Team Number 6 Tommy Hanson v. Atlanta Braves Side represented

Transcription

Team Number 6
Tommy Hanson v. Atlanta Braves
Side represented: Atlanta Braves
Table of Contents
I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
II. Hanson’s career has been in decline since his debut and he has dealt with major injury
problems .......................................................................................................................................... 1
III.
Recent Performance of the Atlanta Braves .......................................................................... 3
IV. Tommy Hanson’s Career Statistics, Injury History, and Platform Year are similar to Jair
Jurrjens, Chris Volstad, and Max Scherzer ..................................................................................... 3
a. Jair Jurrjens signed a contract below the Braves’ offer for Hanson and had a similar career,
injury history, and platform year to Hanson ............................................................................... 4
b. Chris Volstad signed a contract below the Braves’ offer for Hanson and had a similar career,
injury history, and platform year to Hanson ............................................................................... 6
c. Max Scherzer signed a contract below the midpoint and had a better career, injury history,
and platform year than Hanson ................................................................................................... 8
V. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 10
I.
Introduction
This brief is submitted on behalf of the Atlanta Braves and concerns Tommy Hanson’s
2013 salary arbitration. Hanson is a 26 year-old right-handed starting pitcher for the Braves. He
debuted for the Braves in 2009 and is in his first year of arbitration eligibility. The Braves paid
Hanson $535,000 in 2012 and request an increase to $3.5m. Hanson has requested an increase to
$4.3m. The midpoint between these two requests is $3.9m.
The Braves respectfully request that the arbitration panel find the appropriate salary to be
below the midpoint of $3.9m because Hanson has declined each year since his debut, he has
suffered multiple injuries to his pitching arm and shoulder, and he posted career-low numbers in
his 2012 platform year. He has had a similar career, injury history, and platform year to Jair
Jurrjens, Chris Volstad, and Max Scherzer – all of whom signed one-year contracts in their first
year of arbitration eligibility for less than the $3.9m midpoint requested by the Braves in this
case.
II.
Hanson’s career has been in decline since his debut and he has dealt with major injury
problems
Hanson’s performance has declined since debuting for the Braves, and since his debut he
has suffered numerous injuries. This career decline led to a mediocre 2012 season where Hanson
posted career-low statistics. The arbitration panel should find the appropriate salary to be below
the midpoint because of Hanson’s career decline, injuries, and a career-worst 2012 season.
Hanson
2009
2010
2011
2012
Totals
1
ERA
2.89
3.33
3.60
4.88
3.61
WHIP
1.183
1.174
1.169
1.454
1.252
Table 1. Tommy Hanson’s Career Statistics1
W-L
BB/9
K/9
HR/9
IP
11-4
3.2
8.2
0.7
127.2
10-11
2.5
7.7
0.6
202.2
11-7
3.2
9.8
1.2
130.0
13-10
3.7
8.3
1.4
174.2
45-32
3.1
8.4
1.0
635.0
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/hansoto01.shtml
1
SB
18
33
30
31
112
After an impressive debut in the 2009 season – in which he recorded a 2.89 ERA, good
for 10th-lowest in the majors among starting pitchers – Hanson has pitched worse and worse in
following seasons.2 His ERA has declined every year (2.89 in 2009 to 4.88 in 2012), he has
walked more batters (3.2 per nine innings in 2009 to 3.7 in 2012), his strikeout rate has
fluctuated from a low of 7.7 per nine innings to 9.8, and his homerun rate from his rookie year
has doubled.
Furthermore, he suffered worrying injuries to his pitching arm, pitching shoulder, and
lower back in 2011 and 2012, resulting in three trips to the disabled list for a total of 78 missed
games.3 Hanson changed his pitching mechanics in the 2012 offseason,4 but this did not help as
he suffered yet another injury to his lower back and had to spend 17 games on the disabled list
while the Braves were fighting for a playoff spot.5
The Braves entered the 2012 with high expectations for Hanson, but throughout the
season he did not live up to these expectations. Unfortunately for the Braves, Hanson earned a
loss after pitching only 5 innings.6 This inability to go deep into games extended to Hanson’s
whole season; in his 31 starts he was only able to pitch 6 or more innings in 13 games.7 Besides
his low number of innings pitched, Hanson posted pedestrian statistics in other categories.
Among starting pitchers, Hanson had the 19th-highest ERA and the 7th-highest walks plus hits
per inning pitched (“WHIP”),8 and of his fellow Braves starters Hanson had the highest ERA and
2
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=120&type=8&season=2009&month=0&
season1=2009&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=16,a
3
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/card/card.php?id=52080
4
http://atlanta.braves.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20120331&content_id=27782232&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=ml
b
5
6
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=hansoto01&t=p&year=2012
7
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=hansoto01&t=p&year=2012
8
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2012-standard-pitching.shtml
2
WHIP.9 When the Braves had to decide who to pitch in their one-game do-or-die playoff game,
they called upon a pitcher who started the year pitching out of the bullpen and not Tommy
Hanson.10
Tommy Hanson’s disappointing 2012 season mirrors his entire career: high expectations
followed by declining performance and performance-related injuries. The arbitration panel
should award the lower salary because of this declining performance and the potential problems
it portends for Hanson’s future career and value for the Braves.
III.
Recent Performance of the Atlanta Braves
The Braves have not finished first in their division since Tommy Hanson made his debut
at the major league level. Since his debut the Braves have made the playoffs twice, losing in the
division series in 2010 and losing in the wild-card playoff game in 2012. Hanson pitched in
game two of the 2010 division series and gave up four runs in four innings pitched.11
IV.
Tommy Hanson’s Career Statistics, Injury History, and Platform Year are Similar to Jair
Jurrjens, Chris Volstad, and Max Scherzer
Tommy Hanson should receive a salary comparable to those received by Jair Jurrjens,
Chris Volstad, and Max Scherzer in their first year of arbitration eligibility because Hanson
shares similar career statistics, injury concerns, and platform year statistics. Due to these
similarities and because each of these pitchers signed a contract below Hanson’s arbitration
midpoint, the arbitration panel should decide in favor of the Braves and award Hanson a $3.5m
salary.
9
http://www.baseball-reference.com/leagues/MLB/2012-standard-pitching.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/2012_NLWC.shtml; http://www.baseballreference.com/players/gl.cgi?id=medlekr01&t=p&year=
11
http://www.baseball-reference.com/postseason/2010_NLDS2.shtml
10
3
a. Jair Jurrjens signed a contract below the Braves’ offer for Hanson and had a similar career,
injury history, and platform year to Hanson
Tommy Hanson should receive a salary similar to Jair Jurrjens, who received a salary in
his first year of arbitration lower than what Hanson is asking for, because Jurrjens and Hanson
have similar career statistics, a similar injury history, and similar platform year statistics. Jurrjens
signed a contract for $3.25m in his first year of arbitration, a lower figure than the Braves’
offered figure for Hanson and below the midpoint of $3.9m.12
Jurrjens
2007
2008
2009
2010
Totals
Hanson
2009
2010
2011
2012
Totals
ERA
4.70
3.68
2.60
4.64
3.52
ERA
2.89
3.33
3.60
4.88
3.61
WHIP
1.141
1.370
1.214
1.393
1.303
WHIP
1.183
1.174
1.169
1.454
1.252
Table 2. Jurrjens’ Career Statistics13
W-L
BB/9
K/9
HR/9
3-1
3.2
3.8
1.2
13-10
3.3
6.6
0.5
14-10
3.1
6.4
0.6
7-6
3.2
6.7
1.0
37-27
3.2
6.4
0.7
IP
30.2
188.1
215.0
116.1
549.4
SB
2
28
14
6
50
Table 3. Hanson’s Career Statistics14
W-L
BB/9
K/9
HR/9
11-4
3.2
8.2
0.7
10-11
2.5
7.7
0.6
11-7
3.2
9.8
1.2
13-10
3.7
8.3
1.4
45-32
3.1
8.4
1.0
IP
127.2
202.2
130.0
174.2
635.0
SB
18
33
30
31
112
Jurrjens’ and Hanson’s pre-arbitration career statistics demonstrate that they are
inconsistent players who suffered an overall decline after pitching well in certain seasons and
struggled in other seasons. After two seasons, 2008 and 2009, in which Jurrjens gave up half of a
homerun per nine innings pitched, his 2010 season saw an increase to one homerun per nine
innings pitched. Similarly, Hanson had two seasons, 2009 and 2010, in which he gave up 0.7 and
0.6 homeruns, respectively, before giving up 1.2 and 1.4 homeruns per 9 innings in his next two
seasons. Neither Jurrjens nor Hanson effectively countered this increased homerun rate by
allowing fewer walks or by throwing more strikeouts as both pitchers saw negligible differences
12
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/jurrjja01.shtml#contracts
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/j/jurrjja01.shtml
14
13
4
in their walk and strikeout rate. Both pitchers’ increasing ERA and WHIP further reflect this
decrease in pitching efficiency throughout their careers.
Jurrjens’ 2010 season saw his ERA jump nearly a full point from two years before and
more than two points from his career year in 2009, and his WHIP increased year on year leading
to a career worst in 2010. Hanson’s career statistics show a similar decline. He posted a career
low ERA of 2.89 in his debut season, and it increased each year leading to a career-high ERA of
4.88 in 2012. Other overall career statistics closely mirror each other. Jurrjens pitched fewer
innings (549.2 to 635.0) and struck out fewer batters per nine innings (6.4 to 8.4), but in other
categories Jurrjens posted nearly identical statistics or outperformed Hanson. Jurrjens and
Hanson both allowed slightly over three walks per nine innings (3.2 to 3.1) and had very similar
ERAs (3.52 to 3.61); Jurrjens also allowed fewer home runs per nine innings (0.7 to 1.0) and
allowed much fewer stolen bases (50 to 112). Overall, both players have had inconsistent careers
with good and bad seasons with their statistics showing that the overall trend for both is one of
promise before a decline in performance.
Both Jurrjens and Hanson suffered worrying injuries in their pre-arbitration years which
caused them to miss significant time and is a concern for the future. Jurrjens suffered a knee
injury late in the 2010 season and had to miss the end of the season and the Braves playoff series
that year.15 Hanson has likewise missed significant games due to injury. In 2011, Hanson
suffered a shoulder injury, was placed on the disabled list twice in the season, and did not pitch
in the last month of the season when the Braves were fighting for a playoff spot.16 In 2012 with
the Braves again in the playoff hunt, he again missed crucial starts due to an injury.17
15
http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-braves-blog/2011/08/06/braves-place-jurrjens-on-dl-with-knee-strain
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7535668/atlanta-braves-tommy-hanson-says-shoulder-set-normal-springtraining
17
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8220199/atlanta-braves-place-tommy-hanson-15-day-disabled-list
16
5
Jurrjens and Hanson also share similar statistics for their platform year with Jurrjens
slightly outperforming Hanson. Jurrjens allowed fewer players to reach base, demonstrated by
his lower WHIP (1.393 to 1.454) and lower walks per nine innings ratio (3.2 to 3.7), and when
opposing players did reach base, he did not allow as many to steal second or third base (6 stolen
bases to 31 stolen bases). He did pitch in fewer games than Hanson, but Jurrjens posted a lower
homeruns per nine innings ratio (1.0 to 1.4) and a lower ERA (4.64 to 4.88).
Because both Jurrjens and Hanson have had declining careers and have similar career
statistics, have fought injury problems, and share similar platform year statistics the arbitration
panel should view Jurrjens’ salary of $3.25m as a comparable salary below the midpoint of
$3.9m and should award Tommy Hanson a salary of $3.5m.
b. Chris Volstad signed a contract below the Braves’ offer for Hanson and had a similar career,
injury history, and platform year to Hanson
Chris Volstad, who signed a contract for $2.655m in his first year of arbitration eligibility
in 2012,18 is a pitcher who shared similar pre-arbitration career statistics, had fewer injuries, and
had a similar platform year with Hanson.
Volstad
2008
2009
2010
2011
Totals
Hanson
2009
2010
2011
2012
ERA
2.88
5.21
4.88
4.89
4.59
ERA
2.89
3.33
3.60
4.88
WHIP
1.328
1.434
1.411
1.425
1.409
Table 4. Volstad’s Career Statistics19
W-L
BB/9
K/9
HR/9
6-4
3.8
5.5
0.3
9-13
3.3
6.1
1.6
12-9
3.1
5.2
0.9
5-13
2.7
6.4
1.2
32-39
3.1
5.8
1.1
IP
84.1
159.0
175.0
165.2
583.3
SB
12
21
29
10
72
WHIP
1.183
1.174
1.169
1.454
W-L
BB/9
K/9
HR/9
11-4
3.2
8.2
0.7
10-11
2.5
7.7
0.6
11-7
3.2
9.8
1.2
13-10
3.7
8.3
1.4
IP
127.2
202.2
130.0
174.2
SB
18
33
30
31
18
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/v/volstch01.shtml
20
19
6
Totals
3.61
1.252
45-32
3.1
8.4
1.0
635.0
112
Drafted with the 16th overall pick in the 2005 draft, Chris Volstad made his major league
debut halfway through the 2008 season to great success.21 His 2.88 ERA in his first season
ranked 10th-lowest among starting pitchers who pitched at least 80 innings that season.22
Likewise, Hanson debuted midway through the 2009 season and his 2.89 ERA ranked 10thlowest among starting pitchers.23 After each of their stellar debut seasons, both Volstad and
Hanson have had inconsistent careers. Volstad throughout his career has allowed more runs per
game (4.59 ERA to 3.61) and has a lower win percentage (.451 to .584) than Hanson. However,
other important statistics which demonstrate a pitcher’s skills, like walks per 9 innings (3.1 to
3.1) and homeruns per 9 innings (1.1 to 1.0), are much closer to Hanson’s career statistics and
indicate that Volstad and Hanson have had similar, declining careers.
Neither Volstad nor Hanson has suffered an injury that has caused them to miss half of a
season or more, but Hanson has spent significant time on the disabled list whereas Volstad has
not. Volstad only missed 5 games in his whole professional career before his first year of
arbitration, and those games were in the minor leagues.24 Conversely, in 2011 Hanson suffered a
shoulder injury, was placed on the disabled list twice in the season, and did not pitch in the last
month of the season.25 In 2012, he again missed starts due to an injury.26
Both Volstad and Hanson pitched remarkably similar in their platform years. There was
only a 0.01 difference in their ERAs, each pitched about the same number of innings (165.2 to
21
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=80&type=8&season=2008&month=0&s
eason1=2008&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0
23
http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=sta&lg=all&qual=120&type=8&season=2009&month=0
&season1=2009&ind=0&team=0&rost=0&age=0&filter=&players=0&sort=16,a
24
25
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7535668/atlanta-braves-tommy-hanson-says-shoulder-set-normal-springtraining
26
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8220199/atlanta-braves-place-tommy-hanson-15-day-disabled-list
22
7
174.2), and each allowed similar numbers of homeruns per 9 innings (1.2 to 1.4). Although
Volstad posted a lower win-loss record, his team’s meager offensive production in his starts
partially accounts for the low number of wins.27 Other statistics in Volstad’s platform year
compare very favorably to Hanson’s. In his platform year, Volstad allowed fewer home runs per
nine innings (1.2 to 1.4), allowed fewer stolen bases (10 to 31), and allowed fewer batters to
reach base (1.425 WHIP to 1.454 WHIP).
Hanson has been a somewhat better pitcher throughout his career and in his platform
year, but the two player’s career statistics are so similar that the arbitration panel should award a
salary to Hanson above Volstad’s $2.655m salary but below the midpoint of $3.9m; this increase
accounts for Hanson’s slightly better career but is more representative of the similarities between
Volstad and Hanson’s career than Hanson’s requested salary and takes into account Hanson’s
injury history.
c. Max Scherzer signed a contract below the midpoint and had a better career, injury history, and
platform year than Hanson
Hanson should receive a salary lower than the $3.75m Max Scherzer earned in his first
year of arbitration in 2012 because Hanson has similar career statistics, has had more injury
problems, and had a worse platform year.
Scherzer
2008
2009
2010
2011
Totals
ERA
3.05
4.12
3.50
4.43
3.92
Table 6. Scherzer’s Career Statistics28
WHIP W-L
BB/9
K/9
HR/9
1.232
0-4
3.4
10.6
0.8
1.344
9-11
3.3
9.2
1.1
1.247
12-11
3.2
8.5
0.9
1.349
15-9
2.6
8.0
1.3
1.305
36-35
3.0
8.7
1.0
IP
56.0
170.1
195.2
195.0
617.0
SB
0
10
17
12
39
27
In his 2011 platform year, Volstad’s team scored on average 3.5 runs per start. However, in Hanson’s 2012
platform year the Braves scored an average 4.6 runs per start. http://www.baseballreference.com/players/v/volstch01-pitch.shtml; http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/h/hansoto01-pitch.shtml
28
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/scherma01.shtml
29
8
Hanson
2009
2010
2011
2012
Totals
ERA
2.89
3.33
3.60
4.88
3.61
WHIP
1.183
1.174
1.169
1.454
1.252
W-L
11-4
10-11
11-7
13-10
45-32
BB/9
3.2
2.5
3.2
3.7
3.1
K/9
8.2
7.7
9.8
8.3
8.4
HR/9
0.7
0.6
1.2
1.4
1.0
IP
127.2
202.2
130.0
174.2
635.0
SB
18
33
30
31
112
Scherzer made his major league debut late in the 2008 season and, like Hanson, pitched
well in his first year. Scherzer had a nominally higher ERA (3.05 to 2.89) and WHIP (1.232 to
1.183), but Scherzer struck out more than two batters per nine innings (10.6 to 8.2). Like
Hanson, Scherzer has not been able to fully match that impressive debut although his decline has
not been nearly as steep as Hanson’s decline. His ERA in his four seasons has fluctuated
between 3.05 in 2008 and 4.43 in 2011, whereas Hanson’s has been between 2.89 and 4.88.
Additionally, both pitchers have posted high career strikeout ratios (8.7 to 8.4), similar walk
ratios (3.0 to 3.1), a similar number of innings pitched (617.0 to 635) and similar homerun ratios
(1.0 to 1.0).
Scherzer was a remarkably durable player in his pre-arbitration years as he did not face
any major injury scares and missed only 7 games.30 In every full season before arbitration did not
pitch fewer than 170 innings in a season and exceeded 190 innings twice.31 Conversely, Hanson
has only managed to pitch above 190 innings once and was only able to pitch 130 innings in
2011 because of two stints on the disabled list and spent time on the disabled list in 2012.
Scherzer and Hanson share remarkably similar platform year statistics with Scherzer’s
statistics indicating that he was more effective. Scherzer let fewer players reach base as
evidenced by his 1.349 WHIP (to Hanson’s 1.454) and allowed fewer of those baserunners to
steal second or third base (12 stolen bases to 31). Scherzer struck out slightly fewer batters per
nine innings (8.0 to 8.3), but he allowed more than one less walk per nine innings (2.6 to 3.7),
30
31
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/scherma01.shtml
9
pitched significantly more innings (195 to 174.2), and had fewer opposing players score (4.43
ERA to 4.88 ERA).
Scherzer and Hanson had similar pre-arbitration careers with Scherzer’s being slightly
better because he was more consistent and did not have any major injuries. Additionally, his
platform year was better than Hanson’s platform year. The arbitration panel should view
Scherzer’s salary of $3.75m as an appropriate comparison and should determine that since
Hanson has had a worse career, worse injury history, and worse platform year then he should
receive a lower salary than $3.75m, which in this case falls below the midpoint of $3.9m.
Hanson had a similar pre-arbitration career, injury history, and platform year to Jair
Jurrjens, Chris Volstad, and Max Scherzer. In his career, he has a similar WHIP, pitched a
similar number of innings, has a similar walk and homerun rate, and has a similar ERA. Like the
other pitchers, he has suffered some injuries causing him to miss significant time from the
season. In his 2012 platform year, Hanson pitched very similarly to the three comparable pitchers
in important pitching statistics. He pitched worse than Scherzer and Jurrjens and slightly better
than Volstad in their platform years. The arbitration panel should thus award a salary between
these pitchers’ salaries, which in this case is the Braves’ figure of $3.5m.
V.
Conclusion
Tommy Hanson once showed great promise to the Atlanta Braves. He lived up to his
potential in his debut season, but since then his career has suffered. In the past two years, he has
had major injuries which have affected his performance and the Braves’ performance. He is a
similar pitcher to Jair Jurrjens, Chris Volstad, and Max Scherzer, all of whom signed a one-year
contract less than the $3.9m midpoint in this case. Because of these reasons, the arbitration panel
should award a salary of $3.5m to Tommy Hanson.
10

Team Number 6 Tommy Hanson v. Atlanta Braves Side represented

Transcription

Similar documents

Signature Gallery NW – Authors Cake

SE QLD - Hanson

Kensington - Navascape

John Hanson Middle School 3165 John Hanson Drive Waldorf

secrets of success

Read the case study.

Hanson Homes, LLC

Retaining Walls - Hanson QuickBuild

breakdown - CS Hanson