The 2015 Free Agent Landmines

Free agency is the land of false hopes and dreams. While nearly every major signing is heralded as good news for the organization making the commitment, they often turn quite poorly; note the very high number of overpaid veterans being shopped around the league at this moment. Signing the wrong free agent can actually do more damage than not signing any free agents at all, and especially for teams with average or below average budgets, payroll efficiency is a necessity.

So, with that in mind, I’m going to present my annual list of free agent landmines, or players to be most actively avoided based on my expectations of what they’re going to produce versus what they’re going to get paid. Appearing on this list doesn’t make you a bad player, but just one where I think the market’s assessment of your value is too high for the actual production.

For reference, here’s last year’s version of the list, which included some of the more notable free agent busts of last winter: Joe Nathan, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, and Curtis Granderson, as well as two of the three guys who got rejected by the market after turning down the qualifying offer: Kendrys Morales and Nelson Cruz. I don’t expect an 80% failure rate for the five players listed below, but I think there are enough warning signs that I probably wouldn’t pursue them this winter.

For the expected signing cost, I’m going to list both the crowdsourced estimate as well as my own prediction, though the analysis will be based on what I think they’re going to get instead of what the crowd guessed. First a few honorable mentions, and then on to the list:

Others I wouldn’t sign for the expected prices I think they’ll get this winter: Hanley Ramirez (7/$140M), James Shields (4/$80M), and Melky Cabrera (3/$39M).

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

5. Edinson Volquez, Starting Pitcher

Crowd: 2 years, $16 million
Dave: 3 years, $27 million

In 2014, Edinson Volquez cut his ERA from 5.71 to 3.04, a pretty miraculous transformation in results, but his underlying numbers show that he was mostly the same pitcher; his xFIP actually went up slightly from 4.07 to 4.20. The Pirates know how to make groundball pitchers look effective through their use of shifts and the run suppressing impact of their home park, but if you sign Volquez, you’re not also signing the context that made him look good in 2014.

A few years ago, I’d have been more convinced that Volquez was going to turn an artificially depressed ERA into a real paycheck, but teams have gotten smarter, and I wouldn’t be too surprised if he sat around for a while wondering when the offers were going to start rolling in, but eventually, someone will probably give him two or three years and hope that 2014 wasn’t a mirage. It probably was, though, and he’s the type of free agent that could end up as a total waste of cash.

4. Nelson Cruz, “Outfielder”

Crowd: 3 years, $45 million
Dave: 3 years, $45 million

Yes, him again. I’m putting Cruz back on the list for the second year in a row, even though he made the pick look silly with his performance in 2014. Cruz may have eased concerns about whether he can hit for power outside of Texas, but he’s now also a year older and is coming off career bests in nearly every number you can imagine. Signing a 34 year old in the hopes that they can repeat a career year is generally a bad bet, and if Cruz returns to something closer to prior form, he’s an average player who is about to get paid like an impact hitter.

Especially as he moves to DH on a more regular basis, the bat is going to have to carry his entire value, and Cruz’s career 118 wRC+ just isn’t all that special for a bat-only player. He’s going to get paid for what he did in 2014, but paying for that performance requires that we think the mid-30s version of Cruz is a significantly better hitter than what he’s been throughout his MLB career. Maybe he made some dramatic improvements last year that will stick around, but I wouldn’t bet big money on it. Someone probably will.

3. Nick Markakis, Outfielder

Crowd: 3 years, $33 million
Dave: 4 years, $40 million

At this point, Markakis is essentially a lesser version of Nori Aoki, and I’ll be honest, I don’t understand why the market is apparently so bullish on the Orioles right fielder. He’s extremely durable, but he just doesn’t do enough to really impact a team in a significant way, and yet, it seems to be fait accompli that he’s going to land a four year contract for real money.

Markakis is essentially an average offensive player, which is fine for a plus defender, but defensive metrics don’t think Markakis has been a big asset with the glove in years, and even if you think they’re wrong about him, he’s still heading into his age-31 season, so paying for glovework seems like a poor idea. Given his limited value, I’m not even sure I’d give Markakis a two year deal, much less than the three or four year contract he seems likely to land. He’s not entirely useless, but there certainly seem to be better ways to spend money than on locking up a below average player for his decline years.

2. Victor Martinez, Designated Hitter

Crowd: 3 years, $45 million
Dave: 4 years, $64 million

As with Cruz, the bet on Martinez is that a mid-30s career year for a bat only player is real, but this time, the gap in between the track record and 2014 performance is even more extreme. Martinez hit more homers last year than he did in the previous two seasons combined, and he’s only an elite hitter if he’s driving the ball with regularity. Paying big money to Martinez is essentially a bet on his power, but he has 6,000 career plate appearances with an ISO of .168; his 2014 power surge just doesn’t fit with the rest of his career.

The extreme contact skills put a fairly high floor in place, and Martinez is unlikely to be useless going forward, but if the power regresses back to 15-20 homers per year, he’s a good-not-great hitter who doesn’t do anything else of value. And we can’t ignore that he’s one of the game’s very worst baserunners, so he turns times on base into runs at a very low rate, making him overrated even by something as simple as on base percentage. At $10-$15 million per year for a couple of years, Martinez would likely be worth investing in, but he’s going to push towards $20 million per year for four years and cost the signing team a draft pick.

The cost is just too high for a bet that, after a 10 year big league career, Martinez finally figured out how to hit for power.

1. Max Scherzer, Starting Pitcher

Crowd: 7 years, $168 million
Dave: 7 years, $175 million

For the last two years, Max Scherzer has been one of the very best pitchers in all of baseball; only Clayton Kershaw and Felix Hernandez rate better by FIP-. However, a big driver of both his low FIP and ERA has been his ability to prevent fly balls from going over the fence, as he’s posted the fifth lowest HR/FB rate among starters with 400 innings pitched over the last two seasons. His career HR/FB rate is significantly higher than his recent numbers, and HR/FB rate is one of the least predictive parts of a player’s performance, so some regression in this area would make Scherzer look like more of a good pitcher than a great one.

And, of course, there’s the health question. Scherzer has made 30 or more starts in six straight years, but he’s still a pitcher, and guys like Matt Cain and Bronson Arroyo are reminders that even durable pitchers eventually break down. To justify something like the $175 million he’s likely to land this winter, he’s going to have to throw a lot of innings in the second half of his career, but history is not kind to free agent pitchers who change teams, especially when it comes to staying healthy.

The fact that the Tigers preferred to trade Drew Smyly and Austin Jackson to acquire David Price and try to sign him to the deal they wouldn’t give Scherzer is another red flag. It doesn’t make that the correct decision, necessarily, but the Tigers know Scherzer’s arm better than any other team, and certainly put as much value on starting pitching as any team in baseball, and yet they don’t think Scherzer is worth what he’s going to get.

For the next year or two, Scherzer’s signing probably looks just fine, provided he stays healthy. But the long-term cost here is probably just too high. At the rate at which pitchers break down, you have to get truly elite performance when the pitcher is healthy to make a contract this size work, and if Scherzer’s home run rate fluctuates, the top-end performance might not be good enough to justify the dead money that is basically guaranteed at the end of the deal.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

63 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
southie
11 years ago

All of these are true but also a stark reminder of how awful that Robinson Cano contract is going to look IMO.

Forrest Gumption
11 years ago
Reply to  southie

Contract is in no way as bad as Pujols’s deal due to Cano’s superior health and consistency at a difficult position like 2B – plus you have to take into account that there’s no way a player like him goes to a wasteland like Seattle if they don’t overpay. Strange deal to use as an example. $24M in 2022 isn’t going to even be that much.

dl80
11 years ago

But Cano will be 42 then and likely having produced multiple negative-WAR years by then.

He could easily be replacement-level by age 38 (if not sooner), meaning you’ve got 4-5 years of negative value. Not sure if that can make up for however much surplus he creates in the first 5 years.

Tim Eriksen
11 years ago
Reply to  dl80

Cano will be 40 in his final season in Seattle not 42.

skippyballer486
11 years ago
Reply to  dl80

If we use Cano’s steamer projection for next season (5.1 WAR) and then reduce that by .5 each season (shown by Tom Tango to be a really good way to do it) we come up with Cano producing 33.2 WAR over the lifetime of the contract. At $240 million, that’s a $/WAR figure of about 7.2 million. If last offseason’s $/WAR rate was 6 million to 6.5 million, even a conservative estimate of inflation rate of 5 percent will make the contract somewhere between -5 million and +15 million in surplus value.

A more aggressive inflation projection or a higher starting point (and since I went with conservative numbers there’s a good chance of the true figures being higher with very little chance of them being lower) makes the contract a big win for Seattle. True, Cano will look way too expensive in his last couple of years. But he’s going to provide lots of excess value in the early years of the contract, which is exactly what Seattle expects to happen.

Yirmiyahu
11 years ago
Reply to  dl80

Not quite with you on the math there, skippy. If you start him out at 5.1 WAR for 2015 @ $6.5M/WAR and add 5% annual inflation, and pay him $24M/year, he’s (very slightly) overpaid.

year WAR $/WAR value surplus
2015 5.1 $6.50 $33.15 $9.15
2016 4.6 $6.83 $31.40 $7.40
2017 4.1 $7.17 $29.38 $5.38
2018 3.6 $7.52 $27.09 $3.09
2019 3.1 $7.90 $24.49 $0.49
2020 2.6 $8.30 $21.57 -$2.43
2021 2.1 $8.71 $18.29 -$5.71
2022 1.6 $9.15 $14.63 -$9.37
2023 1.1 $9.60 $10.56 -$13.44

total surplus value: -$5.43M

SKob
11 years ago
Reply to  dl80

@ Yirmiyahu – look at your calc again… anything missing?

Way to not include the 2014 (5.3 WAR) season in your calculation of the contract! Pretty sure the real total is right between skippys -5 mill and +15 mill.

Details, my friend, details!

Yirmiyahu
11 years ago
Reply to  dl80

I didn’t include 2014 because I thought we were having a discussion of whether the contract was an albatross going forward.

Anyway, it seems like about a fair contract no matter how you look at it.

southie
11 years ago
Reply to  dl80

Given his position I can see a quick downturn in his overall production/health/PAs. I think one year from now this contract is starting to look worrisome. More so than only one year of aging would normally do.

A
11 years ago
Reply to  dl80

You are really assuming a lot there. You act like turning 40 turns you into a potato.

Cano isn’t a crush homers, strike out 6,000 times type of player. He walks and he plays good defense. At age 40 I can still see him being at least a very good DH.

skippyballer486
11 years ago
Reply to  dl80

Yirmiyahu – You can’t leave any years out when evaluating a contract. The whole point of contract backloading is to give teams value early that they pay for later. Almost all big free agent contracts are going to be really bad at the end; that is by design. It’s the total surplus that matters, not the surplus after a certain date.

Also, keep in mind that I used very conservative numbers in my calculations. The actual baseball inflation rate over the past few years has been closer to 10% than 5%. My point was that at a minimum this contract is a break-even expectation for Seattle, with the chance to be a huge surplus if the baseball economy continues to grow.

Jason B
11 years ago
Reply to  dl80

“You act like turning 40 turns you into a potato.”

No, but it does, very nearly without fail, turn you into a poor, injured, or retired baseball player. The number of productive age-40 (and 39, and 38…) seasons in the modern era is very short indeed.

Regardless of skill set or body type, age is heretofore undefeated, and I wouldn’t bet against it going forward.

Johnny
11 years ago
Reply to  southie

Cano is worth $30 million per season right now. Sure, the last 3 years of that deal will suck but right now the Mariners are getting him on the cheap at $24 million.

AJ
11 years ago
Reply to  Johnny

If we’re being honest, I’d say Cano is worth well above $30M at the moment. All things considered, including the name value and everything associated with it he brings alongside his elite production, the actual amount he’s worth from (say…) 2014 until 2018 could clock in at a staggering number. That fact (err… opinion) combined with the WAR figures listed above would very easily cancel out any lagging performance at the end of the deal. And all of this is assuming he is never traded. They’d likely still have to send along money with him, but I could see a contender willing to eat salary for a year or two of a 38-year old Cano. Sort of like the Ichiro deal, although I think by then he was only making $6M or so.

LHPSU
11 years ago

“The fact that the Tigers preferred to trade Drew Smyly and Austin Jackson to acquire David Price and try to sign him to the deal they wouldn’t give Scherzer is another red flag.”

Tigers also offered Scherzer 6 years, 144 million. Sure Scherzer was 220 innings younger back then, and maybe the Tigers expected him to turn it down anyway, but that seems quite a lot of money to give to a red flag.

Jim Price
11 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

Yeah, I can’t really let the Tigers off the hook here. They wanted to keep him at a big overpay. Instead it seems it will require an extreme overpay to sign him.

rustydudeMember since 2021
11 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

Very good point. And remember, that was an extension for yrs 2015-2021 (after the arbitration salary of 2014 was agreed to), the same years he is seeking from a new free agent contract. So it is apples to apples.

geo
11 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

And how do we know that the Tigers are going to offer Price what they wouldn’t give Scherzer? I’ve never heard that at all.

Enemy of the State
11 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

6 years 144million at the start of last year wouldn’t be that bad. It would include last years performance and 5 additional years. Sure its an overpay, but not nearly as bad as 7years of 175million starting this year.

It seems the Tigers offered as much as they were willing and backed off when pushed any further.

Balthazar
11 years ago

6/$144, 2014-19 is rich but not irrational. Tigers value SP and knew him. Max and his higher minds didn’t take it. 7/$170+, 2015-21 is nuts. That’s just too much risk to take on for a pitcher at that dollar figure. If Scherzer was the only front of the rotation arm the Tigers had going into 2014, maybe they take on all that risk. Letting him walk is the sane move.

History says someone other than sane is going to put up whale money. The question is who? Yankees are pretending it’s not them. Phillies are putatively trying to dump contracts. Dodgers have a lot of rotation arms now. Boston seems the last of the big spenders; their rotation is a list of afterthoughts now too. I could see Cherington holding out and walking this back to six years and an option, and being applauded for it—and the deal still blowing up bad. I can’t see Boston going into 2015 without at least one front of the rotation arm under contract, though.

Shankbone
11 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

Great point. It reminds of the Cardinals and their paltry offer to Albert Pujols.

Ryan
11 years ago

What does it mean to say something like you wouldn’t even give Markakis two years? Clearly, everything depends on the context of the organization considering it. Surely, in the right context it’s possible for such a deal to make sense (e.g., If they have a huge budget, a hole in the corner outfield and no prospects coming, sit at the right place on the win curve, etc.,).

Jim Price
11 years ago
Reply to  Ryan

Also I don’t get the Aoki love. He should be a 4th OF, he plays just OK defense and runs well but thats it. Seems like there are plenty of OF’s with the same skill set.

LHPSU
11 years ago
Reply to  Jim Price

Markakis isn’t much better offensively, and according to metrics Markakis’ defense was absolutely atrocious for the last five years before rebounding to just below average this year.

Believe it or not, the big advantage Markakis has is actually baserunning. Aoki is a terrible base stealer.

dave gb
11 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

I don’t mean to use the “eye test” theory here, but honestly, I never thought Markakis was a bad defender. He nothing special, but he’s reliable in RF and has always had a good arm. Being an O’s fan, I guess I’m biased because I watch almost every game, but I’ve never had a problem with his defense. Now, Adam Jones, I neverliked him as a CF, I’ve always tthought he’d thrive at one of the corners.

BipMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

Somehow, Markakis is always the guy who people think is better than the numbers say. What is it about him? Maybe he’s an illusionist. His real skill is making himself appear to be a better defender than he is.

TR
11 years ago
Reply to  LHPSU

Everybody thinks their team’s RF is better than the numbers say and has a good arm. They can’t all be this way.

Dungeon Master Dayton Moore
11 years ago
Reply to  Jim Price

It’s not love for Aoki, it’s a warning about Markakis.

JayT
11 years ago
Reply to  Ryan

But why give Markakis more than two years when you could probably have Aoki for two years and 75% of the AAV?

Ryan
11 years ago
Reply to  JayT

Well, not everyone is going to be able to sign Aoki. At some point, he’ll be signed and other teams may still need a corner outfielder. They could even be in a situation in which signing Markakis to more than 2 years makes sense.

I didn’t mean to attack the article or anything. I just don’t really understand what I am supposed to make of proclamations about what would make sense when they aren’t attached the circumstances of any particular team, since those circumstances matter quite a lot (as today’s article about citifield suggests).

TR
11 years ago
Reply to  JayT

If Markakis is younger and basically as good, then he’s the better player

JayT
11 years ago
Reply to  TR

But if he gets double the years and %25 more AAV, then he’s the much worse value.

Orsulakfan
11 years ago
Reply to  Ryan

I know it’s a ‘fan’ thing to say (I am what I am) but I am okay with the Orioles overpaying Markakis in AAV and years a bit to reward his good work in the community, his clubhouse presence, his past contributions to the team, and his overall Oriole-ness. I also think he’s better in the outfield and in general than what people say, and he adds to the Orioles lineup in being one of the few guys who can work a count. But I only support just a little bit of an over-pay: I think they need to set their price at just above his ‘real’ value and stick to it.

BipMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  Orsulakfan

Is he the longest-tenured Oriole right now?

Gelatinous Cube
11 years ago
Reply to  Bip

Yes.

Encino Man
11 years ago
Reply to  Ryan

You’ve already very much limited the pool of potential buyers to probably 4-5 teams, max, and your parameters ignore the possibility of trading for someone more desirable, which may be the preferred route for one or more them. It appears that Markakis’ market is in fact quite a bit larger than the one you’re describing, which is why several writers have expressed their confusion about it.

Josh
11 years ago

“Free agency is the land of false hopes and dreams. While nearly every major signing is heralded as good news for the organization making the commitment, they often turn quite poorly; note the very high number of overpaid veterans being shopped around the league at this moment. ”

Didn’t you just write yesterday that these veterans are overpaid by design?

Anon21
11 years ago
Reply to  Josh

No. He wrote that they’re overpaid at the end of their contracts by design, not that the total contract values are overpays by design.

AK7007
11 years ago
Reply to  Josh

Overpaid by design, yes. That doesn’t mean that you can’t still try to offload that dead money – one could even say that’s a motivation to backload contracts – you might get lucky and get somebody to take the most expensive, least productive years for you while still getting to enjoy cheap productive upfront years.

Brian L
11 years ago
Reply to  Josh

His point yesterday was that contracts are designed to underpay in the early years and overpay in the late years, so the total $ paid is equal to the value produced. His point today is these players are overpays (at the contracts he’s guessing) regardless of timing of the payments.

Also I’d argue most of the players getting shopped fall in the absolute overpay category – guys that are guaranteed to underperform the entire contract b/c they underperformed when they were supposed to have surplus value.

Josh
11 years ago
Reply to  Brian L

@Brian L, no that was not the point of that paragraph I quoted. he’s saying that FA contracts are often bad, as evidenced by the number of overpaid veterans. by the very process Dave outlined yesterday, veterans are expected to be overpaid toward the end of their contracts. it was a nitpick by me but a really bad bit of “evidence” by Dave.

Forrest Gumption
11 years ago

The only free agents who won’t get overpaid are the Cubans, Brett Anderson and Colby Rasmus.

AK7007
11 years ago

They call it a winner’s curse for a reason. The key is to not overpay by so much that you can’t make the rest of your payroll work.

MSpitz
11 years ago

A 3/39 deal for Melky looks bad? Based on the crowdsourced numbers, that would be an absolute steal! The only year in the past 4 that he wasn’t above league average was when he was dealing with a tumour in his spine, and Steamer projects him for 1.2 WAR…over 381 PAs??

I think it’s conservative to call him at least a league average player over the next three years, which is easily worth 3/39. I think you could reasonably call him a landmine if you took the crowd sourced numbers, but by your numbers I actually think he’s one of the better deals out there.

JayT
11 years ago

Dave, I assume you see Lester as the best of the three big free agent arms then? Do you think that Lester has a decent shot of giving value on a 6/$145M million contract like you predicted?

Yirmiyahu
11 years ago
Reply to  JayT

Good question. For a pitcher about to turn 31 and get a huge deal, his name is notably absent from this article.

Speaking of free agent starters, anyone else notice that Steamer has Liriano projected for a lower FIP (3.28) than Scherzer (3.41) or Lester (3.55) or Shields (3.70)?

Ben from Boston
11 years ago
Reply to  JayT

I have no doubt Lester signs below market to come back to the Red Sox!

zacksf
11 years ago

How come? Does he have roots in / affinity for Boston?

Jason B
11 years ago
Reply to  zacksf

I think he was making fun of the stereotypical loud, lunkheaded Sawx fan.

JCA
11 years ago
Reply to  zacksf

“Ben” I think refers to Ben Cherington. It is a mock post about the rosy scenario for the Sox, for humor. We can slow it down some more . . .

Tom Au
11 years ago

“You have to get truly elite performance when the pitcher is healthy to make a contract this size work,” CC Sabathia (of the Yankees) is a case in point.

aaron
11 years ago

If I draft them on my fantasy baseball team, they will be landmines.

sgtjuniorMember since 2016
11 years ago

I can’t seem to find an article on Victor Martinez where it gave percentages of how many times he scored from second after doubling or from first costing runs. I thought it was here but nothing in a search. Can somebody help?

Jonathan
11 years ago

Oddly, Seattle might be in the most Victor Martinez situation.

Balthazar
11 years ago
Reply to  Jonathan

When a mid-30s guy who’s had trouble staying healthy suddenly doubles his recent ISO in his walk year and has by far the biggest offensive season of his career, hold onto your wallet and sprint toward the closest exit to wherever he is. We could be talking about either V-Mart or Big Boy Cruz, but either is terrible idea on a mid-term fool’s money deal. You couldn’t even bet on decent value for a one-year.

Seattle has a crew of right-handed batters coming up, so heaving desperation money at a problematic nexus is not the way to go. Trading low for Allen Craig has more appeal. The real move would be to deal for Evan Gattis. Gattis and one of Atlanta’s short-timers in a package would be optimal, but it’s a question of what has to be given up to turn that deal. But V-Mart and Cruz are likely to be problems more than solutions, clog the roster terribly to boot, and max out the budget. If they even underperform, let alone bomb, the line-up impact is hugely negative. No thanks. It’s worth noting that while Jack Zd has acquired a number of problematic DH types, he has never doled out multi-years in doing so. I don’t expect that to change now.

Ralph Malph
11 years ago
Reply to  Balthazar

Seattle may have a crew of RH batters coming up, but they’re in a position to win in 2015. They’re not going to sit around and wait for those kids, none of whom are likely ready to be a middle of the lineup contributor in 2015. V-Mart might make sense for them — he’ll surely be a huge improvement over Kendrys Morales or Corey Hart.

RadermecherMember since 2018
11 years ago

Andrew Miller,real deal or landmine?

ElJimador
11 years ago
Reply to  Radermecher

All relievers are landmines. That said, the crowd sourced 3/24 seems pretty reasonable to me. That would be in line w/the 3/18 that Affeldt got from the Giants a couple years ago just adjusted for inflation. Just hope the team that lands him doesn’t slot him in as the “8th inning guy” vs maximizing his advantage against lefties whenever the come up late. I know he’s no LOOGY but I think a manager who understands where he’s best utilized would go a long way to ensuring ROI in his case.

tz
11 years ago
Reply to  ElJimador

Affeldt is a really nice comp. Lefty who came up with great stuff but never clicked as a starter, but then succeeded as a true non-LOOGY reliever.

Hurtlockertwo
11 years ago

I wish baseball had non-guaranteed contracts. This “hope and pray” economics really sucks the life out of a great game.

Los
11 years ago
Reply to  Hurtlockertwo

This would be awful without a salary cap. No young player would ever sign a long term extension with the team that drafted them and then you would have a situation where all deals are frontloaded

Los
11 years ago
Reply to  Los

On second thought, this would be awful no matter what.

Jason B
11 years ago
Reply to  Hurtlockertwo

“This “hope and pray” economics really sucks the life out of a great game.”

Why? Smarter teams or GM’s don’t have to take that approach. No one makes them pay 10/250 for some dude turning 30.