Poll: Should The Rangers Make Yovani Gallardo A Qualifying Offer
If you aren’t associated with the Rangers in some way, chances are you haven’t wondered if starting pitcher Yovani Gallardo would merit a qualifying offer. Once a promising pitching prospect, Gallardo now features an unimpressive 90 mph fastball, 5.91 K/9, and 3.32 BB/9. In an age of power and pristine strikeout-to-walk ratios, Gallardo is easy to overlook. The Rangers reportedly plan to make the $15.8MM qualifying offer. But should they?
Statistically, there are a few angles to address. The 29-year-old has posted 2.0 to 2.6 fWAR in each of the last four seasons. That’s right around league average. It may feel off, but a relatively young, league average pitcher is generally worth around $12MM to $16MM a year on the free agent market. For example, Ervin Santana inked a four-year, $54MM deal with the Twins last offseason. Santana isn’t a perfect comp because he was coming off a 2.9 WAR season and has a flashier arsenal. He also had a much shakier track record.
Gallardo doesn’t eat innings like a top pitcher. In some ways, that’s both a positive and a negative. The Rangers were able to able to get the most out of him by removing him early. Only five of his 33 starts lasted more than six innings. Ten of his starts ran just five or fewer frames.
That usage put extra pressure on a shaky Rangers bullpen, but it also probably allowed him to post a solid 3.42 ERA in 184 innings. He had a 4.00 FIP based on his strikeout, walk, and home run rates. FanGraphs also tracks an ERA-based WAR called RA9-WAR. By that measure, Gallardo contributed over four wins to the Rangers’ season.
This brings to mind two important questions. Can Gallardo be easily managed by limiting the length of his starts? Evidence suggests he can, but the results are inconclusive. Additionally, how much does the extra strain on the bullpen detract from Gallardo’s value to his club? Obviously, that’s a very club dependent question. A team with a deep, talented bullpen might like using him in a short outing while clubs with less relief depth will prefer longer starts.
The evidence presented says that Gallardo is an unexciting, automatic qualifying offer candidate. However, there are signs that his stuff is on the decline. His strikeout rate has dropped in four straight seasons from 9.00 K/9 in 2012 to a middling 5.91 K/9 last year. His velocity is also down, and he may have experienced a lucky season with regard to his HR/FB rate. He continues to post a high ground ball rate, but he’s shown no signs of developing the excellent command that allows a Mark Buehrle or Brandon McCarthy to thrive.
Every year, a few players are hurt by the qualifying offer designation (refer back to Ervin Santana). Gallardo is exactly the kind of pitcher who could find it difficult to sign with a new club if he turns down the qualifying offer. He’s entering his age 30 season with a multi-year decline in stuff and peripherals. Despite health and consistent league average production, he doesn’t offer clubs much hope for upside.
Ultimately, I still think the worst case scenario for Gallardo is somewhere around a three-year, $28MM contract. Obviously, he could still sign for much more too. If the Rangers are happy to pay him $15.8MM on a one-year contract, then they have no cause for concern either way. But at some point, a player is going to bet on themselves by taking the higher AAV.
Should The Rangers Make Yovani Gallardo A Qualifying Offer
-
Yes 60% (2,397)
-
No 40% (1,615)
Total votes: 4,012
Poll: Should Marco Estrada Get A Qualifying Offer?
Let’s be honest: this is not a question we expected to be asking at the start of the year, when Marco Estrada was settling into the Blue Jays pen as a swingman and long reliever. But he impressed early, provided a solid rotation presence much of the way, and had a notable impact in the post-season. That makes it worthwhile to wonder: is a qualifying offer in play?
We already know something about Estrada’s market valuation, because the Jays acquired him early last fall from the Brewers. The swap sent first baseman Adam Lind to Milwaukee. He, too, had a nice season after the deal, but at the time it wasn’t the most impactful deal. If anything, that trade suggested that Lind was the more valuable player, since he was the more expensive side of the 1-to-1 trade. Lind cost $7.5MM last year, plus a $500K buyout on a $8MM option that wasn’t certain to be exercised (but now likely will be). Estrada, meanwhile, ultimately agreed to a $3.9MM salary to avoid arbitration.
Nothing about that trade suggested that Estrada would be valued at anything close to the qualifying offer rate. Wwhen he came to Toronto, he was coming off of a four-year run in which he compiled 509 2/3 innings of 3.99 ERA pitching, with 8.4 K/9 against 2.3 BB/9. But that K rate had been in decline, and 2013 was his worst season in the earned run department.How have things changed since? MLBTR’s Mark Polishuk took a closer look in September, but in a nutshell, it’s hard to argue with Estrada’s 2015 results: he logged a 3.13 ERA over 181 frames. But his strikeouts plummeted to 6.5 per nine, while his walks ranged above his career average to 2.7 BB/9. And ERA estimators were not pleased with the new mix of peripherals: Estrada earned a 4.40 FIP, 4.93 xFIP, and 4.64 SIERA.
It’s worth noting, also, that Estrada enjoyed a .216 batting average on balls in play against him. He’s always controlled contact, as Tony Blengino of Fangraphs has explained, but that’s still a notably low mark. He has a notably excellent change, and doesn’t rely on velocity, so you might like his chances going forward. But Estrada has already turned 32 years of age, so that’s not on his side, either.
Then again, the post-season provided Estrada an opportunity to put his abilities on display before the entire league, and he didn’t disappoint. In 19 1/3 innings over three starts, he allowed just five earned runs while striking out 15 and issuing only one walk.
All said, there’s reason for some skepticism, but also reason to believe that some team will make Estrade a three-year offer at a healthy AAV. And given that possibility, he might be inclined to test the market for what will likely be his best chance at a multi-year deal. Meanwhile, a pitching-needy Toronto club might feel okay about taking the risk that Estrada will accept a $15.8MM, one-year qualifying offer. That wouldn’t exactly be crippling for a large-budget contender, even if he’s only a solid back-of-the-rotation piece.
It’ll be fascinating to see what happens with Estrada. For now, let’s see what MLBTR’s readers think: should the Jays make him a qualifying offer?
Should The Blue Jays Make Marco Estrada A Qualifying Offer?
-
Yes 63% (2,785)
-
No 37% (1,655)
Total votes: 4,440
Poll: Cubs Or Mets For The Future?
The NLCS matchup between the Cubs and Mets fell flat, as New York steamrolled their fellow upstarts. Chicago, though, did just fine in the clubs’ regular season tilts (they swept New York in seven games) and had the better regular season record (by exactly those seven wins). While the Mets are focused now on the World Series, it’s back to the future all over again for the Cubbies.
It’s hardly novel to observe that these two clubs are both loaded with young, somewhat opposed talent bases, with the Cubs having more on the position player side and the Mets carrying a better stable of pitching. Quite apart from the head-to-head results, then, it seems interesting to consider which organization has the better outlook after both put up huge seasons.
Each club has some significant players who’ll be controlled for two more seasons, barring extensions — Jake Arrieta and Lucas Duda come to mind — as well as some notable near-MLB prospects — such as Billy McKinney and Brandon Nimmo. But perhaps the most telling comparison, for near and long-term outlook, is of the players who have already reached the majors and are under control for three or more seasons beyond 2015. Here’s a list of some notable names to consider:
Cubs: Jon Lester, Starlin Castro, Anthony Rizzo, Jorge Soler, Hector Rondon, Javier Baez, Kris Bryant, Carl Edwards, Addison Russell, Kyle Schwarber, Arismendy Alcantara
Mets: David Wright, Matt Harvey, Zack Wheeler, Jacob deGrom, Travis d’Arnaud, Jeurys Familia, Wilmer Flores, Noah Syndergaard, Steven Matz, Dilson Herrera, Michael Conforto
So, which organizational arrangement would you prefer moving forward?
Which NLCS Team's Future Looks Better?
-
Cubs 58% (5,053)
-
Mets 42% (3,659)
Total votes: 8,712
Poll: Ian Desmond’s Contract Length
Entering the season, Ian Desmond carried the reputation of being one of the game’s top all-around shortstops. From 2012-14, he averaged 23 homers and 22 steals per season, hitting .275/.326/.462 and playing passable, if unspectacular defense along the way. Depending on your defensive metrics of choice (DRS considered him below average, while UZR said slightly above average), Desmond was consistently worth about 3.5 to 4.5 wins per season. That kind of track record and the fact that he didn’t turn 30 until this summer made a $100MM+ commitment on the free agent market seem likely. (Desmond had, in fact, already turned down an offer in excess of $100MM from the Nationals, though it was said to come with a large amount of deferred money.)
The first three and a half months of the season, though, could scarcely have been worse. Desmond struggled in the field immensely and even more so at the plate. On July 19, his season batting line bottomed out at an unthinkable and uncharacteristic .204/.248/.324. While that cutoff is admittedly very arbitrary, his production following that date more or less mirrored his excellent numbers from 2012-14; Desmond hit .272/.343/.464 with 12 homers and eight steals over his final 68 contests. Unfortunately for him, his overall season line wasn’t salvageable. He finished his walk year at .233/.290/.384.
The question now facing Desmond is what that ugly three-and-a-half-month run did to his free agent stock. Disastrous first half aside, his strong finish probably did restore some value in the eyes of interested parties, and there’s little else available on the shortstop market. Asdrubal Cabrera is coming off a nice season, but teams have long been wary of his defense and some may view him as a second baseman. Other options such as Jimmy Rollins, Alexei Ramirez and Stephen Drew had equally, if not more disappointing seasons.
While some will suggest that Desmond accept a qualifying offer (if it’s made) or sign a one-year deal to rebuild value, few players want to go the one-year route, and it’d be surprising to see the lone prominent shortstop on the market not end up with a rather sizable multi-year deal. But let’s see what MLBTR readers think.
For this exercise, we’ll focus on the number of guaranteed years, rather than the average annual value of those seasons. Which scenario do you see as most likely?
How Many Guaranteed Years Will Ian Desmond Get?
-
4 31% (1,510)
-
3 22% (1,073)
-
5 15% (728)
-
1 (he'll accept the qualifying offer) 13% (647)
-
1 (through free agency) 9% (423)
-
2 6% (314)
-
6 3% (148)
Total votes: 4,843
Poll: Should The Orioles Make Matt Wieters A Qualifying Offer?
The Orioles entered the season with a number of important impending free agents. We know Chris Davis will receive a $15.8MM qualifying offer, but it’s less of a certainty with the club’s other two candidates. Wei-Yin Chen is also expected to receive and reject a qualifying offer. As we’ve heard multiple times, most recently from CBS Sports’ Jon Heyman, the team has yet to decide what to do with Matt Wieters.
Wieters will be entering his age 30 season after a disappointing 2015 campaign. He started 2015 on the disabled list while recovering from Tommy John surgery. While there was an expectation that he could make the Opening Day roster, he was actually held out until June 5. The club decided to wait until he could start multiple days in a row behind the plate before activating him.
He was in the midst of a breakout in 2014 when he went down with the injury. While his .267/.319/.422 line over 282 plate appearances is a big step back from 2014, it’s almost a perfect replication of his career numbers (.258/.320/.423). The intervening injury does make it difficult to judge who Wieters is as an offensive player. His strikeout rate (23.8% K%) actually increased dramatically – five percent higher than his career norm. It’s possible that a normal offseason could restore him to his typical whiff rates. That means more balls in play and more hits.
Catcher defense has become an increasingly important measure. Wieters draws mixed reviews in this theater of work. His catcher framing from StatCorner is largely discouraging. He was worth negative eight runs in part-time work this year. In his last full season, 2013, he graded out at negative 11 runs. On a positive note, he’s good at blocking pitches and has caught roughly one-third of base runners over his career. That includes eight of 26 attempts this season (30.7%).
The word from Heyman is that the Orioles will extend a qualifying offer only if they’re convinced he won’t take it. In other words, they aren’t comfortable committing $15.8MM to Wieters next season. The club does work under fairly tight budget constraints and may be able to make a bigger upgrade elsewhere with that money. MLBTR’s Steve Adams “can’t imagine” the Scott Boras client would accept, but there are probably a few feasible circumstances where it could make sense.
For example, any physical problem that could negatively affect his ability to sign a long term contract might provide impetus to take a qualifying offer. Teams are always wary of losing an early draft pick. If they’re concerned about his health, Wieters could wind up getting the Nelson Cruz treatment. To be clear, there are no reports that Wieters is dealing with an injury, it’s just one potential scenario under which he may accept a qualifying offer.
If we assume he’s healthy, it does seem like Wieters should merit a sizable multi-year contract. That’s including a declined qualifying offer. There aren’t any perfect recent comps, but I do see Wieters as closer to Russell Martin (signed last offseason for five-years, $82MM) than Jarrod Saltalamacchia (signed after 2013 season for three-years, $21MM). Wieters may merit a similar annual value to Martin (about $16MM) over fewer guaranteed season. Unless we’re seriously overestimating his market, it should be a no-brainer for Wieters to decline the qualifying offer.
Let’s turn to the poll. We have a player who looks like a lock to decline a qualifying offer, but the club is putting out indications that they’re worried he’ll accept it. Do they know something we don’t?
Should The Orioles Make A Qualifying Offer To Matt Wieters?
-
Yes 60% (2,900)
-
No 40% (1,908)
Total votes: 4,808
Poll: Should The Nationals Make Denard Span A Qualifying Offer?
Heading into the year, it looked like the Nationals would have four fairly obvious qualifying offer recipients: Jordan Zimmermann, Ian Desmond, Doug Fister, and Denard Span. It’s reflective of the team’s overall struggles that only the first of these is a complete slam dunk to receive one now. Despite his forgettable year, Desmond still seems fully worthy as well. But it’s hard to see Fister getting the offer, as $15.8MM for one year probably outstrips his current value on the market.
So what about Span? The center fielder delivered exactly what the Nationals hoped for when they shipped out Alex Meyer to acquire him from the Twins before the 2013 season. He was solid in his first season in D.C. and excellent in 2014, when he slashed .302/.355/.416 and swiped 31 bags over 668 plate appearances. Defensive metrics soured on him somewhat in the second of those campaigns, but he provided outstanding value on his reasonably-priced contract.
This year was more of the same — .301/.365/.431 — but with one glaring exception: Span made only 275 trips to the batter’s box. He recovered quickly enough from offseason sports hernia surgery, missing only about two weeks to start the year. But back and abdominal issues cropped up in the middle of the year, giving way to hip problems, and a late comeback bid proved fleeting. The 31-year-old underwent a hip procedure, ending his season.
The first issue, then, is simply one of health. It’s unclear exactly what kind of recovery timeline should be expected, though certainly we’ve heard no indication that he won’t be ready for the spring. And Span himself recently tweeted that his recovery is progressing well. Regardless of the immediate prognosis, though, there’s some legitimate concern here. The fact that Span struggled with concussions earlier in his career does not help the situation.
While questions about Span’s ability to stay on the field in 2016 do limit his immediate value, though, the bulk of that concern lies in his long-term outlook for teams weighing a multi-year deal. A qualifying offer, of course, only represents a one-year commitment (if accepted), which limits the risk.
True, Span’s health will impact the market assessment that he and his representatives would make in weighing a qualifying offer — i.e., if they don’t foresee an attractive multi-year deal, the QO becomes more attractive. But so long as he remains on track for a more-or-less full 2016 season, Span still seems like an excellent candidate to land a rather high-dollar, multi-year deal in free agency. He and Dexter Fowler arguably represent the only everyday regular center fielders on the market, with Colby Rasmus and Austin Jackson making up their competition.
There’s an argument to be made, then, that the Nats have little risk in extending the QO. There’s no reason not to pick up a draft pick if he’s destined to decline. And we’ve yet to see a single player accept one — even the aging Michael Cuddyer, who declined his offer last year from the Rockies despite coming off of a similarly injury-plagued season. Even if Span did take the $15.8MM, moreover, that might not be a bad result for Washington. Jayson Werth struggled with injuries of his own last year, and Michael Taylor — the presumptive replacement in center — showed both promise and a proclivity to strike out. Both hit from the right side, unlike Span. A left-handed outfielder capable of playing center is a clear target for the Nats, and keeping Span on a one-year commitment (even at that rate) would meet that need and then some. Bringing Taylor on slowly, holding down his arbitration earning power, and limiting the wear and tear on Werth would be nice side benefits.
Of course, there’s a counter-argument to be made here, too. The Nationals have had their share of injury issues over the last several years, and have not always managed to cope when key players went down. And some might disagree that Span would likely turn down the offer; there’s little chance he’ll reach that guarantee over multiple years, and it’s hard to predict how his market would play out — especially if he’s saddled with draft compensation. Is it too great a risk to the club to dangle that much money to an arguably injury-prone player?
Let’s put this one to an up-or-down vote:
Should The Nationals Make A Qualifying Offer To Denard Span?
-
Yes 51% (1,814)
-
No 49% (1,750)
Total votes: 3,564
Poll: Should White Sox Pick Up Alexei Ramirez’s Option?
Option decisions are among the first important moves made by teams in the offseason. While many are fairly easy to call, there are plenty of borderline examples.
The White Sox face a tough decision regarding veteran shortstop Alexei Ramirez. Chicago can choose either to employ Ramirez for $10MM next year, or instead pay him a $1MM buyout and allow him to hit the free agent market. In other words, it will cost the team $9MM if it wants another year of Ramirez.
Looking just at last year, this is not a difficult decision for GM Rick Hahn. Ramirez slashed just .249/.285/.357, put up his worst-ever running mark (a rather stunning -5.0 BsR), and was viewed as a sub-par defender by both UZR (-6.4) and DRS (-6). Things ticked up in the second half, but the overall output wasn’t pretty.
Then again, Ramirez has for the most part been a model of consistency over his eight years with the club. He has made 4,999 plate appearances and played an average of 153 games per season over 2008-2015, providing a stabilizing roster presence. Ramirez hasn’t generally been spectacular, but has been an average or better overall regular in most of those seasons.
The 2014 season, in fact, was one of Ramirez’s best. While his defensive metrics dropped, he still rated well there in terms of UZR and continued to generate good ratings on the basepaths. And the light-hitting infielder posted his second-best career batting line, an unexciting but useful .273/.305/.408.
Even if you value the track record, Ramirez is 34 years old and was never an outstanding player. Reasonable-but-optimistic expectations would be for roughly league-average performance in 2016. There was a time where that kind of outlook would make this an easy buyout situation. But ten million bucks doesn’t buy what it used to in the game of baseball.
Ramirez wouldn’t top any teams’ priority lists if he hits free agency, but he’d still get paid. That’s due in large part to the lack of supply on the shortstop market. After Ian Desmond and Asdrubal Cabrera, clubs looking for a plug-and-play veteran will be choosing between Ramirez and Jimmy Rollins, who had every bit as rough a season and is even older.
As MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes writes in his preview of the White Sox’ offseason, the $9MM that Chicago would need to commit to Ramirez is perhaps “only slightly above” his value in free agency. There are some teams that would love to have a potentially average performer to replace sub-par platoons, while others might want a veteran to help ease the transition of younger, long-term options. To an extent, the White Sox look to fit both situations: the idea of a year with Tyler Saladino isn’t too appealing for a club that hopes to win, but clogging the position wouldn’t maximize the value of top prospect Tim Anderson.
All said, the salary is probably close enough to market that the White Sox should pay it if they want Ramirez back. If nothing else, it may be tough to re-sign him after cutting ties, and the risk is limited on a one-year commitment.
The other options for finding production at shortstop are limited. But there are alternatives, and bringing back the incumbent could represent a slight overpay with a fairly low ceiling.
So, we’ll put it to a vote (app users click here):
Should The White Sox Pick Up Alexei Ramirez's Option?
-
No 61% (2,263)
-
Yes 39% (1,473)
Total votes: 3,736
Poll: Should Daniel Murphy Receive A Qualifying Offer?
This year’s qualifying offer will be set at $15.8MM for one year, which is a hefty sum even considering the old adage that “there’s no such thing as a bad one-year deal.” As we’ve seen in the past three seasons since the QO was instituted, however, no player has actually accepted such an offer, instead preferring to seek out a multi-year free agent deal. This has led to issues for some free agents, as having draft pick compensation attached to their services has greatly diminished their markets and delayed their signings, in some cases (as with Kendrys Morales or Stephen Drew) into the actual next season itself.
With this all in mind, the qualifying offer is still an interesting wrinkle for mid-tier free agents like Mets second baseman Daniel Murphy. He’ll hit the open market on the heels of a .281/.322/.449 line and 14 homers over 538 plate appearances, and the 2.5 fWAR generated gives him 12.2 fWAR since the start of the 2011 season. That’s a pretty nice total for a middle infielder, especially given the lack of depth in the second and third base free agent market.
So in theory, Murphy should be set up for a nice payday this offseason. After speaking to various executives and agents, Joel Sherman of the New York Post hears that Murphy could be in line for a three-year deal in the $30-$40MM range, though an AL team may be his best fit so his shaky defense could be offset by some DH at-bats. Murphy will turn 31 in April so it’s pretty unlikely that he would pass up what could be his only chance at a major multi-year contract by accepting one-year QO to return to New York.
Sherman outlines why the Mets should make Murphy a qualifying offer, as while he isn’t an elite player, he’s not a bad player to get back in the fold should he accept the $15.8MM. Letting him hit free agency without the QO attached would not just cost the Mets a draft pick, but it would be yet another problem caused by the team’s limited budget. Passing up a first-rounder just based on a slight chance Murphy could accept the QO seems like an unnecessarily cautious move.
This all being said, if payroll is still an issue for the Mets, then they have better ways of spending $15.8MM, especially when Dilson Herrera may be waiting in the wings to take over second base. If Herrera isn’t ready for an everyday role yet, a platoon of Herrera and a lower-cost veteran could replace Murphy’s 2.5 fWAR (perhaps based on defense rather than hitting) at a fraction of the price. The Mets have a number of free agents so quite a bit of money will be coming off the books, yet keeping in mind their budget, every dollar may count if the club plans to re-sign Yoenis Cespedes or make a play for a similarly top-tier free agent.
I’d like to add another possible scenario for the Mets. If Murphy did happen to accept the qualifying offer, they could trade him. New York might not want Murphy on a one-year, $15.8MM deal but I suspect several other teams would.
How do you think the Mets should handle Murphy this offseason? (MLBTR app users can weigh in here)
Should The Mets Issue A Qualifying Offer To Daniel Murphy?
-
Yes 54% (2,778)
-
No 28% (1,433)
-
Yes, but if he accepts, try to trade him 19% (980)
Total votes: 5,191
Poll: Valuing A Bryce Harper Extension
In this week’s MLBTR Mailbag, Steve Adams opined that it might take a 13-year, $375MM offer — or more — for the Nationals to make a serious run at extending outfielder Bryce Harper. That number factors in an estimated $36MM over two seasons of arbitration eligibility (2017-18) and then eleven more years at a $31MM AAV. A contract of that magnitude would be enough to best Giancarlo Stanton‘s 13-year, $325MM deal (which also included a significant opt-out provision).
That’s an immense amount of cash, but Harper is about to cap a 10 WAR season at just 22 years of age. The Scott Boras client will hit the open market before he turns 26 years of age, and would have more or less unprecedented earning capacity if he maintains anything approaching his current level of production.
To put things in some perspective, in addition to the Stanton deal, consider the Tigers’ extension of Miguel Cabrera. At the time, Cabrera was set to enter his age-31 season after a huge 2013 campaign that capped a sustained run of excellence at the plate. He was already controlled for two years and $44MM, but the club added another eight seasons and $248MM on top of that (along with two vesting options at $30MM a pop). The AAV of the extension is $31MM, the same amount that Steve theorized for Harper.
While there’s no indication that Harper and the Nats are talking, or have plans to do so, it’s interesting to consider what it might take to get something done. It’s conceivable, of course, that the parties could consider a different type of deal — Mike Trout‘s six-year, $144.5MM extension provides another model altogether — but a maximum value scenario seems more plausible.
Adding eleven free agent seasons at a $20MM average annual value would push Harper past $250MM. At $24MM annually, the total guarantee would be an even $300MM. Or, if you think that Steve is light, and Harper could take down $35MM a year over his free-agent-eligible campaigns, we’d be staring at a $421MM tab.
Assuming the scenario that Steve proposed — two arb years plus eleven more — what kind of cash do you think would be fair and adequate compensation to get a 13-year deal done? Remember, you can discuss in the comments or join the debate over on Instagram.
How Much Is Harper Worth?
-
in the neighborhood of $375MM 35% (3,219)
-
between Cabrera and Stanton ($250MM to $325MM) 29% (2,615)
-
well over $400MM 19% (1,690)
-
less than Miggy (south of $250MM) 18% (1,597)
Total votes: 9,121
Poll: Minor League Deal Of The Year
Every winter, a host of players agree to minor league contracts with hopes of finding good opportunities to make it onto a big league roster at some point in the season. Some of these are reached early on, as teams target players they like but who lack the track record to warrant a major league deal. Others are made just before Spring Training by players who had been holding out hope for a guaranteed contract.
In most cases, minor league signees provide depth and leadership in the upper minors. A good number of those players end up as solid role players on the major league roster, some more impactful than others. And every now and again, a high-end big league player emerges after inking a non-guaranteed contract. (E.g., J.D. Martinez, Justin Turner.)
This year’s MiLB free agent crop didn’t produce any controllable standouts in the mold of Martinez and Turner, but it was loaded with quality players who have delivered immense value to their teams. Who gets your vote as the best of the year?
(Teams listed are original signing clubs. Players ordered alphabetically by last name. Did I miss someone? Choose “Other” and discuss in the comments.)
Joe Blanton, Royals — After appearing in just two minor league games last year, the 34-year-old righty was surprising enough when putting up solid results for Kansas City. But he’s been even better for the Pirates, firing 26 frames from the pen with a 31:6 strikeout-to-walk ratio and just four earned runs.
Franklin Gutierrez, Mariners — He hasn’t had much big league time, but the 32-year-old slashing a ridiculous .309/.358/.647 in 148 MLB plate appearances and was hitting quite well at Triple-A before that. He’ll be quite an interesting free agent to watch, though of course his .357 BABIP and (especially) 36.4% home run-to-flyball ratio are bound to fall.
Kelly Johnson, Braves — Johnson has been steady and productive since signing with Atlanta and moving to the Mets via trade. Filling in all over the diamond, Johnson has provided his clubs with flexibility and a .270/.319/.456 slash in 308 trips to the plate.
Mark Lowe, Mariners — A relatively undistinguished reliever for most of his career, Lowe transformed into a stud this year in Seattle. He hasn’t been quite as good since being shipped to the Jays, but still owns a 1.63 ERA with 10.3 K/9 against 2.0 BB/9 over 49 2/3 frames.
Ryan Madson, Royals — Madson, 34, had not even pitched in the big leagues since 2011 when he came to K.C., yet he picked up right where he left off. All told, he’s contributed 54 2/3 innings with a 2.47 ERA and 8.4 K/9 against 2.0 BB/9.
Franklin Morales, Royals — Notice a theme here? Another bargain bin score for a bullpen that hardly needed any help, the southpaw Morales has tossed 58 innings of 2.79 ERA ball. He’s been particularly stingy against opposing lefties, but has also held righties to below-league-average batting results.
Clint Robinson, Nationals — Unlike the other players on this list, Robinson had virtually no track record in the big leagues coming into the year. While his outfield defense has been predictably poor, it’s not really his fault that the club was forced to use him out of position. Robinson has been a revelation on offense, slashing .272/.368/.423 over 277 plate appearances.
Geovany Soto, White Sox — It was somewhat surprising to see the veteran Soto fail to earn a big league contract, and he’s shown why in Chicago. With well-rated defense and a .237/.321/.444 slash over his 191 plate appearances, Soto has been worth about a win and a half above replacement despite limited duty — and that’s before factoring in his strong framing numbers.
Carlos Villanueva, Cardinals — Targeted by St. Louis because of his swingman capabilities, Villanueva has not been needed as a starter but has excelled in the pen. He sits with a sub-3.00 ERA over 57 1/3 innings, with 8.2 K/9 against 3.0 BB/9.
Minor League Free Agent Of The Year
-
Kelly Johnson 23% (1,476)
-
Ryan Madson 18% (1,164)
-
Mark Lowe 13% (848)
-
Franklin Gutierrez 11% (721)
-
Joe Blanton 10% (617)
-
Carlos Villanueva 9% (560)
-
Clint Robinson 6% (358)
-
Geovany Soto 4% (261)
-
Franklin Morales 4% (236)
-
Other 3% (217)
Total votes: 6,458
