The Yankees’ Path Forward

On Saturday night, the Astros ended the Yankees season with a 4-0 shutout. For New York, even reaching Game 7 of the ALCS was a surprising accomplishment, as this was a team widely considered to still be in rebuilding mode heading into 2017. As a young team who became a good team faster than expected, the easy comparisons are to teams like the 2015 Cubs or the 2008 Rays, and expectations for the 2018 Yankees are now going to be particularly high given the team’s success this year.

And the Yankees are certainly setup well for the future. With Aaron Judge, Gary Sanchez, and Greg Bird, they have three enviable offensive building blocks for the middle of their order, and plenty of quality all-around performers like Didi Gregorius and Aaron Hicks, plus the potential upside of Clint Frazier and Gleyber Torres. And that’s just the young hitters. Few organizations in the game have a similar kind of talent base to build off of going forward.

But, similar to the Cubs, there are some legitimate questions on the pitching side of things, and a winter of inaction while counting on the kids to develop further and carry the team to the 2018 World Series is unlikely. The Yankees are both extremely well positioned for the future, but also need to do some real work this winter.

With CC Sabathia set for free agency and Masahiro Tanaka’s postseason raising the potential of an opt-out, the rotation is the biggest area of concern going forward. Luis Severino and Sonny Gray are a nice start, and Jordan Montgomery looks like a solid back-end starter with some upside remaining, but that’s three arms in an area where you want seven or eight. Between Tanaka (if he opts out, which I’m guessing he will), Sabathia, Michael Pineda, and Jaime Garcia, the team has 82 starts and roughly +6 WAR heading to free agency this winter.

Re-signing either or both of Sabathia and Tanaka is an option, of course, but with the team attempting to get under the $197 million luxury tax threshold, their preference may be to sign free agents for more years at a lower AAV, and neither Sabathia nor Tanaka are guys you’re going to necessarily want to extend for long periods of time.

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.

If Tanaka opts out, the team would be heading into the winter with roughly $130 million committed to 14 roster spots, assuming Erik Kratz is their only non-tender from their arbitration eligibles. That gives them a little under $70 million to spend in AAV while staying close to the luxury tax, but a chunk of that has to be used for the pre-arb guys who round out the roster and they’ll likely want to save some room for mid-season acquisitions, so the winter budget is probably closer to $60 million.

If Tanaka opts out in order to get an extra year or two on his deal, and they wanted to bring him back, it seems likely his AAV would be in the $20 million range; maybe a little more or less depending on whether he settles for four years or pushes for five. Sabathia, I would guess, is probably looking at something like 2/$30M this winter; John Lackey got 2/$32M from the Cubs for his age-37/38 seasons, for reference. So bringing back both of those guys probably takes up about $35M of the ~$60M the team might spend this winter.

Or, if the front office believes they could fill one of those two spots more cheaply, they could combine the money that it would cost to bring back both of those guys into a bigger offer for Yu Darvish, hoping that helps Shohei Otani pick New York as his destination this winter. But, like I said in the Cubs write-up, it’s likely that a few teams are thinking about the sign-Darvish-and-hope-it-gets-you-Otani plan, so Darvish might end up being pretty expensive, and Brian Cashman has made it clear he prefers to stay away from long-term deals for guys in their 30s these days.

So while the Darvish-and-Otani plan might sound the most appealing, it’s also the one they have the least control over, and they could end up in a weird position of having money to spend and no one to spend it on if they wait for resolution on that front and end up not getting either one. Thus, I’d think it’s probably in their best interests to try and retain Tanaka.

His elbow certainly presents some risk, but he’s probably their best chance to get a guy you’re comfortable starting in October at a low enough AAV to give them room to add multiple other pieces as well. If they have to choose between Sabathia at $15M AAV and Tanaka at $20M, even if they’d get Sabathia for fewer years, I think Tanaka might be the better buy, since he could provide some postseason value that you’re probably not going to get from Sabathia.

Assuming one of the two leaves, they’ll likely need to trade for another depth starter or two. Even if they give Chad Green another shot at starting, they’d still be short on guys who could keep the team’s rotation solid if one of the primary starters goes down, so I’d expect the Yankees to be looking to add a starter who has remaining minor league options. And those are usually controllable young guys, which aren’t easy to acquire.

But if the Yankees want to add another depth arm who they can keep at low salaries for the next few years, they have a pretty decent trade chip in Dellin Betances to try and get that kind of guy. Betances’ exit from New York has looked inevitable since last year’s spat over his arbitration filing and the ridiculous public comments made by Randy Levine. With a deep bullpen full of high-octane arms, the Yankees can spare Betances, and he may very well prefer to go to an organization that will give him a chance to pitch in higher leverage situations and not publicly criticize his attempts to get paid for his work.

He certainly didn’t help his trade value by posting a 17% BB% this year — or issuing walks to five of the 19 batters he faced in October, when he was relegated to mop-up work when his control couldn’t be trusted — but he still has one of the best arms in baseball, and a team that thinks it could get him straightened out would likely still be interested in acquiring his final two years before he reaches free agency. The Pirates, for instance, have made a habit of acquiring hard-throwers with strike problems for years, and with depth of young starting pitching, perhaps there’s a deal to be made.

On the position player side of things, the primary questions are at third base and DH. Chase Headley is still under control for one more season and Gleyber Torres is expected to return from his Tommy John surgery in time to compete for the third base job at some point in the spring, so the Yankees have internal options, but with a hole at the DH spot, there’s room to bring a guy like Todd Frazier back if the team so chooses. But, like Sabathia, Frazier isn’t a guy you want to sign long-term, and he’s probably not looking to take a pay cut, so he might be a better fit for a team that isn’t concerned about the AAV-effects on their luxury tax calculation.

Instead of bringing back Frazier on a short-term deal, perhaps they should instead make a run at Carlos Santana, a significantly better hitter who probably won’t get a massive contract as a DH headed towards his 32nd birthday. Adding a switch-hitter who doesn’t strike out that much could deepen the team’s line-up — I like Didi Gregorius too, but you probably don’t want him hitting between Judge and Sanchez forever — and give the team a nice alternative to the type of hitters they are primarily building around. Signing Santana would signal that the team is mostly committed to Gary Sanchez behind the plate, but they could still play Santana at first base against lefties if they wanted to give Sanchez some DH time occasionally.

A Tanaka/Sabathia/Santana trio of signings probably eats up most of the money the team would have to spend this winter, but if they only retain one of their two starters, they’d have room to bring in Santana and still make another upgrade or two. Perhaps that is using Starlin Castro to get someone to take a chunk of Jacoby Ellsbury’s remaining contract, then signing a guy like Neil Walker to take over at second base. Perhaps it is making a trade for a guy like Matt Carpenter to upgrade third base, shifting Torres over to second base, where his skillset is a bit more traditional anyway.

Regardless of what specific decisions they make, they certainly have options, and have the chance to round out an already strong roster with some more quality players this winter. Even with the luxury tax reset as a goal, the Yankees should be plenty active this winter, and will probably enter 2018 as the favorite to win the AL East.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

74 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
JimMember since 2016
8 years ago

“Even with the luxury tax reset as a gaol,” the Yankees can easily free themselves by paying bond.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Jim

Those who downvote this must explain themselves.

insidb
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Jim’s comment or your comment: there are people that default to a downvote lol.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago

As a person who dislikes the Yankees, it pains me to say their future is exceptionally bright. The Judge/Bird/Sanchez trio looks like they have all panned out, and with Severino they’ve got a great nucleus under team control. What I’d really love to see them do from my vantage point is to blow through the luxury tax again. Also, for them to sell low on Betances. But I don’t think either of those things are going to happen.

Questions for them, if I were them, many of which are related to each other:
1) Is Torres their long-term answer at shortstop?
2) Does it make sense to put Torres him at 2nd now if they want him to take over at short for Gregorius? Is he a replacement somewhere else?
3) Do they try to dump Castro to stay under the luxury tax line?
4) Do they try to make room for Frazier in an outfield corner? Or, can Frazier play in center until Gardner’s contract is up?
5) Is Aaron Hicks for real?
6) Can Brett Gardner still play center?
7) Do they eat most of Ellsbury’s contract to clear up a spot in the outfield?
8) Do they trade some non-Torres prospects for starting pitching?
9) Are they happy to get out from under Tanaka’s contract and risky elbow, or are they going to try to bring him back?

If it were me, I’d try to dump Castro to free up space, sign some starting pitchers to large-ish but contracts but where the yearly salary jumps a lot in year two, install Torres at second, find a spot for Frazier, keep the prospects, and stay under the luxury tax line at all costs so you can reset the tax and sign Machado to play 3rd from 2018-2030.

It’s a sad time to be a Yankees hater.

Timbooya
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Backloaded pitcher contracts may help the owner wallets, but luxury tax implications are decided on AAVs… so regardless of the distribution of pay, a large contract affects this upcoming year largely.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Timbooya

This is something I did not know. Amend my statement above accordingly based on the principle “do not go over the luxury tax at all”.

LMOTFOTEMember since 2017
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I was trying to picture Todd Frazier in CF until I figured out I was thinking of the wrong Frazier.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  LMOTFOTE

He was never the same after the Thrilla in Manila.

insidb
8 years ago
Reply to  LMOTFOTE

I can picture it: it’s not pretty.

KayEmCee
8 years ago

Dave – shouldn’t you also factor in reserving about $15M for benefits, when doing a Competitive Balance estimate? So really, the Yankees have $52M to spend, if you want to keep it no more than $182M on payroll.

sabrtooth
8 years ago
Reply to  KayEmCee

The competitive balance payments don’t count against the Yankees luxury tax threshold. The Yankees aren’t interested in cutting payroll because they are financially constrained (beyond the tax penalties themselves), they are interested in staying under the threshold because of the CBA-created draft penalties that come from being above it. Given the Yankees’ direct and indirect revenue sources (they own 20% of their RSN), they could easily spend over $200m if it were more advantageous to do so and still remain profitable.

Joey Butts
8 years ago
Reply to  sabrtooth

I think you’re talking about the payments the Yankees make to the league, based on stuff like how large their market size is. But he’s talking about non-monetary benefits to players, like hotel suites for road games and health insurance. I would also like to know if Dave took that into account.

sabrtooth
8 years ago
Reply to  Joey Butts

If that was the case, I misunderstood, but my overall point remains: any non-luxury tax expenditures would not push the Yankees’ budget far below the cap.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  KayEmCee

Based on Cot’s, you are correct – https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ai3Wo4UVZbUFtEEOnVEUwBgh2H45wwNe4nd6bXPAvRQ/pubhtml#

Cot’s shows the Yankees about $48 million under the luxury tax for 2018 if Tanaka opts out, after taking into account estimates for arbitration as well as minimum salary players and 40 man players in the minors. There’s also an estimate that some of the money sent to Houston with McCann counts for 2018 luxury tax.

And my understanding is that the Yankees’ main goal in getting under the threshold is to reset their luxury tax rate for future years rather than staying at the 50% level for 3rd-time or more payors. So that’s a bit different than some teams than max out spending right around the luxury tax, because going over the luxury tax by even a tiny amount means that the Yankees don’t reset.

Ant C
8 years ago

Have there been any reliable reporting suggesting the the Darvish/Otani signings will be related? Or that they’re even friends? Or is it just assumed because they’re both Japanese?

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Ant C

Otani apparently thinks of Darvish as a role model. So there is some speculation that he would like to play with him. To my knowledge, there is no actual evidence beyond this.

Lucas Maloney
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I got the same feeling about Tanaka. As a Japanese-American Yankee fan, I was pretty excited to hear this past spring that Otani had been working out with Tanaka. I haven’t been keeping the closest tabs on Otani, but it must mean something, right? I’m not a mind reader, but I thought Tanaka would mean just as much to Otani as Darvish.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Lucas Maloney

I don’t think it’s quite the same way with Tanaka. Why? I don’t know. It’s all rumor anyway. Could be totally wrong.

insidb
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I did not know this; thank you for the tidbit.

Cheeknbut
8 years ago
Reply to  Ant C

Darvish and Ohtani played for the same team, The Fighters, though not at the same time. Supposedly Ohtani picked up Darvishs number because he was his idol (they were both #11, but the intention is speculative i guess)

dukebd555Member since 2020
8 years ago

If Tanaka opts out I would stay far away. Even though sabathia turned out alright when the Yankees resigned him, there were a couple of bad years in there. Rather go after someone like lance Lynn. Also would not give cc 2 years. I could see 1 year but they do cleave Chance Adams who is ready for the rotation.

I would also stay away from Todd Frazier who should get a big contract elsewhere.

I like the idea of a cheaper DH like Santana.

I do think they do whatever it takes to move ellsbury and eat half his contract.

Obviously Otani would be the grand prize since he would barely count against the cap and overall this team has very few holes that aren’t solved by internal parts

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  dukebd555

“I do think they do whatever it takes to move ellsbury and eat half his contract.” I suspect that eating half the contract might is not equivalent to doing whatever it takes.

carterMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

As “bad” as Ellsbury has been since he started his contract, he has been worth 8-9 war (depending which site you use) in the last mostly injury shortened 4 years. Clearly he hasn’t been as good as they had hoped, but he is really pretty much the same player for the last few years. So 8 million per war and 9 war= 72 million. He has 3 years left. Let’s say 1.5 war per at 9m per war. He would be worth 100 million of his 152m contract. Sure it didn’t work out, but not to the level it would seem by the comments. Far from an albatross. He was exactly the right type of player to get paid too much money at exactly the right time. Fast, good defense, contact. Royals and Giants were winning. Besides, my understanding is he doesn’t get war for catcher interference since those are considered errors. As he has clearly demonstrated that is a very specific talent that he has. I’m sure if he had a 10% higher obp annually he would also have a tad more war.

Dan GreerMember since 2018
8 years ago
Reply to  carter

I’d value Ellsbury closer to a 1-win player for the remainder of his deal, because he is hurt every year (meaning you need another guy who is a true CF), he is likely to decline further, and he doesn’t seem to have much in the way of upside.

There are very few teams willing to pay tens of millions for an average, extremely unreliable guy with only downside left. The good teams have or want someone better, and the bad teams will save their money.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  carter

Yeah, the thing about Ellsbury is he’s not a great-defending center fielder, he doesn’t hit enough to play in left, he doesn’t get on base at a high enough clip to be a top-notch leadoff guy, and he’s always hurt.

I know that $/WAR in free agency has gone up over the last few years but I just can’t imagine that anyone is going to pay big $$ for Ellsbury the year after Angel Pagan couldn’t even get a major league contract (and like it or not, that’s the closest comp we have for Ellsbury at this stage in his career).

To get rid of him, the Yankees will have to do some combination of paying down his contract, trading away prospects, or taking back a lousy contract in return (but not Jordan Zimmerman, since the point is to save money). I’m sure there is a way to get rid of him, but paying down half the contract is probably only about 40% of the solution.

Dooduh
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

They’ll package him with Betances. Rather than hold out for some big prospect package for Betances, they’ll be better off moving the Ellsbury contract.

Giants seem like a logical match with maybe taking Span back in the deal and getting a minor league arm or two.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  carter

Dan and sadtrombone both make good points.

Even if we assume that Ellsbury was a 1.5 to 2 WAR player in 2017 – he totaled 1.6 fWAR in 409 PA’s – a normal aging curve dictates reducing that by about 0.5 WAR each year for a 34 year old. So that adds up to somewhere between 1.5 and 3 WAR over the next 3 years for a player due to make $68 million including his buyout. Valuing WAR at $9 million per year plus some annual inflation, that’s on the order of $15 to $30 million in remaining production, indicating $40 to $50 million of negative value remaining on Ellsbury’s contract.

Ellsbury’s health history certainly doesn’t suggest that he’ll age better than normal, and it’s easy to imagine a lot of teams thinking that it means that he’ll age worse.

As for his value over the course of the contract, the bottom of his Fangraphs page puts Ellsbury’s value so far on his current contract at $67 million, so in the same range as the $72 million from carter. His total contract will pay him $153 million over 7 years. Add in Ellsbury’s remaining production, and it’s on the order of $85 to $100 million in value over the life of the contract, so roughly $50 to $65 million of negative value.

Putting it in context, that amount of negative surplus value over the life of the contract is on the order of the positive surplus value that Dave Cameron calculated earlier this year for the #6 to #20 prospects across all of MLB – https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valuing-the-2017-top-100-prospects/ . The Yankees can obviously afford to eat this negative value better than virtually any other team (the Dodgers also could), but the total negative value over the life of this contract is really big. It’s on the order of Gleyber Torres’ expected value, but with a minus sign.

Jon
8 years ago
Reply to  dukebd555

I’ve been a Lynn fan for a long time but that looks like a disaster. He’s the 4th best FA starter (counting Otani) so he’s going to get paid, but everything is trending in the wrong direction, and he’d be going from the NL Central to the AL East.

I would take Chance Adams over Lynn on the Yankees in 2018 (not to mention beyond), without even considering the fact that Lynn will be making 30 times as much money.

soaktherichMember since 2016
8 years ago

OMG! I can’t believe the pro-Yankees bias at this site, esp. this writer! Why doesn’t he just send Cashman a road map?

seymour
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

It’s not that easy to hate on the Yankees at the moment. They just developed a pre-arb core of Judge/Bird/Sanchez/Severino, and they will be around for the next 5 years together. Even the biggest hater can’t spin that in a negative way.

Chickensoup
8 years ago
Reply to  seymour

It is hard to dislike the core, what’s not hard is to see how that core + the Yankees budget would be bad for say the Rays for the near future.

It’s great what the Yankees have done as far as getting young and cost controlled. It’s probably even good for the game as an overall. It’s dreadful for teams like the Brewers who could really use just one of the players the Yankees are likely to sign this offseason but will be outbid for.

This article (and the Cubs one before it) show a lot of what’s wrong for teams that can’t freely spend. Lance Lynn would probably be the biggest free agent deal in Brewers history. He would be the 3rd or 4th option for the Yankees if they really want to get below the luxury tax.

If Fangraphs even really dares to do a similar article for the Brewers or Twins, you should pay attention to the differences. You’ll notice that the names mentioned for possible signings are far closer to you asking “who?” They will likely be filled with who do they trade from their farm for good player X than what impactful star players will they decide to sign (mostly because the decision is far less actually up to them and more about what players are left after being outbid on every star if they even try for them).

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Chickensoup

Chickensoup’s rationale is why I do hate the Yankees. Even though I do sometimes root for teams that spend like crazy, rooting for the Yankees is like rooting for Moe to take Calvin’s lunch money.

noseeumMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Chickensoup

Twins fans should be screaming mad at the tight wallets of their billionaire ownership family. Baseball franchises should not have to make a profit year in and year out. No business does. Sometimes you have to invest to grow, and what safer environment is there to plan for a few years of annual losses to grow your business than a government supported cartel?

Purely by numbers, Carl Pohlad bought the Twins for $44 million in 1984. Forbes estimates the teams’ value at $1.025 billion right now. That’s a decent return and it doesn’t include the profits taken annually.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  noseeum

“Baseball franchises should not have to make a profit year in and year out. No business does.”

The norm in fact is that most successful, mature businesses make money year-in and year-out. I’m qualifying that so that we’re excluding the world of very different companies such as high-growth start-ups or development-stage biotech companies.

It’s fair to complain if an owner is extremely tight-fisted, because pro sports franchises have a mix of the attributes of a normal, cash-flowing business and a high-end collectible with scarcity value (such as expensive art). Virtually no mature business plans for a few years of losses to grow its business, however, and if an MLB owner does that – e.g., Mike Ilitch – it just shows the difference between an MLB team and a normal business.

noseeumMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Dave T

Just to clarify what I mean, these are businesses with built in monopolies, each of which get an equal share of national TV revenue and have all increased in value at a fairly fantastic clip for decades. There is always a willing and able buyer for an MLB franchise.

Even moreso than other businesses, all owner should be willing to take annual losses because regardless of income or loss, they should expect a significant increase in company value every year, which is very unlike most other businesses in the world.

But to your point, besides that, these businesses are trophies for billionaires. The league should kick out tight fisted owners because there is always someone out there willing to spend more/lose money in order to win games against other billionaires.

rosen380
8 years ago
Reply to  noseeum

If only he bought $44M of AAPL in 1984; that’d be worth about $14B today. And since you mention taking out profits, had he bought $44M of AAPL in 1984 and kept all of the stock and never bought more and always taken dividends as cash, his last *quarterly* dividend check would have been nearly $90M

soaktherichMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

Yeah, I was being sarcastic, which I guess only people who read the comments to Dave’s “How Astros can win Game 7” post would get. Sarcasm is hard in print. And usually not worth it anyway.

Joey Butts
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

My take was that it was probably too silly to be in earnest. Although maybe not, since you seem to have mostly copied it from an earnest source.

ChinaConor
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

I up voted you because it seemed too over-the-top to be anything other than sarcasm.

insidb
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

I knew this had to be sarcasm: I was shocked to see Dave call out how the K-zone favored the Astros in their live chats. For what it’s worth, the authors are pretty open about their fandoms and don’t really surrender themselves to any bias. Most people hate my Yankees, and that’s really none of my business.

Mike NMN
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

This response was copied from The Onion, right? I like satire.

soddingjunkmailMember since 2016
8 years ago

Thanks Dave, love posts like these would welcome seeing them for other teams (the Indians leap to mind based on all of the position player moving parts they have) as well.

ChinaConor
8 years ago

I don’t think the Yankees have quite as much room under the gap to play around with. Aren’t benefits included in luxury tax calculations?

If they resign Sabathia and Tanaka to fortify the rotation and save room for midseason acquisitions they won’t have enough to add Santana unless they plan on trading Castro and playing Torres at 2nd.

It seems better to wait to July to add on the offensive side. During the regular season, they’ll want Sanchez to DH 50 times so that he’s fresh and in the lineup. They won’t need a full-time DH until October. As importantly, by July they’ll have a better idea about whether Torres, C. Frazier, Andujar, Wade, Adams and any other prospects will be ready to improve on their weaknesses.

soaktherichMember since 2016
8 years ago

In all seriousness, I’m not sure how good a deal NYY is going to be able to get Santana for. They’ll have to outbid the Indians, so it’s not going to be a sweetheart, under-the-radar deal. They’ll also likely have to outbid the Red Sox, so it will probably even be above-market, if anything.

Also, doesn’t whatever cash they throw into an Ellsbur-ectomy also count toward the luxury tax? And how big is the market for a 34-year-old speed guy who’s no longer fast (and lost his starting job at age 33)? Could they take on someone else’s bad contract that has a slightly lower AAV by throwing in a middling prospect? Whatever happens there, it’s not likely to significantly help their situation. I still expect them to do what it takes (i.e. pay down virtually the whole deal) because they’re going to want him gone by 2019 to make room for Harper.

On the pitching side, history suggests they’ll double down on Tanaka; he’s proven to be more than just a thrower but that’s still a high-risk venture (throwing a baseball 88 mph is still bad for your elbow). I would also expect them to re-sign Sabathia, who seems to like being a Yankee (not least because it’s his best shot at Cooperstown). If Cashman is clever, he might concoct a 6-year deal for CC with an AAV of $5-6m with a player option after the second year (you heard it here first). That way, if CC is still a legit pitcher after 2019, he can re-negotiate. If he’s done, he still got his 2 years and $30m.

Given the obvious need to get out of luxury tax gaol, CC and Tanaka provide the surest path back to the ALCS in 2018, along with another $20-25m in free agents. I expect the Red Sox (now out of gaol) to spend heavily (Santana *and* Darvish?) and perhaps trade for a big contract or two this winter, so I wouldn’t set NYY as the 2018 AL East favorites quite yet. But the future is certainly bright.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

I was thinking this too. They’d only have marginal savings by trading Ellsbury, since they’ll have to pay down most of the contract. If I were the Yankees, I’d think about your idea and look into seeing if they could pawn him off with a prospect. Maybe the Phillies or some other rich, non-contending team would be willing to take on some of the contract if they got a prospect out of it.

And if Santana is available for Kendrys Morales money, the Indians would probably love to have him back. If the Yankees jump into the bidding, I would bet the price tag would lead back to luxury tax risk.

emh1969
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

I’m also not sure Santana is willing to sign to play DH. He’s worked hard to make himself into a decent defensive first baseman. My guess is that he’ll give prirotiy to a team that lets him play the field.

emh1969
8 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Another factor Dave didn’t consider re: Santana is this. Brantley now needs surgery and is out 4-5 months before he can even resume baseball activity. Which means the Indians will almost certainly decline his option.

That frees up more money for the Indians to offer Santana. It also means they’re likely to put a QO on him. And while a QO isn’t quite the poison pill it used to be, it still increases what a team potentially has to pay/give-up to sign such a player.

sabrtooth
8 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

At $11m, that’s not an expensive option to pick up. If his surgery doesn’t have complications I think they would pick that up even if he couldn’t be ready for spring training.

emh1969
8 years ago
Reply to  sabrtooth

The problem is that they have to decide by 3 days after the World Series. Which means that they won’t have enough information to make the decision. And given Brantley’s injury history + slow recovery from past injuries, that’s a huge gamble for the Indians. Plus, there’s a chance he’ll need to move to first base. Which doesn’t work if they also sign Santana.

Basically, that’s zero chance they pick up the option. They may try to negotiate a new contract with him, one that’s incentive laden with a small base salary.

sabrtooth
8 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

He has a $1m buyout, so the cost to retain him is actually only $10m. He’d only have to produce 1.5ish WAR to make that a productive expenditure. I don’t think that’s a cost-prohibitive expense for a team with a $120-130m payroll like the Indians.

soddingjunkmailMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

How would they reallocate the $10M for 2017 that would have anywhere near the upside?

emh1969
8 years ago

Ummm…resigning Santana.

Jon
8 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Explain the “upside” in signing a 32 year old 1B/DH for market rate?

Brantley is a bit of a risk but at $10M it’s pretty close to a no-brainer IMO.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

Based on Cot’s, the Red Sox are still in gaol, because they’re already over the 2018 luxury tax including estimated arb salaries, benefits, etc. – https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mVYyinHlYUI0gE98AgFFb5tDFIoEatCfqEo2xDfv1NI/pubhtml# . They’re also at the 50% luxury tax as a team paying for the 3rd-year or more in a row.

I believe that a key point is that releasing Sandoval apparently doesn’t get the Red Sox out from under his luxury tax burden, similar to your point about if the Yankees throw in money to move Ellsbury.

Jon
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

I don’t know how to structure that CC deal. If he opts out after year 2, he just gave the Yankees $20M for nothing. If he doesn’t, he gives the Yankees all of his value from 2020 on. In other words, the only scenario in which he even breaks even (compared with a $30/2 year deal) is if he is released after the 2019 season.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  Jon

Jon makes a good point, and I think there’s a risk that MLB intervenes if it ends up looking like a handshake deal just to spread Sabathia’s money over more years to get under the luxury tax.

Say, for example, Sabathia does pitch pretty well over the next two years, he exercises his player option after 2019, the Yankees release him a week later, and he signs a FA deal elsewhere. Other teams would understandably be upset and think that Sabathia was in fact guaranteed all of the money in the contract for two years.

The idea is creative, but sometimes there’s a good reason that we haven’t seen creative contract structures for purposes like getting around the luxury tax. It feels like it’s sort of bringing amateur international free agent-style shenanigans to luxury tax management, and we’ve seen MLB try to crack down on the amateur IFA stuff. The Yankees and Dodgers combined have paid the overwhelmingly amount of luxury tax ever paid by any teams, so almost all teams would be very happy to see MLB crack down on any “creativity” to get around it.

OddBall Herrera
8 years ago

Even after the Gray trade they have an excess of outfielders in the majors/high minors. McKinney is probably someone they should be shopping ASAP while his value has made a rebound, and then you go with Judge/Hicks/Frazier/Gardner in the outfield

Joey Butts
8 years ago

It might not be the best idea for them to try to get under the luxury tax. Notice that there was no mention of extending any of their young players. Didi, Bird, Sanchez, Judge, Hicks, Severino. (Not that this is the right time to extend all of those players, or that they couldn’t do it after the season starts.) If they want to get under the tax limit and add key free agents, they might not be able to extend any of those guys this off-season. Getting under the LT limit means significant savings, but waiting another year for extensions means lost savings and makes it unclear if the whole thing is worth it.

noseeumMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  Joey Butts

There is lost savings for sure, but resetting their penalty schedule is much larger savings and gives them a new 3 year ramp in luxury tax right as they are ready fight for a title every year. I’m sure they would love to talk extensions, but they are better off waiting.

On top of that, elite players have become more resistant to extensions as of late, so it might not be in the cards anyway.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  noseeum

Right, I think a lot of the idea of getting back under now is based on the idea that the Yankees are highly likely to bounce back over the luxury tax threshold after next season due to a free agent class that includes Kershaw (if he opts out), Harper, Machado, Donaldson and potentially lots of depth behind those top guys (McCutchen, Dozier, Keuchel, Daniel Murphy, Blackmon, and Pollock).

Not saying that the Yankees would be interested in all of those names, but the 2018-19 offseason doesn’t look like the year that the Yankees will be thinking about cutting payroll even with almost $40 million coming off the luxury tax books for Gardner, Headley, and Robertson. Gray and Gregorius will also be in their respective final year of team control in 2019, so next off-season could be a last chance to try to extend them before they reach free agency.

Joey Butts
8 years ago
Reply to  noseeum

You’re right that getting under is worth it, even at the cost of not signing extensions. I still wonder if it’s worth it at the cost of not signing extensions, and maybe not upgrading the team as much as you’d like this off-season, and limiting what you can do at the trade deadline, especially when the franchise is moving in the right direction.

I don’t know. Maybe they sign Tanaka, Otani, and Santana, stay under the LT, and make another deep playoff run. Maybe they sign all of those extensions anyway. That would be good.

Rex Manning DayMember since 2022
8 years ago
Reply to  Joey Butts

Didi and Hicks are still under arbitration and won’t become free agents until 2020. And Sanchez, Judge, Bird, and Severino are all still pre-arb and won’t hit free agency for a long time.

Didi’s probably the only real extension candidate this year among those players, and they can always extend him next year.

Chill
8 years ago

Does it give anyone pause that seemingly every player on the Yankees had a career year? Surely some regression can be expected yes? Count me as one who thinks that the yanks won’t have exclusively smooth sailing going forward.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  Chill

I wouldn’t say “everybody”, and you may get down votes for that. Looking at it, though, their top six players by WAR (Judge, Severino, Sanchez, Gregorius, Gardner, and Hicks) totaled 29 WAR in 2017.

I’d certainly take the under on that total next year, not because any of those are necessarily bad players but because there are some huge individual totals from young players in there (8.2 WAR from Judge, 5.7 WAR from Severino), a massive breakout from a 27 year old (Hicks), another 27 year old player’s best hitting year ever (Gregorius), and a 33 year old having his best season in 3 years (Gardner).

This exercise may yield some expectation of decline for most good teams, because by definition the highest WAR players in a season are the ones who played well . It’s pretty easy to see a potential 4-5 WAR drop-off from Judge and Severino combined, however, while still projecting them as really good players who will stay healthy all year.

francis_soyer
8 years ago
Reply to  Chill

Put me down for Yanks as AL East champs 2018.

ChinaConor
8 years ago
Reply to  Chill

You’re right about that, although except for Gardner most are young players. During the regular season though, they got nothing from Bird, or 1st base and DH in general. Clint Frazier, Gleybar Torres, Tyler Wade and Miguel Andujar may come up to improve on some weaknesses.

Most importantly though, the Yankees vastly underperformed their run differential. A lot of their WAR didn’t show up in the standings.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago
Reply to  ChinaConor

The last point is a very good one. The Yankees won 91 games but had a 101 Pythag win expectation by run differential and were a 102 win team by Base Runs.

Chill
8 years ago
Reply to  Dave T

How “sticky” are Base Runs year to year? Couldn’t you argue that the Yanks frittered away their Base Runs dominance in 2017 and that 2018 will be a different animal? I’m uncertain how predictive base runs is year-to-year, more so than just raw win loss totals but by how much? Again, I can’t help but think that a number of Yankees are in for regression next year. Judge, Sanchize and Sir Didi all had career high home run totals. C.C. had a renaissance year. Gardner had his best offensive season in 5 years. I can’t imagine that all those players will only get better next year.

Dave TMember since 2025
8 years ago

I’m a bit surprised to see the mention of trading for Matt Carpenter as a day-to-day 3B option. Don’t know if I should take that to mean that Dave has heard rumors that he’s being shopped, or if his name just came to mind.

Carpenter has been a below average fielding 3B by for his career by both UZR (-2.3 / 150) and DRS. That doesn’t in itself look awful, but he’s also 32 in a month and has accumulated a variety of at least day-to-day injuries over the past two years (right shoulder, hip, quadriceps, oblique). The Cardinals have tried to move toward playing him at 1B as he only played 214 innings at 2B and 3B combined this season. My recollection is that a fair amount of that playing time was tied to injuries to Gyorko and Wong, so it was a back-filling move more than a preferred idea.

I’m also not sure how well the Cardinals match-up, as I expect that they’ll at least see themselves as a wildcard contender next year. Maybe the Cardinals will get creative based on believing that 325 PA’s from 29 year old Jose Martinez show that he actually is a well above league average hitter, but the current Depth Charts projection is certainly skeptical (projected 102 wRC+ for Martinez).

carterMember since 2020
8 years ago

I keep on hearing people talk about Darvish/Otani but is there any real reason to believe that those two players give a flying (care) where the other player is? Japan has 130 million people. I highly doubt when Wladimir Balentien went to Japan he cared much what team Julio Franco played for.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  carter

FYI, Balentien is from Curacao, Franco from the Dominican Republic. Perhaps not the best analogy.

insidb
8 years ago

I think moving Castro and Betances, potentially with Ellsbury would be a nice way to clear a path for the OF prospects and Torres. Headley is serviceable and more valuable than Frazier, especially the likely price tag for Todd. My fellow Yankees fans overrate Didi (whom I love) and Castro, though, so that will likely be a hard sell to the fanbase.

Jon
8 years ago

I think the offense is basically set. Keep Ellsbury as a 4th/5th OF/DH/pinch runner unless somehow someone takes him while covering the majority of the contract. Give Castro one more year to figure out how to take a walk. Keep Headley in his walk year to keep 3B warm for Torres, and figure out exactly how Torres/Headley/Castro fit later. Split DH between whoever’s not playing the OF and occasionally Sanchez. DH is obviously the easiest position to find on the trade market, so if they need a bat in July, worry about it then.

Don’t sell low on Betances. Recognize that he’s been overworked every year (look at his K and BB rates every September) and that with Robertson, Kahnle, and the emergence of Green, he no longer has to be. Besides, if they try to trade him now for a starter, they’ll get nobody better than many options that they have or are readily available. Is something fundamentally wrong with him? Maybe, but I think it’s more likely than an offseason of rest fixes him (or at least the odds of that happening are high enough to make taking the chance preferable to selling him for pennies on the dollar).

Sabathia and Tanaka for a combined ~$35M sounds good to me. Then their 5 are set with Adams and Sheffield waiting in the wings.

If Tanaka does opt out and it will take $25M+ for 5+ years to sign him, then you’ve got some decisions to make. But otherwise, there is very little to do here.

London Yank
8 years ago

It is time to retire the the false idea that Tanaka’s elbow is any more of a risk than any other healthy pitcher. Tanaka had a very slight tear in his elbow ligament more than three years ago. Contrary to popular belief by FanGraphs writers (and sports writers in general), ligaments do heal themselves. Tanaka allowed his ligament to fully heal in 2014 before resuming pitching.

This site and others have been predicting that Tanaka will blow out his elbow with every next pitch for three seasons now. Tanaka must be close to 10,000 pitches without any elbow trouble. In the meantime, countless other MLB and MiLB pitchers have had Tommy John surgery.

That said, this false belief about Tanaka’s health maybe a good thing for the Yankees. If the other GMs ignore the medical doctors like the sportswriters do then Tanaka’s market value may be deflated.