlander was no-hitting the Pirates through six innings, I started working on a short feature about the pitchers in baseball history who have thrown three no-hitters. About halfway through, the Pirates got a hit, which meant it was time to stop writing and take a breath. I kept going, though, because I was tired of panicking every time Verlander had a no-hitter through six. I finished it and set it aside for the following week, or the week after that, whenever Verlander finally threw that third no-hitter. It was obviously going to happen, right?
Give a fake contract to Justin Verlander to show how much you trust him
Justin Verlander pitched a masterpiece on Wednesday, and it’s time to quantify his resurgence with fake money.
It’s been a weird journey for Verlander since then, peering over the edge of the abyss, hocking a loogie into it, pretending like he was losing his balance just to freak out his friends and slowly climbing the hill back to where he used to be. It’s likely that he’ll never get quite back where he used to be, but that’s the logic of low expectations and cushioned blows. I’m not sure how you watch this and think there isn’t at least a chance.
You don't need to watch a video of Nolan Ryan throwing out a first pitch to realize that every fastball is a rental. No one gets to throw 99 deep into every game, forever and ever, so this version of Verlander was always waiting for us. Except, good gravy, it's not like he's Barry Zito now. Those are still 94- and 95-mph fastballs he's pumping by hitters. The margin for error isn't quite what it used to be, but it was a pretty ridiculous margin of error to start with. If he has to re-learn how to pitch, he's already read the assigned textbooks.
The improvement might have come from a tweak to his mechanics, according to Bless You Boys
Here, a small adjustment Verlander and Tigers' pitching coach Jeff Jones made to his delivery at the end of June appears to have paid big dividends in increasing both the rise and tailing action on his fastball. Just as importantly, the consistency of his location with all his pitches has appeared much improved as he's finally gotten healthy enough to reap the dividends of his off-season strength and conditioning program. This has led to a distinct uptick in swinging strikes and pop-ups against his fastball since the beginning of July, particularly as Verlander has maximized that improved movement by pitching hitters aggressively inside and at the top of the strike zone.
Makes sense. What you have, then is:
- A 31-year-old pitcher
- Three years removed from being the best pitcher alive
- Two years removed from being very good
- One year removed from being quite bad
- On a bit of a hot streak after coming back from a triceps injury
- Who throws roughly as hard as Clayton Kershaw and Corey Kluber
- Which is to say, as hard as, uh, Alfredo Simon and Shane Greene
- So maybe velocity isn't everything?
I’m not even sure if it’s correct to call Verlander confusing. If you use Occam’s Razor, the simplest explanation might be that Verlander is a touch less effective because of his reduced fastball, has had an injury to deal with, and was possibly unlucky last year (with almost a full run difference between his FIP and ERA). That’s not confusing. That’s very linear and simple to understand.
The frame of this article is "What contract would you want your team to give Justin Verlander if he were a free agent today?" and I used to get feedback from someone who hated when I wrote about hypothetical contracts like this. I did it with Albert Pujols in 2012 and Ryan Braun before last season (with bonus wrong about Nelson Cruz), for example, but stopped because of the feedback. Except, I realized why I liked the construct so much. It's a two-part question: How confident are you in this particular player? Can you use fake money to quantify it?
You’re in charge of your favorite team, and they’ve given you a fake blank check. The Tigers have just released Verlander for ... I don’t know, sucking all the jelly out of a donut and putting it back in the box. He’s a free agent. How confident are you that Verlander can help a team win in the coming years? Can you use your fake money to quantify it?
The first thing to remember is that you’ll overpay. That’s how free agency works. No one ever gets the player they want for a comfortable amount of years and a comfortable amount of money. Verlander’s hypothetical contract would stun you into making Elmer Fudd noises, and your eyes would be drawn to the extra years and money at the back end. Take what you’re comfortable with and double it, more or less.
The next step is to find a comparison. Is there a player who a) suffered through injuries, b) was ineffective early in the season before he hit free agency, followed by dominance later in the season and c) a couple of years removed from his very best seasons? Hopefully at a comparable age? Of course not. That criteria is far too precise to be usef...
WELL IF BEING DISCHARGED FROM THE HOSPITAL ISNT THE BEST TIME TO ASK ABOUT A THREESOME THEN IM FRESH OUT OF IDEAS
— Brandon McCarthy (@BMcCarthy32) September 11, 2012 Wait, yes. Yes, Brandon McCarthy fits several of those descriptions, albeit imperfectly. McCarthy has a substantial injury history. Verlander does not. McCarthy has been very effective at times, but he hasn't exactly been in the MVP discussion at any point. So the four years, $48 million he got from the Dodgers is a starting point. There will be a star tax on this one. But there is a precedent for paying a premium for a second-half surge from a previously excellent pitcher.
Another thing to keep in mind is that even if you use Verlander’s runs allowed in 2014, he was still a valuable pitcher. Even though his ERA was 4.54 and his ERA+ was 86, he was still worth a solid win according to Baseball-Reference’s WAR calculation, in part because of his ability to soak up innings. If you try to remove defense and luck from the equation, like FanGraphs does, he was worth three wins, which made him one of top-20 starters in the American League.
That was if he didn’t improve mechanically, if he just stayed the same ol’ disappointing pitcher from last season. Instead, you’re looking at a new-old, improved, old-new Justin Verlander. You want this pitcher on your team. How much would he get?
My best guess: six years, $110 million.
I know, I know, it sounds like far too much for a pitcher who looked like he was irreparably broken in May, who was booed at home after a rough start just two months ago. But we're talking about a pitcher who won't throw 200 innings or more for the first time in eight seasons. Ervin Santana got four years, $55 million after a decent-not-spectacular season, and he didn't have the history of success that Verlander did. Honestly, I'm wondering if I'm undershooting the hypothetical deal. Baseball salaries always overwhelm, never underwhelm.
Verlander’s current contract with the Tigers has four years, $112 million remaining. I remember it being a debacle, and it’s probably the kind of deal that clears waivers every August. Except, it’s not that far out of whack with the open market. It’s only slightly unreasonable, which is something of a coup.
If the Tigers are going to patch their last-place roster and reload over the offseason, they’ll need to be busy and creative. The most pleasing development of all in this disappointing season, then, is that the hundreds of millions in dead money from May might be a slightly overpriced asset next May. Eliminate the money from your analysis and watch that video again. Wouldn’t you like to have that pitcher on your baseball team?
The Tigers are suddenly pretty cool with it.
See More:
