This year, he's right around that number again. His RC/27 in 2005 is higher than Andruw Jones, Vernon Wells, Brady Clark, Hank Blalock, and Carl Crawford. He's right around Ichiro Suzuki, Jason Varitek, Garrett Anderson and Derek Jeter...and there's merely in terms of offensive output. We haven't even started talking about defense yet!
This is where my issue with stats like win shares and RC/27. I know the stats involved are more "complex" than the following, but when Andruw Jones is at:
.272/.352/.578 in 327 AB, 15 2B/2 3B/27 HR, 50 R/67 RBI, 2 SB/2 CS and a 36/64 BB/K ratio
while Mark Kotsay is at:
.281/.335/.413 in 349 AB, 20 2B/1 3B/8 HR, 45 R/ 48 RBI, 4 SB/3 CS and a 29/31 BB/K ratio
and yet RC/27 says 9 Mark Kotsays will score more runs than 9 Andruw Jones - I just don't see it. I know the extra 33 K are bad, but I'll take the almost .200 higher OPS any day - and I don't think the difference in defense between Kotsay and AJ is THAT much different.
Anyway, my biggest complaint about certain stats is the subjectivity that goes into what factors will be considered and the weight that is to be assigned to each factor. And when a stat is created that tells me that 9 Mark Kotsays would score more runs than 9 Andruw Jones, yet almost every major offensive stat says otherwise (including the vaunted OPS), you'll have to excuse me if I don't agree with the factors that are considered and the weight that is assigned to each factor - and therefore that stat as a whole.
However, If Beane and the A's feel he is worth $8M/year, more power to them. He is a good player and a very good defensive player, and in today's market $8M isn't unreasonable for someone of his caliber. I just don't see it as being that much of a bargain.