Headlines

Go To Pro Hockey Rumors
Go To Hoops Rumors

MLBTR Originals

Poll: Projecting Luke Voit’s 2019

By | at

Among major leaguers who finished with at least 150 plate appearances in 2018, future Hall of Famer Mike Trout unsurprisingly led the way in wRC+ (191). But who finished second? Was it AL MVP Mookie Betts, NL MVP Christian Yelich or another big-name superstar? No, it was Luke Voit, who put up a 187 wRC+ in 161 PAs divided between the Cardinals and Yankees. Voit took a mere 13 trips to the plate until late July, when New York acquired him from St. Louis for a pair of relievers, and then proceeded to give the first baseman-needy Yankees an answer at the position over the final couple months of the season.

During his first 148 PAs as a Yankee, the burly, boisterous Voit batted a video game-like .322/.398/.671 with a Ruthian ISO (.350) and 15 home runs. And Statcast backed up Voit’s production, ranking the soon-to-be 28-year-old first in barrels per plate appearance and expected weighted on-base average (.437) among those who racked up at least 150 PAs on the season. While Voit benefited from a .365 batting average on balls in play, a number he may not approach again, the Yankees are understandably optimistic he’s good enough to serve as their No. 1 option at first going forward.

This has been an active offseason in the infield for New York, which has signed DJ LeMahieu and Troy Tulowitzki while showing interest in Manny Machado, but the team has been quiet at first base. Despite Voit’s limited track record, the right-handed slugger’s incredible showing toward the end of 2018 has made him the odds-on favorite to start at first in 2019 for the Yankees, whose previous long-term hope, the lefty-swinging Greg Bird, has fallen short of expectations because of a spate of injuries and less-than-stellar overall production. The Yankees have been bullish on Bird, but he missed all of 2016 because of a shoulder injury, and then produced very little from 2017-18 while dealing with foot problems. His horrific 2018 campaign made it necessary for the World Series-contending Yankees to address first, where they ultimately chose to turn to Voit over the summer.

While it’s still too soon to give up on the 26-year-old Bird, he may not receive regular playing time with the Yankees again unless Voit falls flat. Although Bird was a much better prospect than Voit during their younger days, there’s no doubt the latter has been the superior major leaguer to this point. Consequently, as the Yankees prepare for a championship push, they’ll continue with Voit at first, undoubtedly hoping last season wasn’t a mirage and they’ve acquired a star-caliber hitter for next to nothing.

The Steamer projection system doesn’t expect the 2019 version of Voit to serve as an offensive force, though, as it predicts he’ll wind up with an above-average but hardly world-beating .262/.335/.458 line. That would make for a .793 OPS, far better than what Yankees first basemen managed from 2016-18 but also much less impressive than the production Voit offered during his abbreviated showing last season. Now that he’s the Yankees’ preferred choice at first, how do you expect Voit to perform in 2019?

(link for app users)

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Checking In On The Worst Bullpens Of 2018

By | at

The importance of having a dominant bullpen was on display in 2018, when four of the majors’ five best relief units in terms of fWAR helped pitch their teams to the postseason. On the other hand, four of the league’s five worst relief corps (and nine of the game’s bottom 10) watched the playoffs from home. So now, with the spring fast approaching, where do last year’s bottom-feeding bullpens stand? As you’ll see below, at least one has made major improvements this winter, but the rest look iffier. While there’s still time for these teams to add help from a free-agent class that remains awash with veterans, this quintet’s bullpen-related heavy lifting may be all but complete for the offseason.

Royals (minus-2.2 fWAR; projected season-opening bullpen via Jason Martinez of Roster Resource ): Going by fWAR, the Royals’ 2018 bullpen was among the five worst of the past decade, though the unit “only” posted the majors’ second-highest ERA (5.09) a year ago. Those hideous numbers came in spite of the presence of Kelvin Herrera, who logged a near-spotless 1.05 ERA over 25 2/3 innings before the Royals traded the then-pending free agent to the Nationals in June. They also came thanks in large part to Brandon Maurer, who’s now a Pirate after pitching to a ghastly 7.76 ERA/6.58 FIP in 31 1/3 innings out of Kansas City’s bullpen last season.

Heading into the upcoming campaign, there’s a lot of work to be done to turn this Herrera-less group into a strength, but the Royals haven’t addressed it in any major way this offseason. However, considering they’re coming off a 58-win season and also won’t approach contention in 2019, it’s not surprising the Royals have shied away from major league free agency. They’ve instead taken less expensive routes to acquire potential bullpen pieces, having pulled in Michael Ynoa on a minor league deal, Sam McWilliams and Chris Ellis in the Rule 5 Draft and Conner Greene via waivers. Unfortunately, going by ZIPS projections, no one from that quartet looks like a promising bet to produce much in 2019. Likewise, ZIPS doesn’t have particularly high hopes for the majority of the Royals’ bullpen holdovers from 2018. The system does, however, like 23-year-old left-hander Richard Lovelady – who has turned in excellent minor league numbers but hasn’t yet reached the majors.

Marlins (minus-2.1 fWAR; projected season-opening bullpen): At 5.34, the Marlins’ relief corps managed the game’s worst ERA last year and the sport’s third-highest mark since 2009. The main culprits were Ben Meyer, Junichi Tazawa and Tyler Cloyd, who combined for 56 2/3 innings and each registered an ERA of at least 8.68. Tazawa and Cloyd are now out of the organization. Meyer, meanwhile, is still around, but he’s not even on Miami’s 40-man roster. But neither is righty Nick Wittgren, who led Marlins relievers in ERA (2.94) and FIP (3.13) in 33 2/3 frames last year. The Marlins made the odd choice to designate the 27-year-old Wittgren for assignment earlier this week to make room for the signing of infielder Neil Walker, who’s six years Wittgren’s senior and only under control for one season. Other notable contributors no longer in the mix include Kyle Barraclough (who nosedived in 2018 and was dealt to the Nationals in October), Brad Ziegler (Miami traded him to Arizona last July, and he has since retired) and Javy Guerra (now a Blue Jay after putting up a 5.55 ERA in 2018).

The best returning pieces in Miami’s bullpen look to be Drew Steckenrider and Adam Conley, who each registered solid seasons in 2018. Otherwise, it’s a largely unproven cast – one that hasn’t picked up any major league free agents and seems likely to once again record below-average numbers this year. As with the Royals, the Marlins are rebuilding, so they’ve explored alternative paths for help. Thus far, they’ve acquired Nick Anderson (via trade with the Twins), Tyler Stevens (via trade with the Angels), minor league free agents R.J. Alvarez and Brian Moran, Rule 5 selection Riley Ferrell, and intriguing waiver claim Julian Fernandez.

Mets (minus-0.6 fWAR; projected season-opening bullpen): Unlike the Royals and Marlins, the Mets are making a real effort to win in 2019. As a result, the bullpen has been a key area of focus for new Mets general manager Brodie Van Wagenen, who has swung a blockbuster trade to reel in arguably the best closer in baseball (ex-Mariner Edwin Diaz) and spent a combined $40MM on free agents Jeurys Familia and Justin Wilson this winter. Diaz, Familia and Wilson will join Seth Lugo, who was outstanding in 2018, and Robert Gsellman to give the Mets no fewer than five capable relievers.

Perhaps the Mets will also benefit from less heralded pickups in Luis Avilan and Arquimedes Caminero, whom they signed to minors deals, and Rule 5 pick Kyle Dowdy. Regardless, New York’s new cast of relievers looks a whole lot better than last year’s bullpen, which relied too much on the likes of Paul Sewald, Jerry Blevins, Jacob Rhame, Tim Peterson and Anthony Swarzak, among other ineffective options, en route to a 4.96 ERA. Sewald, Rhame and Peterson are still in the organization, albeit as depth pieces, while Blevins and Swarzak are now gone. All things considered, ZIPS expects the Mets’ revamped bullpen to end up as one of the majors’ best in 2019.

Indians (plus-0.4 fWAR; projected season-opening bullpen): Cleveland found its way to another division title in 2018 despite its weak bullpen, which limped to a 4.60 ERA as innings leaders Cody Allen, Dan Otero, Zach McAllister, Neil Ramirez and Andrew Miller scuffled. Allen, McAllister and Miller are now gone, leaving the Indians with a bullpen that, in spite of the great Brad Hand’s presence, still looks somewhat questionable. The club did well to re-up lefty Oliver Perez, whose 2018 renaissance earned him a guaranteed deal last month, though he’s the only major league free agent Cleveland has signed. The team also made a waiver claim for A.J. Cole, whose penchant for surrendering home runs led both the Nationals and Yankees to give up on him in the past eight months, and brought in veterans Justin Grimm and Brooks Pounders on minor league accords. Big league success has eluded Grimm and Pounders over the past couple years, however, so the Indians surely aren’t expecting significant contributions from either. Instead, their relief corps will count on returning Indians – potentially including flamethrower Danny Salazar, a starter from 2013-17 who missed all of last season because of shoulder problems. While Salazar could factor in at some point, it won’t be at the start of the season.

Nationals (plus-0.4 fWAR; projected season-opening bullpen): Washington, another prospective contender, has made a couple of interesting bullpen moves this offseason after last year’s underwhelming showing. In addition to trading for the hard-throwing Barraclough, who held his own from 2015-17, they inked fellow high-velocity righty Trevor Rosenthal to a $7MM guarantee in free agency. Rosenthal, 28, sat out all of last season while recovering from Tommy John surgery, but the former Cardinals closer was mostly tremendous out of their bullpen from 2012-17.

Should a healthy Rosenthal return to form, it would be an enormous boon for the Nationals, who saw a different ex-Cards reliever – Greg Holland – experience a rebirth in their uniform last season. But after logging a microscopic 0.84 ERA in 21 1/3 innings in D.C., Holland joined the Diamondbacks in free agency. The Holland-less Nats are now slated to rely mostly on elite but oft-injured closer Sean Doolittle, Barraclough, Rosenthal, Justin Miller, Koda Glover, Sammy Solis and Matt Grace, with Tanner Rainey (acquired from the Reds for Tanner Roark) and minor league signings Vidal Nuno and J.J. Hoover around as depth. All said, it’s a high-risk, high-reward bunch, given the injuries Doolittle and Rosenthal have dealt with and the up-and-down performances of Barraclough, Miller, Glover, Solis and Grace.

Poll: Nolan Arenado’s Future

By | at

Just one year from reaching free agency, Rockies third baseman Nolan Arenado may go down among the most coveted players ever to hit the open market – if he does, that is. The chances of Arenado shopping himself around the majors next winter seemingly took a hit Saturday when Rockies owner Dick Monfort expressed optimism about the club’s chances of locking the four-time All-Star up for the long haul.

“I think we’ve gotten it to the point where we’re to the finals. We’re to the crescendo,” Monfort told Thomas Harding of MLB.com in regards to extension talks with Arenado. Monfort added that he’s “comfortable that we can get a number that we can get to” for Arenado, who “wants this to happen as much as we do.”

The Rockies and Arenado have already held at least one meeting this week, during which they hammered out a record-setting, arbitration-avoiding agreement worth $26MM. It seems they also used that summit to discuss a long-term arrangement for Arenado. Regardless, the Rockies will no doubt need to hand Arenado a team-record pact – one that obliterates the $141.5MM guarantee they gave former first baseman Todd Helton in 2001 – to prevent their current franchise player from taking a stab at free agency.

Although they’ve historically been middle of the pack or lower when it comes to spending, the Rockies appear ready to pony up for Arenado. General manager Jeff Bridich said in December that the Rockies could afford a $200MM-plus contract for Arenado, and Monfort noted Saturday that revenue from their TV contract – which runs through 2020 – will jump from $20MM per annum to $40MM. That 100 percent increase, not to mention a new TV deal which the Rockies will begin negotiating in the summer, should only help the team’s chances of retaining Arenado.

For his part, Arenado may simply prefer the comfort of Colorado, where he has posted far better offensive numbers than on the road, to dealing with the free-agent process. The market has become increasingly unkind to players over the past couple offseasons, evidenced in part by the fact that in-their-prime superstars Bryce Harper and Manny Machado have been unemployed for three months. Harper and Machado are eventually going to rake in huge contracts, but with fewer suitors than expected, the duo may not do as well as predicted when the winter began. And while Harper hasn’t even played his age-26 season yet and Machado won’t turn 27 until July, Arenado will be on the verge of his age-29 campaign if and when he becomes a free agent.

Despite the age difference between him and the Harper-Machado tandem, Arenado’s certainly paying close attention to their free-agent forays. The more money Harper and Machado receive, the better it will be for Arenado, whose superb all-around track record gives him a strong chance of joining the $200MM club in the next 12 months. The main question is whether he’ll get that money from Colorado or another franchise. How do you expect it to play out?

(link for app users)

A Closer Look At The Red Sox And The Luxury Tax

By | at

The Red Sox’ bullpen — or, really, its lack of fortification this offseason — has garnered plenty of recent attention. President of baseball operations Dave Dombrowski has not only downplayed the possibility of a reunion with Craig Kimbrel but also the addition of any notable arm. While Dombrowski has stated that there’s no mandate to remain south of the top luxury tax border, it also seems increasingly likely (if not apparent) that that’s exactly what the team is planning to do. Most onlookers have at least a cursory awareness of what that entails, but I felt it worth a deeper look to see exactly what the Sox are deeming the theoretical breaking point — if they are indeed set on avoiding that barrier.

This isn’t necessarily a call for the Red Sox to spend more, to be clear. Boston is poised to carry Major League Baseball’s highest payroll for the second consecutive season and stomached the hit when they incurred top-level luxury penalization last year. This offseason, ownership green-lit a $68MM expenditure on Nathan Eovaldi and another $6.25MM on Steve Pearce. The Sox have hardly refused to spend. Every team, though, has its limit, and at the very least Boston seems close to that point.

At present, Roster Resource’s Jason Martinez has the Red Sox with a 2019 payroll of $238,373,928. That’s how much money they’ll pay out to players — those on the roster and those either no longer on the 40-man (Rusney Castillo) or no longer even in the organization (Pablo Sandoval).

For the purposes of the luxury tax (labeled as the Competitive Balance Tax in baseball’s collective bargaining agreement), however, payroll is calculated by the average annual value of the contracts for which a team is responsible (in addition to a set level of player benefit costs, which include medical costs, moving/travel expenses, etc.). Jason has Boston’s luxury tax payroll (“actual” payroll, as termed in the CBA) projected at $241,269,197. Those numbers, both the 2019 payroll and the “actual” payroll, are estimates and aren’t exact, but they’re both close approximations that provide a reasonably accurate depiction of what the organization’s expenses currently entail. Before delving further into what additional spending would mean for the Red Sox, it’s important to note what those numbers mean for the team’s current taxation penalties.

For the 2019 season, the luxury tax line has been set at $206MM. Even without re-signing Eovaldi and Pearce, the Sox were always going to be well north of that line. The collective bargaining agreement stipulates that a second-time offender — the Red Sox were over the luxury line in 2018 but stayed shy of it in 2017 — will pay a 30 percent tax on the first $20MM over the initial luxury line. Teams are subject to an additional 12 percent tax on the next $20MM spent. If a team crosses the luxury limit by more than $40MM, it will pay an additional 45 percent tax from that point forward and also see its top pick in the next year’s draft dropped by 10 spots. Put otherwise:

  • $206MM to $226MM: 30 percent tax (a total of $6MM)
  • $226MM to $246MM: 42 percent tax (a total of $8.4MM)
  • $246M or more: 75 percent tax and a loss of 10 spots in the following year’s draft

Using Jason’s figures above, the Red Sox are paying the full $6MM of that first level and are $15,269,197 into the second level of tax penalization. That sum is taxed at a 42 percent rate, meaning the Sox are paying a $6,413,063 tax on it. At present, then, the Red Sox are committed to paying about $12.413MM worth of luxury tax penalties. There’s a $4,730,803 gap between their current projection and the $246MM top luxury line. If they were to, theoretically, add another reliever for a dollar less in order to avoid top-level penalization, the Red Sox would be taxed an additional $1,986,937. Of course, that’d leave them unable to make a single in-season addition should the need arise.

That, however, is the gripe for many critics. A bullpen headlined by Matt Barnes, Ryan Brasier, Heath Hembree, Brandon Workman, Tyler Thornburg and Brian Johnson seems quite likely to necessitate trade-deadline augmentation — and that’s before even allowing for the possibility of an injury to a key player that would also require a trade acquisition. It’s not only possible that the Red Sox will have crossed the top luxury line by the time the July 31 non-waiver trade deadline has passed — it seems downright likely. Perhaps the plan is to find trade acquisitions whose salaries can be largely paid down by their current team, but doing so would require paying up a greater premium in terms of prospects and thus weaken an already thin farm system.

Should paying more in terms of prospects be preferable to lessening the 2020 draft budget? Some might argue that it’s preferable to go ahead and commit to taking the draft hit in order to gain the advantages of a bolstered bullpen from the start of the season. After all, the division is hardly a shoo-in and the Sox obviously have designs at chasing an elusive repeat title. But what does that actually mean from a financial standpoint?

For the sake of argument, let’s take a look at what the Red Sox would have to pay in order to sign Kimbrel at the four-year, $70MM term projected by MLBTR in our Top 50 Free Agent Predictions back in November. In trying to peg Kimbrel’s eventual contract, Tim Dierkes, Jeff Todd and I all felt that Kimbrel would seek to top Aroldis Chapman’s record guarantee (which he reportedly has indeed pursued) but ultimately fall shy and instead, ahem, “settle” for breaking Wade Davis’ $17.33MM annual salary record for a reliever over a four-year term. Kimbrel may very well fall shy of our $70MM prediction, but he could still set a new AAV standard with a three-year, $52.5MM deal. Even a one-year deal at the $17.5MM level would come with the same CBT hit for 2019. For purposes of this hypothetical, that seems a reasonable figure to work with.

If the Sox were to pay Kimbrel a $17.5MM annual salary, the first $4,703,803 of that salary would close the gap between Boston’s current “actual” payroll and the $246MM threshold. As noted above, that’d come with a $1,986,937 luxury hit, coming to a total of $6,690,740. The remaining $12,769,197 would come with a hefty tax of $9,576,898. That’s a total of $11.564MM just in taxes before considering the money the team would actually owe to Kimbrel himself.

Viewed through that lens, Boston would effectively be on the hook for a stunning $29,036,835 in 2019 if they were to sign Kimbrel at the record rate he’s quite likely eyeing. (A multi-year deal, of course, might have greater or lesser salaries in its various seasons, though that’s all averaged for the CBT.) Frankly, even beyond any concerns about lengthy commitment to a not-so-youthful reliever, it’s pretty clear to see why the Sox don’t have much interest in retaining Kimbrel unless his price tag craters (at which point a plethora of other teams would join the bidding). Though the total luxury tax bill would still not make up an enormous amount of the team’s total payroll-related spending, it would perhaps turn a Kimbrel signing from a hefty investment to an eye-popping splurge.

That math is also informative when examining why the Sox have passed over other top-end relievers. For instance, beating the Yankees’ three-year, $27MM offer to Adam Ottavino by a margin of $500K annually would’ve still been costly for Boston. As with any contract, the first $4,703,803 of the deal would’ve been taxed at $1,986,937. The remaining $4,796,197 would come with a $3,597,148. In total, signing Ottavino at a $9.5MM annual salary would effectively cost $15.084MM in 2019.

Boiled down, any relief addition for the Red Sox with an annual salary north of the $4,703,803 gap that exists between their current “actual” payroll and the $246MM luxury line could be viewed as such (where X = the average annual value of a new contract):

(X – 4,703,803) + (X – 4,703,803)*0.75 + 6,690,740 = Total 2019 expenditure

All of that, of course, is before even acknowledging the 10-spot drop they’d face in the draft for a second consecutive season. There’s no way of knowing precisely how much the Sox would be costing themselves in the 2020 draft, or even how much they stand to lose in the 2019 draft after crossing the top level last year, as 2019 slot values aren’t yet known. However, dropping from No. 30 in 2018 to No. 40 (the drop they’re facing this year) would have resulted in a loss of $489,500 in the team’s draft pool. Draft slot values increase incrementally each season, and the Red Sox’ exact placement in the draft order obviously can’t be known. But generally speaking, the Sox would be looking at a 10-spot drop and a loss of at least $500K in their 2020 draft pool.

Clearly, the price to add a reliever of any significance will be steep for Boston — possibly more so than most would expect before truly diving into the math behind further additions. That said, it’s still worth questioning the Red Sox’ decision to draw a line in the sand at this juncture. The current state of the ’pen makes it seem likely that Boston will need to add a reliever during the season anyhow, and that could still put the team over the limit while also costing prospects.

Beyond that, this it’s quite likely that this is the last time Boston will ever enjoy the Chris Sale, Xander Bogaerts and J.D. Martinez all on the same roster. Sale and Bogaerts are free agents after the 2019 season, and Martinez has an opt-out provision that he’ll presumably exercise if he produces anywhere near his 2018 levels. Add in the fact that Mookie Betts can become a free agent after the 2020 season — though the Sox surely hope to extend their franchise player — and there’s all the more urgency for Boston to go all out in its pursuit of another championship.

Further spending truly doesn’t appear to be in the cards for Boston, though perhaps they’ll be able to secure one of the market’s remaining relievers at a modest $2-3MM commitment that’d still allow them to avoid the top line. But the Sox look like they’re genuinely poised to enter the season with a glaring weakness — one that’ll be tough to account for during the season. While the staggering level of taxation they’d have had to pay on another notable ’pen arm (or two) makes their reluctance understandable, that’ll still be a tough sell to fans if the current group of relievers doesn’t exceed expectations in dramatic fashion. It’s an illustration of the potency of the current luxury tax rules — though, of course, the payrolls of virtually every other team in baseball presently reside comfortably out of range of this level of penalties.

Extension Candidate: Kyle Freeland

By | at

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Making Sense Of The Whit Merrifield Extension

By | at

It’s difficult sometimes to make sense of the extensions we hear about. Why is it that player A is earning so much more or less than player B? Sometimes it’s obvious; sometimes it’s not. In some cases, there are relatively unique, personal circumstances that help explain it — some of which may not even really become known publicly. In every case, the actual course of negotiations requires both sides to estimate market value at a point at which there are necessarily still key factors that are unknown. There’s plenty of variability based upon varying motivations of the particular team and player involved. Still, we like to think that market value underpins baseball contracts. Every deal is susceptible of examination from a value perspective.

Given all of that, it seems worth taking a closer look at the recently reported deal between the Royals and second baseman/center fielder Whit Merrifield. Despite two-straight All-Star seasons and an upward trajectory in his performance, he’s promised just $16.25MM over four years — less than the qualifying offer rate ($17.9MM) for a single season. He can boost that by a bit via escalators, but will also give away an option year at a $10.5MM salary. Even in the extension context, it seems like a bargain for a high-quality player who has immense versatility and a well-rounded skillset. So, how to make sense of this?

It all starts with his experience and age. Merrifield is still shy of three years of MLB service yet just recently hit his 30th birthday. Since he didn’t have enough service time to reach arbitration early as a Super Two qualifier, he was still a full season away from commanding more than the league minimum salary, with the inherent risks and limitations of the arb process to look forward to thereafter. Moreover, the recent trends in the aging curve have not been kind to elder statesmen.

Add to that the fact that Merrifield’s most notable skills — hitting for average, speed on the bases, and good and versatile glovework — are not particularly well-compensated in the arbitration process. To be sure, they do show up indirectly in earnings since the process pays players who see a lot of playing time. But power stats (homers and ribbies) have tended to pay best over time than the harder-to-quantify areas of the game. Even stolen bases, the counting stat in which Merrifield shines, aren’t considered major drivers.

Whatever one thinks of Merrifield’s particular outlook, in terms of skills and health, the overall situation was one in which his anticipated future earnings were rather limited. In arbitration, barring a huge power burst, he’d have profiled as a strong but hardly record-shattering player. And his hypothetical free agency was laden with risk. How might he look as a player four years in the future? Nobody knows, but odds are he won’t be quite in his prime, since his pre-existing arbitration control extended through his age-33 season.

Let’s dig into the numbers to see why this is the case.

First, looking at the forthcoming arb years, we can check in on some second basemen and other comps to learn about what Merrifield might have taken home had he elected to go year to year. As I’ve noted previously, DJ LeMahieu represents an interesting overall comp since he just wrapped up his own arbitration run. After starting with a $3.0MM salary, and posting one big offensive season during his arb years, he finished with a $16.3MM total — a near-exact (and perhaps not coincidental) match for what Merrifield will receive.

When I first proposed that comp last March, Merrifield had yet to post his excellent 2018 season. As things stand, it’s not hard to see a path to more than $16.25MM. Just how high Merrifield could have climbed would obviously have been dependent upon what he does in the season to come, but we can guess at some parameters.

In terms of starting point, Merrifield ought to end up with a case for much greater earning power than LeMahieu (.284/.329/.370, 15 home runs, 157 RBI, 1,901 plate appearances) and Joe Panik (.282/.345/.408, 29 home runs, 170 RBI, 1,818 plate appearances), who earned $3.45MM in his first arb year. The Dodgers’ Chris Taylor rode a breakout 2017 and solid 2018 follow-up to a first-year arb salary of $3.5MM. He’s sitting on 39 home runs and 152 RBI with a .262/.331/.435 batting line through 1490 plate appearances. Even if Merrifield isn’t able to push or top twenty long balls in 2019, he’d surely be on track to carry a much more impressive overall statistical baseline than Taylor. He already has more plate appearances (1,669) and RBI (167) and nearly as many long balls (33), with a full season left to improve upon those tallies.

On the other hand, it’s tough to foresee anything like the 34-dinger outburst and second-place MVP finish that allowed Javier Baez to achieve a $5.2MM first-year arb salary. In all likelihood, depending upon how things play out in 2018, Merrifield likely would have commanded an arb-1 salary somewhere between the numbers we’ve thrown out for consideration — say, in the realm of $3.75MM to $4.75MM.

A few other mid-arb players also help illustrate how things could have proceeded in the event that Merrifield would have kept producing throughout his arb years, quite apart from the starting point. Shortstop Marcus Semien entered arb with sixty home runs and near-average total productivity through just under two thousand plate appearances. He earned $3.125MM in his first year after an injury-limited platform season and bumped up to $5.9MM in 2019 salary after launching 15 long balls in 703 plate appearances. Scooter Gennett jumped from a $2.525MM starting point to $5.7MM and $9.775MM salaries, driven by a total of fifty dingers and robust overall productivity in his final two platform campaigns.

With good fortune and some continued improvement, Merrifield could have tracked those or even greater raises. In the best-case, reasonably realistic scenario — fully healthy seasons at the top of his prior power levels (~20 home runs annually) — he might have started at a $4.5MM level and taken home successive $3.5MM raises. That would have resulted in $24MM of total arbitration salary.

Of course, it’s imaginable that Merrifield’s performance, and/or intervening health issues, could deflect him from that sort of path. Joe Panik had set the stage for bigger earnings than that (despite suffering a major ballpark-related disadvantage vis-a-vis LeMahieu), but stumbled after taking down $3.45MM in his arb1 season. He settled for just $3.8MM for the coming campaign and has no hope of approaching LeMahieu’s overall earning level.

Obviously, any kind of significant injury would sap any player’s ability to command a raise. Since Merrifield is not even in arbitration yet, an ill-timed and significant injury (say, in camp this spring) could have been extremely damaging to his earning power. Even if things went well for a time, Merrifield would always have been vulnerable to injuries or downturns in performance. That’s the same for any player, but the risks were amplified (and the future free agent benefits diminished) by his age.

It bears emphasis that the risks still apply before Merrifield would reach arbitration, since he’s still a full season away. Don’t believe me about the variance in arb earnings? Here’s an illustration, using some big names. Francisco Lindor nearly set a first-year-eligible record when he agreed to a $10.55MM contract earlier this month. He has been healthier and more productive of late than the fellow star shortstop of the same service class to whom he’s often compared — Carlos Correa, who edged Lindor in the 2015 Rookie of the Year vote. The Astros star’s salary remains unresolved, but will fall between $4.25MM and $5MM. Despite piling up plate appearances at the outset of his career, Correa is now over five hundred shy of Lindor due to some injuries. Unsurprisingly, he has also fallen behind his contemporary in home runs and holds only a slight edge in runs batted in. Correa still holds a clear edge in overall, park-adjusted offensive productivity (128 wRC+ vs. 120 wRC+), and is still considered an elite talent, but took a down year at the wrong time. Lindor’s playing time and power ramped up in his platform years, allowing him to more than double Correa’s first-year arb earning power.

If $24MM of arbitration earnings represented a best-case scenario, then the downside was more or less unlimited. Obviously, it’s hard to imagine that Merrifield would be cut out of significant future earnings entirely, barring a truly catastrophic injury. But he’s still a full season away. And as Panik shows, it’s not hard to craft a scenario where the earnings come in well short of their anticipated trajectory. The risks are clear.

If there’s something potentially objectionable about this arrangement from Merrifield’s perspective, perhaps it’s the fact that he coughed up a free agent season. That’s where the Royals could find some real upside, since they’ll have a chance to hang onto Merrifield for only a one-year commitment, when he could in theory be in position to take down quite a bit more in free agency.

That said, just what kind of open-market earning scenarios is Merrifield really sacrificing (or, at least pushing back by one year)? It seems rather unlikely, even from four years out, that he’ll enter the 2023 season thinking he left an enormous amount of money on the table.

Take this comparison. We can all agree that Merrifield has had an outstanding pair of seasons. He’s sitting on a .296/.347/.449 cumulative slash with 31 home runs and 79 steals, with his other contributions leading to a cumulative valuation of 9.3 rWAR / 8.1 fWAR. Compare that to Jed Lowrie, who once had his own breakout season at 29 years of age. He was injured in the interim but turned things on more recently. Lowrie just hit the open market at a slightly more advanced age than Merrifield would have, sporting a two-year platform of .272/.356/.448 hitting with 37 home runs and 8.8 rWAR / 8.5 fWAR.

Lowrie’s free agent take? Two years and $20MM. That salary level is reflected in the one option year that Merrifield gave the team in his new deal, which is valued at $10.5MM — again, as with the LeMahieu arb comp, perhaps not coincidentally.

Even in a highly optimistic scenario, such as the Ben Zobrist bidding war, there’s a limit to what this sort of player can earn in free agency. Zobrist was a hot commodity entering his age-35 season, having a long track record of excellent offensive production (well outstripping Merrifield’s overall record to this point) and defensive versatility. He secured a four-year, $56MM contract.

All things considered, this seems to be rather a fair arrangement for both sides. It’s a deal that lets the team avoid a runaway arbitration salary, and perhaps gain another season of a respected veteran at a bit of a discount rate. But it’s hardly the Jose Ramirez contract — another deal involving a two-plus service class infielder who was coming off of a breakout campaign. Ramirez, of course, was just 24 years of age and was just beginning an ascendancy that has continued to levels that were perhaps not anticipated at the time. His deal conveyed a pair of valuable team options — for his age-30 and 31 seasons. The sort of upside present there just isn’t available in the Merrifield contract.

For a 30-year-old, non-slugging infielder/outfielder who is still less than three campaigns into his MLB career, this extension lands in a sensible realm in terms of both length and total guarantee. Upon sifting through some other recent contracts, it’s not hard to see how the sides landed where they did.

Trying To Identify “Mystery Teams” For Manny Machado

By | at

The apparent staring contest between Manny Machado, the White Sox and the Phillies doesn’t seem to have an end in sight, and the saga will surely drag on even longer if reports of unidentified suitors prove true. With the identities of said teams (assuming for a moment that they do indeed exist) yet unknown — it’s perhaps worthwhile to at least take a high-level pass throughout the league to see just who could plausibly emerge as a surprise dark-horse in the Machado auction.

It seems safe to eliminate the league’s perennial lowest spenders. While the Rays have an atypical amount of flexibility even after signing Charlie Morton, it’s impossible to imagine a team with this payroll history sustaining even a $25MM annual salary — let alone a salary of $30MM or more. Similarly, the Athletics figure to be priced out of the Machado market, as do the Pirates and the Marlins (the latter of which, once again, is rebuilding anyway). The Reds are already projected to set a new franchise-record payroll in 2019, and adding Machado when they already have strong infield options isn’t all that plausible.

Great as Machado is, there are also some clubs who simply don’t have space in their infield for him. The Astros could afford to add Machado to their ranks, for instance, but Houston wouldn’t displace any of Alex Bregman, Carlos Correa or Jose Altuve to accommodate Machado. The Nationals have Anthony Rendon, Trea Turner and newly signed Brian Dozier comprising their non-first-base infield slots. I wouldn’t characterize the group of Josh Donaldson, Dansby Swanson, Ozzie Albies and Johan Camargo as quite as strong an infield mix, but it’s fair to say that the Braves probably don’t have space for yet another left-side infielder, barring a trade. Machado would also take Atlanta’s payroll to record heights.

Looking further, it’s unlikely that a team in the early stages of a pure rebuild is going to sign Machado the type of contract he’s seeking. The Royals are trying to pare back payroll, and the Tigers have yet to signal that they’re ready to emerge from their own restructuring. The Orioles aren’t going to bring him back into the mix on the heels of selling off the vast majority of their appealing veteran assets last summer. If it turns out that the Mariners wanted to clear money for Machado and/or Bryce Harper all along this winter, well then kudos to Jerry Dipoto on the most entertaining offseason in MLB history. But, since we’re trying to be rational, it seems like a lock that Machado doesn’t align with Seattle’s “re-imagining” movement.

Several mid-market teams are said to be facing payroll constraints that’ll probably keep them out of the Machado market. The Indians have been trying to shed payroll for much of the winter, and the Diamondbacks are currently being weighed down by huge commitments to Zack Greinke and Yasmany Tomas, the latter of whom is no longer even on the roster. The Rockies’ projected payroll already checks in north of $150MM, making a deal tough to envision. And if they’re going to give this type of annual salary to anyone, they’d probably prefer to offer it to Nolan Arenado, anyhow.

There are also several teams who typically spend heavily but are again refraining from doing so. The Dodgers don’t really have a need on the left side of the infield, but they could conceivably move Justin Turner or perhaps even Corey Seager to second base if it meant opening the hot corner for a player of Machado’s caliber, but there have at least been some reports that L.A. is vying to stay below the luxury tax line, and they’ve not spent like a big-market club to date. The Cubs could bid farewell to Addison Russell in some capacity and install Machado at shortstop, but persistent reports out of Chicago suggest their budget isn’t even flexible enough to bolster the relief corps. The Giants seem likelier to rebuild than to add a free agent of this magnitude, and the Rangers have been zeroed in on smaller-scale additions as they embark on their own soft reset. The Blue Jays are no strangers to large payrolls ($160MM+ in each of the past two seasons) but have made only marginal additions as they face the reality of a top-heavy division and the disbanding of the core that recently carried them to the ALCS.

The Red Sox arguably don’t have a dire need for Machado, though they could likely find a way to fit him into the mix. However, they’re just a few million shy of the top luxury bracket, and some reports have implied that an unwillingness to top that threshold is preventing them from even adding a reliever to the ’pen. They’re picking an odd time to draw a line in the sand, but Machado never seemed all that likely a target anyhow. Their chief rival, the Yankees, made (and very arguably still makes) sense on paper, but it doesn’t seem like they’ll outbid the field to further muddle an already crowded infield picture.

Beyond this grouping, of course, we know that both the White Sox and Phillies are legitimate Machado suitors who needn’t be explored as we try to pin down any potential mystery clubs. All of that said, there are still six clubs that strike me as reasonable guesses when trying to pin down potential Machado mystery clubs. Here’s a look at the remaining teams, and how/why they could conceivably add Machado to the mix (listed alphabetically):

  • Angels: The Halos have larger priorities — namely, trying to extend Mike Trout — but it wouldn’t be that hard to fit Machado into the mix. Zack Cozart could be slotted in at second base to make room for Machado at third base. Recent comments from GM Billy Eppler have suggested that the Angels’ spending is likely near its max following the addition of Cody Allen, but they only have Trout under control for another two seasons. There’s every reason to try to maximize the chance of winning immediately, and the Albert Pujols albatross will be off the books after the 2021 season. If the Halos somehow find a way to extend Trout, they’d only be on the hook for all three mega-salaries for one season (2021).
  • Brewers: Milwaukee is already in record payroll territory, but Ryan Braun is a free agent after the 2020 season and they’ve watched the division-rival Cubs largely sit this offseason out. With a clear infield need, the Brewers could theoretically add Machado, slide Travis Shaw over to second base and boast an exceptionally deep lineup. Milwaukee has just $48MM in guaranteed money on the 2020 payroll and $35.5MM in 2021. There’s likely some bad blood after October’s Jesus Aguilar incident — Christian Yelich made his feelings toward Machado known after that game — but presumably the hatchet could be buried if Machado were suddenly helping the Brewers win an extra five-plus games per year for the foreseeable future.
  • Cardinals: President of baseball ops John Mozeliak certainly didn’t sound like someone who was planning on a big free-agent splash over the weekend, but the Cards were prioritizing corner-infield bats earlier this winter prior to acquiring Paul Goldschmidt and could still fit Machado into the fold. Doing so would likely mean sliding either Paul DeJong or Matt Carpenter to second base for a season — the latter of which is probably a particularly unpalatable defensive alignment. But the St. Louis lineup would be exceptionally deep. As mentioned above with regard to the Rockies and Arenado, perhaps the Cardinals would simply prefer to give Goldschmidt a $30MM+ annual salary on an extension if they have the resources available, but Machado is a half decade younger.
  • Mets: The Mets’ infield is overcrowded as is — so much so that Jeff McNeil is likely to play in the outfield next season — so they’d have to make a move in order to fit Machado into the mix. But new GM Brodie Van Wagenen has been vocal about his win-now attitude, and shipping Todd Frazier off in order to open regular time for Machado at the hot corner isn’t outlandish. What could be outlandish would be the Wilpon family green-lighting a payroll north of $160MM, but even with all the moves they’ve made, it’s not that hard to see an on-paper scenario where Machado fits into the mix.
  • Padres: San Diego’s hopeful core is quite young, which presents them with the potential to carry a few notable veteran long-term contracts. Last offseason’s Eric Hosmer deal already looks regrettable, but the Padres did front-load the deal, so their annual commitment to Hosmer drops to $13MM beginning in 2023. The Padres project at a payroll just south of $84MM right now and have about $64MM on the books next season. The Padres haven’t historically been big spenders in the past, but the current ownership group did authorize a $108MM Opening Day payroll back in 2015. The Padres are known to be looking for a third baseman, and Machado would give them a long-term answer.
  • Twins: The Twins are the only team in baseball that doesn’t have a single dollar committed to any player in 2020. With a completely blank payroll slate, they’d have little problem fitting a major salary onto the long-term books. Looking at the 2019 roster, the infield appears full at first glance, but Machado is the type of player for whom a team should be willing to shuffle the deck. Miguel Sano could slide over to first base, pushing C.J. Cron to the bench role that Tyler Austin currently occupies. A $4.8MM bench bat would be an overpay for a team like the Twins, and owner Jim Pohlad would need to approve a record payroll by as much as $10MM for the upcoming season. That, however, would be a one-year expenditure before payroll naturally regressed. Meanwhile, the Indians aren’t improving, the Tigers and Royals aren’t threats to contend, and if any club should have an interest in keeping Machado away from the ChiSox, one would imagine it’d be a division rival.

Projecting Payrolls: Chicago Cubs

By | at

Although substantial time has passed since the last installment in this series, only the reliever market has moved in a significant way. As such, we move on to the 12th piece while the biggest fish remain unhooked. Below find the links to the earlier posts in this series.

Philadelphia Phillies
Los Angeles Dodgers
Los Angeles Angels
Atlanta Braves
New York Yankees
Chicago White Sox
Boston Red Sox
Minnesota Twins
Milwaukee Brewers
San Francisco Giants
St. Louis Cardinals

If you have questions about financial information made available to the public and the assumptions used in this series, please refer to the Phillies piece linked above.

Today, we look into a club coming off of its best four-year stretch in franchise history and flush with cash, yet one who also appears to be fully intent to sit out free agency this winter: the Chicago Cubs.

Team Leadership

Concluding 65 years of ownership by the Wrigley family, the Tribune Company purchased the Cubs in 1981. The franchise had, incredibly, missed the playoffs for 35 straight seasons prior to the transaction. The team went on to make the postseason six times under Tribune ownership, including three times from 2003-08. The final two years of Tribune ownership were executed under the direction of Sam Zell, a real estate mogul who purchased the Tribune in late 2007. Then, in October 2009, the Ricketts family famously acquired the Cubs for $845 million. Ownership of the franchise is managed by team chairman Tom Ricketts, who authorized an aggressive tank followed by the most successful time period in Cubs history.

While the Ricketts family initially kept general manager Jim Hendry in place running the baseball operations department, they made the splashiest of splashy moves in 2011, relieving Hendry of his duties and replacing him with new President of Baseball Operations and renowned curse breaker Theo Epstein. Epstein got his band back together, bringing in former proteges Jed Hoyer and Jason McLeod to be his general manager and vice president of scouting and player development, respectively, both after two years in San Diego. The results have been undeniable: the club averaged a putrid 67 wins per year during the first three years of the Epstein regime and flipped the switch in 2015, averaging 97 per year over the next four years.

Historical Payrolls

Before hitting the numbers, please recall that we use data from Cot’s Baseball Contracts, we’ll use average annual value (“AAV”) on historical deals but actual cash for 2019 and beyond, and deferrals will be reflected where appropriate. And, of course, the value of examining historical payrolls is twofold: they show us either what type of payroll a team’s market can support or how significantly a given ownership group is willing to spend. In the most useful cases, they show us both. We’ll focus on a 15-year span for the Cubs, covering 2005-18 for historical data as a means to understanding year 15: 2019. This period covers two competitive windows and two ownership groups for the Cubs, and it’s not terribly difficult to see where the Ricketts-authorized tank began. We’ll also use Opening Day payrolls as those better approximate expected spending by ownership.

Payroll spiked from 2008-10 as the Cubs paid to keep their 2007-08 winners together. Publicly available reported revenue increases climbed to fuel the spending, growing from $179 million in 2005 all the way to $239 million in 2008. Of course, take all publicly available revenue figures with a significant grain of salt as only ownership and the front office truly know the finances. However, revenue largely stagnated in the following half decade, reaching only $266 million in 2013 during the tank.

What followed is difficult to describe as I’ve never seen anything like it. Revenue climbed to $302 million in 2014, $340 million in 2015, $434 million in 2016 (!), and $457 million in 2017. While 2018 revenue hasn’t yet been reported, it is entirely possible that revenue has increased more than $200 million over just five years. Striking. Seen in that light, the 2016-18 payrolls are hardly surprising.

Ricketts ownership and the Epstein-led front office have been keen to stay under the luxury tax threshold during their time in charge, exceeding the threshold only in 2016, incurring a tax of just under $3 million before staying under the threshold in each of the next two years. The Cubs have simultaneously been major players in the international market, throwing a $30 million guarantee at outfielder Jorge Soler in 2012 and following with a boisterous international class in 2013 that included young stars Gleyber Torres and Eloy Jimenez and a massive 2015 class that yielded just under $19 million in signing bonuses. Major League spending captures a significant portion of Cubs spending, but international amateur spending has been a key facet of Cubs expenditures in recent years.

Future Liabilities

Cubs spending in 2019 will surely hit a new franchise high.

That is a lot of guaranteed money.

The 2019 Cubs are spending $88 million guaranteed on starting pitching, led by $20 million-plus salaries for Lester, Hamels, and Darvish. To say that these commitments are risky is a massive understatement.

  • Lester has been a paragon of stability, but he has seen his FIP rise each year as a Cub, from 2.92 in 2015 to 4.39 in 2018. He’ll enter 2019 with 2,520 combined regular season and playoff innings on his odometer. He just turned 35.
  • Hamels pitched a year and a half to the tune of a 4.87 FIP prior to joining the Cubs at the trade deadline in 2018. He was rejuvenated with the Cubs, but he’ll enter 2019 with 2,653 combined regular season and playoff innings on his own odometer, also having just turned 35.
  • Darvish largely enjoyed success since arriving from Japan before a disastrous debut season with the Cubs that ended in May due to an elbow injury.
  • Tyler Chatwood bombed in his first year as a Cub, losing his rotation job and throwing fewer than 10 innings for the club after the trade deadline.
  • Jose Quintana posted a career-worst FIP of 4.43, fueled in large part by a career-worst home run rate.

Projection systems expect the Cubs rotation to be wildly successful in 2019, especially when the arbitration-eligible Kyle Hendricks is added to the fold. Still, Cubs fans are at least a bit anxious after the across-the-board struggles from 2018.

A trio of lefty hitters figure prominently on the balance sheet, two of whom will be around for years to come. Rizzo and Heyward have been lineup mainstays for years, though Rizzo has obviously been substantially more productive on the field. Unlike Rizzo and Heyward, Zobrist finds himself in a walk year in a season in which he turns 38.

The remaining notable deals are all for relief pitchers, at least four of which find themselves staring down free agency come November. In a highly competitive 2019 National League Central division, the team will need strong production from multiple arms in the group of Morrow, Cishek, Strop, Kintzler, and Duensing.

Finally, Heyward’s signing bonus stands out as the only deferred money for the franchise. But it’s a big number: $20 million payable after his contract expires. Presumably franchise revenue will be so astronomical in the mid-2020s so as to see this amount as largely rounding error, but $5 million is still $5 million.

As a result of stellar drafting in the early part of this decade and a trio of impact trades, the Cubs feature significant talent in the arbitration ranks, including multiple Most Valuable Player candidates and Cy Young contender.

All seven players listed above figure to play key roles for the team in 2019, though Russell finds himself mired in a mess of his own making. As the arbitration chart shows, each player is controllable for at least one year beyond 2019 as well with offensive stars Bryant, Baez, and Schwarber each controllable through 2021.

What Does Team Leadership Have to Say?

So, so, so much.

While ownership, the front office, and manager Joe Maddon have spoken at great length about the budget this offseason, comments from Tom Ricketts in recent days likely shed the most light on the spending plans. In response to questions about expected payroll, Ricketts suggested that “when you make any free-agent signing — not to pick on Darvish, but any of them — you know that you can’t spend that dollar twice and you have to budget that into the future, so that’s going to limit what you can do in the following year. And one of the things this year that we knew going into the offseason was that we weren’t going to have as much flexibility as years past.” When Ricketts moved on to discussing the team’s local tax burden, it seemed that the budget has very little, if any, room.

As we will detail below, it’s close to inevitable that the Cubs will incur a luxury tax in 2019. However, Ricketts more or less stated that the budget is tapped out, jiving with what the front office has said for months now.

In the face of big moves by the rival Cardinals and Brewers, the Cubs appear content to have their offseason largely dictated by their budget.

Are the Cubs a Player for Bryce Harper or Manny Machado?

Ummmm…honestly, I don’t know. Almost certainly not. But crazier things have happened.

The Cubs haven’t been connected to Machado at all this offseason, and given their impressive collection of infield talent, this doesn’t come as a huge surprise.

But Harper? The Cubs have been connected to Harper for years. This article humorously chronicles some of the 2017 nuggets that suggested Harper would — or wouldn’t — join the Cubs. These rumors have become par for the course. Many of the rumors have centered around the close relationship between Bryant and Harper, both Las Vegas natives.

After the Cubs surprisingly bowed out of the playoffs in quick fashion, Epstein lamented that “the offense broke,” leading to significant speculation that the Cubs would seek to add a significant bat.

Nevertheless, budgetary constraints combined with Maddon clearly stating that a Harper signing is “not going to happen” seemingly slammed the door shut on any pursuit.

Despite all of the above, Chicago Sun-Times writer Gordon Wittenmyer commented in December that sources indicated that the Cubs front office requested that Harper and his agent, Scott Boras, come back to the team before Harper decides to sign elsewhere in order to give the Cubs a chance to make a final play for the young star.

What Will the 2019 Payroll Be?

Well, it’ll be a new team record, that’s for sure. But just how high will it go?

Currently, team payroll comes in at $202.1 million before accounting for the luxury tax. If spending sticks approximately where it currently stands, the team figures to incur a luxury tax of approximately $4.4 million based on a luxury tax payroll figure of just under $228 million and a 20 percent tax on the overage.

So how much room is there for additional expenditures? I suspect that ownership would push total spending up around $220 million given the need for an in-season acquisition or two. Given that, don’t expect to see additional expenditures prior to the start of the season save for a possible minimal commitment to a backup catcher or a reliever.

Projected 2019 Payroll: $210 million

Projected 2019 Payroll Space: $2.9 million

If you’d like to go even further down the rabbit hole of Cubs payrolls, I refer you to my series of articles that have appeared on The Athletic going into tremendous detail on team spending.

3 Remaining Needs: AL East

By and | at

In the final installment of our 3 Remaining Needs series, let’s take a look at the division that boasted the best and worst teams of the 2018 season. The AL East perfectly reflects the class warfare plaguing the American League, as the gap between the competitive upper class and, well, the Orioles could not be more stark. Even within the upper crust, however, there is plenty of variance, as the low-payroll Rays have done their best to keep pace with payroll behemoths in Boston and New York. Meanwhile, the Blue Jays have taken a step back but are still looking to prepare their roster for an anticipated influx of premium young talent.

[Previous installments: NL West, NL East, NL Central, AL West, AL Central]

Baltimore Orioles

  • Trade Mychal Givens. It’s a no-brainer for the Orioles to sell off their veteran pieces for prospects, only they don’t have much to sell off. Alex Cobb and Andrew Cashner can be shopped, but they’d be salary dumps if they’re moveable at all and they might be better off providing a veteran base for a rotation that should have younger arms auditioning for at least two turns out of every five. The O’s have invested too much in Dylan Bundy over the years to trade him now for pennies on the dollar; better to hang onto the upside. That leaves Givens (10.3 K/9) as the most attractive piece on an otherwise barren roster. Once the major free agent bullpeners are off the market, teams should come calling for a hard-throwing late-inning arm with three seasons of control remaining.
  • Sign trade bait for July. With a hugely uncertain roster situation, the Orioles should be willing to take some risks and snap up whatever the market leaves. While they’re not likely to snag any major free agents, even on pillow deals, they should be scouring the bargain bin for vets on one-year deals that could potentially bring something back at the trade deadline. Frankly, the particular position doesn’t matter so much as the value opportunity that’s presented. Needless to say, the same reasoning also supports active waiver-wire scanning, such as the team’s recent claims of Rio Ruiz and Hanser Alberto.
  • Boost their international operations. The O’s longstanding aversion to spending on international amateur talent is well-documented. That was beginning to change before the club turned over the reins to new GM Mike Elias, but the org’s initial foray onto the market did not exactly go without a hitch as the club’s top reputed targets (Sandy Gaston and the Mesa brothers) landed elsewhere. That served as a reminder that bringing in top talent — not to mention, unearthing lower-cost gems — involves more than having and spending the available funds.

Boston Red Sox

  • Replace/re-sign Craig Kimbrel. The Red Sox haven’t done much work to rebuild their bullpen as of yet, but the degree to which they’ll need to is still unknown. With no clear market developing for Kimbrel at this time, a reunion is not at all out of the question. If they don’t bring him back to Boston, they’ll need to do something to bolster a unit currently over-reliant on holdovers Ryan Brasier and Matt Barnes.
  • Explore upgrades at catcher. Boston somehow managed to win a World Series in a season where its catchers batted a combined .194/.246/.288 in 619 plate appearances. Regardless of the defensive Christian Vazquez and Sandy Leon can frame and throw with the best of them, and Blake Swihart (if he ever catches) may yet turn into something if given any semblance of an opportunity, but the catcher position in Boston was an utter black hole on offense last season. It wasn’t quite as bad as having a pitcher hit each time through the order, but it was closer than any AL team should be. That the team hasn’t done anything to this point suggests it may not be at the top of the priority list, but it’s hard to deny that there’s an opportunity to improve. Speaking of backstops …
  • Resolve the status of Blake Swihart. The Red Sox need to finally determine if Swihart has any kind of real role with the team. Again, it’s tough to criticize a team that won a World Series in 2018, but even Boston’s most steadfast defenders have to concede that the team didn’t exactly manage its roster all that effectively as pertains to Swihart. Boston wouldn’t put Swihart behind the plate, wouldn’t put him in the field and wouldn’t DH him. Swihart had just 48 plate appearances through May 31 in 2018 despite not spending a single day on the disabled list or in the minors. He had 99 PAs prior to the All-Star break — again, without a DL stint or any time in the minors. He can’t be optioned, and the Sox clearly don’t have a spot for him. It may have worked in 2018, but the Sox were effectively operating with a 24-man roster for a good chunk of 2018. They need more flexibility, and Swihart probably would like a chance to actually play somewhere.

New York Yankees

  • Trade Sonny Gray. Once Brian Cashman began the offseason by declaring Gray would be traded, there seemed little room for negotiation. The market for Gray may not fully materialize until all of the top starting arms are off the market, but there doesn’t seem to be much value in bringing him back to New York. There’s no room in the rotation at present, even if there are questions around the age and durability of their top five. Still, the Yanks are not shy about in-season acquisitions and they have depth in Triple A they can rely on. Specifically, Domingo German (5.57 ERA) and Luis Cessa (5.24 ERA) underperformed last season relative to advanced metrics like FIP and xFIP.
  • Seriously pursue a premium free agent. No, the Yanks do not need Bryce Harper or Manny Machado. The club won 100 games last year and is a threat to do so again (in a highly stratified American League) without making further upgrades. Still, this division — more so than the two other wings of the AL — promises to host a year-long battle. And … well … this is the Yankees we are talking about. What good is it being a financial behemoth if you can’t use your might to elbow out other teams when rare market opportunities come along? We’re not here to say that the Yankees must land one of these two players, or that they simply have to pursue both even if it makes a mess of the team’s roster and financial planning. But it would be odd if the Yanks didn’t at least put in a strong bid for either or both. With the allure of the pinstripes and New York City helping the cause, they just might come away with a bargain.
  • Add another relief arm. Whether or not the club makes any other notable roster moves, this seems like an easy way to improve. The bullpen has been a notable strength in the Bronx of late, and that promises to continue. But the deeper the unit is, the more support it can provide to a highly talented but somewhat risky rotation. Limiting the wear and tear on the starting unit will not only max out its results all year long, but give the Yankees the best chance of having a powerful staff when crunch time comes late in the season.

Tampa Bay Rays

  • Make another free agent splash. A big name would surely help the club draw some fans to the park, and perhaps help jump start a still-flagging ballpark effort. More importantly, the team can still tap into some funds to improve its chances of sneaking up on the BoSox and Yanks. As things stand, there’s still just under $60MM on the books for 2019. With a number of quality free agents still out there and awaiting a deal, the Rays should be willing to be aggressive in doling out short-term money to get significant pieces. Charlie Morton could deliver great value, and adding Avisail Garcia may be a decent risk, but there’s no reason to stop there.
  • Make a run at J.T. Realmuto. Whether or not the free agent market offers another golden opportunity, the Rays should see if they can pull of an intra-state coup by coaxing the Marlins to send their star backstop up the coast. There’s nothing wrong with a Mike Zunino–Michael Perez pairing behind the dish, but Realmuto is the game’s best. The Tampa Bay front office would have flexibility in resolving the preexisting options, particularly since Perez can still be optioned. He’d be a nice depth piece and could perhaps also remain on the roster as part of a three-catcher mix. Alternatively, the Rays could still deal away Zunino.
  • Add some veteran bullpen pieces. The Rays’ fascinating bullpen usage has shown no small amount of promise. Part of the strategy, of course, is to lean on a high volume of young pitching. But it’s hard to deny the value of veteran leadership and of established, steady performance. The current Tampa Bay bullpen unit features just one player — Chaz Roe — with more than three years of MLB service time. Allocating some remaining funds to one or more quality free agents would seem to make sense. Old friend Sergio Romo is among the many remaining possibilities.

Toronto Blue Jays

  • Prepare for potential spring trades. Entering the winter, it seemed that veteran first baseman Justin Smoak would pop up in the rumor mill with some frequency. We broke down his potential suitors in anticipation of just that, but nothing of note has materialized to this point. There has been more chatter surrounding righty Marcus Stroman, but no indication to date that there’s any momentum toward a deal. Things may be quiet now, but more and more of the offseason business is stretching up to and into Spring Training, when teams will see their rosters in the flesh and injuries will begin to pop up. The Jays should anticipate some late-breaking interest in these players and be ready to pounce on any good opportunities that come up.
  • Put the payroll space to work. Neither Smoak nor Stroman need to be moved for purely financial reasons. Indeed, the Jays should also be willing at least to poke around for bargains on the market. The Jays are only projected to have a payroll of roughly $110MM next season right now, well below recent levels of spending. The team has a variety of players who have a decent amount of MLB experience but who have yet to establish themselves fully. It’s fine to give opportunities to players of that kind, but that shouldn’t be allowed to clog things up if there’s a chance to add better talent — even if it costs a bit of money. The Toronto organization could find some opportunities to acquire talent as teams make final payroll decisions, whether that takes the form of snagging unwanted arbitration-year players or taking on an under-water contract that’s packaged with prospects.
  • Add to the bullpen. The Jays have little in the way of established arms at the back of the ’pen, and even if they don’t realistically expect to contend, there’s value in having a few stabilizing pieces to prevent a constant churn of DFAs and other various 40-man machinations throughout the course of the season. Scooping up some useful arms on one- or even two-year deals can also always yield a viable summer trade chip. Last year, the club enjoyed some opportunities at the trade deadline due to its arsenal of veteran relievers, and there’s good reason to pursue a similar course again.
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