With four weeks until the trade deadline, a lot remains uncertain. Most teams still find themselves in a muddled middle and will wait until the last few days to determine how aggressively they'll buy or sell. That's especially true in the National League, where nine teams are within six games of one another as they fight for the final two Wild Card spots. The Mets, Giants and Cubs are among those borderline contenders. It wouldn't be especially surprising to see any of them wind up as sellers depending on how they play over the next few weeks.
The Mets are the NL's top non-playoff team and approaching the deadline as a buyer for the moment. Dropping a few games back in the standings by the end of the month could change that mentality. San Francisco and Chicago are a little further out and perhaps likelier sellers. Cubs president of baseball operations Jed Hoyer suggested late last week that the team would need to perform better to avoid a sell-off. Why focus on those three specifically? Each has a notable player who'd be desirable trade candidates if not for their contract structures.
Unlock Subscriber-Exclusive Articles Like This One With a Trade Rumors Front Office Subscription
- Access weekly subscriber-only articles by Tim Dierkes, Steve Adams, and Anthony Franco.
- Join exclusive weekly live chats with Anthony.
- Remove ads and support our writers.
- Access GM-caliber tools like our MLB Contract Tracker
There’s one aspect of the Bellinger situation that might (?) encourage a trade. It doesn’t seem to me to be a given that Bellinger will opt out. How likely is he to get a $27.5M AAV contract? If he doesn’t opt out, are the Cubs willing to spend $27.5M on a player who is not substantially above average? The buyout is “only” $2.5M. Could they not use that $25M “saving” to more effect elsewhere?
I see Bellinger using his brain this time around and jump on a lower avv to secure a longer term deal. I can see Yankees going 5/100 with Bellinger playing CF/LF or 1B.
Anthony
“I see Bellinger using his brain this time around and jump on a lower avv to secure a longer term deal.”
How is that using his brain
I’m not sure if I’m more afraid that you’re not using your brain or that you are and this is the crap you come up with
How is that using his brain
=======================
If you want to make a claim that Anthony is incorrect in saying he should go for a longer term contract, then please do so. “Him stoopid” is not a legitimate debating point.
JB
“Him stoopid” is not a legitimate debating point.
Agreed
“I see Bellinger using his brain this time around “
You mention the Cubs, Giants and Mets. What do they have in common? Not afraid to spend some money to improve, baby! Good for them.
Using $200 mil as an arbitrary figure as to which owners spend money and who doesn’t and it’s impact on wins and losses, looks like 11 of 14 owners spending over 200 have legit playoff aspirations. Below 200 only 7 of 16.
Why the disparity? I believe the spenders don’t get all that caught up in contract pros and cons when pursuing talent. They see someone that can help them out and they get him.
Why the disparity? I believe the spenders don’t get all that caught up in contract pros and cons when pursuing talent.
=======================
The disparity is probably due to market size. Not everyone has the resources to not pay attention to the pros and cons of pursuing talent.
Point taken JB. I’m chewing on it. Cheers.
As a RS fan, I’m not sure I am allowed to “cheers” you back.
Different takes on a topic done with civility can definitely bring out a “cheers” response in me regardless of team allegiance … even when coming from Clip and the boys up there in the Bronx. LOL.
Not paying to read this article
Players with opt-outs both are and aren’t different than any other player trades
Teams need to roughly agree on the players’ value. The uncertainty of the opt-out adds one more factor to disagree on
Not paying to read this article
================
Thanks for the update, CBeosbol. Very cool.
TAS
(TR)
==============
Thanks for the update, Tabata’s Adipted Sun. Very cool.
Why would Bellinger opt out? Is he really going to get a $50 mill. contract which is what he would get by exercising both options (net of the $2.5 mill. buyout)?
FLorG
“Why would Bellinger opt out?”
Because he thinks he can get a better deal
Because he wants to play for another team
“Is he really going to get a $50 mill. contract which is what he would get by exercising both options (net of the $2.5 mill. buyout)?”
He’d probably get a 3-5 year deal. He might prefer that. He might not
If no one offered him a better contract last year, why would they offer him a better contract next year?
JB
“why would they offer him a better contract next year?”
Two years of improved performance is better than one
Only if you consider 2024 an improved performance. It’s improved over 2022, but it is a reversal from 2023. I think he will improve from what he’s done so far, but his ‘so far’ is pretty weak for that level of salary. 9 HRs in 281 ABs with a 53/24 K/W is nice for a good glove CF, but is not particularly close for a $28M player.
JB
“Only if you consider 2024 an improved performance. It’s improved over 2022”
Noted
There were concerns that his 2023 numbers were not sustainable given peripheral stats. 2024 confirmed that. I think more damage from 2024 season than upside. Plus he’s a year older. Markets change year by year but you’d think Bellinger is less attractive this offseason than last offseason. That said, it could go either way if he opts out or not. He could potentially get a longer term lower and much lower AAV deal and be okay with that.
mlbdf
He’s further removed from being terrible
Bottom line is that he’s not worth the $30mm he’s getting paid this year with opt out or the contract he got. And that has become more evident. You weren’t paying him a 3 yr $80mm contract because you thought he was going to hit based on 2021-2022.
mlbdf
“You weren’t paying him a 3 yr $80mm contract because you thought he was going to hit based on 2021-2022.”
Nope
And now you have more evidence than before 2024 that he’s not that hitter
And now you have solid evidence that he’s not going to hit close to what he hit in 2023. We all suspected that 2023 was a fluke due to lack of hard hit contact and exit velocity, and significantly elevated BABIP. The hard hit stuff is even lower in 2023 & 24 versus 2021& 2022, and yet the BABIP is much higher. Not very typical nor sustainable. It’s very clear what Bellinger is trying to do at the plate which is to just put it in play, and less power this year. That’s not going to help him this offseason if he opts out. The more pedestrian numbers he puts up in 2024 more likely he opts in. Only way he opts out is to take a longer term view and take a much lower AAV over longer period. Quite frankly though I’d be wary of doing that if I was a GM, depending of course on how low the AAV and how high length of contract.
JB
“why would they offer him a better contract next year?”
Two years of improved performance is better than one
Why is half the article cut off?
Way of the world. Pretty soon you’ll be paying to read the boxscores.
nothing is free in life,
Not anymore. When I was growing up, television and radio were free. So was air for your tires. So was a glass of water at a diner or a restaurant.
It is a drastic letdown when you find out that people want to get paid for their services and for their investments.
I get what you’re saying for water and air, just like how folks used to wipe your windshield and check your oil, but those costs were still born by the business owner as a way of bringing business to them.
TV and Radio were “free” but paid for by advertising. MLBTR works in this model. You can optionally pay extra for more articles.
The Risk: they are terrible after the trade and you fall out of contention because the move that was supposed to put you over the top doesn’t pan out and said player doesn’t opt-out and you have to hope next year will be better.
The Reward: the player plays well, team excels and has a nice postseason run, or at the very least the player plays well and opts-out hoping to cash in a career year. Unfortunately even the reward comes with the risk of cashing in top tier prospect capital for what turns out to be a rental, but the reward is flags fly forever…
Rsox
I’m sure this is what the “expert” article says.
But, that’s not really correct.
The “problem” is uncertainty. Teams don’t know what they are trading/trading for. There’s always uncertainty about what the players’ performance will be. But opt-outs/opt-ins create uncertainty about the player contract. Trading/trading for 1 year of a player is different than for 2 years. So, if you don’t know how long the contract is, it’s harder to agree on value.
I agree it is harder, but my philosophy has always be that the more complicated a deal is, the more it favors the more intellectually inclined. A good GM should be able to put a number, however risky, on an option.
The reward is the player signs with your team, and not the team that doesn’t comply with the opt out demand. It’s hilarious how fans whinge about not signing players and also whinge about signing players with opt outs. It’s a way better option than differentiating yourself by guaranteeing extra years.
foppert
That
Plus, you get the player for less