Saito agrees to one-year deal with Dodgers

by ufoboy90 on Dec 5, 2006 4:19 PM EST Comment 20 comments

This has got to be the biggest steal of the off-season.

"Takashi Saito, who recorded a franchise rookie-record 24 saves for the Los Angeles Dodgers last season after beginning the year in the minors, agreed Tuesday to a $1 million, one-year contract." -AP

How does somebody so good last year get so little with this market?

Just to throw some stats around...

2.07 ERA, .91 WHIP, 12.29 K/9, 2.64 BB/9, 4.65 K/BB, .34 HR/9

I mean, none of his stats look particularly dangerous, and even if he regressed a ton, he'd still be worth much more than 1 mil, considering Jamie Walker will be getting about 4 times that next year.

Amazing that the same guy who got this deal done gave Pierre that deal...

0 recs | Comment 20 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Re:

"mean, none of his stats look particularly dangerous"

4.65 k/9 is pretty atrocious for a guy who is supposed to be a closer. I don't think anyone can sustain success at that level (except maybe Wang)

That said, he could double his ERA and still be a bargain at 1 million

by Jgaztambide on Dec 5, 2006 4:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

That's

12.29 K/9, which is really, really good. 4.65 k/BB, which is also really, really good.

by Tyler on Dec 5, 2006 4:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

whoah

"I can't read or write"

yeah, 12+ k/9 is quite impressive.

He wasn't a free agent, was he? He must have been arbitration eligible or something. I refuse to believe he didn't have a bunch of teams all over him if that was the case.

by Jgaztambide on Dec 5, 2006 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

FA?

I don't think he was a free agent; were he, he certainly would have gotten more.

by aCone419 on Dec 5, 2006 4:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

mlb.com

"...As a player with one year service time, Saito was not eligible for salary arbitration or free agency and his only other Major League option was to not play..."

i was curious about that too

by phiago on Dec 5, 2006 5:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

had a blog on there in which Ben Maller stated that if Saito did not receive a significant raise that he would seriously consider sitting out a year or perhaps playing back in Japan. For what its worth this signing has to be the biggest bargain of this offseason

by tbach81 on Dec 5, 2006 6:56 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yeah

he wasn't in this market. that's why. his only leverage was threatening to go back to japan. that's actually a lot of money for somebody who's technically a second-year guy.

by wily mo on Dec 5, 2006 5:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Precursor

Don't want to turn this into a Manny Thread, but could signing Saito be a precursor to trading Broxton?

by wir963 on Dec 5, 2006 6:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Saito

I think the Saito signing was the precursor to having the services of a pitcher likely to be worth $5MM or more signed at $1MM. NOT signing him would have been akin to the Dodgers leaving $4MM on the table.

by BobbyMac on Dec 5, 2006 6:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gagne

So it probably signed the fate of Gagne rather than Broxton?

by wir963 on Dec 5, 2006 7:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gagne

I have to think this guy is gone. Question is, who wants to take the risk signing him given his recent history.
Gagne has much to prove and the odds are against him regaining the arm he once had. Just don't see it happening. Perhaps an incentive laden contract?
Can anybody make a case for this guy?

by bodyiq on Dec 5, 2006 8:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

actually...

My point was more that it didn't decide the fate of anything... rather that the Dodgers front office would have had to have rocks in their collective heads to NOT sign him for that cheap. He could close. He could set up Broxton. He could set up Gagne. He could be used in a deal. But it would have been downright stupid to not sign him for $1MM/yr!

That said, everything I've read indicates that Gagne's long gone.

by BobbyMac on Dec 6, 2006 3:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Saito

was a rookie. They signed him because they controlled his rights, and he was really good last year. If they didn't sign him for any reason other than he wanted to go back to Japan, then they were idiots.

by Tyler on Dec 5, 2006 6:39 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sox Fan

I would love to see the Bull come to the Bean an pitch as a closer at fenway!

What are the chances that will happen?

by ChrisRef19 on Dec 5, 2006 7:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

none

zilch

by sanchez101 on Dec 5, 2006 9:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh

Thanks guys, I was totally in the dark with his contract situation.

Peculiar, yet quite interesting. Thanks.

I'll be the first A+ prospect... www.myspace.com/posingforpennies

by ufoboy90 on Dec 5, 2006 9:26 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Japanese signings

have the same rules as any other amateur signings, and the team that gets them controls their rights for 6 years, hence the undervalued contract.

by Brickhaus on Dec 6, 2006 12:12 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

leverage

in this case he probably had much more leverage then other players since he proably could just go back to Japan and make the amount of money he wants to. What if other players threaten to leave to Japan to try to receive more money? (probably unlikely they would be good enough to warrant any money but hey its an idea)

Go Jays!!!!

by achengy on Dec 6, 2006 5:30 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

good deal for both parties

With Saito's only option being to return to Japan for 07, think this is a good deal for both parties. To give this situation a bit more context, the following article helps explain.
www.japanball.com/news.phtml?id=8452

by Roadkill on Dec 6, 2006 9:32 AM EST reply actions 0 recs