Why Prices for Free Agents Might Not Skyrocket

Heading into the winter, there has been one thing that’s pretty much universally agreed upon; this is a bad free agent class. After chasing Zack Greinke and David Price last winter, the best arms on the market this winter include the likes of Jeremy Hellickson and Ivan Nova. When it comes to just throwing money at veterans in an attempt to upgrade a team’s roster, the pickings are slim this go around.

Naturally, any time there is a diminished supply, thoughts go towards price inflation. And we see this all the time in our daily lives. Gas pipeline bursts? Gas prices go through the roof. Grower strike in Mexico? Avocados now cost like $20 apiece. We need more avocados, people; the lack of guacamole in my life lately has been a real problem.

So, it’s tempting to look at this winter’s sparse free agent crop and think we’re about to see some truly crazy contracts. After all, teams are still making money hand over fist, and there are only so many ways to spend money in baseball, with the path of least resistance being to hand it over the best free agent that will take it. This kind of landscape leads to tweets like this one, from Ken Rosenthal the other day.

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.

I don’t know, maybe Ivan Nova really will get $75 million. I’d take the under, but Ian Kennedy got $80 million (and an opt-out!) while tied to draft pick compensation, so we can’t really say that anything is completely out of the realm of reason. But, as much as there is a supply shortage of upper-end talent in the free agent market this winter, there is one reason to think that prices might not be as outrageous as some expect. That reason? A reduced supply of free agents also means reduced demand for roster spots to be filled.

When we see price spikes for items in our daily life, like for gas or avocados, it’s because we still want those items just as much as we did before the supply shortage. But in baseball, the supply of free agents is driven by the number of players leaving their former teams, which constrains the amount that supply and demand can diverge. If you don’t have a lot of quality free agents, conversely, you don’t have a lot of teams losing quality players to other teams, and thus, they don’t need to look to fill that hole in free agency.

Let’s look at who drove the pricing for free agent pitching last year, for instance. The Red Sox aggressively pursued David Price in order to add an ace to the front of their rotation. They outbid the Cardinals for his services, who were looking to make a big splash themselves, and liked Price specifically. The Diamondbacks were the high bidders for Zack Greinke, offering more than the Giants put on the table; San Francisco then pivoted to sign Johnny Cueto and Jeff Samardzija. And then there were the Tigers, who spent big on Jordan Zimmermann before they also went and spent big on Justin Upton, trying to solidify their team for another run at the postseason.

Realistically, it’s difficult to see any of these teams being big players for free agent pitching again this year. The Red Sox are looking for a DH to replace David Ortiz, some relievers, and probably some rotation depth, but Dave Dombrowski already said he thinks it’s unlikely that his team would be fishing in the slightly-less-shallow end of the pool this year. The Cardinals have too many starting pitchers now, and might be in the market to trade pitching away; they won’t be bidding on free agent starters. The Diamondbacks are very unlikely to repeat last year’s mistakes, and might even be sellers, depending on how Mike Hazen wants to take the organization. The Giants aren’t going to be spending big on rotation arms after their bullpen meltdown cost them a chance to advance in the postseason. The Tigers aren’t going to be spending big on anything, already announcing that they’re looking to move payroll downwards.

Of course, some teams that weren’t buyers a year ago will move into that role, and we’ll still some teams looking to spend on pitching in free agency. The Yankees, for instance, will likely sign a big league free agent this winter after not doing so last year. The Orioles obviously need to do better than their bargain shopping with Yovanni Gallardo last year. The Rangers need more pitching than they have. There will still be buyers, and those buyers will have to figure out what they want to pay these kinds of lesser arms.

But there will likely be fewer buyers in free agency this year, and that diminished demand should keep prices reasonably in check. Even teams who want to upgrade their rotations can turn to the trade market as an alternative, and especially if the White Sox blow it up, there could be far better players available than just looking at a free agent list would indicate. When supply in one market fails to meet demand, alternatives often emerge, and the lack of quality free agents may very well lure some teams into supplementing the talent market by making players available that weren’t on the table last year.

So, yeah, maybe Ivan Nova gets $75 million this winter; he can make a decent case that he’s Mike Leake without a qualifying offer (or the durability, but shhhhh, let’s not bring that up when making a case for him) and the price for average players has gone up a lot the last few years. But I don’t think we’re in for a winter of wholesale silliness in terms of free agent pricing. Wins are still going to cost around $8 to $9 million apiece, probably, and if teams find agents asking for absurd prices, they’ll either call the GMs with players to trade or they’ll look at the fact that their rotation is mostly in tact and decide to go with what they have internally.

There’s definitely a supply shortage of quality free agents this winter, but I think the weakened demand for starting pitching should let the market continue to be at least in the range of rational. And with most every team in baseball being run by — or heavily advised by — strong analytical groups, we’re moving past the days when organizations just deluded themselves into making obviously crazy decisions. Teams will still make mistakes this winter, but the magnitude of those mistakes will probably be smaller. The desperation just isn’t there, so free agents counting on holding all the leverage over a GM who has nowhere else to turn might find themselves particularly disappointed in the offers they get this winter.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

17 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
some guy
9 years ago

The winter of ’18/’19 looms large.

TKDCMember since 2016🏆 MVP
9 years ago

The explosion this year is going to be relievers. Watch someone give Chapman $125 million.

Dave TMember since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Yes, and that looks like a part of the market with a supply-demand situation set up to drive high prices. Three players who look like the cream of the crop: Jansen, Chapman, and Melancon (somewhat below the other two). I count at least six teams that are likely to be in the market for one of those three: Cubs, Dodgers, Giants, Nationals, Red Sox, and Yankees.

Ronson
9 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

The Cubs will definitely be in the reliever market. They have to get one of the big 3 closers and have several holes to fill in the rest of the bullpen. Could Madden have shown any less faith in those guys (other than Chapman/ Montgomery/Edwards) than he did in the WS?

david k
9 years ago
Reply to  Ronson

To be fair, how many teams have more than three relievers they can “show a lot of faith in” when their season is on the line?

Ronson
9 years ago
Reply to  david k

Francona did. But regardless, Epstein will add at least 2 arms, maybe more.

Dave TMember since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  david k

The Orioles – a whole bullpen full of guys who are more trusted than Britton!

Dominikk85Member since 2020
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave T

To be fair showalter was not intending to not use britton. The game was tied and showalter was probably hoping to survive one more inning and then hopefully get a lead and bring britton with a safe Situation.

Still a bad decision but it is unlikely that buck didn’t know that britton was his best Option.

JayT
9 years ago
Reply to  Ronson

A big part of that though was due to Strop and Rondon’s health. If they are 100% next year I would expect Maddon to trust them again.

Beau Horan
9 years ago

The beauty of MLB free agency is its free market principals. I don’t know exactly how many major league quality FAs are out there, but I’d guess that it is at least similar to previous years even if the quality is not as high. I think the current batch of free agents will get overpaid, but not by any more or less than in years past, because that is just the nature of free agency and the “winner’s curse”. I think the increase in the market rate for a Win each year has more to do with the increasing amount of money in the game rather than the supply/demand economics.

Deacon DrakeMember since 2017
9 years ago

Is there a graphic that shows when the cost of “wins” skyrocketed from $3M ($5M for a conservative baseline) to $9M? Am I really looking at Trout/Harper being a half-billion dollar investment?

BipMember since 2016
9 years ago
Reply to  Deacon Drake

I can’t even remember when it was $5 million a win. That seems like forever ago.

rosen380
9 years ago
Reply to  Bip

Using the figures on the value ‘tab’ here:

2002 $3.9M
2003 $4.3M
2004 $4.2M
2005 $4.7M
2006 $4.8M
2007 $5.6M
2008 $6.2M
2009 $6.4M
2010 $6.0M
2011 $7.6M
2012 $6.5M
2013 $7.4M
2014 $7.6M
2015 $8.0M
2016 $8.0M

using linear and exponential trendlines to project out:

2017 $8.6M and $9.1M
2018 $8.9M and $9.6M
2019 $9.2M and $10.2M
2020 $9.5M and $10.7M
2021 $9.8M and $11.2M

BipMember since 2016
9 years ago

This is Sam Miller’s basic free agent market theory: every free agent is a player formerly with a team, a team which now has a hole where that player was. Basically, the act of adding a free agent player to the supply is often also adding a team to the demand, so they increase together in relative sync.

Smurrman
9 years ago
Reply to  Bip

Except for prospects being called up, and maybe international FA.

shaq_diesel
9 years ago

You forgot about “massive depression caused by President Trump”.

Paul22
9 years ago

Prices for top FA have been in decline since 2002 when adjusted for payroll inflation. The MLBPA alleged collusion in 2003 and MLB settled w/o admission. I believe some semblance of collusion has continued, but its almost impossible to prove now as MLB has been caught 3 times and is much smarter about it, plus MLBPA seems less willing to fight.

I think on the whole MLBPA is just content where they are so have allowed payroll as a percentage of revenue to decline from over 50% to slightly more than 40%. MLB sees how soft they have become and like any good company or collective are exploiting that.

So unless MLBPA toughens up, I don’t see MLB teams rocking the boat on the FA market. There just isnt that much of a benefit to winning now that revenue is less dependent on attendance and playoff revenue streams. The TV deals are long term and the collective revenues shared equally regardless of outcome, and getting top draft picks generate future payroll savings and are in great demand