Justin Verlander Returns to the Astros Once More
The Astros have yet again acquired pitcher Justin Verlander and cash on deadline day, this time from the Mets for outfield prospects Drew Gilbert and Ryan Clifford. Verlander, signed to a two-year, $86.667 million contract before the season, put up a 3.15 ERA and a 3.81 FIP in 16 starts for the Mets. The exact amount of cash being sent along with Verlander is not yet known.
Verlander pitching for a team that wasn’t the Astros just felt kind of odd. While he certainly didn’t spend the bulk of his career in Houston, it’s where he had his personal pitching renaissance, where he clinched his future Hall of Fame membership, and where he got his championship rings. Verlander in blue-and-orange felt like that episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation in which Jean-Luc Picard is kind of a sad-sack 60-year-old ensign because he didn’t get in a bar fight as a youngster. Or maybe it’s like when you’re trying to buy a Coke at some rural gas station, but they’re out, and you end up with some bizarre generic cola that may have been sitting there since the Reagan years. Verlander’s opinion may vary, but from at least this fan, it feels like something that went wrong has been set right by Scott Bakula.
The Astros aren’t just trying to satisfy nostalgia; they needed a starting pitcher, so why not one they have a longstanding relationship with? A rash of injuries has left the rotation thinner than they would like heading into the homestretch, and they have a real dogfight this year with the Rangers, who’ve already added Max Scherzer and Jordan Montgomery; there’s no lapping the division by 15 games. Verlander has shown some clear signs of aging this year, as hitters are less prone to whiffing and are hitting the ball harder, and his control isn’t quite as precise as in the past. But these are normal things for a 40-year-old pitcher, and nearly every pitcher who is still in the league at 40 is going to fall out of it during the ensuing few seasons. Houston isn’t asking Verlander to carry the team, but to be a dependable, healthy arm who keeps the team in games. That he’ll do.
| Year | W | L | ERA | G | GS | IP | H | ER | HR | BB | SO | ERA+ | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RoS 2023 | 3 | 2 | 3.59 | 9 | 9 | 52.7 | 47 | 21 | 7 | 16 | 53 | 117 | 1.7 |
| 2024 | 9 | 6 | 3.81 | 24 | 24 | 141.7 | 122 | 60 | 21 | 33 | 135 | 110 | 2.2 |
| 2025 | 8 | 6 | 4.13 | 22 | 22 | 126.3 | 115 | 58 | 20 | 32 | 115 | 101 | 1.5 |
| Percentile | ERA+ | ERA | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|
| 95% | 160.9 | 2.59 | 4.1 |
| 90% | 146.5 | 2.85 | 3.6 |
| 80% | 131.1 | 3.18 | 3.1 |
| 70% | 123.3 | 3.39 | 2.8 |
| 60% | 115.1 | 3.63 | 2.4 |
| 50% | 109.5 | 3.81 | 2.2 |
| 40% | 103.9 | 4.02 | 1.9 |
| 30% | 96.0 | 4.35 | 1.4 |
| 20% | 89.1 | 4.69 | 1.0 |
| 10% | 82.9 | 5.04 | 0.6 |
| 5% | 76.2 | 5.48 | 0.1 |
The money has not yet been disclosed — check my colleague Jay Jaffe’s upcoming piece for this and more — but my initial guess is “a bunch.” Verlander’s contract is a hefty one, and both Gilbert and Clifford are legitimate prospects; I can’t imagine the Astros would have parted with them if they were also paying full or near-full freight on Verlander. Our prospect team has already shifted in Gilbert as the new No. 1 prospect on the Mets, and while his stats at Double-A Corpus Christi are far from eye-popping, you have to remember that this is his first full professional season. ZiPS sees him peaking as a near two-win outfielder in the .260/.330/.400 range, though the error bars are quite wide when you’re talking someone with so little professional experience. ZiPS is highly interested in Clifford’s power upside (as is the scouting community), but there are a lot of questions about his plate discipline and defensive value to be answered.
MLB will have to approve any deal where more than $2 million changes hands, as will be the case with Verlander and Houston. That has not happened yet, so the deal will not be official for a little while .
— Andy Martino (@martinonyc) August 1, 2023
Stay tuned for more on the trade!
Dan Szymborski is a senior writer for FanGraphs and the developer of the ZiPS projection system. He was a writer for ESPN.com from 2010-2018, a regular guest on a number of radio shows and podcasts, and a voting BBWAA member. He also maintains a terrible Twitter account at @DSzymborski.
Not a big Billy Eppler fan but he killed it this trade deadline he got three excellent prospects for declining 38 and 40 year olds . Also got another for a rental reliever.
Yeah–all of a sudden the Mets have five top-100 prospects and two more really interesting ones in their top 10. Wrote this already but I’m hoping they flip some of the young guys they got for Cease.
They’ll have a lot to do in order to contend next year. My hope is Mauricio gets some OF time & Vientos takes over DH’ing for the rest of 2023. If they prove themselves, one to two holes plugged. Our Acuna becomes coverage in case Jeff McNeil continues to suck. Gilbert may be up next year to replace the carcass of Starling Marte–or maybe Marte and McNeil bounce back. The offense could be in pretty good shape. And now they have prospects to trade for pitching–or the savings from Verlander/Scherzer to go after Nola, Urias, Giolito, etc.
If you’re going to praise him, maybe just praise him for getting a job working for a gazzilionaire. It’s not exactly rocket science to pay an assload of money for good players (declining or not), and then eat a ton of that money in trades for prospects. The only reason the Mets aren’t facing certain disaster in the near term is their almost-never-ending-pocketed owner.
I don’t know: Eppler could protect his ass by trying to convince Cohen to go for it. He could have jumped the gun early and gotten worse prospects.
I don’t love the job he’s done, but many predictions said the Mets couldn’t get much for Verlander and Scherzer, and now they have two top-100 prospects they didn’t have before.
I don’t think anyone predicted that the Mets couldn’t get much for Scherzer or Verlander if they were accompanied by a fleet of Brink’s trucks. Any and all above average players have good trade value if you add enough money to it.
Indeed. Nothing clever or shrewd about what they’re doing. It’s the right way to use their bottomless pit of resources to salvage some value from a lost year, but “killing it” if you’re Billy Eppler would have been assembling a winner with the resources they have. Not doing this. That’s my opinion at least
Eh… I mean, obviously, the Mets are in a position to eat contracts which is something that most owners aren’t willing to do. But it takes stones to negotiate a deal this good no matter how much of the money you’re paying. Dana Brown walked away, and Eppler didn’t flinch. He waited until Brown came back, and worked in other teams to drive up the price. So, yeah, Eppler has some wind at his back, but he still extracted max value. Three top-100 position players for two 40-year old pitchers. Heck of a haul.
It’s not rocket science but it is really funny.
I’m sure Steve Cohen spending like a lunatic is going to wear thin on me at some point–like, it’s clear that some teams have way less to work with than others, and it’s not good for the game. And this is an extreme example. But this is just so silly, it’s pretty fun to watch.
Yeah, they’re apparently sending $54M to the Astros in this trade (Verlander’s 2025 vests at $35M if he hits 140ip next year). That’s on top of the $35M they sent in the Scherzer trade. They sent a few $M in giving away Escobar too.
So let’s say, Houston will pick up $6M of Verlander this year, $18M next, and $15M in 2025 and he puts up 5.5 wins over that time. I think Gilbert and Clifford might be a little low because he’s better than Giolito (who returned a prospect slightly worse than Gilbert) for the rest of this year and he’s equal to Scherzer next year plus he’s a fine 4th/5th starter in 2025.
I keep hoping Fangraphs will actually do a study of the effectiveness of FA signings since the writers all keep banging Scott Boras’ mantra of “Teams need to spend on FA’s to win!” A look at this past year’s FA signings on the SP side isn’t pretty. Eovaldi and Eflin are big wins. Taijuan Walker a moderate win — Taillon a moderate loss, and Bassitt a push. Rodon and DeGrom look like big losses. Verlander and Scherzer are underperforming their pre-season Zips forecast, so with almost any other owner they would look like moderate losses. No other signees are remarkable.
The Rangers’ signings of Semien and Seager have been a huge success, but teams trying to get a quarter of their team’s WAR through FA generally fail.
I feel like it’s partially an issue of “if you aren’t gambling on the ~30% chance that a FA deal is good, you have no plausible ways to improve your team”. It’s not like a bunch of big trades get made most offseasons- it’s normally what, maybe two major impact trades made an offseason? There’s only so much value you can squeeze out of the edges of your roster by optimizing everything a la Rays, and most teams clearly lack the ability to do that anyway.
While I don’t think teams should just be spending in FA no matter what, it does seem like the offseason wraps up with a decent number of teams not having committed to a path to bettering their future prospects. And it especially bums me out that lots of the same teams end up doing that for several years.
That’s fair, I agree that FA’s are useful as guys to solidify teams that are already playoff-bound. If a team needs FA’s to just be “playoff-possible”, they shouldn’t be signing FA’s. I know the Mets just won 101 games, so it made sense for them to spend money wildly to upgrade on already good players.
On the other hand, the poor showings of 2023 FA’s are just their first years. Sure, maybe Rodon and DeGrom return to health, but for most of the others it’s just going to get worse. As said by others in this thread, Steve Cohen just uses Free Agency as a very expensive way to buy top-100 prospects. Paying $89M plus another $45M in salaries already paid to Verlander and Scherzer is a lot of money for 2 FV50’s.
Which brings up the question of why the Rangers didn’t do this deal for Verlander instead of Scherzer? Maybe Verlander vetoed the Rangers?
Perhaps the Rangers just really like Scherzer? Because regardless of whether Verlander gets traded or not, the return on Scherzer for what he has done this year felt really high compared to even other pitchers during this deadline
I still think the Astros are overrated this year. I like Texas to win that division by 2-3 games
Good luck with that
Soooooo, like, I don’t think the Mets are tear-down rebuilding with Lindor, Polar Bear, Nimmo, Diaz, etc. still around. How are they gonna put together a rotation next year? Is Cohen gonna go out and sign Nola, Giolito, and Montgomery? That’s what he’s gonna do, huh?
While it’s unlikely, I’m hoping the Mets quickly turn around and put together a package for Cease!
But as you suggest it’s probably going to be the free agent market. I’d take two of those three plus Yamamoto.
Didn’t Yamamoto retire this spring? Did you mean Kodai Senga?
Yoshinobu, not Jordan
The Mets under Cohen (lately) have had a very straightforward strategy: Be the high bidder on every player who doesn’t have a comp pick attached to them. That would indicate to me that they are going to offer way more money than we expect to Yoshinobu Yamamoto, Eduardo Rodriguez, Jordan Montgomery, and Lucas Giolito. And they’re going to have to hope three of them accept. Especially Yamamoto; he’s widely considered to be better than Senga, and he’s young.
There are going to be a lot of other pitchers they could go after if they’re willing to lose some draft compensation. Ohtani, obviously, but also Snell, Nola, Sonny Gray, and maybe even Julio Urias (although I imagine Urias would accept the QO so maybe he won’t get one). In theory they could also go after Stroman (who can’t get a QO), but if they didn’t want him back the last time it’s not 100% clear they’d be super excited for him this time.
considering Stroman’s comments during the Kyrie irving, uh, situation, i’d expect the odds of him being a Met again are near zero
Whoa, I did not see those. I’m sure someone will give him a deal and probably a good one if he opts out because every viable pitcher without a QO gets a good deal now (see: Jameson Taillon, Taijuan Walker) but I can imagine some teams not wanting the headache.
I can’t see Urias not getting a QO and definitely don’t see him accepting it. He’s had a down year for sure but I don’t doubt that he could get at least a 3yr/$60M+ deal on the open market. Depends on what matrix you like to look at but, by xERA, he’s essentially been good to great his entire career with this being his first real down year. And even then, he’s got the same K/9 and BB/9 as last year, hasn’t lost any velocity and has a 4.17 xERA.
Seems like they could sign those 3 (at least in annual money) after clearing $85M from JV and Max.
Is that $85M before or after they paid down a bunch of the contracts?
In any case, I think they could definitely get those three for $85M if they’re willing to make the deals long. But remember, the going rate for Jameson Taillon-level starters is something like $18M a year. All these guys probably top that AAV, and some (like Yamamoto) might do it by a lot.
As an Astros fan I am both thrilled that they made the correct move for another chance at the WS, while also lament the fact that they’re only this desperate because of how badly their offseason worked out. Still, even if the competitive window shrink a bit further with this trade, it’s a necessary evil at this point because no way you want to possibly waste a year of this core because of two good but not generational prospects.
Damn, it is going to be fun to see Verlander anchoring this staff again!
According to MLB TV the mets are sending $59M to Houston so the Astros get Verlander for $29M.
Those prospects had better deliver.
If the Mets are sending $59m, doesn’t that mean the Astros are getting Verlander essentially for free? The Mets have already paid nearly 2/3 of his 2023 salary.
ETA: looks like they are paying all of 2023, half of 2024, and half of 2025 if option vests. That’s still an awful lot of dead money (to anyone but the Mets?)
So Cohen/Eppler spent $57 million for over half a season of Verlander, two top prospects, and any additional revenue he had from extra seats and ads sold due to Verlander signing.
These prospects really don’t need to deliver more than a combined 10 WAR career total to make it a wash.
But they’re young.
And dreaming on prospects is risky business, the younger the riskier.
Yeah that’s a little rich but not too far off of what we would expect. FV50s are typically valued between $20M-$30M, and while the FV45+ value seems to be less defined it’s probably, what, $10M? And they got half a season out of Verlander.
No, the Mets are giving the Astros a $52M subsidy for Verlander (assuming he hits 140ip next year and his 2025 contract vests) and have already paid Verlander $30M in salary. So that’s $82M for two prospects.
Prospect values are good for comparing farm system values, but not good for trade values.
It waits to be seen as to how much of Verlander’s salary the Mets are eating … but you have to respect that Cohen has come to terms with these contracts all being sunk costs and his only concern seems to be maximizing future returns instead of minimizing current expenses.
It will be interesting to see how all these deals pan out over the next few years.
I like it for this reason too. There are a ton of owners who greenlight huge expenses and then get mad at the front office for it, forcing them into suboptimal situations later as a result. Ken Kendrick and Tom Ricketts are the worst of these, but John Henry, Arte Moreno, and others have had this reaction too. This is what you would want an owner to do.
Don’t get me wrong, Drew Gilbert is a good prospect and one who should slot in next to Nimmo in the near future. And Clifford is exciting too. But there is a big difference between signing 2 quality starters in a single offseason and 3. You can get two in a field of three or four by being the high bidder on all of them. But signing over half your rotation in a n offseason is a tall order.
I hear what you’re saying. I wanted to keep Verlander for this reason. But I think the experience of watching Verlander’s injury & shaky start to the season plus Scherzer’s unevenness maybe made the Mets realize you can’t really count on older pitchers.
Nola, Giolito, Urias, Yamamoto–I think two of these four, then a trade for another guy (maybe Cease?). Hopefully Peterson or Megill takes a big step forward over the last two months, too.
Don’t forget, there are a number of solid (and much younger) SPs available in FA this year. I’m sure the Mets will sign at least one of them.
The Mets added several top 60 prospects by dumping mainly expiring contracts of players aged 35–41 in a disappointing playoff-less season.
You have to do that every single time.
The ’23 season was over with. 2024 and beyond was also looking more and more suspect. Now, at least, they have a much deeper farm and have freed up *some* salary to retool and start fresh for 24 and beyond.
The Mets lost much of their pre-season, top-heavy, farm ratings with the promotions of Baty, Alvarez, and Senga. Now it looks like a Top 10 farm again, which is all we could have asked for a week ago.
Yeah, there are a lot of interesting free agents. But they’re going to have to sign a lot of them!
Mets 2024 rotation :
1. Senga
2. ?
3. ?
4. ?
5. ?
You can put Quintana on there too. That doesn’t really inspire confidence but he’ll still be around.
going into this year it was Scherzer, Carrasco and a bunch of ???s, and i think it’s reasonable to expect that both Senga and Quintana will be better next year than Scherzer and Carrasco, respectively, have been this year.
i’m not really worried. they also now have real trade chips to go get Cease, Gilbert, Burnes, etc
Ohtani? 🙂
They still have:
Senga: about 3 WAR
Quintana about 2–3 WAR
David Peterson 1–2 WAR
McGill for 0.5–1 WAR
Not exactly HOFers but that’s 4 serviceable starters. The Mets just need to sign about 2 SPs and they’ll be fine. And to be honest, they’ll probably be safer with two younger 2–3 WAR pitchers than a couple of 40-year-olds on the decline.
Preliminary ranking of 2024 MLB Payrolls:
1) NY Mets
2) NY Yankees
3) SD Padres
.
.
.
29) Pittsburgh Pirates
30) NY Mets Dead Money
31) Las Vegas As
This is only sort of a joke. Right now the Mets have $64M committed to players who will be active on other teams in 2024. Meanwhile the 2023 Oakland As are paying only $56M to their entire roster.
If the A’s don’t trade Blackburn (I would have thought it would be done by now, so maybe it won’t be), they decline Rucisnki’s option (seems obvious) and they do non-tender Kaprelian and Seth Brown (it’ll be 50/50 on each of those, I think) they will only have four players on the entire roster making more than league minimum: Diaz, Pina, Laureano, and Blackburn. They could theoretically have a payroll of something like $45M and maybe even less, since league minimum for 22 players is something like $16.5M.
I’d love to see an article after the dust settles breaking down the math of both big Mets deals – money sent and owed, the surplus value of each pitcher, and the FV and dollar value of the prospect return. Loose back of the napkin math makes it look like both deals were pretty even but they’re so unique because of the straight money exchanged I think it would be a cool exercise.
Gilbert seems a similar type player as Len Dykstra. So the Mets make sense. Gilbert is unlikely to be as terrible a person though
Gilbert has that same sort of edginess. Sometimes that edginess is just being a competitor, and sometimes it means you have Lenny Dykstra on your hands.
I’m fairly unimpressed by Gilbert. If he has the same exact professional career and physical profile after coming out of literally any other college program where he didn’t wear eye black I think he’s getting comp’d to 4th and 5th outfielders
Clifford seems pretty interesting, on the other hand. Him and the Marlins prospects will ultimately decide if this episode of Spending Stevie’s Money was worth it because I don’t think any of the close to the majors guys have particularly notable upside
Gilbert is a bit of a tweener on defense but if he hits it isn’t going to matter. I think there is a pretty good chance he’s going to hit. A lot of plus tools and no double-plus ones.