Nick Swisher signing will backfire for Indians per Jim Bowden

I find this analysis to be pretty lazy. So Swisher has never won a Gold Glove or Silver Slugger and has only been to one All-Star Game? And this equates to “backfiring?” And furthermore, if he’s never performed well in the post-season, how does this “backfire” for a team that’s “not likely” to be in the post-season, anyway? His “energy and enthusiasm” are a “huge plus,” yet it’s somehow “backfiring” to sign him – even though the contract “will work for the first two years?”

I’m sorry, there might be many reasons that the Swisher signing could “backfire,” but none of these are those.

This argument is dismissed for failure to state a claim.

here’s the part I don’t disagree with:

“$56 million for a player who will be playing in his decline years from
age 32 to 36 is extremely risky, especially because he doesn’t profile
as a legitimate 3-4-5 hitter.”

it’s true, but negligible in this particular case for the reasons I stated in my other comment.

Sure. I don’t disagree, either. It is arguable that we could have another Hafner on our hands – which would certainly be a “backfiring,” but it’s not likely. And Bowden even said that it “would work” for two years. Besides, as you note, what other legitimate 3-4-5 hitters do we have or could we have gotten.

Choo has a better arm and range, but he takes some of the worst routes to balls I have ever seen.

exactly. and, as long as he can stay healthy and maintain his hitting value, we can always move him to fulltime-DH if his fielding goes downhill (regardless of injuries).

Because he will command a $100 million deal and the Indians are not signing anyone to such a contract.

Yeah, as mgbode said, Boras is the reason. That’s it.

I’m not sure what the going rate is, but I’m guessing $ per WAR for FAs is probably around $5M per WAR. With a WAR hovering around 4, Swisher is a deal. Even if his production falls the last two years, $ per WAR will probably see some inflation so it won’t be a terrible deal.

Obviously, if he breaks down or just sucks, we’ll be screwed, but that’s true of any signing.

Basically, ESPN talking head is just talking.

Depends how you view his defense. By bWAR, which sees Swisher as below average in the field, he’s a ~3 WAR guy over the last few years.

And I think Bowden is suggesting that Swisher may be a good candidate to fall off the table quickly. Guys who are already low-value in the field (play mediocre or worse defense at a position low on the defensive spectrum) don’t have anywhere to move. If Swisher is a bad 1B/DH in a couple years, this deal starts to stink. And guys who start out as lower-AVG guys seem to lose it at the plate a bit more quickly than higher-AVG guys. And guys who blossom a bit later (at 25, Swisher isn’t a late bloomer, but that’s late for a good to great player) also tend to tail off quicker. There isn’t enough evidence yet that he’s going to stink, but the warning signs certainly are there.

I’m not enamored by UZR, especially when it comes to odd field dimensions, like RF in Yankee Stadium. I’ll defer to the scouts who seem to have him as no better than average in the field.

And the red flag isn’t in his past performance. He’s got solid numbers, but I’ll respond with a Keith Law quote “corner bats don’t typically age well into their mid-30s, and
Swisher’s passive approach, with lots of walks and strikeouts, is often a
harbinger of an earlier decline”

Yeah, I don’t believe that. Boras is the serpent in the garden. Sure, it is ultimately the player’ “call,” but those calls don’t come from nowhere.

Fair enough. I’ve never seen anyone look at players with comparable numbers and skill sets to see how they aged. I just think, that while there is obviously reason for concern regarding Sisher, I don’t know if it’s markedly more than for any 30+ vet. I mean, Choo has traditionally had an abnormal BABIP, sloppy in-field play, a history of injury, and a canon arm that doesn’t produce the put outs it once did.

nj0 you nailed it. I expected Swisher to get a much larger contract than he received. His draft pick attachment strongly limited his market. While it’s great we wooed him “because he was from Ohio” the reality is his market was submarined bythat compensation. It’s also happening with Kyle Lohse, Rafael Soriano and others.

What that means is he is a steal. I fully expected 5 years $80 to $85 mil, and I think he’s a better (if older) player than BJ Upton, who received 5 years and $75 mill. Unless he has injuries his consistency and production will easily make the contract worthwhile (and also moveable if necessary). Of course, injuries happen to lots of players – Swisher has done a tremendous job of playing in 150 or more games a year. That’s something people sleep on.
Plus his right-handed power is the most desperate need on this club.

I literally cannot see how someone could call this a bad move if you objectively look at the free agent market. Even Keith Law, someone who notoriously disparages aging players (often deservedly) is on board as this being a great value. It doesn’t matter if it raises our payroll; the Dolans have a large influx of cash so I’m not going to cry about a slight bump.

Agree with this. Guys in their 30s are bad bets for long-term deals, especially non-superstars. I’d put Choo at a slightly better bet, but not enough to wager a lot on.

So what is Swisher’s “value”. 11 million a season? So for 3 million extra a season the Indians will be burned? Travis Hafner was being paid 12.5 million a year for five years for a little more than a half season of at bats each year and NO field play, Swisher’s deal, if he doesn’t injure himself, should be a fine deal.