Jacoby Ellsbury and the NBA-Style Trade
LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. — The Yankees weren’t necessarily looking to add a player who can earn $295 million over the next 10 seasons, but when you can land Giancarlo Stanton by surrendering only cash and a modest return of prospects, it’s an opportunity worth exploring.
The addition of the reigning NL MVP not only has the Yankees leaping the Red Sox in the AL East — 92 to 91 projected wins according to our projections — but he creates one of the rarest player tandems in history with Aaron Judge, making the Yankees’ lineup extremely potent on paper and also must-watch entertainment.
The biggest negative regarding the transaction for the Yankees is the $22 million Stanton luxury-tax number Stanton adds to the club’s payroll.
According to Cot’s Baseball Contracts, the addition of Stanton places the Yankees’ 2017 payroll at $183 million, which includes arbitration estimates, pre-arb salaries, and player benefits. The luxury-tax threshold is $197 million in 2018. In 2019 and 2020, the Yankees have $97.15 million and $97.24 million committed in guaranteed salaries and player benefits before including arbitration costs, pre-arbitration salaries, and minor-league players on the 40-man roster.
For a team interested in short-term upgrades, like finding another arm and perhaps adding a second baseman, first-base insurance and another option at catcher, that’s little room for added payroll. In the longer term, if the Yankees want to pursue, say, Bryce Harper next offseason, they might need to shed some salary to stay under the tax threshold — or at least restart their tax-penalty clock and avoid or delay the most punitive new measures in the CBA that include two tiers of surcharges. If a team spends more than 20 million above the threshold it is subject to an additional 12% tax and then a 42.5% to 45.0% tax on spending that is $40 million above the threshold.
And surcharges occur on top of the luxury tax: 20% for a first-time payer, 30% for a second-time payer, and 50% for a third-time one.
Baseball, in essence, has made its soft salary cap more rigid.
As Billy Witz reported for the New York Times, the Yankees entered the offseason motivated to get below the tax for the first time.
The Yankees are the only team that has been taxed every single season, and they have paid close to $335 million across those seasons, far more than the rest of baseball combined …
Just last month, the Yankees’ principal owner, Hal Steinbrenner, said it was “absolutely a goal” to get below the luxury tax threshold — and there is good reason.
Indeed.
The Yankees are still below the threshold, but they’re going to have to be creative to stay below it to address short-term and longer-term needs unless they can shed salary. And there is a top candidate to shed: Jacoby Ellsbury, who is owed $63.3 million over the next three seasons and has a $5 million buyout in 2021.
Ellsbury is not total sunk cost. He produced 1.8 WAR, .264/.348/.402 slash line, and a 101 wRC+ last season. He averaged 1.5 WAR over the last three years. He could fill a role. But as he enters his age-34 season, he’s not the kind of player you want to owe $68 million. The other issue is he is not going to fill a starting role in New York. The Yankees have the corner outfield positions covered, Aaron Hicks is going to start in center, and Brett Gardner is also ahead of Ellsbury on the outfield depth chart, though perhaps not a trusted center-field option at this point in his career.
Ellsbury is a fifth outfielder owed $68 million. There are few contracts a team would rather shed this offseason. Complicating matters is that Ellsbury has a full no-trade clause.
Still, the Yankees ought to try and move him. Easier said than done? Yes. But let’s explore some hypotheticals that could contain some logic and pragmatic appeal.
While the Phillies eroded a portion of their spending power by signing Pat Neshek on Monday, they still entered the offseason with the second-most room to add salary after the Tigers — around $70 million, according to Craig Edwards’ estimates. The Phillies are also projected to be one of the worst teams in the sport according to FanGraphs’ projections. Spending on high-end free agents might be a bit mature for the Phillies particularly given next year’s class. But the Phillies could use their spending power to buy prospects, essentially. They could make an already “elite” system (according to Baseball America) better.
What could they buy? Part of it depends on how they project Ellsbury’s remaining performance value. For the sake of simplicity without accounting for inflation, let’s say he’s worth about a win a year — or about $27 million in performance value over the next three seasons — given regular playing time. So he has a projected surplus value of negative-$41 million.
What would it take to move a player with a projected surplus value of negative $40 million? According to prospect values, that’s a position-player prospect with a future value grade of 55. FanGraphs’ Eric Longenhagen stamped Clint Frazier with a FV of 55 last year. Frazier appears to be an attractive trade chip for the Yankees. Left-handed pitcher Justus Sheffield has a FV 50 (worth $14 million). The Yankees moved similarly valued prospects at last summer’s trade deadline.
Baseball’s cap makes this sort of NBA-style trade a possible option for a number of other clubs, too.
According to Edwards, the Tigers have the most payroll room entering the offseason, just over $80 million. The Tigers are in need of young talent to refresh their system and could benefit from a similar NBA-style trade. The White Sox, A’s, Mets, Angels, Braves and Orioles are other teams that have money to spend — more than $30 million in estimated payroll space — but might have little motivation to spend on free agents while also having an interest is adding young talent. They could all stand to purchase some prospects from a Yankees’ system that is still loaded for talent.
The no-trade clause is a significant issue. Ellsbury probably doesn’t want to play for a team that is not expected to contend. But if Ellsbury wants to play at all, he might have to accept a trade, as he’s headed for reserve duty in New York.
The Yankees could use more payroll space. Many teams are in need of young talent. Ellsbury is not going to play much in New York. Where there is a will, payroll space, and prospects, there is a way.
A Cleveland native, FanGraphs writer Travis Sawchik is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Big Data Baseball. He also contributes to The Athletic Cleveland, and has written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @Travis_Sawchik.
I also like Rusney Castillo in this role. So long as he’s marooned in Pawtucket he isn’t affecting the RedSox luxury tax number so the urgency isn’t the same. But $37M is still an awful lot of money to spend on a guy who’s never going to play, and I’d bet a willingness to buy that contract off of Boston could land someone … something of value at least.
The difference is the Sox aren’t overflowing with prospects with no path to starting. DD saw to that when he gutted a top minor league farm for relief and starting pitchers
Until that deal’s almost shot, it’s a huge thing to convert his salary from untaxed to taxed. For all the teams with big financial resources, the taxed vs. untaxed distinction matters, and for the ones without big pockets, if Boston has to eat salary to move him then it’s probably a deal breaker given their efforts to get under the cap last year and this coming year.
Rusney Castillo’s contract counts towards the luxury tax.
The Cots payroll snapshots overstate things a little because they don’t use AAV. I’ve been keep tracking of the Yankees payroll for a few years (see here for detailed look at 2018: https://tinyurl.com/y6wsadlp), and after Stanton, the team now has about $22 million left to spend on 2 roster sports. That’s certainly doable, but when you factor in things like potential incentives and in-season acquisitions, the cushion is probably much smaller, so that’s why they will probably work very hard to shed Ellsbury.
They use AAV on the spreadsheet (2nd tab). 15 million under 197 using mlbtr arb projections
In a hypothetical ‘Ellsbury to Phillies’ scenario, would Ellsbury even start? They’ve got 3 young outfielders that they (or at least, I) like. Or would it just mean trading Herrera and trying to get some young value there, too?
The White Sox make more sense in terms of playing time, Ellsbury becomes their starting center fielder in 2018. The issue is what to do with 2019 and 2020, as the Sox prospects start to come through the system and/or the Sox starting spending money in free agency. The Sox can take on all of Ellsbury’s salary in 2018 and probably 2019 without it affecting their long term plans, but I’d assume they’d want the Yankees to cover a good chunk of 2020 and the buyout. If the Sox can get the Yankees to throw in ~$18-$20m of the $68m this might work… but that also lessens the return for the Sox.
There’s probably a very strong case for the Tigers too, but my guess is they’re not going to add salary this winter even if they have the room to do so (of course a Kinsler trade would change the picture a bit).
I think moving Ellsbury is going to be very hard because of the years left on the deal. Most rebuilding teams are probably envisioning themselves contending in 2020, so their current payroll flexibility is front loaded. And with the Headley trade in the last hour, my guess is Ellsbury will be with the Yankees in 2018, and maybe next year they can trade him into a rebuilding teams payroll.
Obviously the last thing in the world the Phillies want is a 34 year old outfielder and the Yankees aren’t about to give up their first tier prospects in a salary dump. Clint Frazier and Justus Sheffield, Travis must be kidding????? This isn’t Chase Headley and Bryan Mitchell for 13 million and an empty uniform.
I don’t see a non-competitive team being willing to take Ellsbury at any value over a fairly nominal amount. Maybe he is actually worth 3/$27 million, but rebuilding teams don’t sign aging players to three year deals. I also have my doubts that Ellsbury could even get that deal if he were a free agent. We’ve heard all about the problems with the “middle class” and Ellsbury right now seems like the kind of guy that would struggle to get a decent 1-year deal.
The Yankees might be able to pull this off, but I don’t think it works unless the team they are trading with values the prospects as essentially worth Ellsbury’s entire remaining contract. It’s not that he doesn’t have value, he just doesn’t have value to a team like the Phillies, and his value to any team is limited because they can look around at the free agency trash heap and find someone about as good for next to nothing.
But if the Phillies can get Ellsbury down to 3/27 (at least in their heads), he can then be traded to more of a contending team for more prospects or salary relief
I would agree with this– that’s a very Phillies-like move– but he’s got a no-trade clause.
This is a good point, and something I wonder if is even possible would be for teams to do a three way trade where one team takes on salary while not ending up with the player. So for example the Phillies get prospects, let’s just say the Cardinals get Ellsbury, but the Phillies are paying $40 million of Ellsbury’s deal. That way, the Phillies know they won’t be left holding the bag, and Ellsbury also knows that he is waiving his no-trade clause to go to a team that isn’t going to suck in 2018. Presumably you could send some organizational player from the Cardinals to the Yankees for optics.
I’m struggling to think that the Cardinals would really want Ellsbury. The Cardinals already have a glut of outfielders between the major league team and upper minors.
The Cardinals also have plenty of 2-ish WAR position players, their goal is to find a way to consolidate value into at least one player a couple wins (or more) per year better than that. Acquiring Yelich or Ozuna appears to be one logical way to do that, and there’d be even less logic to getting Ellsbury if the Cardinals trade for one of them. If a trade like that doesn’t happen, I still think the Cardinals are probably fine with the idea of moving Fowler to LF, playing Pham in CF, and playing Grichuk and/or Piscotty in RF.
I was really just using the Cardinals as a random team example.
Why not just deal directly with a team that could actually use Ellsbury on their roster? 3 years of Jacoby Ellsbury is only valuable to a competitive team. Prospects are valuable to everyone.
The other reason it doesn’t make sense to deal with a team like the Phillies is because of the no-trade clause. Ellsbury is less likely to approve a deal to a non-contending team. And it doesn’t make sense to take on a guy with a no-trade clause if your plan is to flip him to a 3rd team; it’s too risky.
Actually I do think the Jays might be willing to do something. They could put Kendrys Morales in the deal, so Ellsbury would cost $10M a year extra the next 2 years anyway. Could get an extra prospect to sweeten the deal, or Yanks add some more $$. The Jays do need OFs. This would also let them shift Pearce to 1B, which helps their OF D and would hopefully keep him healthier than playing defence in the OF.
Ellsbury would be 10M/10M the next 2 years, 21M in 2020, and they’d buy him out in 2021. So extra cost would be 46M/4. Could give them a prospect to make up for the extra $$.
I think the Jays should retool but this does kind of help their roster depending on how much cash Yanks add or what prospects they get back.
“I don’t see a non-competitive team being willing to take Ellsbury at any value over a fairly nominal amount… It’s not that he doesn’t have value, he just doesn’t have value to a team like the Phillies.”
The whole theme of the article is that he does have value to the Phillies, by allowing them to essentially purchase a decent prospect. We see these trades often in the NBA and moreso in the MLB as of late. Even today, the Padres took on Headley’s contract to buy a pitching prospect who they think has quite a bit of potential.
My point is not that they wouldn’t take him, but that they wouldn’t take him without getting close to the full $68 million in value along with him. Because while he might have some decent value to a good team, he is next to worthless for the Phillies.
As a bench player/part time player, he’s been worth 3 years $27 mill with his production (by free agent $/WAR). So he would have value regardless of the team he’s on, unless his roster spot + player he displaced is valued internally above $9 a year.
But they could see that roster spot as more valuable housing their own guys who may be fighting for a spot.
If you are a bad, rebuilding team, a role player who doesn’t make you a contender and has no future value is not worth the same as he is to a team that could actually use him. Ellsbury is unlikely to be worth $27 million to the Phillies from a business perspective. That’s why players like Ellsbury don’t sign with teams like the Phillies. Simply citing an average $/WAR doesn’t change that.
This is simply the flip side of teams giving up enormous value at the trading deadline when they know that a win or two could make the difference in season.
“That’s why players like Ellsbury don’t sign with teams like the Phillies.”
This simply isn’t true.
I haven’t looked anything up, but I recall Markakis signed a $40 mill, 4 year deal with the braves at the crater of their struggles. He is similar to Ellsbury – was in his early 30’s and plays OF.
1. That was a weird signing and was widely panned. It was thought that Braves were simply trying to make a show of competing (this was not at the crater of their struggles, it was right before the crater)
2. Still, Kakes was at least actually in his early 30s. He was three years younger (31) than Ellsbury is now (34). So even that oddball signing made more sense than a non-competing team signing an old guy to a longish commitment.
Great point, TKDC.
People often seem to forget that free agency $/WAR is largely driven by teams at a spot on the win curve where they’re expecting to contend, so we can’t just transfer that value logic to rebuilding teams.
There are some free agent deals that make sense for rebuilding teams, such as pillow contracts (especially for pitchers) with a thought of possibly being able to trade to contenders at the trade deadline and get back prospect value. Ellsbury for 3/$27 doesn’t fit that framework very well, however.
Again, that’s entirely the whole point here. He has negative value because of his contract, so you basically trade “taking Jacoby Ellsbury from NYY” for “a bunch of NYY prospects” (and throw NYY some token A-level player probably). Whatever value of prospects the Phillies or anyone else demand depends on how much negative value they assign to having that contract.
Because of the NTC and the negative value on the deal, I keep thinking the Yankees to clear a little more salary space by dealing someone else with even or positive value on a moderate deal like Gardner, Betances or Robertson.
I would not be surprised to see a team like the Rangers do a trade like this. A team that thinks that they’re unlikely to be competitive this year and whose realistic contention window is in 2-3 years, but doesn’t want to tear down. If the Giants weren’t so close to the luxury tax I’d think they would give it a shot as well. And the Brewers and if they had more a bit more money. I can’t think of any others right now that are too far away to go all in but might be close enough in a year or two that Frazier or Sheffield is a big lure.
Ellsbury might be more willing to accept a trade to a team that has a decent shot at a wild-card too.
This all assumes the Yankees would be willing to do this which I would very much doubt. Cashman likes his prospects. I’d think he’d be more likely to try and trade Ellsbury for an underperforming pitcher on an enormous contract but with a lower AAV than Ellsbury for luxury tax purposes.
I particularly agree with your last point. I could see Ellsbury as part of a deal for another overpriced player who is more useful to the Yankees, but I don’t see simply selling him with a quality prospect.
The Yankees now have very limited ways that they can use their financial muscle to get prospects. They can no longer blow past their IFA pool and pay penalties. They project to draft at the end of the first round, which makes it tougher to find high-upside prospects. They are free agency buyers who are normally over the luxury tax, meaning giving up draft picks for QO’d players. They look like trade deadline buyers, not sellers, going forward.
Add all that up, and I don’t see them using their quality prospects simply to move contracts to stay below the luxury tax line in 2018. (I’m aware of the Headley-Mitchell trade, but Mitchell is 26, well down the depth chart, and also out of option years. Mitchell has upside, but he’s well below the names discussed by Travis in this article.)
The Orioles seem like a good fit, though it would seem unlikely that the Yankees would trade to a division rival. The O’s need a rightfielder, because Austin Hays is not likely ready. And they really need prospects.
Similarly it could work for the Jays. Left-handed OF would be just about ideal there, and if he came with Clint Frazier, that would be a mighty tempting option. Jays have also done other deals like that recently too in getting guys underwater and having extra prospects thrown in.
I would agree that this is totally a Blue Jays thing to do but with the recent news that Rogers communications is looking into possibility selling the team I doubt they’ll be willing to take on any more long term commitments, especially if it’s nearly dead money.
It doesn’t sound like there’s urgency to the sale. It’ll probably take a few years to get serious offers.
I don’t know, these sales seem to be coming together real quick these days, I think the broadcast rights will complicate things a little though.
Ellsbury with 24 mm(8/year), Dellin Betances, Clint Frazier for Jed Lowrie. Cash and Beane love to chat after all. Gives Beane a CF option, a stud left fielder, a potentially super valuable RP trade chip to flip, and the Yankees solve their 2nd base problem until Torres comes up, free room in the BP for their high level relief prospects and get some spending money to snag a pitcher. Only problem I see is the NTC because if Ells were asked to go play 81 in the colosseum Im guessing he would probably decline.
The only problem you see is the NTC? really? You want the Yankees to send 44 mil, Ellsbury, Betances & Frazier for Lowrie with his contract? Let’s do some math.
Betances – 4.4 mil projected arb
Ellsbury – 8 mil
Frazier – min
Lowrie – 6 mil
You have the Yankees sending 12.4 mil and taking back 6 mil saving a whopping 6.4 mil while giving up Frazier & Betances (Not to mention Ellsbury’s positive value) and having to find a replacement for Betances and paying 15 mil to Ellsbury for the next 3 years, great trade for the A’s.
No i meant theyd send 24/3 years, i.e. 8 per year, figure lowrie and betances are close enough to cancel out, but lowrie is in a better spot on the roster then betances as th unstable fifth closer, lowrie seems like a good pickup for a year to be a backup 1b and start the year at 2b/3b then be a backup infielder, and they get off of forty million for frazier.
Basically I see it as Frazier for forty million, and then betances for lowrie
I’m not going to go into how you are wrong about value calculations, I get the feeling that might be an exercise in futility. I will say that when trading from a position of surplus you don’t have to take lesser value to plug holes, especially when that position is over valued by other teams. Also 68-24 = 44 million 44/3 = 14.66/y so like I said great trade for the A’s.
BTW don’t try throwing some “Yankee’s homer fan” bs at me cause I’m neither a homer or a Yankees fan, in fact quite the opposite as a Jays fan I really hate the Yankees, but I admire the F*ck outta them, I’m wishing the Jays would make the trade you suggest.
I apologize I reread what you said and now realize you mean the A’s assume the 44 mil and the Yankees assume 24 mil changes nothing about anything else I said but still.
I could see something a little more like Joyce/Lowrie and paydown Joyce for Betances/Fraizer/Ellsbury and maybe 11mm in 2020. Oak also deals for Piscotty as looks probable and can run out Powell/Ellsbury/Fraizer/Piscotty/Fowler and play Pinder/Baretto at second. Oak gets Fraizer and the ability to play Ellsbury so he might have more value in trade, and fix Betances control issues similar to Trinian while ridding the Yankees of a player whos salary they dont want to pay, and whose relationship with the team has deteriorated. NY gets a second baseman and more affordable 4th outfielder, and saves 20mm on the luxury tax threshold.
The Yankees should pay money to create roster space by moving him but trading 55 fv prospects to move Ellsbury is a spectacularly terrible idea. While SIMILAR to a hard cap it still isn’t one. And they remain far enough under with enough internal options that attaching Frazier to a deal is unnecessary.
Just pay his contract downto market value and save5-8 million a year.
The real problem is he’s the sixth or seventh best use of that roster spot.
Exactly.
This is “an NBA style trade” in that it’s the kind of trade that stupid, poorly run NBA teams are forced to make when they have no other options.
The Yankees are neither stupid nor poorly run, and have plenty of other options.
Haven’t the Golden State Warriors made plenty use of trades like this in recent years, largely to build their current juggernaut? I wouldn’t have thought they were poorly run.
You wouldn’t have thought they were poorly run, because this is the exact type of trade they never make.
The Warriors buy picks from other teams.
Draymond, Klay and Curry were drafted. Durant was signed as a FA. Most importantly, Curry signed his first extension when his health was an open question.
The only thing you might be thinking of is their renouncing Barnes as an RFA in order to sign Durant back in 2016?
While it wouldn’t help the Yankees shed payroll, what about a Cano for Ellsbury trade? Would help the mariners shed a lot of payroll, and you’d be able to switch Gordon to his natural position, and Ellsbury would go back to his natural position. He is also from the northwest. I’d venture that would be one of the few places both would waive their no trade clause too. Also that is one of Yankees few soft spots. Can you imagine that line up? Something like Gardner/Hicks, Stanton, Sanchez, Judge, Cano.
I think they’re probably planning on installing Gleyber Torres at 2nd base pretty soon. Haven’t read any solid reporting on this, but it sure seems like the Yankees aren’t in a rush to fill 2nd base.
Edit: They just traded Headley, so maybe there’s a different spot for Torres after all.
You beat me to it about the fit with Seattle, though I was thinking about Gordon going to the Yankees for Ellsbury and prospects. Don’t know if the M’s would take on the extra $, but they wouldn’t have to worry about Cano’s no trade clause.
I don’t think the mariners are trying to cut down salaries, and they WANT Gordon in CF. He didn’t become their CF because of a logjam, they acquired him to be their CF.
Besides, Cano has more surplus value than Ellsbury. The Mariners would have to be stupid to make that deal while trying to contend before their core ages.
And, Cashman is incapable of admitting how bad an idea it was to sign Ellsbury instead of Cano…
Well the Yankees just did this with Chase Headley, on a smaller scale
Literally minutes ago. You are locked in.
A little surprised they didn’t throw in something slightly more valuable than Mitchell and get Solarte back too.
It is odd. Now they’ve got holes at both 2nd and 3rd. So either they go buy someone and walk back some of the tax savings, or they’re committing to starting the year with either Andujar
or Torres or both in MLB. right?
Edit: Or Aaron Boone comes out of retirement to man 3rd base and be a player-manager! That would be … amazing
Or Tyler Wade and Thairo Estrada as bridges. But they’re all unproven.
Rumor has it that they want Frazier back, but there’s no reason to block Andujar with a longer-term contract, right?
This is why Solarte would have been perfect. Jed Lowrie would have been good too.
Could see Frazier for 2/$16m or so, now.
Fraizer on a one year deal makes a lot of sense.
Something tells me that if Headley is getting picked up nearly for free, Frazier isn’t getting less than that. Dave forecasted Frazier for 3/$42m, and maybe that ends up being high but it seems like the right ballpark.
I know it only takes one team… but other than his power, most everything about Frazier’s play the last 2.5 seasons would give me concern. He seems like someone most teams are “smart” enough to only give only a one or maybe two year deal.
I’m wondering about the Machado being marketed news or Donaldson, if either of those players move I dount the O’s or Jays care if it would be in division since they would be punting the season anyway it would seem. This is all starting to feel very superteam’ish al la NBA style, I could just see some trade with either of those teams wherein they take back Ellsbury and get A prospects.
They can now get a cheaper 1B/3B than Headley (I.e. Frazier on a hometown discount), while still clearing up the money to resign CC and maintain some flexibility after arbitration.
Because Mitchell is out of options and wasn’t going to make the team anyway.
He’s a good pickup for the Pads, but he held no value for the Yanks.
or Donaldson/Machado even though it’s within the division. Fills a one year need
I just don’t see much chance of him agreeing to a trade. There’s no reason for him to go to Philly.
If I’m Ellsbury, I’m going into 2018 thinking I have a shot at a decent number of at bats anyway. He may be considered the 5th OF, but he’s probably the back-up CF. Hicks was very good last year, but he was a below average hitter every year of his career before 2017. Heading into last year, he was worth 0.7 WAR in 370 career games. If he tweaks a hamstring or hits like it’s pre-2017, Ellsbury has a shot at some at bats for a team that will be contending for a WS title. And since Hicks is better against LHP anyway, Ellsbury still has some at bat potential in a platoon role.
Edit: And just like that, the Yankees traded Headley to the Padres. That extra $13mm will make it much easier to stay under the Luxury Tax threshold.
And cleared Mitchell’s 40 man spot to boot.
Good trade for both sides.
Yeah this is a nice idea in theory, but Ellsbury has already stated that he would not waive his NTC even after being informed that he would be the 5th OF. The Yanx already moved on to plan B and shed Headley, not much they can do about this.
Also…it’s a fucking terrible idea “in theory” for the Yankees to give up a valuable asset in order to have more spending money for a weak FA class.
Yes, I think Hicks is the reason they’ll wind up keeping Ellsbury. Not only was this a career year, but he was bad after the 6-week DL stint. That uncertainty, plus Hicks’s weakness vs. RHP, makes Ellsbury look like a good complement for a team that expects to play in October.
The Yankees are never, ever going to trade a talented young player to dump salary.
They’ll pay $15m a year of Ells’ salary, first.
The real issue is the NTC, because Jacoby likes NY, and likes winning.
Is the idea that in normal deals, where the team in the Yanks’ role sends $$ to the team that is taking on the overpriced player, that such money still in considered Yanks’ expense from a luxury tax perspective? i.e they cover a portion of the salary, as opposed to simply making a one-time payment?
And, tangent: did Ellsbury actually improve a little in the second half of last year or does that look like noise? A .778 OPS player who can swipe 12 of 13 and dominate in the area of catcher interference (lol) is not so embarrassing.
He had one of his hot streaks in the second half.
But yeah, if he were on Gardner’s contract, he’d be very flippable.
He isn’t, though, and he doesn’t want to leave NY either.
“Is the idea that in normal deals, where the team in the Yanks’ role sends $$ to the team that is taking on the overpriced player, that such money still in considered Yanks’ expense from a luxury tax perspective?”
Yes, that’s exactly the case. For luxury tax, the money sent still stays in the Yankees’ calculation (on an AAV basis) and is a deduction for the calculation of the team that receives it. In other words, a team can’t lower its luxury tax number just by sending money along with a player.
The season is long. It doesn’t make sense to give up so much cheap depth just to clear out some cap space.
Could a team like the Braves sign a guy who is already deal money (Matt Kemp) to a long term extension at ML minimum (let’s say 8 years, $4 million, and let’s assume Kemp goes along with this), and then trade that player for another team’s dead money? Because when you are taking on a player, you use to AAV of what you are taking on, so while Kemp would $19 million each of the next two seasons, if they tack on another 8/$4 million, that would make the AAV $4.2 million. If the other team is willing to take that in exchange for sending $34 million or less to the Braves, then the Braves win because they are paying less money, and the other team wins if the $8 million difference is less than they’d pay in tax.
I’m sure it’s possible in theory. I’d like to see it happen.
Essentially that’s what the Nationals are doing now while they try to steal money they agreed belongs to the Orioles.
I thought the deferred money still counted based on the present value for only during the term of the contract?
That’s accurate on deferred money, which is defined for the luxury tax to be any money payable after the last year of service (i.e., playing baseball for the team) in the contract. There’s also some sort of net present value calculation for deferred money.
Creative idea. I think that it meets the letter of the luxury tax definitions, but I see two possible issues:
(1) I’m pretty sure that the Commissioner’s Office could find some justification not to approve the contract, perhaps nothing more than a blatant attempt to circumvent the luxury tax.
(2) As you reference, while Kemp probably should agree to this deal, I’m not sure that he would. Maybe he thinks that after the next 2 years he finds some series of low-dollar contracts to DH at a couple million per year. And a club would absolutely have a right to make him report to the team each year in order to earn his money. While it could be a waste of a 40 man spot to carry him, he does have some risk of losing that money if a team does carry him (for whatever reason) and not simply release him, more or less pressuring Kemp into retiring.
Bobby Bonilla thinks this is a great idea.
Between Odubel Herrera, Nick Williams, and Aaron Altherr, I think the Phillies OF is basically set. I’m not sure what team Ellsbury could fit on right now (perhaps the Giants?) but Philadelphia will be taking steps forward in 2018, and Ellsbury would just eat playing time better spent on the aforementioned three, plus Hoskins.
HA! Yankees did the NBA style trade, just with Headley instead of Ellsbury. Given the terms of that deal though, it’s highly unlikely Yanks are able to move Ellsbury though without throwing in a lot.
The other differentiating factor is that Mitchell is out of options, and unlikely to make the team out of ST.
Just trade him to Miami for Starlin Castro and $250 million.
The Yanks will have to eat a considerable amount of Ellsbury’s salary and hope he doesn’t veto the trade. Not sure too may teams are looking for an oft-injured player that consistently underachieves, in terms of contract…he was never worth that money to begin with.
The Mets come to mind as a trade partner here. Ellsbury gets to stay in New York, and the Mets get prospects to build around.
I guess I agree, but I could see it happening a lot more easily if more of the warm bodies and/or hot prospects involved were infielders. Adding both Ellsbury *and* Clint Frazier barely changes the quality of the team the Mets would be putting on the field for the next year or two — where if both of them were 3B/1B of equivalent value instead it’d be a nice upgrade. But I suppose you could see it as opening up room for the Mets to consider dealing an outfielder — Cespedes? — to fill other positions of need. We’d have to imagine Sandy Alderson suddenly getting really trade-happy at the winter meetings.
I would argue that regardless of whether Ellsbury produces ~1 WAR for the Phillies he still represents no “Winning” value as the Phillies have no incentive for going from shit to less-shit. I think it would behoove them to trade for Ellsbury to pay for prospects, but I don’t think the Yanks should get any “credit” for whatever WAR he will provide.
Given the NTC the process has to start by asking which teams he would aprove a trade to. Then Ellsbury tells them but only if my option year is picked up. Yankees would need to eat 40-50 million.
Ellsbury may be better suited for a part time roll than Gardner who is playing for his next contract after 2019. Financially they save just as much for Lt purposes dealing Gardner (eating no salary) and unlike Ellsbury they would get some value in return
Sorry but nobody is going to trade a top 100 prospect just for a salary dump. Yeah technically it might be fair surplus value but you can’t buy top 100 prospects.
The yankees system is currently good but it will get bad really fast with graduations and trades to fill in. Just look at the cubs, their system is now bottom 5 after a few trades.
The yankees won’t draft high anytime soon. Their real challenge is not to stay under the tax in 2018 but it is around 2020 when all the young guys get more expensive in arbitration. Then we are talking 300 m and not just a few millions over the tax.
Yankees system will start to get thin soon and then they need every prospect they can get (for example if a starter gets injured)
The Giants are getting absolutely nothing out of Pablo Sandoval (18m this year and next) and also don’t have money to spend, but could use a 1.5-win outfielder somehow. Is there an avenue to trade Ellsbury for Panda and then just cut Panda outright? Yankees get away from Ellsbury and Giants get an albatross they can actually use. I’m not sure which side needs to kick in more.
Sandoval isn’t costing the Giants more than minimum. Red Sox are paying almost all of his salary.
Ells is basically done. There’s no good reason to take him. Sorry.
Looks like the Yanks want Moose.
send Ellsbury along with Adam Warren to San Fran in exchange for Melancon and his now-unwanted contract
The Yankees aren’t in need of shedding payroll. They just moved Headley, putting them at $170M, with very few spots to fill.
If they move Ellsbury for $27M, and eat the other $40M, they’ll be at $161M. And that means they’re resetting their luxury tax, so 2019-20 spending is not a concern. They can afford to go to $250M payroll and still turn a profit.
What possible reason would they have to sell Frazier for money? When you just said that he’s worth $41M. So, even if Machado or Donaldson are worth $60M, the Yankees can get one of them for Frazier basically straight up (with some low level prospects added in to make it look good)…leaving them with Machado orDonaldson at third, the no. 1 prospect (Torres) at second, and $35M left over to spend on a starter and mid season additions (guessing CC Sabathia now and then another starter in mid season). Thus taking care of every possible need you can think of for 2018.