Headlines

Go To Pro Hockey Rumors
Go To Hoops Rumors

Extension Candidates

Extension Candidate: Kyle Freeland

By | at

Pitchers and catchers report to Spring Training in about two weeks.  Along with the relaxed vibes of baseball’s preseason comes long-term contract discussions for young players.  One standout from the 2018 season who could look to make a deal is Rockies lefty Kyle Freeland.

Freeland, 26 in May, was drafted eighth overall by the Rockies in 2014.  He reached the Majors in 2017, posting a solid rookie campaign with a 4.10 ERA in 156 innings.  That earned him a seventh place finish in the NL Rookie of the Year voting.  Freeland’s peripheral stats were unimpressive, but you can’t argue with results – especially for a pitcher who calls Coors Field home.

Then, in 2018, Freeland took his game to the next level.  He posted a 2.85 ERA in 202 1/3 innings, ranking fifth among qualified NL starters.  That was good for a fourth place Cy Young finish.  Again, Freeland’s strikeout, walk, and groundball rates were nothing to write home about, but he was able to succeed by avoiding the middle of the plate and generating soft contact, as explained by Jeff Sullivan of FanGraphs.  Sullivan cautiously drew a Tom Glavine comp, and wrote, “It’s not the most comfortable skillset to bank on, but, honestly, after looking at Freeland with a microscope, I have become a believer in his ability to move the ball around.”

I imagine the Rockies believe in Freeland more than anyone than perhaps his mom – they drafted and developed him, and they just watched him pitch perhaps the best season in franchise history.  So it would make sense for Rockies Executive Vice President & General Manager Jeff Bridich to look to broker a deal.  Bridich became the Rockies’ senior director of baseball operations in 2006, so he’s had a hand in approximately 20 multiyear extensions the franchise has done since then.  Bridich likely intersected with Freeland’s agency, MSM Sports, on Jamey Carroll’s 2007 deal.  MSM has also done extensions for Josh Harrison and Brandon Webb over the years.

So let’s talk numbers.  Freeland has exactly 2.000 years of Major League service, so credit the Rockies for not manipulating his service time back when he cracked the team’s rotation out of Spring Training in 2017.  There is a very clear template for contract extensions for starting pitchers with 2+ years of Major League service who fell short of Super Two eligibility.  The framework of a five-year, $30MM deal originated with Jon Lester’s contract with the Red Sox in March 2009.  Yovani Gallardo signed a similar deal with the Brewers a year later, and then they became commonplace for the next couple of years.  However, the trend has died off, with only Corey Kluber’s April 2015 deal existing as a somewhat recent example.

Kluber’s contract does not fit the mold – at $38.5MM, it was the largest of the bunch.  That’s with good reason, as Kluber’s career and platform year numbers dwarfed the others, and he was coming off a Cy Young award.  He mostly seems relevant here as a clear ceiling for Freeland.  Aside from the many comparable 2+ pitchers like Lester, Trevor Cahill, and Clay Buchholz, we can also throw a couple of 1+ pitchers into the mix in Julio Teheran and Madison Bumgarner.  Bumgarner received a $35MM deal in April 2012 with just one year and 127 days of service time under his belt, scoring a contract bigger than those in the 2+ class.  Teheran’s deal in February 2014 is also worth mentioning, as he simply didn’t have the stats of those who came before him (like innings and wins) yet landed a $32.4MM guarantee.  That’s just $100K less than Chris Sale, who signed a year earlier with superior stats across the board.  Teheran’s deal was thought to be a new benchmark at the time, but I think it raised expectations for young pitchers and their agents, mostly preventing subsequent extensions.

Freeland compares favorably to guys like Cahill and Buchholz, who signed very similar $30MM deals that bought out one year of free agency and included club options on two more.  Plus, those contracts are eight years old.  It’s possible Aaron Nola and Luis Severino can raise the bar for what successful starting pitchers (who nonetheless lack a Cy Young award) can earn their first time through arbitration if they win their hearings in February.  Plus, a good case can be made that Freeland should beat Bumgarner’s $35MM contract, as Freeland had the better platform year and pitches at Coors Field.

In my opinion, a fair deal for Freeland would be for five years and $35-37MM.  It would cover his final pre-arbitration season (2019), all three arbitration years, and one year of free agency, taking the deal through 2023.  One perk MSM Sports could fight for would be one club option instead of two.  Of the ten comparable deals I looked at, seven of them included two club options.  And two of the deals that only had one were the initial contracts in this mold, for Lester and Gallardo.  Beginning with Buchholz’s deal in April 2011, every pitcher accepted two club options with the exception of Teheran.  The Rockies will likely label Teheran an outlier, but we haven’t seen the Lester Contract type deal in the last five years.  A contract for Freeland would re-establish a precedent in case 2+ pitchers like Jose Berrios, Mike Clevinger, German Marquez, Blake Snell, Jameson Taillon, and Trevor Williams seek financial security.

Extension Candidate: Aaron Hicks

By | at

In shortstop Didi Gregorius and center fielder Aaron Hicks, the Yankees entered the offseason with two obvious extension candidates among their position players. But since the Yankees’ season ended Oct. 9, when the Red Sox bounced them from the ALDS, Gregorius underwent Tommy John surgery on his right elbow. Consequently, Gregorius will miss a large chunk of next season – his contract year – which could make him a more logical non-tender candidate than someone who’s up for an extension. That leaves Hicks, who’s also set to become a free agent a year from now. Considering Hicks’ production over the past couple seasons, perhaps the Yankees will work to prevent him from reaching the open market any time soon.

New York bought fairly low on Hicks in 2015, seven years after he went 14th overall in the 2008 draft, when it acquired him from Minnesota for backup catcher John Ryan Murphy. MLBTR’s Jeff Todd noted at the time that it was a surprise the Twins gave up on Hicks on the heels of an encouraging season. After Hicks was essentially a non-factor in a combined 150 games from 2013-14, he managed 2.0 fWAR in 97 contests and 390 plate appearances in his final season as a Twin. Along the way, the switch-hitter mixed approximately league-average offensive production (.256/.323/.398 with 11 home runs – good for a 96 wRC+) with quality base running (13 steals on 16 attempts) and plus defense in center field (two DRS, 6.9 UZR).

Upon landing Hicks – who was then 26 years old – Yankees general manager Brian Cashman declared, “We think Aaron Hicks is an everyday player.”

Cashman’s assessment looked wildly optimistic in Hicks’ first season in the Bronx, though, as he endured a horrid campaign in which he managed minus-0.2 fWAR in 361 PA. While Hicks was fine in the field, his offensive production plummeted. Among MLB hitters who racked up at least 350 PA, Hicks logged the eighth-worst wRC+ (64), batting a weak .217/.281/.336. And when he did get on base, Hicks swiped just three bags on seven tries.

To Hicks’ credit, he put 2016 way behind him in the ensuing season, even though he wasn’t a regular at the outset of the campaign. All told, Hicks slashed an outstanding .266/.372/.475 (126 wRC+) and offered easily above-average production against both right- and left-handed pitchers. He also registered solid power numbers (15 homers, .209 ISO) with appealing walk and strikeout rates (14.1 percent BB, 18.6 percent K), and chipped in 10 steals on 15 attempts. With another season of high-end defense factored in, the big-armed Hicks was worth 3.3 fWAR over 361 PA. The only problem? He went on the disabled list with an oblique strain on two occasions, thus limiting him to 88 games.

Until 2018, Hicks only had one 100-game season on his resume. However, Hicks is now coming off a career-best 137-game, 581-PA campaign in which he truly emerged as the full-time player Cashman thought the Yankees were getting when they landed him. Hicks essentially matched his 2017 rates and continued to fare nicely against both righties and lefties, but he did so over a much larger sample en route to a 4.9-fWAR showing. While Hicks’ slash line dropped a tad to .248/.366/.467, his wRC+ increased to 127. Statcast data backs up that production, as there was little difference between Hicks’ weighted on-base average (.360) and his xwOBA (.365). The 29-year-old helped the Yankees’ cause by mashing 27 homers with a .219 ISO, putting up terrific K/BB numbers (15.5 percent and 19.1 percent, respectively), stealing 11 of 13 bags and, per FanGraphs, contributing elite base running in general.

If there’s one statistical gripe with Hicks’ season, it’s that the advanced metrics didn’t particularly like his defense. After he totaled a whopping 15 DRS – including 12 in center – in 2017, he fell to minus-3 this past season. UZR (0.7) and Outs Above Average (minus-3) weren’t all that bullish on Hicks’ work, either. No matter, Hicks was still one of the game’s most valuable outfielders in 2018, and if the Yankees expect that to continue, they may try to lock him up in the coming months.

The question: How much might it cost New York to extend Hicks? Although several outfielders have signed extensions over the past couple years, none are that comparable to Hicks in production and/or his closeness to free agency. One possible exception is Charlie Blackmon, who – like Hicks now – had five-plus years of service time and was only a season away from free agency at this time a year ago. Blackmon ended up inking a five-year, $94MM guarantee to stay in Colorado last spring, when he had just begun his age-31/32 season. While Blackmon garnered that contract as a player who was a couple years older than Hicks is now, the former also offered a more accomplished track record. Blackmon was a two-time All-Star, a two-time Silver Slugger recipient, an NL batting champion and a past MVP candidate when the Rockies ponied up for him. Hicks doesn’t have any such honors on his resume.

If Blackmon’s deal is out of reach for Hicks, perhaps one of the recent big-money contracts given to a center fielder in free agency would be more realistic. A pair of center fielders – the Cardinals’ Dexter Fowler and the Brewers’ Lorenzo Cain – scored five-year contracts worth $82.5MM and $85MM, respectively, on the open market over the previous two winters. Fowler inked his pact on the brink of his age-31 season, while Cain signed his as a soon-to-be 32-year-old. Age is on Hicks’ side in both cases, then; however, like Blackmon, both Fowler and Cain had more established track records than Hicks when they signed, and it helped that they had multiple teams bidding on them in free agency.

While the comparisons are imperfect, Hicks’ reps at CAA Sports likely wouldn’t be out of their depth to push for an extension in the neighborhood of the contracts Fowler and Cain received. He still has another full season to play before he turns 30, after all, and is fresh off back-to-back years in which he was among the game’s premier center fielders. Whether the Yankees will consider an extension for Hicks this offseason is unclear, especially considering fellow outfielders Aaron Judge, Giancarlo Stanton and Clint Frazier are under long-term control, and they may pursue Bryce Harper in free agency. For now, Hicks is projected to play 2019 for $6.2MM – a bargain in light of what he brought to the table from 2017-18.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Extension Candidate: Matt Chapman

By | at

The chatter started last year as Matt Chapman burst onto the scene for the Athletics. The early returns were impressive. Still, Dave Cameron was seemingly pushing the envelope a bit when he asked in early August whether Chapman could be emerging as a star.

Of course, as Cameron noted, there was plenty of reason to wonder whether Chapman would really be able to hit enough to profile as a true star. The thrust of the post, really, was that his outstanding glovework made Chapman a potentially excellent player even if he only hit around the league average. From that point in the season, moreover, Chapman’s output at the plate faded, leaving him with a solid but unspectacular 109 wRC+ at season’s end.

The overall rookie showing was still plenty promising, no doubt. A quality regular on a league-minimum contract for years to come? Sign any team up, especially one that’s somehow still playing in the O.co Coliseum.

Of course, it still remained to be seen how Chapman would look over a full season in the majors, after opposing pitchers had a chance to adjust. Would his prodigious minor-league strikeout levels be too much to overcome? Would his obvious defensive talent be sufficient to carry him if the bat lagged?

Consider those questions answered. Put most simply: he finished third in all of baseball in position-player rWAR (8.2) and rated among the top ten by measure of fWAR (6.5).

With 2018 in the books, the only question left is how much it’d cost the A’s to lock Chapman in for the long run. It’s a question that was already on the minds of the Oakland brass, as the organization reportedly sought to talk about a deal over the 2017-18 offseason. Unfortunately for the club, Chapman and agent Scott Boras declined the opportunity to discuss a contract at that time.

It could be, then, that discussing Chapman’s value now is mostly an exercise in the hypothetical. But it stands to reason that the A’s will at least try to open the door to talks once again — perhaps with added motivation as they seek to continue the momentum from an exciting 2018 season and keep pushing for a new ballpark. And perhaps Chapman’s camp will show some willingness to consider numbers now that he has set down a marker as a top-end player rather than a target for a cheap pre-arb deal. He is still reasonably youthful, at 25 years of age, but won’t reach arbitration until 2021 and can’t qualify for free agency until the 2024 season — his age-31 campaign.

A lot can change in the meantime, as Chapman’s just-announced thumb surgery underscores. Fortunately, it seems as if there isn’t any reason to think that procedure will represent an ongoing problem; exactly how it could influence the possibility of a deal isn’t entirely clear, though odds are it won’t be a major factor in any direction.

In examining Chapman’s merit as a player, there’s frankly not a ton to discuss regarding his glovework. It’s lauded by scouts and stats alike and there’s no real reason to think it’ll fade any time soon. He’s also a solidly graded baserunner even if he isn’t a threat to swipe any bags. The floor, as has long been suspected, is rather lofty. Those skills won’t really pay in arbitration, which is certainly a relevant consideration in contemplating the valuation of a potential extension, but their value isn’t in question.

The bat is where it’s still interesting to dig in. Even as Chapman’s output sagged some late in 2017, he made a notable improvement in his contact ability. For September and October, Chapman recorded a 21.2% strikeout rate — far superior to what he had shown as a professional to that point. He sustained the improvement in 2018, showing a similar approach to what he exhibited in 2017 but posting a much-improved 8.8% swinging-strike rate.

Even as he put the bat on the ball more often, ultimately carrying a 23.7% strikeout rate that sits barely above the leaguewide mean, Chapman kept producing power numbers. He finished the season with 24 long balls, a .508 slugging percentage, and .230 isolated slugging mark. With a solid 9.4% walk rate chipping in, Chapman managed a .356 OBP.

There’s a lot to like here, clearly. Upping his contact rate clearly didn’t prevent Chapman from making good contact. To the contrary, he posted an outstanding 93.0 mph average exit velocity and 47.6% hard-hit rate, according to Statcast. That said, some of the numbers also suggest some cause for skepticism with regard to the sustainability of Chapman’s output. His on-base numbers were boosted by a .338 BABIP — the first time he cleared the .300 barrier as a professional. Chapman’s average launch angle dipped to 14.7 and his groundball rate jumped to 40.3% (well over his minor-league average), perhaps explaining why Statcast credited him with only a .333 xwOBA — well shy of the .370 wOBA he actually recorded.

Perhaps it’s not a slam dunk that Chapman will produce at a rate thirty percent better than league average for the foreseeable future. But he has already shown more adaptability as a hitter than was generally anticipated and established a fairly significant overall offensive ceiling. If there’s some danger of regression, perhaps there’s also some possibility that Chapman will continue to improve at the plate. Supposing he settles in as a solidly above-average hitter who can’t ever quite fully combine both high-end power and strong on-base ability, Chapman could still easily run off a few more 5-WAR campaigns before he sniffs the open market.

Let’s get down to some salary numbers, then. Chapman largely matched Nationals star Anthony Rendon in output this year and likely has even greater arbitration earning upside with his potential to drive the ball out of the park. Though Rendon benefited from having originally signed an MLB contract, boosting his first arb salary, his anticipated total of around $35MM in total arbitration earnings seems to be a reasonable ballpark tally for Chapman. Of course, Oakland wouldn’t need to begin paying that for a few more years, during which time the club can pay him no more than it does any other player who happens to be taking up an active roster spot. And Chapman also was a bit slower to reach the majors, limiting his eventual free-agent value. Even if we guess he’ll ultimately command $30MM+ annual salaries in his open-market years, there’s a limit to what the A’s in particular would be willing to promise to lock those seasons in.

From a practical perspective, then, there’s reason to be skeptical that Chapman warrants anything approaching a nine-figure guarantee. He certainly would scoff at the kind of deal that he might have been presented with last offseason — say, the sub-1.000 service record deal (six years, $26MM) signed by Paul DeJong after a similarly strong 2017 debut. But there’s a reason that the current record for a player with less than two years of service is still held by Andrelton Simmons, at a relatively modest $58MM over seven years. In short, there’s not a ton for teams in this situation to gain by going wild at this early stage — particularly for players, like Chapman, that aren’t especially precocious.

It seems fair to assume that beating the Simmons deal would represent a bare minimum starting point to capture the attention of Boras, who is a notoriously hard bargainer in early extension talks, in particular. Even handing over control over a pair of free agent seasons for Chapman could, after all, have a monumental impact on his eventual open-market earning capacity. My own guess is that Boras would take aim at some other notable pre-arb targets, even if they were landed for players with more than two seasons of MLB service. The Mike Trout contract (six years, $144.5MM) is assuredly well out of reach, but Carlos Gonzalez showed way back in 2011 that even mere mortal pre-arb players can secure big guarantees (seven years, $80MM).

It might well take something approaching or exceeding that salary level to get Chapman to bite. That’d be an unprecedented payout for a player who hasn’t even recorded two full years of service time, but today’s youthful superstars seem to be holding for such a move in the market. It’s notable, after all, that we haven’t seen a premium all-around player ink a deal at that stage of his career in recent years, with the largest sub-2 extensions of recent vintage being secured by players like Simmons and Christian Yelich before they fully broke out in the manner Chapman has. Here, Chapman has not only already turned in a superstar-level campaign, but features the kind of offensive profile that will boost his arb earnings.

Whether there’s appetite on either side for a full exploration of a contract isn’t yet known. It could be that last year’s non-talks and/or the thumb surgery will interfere. Chapman may simply not have interest personally. The A’s have a clean balance sheet to work with, but they also have other priorities to address and have never yet opened a season with a payroll of even $90MM. Then, there’s the fact that the team’s record for a single contract is still owned by former hot corner stalwart Eric Chavez — a player who in some ways serves as a fairly interesting comp for Chapman on the field — which on the one hand illustrates the extent to which the Oakland organization would need to leave its comfort zone to do a deal, and on the other hand perhaps suggests it’s time it does so again.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Extension Candidate: Anthony Rendon

By | at

The Nationals will watch their best-known, homegrown position player hit the open market this season. But the team still has another season of control over another top draft choice who made good on his promise, potentially creating an opening for long-term talks.

Sure, Bryce Harper is the bigger star and the more visible talent. But since Anthony Rendon turned into a regular in 2014, he has out-WAR’ed Harper. That’s particularly true over the past three seasons, as Rendon has churned out quality campaigns while Harper’s 2015 MVP effort has faded into memory.

The shadow hanging over Rendon seems to suit his personality. But it has seriously obscured his productivity. Since the start of ’14, he’s among the ten biggest position-player WAR producers in the game, yet he somehow hasn’t yet been named to an All-Star team. True, Rendon has twice finished among the top-ten in the MVP vote, but his profile remains much lower than the quality of his play would support — not even close to that of his long-time teammate.

It’s somewhat surprising that the careers of Harper and Rendon have never been seen as being intertwined in any meaningful way, despite the fact that they were chosen with lofty picks in successive drafts and reached the majors on a similar timetable. There are many reasons for that fact, but it’s all the more interesting to ponder given that there could be a very tangible way in which their outlook is connected. Specifically, if the Nats decide to let Harper walk, or are unable to coax him back, they’ll have vastly more future payroll capacity to work with in pursuing a new deal with Rendon.

To be sure, the Nats have more immediate needs than a new deal with Rendon, who’ll command a healthy raise on his $12.3MM salary through arbitration. But that’s all the more true in the case of Harper, who can be replaced from within by rising young talents Juan Soto and Victor Robles. In the case of Rendon, there’s no obvious heir at third base once he reaches free agency next fall. True, Carter Kieboom and Luis Garcia loom as promising young players in the infield, but neither is quite as advanced or as promising as are the outfielders.

Plus, there’s likely more value to be achieved with a Rendon deal than one involving Harper, if for no other reason than that the latter will be on the open market at a rarely-seen point of his career. Convincing Rendon to stay would cost, to be sure, and he’s also a client of Scott Boras (as are many other current and former Nats, including the recently extended Stephen Strasburg). But it is at least possible that the low-key player would be more inclined to take a slight discount to stave off some risk and maintain stability. He won’t be selling as much of his youth; though he only just turned 28, Rendon won’t reach the market at an unusually young age. And he’d also be weighing terms with another year to go before free agency, creating a lever for at least something of a discount.

Risk, to be sure, would weigh in the equation for both sides if talks take place. Beyond the usual, injuries have been a particular concern for Rendon. A variety of lower-leg ailments, involving his ankles especially, have limited him over the years — both before and during his professional career. While he turned in mostly full 2016 and 2017 seasons, Rendon ended up missing a reasonably lengthy stretch this year after suffering a hairline toe fracture on a hit-by-pitch.

That consideration might weigh down the price, but surely wouldn’t get in the way of a deal entirely. As noted above, after all, Rendon has been supremely valuable despite his medical rap sheet.

It’s also true that Rendon isn’t hitting quite as much as he did in his outstanding 2017 season, when he walked more than he struck out and produced a career-high .232 isolated power mark. But that’s not to say that he isn’t doing quite a lot with the bat. Through 511 plate appearances in 2018, Rendon carries a .298/.358/.508 slash with 19 long balls.

This, interestingly, is the most aggressive version of Rendon we’ve seen. His strikeout-to-walk numbers (14.3% vs. 8.6%) have returned to something like his career norms after the uber-patient 2017 showing. He’s swinging (48.1%) and chasing out of the zone (29.9%) more than ever, though his contact rate remains in range of his career mean.

That’s not necessarily a problem, particularly since we know he has the pitch recognition in his pocket if needed. Rendon is also making more hard contact than ever before (38.1%) this season, so much so that Statcast thinks he has been quite unlucky (.403 xwOBA vs. .366 wOBA).

It’s worth bearing in mind, of course, that Rendon is also a high-quality all-around player. He’s not stealing as often this year as in the past but grades as a well-above-average overall baserunner. With the glove, it’s worth noting a sudden downturn in DRS (from +7 to -6). But he’s still a solidly above-average performer in the view of UZR and has long drawn sterling grades from those metrics and scouts.

So, what kind of a price tag might the Nats be looking at?

In truth, we haven’t seen the veteran third base market tested through extensions for quite some time. David Wright (eight years, $138MM) and Ryan Zimmerman (eight years, $126MM) signed those contracts before Rendon was even in the big leagues. Now, they feel a bit longer and a bit lighter on annual salary than we’re likely to see in the present market. The more recent action has been on players with much greater team control remaining, largely rendering them useless for our purposes.

Neither has the free-agent market seen many premium third baggers of late. Mike Moustakas fell flat on the open market with worries over his OBP and glovework. Pablo Sandoval got five years and $95MM, representing one of the closest comps for Rendon, though the Nats’ star is surely in a higher tier altogether. Before that, Adrian Beltre’s five-year, $80MM deal stands out as a laughable bargain for the club … and also a deal that’s far too stale to have any real relevance.

Perhaps, in approaching a Rendon price tag, we ought to consider two far more recent contracts, even if they truly aren’t on all fours with Rendon’s situation. Charlie Blackmon inked a deal in advance of his walk season that put a $21MM valuation on his free-agent seasons. While he was in an older age bracket, thus obviating the value of looking at his years, Blackmon was arguably a similarly situated player in terms of quality. Of course, there’s also an argument to be made that Rendon isn’t that far shy of the ability level of Jose Altuve, who was two years from the open market when he signed a deal with an AAV of over $30MM for his age-30 through age-34 seasons. Then again, he won’t be coming off of a superlative season capped by a World Series win and MVP award.

For Rendon, who’d stand to reach free agency in advance of his age-30 season without a new deal, it’s certainly arguable that a valuation between those two makes sense. Contract length is another variable that can’t be considered in isolation; likewise, options and opt-outs are a factor. Generally, the trend is toward slightly shorter deals that leave players with chances to cut things off a few years into the deal. In this case, perhaps, Rendon would be looking at adding five or six new seasons on top of his existing 2019 arbitration contract. With an AAV range in the neighborhood of $22MM to $26MM, that puts a rough guess in the range of a $130MM new-money commitment.

It’s certainly possible that’d be a bit too rich for the Nats’ liking, especially given the injury history (the details of which they know better than other teams) and the organization’s other needs. Then again, it may not be enough for Rendon to give up the chance of testing the open market. As always, these matters come down to negotiations between parties with real-world interests that can’t simply be reduced to baseball valuations. From the perspective of the baseball market, however, the above number — with a healthy error bar on either side — seems to be a generally fair target.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Extension Candidate: Aaron Nola

By | at

The Phillies have scrupulously maintained their future balance sheets, preferring not to make any commitments that might tie their hands in future seasons. But the organization has already made one exception, inking Odubel Herrera last winter, and could explore yet more extensions with core players this winter.

Aaron Nola | Derik Hamilton-USA TODAY Sports

One could probably make a case for a very early strike with one of the team’s less-experienced would-be stars — chief among them, Rhys Hoskins. But by far the likeliest candidate for a long-term deal is righty Aaron Nola, who was selected with the seventh overall pick of the 2014 draft and has since established himself as one of the game’s better young starters.

Nola, 24, reached the majors after just 30 minor-league appearances, showing quite well in his 13-start debut at just 22 years of age. Last year, though, he faded after a strong opening and ended the season facing injury questions. Nola ultimately avoided surgery for some UCL and flexor tendon issues and was able to rehabilitate through the problem over the offseason.

It’s easy to forget now, but entering the current season, nobody was quite sure what to expect from Nola. He responded with 168 innings of 3.54 ERA ball. Nola also racked up 9.9 K/9 against 2.6 BB/9 along with a 49.8% ground-ball rate in his 27 starts, showing career-best numbers in average fastball velocity (92.5 mph) and swinging-strike rate (10.8%).

Looking at Nola’s overall body of work, it’s hard not to be impressed. While he did struggle to keep runs off the board in 2016, advanced metrics have basically loved him from day one. Through 356 2/3 MLB frames, he carries a 3.38 FIP, 3.33 xFIP, and 3.52 SIERA.

The hugely positive outlook on his future makes Nola a bargain, as Fangraphs’ Dave Cameron suggested when ranking him 49th in all of baseball on his top 50 trade value rankings. Because he didn’t reach the Majors quite soon enough back in 2015, Nola will fall shy of Super Two qualification, meaning he’ll play at (or near) the league minimum in 2018 before reaching his three years of arbitration eligibility.

While Nola did take home over $3MM to sign out of LSU, he has another year to wait for significant Major League earnings. That means risk aplenty, which is true of any pitcher but perhaps especially so for Nola, given his prior injury scare. He and the team are aware of the details of the medical situation and thus can adequately account for the risk it entails, but that factor could also push him in the direction of weighing a contract extension.

It’s tempting to speak abstractly about a possible discount for the injury questions. In truth, though, the more interesting question is just what framework might be utilized as a starting point for talks. To this point, no pre-arbitration starter has scored a guarantee of over $40MM. Even Corey Kluber, a 2+ service-class pitcher like Nola, was promised $38.5MM over five years (while giving up two option years) in his 2015 contract. Kluber was more than five years older than Nola is now but also was coming off of a Cy Young Award at the time.

The Kluber deal largely fell in line with prior pre-arb starter contracts, though, and even moved the standard up a bit. Chris Sale ($32.5MM), Derek Holland ($28.5MM), and Trevor Cahill ($30.5MM) are a few of the prior 2+ service hurlers that took five-year deals with similar structures.

Though Nola has staked out a claim as a top-quality young starter, it’s hard to argue that he has shown more to this point than had Sale or Madison Bumgarner (who signed his own five-year, $35MM deal as a 1+ service-class player). Considerations of inflation could be somewhat offset by Nola’s health record, though his representatives would surely argue that his avoidance of surgery and a 2017 season free of arm issues render that a largely moot point.

Provisions could be worked in that would protect the team in the event of an elbow flare-up, such as the addition of cheap option years at the end of the pact. (For example, both Felix Hernandez and John Lackey have previously agreed to clauses that add a league-minimum option to the end of their deal in the event of Tommy John surgery) Or, perhaps the wealthy Phils would be willing mostly to look past Nola’s elbow questions in the hunt for upside, reasoning that the overall risk is minimal and that the open-market price for pitching has steadily risen in recent years and figures to do so between now and the point at which Nola himself would reach the open market.

The previously mentioned five-year structure would run through Nola’s age-29 season and buy out one free-agent year. That’s still a lucrative age at which to reach the open market, though the Phils may seek to add a club option or two that’d further delay his path to the open market. Reaching free agency in advance of his age-31 season would leave Nola with plenty of earning capacity, though tacking on a second club option (and thus delaying his free agency by three full years) could be a tough sell. Generally speaking, Nola and his reps at Paragon Sports would be weighing whether an immediate guarantee is worth forgoing the opportunity to reach free agency before his age-29 season — an age at which he’d almost certainly be one of the youngest starters on the market.

With a number of factors for both sides to weigh, it’ll be an interesting situation to watch if the Phillies and Nola do indeed sit down this winter. Nola could well become the latest Phillies player to secure a long-term commitment as part of the organization’s hopeful contending core, but his proximity to arbitration should reduce his urgency to take a deal to some extent.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Extension Candidate: Carlos Martinez

By | at

We know that the Cardinals are interested in exploring an extension with righty Carlos Martinez, though there’s no news of progress (or even earnest engagement) to this point. But new contracts are often sorted out during the spring, and the sides will need to discuss money one way or another since Martinez is entering his first season of arbitration eligibility.

Only 100 days past his 25th birthday, Martinez is young enough to believe he has plenty of good years ahead of him. He’s also among the game’s hardest-throwing starters. Though his average fastball velocity took a slight step back in 2015, it bounced back to a robust 96.5 mph in his most recent campaign. And the results have followed, as Martinez posted a combined 3.02 ERA over the last two seasons. That combination of age, the liveliness of his arm, and results make the Octagon client an appealing candidate for an investment for a St. Louis club that has faced a few questions in its still-talented rotation of late.

"Sep

Of course, the arbitration process provides an important starting point for weighing Martinez’s value. MLBTR and contributor Matt Swartz project him to earn $5.3MM in his first season of eligibility, a rather lofty sum for a first-year-eligible starting pitcher. (Dallas Keuchel set a new record last year with a $7.25MM deal, blowing away the long-standing $4.35MM record held by Dontrelle Willis and David Price.) If Martinez continues his current trajectory, he could follow Price in landing some truly significant arb salaries, though unlike the talented lefty, he won’t be able to build off of a Super Two campaign.

For Martinez to max out his earning capacity, though, he’ll need to extend his outings. He topped 180 innings for the first time in 2016, ending up with 195 1/3 frames on the ledger. Durability will be a key consideration for the Cards. Though there haven’t been any significant health concerns to date, Martinez’s combination of youth and propensity for relying on hard pitches gave him a somewhat elevated Tommy John risk profile in the study completed earlier this year by MLBTR contributor Bradley Woodrum (see here for an explanation; here for individual player results).

All told, there’s plenty of reason for confidence in Martinez’s outlook. Increased confidence and usage rates in his changeup — the only one of his four pitches that didn’t score as a top-level offering in 2016 — has allowed him to make strides against lefties, who battered him in 2014. Though he still surrendered a .256/.342/.387 batting line to opposing southpaws in 2016, that’s enough to make him a high-quality starter when combined with his dominating work against right-handed batters (who hit just .204/.270/.269).

Though he lost over one strikeout per nine as against his prior season’s results in 2016, and his swinging-strike rate dwindled a bit to 9.4%, Martinez posted a career-best 56.4% groundball rate. He also worked in the zone more than he had in the preceding two years, though his walk rate has remained relatively consistent. Martinez continues to be tough to take deep — he has allowed 0.6 dingers per nine for his career — and has given up hard contact on less than three of ten balls put in play against him in every one of his seasons in the majors.

So, assuming that St. Louis is prepared to do what’s reasonably necessary to make a deal, what kind of contract might we be looking at? It has been quite some time since we saw a reasonably comparable pitcher in the 3+ service class strike a long-term deal. Johnny Cueto got $27MM over four guaranteed seasons while giving up one option year, but that was way back in 2011, and his platform wasn’t as impressive. Before that, Ervin Santana earned $30MM in a similarly situated deal.

Those numbers seem well shy of what Martinez can command in a market where top-end starters have earned increasingly significant sums. Indeed, the Cards recently reached an arb-only deal with fellow righty Lance Lynn, who took a similarly compelling case into his first year of arbitration eligibility ($5.5MM projection), that priced his arb years at $22MM. For Martinez to give up any free-agent seasons, particularly by way of option, St. Louis will need to up the ante.

Expanding the search a bit, there are some other contracts worth considering. Corey Kluber landed $38.5MM over five years, with two options attached, on the cusp of his age-29 season. He was coming off of a Cy Young campaign, and would have qualified for Super Two status after the season in which he signed his deal (which came in early April of 2015). The contract valued Kluber’s bought-out free-agent years at $13MM and between $13MM and $17MM (depending upon escalators). Before that, Chris Sale took down a $32.5MM guarantee on an identical structure. Sale was just 23 years old at the time, and already pitching like an ace; his contract could well represent the tail end of an old model rather than a truly relevant mark going forward. Looking at 4+ service deals, and excepting ace-level performers (Justin Verlander and Felix Hernandez), Matt Harrison owns the high bar in recent contracts at five years and $55MM (plus an option). He was 27 years of age at the time that deal was struck.

In Martinez’s case, a five-year arrangement (including the 2017 season) would put him under contract for two would-be free-agent years and take him through at least his age-29 campaign, with options perhaps extending the Cards’ control into his early thirties. Taking Lynn’s $22MM and adding another $25MM or so to cover two free agent years — with Martinez’s age roughly balancing off Kluber’s advantage in quality in pricing those seasons — would put the total guaranteed value to roughly the midpoint between Kluber’s and Harrison’s contract. Arguing for a guarantee that reaches or exceeds Kluber’s could represent a sticking point in and of itself. On the other hand, the Cards have perhaps been more willing to spend big in extensions than have the budget-minded Indians, while Kluber’s meteoric rise at a relatively advanced age made him a unique case. Plus, Martinez can reasonably argue that his age-28 and 29 seasons can be expected to earn him much greater sums than even the numbers just noted; relatively youthful free-agent starters such as Jordan Zimmermann have commanded over $20MM annually.

That’s all just a spitball range, of course, and it’s certainly plausible to imagine any number of creative scenarios, including escalators, opt-outs, and options that could play a significant role in determining the final value. Regardless, it’s somewhat uncharted territory; the sides figure to have plenty to talk about over the coming months.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Extension Candidate: Jake Arrieta

By | at

The Cubs reportedly plan to discuss a new, long-term contract with star righty Jake Arrieta early in 2017. Prior talks failed to produce much apparent traction, but there’s new urgency if a deal is to be found. Arrieta, after all, will reach the open market after the season.

If nothing else, Chicago will need to sort out Arrieta’s final arbitration salary with agent Scott Boras. After a huge raise following his monster 2015 season, Arrieta took down $10.7MM last year. And though he wasn’t as good in 2016, there’s another hefty boost coming; MLBTR projects to earn a $16.8MM payday.

Jake Arrieta

So, aside from nailing down that number, just what might the sides talk about when they sit down in the coming weeks? Expectations, perhaps, represent the most important ingredients in this particular extension scenario, because valuing Arrieta’s post-2017 seasons without the knowledge of his 2017 output is particularly difficult.

Arrieta’s story is well known, and need not be repeated in full here. Suffice to say, his career renaissance in Chicago has been spectacular and complete. Over 2014-15, the righty provided 358 2/3 innings of 2.08 ERA pitching over 58 starts. He was dominant, especially, in the latter of those two seasons, when he posted 9.3 K/9 against just 1.9 BB/9 and allowed a league-low 5.9 hits per nine while spinning four complete games. After filling up 229 innings and taking home the National League Cy Young award, a course was set for a huge free-agent contract.

The early portion of 2016 largely represented a continuation; though his walk rate was up, the results remained dominant. By early June, though, the earned runs began to catch up as Arrieta’s typically excellent suppression of walks and home runs began faltering. Ultimately, he fell just shy of 200 innings and ended the year with a 3.10 ERA to go with 8.7 K/9 and 3.5 BB/9. Beyond the jump in walk rate, Arrieta also paced the league with 16 wild pitches.

To be sure, all the signs weren’t concerning. Arrieta continued to induce grounders on about half of the balls put in play against him, didn’t show any worrying changes in velocity, mostly maintained his swinging-strike rate (10.5%, down from a personal best 11.1%), and continued to suppress BABIP in a consistent manner suggestive of skill, not merely good fortune. But hitters chased out of the zone slightly less frequently and made somewhat more hard contact in 2016, while also managing a few more home runs (16).

In the aggregate, Arrieta is still exceedingly difficult to square up and seems to be about as good a bet as anyone to deliver 200 or more innings from a health perspective. Even the less-dominant version is still a high-quality pitcher. Heck, he even managed to add real value with the bat last year (.262/.304/.415). And Arrieta showed up in the postseason — the World Series, especially, where he allowed just three earned runs on five hits over 11 1/3 innings in two starts.

Still, it’s hard to say that Arrieta’s current standing matches his status at this time last year. If Arrieta isn’t a true ace — which, at least, is in doubt — then the conversation is somewhat different. Valuing his future is more about projections and comps than it is a question of just how much a team can really spend on a single pitcher. And reaching agreement on an extension poses questions such as: Will the team will ascribe added value to the possibility of a return to full dominance? Will the player forego perhaps greater potential earnings to sell away the risk of another less-than-excellent (or worse) season?

If Arrieta isn’t a true ace, then pedestrian considerations such as age — he turns 31 in March of 2017, and will turn 32 before the start of the 2018 season — rise in importance. That means Arrieta will hit the market at nearly the same age (just a few months younger) as Zack Greinke did last winter. Greinke’s massive contract (six years, $206.5MM) isn’t exactly a bad sign for Arrieta, but it’s tough to see Chicago valuing the latter’s free-agent years as highly as the D-Backs did the former’s (over $34MM). That contract always seemed a reach, and came on the heels of Greinke’s historic 2015 season.

Perhaps a more reasonable current comp is pitching alongside Arrieta in the Cubs’ rotation. Jon Lester, who was a younger free agent than will be Arrieta, got $155MM over six years. But even that could be rich. Johnny Cueto, one of the game’s most accomplished hurlers, landed shy of Lester (six years, $130MM, albeit with an opt-out) heading into his age-30 season. His late-2015 scuffles — which weren’t, perhaps, all that dissimilar from Arrieta’s — seemed to put a real dent in his value.

The most direct comparables, of course, are drawn to players who sign extensions just before hitting the market. Stephen Strasburg got seven years and $175MM from the Nationals in the middle of the 2016 season. Before him, Homer Bailey took home $105MM over six seasons (including his arb year) from the Reds. Neither pitcher is a clean comp — Strasburg, due to age; Bailey, due to performance — but those deals are still illustrative. Strasburg’s signing, in particular, shows that an extension can’t be ruled out, even for a market-leading starter repped by Boras. Both contracts show the need for compromise as well as the inherent risk in a late-arb pitching extension. Injuries slowed both Strasburg and Bailey not long after their new deals were inked. In both of those cases, they wisely (in hindsight) sold away the chance at perhaps even greater earnings to lock in contracts with their existing organizations.

It is ultimately difficult to know whether there’s a realistic chance of the Cubs and Arrieta reaching a deal. The relative lack of upper-level, high-quality starting pitching prospects in the Chicago system suggests an ongoing need. And the Lester signing shows that the team will sign a long-term deal with a starter in the right circumstances. But it seems likely there’ll be some cap to the team’s willingness to add guaranteed years and boost the AAV in Arrieta’s case. Just where those lines will be drawn by both the team and its once (and future?) staff ace remain to be seen. Is Strasburg’s $25MM AAV a fair market point, perhaps over a shorter term? Does Cueto’s combination of a lower AAV and opt-out provide a guide? Or will Arrieta hold out for a chance to chase Greinke?

Just for kicks … let’s see how likely a deal is, in the estimation of MLBTR’s readers:

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Extension Candidate: J.D. Martinez

By | at

The Tigers discussed a long-term contract with J.D. Martinez last offseason before settling on a shorter multi-year pact.  Martinez’s two-year, $18.5MM deal allowed the two sides to avoid arbitration, settling the outfielder’s salaries for both his second and third years of arbitration eligibility.  With Martinez now just over a year removed from free agency in the 2017-18 offseason, Tigers GM Al Avila will surely re-engage Martinez’s agents at RMG Baseball about an extension that will keep the slugger in the Motor City for years to come.

Martinez missed just under seven weeks due to a fracture in his right elbow, a somewhat fluky injury that interrupted an otherwise outstanding season.  He entered Wednesday’s action hitting .317/.384/.556 (all of which would be career highs) with 21 homers over 469 plate appearances, plus his 151 wRC+ ranks among the top ten hitters in the sport in that metric of total batting productivity.  He is also on pace for a career-best walk rate, as well as his lowest strikeout rate in four years.  Since joining the Tigers as an unheralded minor league signing during Spring Training 2014, Martinez has done nothing but rake, delivering a .907 OPS over 1606 PA in a Detroit uniform.

J.D. MartinezMartinez expressed an interest in being “a Tiger for life” last winter, though his asking price has surely gone up in the wake of his third straight huge season.  He has extra leverage in the form of financial security (over $21.5MM in career earnings by the end of next season) and the fact that he’d be in line for a monster contract in the 2017-18 free agent market.  If he duplicates his 2014-16 numbers, JDM will have the most earning potential of any hitter in that year’s free agent class.  Carlos Gonzalez has a longer track record but he is two years older than Martinez and hasn’t been as impressive of late; the Royals trio of Lorenzo Cain, Eric Hosmer and Mike Moustakas can’t be considered locks for huge money based on their problems in 2016; Justin Upton has also struggled this season and may not choose to opt out of his own contract with the Tigers next winter.

Upton’s situation looms as a major factor in the talks between Martinez and the Tigers.  Upton has only recently started to hit after a dreadful first half, so he’d need a big rebound year in 2017 to consider opting out.  If he chooses to remain in his contract, the Tigers will owe Upton $88.5MM through the 2021 season.  That is a sizeable chunk of payroll that, based on this year’s numbers, Detroit would surely prefer to allocate towards keeping Martinez in the fold.

Read more

Extension Candidate: Jose Bautista

By | at

In the wake of Jose Bautista’s breakout 2010 season, the Blue Jays signed the right fielder to a five-year, $65MM extension that covered his final year of arbitration eligibility and first four free agent seasons.  (It also included a $14MM club option on the 2016 campaign.)  This extension generated quite a bit of controversy at the time.  An MLBTR poll revealed that over 72 percent of readers polled felt the deal was unwarranted, and several pundits felt the Jays should’ve sold high on Bautista rather than gamble that his out-of-nowhere slugging prowess wouldn’t just as suddenly disappear.

Instead, that extension turned out to be one of Alex Anthopoulos’ canniest moves as Toronto’s general manager.  Bautista has averaged a .933 OPS over the last five seasons, and he leads all players with 173 home runs over that same span.  Needless to say, that $65MM deal has turned into one of the largest bargains in the sport, and the club’s decision to pick up Bautista’s $14MM option for the coming season was the easiest of no-brainers.Jose Bautista

With this track record under his belt (and in the wake of a certain instantly-iconic postseason blast), Bautista has a lot of negotiating power on his side if the Jays want to negotiate an extension this offseason.  That being said, there are a large number of factors to consider in this particularly interesting extension case, as if Bautista and the Jays were to reach a new deal, it would very likely set a new contractual precedent.

Bautista is still hitting at an elite level as he enters his age-35 season, and thus he doesn’t really have any comparables among past players with at least 6 years of service time who signed multi-year extensions.  Looking at veteran sluggers who have signed big free agent deals in recent years, Bautista has out-performed the likes of Victor Martinez, Nelson Cruz or Carlos Beltran and also lacks major baggage like Cruz’s PED suspension history or the torn ACL that cost Martinez his entire 2012 season.  Since V-Mart was limited to DH-only duty and still received a $17MM average annual value, Bautista and agent Jay Alou can certainly make the case that Bautista’s superior hitting numbers and added defensive value deserves a $20MM+ AAV.

It may sound like a big salary for a player in his mid-30’s, yet power is a valuable commodity.  Tim Dierkes predicts that five of this winter’s free agents (Jason Heyward, Chris Davis, Justin Upton, Yoenis Cespedes, Alex Gordon) will all find deals with an AAV north of $20MM per season; add Bautista to that group, and he and Davis topped them all by each posting a 147 wRC+ in 2015.  There’s enough interest in Ben Zobrist that he could also conceivably find a four-year deal entering his age-35 season, and while Zobrist far outpaces Bautista in defensive versatility, Bautista is also the far superior hitter.  To sum up, if Bautista hit the open market this winter, he’d very likely find a four-year deal in the $80MM-$100MM range.

This is the price tag the Blue Jays will need to approach in order to extend their star.  If they’re open to meeting this price, it might be a smart move to tear up Bautista’s 2016 contract and essentially start the extension next season by giving him a raise to at least $20MM and then three more $20MM+ seasons through 2019 (with possibly a vesting option for 2020).  Starting a four-year extension in 2017 would mean the Jays are on the hook for a big salary in 2020 when Bautista would be entering his age-40 season.  If I’m the Jays, I’d much rather pay Bautista a $20MM+ salary next year than I would for 2020 since the team is obviously much more confident that Bautista will still be a top run producer in the short term.

We’ve already looked at the pros of a Bautista deal, so now let’s focus on the cons.  Despite Bautista’s consistency, guaranteeing big money to any slugger in his mid-30’s carries a lot of risk.  Of the three veteran free agents I cited earlier, Martinez and Beltran both struggled through injury-plagued down years in the first seasons of their latest contracts.  Bautista’s 2012 and 2013 seasons were both shortened by injuries — a bad wrist that required surgery after the 2012 campaign and a bruised hip that led the Jays to shut Bautista down in late 2013.

He also played through a shoulder injury for much of 2015 that didn’t much affect his hitting, though it weakened his usually-strong throwing arm and may have contributed to his subpar defensive metrics (-3 Defensive Runs Saved, -12.5 UZR/150).  Bautista’s defensive numbers in right field have fluctuated over the years, though it also wouldn’t be a surprise if his 2015 stats are the first sign of a permanent downswing.

So if the Blue Jays were to extend Bautista, it would be under the assumption that he might only be a couple of seasons away from permanent first base/DH duty.  It’s this scenario that poses the biggest question mark to a Bautista extension, as the Jays already have Edwin Encarnacion as a full-time 1B/DH.  Encarnacion is also eligible for free agency after the 2016 season, is 26 months younger than Bautista and he’s posted slightly better numbers in some notable stat categories since the start of the 2012 season.

Bautista: 2266 PA, 130 HRs, 355 runs, .261/.377/.522, .387 wOBA, 146 wRC+, 18 fWAR

Encarnacion: 2431 PA, 151 HRs, 352 runs, .274/.371/.549, .391 wOBA, 149 wRC+, 16.3 fWAR

In Russell Martin and Troy Tulowitzki, Toronto already has two major salaries on the books for the next four and five years, respectively.  Another big long-term commitment will be added if the club extends Josh Donaldson.  It’s hard to see the Blue Jays committing over $40MM per season in additional salary through the rest of the 2010’s to two more players, especially two players in their mid-30’s who would be locked into the first base and DH spots.

Unless Bautista or Encarnacion could somehow be talked into another team-friendly deal, the Jays may well have to choose which of the two franchise cornerstones they want to keep in the fold.  Encarnacion is younger but Bautista is the better athlete of the two.  In terms of pure dollars, Bautista’s age makes him slightly cheaper to extend since Encarnacion would likely push for another guaranteed season or two.  Then again, if the Jays are willing to spend big money to retain a slugger, going with the younger option makes more sense if they feel all else is equal or if they feel Encarnacion will age better over the next few years.

Optics will also play a big role in a Bautista extension.  The Blue Jays organization already took a PR hit with its revived fanbase this offseason given the awkward nature of Anthopoulos’ departure.  It wouldn’t help public perception of new president/CEO Mark Shapiro or the Rogers Commnications ownership group if a new deal couldn’t be worked out with the face of the franchise.  Bautista hasn’t been shy about expressing his opinions on the club’s business over the years, and one suspects he would speak up if he doesn’t feel the Jays are making a concerted effort to extend him.

From Bautista’s perspective, an extension would allow him to remain in a familiar spot, keep him playing for a contender if the Jays keep up their 2015 form and, in all likelihood, spend the rest of his career in Toronto.  Given all of the factors that will go into Bautista’s extension case, it will fascinating to see if the two sides can reach a new deal or if Bautista will be tossing a bat while wearing another team’s uniform in 2017.

Photo courtesy of Kim Klement/USA Today Sports Images

Extension Candidate: Shelby Miller

By | at

Signing young players to extensions has been the backbone of John Hart’s long career as a baseball executive.  Since taking over the Braves last year, Hart has primarily focused on acquiring new young talent for the rebuilding club rather than locking up existing players. Now that some new pieces are in place, though, Hart and GM John Coppolella will surely look into extending some players that project to be part of the next Braves winning team.

Shelby Miller may well be at the front of that list, as the right-hander is coming off a very solid (albeit unusual) 2015 season.  Miller posted a 3.02 ERA, 7.5 K/9 and 2.34 K/BB rate in his first year in Atlanta, tossing a career-high 205 1/3 innings and reaching his first All-Star team.  Unfortunately for Miller, these numbers didn’t translate into many wins since he received a near-record low amount of run support (2.64 runs per game) from the anemic Braves offense.  This lack of support culminated in an astounding 24-start winless stretch that saw Miller go 0-16 despite a solid 3.83 ERA over that stretch.

While “baseball card stats” are a big part of the arbitration process, Miller’s rough 6-17 record shouldn’t hurt him too much as he enters his first year of eligibility this offseason.  MLB Trade Rumors projects Miller will earn a healthy $4.9MM salary in 2016, and the Braves could look to get some cost certainty over Miller’s two arb years and possibly even a free agent year or two.

"<strongA note about that $4.9MM figure: it would actually set a new record for a starting pitcher in his first year of arbitration eligibility, topping Dontrelle Willis’ $4.35MM figure from 2006.  Last year, Matt Swartz wrote about how that $4.35MM record has somewhat unexpectedly stood the test of time, though MLBTR’s projections have three pitchers beating the mark this winter — Matt Harvey at $4.7MM, Miller at $4.9MM and Dallas Keuchel at $6.4MM.

As we see from the MLBTR Extension Tracker, four starters with 3+ years of service time have signed extensions since the end of the 2012 season.  (I feel comfortable cutting it off there since Kyle Kendrick and Clayton Kershaw aren’t ideal comparables as, respectively, a Super Two player and a reigning Cy Young Award winner.)  Let’s see how Miller compares to these four pitchers using extension size, their MLBTR arbitration projection, notable stats and ERA predictors…

Mat Latos:  Two years/$11.5MM before age-25 season, $4.6MM arbitration projection.  639 IP, 3.41 ERA, 8.42 K/9, 2.8 BB/9, 43.7% ground ball rate, 11.5 fWAR (3.47 FIP, 3.60 xFIP, 3.59 SIERA)

Wade Miley: Three years/$19.25MM (with $12MM option for 2018) before age-28 season, $4.3MM projection.  638 2/3 IP, 3.79 ERA, 7.03 K/9, 2.76 BB/9, 48.6% ground ball rate, 7.4 fWAR (3.80 FIP, 3.72 xFIP, 3.90 SIERA)

Lance Lynn: Three years/$22MM before age-28 season, $5.4MM projection but it was an unusual situation, as noted earlier in Matt Swartz’s piece.  616 IP, 3.46 ERA, 8.75 K/9, 3.26 BB/9, 44.4% ground ball rate, 10.5 fWAR (3.34 FIP, 3.64 xFIP, 3.65 SIERA)

Miller: Heading into age-25 season, $4.9MM projection.  575 1/3 IP, 3.22 ERA, 7.56 K/9, 3.24 BB/9, 42.3% ground ball rate, 6.9 fWAR (3.82 FIP, 4.07 xFIP, 4.16 SIERA)

Jhoulys Chacin: Two years/$6.5MM before age-25 season, $1.6MM projection.  411 1/3 IP, 3.68 ERA, 7.57 K/9, 4.18 BB/9, 49.7% ground ball rate, 5.0 fWAR (4.17 FIP, 4.06 xFIP, 4.17 SIERA)

Miller just turned 25 last week, putting him in the Latos/Chacin age bracket.  Miller is clearly a step behind Latos and Lynn WAR-wise (they have an edge in strikeouts and innings) and you can make a case that Miley was also a better pitcher than Miller at this stage of both pitchers’ careers.

Since Miller is three years younger than Lynn and Miley were at the time of their extensions, however, his ultimate price tag is going to be bigger.  If he keeps up his current form through his arbitration years, hitting the open market as a durable and productive 28-year-old arm could mean something in the range of five (or even six) years in the $85MM range.

With this in mind, would Miller even be interested in an extension?  He already banked one nice payday when he signed for a $2.875MM bonus with the Cardinals after being drafted in 2009, and he’ll earn something in that $4.9MM range next year.  Miller is on pace to get healthy raises in his final two arbitration years anyway, so he could very well decide to bet on himself with an eye towards free agency and avoid a long-term commitment.  If the CAA client betters his current form and makes the leap from very good pitcher to full-blown ace, Miller would be costing himself some money by locking himself into an extension now.

The Braves would have to make it worth Miller’s while, therefore, for him to sign away one or two of his free agent years.  A straight club option for 2019 likely wouldn’t be enough unless it had an easily-reachable vesting option.  Corey Kluber’s extension with the Indians could be a model in this regard.  The two club option years that cover what would’ve been Kluber’s first two free agent seasons can rise in value by up to $4MM based on performance escalators, turning a potential extra $27.5MM for Kluber into as much as $35.5MM over those two seasons.

Lynn’s extension paid him $7MM in 2015 and he’s owed $7.5MM in each of the next two years, while Miley’s deal escalated from $4MM last season to $6MM in 2016 and $8.75MM in 2017.  If we mark Miller for $4.9MM this season, it would make sense for Atlanta to boost his salary in 2016-17 once Nick Swisher and Michael Bourn are (in all likelihood) fully off the books.  So at something like $4.9MM in 2016, $7.4MM in 2017 and $9.5MM in 2018, that gets Miler to $21.8MM over three years.  If there’s a 2019 club option, I would guess it would have to be in the $13MM range and, like Kluber’s contract, subject to rise via escalator bonuses.

Unlike Keuchel and Harvey (his fellow would-be arbitration record-breakers), Miller hasn’t quite shown that he’s a frontline ace.  Don’t forget, however, that Miller is just a few years removed from being a consensus top-10 prospect, so it’s very possible that his best is yet to come.  Even at Miller’s current level of production, a four-year deal that could max out in the $38-$39MM ballpark isn’t a bad price to pay for a 25-year-old who’s averaged 187 innings a year since 2013.  It could end up being yet another canny John Hart extension if and when the Braves begin to turn things around.

Image courtesy of Mark J. Rebilas/USA Today Sports Images

MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com

hide arrowsFOX Sports Engage Network scroll to top