FanGraphs Weekly Mailbag: February 14, 2026
Happy Valentine’s Day, everyone, and welcome to the first mailbag of spring training. It’s fitting that this annual day of love coincides with the return of baseball, because all of us are madly in love with this sport. If you weren’t, you wouldn’t be spending part of your Saturday reading a Members-only mailbag on a website dedicated exclusively to covering our game. Really, baseball is the game of love. Our fandom begins as passionate affair, and then like any lasting relationship, it requires daily commitment, growing stronger over time. It rewards patience, hard work, and finding joy in both the mundane and the extraordinary. It isn’t always easy, but it’s always worth it. How can you not be romantic about baseball?
Speaking of love, nobody I know loves college baseball like Michael Baumann. With Friday marking the start of the college season, he previewed the action to come in two pieces. First, he ran through the seven college teams you need to know in 2026, and then went deep on what he dubbed, “The Ridiculous Firewagon Offenses of College Baseball.” The opening of spring camps also means it’s Prospect Week here at FanGraphs. If you missed any of our coverage, you can find Eric Longenhagen’s audit of our 2019 Top 100 list, David Laurila’s interviews with Cardinals assistant GM Rob Cerfolio and Padres assistant director of player development Mike Daly about their respective farm systems, Brendan Gawlowski’s reflections on what he learned from his worst scouting report during his time as a Pirates pro scout, and Eric’s updated 2026 draft rankings. Early next week, we’ll have our Top 100 Prospects list, as well as those from both ZiPS and OOPSY, along with fantasy rankings and plenty of other prospect coverage. So be sure to come back to the site to check it all out.
That’s the last you’ll read about love and Prospect Week in this week’s mailbag. Instead, we’ll be answering your questions about the cost of 1.0 WAR, the legality of a dog playing first base, the number of balls players hit in their careers, and whether a full team of free agents could beat the Rockies. Before we do, though, I’d like to remind you that this mailbag is exclusive to FanGraphs Members. If you aren’t yet a Member and would like to keep reading, you can sign up for a Membership here. It’s the best way to both experience the site and support our staff, and it comes with a bunch of other great benefits. Also, if you’d like to ask a question for an upcoming mailbag, send me an email at mailbag@fangraphs.com.
Matt is the associate editor of FanGraphs. Previously, he was the baseball editor at Sports Illustrated. His work has appeared in The New York Times, Men’s Health, Baseball Prospectus, and Lindy’s Sports Magazine. Follow him on Twitter @ByMattMartell and Blue Sky @mattmartell.bsky.social.
IMO, it’s not just restricted supply of top-end players that makes the WAR/dollar curve nonlinear, it’s that roster spots and playing time are also limited resources. You can’t get 40 WAR by signing forty one-win free agents. Unless you’re Dan trying to beat the Rockies.
Yup, you can’t replace one 6 WAR guy with four 1.5 WAR guys.
Sox brass mookie trade era: “hold my beer”
You can only play nine position players at a time, and only one pitcher. I sometimes think that people who laud these one-star-for-four-role-players trades are missing that.
This isn’t entirely a Rays and Rays-alumnus level problem, but it is something that is a big issue with their approach.
(not Friedman, obviously)
Let’s say the Rays have two options with Isaac Paredes:
1) Move him to primarily being a 1B so you can give the job to Junior Caminero. In that case, he’s probably a 3-win guy at about 130 wRC+ intead of a 4 win guy.
2) Trade him for a couple prospects and a projected 1.5 win guy (obviously that part didn’t pan out, but that’s what they were thinking)
Obviously the Rays picked option #2. And it’s great that they can find role players for cheap, but when you trade away a guy with a 130 wRC+ for you like Isaac Paredes and you replace him with a 1.5 win guy, you have to replace one of your other 1.5 win guys with a 3-win guy or you’re moving backwards.
The Rays are not moving backwards if one of the prospects turn into another Caminero. That’s not easy to do but what other option do they have with their payroll.
In theory you could if all the other players in your lineup are replacement level?
That was the secret to to the Pirates’ offseason!
But yeah, that works in theory if you’re starting from scratch–but then your team is also very bad.
Rowdy catching strays this morning, and on Valentine’s Day no less.
When he hosts a barbeque (which I might guess happens…often?) does he say “all my Rowdy friends comin’ over tonight?”
Why is Tauchman not signed? Is he not healthy?
Because MLB economics have priced role playing, mid level veterans into unemployment.
Why pay a guy $5M or $8M for a win or two when you probably have a guy at AAA that can give you that for MLB minimum?
I get the point, but I’m not sure about a surfeit of spare 4A players who get on base with medium power.
The year in the headline is in error, just fyi.
Meg’s still distracted by the Seahawks.
That was my error, not Meg’s. Thanks for catching it. Should be fixed now.
I don’t think that team is better than the Rockies. The starting pitching is certainly better because those are mostly credible if unexciting starters. But the position player group is awful.
It would be fun to see when the last date would be that you could build a winning team entirely out of free agents. Certainly you could do it on January 12th, because Kyle Tucker (1/15), Bo Bichette (1/16), Framber Valdez (2/5), Ranger Suarez (1/14), and Cody Bellinger (1/21) were all available. You also had Eugenio Suarez (2/1), Harrison Bader (1/26), and JT Realmuto (1/19), none of whom are in the same tier as the first group but if you play them every day you’ll probably be okay. Plus Jorge Mateo, who probably isn’t someone you should rely on but he can at least play shortstop a whole lot better than Jose Iglesias these days.
Your starting lineup and roster would look something like this:
RF Tucker
2B Bichette
LF Bellinger
3B E Suarez
DH Ozuna (could go for Arraez if you prefer his hitting aesthetic)
C Realmuto
1B N Lowe (I still believe!)
CF Bader
SS Mateo
SP: R Suarez, F Valdez, Verlander, Bassitt, Cobb (or Gallen if Cobb isn’t healthy)
RP: S Dominguez, Taylor Rogers, D Coulombe, M Kopech, J Beeks, S Barlow
Swing: N Martinez
Bench: R Urias (utility), W Castro (utility), A Hays (OF), V Caratini (C)
A couple more spots to fill but that team would have a shot at the playoffs unless the bullpen melted down every night.
“But the position player group is awful.”
So is the Rockies position player group!
‘I asked a lawyer friend of mine, who shared some insight on the condition that she remain nameless on account of this being a stupid question that she doesn’t want coming up when potential employers Google her.’
Amazing.
I think a golden retriever would be far better at baseball than basketball. They can catch balls, so they might at least be able to make some plays at first base, and their strike zone would be very small so they’d probably take a lot of walks.
Would never argue with the ump either, so no ejections. And they’re so likeable they’re probably getting the benefit of the doubt on a lot of close plays.
Easy to pick off though…pitcher just gives them a “WHO’S A GOOD BOY?!” and they’re trotting over
On the other hand, if a cat were to earn a walk and be able to take first base, would either (a) be similarly distracted with a psspsspsspss or (b) be completely disdainful of the whole sordid affair and just lay down in the batter’s box and nap in the sunshine.
As an owner of a Golden, he would love taking all those walks
OK, Steinbeck