Headlines

Go To Pro Hockey Rumors
Go To Hoops Rumors

MLBTR Polls

Poll: Still-Unemployed Top Ten Free Agents

By | at

Spring training has begun, and while recent announcements by the Cubs and Padres of nine-figure deals (with Yu Darvish and Eric Hosmer, respectively) have quieted cries of collusion from the player’s union, the unemployment level of top free agents remains historic. Specifically, five of MLBTR’s top ten free agents (excluding Masahiro Tanaka, who never actually reached free agency) are still unsigned. The recent mega-contracts have overshadowed the urgency of the situation for these free agents, as they’ve got barely more than a month left to find jobs before Opening Day. As each day passes, it becomes more difficult to simply assume that Jake Arrieta, Mike Moustakas, Lance Lynn, Greg Holland and Alex Cobb will all agree to terms before that time comes.

The market on the above players isn’t totally cold as of now. On the contrary, there seems to be some buzz surrounding many of them. Here’s what we know at the moment…

Arrieta and his representatives were said to be “having dialogue” as recently as four days ago, and it’s believed that there’s real interest being explored. At the same time, though, there appears to be a gap between the two sides’ bargaining positions. There have also been multiple recent reports that the Phillies don’t want to lock themselves into a long-term deal to improve their rotation. While Darvish fell short of expectations with a $126MM guarantee, Jon Heyman of FanRag Sports says Boras is attempting to convince front offices that Arrieta compares more favorably to David Price, Max Scherzer and Zack Greinke. The oft-vehement Boras apparently sees Darvish as an “analytics phenom”, but describes analytics as a “management excuse to keep salaries down.” He also says that Arrieta beats Darvish in something he calls “prestige” value. Heyman lists seven teams as potential landing spots for Arrieta, believing he’s most likely to land with the Nationals, Brewers or Phillies.

Moustakas seems to have little traction with any MLB club at this point. The Braves have engaged his camp, but there seems to be no evidence that a deal is likely to come together. The White Sox have also been loosely linked to him. It’s highly unlikely that he’ll return to Kansas City at this point, as the Royals would apparently rather give Cheslor Cuthbert a shot at third base as they begin to rebuild. Moose reportedly has plenty of one-year offers on the table, but it’s not clear whether he’ll receive any significant multi-year offers at this point in the offseason.

Lynn hasn’t been forced to dramatically lower his asking price, and last we heard, the Twins preferred him to the other options available on the market. Earlier reports suggest he’s received interest from seven or eight teams in recent weeks, including the Orioles, Brewers, Nationals, and Mets in addition to the aforementioned Twins. For his part, Lynn believes there’s “nothing really to worry about — at this moment.“

Holland has the coldest market on this list, at least publicly. The Wade Davis signing seemingly eliminated the possibility of a reunion with the Rockies, and in nearly two months since then, the only public mentions of Holland have been from the Nationals and the Cardinals. Both of those mentions were negative, with the former saying they weren’t very high on him and the latter expressing trepidation about giving a big contract to a closer. Of course, those teams could still be suitors if Holland’s asking price drops far enough, and so could the Indians. I also mentioned the Astros, Rangers, Cubs and Brewers as potential fits back in mid-January.

Cobb reportedly had an offer from the Cubs earlier in the offseason that was said to be in three-year, $42MM range. His camp passed on it, and his market has little in the way of clarity at this point. The Twins showed interest at one point, while the Mets would reportedly explore signing him if his asking price drops far enough. That’s about the only direct link between him and an MLB club we’ve heard about in recent months, though. The Orioles seem to believe he’s too expensive, and the Cubs might not have a clear role for him following the Darvish pact.

A lot can happen in one month; the free agent action so far in February should serve as a prime indicator of that. But at this point it looks possible that one or more of the top ten free agents could hold out into the regular season in hopes of nailing down a guarantee to his liking. With that in mind, I’d like to ask the readers two questions. How many of these players do you think will still be unemployed when the first pitch is thrown on Opening Day, and who do you think is most likely to be unsigned by that point?

Poll link for app users

Poll link for app users

Poll: Grading The Yu Darvish Deal

By | at

Unfortunately for those who follow baseball, the most popular topic in the sport this offseason has been the historically slow free-agent market. Upward of 100 players remain without contracts as spring training nears, but the good news is that the top available veteran finally came off the board Saturday.

The six-year, $126MM agreement the Cubs reached with right-hander Yu Darvish will hopefully lead to a flurry of signings in the near future. Regardless of how the majors’ other 29 teams react, it likely concludes the offseason heavy lifting for Cubs president Theo Epstein and general manager Jed Hoyer, who have added Darvish, two other starters (Tyler Chatwood and the injured Drew Smyly) and a pair of established relievers (Brandon Morrow and Steve Cishek) to a club that ruled the National League Central in each of the previous two years.

Even without Darvish, the Cubs probably would have entered 2018 as the popular pick to win the division, though arguments could have been made for either the rival Brewers or Cardinals to seriously challenge for the crown. Both Milwaukee and St. Louis have been active this offseason after nearly making the playoffs last year. As things stand, though, they’re clearly looking up at a Cubs team with a set rotation (Darvish, Kyle Hendricks, Jose Quintana, Jon Lester and Chatwood) and an enviable group of position players. There was speculation earlier in the offseason that Chicago would deal from its lineup and/or farm system to boost the front of its rotation, but bringing in Darvish officially took that possibility out of play.

Along with retaining their position players and prospects, there are other other obvious benefits to picking up Darvish, including that he’s a tremendous starter who should boost the Cubs’ World Series chances in the coming years. The towering flamethrower, who emigrated from Japan in 2012, generally thrived with the Rangers and Dodgers, and there’s little reason to expect he’ll fail in Chicago in the near term. Speaking of the Dodgers, they rank as arguably the prominent concern in the NL for the Cubs (with Darvish’s help, they upended Chicago in the NLCS last season), so pilfering the 31-year-old from LA makes the signing all the more satisfying for Chicago. Plus, because Darvish was part of a midseason trade and wasn’t eligible for an offseason qualifying offer, reeling him in won’t cost the Cubs anything in draft-pick compensation or international bonus pool money.

With Darvish now in the mix, the Cubs will say goodbye to free agent Jake Arrieta, who did receive a QO after the season. When he heads elsewhere, Chicago will nab a pick after the second round of this year’s draft in return. Of course, even though Darvish is more hyped than Arrieta and will likely end up with the bigger guarantee of the two this winter, some may prefer the latter. The soon-to-be 32-year-old Arrieta wasn’t great last season, when he alarmingly lost some velocity, but he has been the more successful of the two in recent years. During his run as a Cub from 2014-17, Arrieta ranked third among starters in ERA (2.67), fifth in fWAR (18.5) and collected a Cy Young Award (2015).

Even if you’d rather have Darvish than Arrieta, the contract comes with some risk for the Cubs (which you’d expect with all big-money accords). Specifically, it’s in the form of an opt-out clause after the 2019 season. If Darvish pitches well enough over the next two years to vacate the deal in favor of another trip to the market, his departure would create a sizable hole for a Chicago team that hasn’t had great success at developing starters during the Epstein era, as Sahadev Sharma of The Athletic recently detailed (subscription required).

On the other hand, should he go downhill during the next two years and stick with his current contract, it could leave the Cubs with another expensive, declining veteran to join Lester (guaranteed $25MM after 2019, including a $10MM buyout for 2021) and outfielder Jason Heyward (guaranteed $86MM from 2020-23). The Cubs took the opt-out risk on Heyward when they signed him to an $184MM contract prior to 2016, when he was one of the sport’s foremost all-around players. Since then, his offensive game has gone in the tank, making it unlikely he’ll leave when he’s allowed to after next season or potentially at the end of the 2019 campaign.

To the Cubs’ credit, the $126MM guarantee looks quite reasonable for Darvish, and at $21MM per year, it’s palatable from a luxury tax standpoint. During a normal winter, Darvish may have ended up with a much wealthier contract. In fact, at the start of what has since turned into a bizarre offseason, MLBTR predicted a six-year, $160MM payday for Darvish, while former FanGraphs writer Dave Cameron forecast an even richer figure ($168MM) over the same term. All things considered, then, it seems the Cubs made out rather well with this move – one they hope will help guide them back to World Series glory in 2018. What are your thoughts?

(Poll link for App users)

Are MLB Players Overpaid?

By | at

MLB players earned more than $4MM on average in 2017, with some players’ salaries exceeding $30MM.  For most people, that’s an unfathomable amount of money.  Many people feel that baseball players and other athletes are overpaid, with the median American full-time worker earning around $45K per year.

Why do people object to MLB player salaries?  One reason is the nature of the profession – Major League Baseball is a game played for the public’s entertainment, while baseball itself is a game many of us played in our youth for the sheer enjoyment of it.  MLB players don’t serve an essential function to society like a teachers or doctors.  And to many, the work of an MLB player seems less difficult and much more enjoyable than a typical job.  It can be difficult to stomach professional athletes earning 100 times or more than that of a typical American.

Another reason some fans consider players to be overpaid is ticket prices.  For a family of four to see the Cubs host the Cardinals on a Saturday in July, sitting in the upper deck, currently costs $565.91 on Stubhub for tickets alone.  Of course, context is everything.  Go to a Rays-White Sox game on a Wednesday afternoon in April, and a family of four can get in the door for $50 or less.  At the heart of the matter: how much do player salaries actually affect ticket prices?  I’m not an economist, but I think one would argue that teams will charge what fans are willing to pay.  If player salaries were magically cut in half tomorrow, but demand for tickets remained the same, would you expect teams to reduce prices?

The other side of the coin is that, as difficult as it may be to accept given their salaries, MLB players might be underpaid.  As an industry, MLB’s revenue has grown to $10 billion.  As Nathaniel Grow wrote on FanGraphs a few years ago, the players’ percentage of that pie has dropped from a peak of 56% in 2002 to less than 40% in 2015.  No one’s suggesting fans should feel sympathy for wealthy MLB players, but rather that they are entitled to fight for their fair share of the sport’s revenue.  After all, without these 1,000 or so players, there’s no MLB.  More money for the players doesn’t have to mean higher ticket prices; it would just mean less for the owners.  Those on this side of the debate would note that MLB players are highly compensated because there are so few people in the world capable of doing their jobs, and interest in watching them perform drives the sport’s revenue.

As tensions mount between the owners and players, let’s see where MLBTR readers stand.  App users can click here to take the poll.

MLBTR Poll: Predicting A Contract For Mike Moustakas

By | at

The market has just not lined up well to this point for former Royals third baseman Mike Moustakas. While we guessed he’d be able to command a five-year commitment and ranked him the sixth-best free agent available in our 2017-18 Top 50 Free Agents list, that level of contract is increasingly difficult to imagine.

In that ranking, MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes listed the Angels, Braves, and Cardinals as conceivable landing spots. In a full breakdown, MLBTR’s Mark Polishuk noted that a variety of other organizations could conceivably get involved on the still-youthful Moustakas. The Giants and Mets were clear possibilities on paper, with some scenarios imaginable in which teams like the Phillies, Red Sox, Indians, Orioles, or Twins might enter the picture. And, of course, the incumbent Royals were expected to remain in the frame to some extent.

As things have shaken out, several of the plausible pursuers have elected to go in different directions. The Angels (Zack Cozart), Giants (Evan Longoria), and Mets (Todd Frazier) now seem clearly out on Moustakas after adding third basemen. Any outside chance that the Phillies would get involved may have disappeared when the team signed Carlos Santana to play first base. There’s no indication that the Red Sox are looking in this direction, the Indians don’t seem to have funds available, and the Orioles and Twins remain only speculative possibilities at this stage. The Royals don’t seem to expect a reunion. While the Cardinals are still a conceivable fit, indications are the organization doesn’t like the match. Though the Braves likewise still theoretically work, David O’Brien of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution suggested on Twitter today that he doesn’t expect the organization to offer up significant money. Developments have left the Yankees seeking a third baseman, but they are walking a luxury tax tightrope.

Quite apart from the broader market slow-down, then, there are arrows pointing toward trouble for agent Scott Boras in finding a major deal for Moustakas. That’s not to say it isn’t possible — it’s worth bearing in mind there was plenty of hand-wringing over Lorenzo Cain before he recently secured a significant contract, and Moustakas is hardly alone among still-unsigned premium free agents — but the picture does seem decidedly different than it did entering the winter.

All said, it seems an opportune moment to see what the MLBTR readership anticipates. Can Boras still pull off a big contract? Will “Moose” have to settle for significantly less? Is there a middle ground? Give your opinion here on the sort of contract Moustakas is likeliest to sign (link for app users):

Poll: Who Will Sign Jonathan Lucroy?

By | at

Jonathan Lucroy went into the offseason as the most prominent free agent catcher available, though with February just a day away, Lucroy is still looking for his next team.  Yesterday’s news of an agreement between Alex Avila and the Diamondbacks took yet another potential landing spot off the board for Lucroy, leaving him with a rapidly narrowing list of options as Spring Training approaches.

Sep 22, 2017; San Diego, CA, USA; Colorado Rockies catcher Jonathan Lucroy (21) at bat during the seventh inning against the San Diego Padres at Petco Park. Mandatory Credit: Jake Roth-USA TODAY Sports

While Lucroy is far from the only notable player whose market has stalled in this unprecedentedly-slow free agent season, his case is a particularly interesting one given the traditional lack of catching depth around baseball.  There was certainly reason for teams to have concern about Lucroy heading into the winter, most notably his decline in power and framing ability and his massive slump in the first half of the 2017 season, yet you’d think that a player with Lucroy’s track record would’ve found some type of acceptable contract given how often teams require an upgrade behind the plate.  It was just in 2016, remember, that Lucroy hit .292/.355/.500 with 24 homers over 544 plate appearances.

As it happened, however, Lucroy seems to have run into something of a perfect storm of circumstances.  Beyond just his down 2017 season and the overall free agent deep freeze, the catching market was further crowded by the presence of J.T. Realmuto and Yasmani Grandal as trade candidates.  Lucroy also happened to hit free agency in a winter when most of the contending teams were pretty set behind the plate.  The D’Backs and Rockies both had holes at catcher, though Arizona went with Avila while Colorado signed Chris Iannetta despite some known interest in bringing Lucroy back to Coors Field.

Beyond just the contenders, a larger-than-usual number of teams in various stages of rebuilding phases haven’t had interest in spending significant dollars on a catcher (or, Lucroy may not have interest in finding himself traded at the deadline for the third consecutive year, which would be a distinct possibility if he joined a losing team on a pillow contract).  The White Sox gave Welington Castillo a two-year deal, while other catchers have inked one-year Major League pacts or minor league contracts to serve in backup roles.

MLB Trade Rumors ranked Lucroy 20th on our Top 50 Free Agents list, projecting him for a two-year, $24MM deal.  Finding even that modest contract seems unlikely at this point, though that could open the door for more teams to some looking at Lucroy as a potential bargain.  Here are some of the candidates…

Mets: Lucroy reportedly drew some interest from the Amazins earlier this month, and they certainly fit the description of a team that could turn to Lucroy if (or now that) his price tag can fit into their limited budget.  Steve Phillips of MLB Network Radio on SiriusXM (Twitter link) outlined some of the reasons for a Mets/Lucroy connection this morning, calling him “a perfect fit” given Travis d’Arnaud’s defensive limitations and the fact that d’Arnaud could either be retained as a non-costly backup or perhaps shopped himself in trade talks.

Astros: Aside from the Mets and Rockies, there has been very little buzz about Lucroy on the rumor mill this winter, to the point that this item from Jon Heyman back in November about Houston’s interest in Lucroy represents the only other team linked to the catcher this offseason.  In the two and a half months since Heyman’s report, the Astros agreed to a $6.7MM arbitration-avoiding deal with Evan Gattis and plan to use him as their primary DH, and also signed Tim Federowicz as minor league depth to battle with Max Stassi for the backup job.  A catcher/DH timeshare between Lucroy and starter Brian McCann would’ve been creative, though it doesn’t seem like the Astros still seem like plausible suitors.

Nationals: Unwilling to deal their very best prospects to Miami for Realmuto, the Nats could pivot away from a trade and instead sign Lucroy to supplant Matt Wieters as the everyday catcher.  Lucroy could potentially be a open to a discount to play for a World Series contender like Washington, and even a two-year deal would make a him a nice bridge to Pedro Severino if the Nationals still see the youngster as their catcher of the future.  One obstacle: after getting burned on the Wieters contract, could the Nats be wary about signing another veteran catcher showing signs of decline?

Athletics: In the wake of Bruce Maxwell’s arrest on aggravated assault and disorderly conduct charges, GM David Forst said that the A’s were still counting on Maxwell as their first-choice catcher heading into 2018.  With Lucroy still on the market months later, however, the A’s might take advantage of an opportunity to land a potential star catcher at a lower price.  As mentioned earlier, however, Lucroy might be hesitant to join a team that could again make him a trade deadline chip.

Orioles: Dan Duquette is no stranger to signing free agents still lingering on the market in February.  Top prospect Chance Sisco is slated for regular duty next season, though since 2018 is clearly a go-for-broke season for the O’s with so many big names (Manny Machado, Adam Jones, Zach Britton, Buck Showalter, and Duquette himself) entering the last year of their contracts, the team might want more of a proven veteran presence behind the plate.

The field: You could stretch and make cases for such teams as the Red Sox, Indians, Brewers, Rangers, Cubs, or Angels as potential Lucroy suitors, though these teams range from “probably only in the event of another trade” or “major longshots.”  Still, we could be in for a wild February of player movement given how much has yet to be decided within the free agent market.  It isn’t out of the question that further trades could open up a spot for Lucroy on an unexpected roster, and an injury in Spring Training could also create a new suitor out of nowhere.

Where do you think Lucroy will be playing come Opening Day? (poll link for Trade Rumors mobile app users)

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images

Poll: How Good Are The Brewers?

By | at

The Milwaukee Brewers have had a busy offseason (especially over the course of the past week), and they appear to be nearing the end of a surprisingly short rebuild.

Just last week, it would have seemed odd to count the Brewers as serious contenders for an NL Central pennant in 2018, considering the apparent strength of the rival Cubs and Cardinals. But the Brew Crew shocked the baseball world by acquiring Christian Yelich from the Marlins and signing Lorenzo Cain to a five-year contract within a span of two hours. They’ve since signed Matt Albers to a two-year contract as well, who’ll join lefty Boone Logan as veteran upgrades to the club’s bullpen.

But even after all those upgrades, Fangraphs still projects the Brewers to finish with a record of 77-85. That’s surprising on the surface considering the club’s 86-76 record in 2017 in combination with the team’s offseason moves thus far. But when taking an in-depth look at the club’s roster, they have some key holes that may hurt their ability to compete with more complete teams.

The club’s rotation is their most obvious issue. Jimmy Nelson, who took an enormous leap forward last season, will be sidelined until June while recovering from a torn labrum. Chase Anderson and Zach Davies seem like safe bets, but beyond them is a risky and seemingly low-ceiling group that includes Brent Suter, Yovani Gallardo and Jhoulys Chacin. That’s not to say that the Cubs and Cardinals don’t have their own sets of question marks, but the Brewers’ rotation without Nelson could prove somewhat of a white-knuckle experience for fans.

It’s not as though the club can simply lean on its bullpen, either. Corey Knebel and Josh Hader will serve as an intimidating closer and fireman, respectively, but beyond them there’s plenty of uncertainty. The recently-signed Matt Albers isn’t a lock to repeat the figures of his career year in 2017, and Boone Logan is returning from a lat strain that sidelined him for the final two months of his contract with the Indians last season. The remainder of the club’s relief corps is a ragtag group that includes Junior Guerra, Jacob Barnes, Olivier Drake and the declining Jeremy Jeffress. The bridge to Hader and Knebel is a rickety one.

Milwaukee’s offense can probably be looked at as a strength, but it’s not without holes of its own. It remains to be seen whether Jonathan Villar can bounce back from an incredibly poor 2017 campaign during which he struck out more than 30% of the time and posted an on-base percentage below .300. The club will also count on 30-year-old catcher Manny Pina to sustain his sudden offensive breakout.

That being said, the Brewers lineup on the whole is intimidating, to say the least, particularly if the young Orlando Arcia takes another step forward, Travis Shaw keeps his foot on the gas and Ryan Braun remains mostly healthy. If things break right, their offense could end up being on par with those of the Cubs and Cardinals.

It’s time for the readers to weigh in. Sure, there’s some offseason left to go, and a pitching market that could certainly shift the division’s power balance once the dominoes begin to fall. But as things stand right now, do you think the Brewers are a playoff team?

(Poll link for app users)

Poll: What’s Holding Up The Market?

By | at

The snail’s pace of the 2017-2018 offseason is painfully apparent, and it’s been painstakingly examined. One union official appears to believe it’s a symptom of issues that’ll inevitably lead to new labor negotiations, which in turn could reshape the infrastructure of baseball’s economic landscape. While such an assessment certainly seems extreme, so is the unprecedented territory the market is about to embark upon: if nothing changes in the next three days, February will emerge with the top five free agents lacking jobs, and ten of the top twenty.

Before we get too deep into the gravity of a situation that could still feasibly resolve itself ahead of spring training, let’s begin by rejecting the idea that just one factor is at play in this undertaking. The historic circumstances before us are likely due to a convergence of contributing powers (though one could feasibly make a case that the symptoms all stem from one singular disease). But as ever, we only know a laughable percentage of the information buried deep within the offices of ballclubs, player agents and the MLBPA. With that in mind, it might be more rational for us all to examine the individual catalysts on the surface rather than develop conspiracy theories about how they might all be interwoven.

To that end, here are some items that, in theory, could be holding up the market…

The Competitive Balance Tax: If the combined average annual salaries of all players on a team’s roster exceed $197MM in 2018, that team will need to pay a tax on the overage. The luxury tax isn’t anything new. However, with the escalating penalties built into the current CBA, some teams are paying as much as 50% on the surplus. The Yankees, Dodgers and Giants are all taking this heavily into consideration for the coming season, and are seemingly working very hard to remain below the threshold in order to reset the escalators. If they manage to do so, the incentive is that they’ll only need to pay a 20% tax on their next overage.

While one might react by pointing out that those teams can certainly afford high penalties, it’s fair to mention that resetting the escalators will save them money not just for one or two seasons, but potentially through 2021. That footnote is all the more relevant when one considers the caliber of players who will be available on the free agent market next season (Bryce Harper, Manny Machado, Clayton Kershaw, etc.), and the dollars those players are likely to command. If the Yankees, as a purely speculative example, were interested in vying heavily for the services of Harper and Machado, they could end up blowing past the 2019 tax barrier ($206MM) by over $50MM. In such an instance, resetting the cap in 2018 would make not only a difference of $15MM the following season, but perhaps some $10MM the year after that, and yet more dollars in the season that follows.

Tying it all back to the free agent market, these considerations could dramatically reduce the competition for the top tier free agents by removing three or four of their potential suitors. Because over a dozen teams are already eliminated from the running due to their market size (and resulting income), while still others may not have a need for a given free agent’s position, the upper echelon of free agents may be seeing their market value fall off due to the law of supply and demand. Looking at it from another angle, if a player was expected to have eight suitors and now has only three or four, those remaining teams may be less afraid of seeing their target scooped up, and may therefore feel more comfortable waiting for his price to drop.

Collusion: It’s important to note immediately that MLB has staunchly denied any collusion between its teams, and has made readily apparent the lack of evidence to support any such claims. Indeed, there is no legitimate reason to think that MLB isn’t telling the truth. That being said, I’ve included this in the list simply because the notion still going to be on some fans’ minds. The motivation for potential collusion is obvious: if all 30 teams collectively agreed to wait until free agent prices dropped, they’d stand to save tens of millions of dollars between them. At its core, MLB would still have baseball games to produce absent a couple dozen players… the players themselves would have much more to lose. Being that this is such a dark subject (and incredibly unlikely), we won’t spend any more time looking at it.

Agent Scott Boras: In its denial of collusion, MLB aptly pointed out that a certain agent who is know for being incredibly patient represents a large number of free agents who are still on the market. Furthermore, Boras was said to be seeking an astronomical deal for J.D. Martinez at the outset of the offseason. If the asking price for Martinez remains anything close to that number, it’s easy imagine that no team sees him as capable of providing value on such a contract. And if that’s also the case for Jake Arrieta, Mike Moustakas and Eric Hosmer as well, the fact that all four remain unemployed would simply make fiscal sense. Going deeper down the rabbit hole of this hypothetical scenario, it’s not hard to imagine that many teams would want to wait for these dominoes to fall before turning to inferior options.

Coalescence of Player Evaluation: With a statistical revolution already many years in the making, focus on advanced scouting and analytics has increased tenfold. But from GMs to interns, hundreds of employees have changed organizations, and it’s thought possible that teams are converging on uniformity by which they evaluate players. If that’s true, it wouldn’t come as much of a surprise if all teams quietly and unknowingly agreed on price points for free agents; that would obviously reduce the likelihood that two or more teams end up in a bidding war for a player’s services.

Focus on Next Year’s Class: This one’s pretty simple. Teams like the Phillies and Braves might not like their chances of competing this year, and therefore could be comparing members of this year’s class with those of next year’s. For example, why the Phillies spend on Moustakas when Machado is a possibility and they see themselves as unlikely to compete with the Nationals this year? It could be that they’re only interested in the former if he comes at a bargain (the latter certainly won’t), so it would make perfect sense that Philadelphia might be willing to balk at his actual market value.

Apathy Towards a Free Agency: Teams are well aware at this point that lengthy contracts given to aging players seldom work out well and sometimes handcuff a franchise for years. Albert Pujols, for example, was worth two full wins below replacement level in 2017, and he’s signed through the 2021 season. The aging DH is a liability on the roster at this point, meaning the Angels owe him over $100MM in what amounts to a sunk cost. Contracts given to Alex Rodriguez and Prince Fielder have worked out similarly towards the tail ends, and plenty of other large and medium-sized contracts have hurt a team’s ability to compete for years. Free agency, at its core, is an incredibly cost-inefficient market. It’s possible that teams have simply learned their lesson about promising too many years to players who are, by the very nature of an aging curve, in a phase of decline.

Lack of Effort to Win: The past two teams to win a World Series got there by tanking for years, putting that model firmly in the spotlight. In some cases, fans may now be rooting for their teams to lose for a few years in order to match the extreme nature of the Houston and Chicago rebuilds. As Jeff Passan of Yahoo Sports pointed out in this piece, there are at least eight MLB teams who have absolutely no intention to compete in the free agent market this winter, in part because those teams have no desire to put effort towards a title run in 2018.

Tanking has become an acceptable business model, and a lucrative one considering the money not spend on free agents can simply become revenue instead. With nearly a third of all teams content to sit out, it would make sense that the market just never developed like it has in the past. Indeed, many teams have turned to the trade market to fill their needs; a strategy that’s become that much more feasible due to the number of teams not trying to win.

Players Overestimating Their Markets: While there is certainly incredible upside to players like Darvish, Martinez and Hosmer, there are significant question marks surrounding each of them. Darvish had a dreadful World Series performance and has been through Tommy John surgery in his career. Martinez has missed significant time in two of the past three seasons. Hosmer has played at or below replacement level in three seasons of his career. And yet the latter two haven’t accepted reported offers of over $120MM. This year’s class of free agents is imperfect, and perhaps they simply overestimated their markets at the outset of the offseason.

While this covers the bulk of the obvious potential explanations, there are yet others I haven’t even touched on. But at this point, I’d like to ask you all to weigh in. Yes, the slow offseason has certainly been caused by a number of factors. But what do you think is the biggest contributor to the pace of the market?

(Poll link for app users)

Poll: Grading The Brewers’ Blockbuster Moves

By | at

For a brief time this week, the Brewers turned this maddeningly slow offseason on its head. Within a one-hour period on Thursday afternoon, Milwaukee agreed to acquire two star-caliber outfielders – free agent Lorenzo Cain and then-Marlin Christian Yelich – in moves that the club hopes will help end its five-year playoff drought in 2018. Those additions came on the heels of a year in which the Brewers were among baseball’s surprise success stories, as they entered as expected non-contenders and exited with a solid 86 wins – one fewer than Colorado, which earned the National League’s last playoff spot.

With Cain and Yelich in the fold, it would be understandable to have high expectations for the Brewers as presently constructed. Although, general manager David Stearns clearly still has work to do, particularly to improve a less-than-stellar pitching staff. Thanks in part to the Brewers’ unspectacular group of hurlers, FanGraphs is only projecting them to win 77 games at the moment. That, of course, factors in notable contributions from Cain and Yelich, who are forecast to combine for just under 7.0 fWAR.

While Stearns figures to make further moves to improve Milwaukee’s chances, including potentially dealing from the team’s outfield surplus to upgrade elsewhere, we can still offer initial judgments on the Cain and Yelich pickups. Those who follow the league know what Cain is by now – a gifted center fielder, hitter and baserunner who was likely Kansas City’s best player during his tenure there from 2012-17. Cain’s track record led the Brewers to hand him easily the offseason’s richest contract, a five-year, $80MM deal with decreasing no-trade rights as the pact progresses. Cain absolutely could live up to that payday, though red flags come in the form of his age (32 in April) and injury history (he went on the disabled list in 2012, ’13, ’14 and ’16). All things considered, did Milwaukee make the right move in signing him?

(Poll link for App users)

 

Meanwhile, at 26, Yelich has a few prime years left, and he’s under contract for all of those seasons at eminently affordable rates. Milwaukee could control Yelich through 2022 for a combined $58.25MM, and there’s nothing to suggest he won’t be worth that money. Since he became a regular in 2014, Yelich has racked up 15.9 fWAR, with FanGraphs valuing that four-year performance at a whopping $125.6MM. He could have continued to be part of the solution in Miami, but with the Marlins in the early stages of a major teardown, they figured it would make more sense to cash in their top trade chip.

Of course, given all the pluses Yelich brings to the table, prying him out of Miami wasn’t easy. To secure Yelich, the Brewers waved goodbye to four prospects – outfielders Lewis Brinson and Monte Harrison, infielder Isan Diaz and right-hander Jordan Yamamoto. In Baseball America’s newest top 100 prospect list, which came out this past Monday, Brinson ranks 18th and Harrison 75th. There are also reasons for optimism that Diaz and Yamamoto will develop into productive major leaguers, as FanGraphs’ Eric Longenhagen wrote in the wake of the trade. So, it’s fair to say the Brewers took a sizable bite out of their farm system to make this deal. Was it worth it?

(Link for App users)

Poll: Who Will Sign Lorenzo Cain?

By | at

The market for at least a couple of the top remaining free agents looks to be picking up steam, with Yu Darvish reportedly likely to sign in the coming days and Lorenzo Cain said to be eliminating teams from the field as he weighs multiple four-year offers. The Cubs came out on top of MLBTR’s recent poll of which team will sign Darvish, and with Cain’s market seemingly gaining momentum, it’s prediction time once again.

To date, the Rangers, Blue Jays, Giants and Brewers have been most prominently linked to Cain, while the Cubs have been somewhat loosely connected to him. Much earlier this offseason, the Mets were said to have interest as well.

Lorenzo Cain | Jay Biggerstaff-USA TODAY Sports

Texas makes good sense for Cain on paper. Nomar Mazara and Delino DeShields will be mainstays (with DeShields manning center on a daily basis), while Shin-Soo Choo and Willie Calhoun figure to split time between a corner spot and designated hitter. Cain, clearly, would be a defensive boost, though his arrival could push Calhoun back to the minor leagues until an injury on the big league roster created some space. Texas has reportedly been aiming to drop its payroll by as much as $10MM from 2017’s Opening Day mark of $165MM. They’re currently projected at $144MM for Opening Day, so there could be room for Cain, especially if he signs a backloaded deal. GM Jon Daniels did recently imply that Cain may not be a fit, stating that the team wants DeShields to play center field every day and adding that any additional “big expenditure” would likely to be on the pitching side of the equation, if there is one at all.

The Blue Jays, meanwhile, recently picked up Randal Grichuk in a three-player trade with the Cardinals. Grichuk revealed after the fact that he’s received indication that he’ll get everyday at-bats with the Jays. Toronto also has defensive standout Kevin Pillar in center as well as Curtis Granderson, Steve Pearce, Ezequiel Carrera, Teoscar Hernandez and Anthony Alford in the mix for MLB at-bats early in the year. Kevin Pillar has been at times been speculated upon as a trade candidate by Jays fans, though moving his affordable $3.25MM salary to pay Cain upwards of four to five times that amount on an annual basis wouldn’t make sense unless Toronto were receiving some immediate help for its pitching staff.

The Giants have long been linked to Cain given the team’s need for a defensive upgrade in center field. San Francisco is roughly $2.1MM shy of the $197MM luxury tax line at present, so signing Cain is wholly impossible unless they can somehow find a taker for an expensive veteran (e.g. Hunter Pence) or they abandon their quest to dip south of that threshold. If the Jays would consider moving Pillar — and there’s no indication of that at present, to be clear — then the Giants could potentially move a lesser salary to squeeze him into the mix. That’s a lot moving parts, though, and the entire scenario seems rather unlikely.

Milwaukee has Ryan Braun (and his full no-trade protection) in left field with Keon Broxton in center and Domingo Santana in right field. Brett Phillips is on hand as a fourth outfield option for now, and the Brewers are hopeful that ballyhooed prospect Lewis Brinson will soon cement himself as a fixture in the outfield at Miller Park as well. But, despite that quality stock of outfielders, they’re reportedly exploring the idea of dealing an outfielder in an effort to bolster the rotation (or, perhaps, condensing that surplus into a high-profile talent like Christian Yelich). If the Brewers were to sign Cain — in whom they’ve been rumored to have interest — there’d be at least one corresponding trade to make way, it seems.

The Cubs, meanwhile, have a host of outfield options, even if several have their warts. Jason Heyward’s contract makes him essentially untradeable, so he’ll hold down a spot in right field. Kyle Schwarber comes with plenty of questions after his rough 2017 season, but he remains in the mix as well. Albert Almora looks ready for a larger role in center field, and the Cubs also have Ben Zobrist and Ian Happ both in the mix for outfield time. They could perhaps fit Cain into that mix, but they’re reportedly looking closely at the free-agent market for top starters like Darvish, Jake Arrieta and Alex Cobb.

As for the Mets, they’ve signed Jay Bruce since they were linked to Cain and now have him, Yoenis Cespedes, Juan Lagares, Michael Conforto and Brandon Nimmo in the picture. New York apparently has a bit of money left to spend, but they still need a second or third baseman — Asdrubal Cabrera will play the other — as well as some depth on the pitching staff. A Cain signing seems decidedly unlikely.

Cain’s all-around game should appeal to a wide number of teams, so it stands to reason that there could, of course, be dark horse clubs (or, yes, “mystery teams,” if you prefer the term) at play for his services. He’ll cost any team that signs him some value in the 2018 draft (here’s a refresher on which picks each team would lose by signing him), but that won’t be a make-or-break proposition for every club.

With all of that said, let’s open this up to the field (poll link for Trade Rumors mobile app users)…

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

MLBTR Poll: Grading The Giants’ Offseason To Date

By | at

The winter isn’t over — far from it, in fact — but a few teams have gone further than others in determining their direction for the coming season. Out in San Francisco, there’s no question that the Giants are pushing in some chips in hopes of rebounding from a miserable 2017 season, while at the same time avoiding a wholesale raid on the farm or major long-term contract entanglements.

Walking that kind of tightrope is never easy. For an organization with so many major contract commitments already on the books, there was an obvious risk both in going too far and not far enough. Let’s not forget that the Giants initially set out in pursuit of Giancarlo Stanton, too, suggesting both that the team would have blown past the luxury tax line in some circumstances (and perhaps may still) and also that the ultimate series of moves was (at least in part) something of a backup plan.

Having entered the offseason with glaring holes at several positions, and the above-noted limitations on resources, here’s what the Giants front office has come up with thus far:

In the aggregate, the organization has parted with some youthful assets and MLB pitching depth while reallocating those resources (including Moore’s $9MM salary) to other areas of need. And the team is still flying just beneath the luxury tax line, with the inclusion of Span in the Longoria swap helping to manage the accounting.

The results surely aren’t bombproof. Longoria and McCutchen, the two main additions, are no longer the superstars they once were. Meanwhile, the San Francisco pitching staff will need to rely on some unproven youngsters. Even having bypassed several internal options to make Jackson the anticipated fourth outfielder, the team still needs to acquire a center fielder (or choose one from within) to take regular time or platoon with Jackson.

There’s an optimistic view here, too. While Longo and Cutch aren’t likely to carry the club, they don’t need to do that to justify their additions. Both are still in their early thirties and it would hardly be surprising to find there are still a few more high-quality seasons left, given their undeniable talent levels. The pitching reductions may feel somewhat riskier than they really are, as the Giants do have quite a few arms on the rise. And it seems reasonable to expect that the front office already has a pretty good idea of what its options are in center. The team could still land a bigger asset if the opportunity is right; or, it can stay beneath the luxury tax line while relying on cheaper options. Retaining that flexibility while still making notable gains in roster quality was surely a chief aim.

Of course, the offseason is still not over. But many if not most or all of the team’s significant moves are in the books; at a minimum, we can see how they’ve set the stage for completing things in the next few weeks. So, we’ll turn it over to the MLBTR readership for a mid-term offseason grade (link for app users):

Show all

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

hide arrows scroll to top