Back in the 2005-06, when the world was fresh and green and a young man could usually post on a Jays-related website without wanting to spill blood all over it, a group of us had a conversation about Brad Wilkerson over at Batter's Box. Wilkerson was a popular rumoured target of the Jays at the time, a target that I think we all can say we're relieved not to have hit.
I had something to say that I saw again tonight and that I thought was a particularly good, short point about my favorite hobbyhorse, risk.
You've done a much better job at outlining the anti-Wilkerson case, which I acknowledge is totally legit and sensible. Few players are perfect, and Wilkerson's flaws are more obvious than most good players (his skills are also less obvious).
Much of that case boils down to Wilkerson having a bad year last year. If he hadn't, there is absolutely no way he'd be available in the first place - the year before he'd hit 32 home runs and nobody could touch him with a ten-foot pole. "What have you done for me lately?" has a powerful psychological hold on fans, press and baseball people, but it shouldn't make us lose sight of the fact that Wilkerson's skills do not appear to be significantly eroded, he is still in his prime, and his relatively poor performance last year will make him cheaper in arbitration.
Wilkerson is risky, because he may not return to the level he played at previously. Because of the Jays' position in the AL, it is imperative that they take significant risks in order to be competitive. The Jays cannot wait for the "sure thing" to drop into their lap, not merely because we've all waited long enough, but because they need to get more bang for their buck than the typical team. Taking risks needs to be an essential part of their strategy. Signing players like Wilkerson who have just had an off year is a sensible way to add risk to the team.
In business, in life, in baseball, too often we equate the notion of "risk management" with "risk minimization". This is not the proper way to see risk. Properly considered, risk in and of itself is value-neutral, and merely adds variability. The Jays need to make variability their friend if they want to win a World Series - almost anybody does. If you want an example of that, call up Kenny Williams and ask him why he signed Orlando Hernandez and Jose Contreras or ask the Pistons why they "rolled the dice" with Antonio McDyess.
Properly managed, risk wins championships.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment