The Dodgers Should Claim Cliff Lee
While this kind of thing is expected, there’s still some news today from Jeff Passan of of Yahoo Sports.
Source: Phillies have placed Cliff Lee on waivers. Executives expect him to clear Friday afternoon, be eligible for trade.
— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) August 2, 2012
Most teams run nearly their entire rosters through waivers in August, just on the off chance that someone gets through and they can end up making a deal with a contender in a seller’s market. Probably every big name player in baseball is going to be put on waivers at some point in the next few weeks, and so Lee is no different in that regard.
He is somewhat different, though, in that his contract makes it likely that he’ll actually clear waivers, and a team putting in a claim would force the Phillies to make a pretty interesting decision.
Lee is due about $6 million over the remainder of the 2012 season, then is under contract for $25 million in each of the next three years. The contract gets a little sticky in 2016, as its currently a club option for $27.5 million with a $12.5 million buyout, but it becomes guaranteed if he’s not on the DL at the end of the 2015 season and threw either 200 innings in 2015 or 400 combined in 2014 and 2015. Given that, an acquiring team would probably need to treat that final year as essentially guaranteed as well, and treat Lee like he’s owed about $110 million over the next 4 1/2 seasons. That’s a lot of money for anyone, much less a pitcher who is a month away from his 34th birthday.
At that price, most teams in baseball are probably going to take a pass on putting in a claim. The Dodgers, however, should take the gamble and put the ball in the Phillies court.
The Dodgers new ownership has already flexed significant financial muscle since taking over for Frank McCourt in the spring. They signed Andre Ethier to a five year, $85 million contract that was probably a bit of an overpay, took on all of the ~$36 million still owed to Hanley Ramirez through 2014, and signed 21-year-old Cuban outfielder Yasiel Puig to a $42 million contract that was considered to be a wild overpay by those who follow the international market closely.
While the Dodgers might not have unlimited resources, the new ownership group clearly intends to make the organization of the big spenders in baseball, taking full advantage of their television market to establish something like Yankees West. If the Dodgers run out an opening day payroll of $175 million next year, I don’t think anyone would be too terribly surprised.
Based on the contracts currently on the books, the Dodgers have $135 million already allocated to players under team control for 2013, while A.J. Ellis is their only significant arbitration eligible player. So, if their payroll target was $175 million (which, keep in mind, is a number I pulled out of thin air, and may not actually represent their budget), that would leave them about $35 million to spend to fill out the roster, meaning they could take Cliff Lee’s contract and still have enough left to buy a new first baseman. While Lee’s contract would be a budget buster for most organizations, it might not prevent the Dodgers from making further upgrades in other areas as well.
And, to be honest, there’s probably not a better use of that money available in free agency this winter. Before the season started, the assumption was that the Dodgers would make a huge push for either Cole Hamels or Joey Votto — or both — but they have since re-signed with their clubs, eliminating them from possible consideration. That leaves the big name targets this winter as Josh Hamilton, Melky Cabrera, B.J. Upton, Shane Victorino, Mike Napoli, Nick Swisher, Anibal Sanchez, Edwin Jackson, and potentially Zack Greinke, if he doesn’t re-sign with the Angels first. There’s certainly some nice players in there, but besides Greinke and Hamilton, no one in that group has the potential impact that Lee would have, and both of those guys come with their own set of risks as well.
And, of course, there’s also the fact that signing a free agent this winter does nothing to help you win in 2012. Yes, if you think you could get Greinke for something close to that same $110 million you’d be committing to Lee, then you might prefer the younger pitcher, but present value has to be a factor as well, and the contending Dodgers are in the sweet spot where every marginal upgrade represents a significant return.
The upgrade would over Stephen Fife — who has racked up a whopping seven strikeouts in three starts since being recalled from Triple-A — would likely add about +1.5 wins to the Dodgers regular season total, and Lee would represent a substantial upgrade to their potential playoff rotation as well. Going from second place finisher to NL West champions could return as much as $30 to $40 million in additional revenues if the Dodgers made a World Series run. Even a first round playoff victory probably nets the team an additional $5 to $10 million in revenue from future ticket sales and the attendance boost that goes with generating excitement in the fan base.
So, while Lee’s marginal cost is probably a bit higher than what he’d sign for as a free agent this winter, that’s not really the appropriate comparison, because it ignores the actual value that Lee could bring to the Dodgers before we get to the off-season. Given the Dodgers spot on the playoff bubble, they should be valuing each additional win added very highly, and should probably see the remainder of Lee’s 2012 performance as worth at least $10 million, so the future value proposition is more along the lines of 4/100 than 4/110.
Is 4/100 a gross overpay for Lee for a team with massive revenues? I don’t think so. He probably won’t be worth that money, and it could even be pretty ugly by the last year of the deal, but Lee’s still an excellent pitcher right now and projects to remain one for the next several years. Given the significant difference he could make to the Dodgers organization right now and the mediocre alternatives that they’ll have to consider overpaying this winter, claiming Lee on waivers is a risk the Dodgers should take.
Maybe the Phillies won’t let him go for nothing, but they should at least dare Ruben Amaro to have to make that call.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
Just because one has money to spend doesn’t mean one needs to spend that money the first chance one gets.
If anyone learned that, it was Raul Mondesi.
How?
Yes it is an overpay, but I think that it may be worth it for the Dodgers. If Greinke signs then anibal will probably get 18M (if he is worth it is out of question). So the upgrade of lee over anibal is pretty significant.
I agree with you that Lee is an upgrade over Sanchez, but nobody is giving Anibal Sanchez $18M/year. I don’t think you could even talk Omar Minaya into that. Ha ha…just kidding. Omar would totally do that.
The new CBA has turned MLB into a big market team’s paradise. I think the Dodgers have recognized this and are moving to capitalize. Lee would not be a huge overpay at $100M/4Y. Of course, the Mets and Cubs get a first crack at the claim and might be interested, too.
Maybe the mets would be interested if they have the cash and feel like they can really contend next year. Hard to see the Phillies letting him go there though.
I don’t think Lee would make much sense for the Cubs right now.
Mets are 16th in attendance.
“Mets are 16th in attendance.”
…so?
fat chance.
My sentiments exactly. Lee is good for a team that views itself as a contender over the next 3 years. Cubs are realistically expecting to contend by the end of that time frame, while the mets are still trying to accrue capitol after some bad contracts and the madoff disaster.
if cliff lee is an excellent pitcher right now, and projects to be that way for the next several years, how is he “probably” not worth 4/100 and/or why would it be “pretty ugly” the last year? if you thought he’d be an excellent pitcher and now into the forseeable future, i imagine any high revenue contender would sign up for lee on that contract. i know i’d want my team to.
The expectation that he’d clear waivers seemed a bit suspect to me as well. I wouldn’t be surprised if he did clear — but in addition to the Dodgers, the Rangers, Yankees, and maybe even the Angles and Tigers could be fits by similar logic.
Also, the Angels. Although I hear the Angles are just one or two pieces away, as well. The Angels could see it as a defensive maneuver.
Sorry, what?
The Jays, too, tried to get starting pitching at the deadline and had cash to blow.
Cubs & Mets interested? I’ll have what he’s drinking…
Recipe: http://www.thatsthespirit.com/en/drinks/recipe.asp?recipe_id=1579
The Mets clearly have the intention of competing in the next year or two. The Cubs window might only just be opening as Lee’s contract expires, but star power still means a lot in big markets.
And why not put in the claim, especially for the Mets- either they get a great pitcher to put in a pitcher’s park, or they stop the Phillies from clearing salary room.
says who?
Niese, Gee, Harvey, Wheeler plus whatever Santana and Dickey can still bring in the next 2 – 3 years…As a Met fan I’d hope that they would use whatever funds they have to keep Wright and upgrade the OF as opposed to getting Lee.
I know the authors differ, but it’s amusing that in three days FanGraphs went from “Texas should trade the #31 prospect in baseball, plus two of their other top tens, for Cliff Lee and his contract,” to “Cliff Lee is going to clear waivers, but LA should probably claim him.”
Yeah, I was wondering the same thing.
I almost commented on that last post about why a pitcher who is being paid so close to what he’s worth has any value particularly given how much resources are going to be tied up in one player … and this remains a question for me? Can someone fill me in on this, and explain the discrepancy between these 2 posts?
Seems like some rebuilding team with room in their budget should claim Lee… especially if he’s going to to for free (prospect-wise, not $).
My other question is … doesn’t Lee have a limited no-trade clause, and isn’t it likely to include the Dodgers (since they’re a big market team)?
Do no-trade clauses count if it’s a waiver claim?
Reply to viva: no-trade clauses absolutely do count.
However, let’s say for fun that the Dodgers claim him and Lee has the Dodgers on his no-trade list.
If he opts to waive that (his choice), then the negotiations begin. If he opts to invoke his right to block the Dodgers, then the waiver claim is wasted… the Phils have no choice but to revoke the waiver request, for no other team can be involved once one is awarded the claim.
There would be one other opportunity for the Phils to put him back on the waiver wire this month,…. but that’ll get too messy for this comment… let’s see if it happens first!
Not to force your hand or anything, but now you’ve made me curious. I’d not really though about it before, but in the later scenario (irrevocable waivers), what happens should Lee do the same?
You can’t withdrawl the waiver by definition, so that option is out. Would you be forced to release him?
Thanks!
My guess is that you couldn’t swing a trade, since there’s a no-trade clause, so you’d be forced to give him up on waivers for no return. Unless there is language in the contract (or the CBA) that would grant him his unconditional release under those circumstances, which would of course make some sense.
I wanted him in 09 but oh well, go get um!
Should Michael Bourn be on that list of big name free agents?
Without question.
When is Ted Lilly due back?
possibly final MiLB rehab assignment tomorrow, but no definite return date.
Thanks. So it might not really be Fife that Lee would be replacing.
Lilly has lasted because he hasn’t pitched a whole season in 4-5 years. He misses soooo many games every year he is not worth the money. I am a Dodger fan and I can’t wait for them to get another studd pitcher and give Lilly, and Bills the heave-hoe!
Get rid of Billingsley? This is fangraphs, we appreciate him here.
This may sound like a dumb question: are the Phils bent on letting Lee go to anyone who will take his contract? They just re-signed Hamels, looks from here like they are re-loading
No, or at least not at the moment. They still believe they can get value for him in a trade. The goal with Lee, like with Pence, is to dump salary while stockpiling young talent. The fact that they do not have urgency to get something done right now gives them some leverage. They can sit and wait for a team that really wants him to make a play, and seem content to keep him if that’s not the case.
That can certainly change, though.
lulz. I will block this
did you mean “lolz”
typos. lolz.
lulz works too. Look it up.
you spend this much time on the internet and you don’t know what lulz is?
You don’t know what “lulz” means?
lyzof!
Fake everdiso trolls with such ease with this crowd that it almost isn’t even funny anymore.
I spend quite a bit of time on the Internet, but none on texting or tweeting.
I have no idea what “lulz” means, and I am proud of it.
No, the Phils are not looking to give up Lee for nothing. They are not re-building, they are just re-loading/re-tooling. They are more than happy to build around Hamels, Lee, and Halladay and plan on going after less expensive people in the offseasons such as Chase Headley and Choo via trades and Michael Bourn via free agency. They are clearing some money (Victorino, Pence, Blanton, Polanco, …..) to make these moves/attempts.
If they could get an overwhelming deal for Lee that helps fill some of the voids they aim to cover in the offseason, I am sure they would more than listen though.
Normally I wouldn’t disagree with this, but the Phils won’t have a ton of money to sign people this offseason. Just to retain most of the guys they want to keep, they will be over 150 million, and that doesn’t include a 3rd baseman, any decent starting OF, a good 4th SP. Someone like Bourne at 12-15 million won’t fit in that budget at all. Headley won’t come cheap, and that farm system isn’t very strong. Letting Lee go gives them money to chase 2-3 guys at around 10 million each.
Where they were, the Phils were slightly under the luxury tax for next year I believe. They got rid of 10.4 with Pence, 9.5 with Victorino, will get rid of 6.25 with Polanco, and 8.5 with Blanton. So that is $25m right there.
Bourne at 15
gives them 10m to play with
and that is without doing anything else. I could see Rollins or Utley being moved and letting Galvis play ….
Point is, I do not think they would give away Lee to free up any more money. Would they trade Lee to Arizona in a deal that includes Justin Upton? Possibly. But I think Lee is a convenience to them right now, not a hinderance.
Jeff, it doesn’t work that way. You can’t just subtract the players you let go, and leave all else equal.
Cliff Lee is making almost $3.5MM more in 2013 than 2012. I don’t know how much of Hamels’ contract is paid next year, but he makes $15MM in 2012 and his contract averages $24MM in the future. There’s at least a $5MM increase. Papelbon makes $2MM more in 2013 than 2012. Ruiz and Kendrick are more than an extra million each. Some of their younger players will make more as well.
Suddenly, the savings from Pence and Victorino are gone, just to retain players on hand.
You are right viva. I am at work so was just working with averages rather than looking everything up.
But i still dont think they are letting him go for nothing.
Like I said, they would trade him for Upton in a deal cuz it fills a future hole. So I think they’d look for a deal like that, otherwise wait til the offseason.
Definitely not going to give him away
I wouldn’t think they would either. They will just have a very hard time competing next year if they don’t do something drastic. That’s an old, highly overpaid group in Philly.
Viva, with respect to the luxury tax, individual yearly increases don’t matter, it’s the average annual salary tats used for the calculation, so the increases to Ruiz, Kendrick, Lee, et al are already accounted for. Arbitration awards aren’t, but there isn’t really anyone on the Phillies due for a huge arb increase, so thats not an issue either. They’ll have some room to play with, which is good since they’ll have to find at least a CF and SP for next season.
Viva, Jeff, et al,
For the luxury tax, contracts are counted according to average annual value. So, Hamels is 24 million, Howard is 25 million, etc. Also, health benefits count as well, which were estimated to be between 10 and 11 million this year. Here is a link to an article that explains it.
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/phillies_zone/understanding-payroll-and-luxury-tax.html
And, here is a link to Cot’s Contracts that lists the accounted for salaries for 2013 (without Hamels being updated for some reason)
https://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tSSu2Qy8G9pTSsguHAbeu-A&output=html
what do the phillies have, and would be willing to move, that could possibly land them chase headley as anything but a free agent?
Let’s not forget the biggest overpay of all: the price Magic Inc payed to buy the Dodgers in the first place.
It’s fun to speculate, but have you seen the books? Angels TV deal is 3 billion over 20 years… Dodgers should be able to beat that, and I imagine they will end up with a decent rate of return on investment.
This is true, pro sports teams have to be insanely profitable. I mean, a team in Cleveland went for over a billion today. Different sport, I know, but I would have had a hard time thinking that the entire city of Cleveland was worth a billion.
The Dodgers are about to cash in on about 200-250 Million a year for the next 20 Years with their next media contract. I’m sure 24 mil for the next 4 years is nothing. Plus they already committed to winning this year, and we really need a starting pitcher. Lee suffered more from poor run support!!!
The Phillies are also about to go into a HUGE TV contract, so money will not be an issue.
To say Cliff Lee suffers from poor run support though isn’t totally accurate. This year he has sufferred from “one big inning” in most of his starts. He will be strolling along with a 3-1 lead in the 7th then give up 4 runs. It’s why his ERA is close to 4. A majority of his innings he puts up zeros. But then he has innings were gives up multiple runs. It’s usually not just 1 run here 1 run there. It’s usually 0 runs here, 0 runs there, the 5 runs!
So you’re suggesting the Dodgers take a move out of the Kenny Williams playbook…..interesting
Ned Coletti’s not exactly a genius himself.
Saying Ned Colletti is not exactly a genius is like saying Einstein is not exactly a dumbass.
I’m not sure I see the Phillies letting him go for nothing, that would completely demoralize their fan base. Not sure what the Dodgers would have to give up in a trade to get him, would Zach Lee be too much?
Scenario #1: Dodgers claim, Phillies let Lee go, huge market Dodgers are overpaying – but not hugely – for a needed starting pitcher.
Scenario #2: Dodgers claim, Phillies say, “great, let’s deal!”, Dodgers reply, “uhh, yeah, watch for us in the window”.
Scenario #3: Dodgers don’t claim, Phillies wind up trading Lee to one of the Dodgers’ competitors for the stretch run.
Of course the Dodgers should claim Lee. #2 is far the most likely one, IMO. And #1 would be still better than #3.
And this from one of the few here who realize that big-market teams still actually have budgets too, folks.
Guys 4/100 is not the worst case scenario. 3/87.5 is. 4/100 still means he is healthy and gave you 200+ innings. No guarantee he is a healthy 36-38 year old at the end of this contract.
Barry Zito’s contract/health begs to differ.
What? Cliff Lee and Barry Zito are both left handed starting pitchers, but the comparison has to end there. Lee is 1) vastly superior and 2) has thrown 600 fewer innings than Zito.
So when taking a big gulp like the Dodgers might do, consider that 3/87.5 is possible if not the more probable outcome.
There is zero chance that the Phillies would let Lee go for nothing. Teams put players like this on waivers and if they clear they then can trade them after the non-waiver trade deadline (7/31). If no one claims him they can then pursue a deal. If someone claims him they pull him back and wait till the off season and look into trading him. Again, there is ZERO chance the Phillies let him go for nothing though I think there is a decent chance they trade him if he clears waivers. So if the Dodgers want him they let him go through waivers then contact the Phillies about a trade, if they calim him the soonest they can get him is the off season.
If the Dodgers want him, they should claim him. After a team claims a player on waivers, the following 3 things can happen:
1) Original team pulls him off waivers
2) Original team lets claiming team have him
3) The two teams are given a time period to work out a trade (I think 48-72 hours) and if one can’t be agreed upon, the original team keeps him.
So, by claiming Lee, they ensure that either they get him, or nobody does (unless some team with a worse record claims him first. Worst team in the league gets first dibs, best team gets last.)
I think that Ruben might thank the Dodgers for getting him out from under that contract lol. That would given Ruben the financially flexibility to almost anything he wanted in the offseason and correct some mistakes that he may have made in the past.
Yes, it would give him financial flexibility. It would also leave him without a key piece to the rotation who has been worth ~6.9 WAR per season over the prior 4 seasons and worth 0.15 WAR per start (4.8 WAR for a whole season of 32 starts) in this sub par (for him) season.
Its also absolutely comical that the Phils are being talked about like the Dodgers are going to bully them around financially. I think the Dodgers fans are getting a big head. Remember, the Phils are a big dog in the league too.. if they want to keep Lee they can keep Lee. The Phils are under the luxury tax this year so the penalty wouldnt be as harsh next year and I think they have every intentions of going over. The Phillies cleared out major payroll with the trades they just made and are setting themselves up for future years. They have to fill 2 OF positions, 3b, and bullpen for next year.. if they actually did get out from under Lees contract that would be disastrous for the rest of the league with a rebounding Howard and a hopefully healthy Utley. Like I said, I think the Dodger fans are getting a little ahead of themselves beacuse the Phils had a bad year… they will be back.
So, 2013 is going to be the year that Chase Utley gets and stays healthy, and returns to form, huh?
If you really want to secure a World Series championship in 2013, why not sign Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez to round out the rotation? And how good would Wade Boggs look over at 3B? The sky’s the limit!
Utley’s done. He was a heck of a ballplayer. “Was” = past tense!
Utley has played 27 games (1/6 of the season) after no Spring Training and a minor league rehab and he’s been worth 1.0 WAR due to a .352 wOBA, very good defense and good base running. He also claims that the new treatment makes his knees feel significantly better than they did all of last year. Now, I’m not saying that Utley will ever return to being an 8 WAR player, but to call him “done” is simply absurd.
What? Utley’s been worth 1 WAR in a little over 110 PAs this year. He might not make it throw an entire season anymore, but when he’s healthy, he’s still borderline elite.
A Phillies’ fan’s response to various posts above:
1. The Phillies have a 4th SP (Worley) who is doing well and is under team control for a while (unless the poster was implying Lee is gone, in which case Worley is your 3rd SP).
2. If need be they will absolutely run Kendrick out there as the 5th SP and figure it out as they go along, hoping for a May/Biddle emergence in 2013.
3. They’re not moving Utley.
4. They aren’t trading Lee for salary relief. The only possible trade they’d consider is a Justin Upton type deal which I really don’t see happening.
I also understand the Phils plan on paying luxury tax next year… That was why they wanted to clear salary this year, so they won’t be repeat offenders. And with the cap expected to raise th following year, and Halladay’s 2014 option not likely to vest (as i understand it) they will still have some flexibility (if not a whole lot) after 2013.
Umm.. after 2013 they are committed for 74mil and the luxury tax cap goes to 189. I would say 115 million is enough.
How exactly are the Dodgers going to “dare” RAJ? Phillies lose absolutely nothing by putting him on waivers. Anyone can claim him, but Phillies are not going to let him go without a sizable return coming back.
From my calculations, the Phillies will have about $22 million to get two outfielders, a third baseman, and a reliever. These are luxury tax salaries I’m calculating, and I’m factoring in the roughly $11 million in benefits that count.
They could make a play for Headley at $6 million, get a cheap righty to platoon with Schierholtz for a million, a set-up man for $3 million, and have $12 million left over to go for one of the premier outfielders. Also keep in mind that the Phillies themselves admit that they’ll probably go over the luxury tax next year, so there’s really no reason to give Lee away.
Mayberry can platoon with Schierholtz
Relievers are a dime a dozen in this day and age, if the Phillies are smart and want financial flexibility they’ll learn how to build a bullpen the way the Rays do
Too late for that, after that idiotic Papelbon contract! I wonder if the Rays have committed as much over the past three years to all of their relievers as Philly committed to Papelbon in one fell swoop. Probably not.
I agree, but I believe Amaro’s already stated they’re going to address the bullpen this offseason. Which is dumb, since they have a ton of young relievers coming up.
Why not trade Lee to the Rangers for Beltre?
They need to clear a spot for Olt anyway.
Too bad the Phillies didn’t make a run at Adrian Beltre when he was a free agent a few years ago, huh? Obviously a much better investment than any of these big money starting pitchers on the Phillies’ payroll.
The Rangers can get a hell of a lot more for Beltre in the offseason, if they choose to shop him, than an insanely expensive Cliff Lee, as good as he is. I have to think that the Rangers will pass on this deal.
Different question: Should the Rangers claim Lee? Probably!
Orioles should go for Lee. They’re still in the wild card hunt and they need a quality starter HARD. They’ve got the dough to commit to Lee for four seasons.
NO WAY they give him up for nothing no body would have any interest in that when he can be traded in the offseason
Cliff Lee only has 2 wins! He’s terrible! You stat geeks in you’re grandmothers attic need to watch the game!
Well played sir. If somehow grandmother’s attic replaced mother’s basement in the anti-nerd lexicon, you will have advanced the cause. In fact, I demand that you start creating and/or altering Wikipedia pages to reflect the stat-nerd’s proclivity for his grandmother’s attic.
anyone know what the numbers are on stat nerds living in grandmother’s attic ?
I am a stat-nerd who lives in my mother’s bedroom. No, I am not from West Virginia. She moved to the smaller bedroom but banned me from the living room. I also have to do all household chores and be her chauffer.
It’s not such a bad deal–I have the master bath, my computer, TV, bed, a stuffed rocking chair and ignorami like you to laugh at.
Oops! That was supposed to go under Matty, not under mcneildon.
Lee’s contract could be perceived as a bargain for the Yanx. They offered him more, reportedly. Also not incidentally they need a second elite pitcher to survive the playoffs, particularly with Grampa Pettite’s uncertain status.
Someone mentioned the O’s. Add the Jays and Red Sox as other teams that make some sense to put a claim in.
B.J. Upton is a “big name target” this winter?
lol
It’s a big name for GM’s who look at the last name only. Maybe Sabean?
They absolutely should do it. Even Greinke will cost that much by then. Their outfield is set for next year. (They’re certainly not going to pay Yasiel Puig $7M a year to play A Ball!). Much of the rotation will be there.(Kerch, Lilly, Cappy, Harang, & Bills) (No one will ever take on the Billingsly contract so he may become the most expensive long reliever in baseball!) The bullpen – Guerrier & Choate signed; Jansen, Guerra, Belisario, Elbert, & Hawksworth under control. Lineup – Kemp, Eithier, Ramirez, Mark Ellis, Puig, & unfortunately Uribe signed, A.J. Ellis, Dee Gordon (or Louis Cruz!) under control. Bench – Gwynn & Hairston are signed through ’13. Loney, Rivera, gone. Lee could help them win it all this year and head a much stronger team next year.
Phillies are not going to let him go. What is hard to understand about that?
because we continually want to believe ruben amaro isn’t as stupid as he actually is
Because the Phillies could do a lot to rebuild their ravaged team with the $81M saved. They put Lee through waivers first because it forces the decision on both sides. They could have initiated their waivers with anyone else and they can only revoke once. It makes sense for both teams and no other team except the Dodgers could take on that contract. Yet it’s cheap, just 3+ years left on the tome. Ideal for the Dodgers who are averse to long term deals. Greinke is going to take at least 6 at at least $22M. That, my friend, is a substantial savings. Greinke is going to be in the same age range at the end of that six that Lee is now. The Phillies are several years from being competitive again and Lee won’t be a happy camper for that long. And if he is not a happy camper, just how well will he be pitching for all those dollars? Not so well, I would imagine. Then what would keeping him get you?
Phillies being ‘ravaged’ and years away form contending is nonsense.
The answer to my rhetorical question is: Nada. Just ask the Red Sox how much fun it is to pay millions to unhappy campers. (Or, I guess you could ask a certain Mr. Epstein why he had to change the color of his sox.)
I Know fangraphs love sample size. He’s thrown 100 innings and is about a 2.5 WAR. He posted by far the best season of his career in 2011. 3 years 95 millionish isn’t an over pay for Cliff Lee it’s a down right bargain. By the time the contract ends we will be seeing 200 million dollar pitching contracts. If Lee gets claimed someone is coming back to the Phillies and that guy will be a top prospect.
you forget about Kershaw…they still need to pay him and its going to take a Lee-like contract. So they’d be committing $50m to 2 southpaws. Not sure that’s the best place to put their money. Great move for the short term…waste of resources in the long term. Pains me to say it, because they are basically going to die by the current pitching they have sans Kershaw.
Since, Bills is pitching better these days, it could be that Lilly could go to the pen, at least for a while.
The Mariners should claim Cliff Lee.
“But the Mariners need a bat more than a pitcher!” you say.
Well, no. The Mariners’ offense, actually, is almost certainly close to fine. Take the median road wOBA offense (Red Sox, .310 last I checked), then look at the line the Mariners’ pitchers have allowed in Safeco (.270 wOBA). Consider that the Mariners’ rotation includes Jason Vargas as a #2, plus actually-replacement-level Blake Beavan and (for half the season) atrocious disaster Hector Noesi, and that their pitching staff is ranked around 27th on the road by most FIP stats despite an excellent bullpen. If the Red Sox played half their games agains the Mariners’ (very bad) rotation in Safeco, they’d be putting up a ((.310+.270)/2)=.290 wOBA… which is pretty much exactly what the Mariners have. The Mariners have been facing better pitchers than their own, which is why they’ve been losing games. So consider that, adjusting for Safeco’s funky one-year park effect, the Mariners have been basically average with the bats, and then consider that next year Figgins won’t be getting any playing time (like he did at the beginning of this year), Ichiro will be gone, and Olivo will not be extended. That’s the three worst hitters off the payroll. Then factor in that the Mariners’ offense has done this without much help from Dustin Ackley or Jesus Montero, both of whom have been improving after first-half struggles. The offense isn’t really the problem.
Yeah, they’ve got three good rotation prospects sitting in the minors, but you can’t bet on all three panning out. The team needs a #2. Vargas isn’t it, and Hultzen, Walker and Paxton aren’t ready to be it next year either.
Ichiro and League just left town, and that’s $23 million of payroll opened up from this season’s already-low-for-the-Mariners payroll. Coincidentally, Lee is owed $25M. Not many teams have that much free payroll space to throw around at the moment. When the new guys need arb, Figgins and Gutierrez will be off the books to free up the cash.
Cliff Lee would make the rotation great next year instead of below average without costing the Mariners any prospects, and there’s evidently not very much competition to acquire him at this particular moment in time. They already have a ridiculous bullpen (everyone in it has an above-average K rate and below-average FIP, and almost everyone in it is young and cheap and controlled) and a ridiculous defense (only Thames (who is only playing because death-to-flying-things Gutierrez is injured) and the catchers are below average, plus the SS is Brendan Ryan). The offense is mediocre but has all of its worst members leaving next year, Nick Franklin waiting in the wings, and Ackley and Montero expected to improve.
A rotation composed of Hernandez/Lee/Vargas and then two of Hultzen, Paxton, Walker, Ramirez, and even Beavan if necessary would be great-not-good, as opposed to this year’s bad starting five. Lee fixes the biggest hole on the team by replacing replacement-level Beavan with another Felix.
The Mariners should claim Cliff Lee.
Looks like it happened!!!
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/08/cliff-lee-claimed-on-waivers.html
Wow. Seriously impressive, Dave. According to FOXSports.com a few minutes ago, Lee was claimed off waivers today. Jon Heyman reports he was claimed by the Dodgers…
http://twitter.com/JonHeymanCBS/status/231517704199221248
Ok, slight clarification: Jon Heyman reports that Jon Morosi reports that Lee was claimed by the Dodgers…
http://twitter.com/jonmorosi/status/231513062513971201
Well? Actually, the trade probably won’t happen because the Phillies probably won’t let him go for nothing and I doubt the Dodgers will let go of their top prospects but it’s nice to contemplate. But what it effectively does is block any trade of Lee to any Dodger competition this season. Because, as you know, they can’t pull him back but once. I see this really as a big blocking move to prevent any team that did have the prospects to trade. And only the Dodgers had the $ to pull the big bluff (and maybe cajones as well!)
Lee for Crawford and Ciriaco? Boston gets a top line SP and shortens their payroll timeline, Philly gets a guy that if healthy is what they need in the OF and the top of the order. CC is a NL style player and Lee keeps the ball down and in the park….amounts on contracts left are close….
Lee’s either going to be paid ~$110M through the 2016 season or ~$95M through the 2015 season. Having him for the final 2 months of this year for ~$7M is so much more valuable to the Dodgers than to the Phillies that it makes sense for both teams to find a common ground for a trade. From the Phillies’ perspective, since this season’s over for all intents and purposes, if they keep him, in effect they’re going to pay him that ~$110M for the next four seasons (~$27.5M per year) or an even higher AAV if the option doesn’t vest. Because of the Dodgers’ current place in the standings, one could argue that from their perspective, they would be getting the equivalent of closer to 5 years than 4 of Lee for the ~$110M.