Headlines

Go To Pro Hockey Rumors
Go To Hoops Rumors

MLBTR Originals

Johnny Cueto Can Still Help A Rotation

By | at

If you were to sit down and make a list of the best pitchers in baseball from 2010-16, you’d be hard-pressed not to include Johnny Cueto in some capacity. The two-time All-Star finished among the top six in National League Cy Young voting three times in that stretch, including a runner-up finish to Clayton Kershaw in 2014. He received at least one down-ballot MVP vote in all three of those seasons as well. From 2010-16, Cueto turned in a 2.86 ERA, a 20.6% strikeout rate (at a time when that number was much more impressive than it is in 2022) and a terrific 6.2% walk rate. Cueto was viewed as a No. 1 or No. 2 starter, and rightly so. He ranked fourth out of 228 qualified starting pitchers in ERA during that time, and his 1294 2/3 innings were the 16th-most in baseball.

Given that context, it’s no surprise that Cueto hit the open market as one of the most in-demand free agents in the game following the 2015 season. He’d struggled a bit following his trade from Cincinnati to Kansas City, but Cueto’s final impression on the Royals was a two-hit, one-run complete game in Game 2 of the World Series, which the Royals won 7-1. Not a bad way to set out into free agency for the first time.

Cueto’s six-year, $132MM contract with the Giants made him the third-highest-paid pitcher of the 2015-16 offseason, trailing only David Price and Zack Greinke’s pair of $200MM+ deals (and beating MLBTR’s expectations by a year in the process). For the first year of his contract, the signing looked quite strong. Cueto hurled 219 2/3 innings of 2.79 ERA ball, made the All-Star team, and enjoyed both Cy Young and MVP votes in his first year with San Francisco. The Giants’ “even-year” dynasty was cut short at three years (2010, 2012, 2014) — but not for any fault of Cueto’s. He made one appearance in the playoffs that winter and took a brutal complete-game loss that saw him allow just one run on three hits and no walks with 10 strikeouts against the eventual-champion Cubs.

Cueto missed a handful of starts in 2017 due to an ongoing blister issue and wasn’t at his best when healthy. His 4.52 ERA that year was his worst since his rookie campaign back in 2008, and it was a particularly poorly-timed slump, as Cueto could’ve opted out of the final four years of his contract and tested the market a second time, had he turned in another healthy season of Cy-caliber results. Ankle and elbow injuries wound up hobbling Cueto in 2018, and by August of that season, he was headed for Tommy John surgery. Cueto returned late in the 2019 season and tossed 16 pedestrian innings, and his work in the shortened 2020 campaign was the worst of his career (5.40 ERA, career-high walk rate).

Expectations for Cueto were light heading into the 2021 season, then, which made his rebound effort with the Giants something of a pleasant surprise. Cueto missed nearly a month with a lat strain and was on the IL for much of September with an elbow strain. The latter of those two injuries is particularly concerning, since we didn’t see much from Cueto after he hit the IL. He made a lone rehab appearance in the minors (1 2/3 innings) and pitched 2 1/3 innings of relief in the Majors on Sept. 30.

It’s not a great note on which to end a season, but Cueto’s 92 mph velocity in that final outing was right in line with what he’d done throughout the season. And, when he was healthy, Cueto was the best version of himself fans and opponents had seen in years. No, this wasn’t Cy Young runner-up Cueto, but it was a very serviceable version of the quirky right-hander, who slotted nicely into the fourth spot in a deep San Francisco rotation.

At 35 years old, Cueto wasn’t the fireballer he was earlier in his career, but his 91.9 mph average fastball velocity was the highest mark he’d posted since that outstanding 2016 campaign. His 6.1% walk rate was also his best mark since that ’16 effort, and Cueto’s 9.7% swinging-strike rate and 31.4% opponents’ chase rate were his best marks since 2017. Cueto’s average exit velocity, hard-hit rate and barrel rate were all better than the league average, and his walk rate was in the 81st percentile of MLB pitchers.

Cueto was much more effective through his first dozen starts of the season (3.63 ERA) than over his final nine appearances (4.72), but perhaps some late fatigue was to be expected. His first “full” season back from Tommy John surgery, after all, was the pandemic-shortened 2020 campaign. The 2021 season was the first time since 2017 that Cueto had started the season healthy in April and was still trying to pitch into August and September.

The end result of Cueto’s 2021 campaign was a respectable 4.08 ERA and peripherals that largely backed him up (4.05 FIP, 4.27 xFIP, 4.43 SIERA). It’s not necessarily a dominant profile, and projection systems are down on him by virtue of factoring in his ugly 2019-20 results in the wake of Tommy John surgery. ZiPS has him at 92 innings of 4.43 ERA ball. Steamer is more bullish in workload (144 innings) but much more bearish in results (5.05 ERA). You’re forgiven if you are not overly optimistic for Cueto’s outlook in 2022 and beyond. The past few years, taken as a whole, have not been great.

A team that’s more focused on Cueto’s 2021 characteristics — the increase in velocity over 2018-20, the upticks in swinging strikes and chases — might see things differently, however. Cueto shouldn’t be penciled in for a return to his halcyon days of 200-plus innings and 33 starts, but he did make all 12 of his starts in 2020 and was more healthy in 2021 than he’s been since undergoing Tommy John surgery. He’s not the complete-game threat and workhorse he once was, but Cueto averaged 5 1/3 innings per start in ’21 and had been averaging about 5 2/3 per outing up until the All-Star break. It’s not out of the question that he could bounce back a bit further and make 24 to 25 starts with average or better results. At his per-start output, that clocks in somewhere in the range of 130 to 140 innings.

Maybe 135 innings of low-4.00s ERA doesn’t jump up and excite fans, but for the right team, that’s plenty valuable. The prevailing, but often incorrect, mentality is that every team possesses some guys in Triple-A who could come up and fill that role. However, there were only 89 pitchers in MLB last season who pitched at least 80 innings and posted an ERA under 4.25 — about three per team, on average. Bulk sources of respectable innings don’t necessarily grow on trees.

Clubs that already have solid options in the top four spots of their rotation could look to Cueto as a fairly affordable means of rounding things out. The Mets, Mariners, Blue Jays, Braves, Cubs and the incumbent Giants all fit that billing to varying extents. A team in need of filling out multiple rotation spots (e.g. Twins, Nationals, Rangers) might look for a bit more reliability, but perhaps even they’d see some merit in installing Cueto as a steadying presence while awaiting the arrival of some younger arms.

Regardless of Cueto’s eventual destination, it’s a bit surprising that he’s become something of a forgotten man this time around in free agency. There’s been nary a word about his market since the Giants opted for a $5MM buyout over a $22MM club option for the 2022 season. At a net $17MM, that option was never getting picked up, but Cueto had a decent rebound campaign in ’21 and probably ought to be getting a little more consideration as fans, pundits and teams alike consider the post-lockout market. He might not command more than a one-year deal, and that comes with serious bargain potential — relative to other names who’ve signed thus far, anyway.

Corey Kluber got $8MM from the Rays, and Cueto pitched as much in 2021 as Kluber has over the past three years combined. Jordan Lyles received a $7MM guarantee from the Orioles despite leading the Majors with 38 homers allowed last year and leading the Majors in earned runs allowed since 2020. Andrew Heaney got $8.5MM from the Dodgers. The Red Sox gave $7MM to Michael Wacha. This isn’t to disparage any of those deals individually. The teams paying those salaries are paying for varying levels of perceived upside, relative youth and/or bulk innings. However, it’s hard to see those figures and think Cueto won’t command something similar, if not better. And if he does clock in south of that range due to concerns over the late elbow issue, he has some significant bargain potential.

It seems silly to call a multi-time All-Star and former Cy Young candidate who just finished up a nine-figure deal “overlooked,” but Cueto hasn’t gotten much attention even in terms of pure free-agent speculation, despite the fact that he just turned in a pretty decent season overall.

The Value Of The MLBPA’s Super Two Proposal

By | at

In its most recent proposal, the Major League Baseball Players Association asked that 80% of players with at least two years of MLB service be considered arbitration eligible.  This is up from 22%, which has been the cutoff since 2013 when it was increased from 17%.  In the ongoing CBA negotiations, MLB has shown no interest in any change to the 22% figure.  The MLBPA started these CBA talks at a position of making all 2+ players eligible for arbitration, which had been the case from the inception of salary arbitration in 1973 up until 1985.

I thought it might be interesting to attempt to quantify the MLBPA’s request.  First, we should get an idea of how many additional players would be thrown into the arbitration system each year.  As I mentioned on Twitter last week, the 80% request, if in effect this offseason, would mean changing the current Super Two cutoff from 2.116 (two years and 116 days of MLB service) to 2.028.  Keep in mind that the Super Two cutoff is always a moving target.

By my count, under the 2.116 cutoff, 26 players currently qualify as Super Two this offseason, led by Vladimir Guerrero Jr., Austin Riley, and Bryan Reynolds.

Under a cutoff reduced to 2.028, 79 additional players would qualify as arbitration eligible.  I’ve listed them below along with projected arbitration salaries from Matt Swartz.  Note that our arbitration projection model sometimes spits out a number below the league minimum, in which case we set the projection equal to the minimum.  For this exercise, we’ll use a minimum salary of $700K.

To calculate how much additional money MLB teams would be paying under this system in 2022, I found the difference between the projected arbitration salary, and a hypothetical $700K minimum.  So, for example, Yordan Alvarez and Bo Bichette would gain the most, an additional $3.9MM each in ’22.  Note that it’s possible a few star players might make more than the league minimum even as a pre-arbitration player, like when Mookie Betts was renewed for $950K in 2017, but we aren’t modeling that in.

So, for these 79 additional Super Two players under the MLBPA’s proposal, we estimate that teams would pay an additional $72.4MM in 2022.

By itself, MLB might be willing to stomach something of that nature.  They’ve shown a willingness to put $15MM into a pre-arbitration bonus pool, and I assume they could be pushed up higher if the players drop their request to change Super Two eligibility.

But there’s the rub: MLB doesn’t want any additional players thrown into the arbitration system.  Doing so, particularly for star players, would increase that player’s total arbitration earnings by a significant amount, and also help push up the pay scale.

To illustrate this, we asked Matt Swartz to model out a couple of players who have been through the arbitration system already.

The first is Francisco Lindor.  Lindor went through arbitration three times, earning salaries of $10.55MM in 2019, $17.5MM in 2020, and $22.3MM in 2021, for a total of $50.35MM.  Under the MLBPA’s proposal, Lindor would have been arbitration eligible four times.  This means he would have earned a lot more than the $623,200 he did in 2018 – 10.7 times as much, in our estimation.  Here’s how our model saw a Lindor who went to arbitration four times, keeping his actual statistics the same:

  • 2018: $623,200 -> $6.7MM
  • 2019: $10.55MM -> $14.9MM
  • 2020: $17.5MM -> $20.7MM
  • 2021: $22.3MM -> $23.4MM
  • Total: $50,973,200 -> $65.7MM
  • Difference: $14,726,800

Our other example is Josh Bell.  He’s also set to go through arbitration three times, earning $4.8MM in 2020, $6.35MM in 2021, and a projected $10MM in 2022 for a total of $21.15MM.  Here’s how that might have played out had he gone through arbitration four times:

  • 2019: $587K -> $2.8MM
  • 2020: $4.8MM -> $8.1MM
  • 2021: $6.35MM -> $9.6MM
  • 2022: 10MM (projected) -> $13.2MM
  • Total: $21,737,000 -> $33.7MM
  • Difference: $11,963,000

The Pirates traded Bell in December 2020, knowing he was set to get a bump from $4.8MM to $6.35MM.  MLB might argue that the Pirates would have traded Bell a year earlier if he was slated to jump from $2.8MM to $8.1MM.  They might say that not only would expanding Super Two be bad for their pocketbooks, it’d be bad for “competitive balance.”  I imagine the MLBPA would argue that the Pirates could have afforded Bell in either scenario.

There’s also the chance that shifting the arbitration pay scale a year earlier for a good number of players would simply result in them getting non-tendered a year earlier and hitting the free agent market.  If you look at the list of 79 players above, you can be assured that many of them will not make it all the way through arbitration even if they earn the league minimum in 2022.

Looking at a player like Bell, if he was coming off a poor 2020 season and was set to earn $9.6MM instead of $6.35MM, he might have simply been non-tendered.  As we’ve seen with an example like Kyle Schwarber, this is not necessarily a bad scenario for the player, since Schwarber earned more in free agency than he was projected to get in arbitration, and he’s set to parlay a strong bounceback year into a good multiyear contract.

If you wanted to model out the MLBPA’s 80% request further, you’d have to retroactively apply it to all the players who would’ve been affected and see how much money moves toward the players in that scenario.  But it’d be impossible to guess who would’ve been non-tendered when, so it’s not an exact science.  At any rate, we may learn this week whether MLB truly has any willingness to move off the 22% Super Two cutoff, even if it’s not to 80%.

Who’s Blocking Alek Thomas?

By | at

In the second round of the 2018 MLB draft, the Diamondbacks selected Alek Thomas, an outfielder from Mount Carmel High School in Chicago. Just 18 years old at the time, Thomas played 56 rookie ball games that year, 28 each on two different teams, hitting .333/.395/.463, wRC+ of 133, with a walk rate of 8.9% and strikeout rate of just 13.7%.

In 2019, he got bumped up to A-ball, playing 91 games and hitting .312/.393/.479. His walk and strikeout rates were 10.7% and 17.9%, culminating in a 153 wRC+. He got promoted to High-A that year and struggled a bit, which isn’t terribly surprising given that he was more than three years younger than the average age for that level. But it was also a small sample of just 23 games.

The pandemic wiped out the 2020 season but didn’t slow Thomas down at all. In 2021, he started his season in Double-A and played 72 games there, hitting ten home runs and stealing eight bases. Along with a walk rate of 11.2% and strikeout rate of 19.8%, he hit .283/.374/.507 for a wRC+ of 134. He got promoted to Triple-A and took his game up another notch. Despite his walk and strikeout rates slipping to 9% and 20.5%, he hit eight home runs in just 34 games, adding five steals, finishing with a line of .369/.434/.658, wRC+ of 168. Thomas is now considered one of the top prospects in the game, with Baseball America ranking him #32, MLB Pipeline #40 and FanGraphs #23.

Thomas, 22 years old in April, has little left to prove in the minors, having now shown himself capable of playing well at the top parts of the D-Backs’ system. One thing standing in his way is the fact that he’s not on the team’s 40-man roster yet, since he’s still a year away from Rule 5 eligibility. Furthermore, as with all top prospects nearing MLB readiness at this time of year, there’s the possibility that they won’t get promoted until they are held back long enough for the club to gain an extra year of control over them. Though there’s also the possibility that the service time rules change, as they are currently being negotiated as part of the next CBA.

Thomas has played all three outfield positions throughout his minor league career, but more in center than the corners. FanGraphs, however, sees him as more of a left fielder in the long term. Even with that move to a less-demanding defensive position, they still view him as a future above-average regular.

At the big league level, the outfield picture for the Diamondbacks is quite murky at the moment. David Peralta is likely to continue as the team’s primarily left fielder, though this is the final year of his extension and he turns 35 in August. He also had a mediocre season at the plate last season, putting up a wRC+ of just 93, his lowest in years. Taking all that into consideration, he might not be a part of the long-term picture.

The attempts to turn Ketel Marte into a center fielder didn’t really work out and he seems poised to return to full-time second base work going forward. Daulton Varsho is a baseball oddity, capable of switching between outfield and catching duties. He was behind the plate for 41 games last year but also saw time on the grass in 54 contests. He hasn’t fully established himself as an MLB hitter just yet, but is just 25 years old and has an excellent minor league track record. Pavin Smith is in a similar position to Varsho, hitting just below league average in his MLB time thus far. But he just turned 26 and has carried himself well in the minors. Josh VanMeter is in the picture but mostly as a bench/utility option. Jordan Luplow came over from the Rays in a trade just before the lockout. He’s likely to be primarily used in a platoon capacity, given his excellent career numbers against lefties and the fact that Peralta, Varsho and Smith all hit from the left side. Thomas is also a lefty, but actually hit southpaws better than righties last year. (1.073 OPS versus lefties and .909 against righties.) Cooper Hummel was added to the 40-man roster in November but has yet to make his MLB debut. Jake McCarthy and Stuart Fairchild are also on the roster, but each has less than 25 games of MLB experience. There’s also another highly-touted outfield prospect in Corbin Carroll, though he’s only reached High-A so far.

In short, there are a lot of options written in pencil, but none in ink. The Diamondbacks had a nightmare season in 2021, going 52-110, tied with the Orioles for the worst record in the majors. They share a division with strong teams like the Dodgers and Giants. The Padres have a decent chance of being much better this year than last. The Rockies plan on spending some money and competing this year. Arizona will need a lot of things to go right if they’re going to bridge the gap with their competitors, including Thomas, and a few of these other names, cementing themselves as mainstays in the outfield.

An Under-The-Radar Free Agent Option For Teams Seeking Rotation Help

By | at

The 2021-22 free agent market was highlighted by a historically talented group of shortstops, an unusually deep collection of starting pitchers and a good deal of power bats at the outfield and infield corners. This winter’s collection of free agents is the strongest in recent memory and quite likely the strongest we’ll see for a good while. Look ahead to the 2022-23 class, and while there are certainly a few star names, it pales in comparison to this year’s group.

With any deep free agent class, there are bound to be some names who slip through the cracks or simply don’t draw much in the way of appreciation or attention. We try to minimize this each offseason when ranking our Top 50 free agents and putting forth contract predictions, highlighting a handful of “honorable mentions” who seem likely to secure decent free-agent deals even though we’ve left them sitting outside the top 50. Even still, there’s usually a name or two we wind up wishing we’d considered more closely.

Of the non-top-50, non-honorable-mention free agents in this year’s class, former Cardinals lefty Kwang Hyun Kim fits that bill for me. A combination of age, lack of velocity and lack of bulk innings made us feel comfortable leaving him off the Top 50, but taking a retrospective look at his numbers, I’m not so sure that should’ve been the case. I’ve been asked a few times in recent chats here on MLBTR whether Kim was contemplating a return to the Korea Baseball Organization in light of the MLB lockout. My understanding is that he fully intends to continue on in the Majors and sign with a big league club whenever the transaction freeze lifts.

A very surface-level glance at Kim reveals a solid set of numbers. He’s pitched in 145 2/3 Major League innings, notched a 2.97 earned run average and kept the ball on the ground at a 48.1% clip. Kim doesn’t boast elite command, but his 8.4% walk rate is a bit better than the league-average 8.7%. He’s well below average in terms of strikeout rate (17.2% versus the league-average 23.2%), but the bottom-line results are there.

Had he remained healthier and worked a full season of innings, Kim would likely have a bit more buzz. That didn’t happen, however. He missed a portion of Spring Training and the first three weeks of the season due to a back injury — an issue that sent him to the injured list for another 10-day spell in mid-June. Kim later spent another two and a half weeks on the injured list owing to some elbow inflammation. It proved minor, but the Cardinals picked up a pair of veterans at the deadline (J.A. Happ and Jon Lester) and welcomed back several other injured starters while Kim was on the mend. He did not make a minor league rehab start despite pitching just once over a month-long period, and the Cards moved him to the bullpen when activating him in late August.

The other red flags on Kim were an 89.4 mph fastball and a sub-par strikeout rate led to questionable fielding-independent pitching marks; metrics like FIP (4.34), xERA (4.48), xFIP (4.70) and SIERA (4.85) all pegged Kim as more of a mid-4.00s type of pitcher. The sub-3.00 ERA he’s posted was clearly aided by an elite Cardinals defense, but he also created some of his own luck by limiting hard contact, keeping the ball on the ground and inducing pop-ups at an above-average rate.

Kim rates comfortably above average in terms of average exit velocity, hard-hit percentage and barrel percentage. He also has a penchant for surprising hitters, as his 18% called-strike rate tied him with names like Walker Buehler, Charlie Morton and Steven Matz for the 30th-best mark among the 145 starting pitchers who’ve pitched at least 100 innings since 2020. It’s not an elite figure, but possessing the command and deception needed to freeze opponents does help Kim to offset a below-average swinging-strike rate, to an extent.

In terms of platoon splits, Kim — like most lefties — is more susceptible to right-handed opponents than lefties. That said, it hasn’t been a glaring deficiency. Lefties have posted a putrid .164/.263/.224 slash against him in 133 plate appearances, while righties are at a relatively tepid .248/.310/.397 output. Kim has only fanned a tiny 14.6% of right-handed opponents against a hefty 26.3% of the lefties he’s faced, but his walk rate, ground-ball rate and pop-up rate are all actually much better against right-handed opponents.

Some clubs may be intrigued by Kim as a reliever, given that he’s dominated opponents the first trip through a batting order, yielding a lowly .192/.260/.314 batting line the first time facing a hitter on a given day. That spikes to .290/.354/.425 the second time through a lineup, which is an obvious concern. Then again, Kim’s opponents have hit just .184/.253/.316 in 83 plate appearances when facing him for a third time, so it’s not as though he’s incapable of turning a lineup over with any success. Realistically, that third-time-through-the-order split would likely regress in a larger sample, but it’s also fair to wonder whether that second-time split might improve with more opportunities.

So, to this point, Kim has been primarily a five-inning starter — he’s completed six frames in just eight of his 28 starts — with below-average strikeout capabilities but solid command and a knack for inducing weak contact. He’s struggled a bit the second time through the order, due in no small part to a notable drop in strikeout rate in such settings, but there’s at least some reason to believe he could improve upon that when looking at his third-time splits.

It’s not necessarily an exciting package that teams should be falling over to sign, but the other reason I’ve come to expect we’ll have been light on Kim’s market is simply by looking at how the market has valued other arms this winter. Jordan Lyles can be relied upon for some bulk innings, but his results (5.60 ERA), batted-ball profile and other peripherals are all more questionable than those of Kim. He still signed for a $7MM guarantee. Michael Wacha matched that guarantee despite a third straight sub-par season. Steven Matz and Nick Martinez both beat expectations with four-year contracts — the latter being a particular surprise. The Cubs had the No. 7 waiver priority this offseason and pounced to claim Wade Miley at a year and $10MM. Miley provides more innings, but he’s two years older and, over the past few seasons, looks an awful lot like Kim on a per-inning basis.

Put more simply, it’s been a bull market for starting pitching help, and while Kim’s soft-tossing, weak-contact specialist profile isn’t necessarily a sexy one in the eyes of modern front offices, he’s managed to succeed with it to this point in his career. A team looking for a fairly steady fourth or fifth starter could do much worse than plugging in Kim for five to six innings every fifth day, and if I were reconsidering the remaining free agents on the market, I’d probably peg him for a two-year deal when the lockout lifts. Perhaps that simply won’t be in the cards — the middle class of free agents could be squeezed into some lackluster contract terms — but if he’s available on a one-year deal, it’d be a steal for the signing team.

The number of clubs still needing arms will work in the favor of Kim and other remaining free agents. The Mets still need a fifth starter, and the Mariners and Tigers are also on the hunt in that market. The Twins, Nationals and Rangers all have multiple rotation spots they’ll yet need to fill. The A’s might have a pair of starting jobs to fill, depending on their trade activity. The price tag on Kim shouldn’t be prohibitive one way or another, and the demand should get him a decent deal when all is said and done.

Admittedly, this a lengthier look than I’d normally take at a fourth starter type whose best-case scenario feels like a two-year deal. FanGraphs’ Ben Clemens predicted two years and $20MM back in November, and even after digging into Kim, I think I’m slightly lower than that figure. Still, for a pitcher who’s generated very little fanfare, Kim has a strong track record of results and, based on those first-trip-through-the-order splits, could at worst be deployed as a quality multi-inning reliever. He’ll likely prioritize a team with a clear rotation opening, which dampens the possibility of a Cardinals reunion, but there’s solid value to be had here.

Projected Arbitration Salaries For 2022

By | at

At some point, the MLB lockout will end and teams will be scrambling to address their arbitration eligible players.  We’ve updated this post, removing players no longer on 40-man rosters.  We’ve also moved traded players to the correct teams and added official service time as well as notes for pre-tender agreements.

Matt Swartz has created a model to project salaries for arbitration eligible players, which we’ve been publishing at MLB Trade Rumors for 11 years.

In the baseball industry, teams and agents determine arbitration salaries by identifying comparable players. To project the entire arbitration class in this way would take a massive amount of time and effort. So, Matt has developed an algorithm to project arbitration salaries that looks at the player’s playing time, position, role, and performance statistics while accounting for inflation. The performance of comparable players matters, but our system is not directly selecting comps for each individual player.

As a disclaimer, I should note that our projections are not to be used as a scorecard for the agent and team on an individual player level. A player doing better or worse than our projection isn’t indicative of anything. Our arbitration projections are created as a tool for our readers to get a general idea of a team’s payroll situation.

The Super Two cutoff is 2.116 in Major League service time.  The service time figures below are official.  We’ll make adjustments to any projection below the league minimum salary, once a new minimum is established.  Also, please note that contracts signed prior to the non-tender deadline aren’t generally considered to be normal arbitration comparables.

If you find MLBTR’s arbitration projections useful, please consider supporting us with a subscription.

Angels (3)

  • Max Stassi (5.049) – $2.7MM
  • Mike Mayers (4.020) – $2.2MM
  • Tyler Wade (3.088) – $700K

Astros (6)

  • Rafael Montero (5.138) – $3.1MM
  • Aledmys Diaz (5.100) – $4.0MM
  • Phil Maton (4.047) – $1.4MM
  • Ryne Stanek (4.038) – $2.1MM
  • Josh James (3.005) – $700K
  • Framber Valdez (2.163) – $3.2MM

Athletics (10)

  • Sean Manaea (5.157) – $10.2MM
  • Chris Bassitt (5.130) – $8.8MM
  • Chad Pinder (5.047) – $2.8MM.  Signed for $2.725MM prior to NT deadline
  • Matt Chapman (4.109) – $9.5MM
  • Matt Olson (4.103) – $12.0MM
  • Tony Kemp (4.098) – $2.2MM.  Signed for $2.25MM prior to NT deadline
  • Frankie Montas (4.015) – $5.2MM
  • Lou Trivino (3.163) – $2.9MM
  • Deolis Guerra (3.071) – $900K.  Signed for $815K prior to NT deadline
  • Ramon Laureano (3.014) – $2.8MM

Blue Jays (10)

  • Ross Stripling (5.115) – $4.4MM
  • Teoscar Hernandez (4.097) – $10.0MM
  • Adam Cimber (3.156) – $1.5MM
  • Trevor Richards (3.084) – $1.1MM
  • Ryan Borucki (3.066) – $800K
  • Danny Jansen (3.050) – $1.5MM
  • Vladimir Guerrero Jr. (2.157) – $7.9MM
  • Tim Mayza (2.156) – $1.2MM
  • Trent Thornton (2.150) – $900K
  • Cavan Biggio (2.129) – $1.7MM

Braves (10)

  • Adam Duvall (5.151) – $9.1MM
  • Dansby Swanson (5.047) – $10.1MM
  • Luke Jackson (5.019) – $3.8MM
  • Guillermo Heredia (4.112) – $1.6MM.  Signed for $1MM prior to NT deadline
  • A.J. Minter (3.154) – $2.1MM
  • Max Fried (3.148) – $7.1MM
  • Mike Soroka (3.146) – $2.8MM
  • Sean Newcomb (3.123) – $900K
  • Tyler Matzek (3.019) – $1.5MM
  • Austin Riley (2.138) – $4.3MM

Brewers (12)

  • Jace Peterson (5.142) – $1.3MM.  Signed for $1.825MM prior to NT deadline
  • Omar Narvaez (5.089) – $4.1MM
  • Hunter Renfroe (4.165) – $7.6MM
  • Brent Suter (4.161) – $2.3MM
  • Josh Hader (4.115) – $10.0MM
  • Brandon Woodruff (3.161) – $7.1MM
  • Willy Adames (3.105) – $4.0MM
  • Corbin Burnes (3.049) – $4.0MM
  • Eric Lauer (3.033) – $2.7MM
  • Jandel Gustave (3.027) – $800K.  Signed for $675K prior to NT deadline
  • Adrian Houser (3.010) – $2.3MM
  • Rowdy Tellez (3.004) – $1.9MM.  Signed for $1.94MM prior to NT deadline
  • Luis Urias (2.120) – $2.4MM

Cardinals (7)

  • Alex Reyes (4.056) – $3.3MM
  • Harrison Bader (4.030) – $3.7MM
  • Jack Flaherty (4.006) – $5.1MM
  • Jordan Hicks (4.000) – $1.0MM
  • Giovanny Gallegos (3.085) – $2.8MM
  • Dakota Hudson (3.066) – $1.7MM
  • Tyler O’Neill (3.059) – $3.5MM

Cubs (3)

  • Willson Contreras (5.108) – $8.7MM
  • Ian Happ (4.036) – $6.5MM
  • Harold Ramirez (2.124) – $1.6MM

Diamondbacks (7)

  • Luke Weaver (4.112) – $2.7MM
  • Noe Ramirez (4.083) – $1.8MM.  Signed for $1.25MM prior to NT deadline
  • Caleb Smith (4.078) – $2.1MM.  Signed for $2MM prior to NT deadline
  • Carson Kelly (3.161) – $3.0MM
  • Christian Walker (3.124) – $2.7MM
  • Jordan Luplow (3.112) – $1.5MM
  • J.B. Wendelken (3.028) – $900K.  Signed for $835K prior to NT deadline

Dodgers (4)

  • Trea Turner (5.135) – $19.8MM
  • Cody Bellinger (4.160) – $16.1MM.  Signed for $17MM prior to NT deadline
  • Julio Urias (4.117) – $8.8MM
  • Caleb Ferguson (3.093) – $700K

Giants (7)

  • Dominic Leone (5.168) – $1.5MM
  • Curt Casali (5.151) – $2.0MM
  • Darin Ruf (4.138) – $2.6MM
  • Jarlin Garcia (4.114) – $1.8MM.  Signed for $1.725MM prior to NT deadline
  • John Brebbia (4.078) – $1.0MM.  Signed for $837.5K prior to NT deadline
  • Austin Slater (3.147) – $2.0MM.  Signed for $1.85MM prior to NT deadline
  • Mike Yastrzemski (2.128) – $3.1MM

Guardians (7)

  • Austin Hedges (5.166) – $3.8MM
  • Amed Rosario (4.062) – $5.0MM
  • Franmil Reyes (3.115) – $4.4MM
  • Shane Bieber (3.097) – $4.8MM
  • Bradley Zimmer (3.077) – $1.5MM
  • Cal Quantrill (2.132) – $2.8MM
  • Josh Naylor (2.127) – $1.2MM

Mariners (10)

  • Adam Frazier (5.075) – $7.2MM
  • Mitch Haniger (5.048) – $8.5MM
  • Drew Steckenrider (4.094) – $2.1MM
  • Tom Murphy (4.092) – $1.7MM
  • J.P. Crawford (3.163) – $5.0MM
  • Diego Castillo (3.118) – $2.6MM
  • Paul Sewald (3.072) – $1.8MM
  • Casey Sadler (3.035) – $1.3MM.  Signed for $1.025MM prior to NT deadline
  • Dylan Moore (3.000) – $1.6MM
  • Luis Torrens (2.118) – $1.6MM

Marlins (10)

  • Jesus Aguilar (5.082) – $7.4MM
  • Richard Bleier (5.074) – $2.5MM
  • Joey Wendle (4.088) – $4.0MM
  • Garrett Cooper (4.053) – $3.0MM
  • Dylan Floro (4.053) – $2.4MM
  • Brian Anderson (4.031) – $4.5MM
  • Jacob Stallings (3.149) – $2.6MM
  • Elieser Hernandez (3.118) – $1.4MM
  • Pablo Lopez (3.093) – $2.5MM
  • Jon Berti (2.168) – $1.2MM

Mets (13)

  • Edwin Diaz (5.121) – $10.4MM
  • Seth Lugo (5.082) – $3.7MM
  • Miguel Castro (5.079) – $2.6MM
  • Brandon Nimmo (5.042) – $6.0MM
  • Trevor Williams (5.027) – $3.8MM
  • Dominic Smith (3.146) – $4.0MM
  • J.D. Davis (3.137) – $2.7MM
  • Tomas Nido (3.089) – $900K
  • Jeff McNeil (3.069) – $2.8MM
  • Joey Lucchesi (3.067) – $1.6MM
  • Drew Smith (3.034) – $900K
  • Pete Alonso (3.000) – $7.3MM
  • Luis Guillorme (2.167) – $700K

Nationals (8)

  • Josh Bell (5.053) – $10.0MM
  • Joe Ross (5.018) – $3.0MM
  • Juan Soto (3.134) – $16.2MM
  • Erick Fedde (3.099) – $1.9MM
  • Victor Robles (3.033) – $1.7MM
  • Austin Voth (2.127) – $1.0MM
  • Tanner Rainey (2.127) – $800K
  • Andrew Stevenson (2.127) – $900K.  Signed for $850K prior to NT deadline

Orioles (6)

  • Trey Mancini (5.015) – $7.9MM
  • Anthony Santander (3.162) – $3.7MM.  Signed for $3.15MM prior to NT deadline
  • Jorge Lopez (3.102) – $1.5MM.  Signed for $1.5MM prior to NT deadline
  • Paul Fry (3.075) – $1.1MM.  Signed for $850K prior to NT deadline
  • Tanner Scott (3.059) – $1.0MM
  • John Means (3.007) – $3.1MM

Padres (8)

  • Joe Musgrove (5.063) – $8.9MM
  • Dinelson Lamet (4.130) – $4.6MM
  • Emilio Pagan (4.091) – $2.3MM.  Signed for $2.3MM prior to NT deadline
  • Jorge Alfaro (4.083) – $2.7MM
  • Victor Caratini (4.051) – $2.1MM
  • Tim Hill (3.112) – $1.4MM.  Signed for $1.325MM prior to NT deadline
  • Austin Adams (3.015) – $1.0MM.  Signed for $925K prior to NT deadline
  • Chris Paddack (3.000) – $2.1MM

Phillies (4)

  • Zach Eflin (5.018) – $6.0MM
  • Jose Alvarado (4.088) – $1.9MM
  • Rhys Hoskins (4.053)  – $7.6MM
  • Seranthony Dominguez (3.131) – $800K.  Signed for $725K prior to NT deadline

Pirates (4)

  • Ben Gamel (5.029) – $2.9MM.  Signed for $1.8MM prior to NT deadline
  • Chris Stratton (4.100)  – $2.2MM
  • Kevin Newman (3.046) – $2.2MM
  • Bryan Reynolds (2.163) – $4.5MM

Rangers (4)

  • Isiah Kiner-Falefa (4.000) – $4.9MM
  • Willie Calhoun (3.033) – $1.6MM
  • Brett Martin (2.151) – $1.1MM
  • Taylor Hearn (2.140) – $1.1MM

Rays (14)

  • Matt Wisler (5.042) – $1.8MM
  • Manuel Margot (5.012) – $5.0MM
  • Tyler Glasnow (4.158) – $5.8MM
  • Ji-Man Choi (4.076) – $3.5MM.  Signed prior to NT deadline for $3.2MM
  • Ryan Yarbrough (3.147) – $4.4MM
  • Yonny Chirinos (3.137) – $1.2MM
  • Yandy Diaz (3.122) – $2.7MM
  • Austin Meadows (3.074) – $4.3MM
  • Andrew Kittredge (3.070) – $1.6MM
  • Jalen Beeks (3.070) – $600K
  • Francisco Mejia (3.062) – $1.5MM
  • Jeffrey Springs (3.055) – $1.0MM
  • Brett Phillips (3.013) – $1.2MM
  • Nick Anderson (3.000) – $900K

Red Sox (7)

  • Kevin Plawecki (5.167) – $2.0MM.  Signed for $2.25MM after NT deadline
  • Ryan Brasier (4.109) – $1.4MM.  Signed for $1.4MM prior to NT deadline
  • Rafael Devers (4.070) – $11.1MM
  • Nick Pivetta (3.166) – $3.2MM
  • Alex Verdugo (3.078) – $3.2MM
  • Christian Arroyo (3.036) – $1.1MM
  • Josh Taylor (2.121) – $1.1MM

Reds (10)

  • Tyler Naquin (5.033) – $3.6MM
  • Luis Cessa (4.131) – $1.6MM
  • Luis Castillo (4.101) – $7.6MM
  • Amir Garrett (4.099) – $2.2MM
  • Jesse Winker (4.080) – $6.8MM
  • Tyler Mahle (4.018) – $5.6MM
  • Kyle Farmer (3.129) – $2.2MM
  • Jeff Hoffman (3.105) – $1.1MM
  • Lucas Sims (3.014) – $1.2MM
  • Nick Senzel (2.150) – $1.1MM

Rockies (9)

  • Daniel Bard (5.103) – $4.8MM.  Signed for $4.4MM prior to NT deadline
  • Carlos Estevez (5.022) – $3.2MM
  • Kyle Freeland (4.144) – $7.0MM
  • Robert Stephenson (4.049) – $1.1MM
  • Raimel Tapia (4.020) – $3.9MM
  • Ryan McMahon (4.006) – $5.5MM
  • Garrett Hampson (3.030) – $1.8MM
  • Tyler Kinley (3.014) – $1.0MM.  Signed for $1.025MM prior to NT deadline
  • Peter Lambert (2.116) – $600K

Royals (7)

  • Andrew Benintendi (5.062) – $9.3MM
  • Adalberto Mondesi (4.088) – $3.2MM
  • Brad Keller (4.000) – $5.2MM
  • Cam Gallagher (3.106) – $900K
  • Scott Barlow (3.030) – $2.4MM
  • Ryan O’Hearn (3.002) – $1.4MM
  • Nicky Lopez (2.139) – $2.0MM

Tigers (8)

  • Michael Fulmer (5.157) – $5.1MM
  • Joe Jimenez (4.061) – $1.8MM
  • Jeimer Candelario (4.038) – $5.9MM
  • Jose Cisnero (4.020) – $1.9MM
  • Victor Reyes (3.075) – $1.3MM
  • Spencer Turnbull (3.020) – $1.8MM
  • Dustin Garneau (3.015) – $1.6MM
  • Harold Castro (2.141) – $1.5MM

Twins (6)

  • Taylor Rogers (5.145) – $6.7MM
  • Tyler Duffey (5.074) – $3.7MM.  Signed for $3.8MM prior to NT deadline
  • Mitch Garver (4.045) – $3.1MM
  • Caleb Thielbar (3.131) – $1.2MM.  Signed for $1.3MM prior to NT deadline
  • Jharel Cotton (3.052) – $1.2MM.  Signed for $700K prior to NT deadline
  • Luis Arraez (2.121) – $2.0MM

White Sox (3)

  • Lucas Giolito (4.080) – $7.9MM
  • Adam Engel (4.058) – $2.2MM
  • Reynaldo Lopez (4.004) – $2.8MM

Yankees (16)

  • Jameson Taillon (5.110) – $4.7MM
  • Joey Gallo (5.103) – $10.2MM
  • Gary Sanchez (5.086) – $7.9MM
  • Aaron Judge (5.051) – $17.1MM
  • Chad Green (5.050) – $4.1MM
  • Wandy Peralta (4.168) – $1.7MM
  • Jordan Montgomery (4.153) – $4.8MM
  • Gio Urshela (4.127) – $6.2MM.  Signed for $6.55MM prior to NT deadline
  • Luke Voit (3.169) – $5.4MM
  • Gleyber Torres (3.162) – $5.9MM
  • Miguel Andujar (3.117) – $1.7MM
  • Clay Holmes (3.031) – $1.0MM
  • Jonathan Loaisiga (3.022) – $1.7MM
  • Domingo German (3.017) – $2.1MM.  Signed for $1.75MM prior to NT deadline
  • Lucas Luetge (3.015) – $1.1MM.  Signed for $905K prior to NT deadline
  • Kyle Higashioka (3.005) – $1.2MM

The arbitration projections were originally published 10-11-21.  Additional information was added 2-17-22.

MLB Is Trying To Trade Draft Pick Compensation For A Much Tougher Competitive Balance Tax

By | at

In a recent article, I tried to make the point that MLB, in general, wants something resembling the status quo in these CBA negotiations.  But there’s one area where I was wrong and MLB’s proposals have been clearly worse than the status quo, and that’s the competitive balance tax.

Let’s look at how MLB’s proposed tax rates compare to the status quo from 2017-21.

MLB’s goal here is clear: make teams much less likely to exceed the base tax threshold at all.  However “soft” of a salary cap this was in the 2017-21, MLB is attempting to harden it.  These tax rates say, “If you go over the tax thresholds, we’re really going to make you pay.”

MLB doubled down on the goal of hardening the CBT as a cap by adding new draft pick penalties.  The status quo: any club that exceeds the second surcharge threshold ($250MM in 2021) would have its highest available selection in the next draft moved back ten spots.  If a team is set to pick in the top six, that is left alone and the second-rounder is moved back ten spots.

MLB’s latest offer is far more extreme than this: a team in the second tier (MLB proposes $234-254MM for 2022) entirely surrenders its second round pick, and a team in the third tier ($254MM+) forfeits its first round pick.

I don’t think anyone would argue with this: MLB’s current proposal is for a much more restrictive competitive balance tax, without even getting into the matter of the thresholds.  So, how would they defend it?  The answer is that MLB likely feels it’s proposing an even trade by eliminating draft pick compensation for signing free agents.

Every winter, somewhere between six and 20 players at the top of the free agency class receive a qualifying offer.  Under this system, the worst possible penalty for signing a qualified free agent is forfeiture of a second and fifth round pick and having your international bonus pool reduced by $1MM.    The Yankees, for example, made this sacrifice to sign Gerrit Cole.  MLB’s pitch may be that under their new CBT plan, teams would have forfeited fewer draft picks than they gave up to sign free agents during the most recent CBA (something I intend to explore).  I think that in MLB’s eyes, they are offering to transfer the burden that a certain number of players at the top of each free agent market bear under the qualifying offer system to the team level as a CBT penalty.

Elimination of the qualifying offer system would remove the Craig Kimbrel/Dallas Keuchel type situations, where those players waited until after the June draft to sign because of the drag caused by draft pick compensation.  It would also remove the dynamic where a player accepts a qualifying offer and ultimately earns less in his career as a result, like perhaps Neil Walker.

I would guess that the MLBPA doesn’t consider this an even trade whatsoever, and has likely told MLB as much.  The MLBPA likely takes major issue with drastically increased CBT penalties.  Consider Giants pitcher Alex Wood, who tweeted,”If penalties increase under the CBT/Luxury tax IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT THE THRESHOLD IS MY GOD. Make the threshold a billion dollars it doesn’t matter. Teams already don’t spend bc they use the current penalties as an excuse not to. Imagine if the penalties got worse. SMH.”

In a theoretical sense, I disagree with Alex.  One could argue that the thresholds matter more than the penalties, because more teams stop right before the base tax threshold than actually pay the tax.  In recent years, only two or three teams have typically paid the tax.  To take Alex’s example to the extreme, if the base tax threshold actually was a billion dollars, and the penalty for exceeding it was that the team needed to play defense with only eight players on the field at all times, the MLBPA should take that deal because the penalty is irrelevant if teams don’t exceed the base tax threshold.

However, there’s a slippery slope concern here on the side of the MLBPA.  History has shown us that once the players surrender something to MLB, it is very hard to claw any of it back.  Case in point, the players moved arbitration eligibility from three years to two in 1980 and gave that back in 1985.  Since then they’ve only managed to win back 22% of the 2+ class, and MLB is currently drawing a hard line on a return to the pre-1985 arbitration structure.

That’s why the MLBPA will likely draw their own hard line and refuse to further increase the tax rates or the draft pick penalty for exceeding tax thresholds.  That might be one of the MLBPA’s non-starter stances.  And if the MLBPA thinks elimination of the qualifying offer system is of modest value, keeping it in place would not be a major problem.

MLB should stop proposing this supposedly even trade.  It’s like in a fantasy baseball league where a guy keeps making you the same offer over and offer, telling you it’s fair.  It’s just not conducive to making a larger deal.

MLB should take increased CBT penalties off the table entirely, and should also propose leaving the qualifying offer system completely intact from the previous CBA.  That would be, literally, the status quo.  Then, with the clock ticking, the two sides can get down to solving the $51MM gulf between where they think the CBT thresholds should land by 2026.

Why MLB Players Went On Strike In The Past And What It Tells Us About The Current Lockout

By | at

A lockout is not a strike.  You probably already knew that, but in all of my in-person conversations with casual to moderate baseball fans since the lockout began, none of them knew the difference.

A lockout is a work stoppage initiated by ownership.  MLB teams locked out the players back in December, and that’s why we aren’t seeing pitchers and catchers reporting to spring training today.  If players were to show up at the stadiums, they’d literally find themselves locked out.

A strike is when employees cease going to work as a group.  Since Marvin Miller created the Major League Baseball Players Association 56 years ago, the players have gone on strike five times.  Let’s take a look at why they elected to do so.

1972 strike – 86 games lost

The union itself was only six years old.  The issue at stake is what Miller called a “modest request” of increases in the players’ pensions and health care contribution to keep up with inflation, part of which meant using an existing surplus in the pension fund.  In spring of 1972, Miller felt that an agreement was within reach.  Then, ownership surprised the players by taking a position of no increase on the pension, and a reduction on health care.  Miller saw this as an “unmistakable signal” that “management was baiting us into a strike.”

Two days prior to the expiration of the pension agreement, Miller proposed solving the dispute by using an independent arbitrator, in an attempt to avoid a strike.  The owners declined.  Miller was concerned the “still young Association” wouldn’t be able to sustain a strike, and advised the players to postpone it and negotiate during the season.  Miller found his players to be “positively militant” about going out on strike, however, so that’s what they did.  After 13 days of lost revenue, the owners folded and the first strike in professional sports was over.

1980 strike – 92 exhibition games lost

At this point, free agent compensation was the issue at stake.  Free agency had only been around for four years, and the owners felt they needed to add restrictions to it.  Specifically, owners felt that signing a free agent should require giving up a Major League player as compensation.  Faced with this issue, the players voted to cancel the final week of spring training, return to play Opening Day, and possibly strike on Memorial Day weekend in 1980.

Instead, Miller and MLB negotiator Ray Grebey settled all the other issues, including dropping the salary arbitration requirement from three years to two (something MLB considers a non-starter in these 2022 negotiations).  The two sides were able to avoid a regular season strike by kicking the can down the road on free agent compensation, forming a study committee.  As part of announcing the 1980 agreement, Grebey “poisoned the bargaining well” (in the words of John Helyar in Lords of the Realm) by telling the press the owners’ compensation plan would go into effect in 1981, which was untrue.

While the cancellation of a week of spring training makes this technically count as a strike, no regular season games were missed, and it was more of a prelude to the 1981 strike.  Helyar called it “a lull until the next battle.”

1981 strike – 712 games lost

This was the first major strike in baseball history.  The aforementioned free agent compensation study committee produced nothing of value.  Miller described ownership’s proposal thusly: “A club signing a free agent could very well lose an established player more valuable than the free agent, or lose a prospect with All-Star potential.  The scheme was designed to end free agency and would certainly had succeeded if it had gone into effect.”  After the committee issued a report with “two diametrically opposed opinions,” the two sides had 30 days to hammer out an agreement in early 1981.  That didn’t happen, allowing owners to unilaterally adopt their free agent compensation proposal.  The players were only offering a draft pick as compensation, and over this gap, they went on strike.

Miller called the 1981 strike “the most principled I’ve ever been associated with” and “the Association’s finest hour.”  He notes that the union was not making demands; it was ownership seeking what he considered excessive free agent compensation.  As the strike dragged on, federal mediator Ken Moffett “never got past first base” with his proposals, as Miller put it.  Instead, the MLBPA proposed a system where each team could protect 25 players, and all other players would become part of a pool from which teams losing certain free agents could choose.  With the owners’ strike insurance running out, this “pool” free agent compensation plan led to a settlement after 50 days.  Four years later in 1985 the owners were already asking for the pool compensation plan’s removal.

1985 strike – no games lost

This two-day strike is similar to 1980 in that it technically counts, but no regular season games were lost.  By 1985, Marvin Miller was retired “but remained a power in the union,” according to Helyar.  Still, Don Fehr was in charge of negotiations for the MLBPA.  With the union under new leadership and solidarity of the players waning, the players’ union agreed to “give-backs” for the first time, as arbitration was rolled back to three years instead of two and the pension formula was changed to the players’ detriment.  As Miller put it, “For the first time in its almost twenty years of existence, the Players Association took backward steps.”  He added, “Either you push forward or you’re going to get pushed back.”  Miller felt that Fehr’s error was “in not instilling in the players the determination to fight the good fight.”

1994 strike – 938 regular season games lost, plus cancellation of the playoffs

In 1994, as Helyar put it, “The players rejected a salary cap as repugnant at any price.”  Nonetheless, owner of the small market Brewers and acting commissioner Bud Selig was convinced a salary cap was necessary and convinced the other owners to fight for it.  Helyar explains, “The players had to go on the offensive, if only for defensive purposes. If no contract was reached by collective bargaining, the Lords could eventually shove the salary cap down their throats. Federal labor law allowed employers to declare a bargaining impasse, after a decent interval for negotiations, and impose employment terms.  The players had to try forcing a deal when they still had some leverage – during the season, when lost games meant lost money for the Lords.”

So, the players went on strike on August 12, 1994.  Ultimately the rest of the season, including the playoffs, were canceled.  Fehr and Selig wound up in court, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor granted an injunction blocking Selig’s intended use of replacement players to start the ’95 season.  The status quo was returned and the strike ended.

Why The Players Went On Strike

I worked through this little history lesson to explain the circumstances under which the players went on the three significant strikes in the 56-year history of their union.  In 1972, it was because the owners tried to test a young MLBPA by moving backwards on an issue that was key to players at the time, their pension and health care benefits.  In 1981, players went on strike because owners demanded a compensation system that would significantly devalue their newly-won right to free agency.  In 1994, players went on strike because Bud Selig attempted to force a salary cap.  The common thread: in each instance, ownership was attempting to move the players significantly backward.

How The Owners Have Justified The 2022 Lockout

Now let’s tie this into the present dispute.  MLB’s lockout is already affecting spring training and could well lead to canceled games in April, so it’s important to understand why they did it.  In his December 2 “letter to baseball fans,” Commissioner Rob Manfred provided two reasons why MLB was “forced to commence” a lockout of the players:

  1.  “We hope that the lockout will jumpstart the negotiations and get us to an agreement that will allow the season to start on time.”
  2.   “We cannot allow an expired agreement to again cause an in-season strike and a missed World Series, like we experienced in 1994.”

It’s pretty easy to dismiss the “jumpstart the negotiations” angle, given that MLB waited 42 days between its lockout and its next proposal.  In my opinion, some credibility is lost when you say that and then wait that long to make your next offer.

But let’s examine the second point, about how we can’t allow another strike like ’94.  I have already established that historically, MLB players going on strike has been rare, and pretty clearly provoked by ownership each time.  However, ownership has not done anything to provoke a strike in 2022.

As Manfred put it, “Baseball’s players have no salary cap and are not subjected to a maximum length or dollar amount on contracts. In fact, only MLB has guaranteed contracts that run 10 or more years, and in excess of $300 million. We have not proposed anything that would change these fundamentals.”  Emphasis mine.  This is completely true.  The MLBPA has plenty of concerns right now with various causes, but they’re not the result of something radical MLB is trying to impose.  MLB wants something resembling the status quo.  The difference of opinion is on whether the status quo is acceptable.

The Current Issues Are Not Strike-worthy

It’s my opinion that the current differences of opinion, which are mostly in in degrees and not concepts, are not compelling enough to cause the players to strike.  Sometimes the degrees of difference are large, like in the case of the competitive balance tax, but it’s still mostly haggling over numbers.  To be clear, the idea that the players wouldn’t strike is guesswork based on the historical precedent I’ve laid out in this post.  Publicly or even privately, if the players are disinclined to strike over the current differences, they cannot admit it.  To do so would be to lose their leverage.

MLB could lift the lockout today and everything would start on time, with negotiations continuing during the season.  So for them to keep the lockout in place and risk canceling games, under the justification Manfred provided, MLB really has to feel a midseason strike would have been likely.  Let’s game that out and envision a hypothetical strike announcement by MLBPA executive director Tony Clark.  For this exercise I’m using the current gaps, even though six months from now those gaps would presumably be smaller.

August 12, 2022: Hypothetical Press Release From Tony Clark On Behalf Of MLB Players

“On this the 28th anniversary of the 1994 strike, I’m devastated to say that MLB players have no choice but to go on strike due to the unreasonable positions of the owners.  Our differences are large enough to risk losing the rest of the 2022 season and the World Series if the owners don’t move significantly within the few weeks.  Here are the reasons we’re going on strike.

We believe all 30 teams should try to win every year.  While we have agreed with MLB on the implementation of a draft lottery, we differ on how many picks should be subject to it (three vs. eight)  and whether teams should be penalized for being bad in consecutive years.

We want the best players to be promoted as soon as they’re ready for the Majors.  Service time manipulation meant MLB stars like Kris Bryant and Vladimir Guerrero Jr. had their debuts delayed past the point of readiness.  Perhaps more importantly to the union, this practice allows teams to control players for nearly seven years instead of the agreed-upon six.  MLB has proposed extra draft picks to incentivize teams to put MLB-ready stars on Opening Day rosters, but we don’t think it’s enough to move the needle.  We feel that rookies should have the opportunity to earn a full year of service time based on factors like awards voting and WAR.  We’re also seeking a $30MM cut in revenue sharing, as we feel these transfers of wealth allow small market teams to be profitable without investing in players and trying to win.

We also believe large market teams should have fewer payroll restrictions.  When we agreed in the previous two CBAs to the competitive balance tax increasing by $32MM over a ten-year period, we didn’t anticipate large market teams would treat the base tax threshold as a de facto salary cap.  MLB has proposed moving the tax threshold by only $12MM by 2026, but we feel a $63MM increase to $273MM over the next five years is necessary.  MLB has proposed increasing the tax rates on overages as well.

As teams have de-emphasized free agency, we need to get players paid earlier in their careers.  One key is the minimum salary, which we feel should increase from $570,500 in 2021 to $775,000 in ’22.  MLB has proposed $630,000, leaving us $145,000 apart.  On a related note, we’re also looking to change salary arbitration so that all players with at least two years are eligible.  This would add dozens of players into the arbitration system each year who previously would have been making a salary close to the league minimum.

The third way we’re looking to increase pay for players earlier in their careers is by the implementation of a pre-arbitration bonus pool.  MLB has agreed to this concept.  We’re proposing each team contribute $3.33MM per year to this pool (a total of $100MM), but MLB is offering only $500K per team (a total of $15MM).

Though the MLBPA is not seeking playoff expansion, we are nonetheless willing to grant MLB an increase to a 12-team field.  They’re seeking a 14-team field.  We feel that expanded playoffs, plus MLB’s proposed addition of advertising to uniforms, would bring significant additional revenue to the teams.

We find the universal designated hitter to be mutually beneficial, and MLB has agreed to implement it.  MLB has also agreed to eliminate the qualifying offer system, which we concede would benefit several players each offseason.

Collective bargaining has been ongoing for nearly 16 months, and we’ve played out the 2022 season without an agreement in place.  While we were cautiously optimistic when MLB lifted the lockout six months ago in February, we now feel that our differences are too significant to be resolved through further bargaining.  Regretfully, a strike is our only recourse, and we hope it will prompt the required movement from MLB to lead to an agreement and save the ’22 playoffs.”

A Possible Third Motive For MLB’s Lockout

Maybe you’re like me and you can’t see Tony Clark issuing a strike announcement statement similar to the hypothetical I wrote above.  Though they wouldn’t admit it, maybe MLB also finds a strike on these grounds to be unlikely.  That leads to a third, unstated possible motive for MLB initiating a lockout in December 2021: they did so mainly to gain financial leverage over the players and get a better deal for themselves.

That’s what I think is happening, and it’s MLB’s right to do so.  In that case, the current situation boils down to MLB being willing to cancel games in April to get a better agreement.

I know it’s easy to “both sides” the current labor dispute.  Feel free to choose from among these commonly-used phrases:

  • A pox on both your houses
  • Millionaires vs. billionaires
  • Where is the fan in all of this

However, only one side can implement a lockout, and only one side can go on strike.  Currently, we’re in a lockout, and I don’t think it’s reasonable to blame the players for going on strike unless they actually do, you know, go on strike.  If the lockout is lifted and the players go on strike over these issues, then yes, the players would shoulder the lion’s share of responsibility for missed games and/or canceled playoffs.  Until then, missed games fall on ownership.

Required baseball labor reading:

MLBTR Poll: Where Will Zack Greinke Sign?

By | at

The free agent starting pitching market moved very quickly in the early stages of the offseason. A few prominent starters remained unsigned heading into the lockout, though. Among them — Zack Greinke, whose market remains largely undefined.

Greinke is no longer the ace he was at his peak. The six-time All-Star is coming off a 4.16 ERA over 171 innings, his second straight season with an ERA a touch over 4.00. That’s still capable run prevention, but Greinke’s days of posting sub-3.00 marks are probably behind him. His swing-and-miss and strikeout rates regressed last year, and he dealt with some neck soreness down the stretch. Between his age and those trends, teams can’t reasonably expect Grienke to assume the role of Game 1 or Game 2 playoff starter next season.

That said, there aren’t many rotations he wouldn’t still upgrade. He’s still one of the game’s best command artists. Greinke has shown a knack for remaining successful even as his raw stuff has ticked down with age. Even if his production might now be closer to average on a rate basis, the former Cy Young Award winner has continued to soak up innings. He exceeded 200 frames each season from 2017-19, and he’s surpassed 150 innings every year since 2007 (excluding the shortened 2020 schedule).

Immediate contenders could certainly stand to plug Greinke into the middle or back of their starting staff. Rebuilding teams might view signing him as an opportunity to bring aboard a famously cerebral hurler with an elite track record as an example for their younger, controllable arms (although it remains to be seen if the 18-year MLB veteran would be open to signing with a team that doesn’t look like a surefire competitor).

To date, however, we’ve heard very little about where Greinke might end up. He’s not expected to re-sign with the Astros, a testament to their enviable collection of in-house rotation depth. Beyond that, there’s not been any substantive indication in which direction he might be leaning. At the start of the offseason, Bob Nightengale of USA Today tweeted that Greinke “(wanted) to continue pitching for an NL team.”

The rationale for that reported desire to return to the Senior Circuit is unclear. If it were about getting another chance to hit regularly — Grienke has won a pair of Silver Slugger Awards in his career — that’ll probably prove moot. Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association seem to have mutual interest in implementing a universal designated hitter in the next collective bargaining agreement. If that comes into play, then there’ll be no difference in rules between the leagues. If Greinke just prefers certain National League cities or ballparks and is indifferent about an opportunity to hit, then that could give NL suitors an upper hand.

It’s also at least worth contemplating the possibility Greinke moves on from playing entirely. Nightengale’s report suggests he was planning to continue his career as of a few months ago. He’s still an effective pitcher, even if he’s no longer elite. There’s been no indication he’s not planning to play in 2022, so him stepping away seems unlikely. But Greinke turned 38 years old in October, so one seemingly can’t definitively rule out the possibility he retires until he speaks publicly about his future or puts pen to paper on a new contract.

Where does the MLBTR readership think Greinke will be in 2022? Will he continue playing, and if so, where will he sign?

(poll link for app users)

Where Will Zack Greinke Sign?
Cardinals 7.11% (914 votes)
Mets 7.00% (900 votes)
Braves 6.91% (889 votes)
Dodgers 6.38% (820 votes)
Giants 6.31% (812 votes)
Angels 5.81% (747 votes)
Blue Jays 4.42% (568 votes)
Retirement 4.41% (567 votes)
Astros 4.18% (538 votes)
Royals 4.00% (515 votes)
Rangers 3.66% (470 votes)
Tigers 3.39% (436 votes)
Twins 3.30% (424 votes)
Mariners 3.28% (422 votes)
Yankees 3.25% (418 votes)
Cubs 3.13% (403 votes)
Brewers 2.99% (385 votes)
Red Sox 2.82% (363 votes)
Phillies 2.78% (358 votes)
Padres 2.50% (322 votes)
White Sox 2.49% (320 votes)
D-Backs 1.69% (217 votes)
Rays 1.62% (208 votes)
Orioles 1.35% (173 votes)
Nationals 1.17% (150 votes)
Pirates 0.99% (127 votes)
A's 0.93% (120 votes)
Reds 0.85% (109 votes)
Guardians 0.51% (65 votes)
Marlins 0.41% (53 votes)
Rockies 0.36% (46 votes)
Total Votes: 12,859

 

8 Post-Tommy John Pitchers Who’ll Impact Next Year’s Market

By | at

We’ve grown accustomed to seeing headline after headline indicating that a pitcher is slated to undergo Tommy John surgery in today’s game. The procedure has become so commonplace, in fact, that it’s no longer surprising to see teams guarantee multi-year deals to rehabbing pitchers who’ll be sidelined for a full season of that contract as they work back from the injury. Such deals have produced varying levels of success in the past. Nathan Eovaldi’s two-year deal with the Rays worked out great; Drew Smyly didn’t pitch for the Cubs and posted a 6.24 after being traded to the Rangers.

Heading into the 2022 season, there are a handful of notable pitchers who were either signed under just that circumstance or are now playing for a contract on the heels of a Tommy John surgery that, hopefully, is more or less in the rearview mirror. A strong rebound will position any of this bunch either as a prominent member of next winter’s free-agent crop or, in some cases, to have a lucrative 2023 club option picked up. Here’s a look at a handful of Tommy John recoveries that could have a notable impact on next year’s market.

Starting Pitchers

Mike Clevinger: A marquee addition by the Padres at the 2020 trade deadline, Clevinger made only four regular-season starts and a one-inning postseason cameo before requiring Tommy John surgery in the 2020-21 offseason. San Diego, knowing he’d miss the entire 2021 season, signed him to a two-year, $11.5MM deal that paid him $2MM during his rehab season but will more heavily compensate him in 2022, now that he’s expected to be back to full strength. It was the second Tommy John procedure of Clevinger’s career, as he also had the surgery as a minor leaguer back in 2012.

There’s little questioning Clevinger’s talent, as the now-31-year-old righty was one of the most effective starters in all of baseball from 2017 until the time of his injury in 2020. In 489 1/3 innings over that stretch, Clevinger posted a 2.96 ERA while punching out 28% of his opponents against a 9% walk rate. Among big league pitchers with at least 400 innings thrown during that time, Clevinger ranked seventh in ERA and 14th in FIP (3.39). That said, he’s also only reached 130 innings in a big league season on one occasion, when he threw an even 200 frames in 2019.

That relatively limited workload, coupled with this being Clevinger’s second Tommy John procedure, will surely impact his free agency next winter to an extent. That said, a strong and healthy season out of the righty will still position him as one of the top arms on next winter’s market. Clevinger, teammate Joe Musgrove, Sean Manaea and Noah Syndergaard are among the more prominent free agents still in their early 30s next winter (to say nothing of older veterans with contract options or opt-outs, such as Jacob deGrom, Justin Verlander and Charlie Morton).

James Paxton: Paxton isn’t necessarily playing for a free-agent contract. He signed a complicated multi-year deal with the Red Sox that’ll pay him $6MM in 2022 before he can either trigger a $4MM player option or the team can exercise a pair of $13MM club options for the 2023-24 seasons. For luxury-tax purposes, that should be considered a two-year, $10MM deal, as the player option for 2023 is considered to be guaranteed money. Of course, there’s also the possibility that with a healthy season, the contract will effectively balloon to a contract that pays Paxton $32MM over a three-year term. The deal contains further incentives, as Paxton could boost those 2023-24 salaries by $250K apiece for reaching 12, 14, 16 and 18 starts.

It’s a heavily incentive-laden deal that speaks both to the considerable risk in signing Paxton and the considerable upside he’ll bring to Boston. A healthy Paxton is a high-quality big league starter, evidenced the career 3.50 ERA he carried into an injury-ruined 2020 season with the Yankees. Among the 149 big league starters to toss at least 200 innings from 2017-19, Paxton’s 30.1% strikeout rate ranked seventh, and his 7.3% walk rate was markedly better than league average. His 22.7 K-BB% was among the best in the game, as were his strong ratings in the eyes of fielding-independent metrics like FIP (3.26) and SIERA (3.45).

Since that 2019 season, however, Paxton has undergone back surgery, missed significant time with a forearm strain and eventually undergone Tommy John surgery. Earlier in his career, he’d dealt with lat, forearm and pectoral injuries, among a litany of smaller-scale issues.

There’s probably a scenario where Paxton pitches well enough to turn down his $4MM player option even if the Red Sox decline the effective two-year, $26MM option they hold over him. (We saw a comparable situation play out with Yusei Kikuchi earlier in the winter.) That said, the ideal scenario for Paxton and the Sox is that he pitches well enough to reestablish himself as a quality MLB hurler and boost those two club options to $14MM apiece in total value in the process.

Paxton underwent his Tommy John procedure in late April, so he’s not likely to be ready to help the Red Sox at the beginning of the season. By late May or June, however, he could represent a boost to a rotation that is not exactly shy of other injury concerns.

Justin Verlander: Even though he hasn’t pitched since undergoing Tommy John surgery, Verlander still got a hefty $25MM guarantee from the Astros — plus a conditional $25MM player option that kicks in if he reaches 130 innings pitched. The two-time Cy Young winner and former AL MVP has a track record that speaks for itself; when we last saw Verlander in a full, healthy season, he was edging then-teammate Gerrit Cole for the 2019 AL Cy Young Award.

Verlander has said in the past that he hopes to pitch into his 40s, and he has a good chance at doing so if he can bounce back this coming season. He’ll turn 39 later this week, and if he goes out and looks anything like he did from 2015-20 — 1010 innings, 2.94 ERA, 29.7% strikeout rate, 6% walk rate — Verlander will likely turn down that $25MM option, or at least leverage it into a new multi-year arrangement with the ’Stros. He was just promised a $25MM guarantee despite having thrown only six innings since Opening Day 2020, so there’s little reason to accept that he’d take a year and $25MM on the heels of a healthy return effort at Minute Maid Park.

Noah Syndergaard: Perhaps it’s not quite fair to label Syndergaard as a Tommy John rehabber; after all, he did make it back to the mound with the Mets late in the 2021 season — albeit for only two innings. That said, this is Thor’s first full season back from that ligament replacement procedure, and he’ll be pitching for a big contract next winter from the moment he suits up in Orange County. Signed by the Angels to a one-year, $21MM contract, Syndergaard will be pitching with a team other than the Mets for the first time in his big league career.

It’s a hefty price to pay, particularly considering the fact that Syndergaard had rejected an $18.4MM qualifying offer, but his career to date is all the evidence needed to suggest that at his best, Syndergaard is plenty worth that gamble. He’s never walked more than 6.1% of his opponents in a given season and has never failed to strike out a batter per inning. Few pitchers can match Syndergaard’s blend of pure velocity, missed bats and impeccable command, and he manages all that while still turning in a ground-ball rate that’s well higher than the league average.

Syndergaard has always felt like he’s one step away from solidifying himself as a bona fide ace, and as Robbie Ray showed in winning the AL Cy Young Award this season, one dominant season for a player with this type of track record can result in a nine-figure payday if things break right. The market has already proven to value Syndergaard at more than $20MM per year, and given that he’d be 30 years old in 2023, it’s not hyperbole to suggest that he’s pitching for a $100MM contract this season.

Luis Severino: As with Syndergaard, Severino may not quite fit the criteria for this list. The 27-year-old (28 later this week, on the same day Verlander turns 39) returned to give the Yankees six innings out of the bullpen late in the 2021 season, and his protracted absence from the team’s pitching staff cannot be solely attributed to Tommy John surgery. Severino has also battled groin, shoulder and lat injuries along the way. That said, Severino really hasn’t pitched since undergoing Tommy John surgery in Feb. 2020, and it’s that operation that is the primary reason for his absence over the past two seasons.

Severino isn’t yet slated to hit the open market at season’s end — at least not before the Yankees make a call on a $15MM club option or a $2.75MM buyout. The resulting $12.25MM net decision would be a straightforward one for general manager Brian Cashman if Severino at all looks like his former self. From 2017-18, Severino gave the Yankees 384 2/3 innings of 3.18 ERA ball with outstanding strikeout and walk rates, prompting the team to sign him to a four-year contract extension that promised him $40MM.

That deal looked like a bargain for the team at the time but has since gone south, due largely to repeated injury woes. Severino made a combined 63 regular-season starts for the Yankees in 2017-18, looking every bit like a foundational piece to the pitching staff, but he’s combined for just 25 starts and another 18 relief appearances in the five seasons surrounding that brilliant run.

With a big season in 2022, Severino could still see that $15MM option picked up, and if he can remain healthy into 2023, he’d hit the open market heading into his age-30 season. There’s a long way to go before that scenario becomes reality, however.

Relievers

Tommy Kahnle: Signed by the Dodgers to a two-year, $4.75MM contract last offseason, Kahnle was never expected to contribute in 2021 — hence the backloaded nature of his contract, which will pay him $3.45MM in 2022. The hard-throwing righty only managed one inning for the 2020 Yankees, meaning this coming season will be the first since 2019 in which he’ll potentially pitch anything resembling a full workload.

The 32-year-old Kahnle has been inconsistent but has dominated more often than he’s struggled. From 2016-20, he logged a combined 3.48 ERA, 32.9% strikeout rate and 9.9% walk rate while averaging 97.1 mph on his heater. That includes a disastrous but also fluky-looking 2018 campaign in which he was tattooed for a 6.56 ERA in 23 1/3 frames. From 2016-20, Kahnle’s 32.9% strikeout rate ranks 17th among the 155 relievers to have thrown at least 150 innings, while his 15.9% swinging-strike rate is tied for sixth.

Kahnle’s Tommy John surgery came way back on Aug. 5, 2020, so there should be no restrictions on him by the time the season gets underway. He’ll be heading into his age-33 season next winter, and a return to his vintage form should position him as one of the top relievers on a free-agent market that is lacking in big-name right-handed relievers.

Ken Giles: Like Kahnle, Giles was signed by the Mariners — two years, $7MM — knowing full well that he would not pitch in 2021. Unlike Kahnle, his contract includes a club option for the 2023 season, which is valued at $9.5MM (with a $500K buyout).

Many of the same superlatives that apply to Kahnle apply even more so to Giles. His 18% swinging-strike rate, for instance, tops Kahnle and sits third among the 155 relievers who totaled at least 150 frames from 2016-20. His 3.33 ERA in that time is a bit more toward the middle of the pack, but Giles misses bats, induces chases outside the zone and throws as hard as nearly any reliever in the sport. He’s had a pair of 4.00-something ERAs sprinkled in amid a series of pristine marks throughout his big league career. Those two blemishes have coincided with spikes in his average on balls in play and dips in his strand rate.

On the whole, Giles is a power arm who can pile up strikeouts in droves. He’s a sometimes forgotten piece of the puzzle when looking at the 2022 Mariners and their hopes of contending, but he’ll join a deep bullpen mix that also features Diego Castillo, 2021 breakout closer Paul Sewald, former Marlins stopped Drew Steckenrider (who enjoyed a tremendous rebound in 2021) and the underappreciated Casey Sadler, who notched a 0.67 ERA in 40 1/3 innings last year.

A healthy Giles would very likely see that $9.5MM club option for the 2023 season picked up, and at his best, he’s a bargain at that price. If Giles is pitching well but things go south for the Mariners, teams will come calling at the trade deadline. Of course, the Mariners are hoping to be squarely in the postseason mix, and they’re likely not done with their offseason shopping just yet.

Jose Leclerc: Armed with a fastball in the mid to upper 90s, Leclerc’s ability to return to form (or his lack thereof) will have major implications for the Rangers moving forward. His four-year, $14.75MM contract extension includes a $6MM club option for the 2023 season and a $6.25MM option for the 2024 season. A rebound effort makes that 2023 option a no-brainer for the Rangers to pick up as they hope to ride a hyper-aggressive offseason into their next competitive window.

Leclerc, 28, has fanned just shy of a third of the hitters he’s faced so far in his big league career and has only allowed a dozen homers in 189 Major League innings (0.57 HR/9). His 14.9% walk rate is far too high, but he looked to be making considerable strides in that department in 2019 when he posted a sub-2.00 ERA, a 38.1% strikeout rate and an 11.2% walk rate. He’ll be a highly intriguing lottery ticket on next year’s market if he pitches poorly enough that the Rangers buy that option out (or if they do so on the heels of another injury). If he rebounds, he’ll be a bargain piece of an on-the-rise Rangers club in 2023-24.

Post-Lockout Trade Candidates: 27 Regulars Who Could Plausibly Change Teams

By | at

In recent days, MLBTR has taken a look at some players who could find themselves on the move between the conclusion of the lockout and the start of the season. First, Tim Dierkes looked at the league’s 14 likeliest trade candidates. Steve Adams then ran through some impact players who, to varying degrees, could find themselves in trade rumors whenever transactions resume.

Today we’ll look at other regulars who we could envision changing uniforms in the relatively near future. Acquiring any of the players on today’s list wouldn’t be quite as splashy as landing the stars we covered last week, but it’s easy to envision any one of them assuming an important, regular role on a new team.

Before we get into the list, a quick note on methodology. In defining “plausible” trade candidates, we looked at players we felt had somewhere between a 20% and 50% chance of being dealt before the start of the season. It’s not meant to be an exhaustive list of trade possibilities — almost any player around the league could theoretically move if another team made the right offer — but it’s meant to capture a tier of regulars we wouldn’t be surprised to see change hands. In an exercise of this nature, there has to be a somewhat arbitrary line that delineates the last of the players who, in our view, are “plausible” trade candidates. Players like Gary Sánchez and Jesús Aguilar were discussed internally but fell just on the other side of that line.

Now, on to the list. The players are ordered by what we feel to be their likelihood of getting traded (all arbitration projections via MLBTR contributor Matt Swartz):

John Means, Orioles SP

Buster Olney of ESPN reported in November that the Orioles were “dangling” Means in trade talks. Baltimore’s rebuilding and seemingly amenable to offers on anyone on the roster, but it remains to be seen how actively they’ll push to make their top starting pitcher available. With Means controllable through 2024 and projected for a modest $3.1MM salary, the O’s needn’t force a deal this offseason.

The 28-year-old presents a tricky evaluation for teams. He got off to an excellent start to the season, posting a 2.28 ERA (albeit with a 4.20 FIP) through his first 71 innings. Means then landed on the injured list with a shoulder strain. After returning in July, he posted a 4.88 ERA down the stretch, watching his strikeout rate tumble almost six percentage points in the process. The medical evaluation will be critical, but teams that are comfortable with the state of Means’ shoulder moving forward might expect him to regain the strong mid-rotation form he showed early in the year.

Isiah Kiner-Falefa, Rangers SS/3B

Kiner-Falefa has been a solid regular for the Rangers for the past couple seasons. He spent 2020 at third base, then was tasked with moving up the defensive spectrum to shortstop last year. Defensive Runs Saved loved his glovework at short; Statcast’s Outs Above Average did not. Kiner-Falefa finished third in the 2021 Fielding Bible shortstop award voting. There’s not much question he’s a very good defender at the hot corner, and most teams would probably at least feel comfortable with him moonlighting at shortstop if need be.

Texas remade their middle infield in free agency, signing Corey Seager and Marcus Semien. Kiner-Falefa could kick back to third base, but the Rangers have top prospect Josh Jung nearing big league readiness at the position. Controllable for two more seasons and projected for a $4.9MM salary, he could stick around as a utility guy. But if another team buys him as a plus defender at shortstop, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see Texas ship him somewhere he can continue playing everyday. Kiner-Falefa’s .271/.312/.357 line fits better at the bottom of a lineup, but he brings good contact skills and a solid infield glove to the table. MLBTR’s Steve Adams explored the possibility of a Kiner-Falefa trade at greater length this afternoon.

Raimel Tapia, Rockies LF

Reports out of Denver have suggested the Rockies could look to move Tapia, projected for a $3.9MM salary in his second-to-last arbitration-eligible season. The Rox need to bolster an offense that was among the league’s worst last year, and they’re seemingly planning to make a splash in the corner outfield. That’d probably push Tapia — who’s spent almost his entire MLB career in left field — out of the everyday lineup.

Tapia has never hit at the level one would hope from an everyday left fielder. One could argue he’s better suited for a fourth outfield role regardless. He’s a plus runner with good bat-to-ball skills, though, and he ranked among Baseball America’s top 50 overall prospects back in 2017. It’s certainly not out of the question another team takes a flier on him, particularly if the Rockies are willing to take a minimal return after acquiring his replacement.

Chris Paddack, Padres SP

The pre-lockout agreement with Nick Martínez bumped a bunch of the Friars’ younger arms down a peg on the rotation depth chart. As MLBTR’s Steve Adams recently explored, that could pave the way for them to move one of their controllable starters. If they do, Paddack looks the likeliest of the bunch. He’s arbitration-eligible and projected for a $2.1MM salary. That’s certainly affordable, but the Padres could be looking to open some payroll space after exceeding the luxury tax threshold last year.

Paddack has had back-to-back down seasons after a promising rookie campaign. But he’s still only 26 years old, boasts pristine control, and teams can dream on him recapturing his 2019 form. That he’s controllable for three seasons could be of particular appeal to teams like the Rangers and Nationals (who expressed interest at last summer’s deadline) who might be eyeing 2023 as a more plausible contention year.

Ryan Yarbrough, Rays SP

Yarbrough has been a flexible member of the Rays pitching staff for the past few years. He’s worked variably as a traditional long reliever, a bulk man behind an opener and as a true starting pitcher. Yarbrough posted an ERA of 4.13 or lower in each of his first three seasons, but he scuffled to a 5.11 mark in 2021. That came without meaningful changes to his strikeout and walk numbers, though, and Yarbrough remained excellent at avoiding hard contact.

The Rays likely anticipate the southpaw will return to form, but his price is escalating. Tampa Bay is already projected for a franchise-record payroll, so it wouldn’t be surprising if they move some of their arbitration-eligible players for pre-arb or minor league talent. Yarbrough is projected for a $4.4MM salary and remains under team control through 2024.

Austin Meadows, Rays LF/DH

Marc Topkin of the Tampa Bay Times wrote over the weekend that the Rays could be open to moving Meadows, who is projected for a $4.3MM salary. Controllable through 2024, Meadows would be a long-term option for Tampa Bay or any potential acquiring team, but the Rays have proven willing to field offers on almost anyone on the roster. And with the aforementioned payroll outlook for the typically low-spending club, the front office figures to be amenable to ways to pare back costs.

Meadows is coming off a decent season, in which he hit .234/.315/.458 with 27 homers over 591 plate appearances. That marked a bounceback from a below-average offensive showing during the shortened 2020 schedule, but it’s a fair bit shy of his career-best .291/.364/.558 line the season before that. Meadows isn’t a great defender, so he needs to mash to be a star. He did that in 2019, but he’s otherwise been a good-not-great hitter. That’s still a valuable player to have on hand, but unless the Rays anticipate him replicating his peak season this year, it’d be sensible to listen to offers.

Tony Kemp, Athletics 2B/LF

Kemp has bounced around the league a bit in recent seasons. He plays second base and left field, but advanced metrics have pegged him as a fringy defender at the keystone. Kemp doesn’t bring a ton of power to the table, and he’s already 30 years old. It’s not the easiest profile to make work, explaining why he has yet to find a long-term home.

There’s no questioning Kemp’s 2021 results, though. Over 397 plate appearances, he hit .279/.382/.418. Both FanGraphs and Baseball Reference pegged him as worth around three wins above replacement. Kemp has excellent plate discipline and bat-to-ball skills, and he could be trending towards a late-career emergence in the mold of former A’s second baseman Tommy La Stella. The market for teams on the hunt for second base help is pretty thin. Kemp, who avoided arbitration on a $2.25MM salary and is controllable through 2023, would be an affordable pickup if the A’s move him as part of their anticipated post-lockout efforts to trim payroll and reboot the roster.

Manuel Margot, Rays OF

MLBTR’s Mark Polishuk recently looked at the possibility of the Rays making Margot available. He’s projected for a $5MM arbitration salary as he enters his final year of club control. That’s a reasonable salary for a player of Margot’s caliber, but Tampa Bay has plenty of cheaper, controllable outfielders on hand, and top prospect Josh Lowe looks ready to step into an everyday role somewhere in the grass after a monster season in Triple-A.

It’s not out of the question Tampa trades away multiple outfielders, but if they move the more expensive Kevin Kiermaier, Margot sticking around to handle center field is certainly possible. The latter might have broader appeal around the league, though. Not only is he set to make around a third of Kiermaier’s remaining guarantees, Statcast credited Margot with a league-best +16 Outs Above Average in the outfield last year. He’s never been more than an average hitter, but acceptable offense coupled with Gold Glove caliber defense is a very valuable player. There’s also a dearth of center fielders available in free agency at this point.

Max Kepler, Twins OF

MLBTR’s Mark Polishuk recently broke down Kepler’s trade candidacy at great length. Guaranteed $16.25MM through 2023 and controllable for 2024 via club option, he’d be an affordable target for teams seeking outfield help. Yet Kepler’s offensive production has ticked down towards league average following what seemed to be a breakout showing in 2019. The Twins might prefer to hold onto him in hopes he rediscovers that form, but they just extended Byron Buxton and have former top prospects Alex Kirilloff and Trevor Larnach in the fold as corner outfield options. A Kepler deal could be a creative way to address some of the team’s other issues in the starting rotation or at shortstop.

Danny Jansen/Alejandro Kirk, Blue Jays C

The Jays’ catching depth has been a topic of conversation throughout the offseason. Would Toronto part with one of their controllable backstops to land help in the rotation or infield? The signing of Kevin Gausman probably diminishes their need to land an impact starter via trade, although they’re likely to at least look for depth pieces.

Reese McGuire is a capable backup catcher who’s out of minor league options. Top prospect Gabriel Moreno is rapidly approaching and could be in the majors by the end of the season. Jansen offers a solid bend of power and defensive acumen, while Kirk has otherworldly bat-to-ball skills and an elite minor league track record. Toronto doesn’t have to move anyone from this group, but it could be an opportunity to consolidate their catching depth for help elsewhere on the roster.

Amed Rosario, Guardians SS/CF

Cleveland acquired Rosario from the Mets as part of the Francisco Lindor trade last offseason. His offensive numbers (.282/.321/.409) were fine, although neither Defensive Runs Saved nor Statcast was fond of his glovework at shortstop. Rosario’s aggressive approach at the plate will probably keep him from emerging as the star many envisioned he’d become as a prospect, but he has alright career hitting numbers, runs well and could be an option for teams at any of the up-the-middle positions on the diamond (aside from catcher).

The Guardians have a lot of infield depth, with several talented prospects in the high minors and already on the 40-man roster. With their seemingly annual need for outfield help, a Rosario trade could help balance the roster. Cleveland could also just give him more run in center or left field themselves, but it might be more straightforward to trade him to an infield-needy team with an outfield surplus. Rosario is projected for a $5MM salary and controllable through 2023.

Josh Bell, Nationals 1B

I covered Bell’s trade candidacy in greater length in late December. The Nationals are taking a step back in 2022, and he’s entering his final year of club control. A projected $10MM salary might scare away some suitors, but Bell would be a notable offensive upgrade for many teams around the league. The switch-hitter posted a .261/.347/.476 season-long mark, and he had an excellent 277/.381/.506 line with more walks than strikeouts after the All-Star Break.

Garrett Cooper, Marlins 1B/COF

Cooper has looked like a viable trade candidate for a few seasons. He’s part of a corner outfield/first base rotation in Miami that got a bit more crowded when the Fish signed Avisaíl García. The Marlins have suggested they could use García as their regular center fielder, but that’s less than ideal. If they land a center fielder after the lockout and push García to a more suitable right field role, Cooper might find himself squeezed for playing time.

A late bloomer, Cooper’s already 31 years old. He has quietly been a very productive hitter when healthy, though, including an excellent .284/.371/.478 line (133 wRC+) in 383 plate appearances since the start of 2020. Health is a big caveat for Cooper, who has had stints on the injured list in all five of his MLB seasons and missed the second half of last year with a left elbow injury. As MLBTR’s TC Zencka explored in December, he’d returned to taking batting practice and figures to be ready for 2022. Projected for a modest $3MM salary with an additional season of control thereafter, he could be an interesting flier, particularly for NL teams looking to add offense if/when the universal designated hitter is finalized.

Anthony Santander, Orioles RF/LF

Santander’s name has been floated around the rumor mill in years past. The Orioles are rebuilding, and he’s more of a complimentary piece than a likely member of the long-term core. Santander is limited to the corner outfield and has a very aggressive approach, though, making it crucial he makes plenty of contact and hits for power. He did that in the shortened 2020 season en route to a .261/.315/.575 line, but he couldn’t follow up on that success.

Last season, Santander had a couple injured list stints and struggled to a .241/.286/.433 mark. He signed for $3.15MM to avoid arbitration in November and remains controllable through 2024. Given their competitive window, the O’s would certainly listen to offers on Santander. But it remains to be seen whether there’ll be sufficient demand that Baltimore wouldn’t be better off hanging onto him and hoping he approximates his 2020 performance over the first few months of next season. MLBTR’s Darragh McDonald recently explored Santander’s trade candidacy in greater depth.

Zach Plesac, Guardians SP

Plesac isn’t yet arbitration eligible and he’s controllable for another four seasons. The Guardians might simply prefer to hang onto him, particularly after their 2021 season was derailed by rotation injuries. Yet as mentioned with regards to Rosario, Cleveland has significant concerns in the outfield. They’ve dealt key starting pitchers over the past couple seasons, seemingly confident in their ability to continue to develop less-heralded prospects into capable rotation cogs.

If they were to deal a starter, Plesac would seem the likeliest candidate. The Guardians aren’t about to rebuild, and moving Shane Bieber or Aaron Civale might be too significant a blow to their hopes of contending in 2022. Triston McKenzie and Cal Quantrill might still have upside Cleveland’s hoping to unlock. Plesac’s small sample excellence in 2020 was probably inflated by a regional schedule against Central-division teams that, by and large, weren’t good offensively. That season aside, he hasn’t posted particularly impressive strikeout rates. But he’s got excellent control, gets a decent number of grounders, and should be a solid bet for league average rotation innings over the next few seasons.

Merrill Kelly, Diamondbacks SP

The D-Backs were the worst team in the National League last season. They don’t seem to have the appetite for a full rebuild, but Kelly’s entering his final year of club control. At age 33, he’s probably not an extension candidate, so Arizona figures to be open to moving him.

Kelly’s not an overpowering arm. He posted a 4.44 ERA over 158 innings last season, striking out only 19.5% of batters faced. He throws plenty of strikes, though, and he gets a decent number of grounders. Playing on a modest $5.25MM salary, Kelly would be an eminently affordable pickup for contenders looking to stabilize the back of the rotation.

Mitch Garver/Ryan Jeffers, Twins C

Garver missed a good chunk of last season after suffering a gruesome injury. During his 243 plate appearances, he mashed at a .256/.358/.517 clip with 13 home runs (137 wRC+). That’s two of the past three seasons with some of the best offensive output of any catcher in baseball. He’s controllable for two seasons and projected for a modest $3.1MM salary. Jeffers hasn’t yet hit arbitration-eligibility and still has minor league options remaining. He struck out too often as a rookie, but he hit for power and is a well-regarded defender who entered the year among the sport’s top catching prospects.

As with Kepler, a trade of Garver or Jeffers would probably be about dealing from an area of surplus to address the rotation or shortstop. Both players could plausibly be regular catchers next season, and they’d lose some of their value if penciled into the DH role regularly. Given Garver’s injury troubles, Minnesota might prefer to hold their depth behind the dish.

Elieser Hernández, Marlins SP

The Marlins have reportedly fielded offers on their arbitration-eligible starting pitchers this winter, perhaps in search of controllable outfield help. Miami already thinned their rotation depth a bit by including Zach Thompson in the Jacob Stallings deal, but it wouldn’t be a surprise if they make one more move in that vein.

Over the past two years, Hernández owns a 3.84 ERA in 77 1/3 innings with very strong strikeout and walk rates (26.3% and 5.7%, respectively). He’s an extreme fly-ball pitcher who’s likely to always have some difficulty keeping the ball in the yard. He missed most of 2021 recovering from a pair of long-term injuries (biceps inflammation and a quad strain). Because of those drawbacks, he won’t be in as much demand as rotation mate Pablo López. Yet another team may try to take a shot on Hernández’s promising strikeout/walk profile, particularly since he’s only projected for a $1.4MM salary and controllable through 2024.

Chris Stratton, Pirates RP

I covered Stratton’s trade candidacy at greater length in December. He’s a 31-year-old reliever controllable for two seasons on a rebuilding team. The Bucs aren’t going to view him as a core piece of the rebuild, and it stands to reason they’d welcome the opportunity to pick up an intriguing low-level prospect. Over the past two seasons, Stratton has been the kind of capable if unexciting middle relief piece contending teams need. He won’t bring back a franchise-changing return, but at a projected $2.2MM salary, he should draw some interest.

Cole Sulser, Orioles RP

Sulser had a quietly strong second half with the Orioles, occasionally factoring into their closing mix. A late bloomer, he’ll be 32 by Opening Day. So while they’re under no contractual pressure to move him, the rebuilding O’s would certainly listen to offers. After putting up a 2.70 ERA with a 28.4% strikeout rate, he should be of interest to contenders. Sulser isn’t yet arbitration eligible and can be controlled through 2025.

Adrian Houser/Eric Lauer, Brewers SP

The Brewers certainly aren’t obligated to trade either of Houser or Lauer, both of whom are coming off strong seasons. Still, the Brew Crew already have a vaunted top three of Corbin Burnes, Brandon Woodruff and Freddy Peralta and prospects Aaron Ashby and Ethan Small are at or nearing the big leagues. Might Milwaukee plug one of the younger arms into the rotation and flip a veteran back-end starter for offensive help?

Adalberto Mondesi, Royals 3B/SS

Mondesi’s an enigmatic player. He brings an enviable combination of power and speed and has enough athleticism to play a competent or better shortstop. He also has among the worst strikeout and walk numbers of any regular position player in MLB. Perhaps most alarming, he’s dealt with enough injury issues in recent years that Royals president of baseball operations Dayton Moore expressed some doubt about his ability to play more than 100 games per season regularly.

Nicky Lopez played well enough to supplant Mondesi at shortstop last year. Bobby Witt Jr. will probably take that position early in 2022, pushing Lopez somewhere else on the dirt. Whit Merrifield is still around as a second base option. Kansas City might have enough infield depth to explore a Mondesi trade, although it’d be a bit of a sell-low on a player with obvious physical gifts who’s controllable through 2023. He’s projected for a $3.2MM salary.

Kyle Hendricks, Cubs SP

Hendricks is guaranteed $29.5MM through the next two seasons, with a vesting option that could keep him in Chicago through 2024. The Cubs have moved most of their core players dating back to last offseason, but Hendricks remains on the North Side. That might be attributable to some uncharacteristic struggles, as the righty’s coming off a career-worst 4.77 ERA with unimpressive peripherals.

Hendricks has never struck batters out or fared exceptionally well in the eyes of ERA estimators, though. Until last season, his actual run prevention handily outperformed metrics like FIP and SIERA as he thrived on exceptional command. He’ll probably bounce back, even if he may never recapture his Cy Young-caliber, 2.13 ERA form from 2016. With the amount of teams on the hunt for starting pitching, there’d no doubt still be demand if the Cubs made Hendricks available. Will they? Perhaps, since they’re not likely to compete in 2022. Yet their early-offseason activity — signing Yan Gomes and Marcus Stroman, claiming Wade Miley — has suggested they may not be keen to punt next season entirely.

Trey Mancini, Orioles 1B

The Orioles aren’t going to compete in 2022, and Mancini is ticketed for free agency at the end of the year. Most players in his situation would be very straightforward trade candidates, but the first baseman is a fan favorite and reported clubhouse leader who made an inspiring return to the diamond last year after missing the 2020 campaign battling colon cancer.

That Mancini returned to play in 147 games after facing that kind of life obstacle is a remarkable achievement. It’s undeniable, though, that his production slipped relative to his excellent 2019 campaign. Mancini’s .255/.326/.432 line was only marginally above average, and he played exclusively first base and designated hitter. It certainly wouldn’t be surprising to see him bounce back into a middle-of-the-order presence as he gets further away from beating cancer, but demand for his services might be limited until his production rebounds. If that’s the case, it’s probably not worth it for the O’s to trade him away this offseason. He’s projected for a $7.9MM salary, but Balitmore’s 2022 payroll ledger is wide open.

Show all

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

Do not Sell or Share My Personal Information

hide arrows scroll to top