6:49pm: Logan will earn a $5.5MM base salary in 2017, tweets Hoynes. His 2018 club option is worth $7MM and comes with a $1MM buyout.
2:31pm: It’s a one-year deal with a club option, per Paul Hoynes of the Plain Dealer (via Twitter).
1:55pm: The Indians have agreed to a deal with free-agent lefty Boone Logan, per Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports (via Twitter). Terms remain unknown at this time; the deal is pending the results of a physical.
Logan, 32, has reportedly sought a two-year deal, with indications he’d be able to command that. Before the offseason, MLBTR predicted a two-year, $12MM contract for the veteran. He just wrapped up a three-year, $16.5MM pact with the Rockies that didn’t really pan out for the team, though Logan certainly ended his tenure in Colorado on a strong note.
In 2016, Logan worked to a 3.69 ERA — all the more impressive that he did so while pitching at Coors Field — with 11.1 K/9 and 3.9 BB/9 over 46 1/3 innings. With a 93 mph fastball and a devastating slider, he racked up an outstanding 16.4% swinging-strike rate that rates among the game’s best. He typically produces solid groundball rates, too, with a lifetime 46.4% mark.
Of course, Logan wasn’t nearly as good over the two prior seasons, over which he carried a 5.37 ERA — due, at least in part, to elevate BABIP totals (.379 in 2014 and .374 in 2015). He has also dealt with elbow issues at times, which presents not-unfamiliar risk.
The bigger issue, though, may be in his usage limitations. While he’s dominant against opposing southpaws, Logan isn’t nearly as effective against righties. Over 847 total plate appearances during his career, righty hitters own a .288/.376/.478 slash.
[RELATED: Updated Indians Depth Chart]
For the Indians, though, Logan still offers plenty of functionality. The club already has the dominant Andrew Miller available as the southpaw piece of a high-leverage mix that includes righties Cody Allen and Bryan Shaw. With those three arms already in place, skipper Terry Francona ought to have plenty of flexibility in deploying Logan to take full advantage of his skillset.
Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.
Whoa
That was the first word out of my mouth…….followed by “I didn’t expect that.”
I’ll second that…
I hope the Indians don’t enter into the “winning of the offseason” category, because they are fun to watch.
Not every team that “wins the offseason” turns to crap. Cubs “won the offseason” last year with Heyward Zobrist and Lackey and it worked out pretty well for them.
Not really sure that really qualified of that label last year or most considered “they won the offseason” last year. Usually that label goes to accumulations of a trade or signing of a superstar or superstar players. The splash signing or trade. I’m just discussing the label. It’s obviously arbitrary label, but it’s interesting to follow.
I have no issue calling $184 million a splash signing, to someone at the time they obviously considered a superstar player in Heyward. Zobrist and Lackey were fresh off very successful 2015 seasons including playoff performances. I’m with rols on this one.
Lol Heyward was horrible last year and the Cubs would have won 95+ games without Lackey or Zobrist.
@bosox90 I mean that’s fair. I guess it’s on an individual interpretation of superstar. But then again, I think considering the estimated jump to the playoffs by pundits most considered the Dbacks to have garnered the “Winning the off season” moniker. But it’s a fair comment or interpretation.
I don’t think they win even 90 without Zobrist. He was a productive bat and a veteran leader.
@chri Not the point… That obviously wasn’t the plan or expectation when the Cubs invested $184 million in him. The conversation we are having is about whether or not the Cubs were considered to be the team that “won the offseason” heading into the 2016 season. This is in reference to teams like the Marlins, White Sox, and Blue Jays who all recently had big splash offseasons that turned into mediocre seasons, leading folks to thinking their may be some kind of curse on the “winners of the offseason”
That’s silly. You’re silly.
other examples are the Red Sox who “won” the 2010 and 2014 offseasons, but most of those splashy contracts/trades didn’t work out the following season.
Don’t remind me, I left those out on purpose :X
Ha, also a Sox fan. Unfortunately the first things I can think of when “winning the offseason” comes up.
or the dbacks, there were a lot of people creaming about the miller – greinke 1-2 punch and look what happened there
like azphil or azsteve or whatever who wouldn’t shut up about how the dbacks were gonna win 94 games. I don’t think he’s been back here since like midseason.
I don’t think anybody ever thought the DBacks won that Shelby Miller trade.
That being said, I hope EE stays healthy and performs well. Just like I hope the Indians stay healthy and perform well. The Indians are going to be a scary team.
@Visions I agree, even rooting for a team in direct competition with them for the pennant, I’d love to see them stay healthy because they are very fun to watch. Really holding out hope for a rematch, this time in the ALCS on the bigger stage!
yeah – the arms are pretty damned scary on that team. heading into the WS there were a lot of commentators saying that they expected last year to be Cleveland’s one and only chance and that the cubs would dominate for a long time – I don’t know if that really is the case, the Indians look pretty damned good.
its baseball. Anyone who thinks a team will dominate for a long time doesn’t watch enough of it. Sht happens all of the times
Wait a minute, Zobrist and Lackey were bad last year? Hmm. Maybe you were watching alternate universe baseball or something.
No one said they were bad? And they combined for 7 wins, cubs won 103 and their baseruns had them even higher, so saying they would have won 95+ without them isn’t ludicrous. Especially because that would have opened up more time at 2b for Baez. The cubs are a really really good team even without those two.
With all of that said, I’m not sure what any of that has to do with whether or not they won the offseason. Even if a team is really good, they can still win an offseason by adding more good players to their already really good team.
Great signing, takes a little bit of the workload off Miller. Basically use Logan as a middle inning situational lefty killer
My jaw just dropped to the floor. As confident as I am in the Red Sox this year, it looks like the Cubs and Indians may be playing in a league of their own in 2017.
Boone Logan. Situational lefty with a ifetime ERA of 4.48 who can’t find the plate and pays dearly when he does. Yeah, you people should be really pumped.
look at him vs Lefties Ave he was a Coors last year
Oh sure, include his seasons between 2006 and 2009 when he struggled because they are so relevant to how he’s pitching now. And don’t factor in the past three years he spent pitching at Coors..
But hey, don’t let me keep you from swimming in the shallow end.
If you think Coors was more relevant than his elbow, you’re not even in the pool.
3.69 ERA last season in Colorado, 1.01 WHIP (so much for your lack of control argument). and 0.8 HR/9 rate (so much for your “he pays” comment). You are a fountain of misinterpreted information.
You can’t really call someone a “fountain of misinterpreted information” and then use WHIP to gauge a guys control. Logan has issues walking batters, out of the 176 pitchers who threw at least 40 innings last year, Boone ranked 135 in BB%.
If he’s used as a strict LOOGY and faces no RHB, I can see him with an ERA under 2.50
ERA has him as an above average pitcher in all but one year since 2010.
It’s a great depth move, i hope they win next year
That bullpen is going to be even better than last year.
With an entire right handed rotation,picking up a solid LOOGY who can turn around a line up in the middle innings is a need.Logan should fit that bill quite nicely and decrease Miller’s regular season work load a bit as well.
A LOOGY is all he is. You don’t even want to leave him in against a RHB or you’re putting a runner on. His #s against righties are wretched… 16% walk rate, and 25% line drive rate! Ouch!
And talk about Coors is overblown. It doesn’t matter. He’s a heavy groundball pitcher. When he does give up a FB it’s a HR — everywhere he plays. It’s actually better at Coors than it is away.
AWAY FROM COORS — 25% of flyballs off a RHB go for HR. and 20% off a LHB.
So he can’t face a RHB, or give up a FB to anyone. or he gets in trouble, which is why he tries to nibble and miss the plate in the first place, or there’s hard contact.
And his .215 BABIP against LH suppose there will be some regression on that lefty slash-line, anyway — and playing at Coors doesn’t make that a better thing.
Great analysis! I think it is such a scary signing because Cleveland has the depth and talent in their bullpen to not need him in any other situation but precisely that: getting a lefty or two out. He fills a role perfectly and makes the bullpen that much more deadly.
Yeah I didn’t think so…
yeah but it doesn’t hurt to have a LOOGY on there – look at the last handful of years and the success of someone like javier lopez who has been a straight up LOOGY and dominated with last year being a standout but hovering around 2.0 in the ERA pretty consistently.
If he’s strictly used as a LOOGY, then he can be really good in the role — but then he’s getting paid a lot to do that. He’ll likely be used in a larger role, and that’s when there’s a little bit of nail-biting. But it’s not like he’s a bad reliever, he’s great to have in the pen. He and his role are just being overrated a bit right now, and paid a lot.
I;m curious how club options are valued by players. We have seen calculations of the value of opt out clauses where the player gives up dollars for that right. A club option would in theory would have to work in reverse, right? The player should get extra money for allowing club control at their option for subsequent years?
Yes, Logan will get more guaranteed money than if this was strictly a one year deal.
Yes, he’ll either get more in 2017 or there will be a significant buy-out if the Indians decline his option in 2018.
Club options typically come with buyouts, that range based on what is negotiated. Not sure I’ve ever seen a buyout for below 500k, and they often go much higher.
I think it depends quite a bit on the structure, but generally, that’s true. There’s a big difference, though, between a $500K buyout on a $10MM option (more or less pure upside for team) and the rare extreme examples like Ryan Howard ($10MM buyout on $23MM option).
Right, he will get more guaranteed money — but that extra guaranteed money will come in the form of a buy-out of the 2018 option. Say $1MM buyout in case they decline the option; and then his 2018 salary would generally be higher than 2017, and essentially include that buyout money. So yes, it guarantees him more money on a 1 year deal.
So who loses their roster spot?
Austin Adams?
Mets should offer Blevins 2 with a 3rd year club option.
Blevins is the real lefty prize. But this deal, not guaranteeing 2 years, hurts his leverage some. He might have to take something similar. Otherwise, a 2 year deal on Blevins feels alright — and better than Logan would.
1+ a club option? Surprised he didn’t get 2 years. Even more surprised he conceded to a club option.
He wants a ring.
I’m hoping this might get Hoby Milner sent back to Philly.although like Severino Gonzalez,he’s a Rube guy,so the current front office might not care to have him back.ofcourse my opinion would change if we signed a legit lefty for the pen.
I am a die hard blue jays fan and should hate the Cleveland but I can’t help but make them my second choice after what they have done over the past couple seasons and I think the have a real chance at going to the World Series again unlike the bluejays if they don’t get more bullpen help.
I feel like this sometimes then I think of Two words: Trevor Bauer.
Cleveland is supposed to be way above their payroll limit. Props to ownership for signing off on this.
$6.5M for a LOOGY?
What a game.
I am optimistic about this signing but I am also concerned about who lost a roster spot
My guess is Austin Adams.
I think you’re right. He has heat but just gets clobbered for the most part.
He was throwing 96 all season, still hitting it in September. But he’s 30, he’s not a prospect anymore. He was held off the postseason roster, that shows no confidence in him. I think he’s most expendable on the roster, and he might make it through waivers anyway.
Nice lefty to have in the bullpen. 4.5 million or less a year
it’s 6.5/yr with buyout or 6.25 if not
That’s a lot of money for this team to pay a guy in that role and see him throw about 40 innings all season.