The current trend with free agents in Major League Baseball does not favor Aaron Judge, the New York Yankees' slugger and face of the team. The big man has a problem in that he has not yet reached the arbitration years (2020 will be his first) and cannot hit the open market until 2023. By then he will be 31-years-old. If he continues his star pace through the years, he will be limited by the length of any free agent deal. The Yankees, however, have no urgent need to speed up the process since he is under the team's control for at least four more seasons.
These thoughts coalesced upon hearing of Nolan Arenado's new extension with the Rockies. Arenado is a year older than Judge but had the benefit of starting younger in his career. That gave the Rockies a bit more urgency to tie up the face of their organization for the foreseeable future.
Aaron Judge probably is not built this way, but it would be understandable to see him whistling ruefully over the money that Arenado is getting. After all, Judge has compiled 13.2 fWAR over the last two seasons even though he missed a good chunk of 2018. Arenado, in comparison, compiled 11.7 fWAR in that same period. Judge has also had great numbers in the post season while Arenado has not. But Judge has no leverage with so much team control remaining.
If Gleyber Torres and Miguel Andujar continue to advance their young games, they will be in much better positions when their times come. They started so young that their greatness will be rewarded. Gary Sanchez is in a similar position to Judge, but Sanchez has to prove that 2018 was just a ditch in a long road. Sanchez cannot even get to a deserving point of view until he Lysol's what happened last season.
Aaron Judge's position is the exact one where MLB players have a problem. The days of a 30-year-old getting eight or more years are over and will not come back. Teams do not want to speculate on a player beyond his 35th birthday. And if that is what the numbers say, who can blame them? There have been enough of those foolish deals spattered over history: Pujols and A-Rod are just two who come to mind.
From a player's standpoint, if the free agent game has changed to a younger mindset, then the players cannot keep playing for free in their early careers. Yes, $1.2 million over two years is a lot of money by our mortal standards. But, it is peanuts in baseball's expense model. Consider that Aaron Judge has given the Yankees $118 million of performance value for a three year paycheck of about $2 million. That is a steal and Judge will probably not have the ability to recoup what he has provided.
Aaron Hicks seemingly read the tea leaves and signed a bargain of a deal for the Yankees in his extension. While I am not as high on Hicks as others, if he continues on his current track and stays healthy, he will blow away that deal in favor of the team. But Hicks had more leverage than Judge has.
Will the Yankees buy out the remainder of Aaron Judge's pre-free agent years? And if so, what would that look like? Again, there is no real urgency on their part to even consider it at this stage of Judge's career.
And so Judge has a problem. He must continue to prove that he is this big of a star, wait patiently and get decent raises through the arbitration process (once that even starts) and hope he can get a four or five-year deal on the back end that makes up for what he essentially gave for free. I am not sure if this model is fair for any players who start at an age when Aaron Judge did or whether this only applies to superstars. Either way, the odds are against Aaron Judge ever seeing Arenado-type money even though he has been a more valuable player.
Showing posts with label free agency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label free agency. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 26, 2019
Thursday, October 28, 2010
The Case Against Signing Cliff Lee
It is easy to pick on Cliff Lee after he was toasted by the San Francisco Giants yesterday. That hardly seems fair. But regardless of how the rest of the post season goes, Cliff Lee is going to be a big time free agent once the World Series is over. Lee seems to have nice leverage after three dominant seasons and (besides yesterday), great post season heroics. But will it be a good idea for any team to give Cliff Lee what he will be asking for in his free agent negotiations? This observer thinks not.
First of all, Cliff Lee is going to want a Sabathia-like deal and who could blame him. This is Lee's first real crack at free agency and he's going to shoot for the moon. Why else would Lee and his agent react so swiftly to the story that Lee's wife was abused by Yankee fans? Lee and his agent need the Yankees to drive up the price to ensure that Lee gets the best deal possible. The Rangers want to resign him and if their "lifestyle points" don't equal the money he can make elsewhere, it won't cut it. The Rangers will have to come close to matching Lee's market value to keep him.
Let's say that Cliff Lee will command $20 million a year for four years. That seems conservative in light of the Santana and Sabathia deals. But let's use $20 million. Lee would probably earn that in the first two years of his contract. Or at least he would come close to that kind of performance. But if you place any value in PECOTA projections, here is their projections for Lee for the next four years:
That does not look like a good value projection based on a contract that pays Lee $20 million a year for the next four years. Cliff Lee will be 33 next year. A four year contract will take him to age 37. When considering signing such a pitcher, the Fan's mind drifts back to Pedro Martinez. Martinez was dominant right up to his 35th year. At age 33, he posted a WAR of 4.8. The following year, he was even better and his WAR went up to 5.4. But Martinez never topped 1.0 again in his career after that. That is the real problem with signing Lee long term at this point in his career. Lee relies on pinpoint control of his fastball and cutter. His curve is great at times, but really, he relies on the accuracy of his fastballs. He has been throwing 91-92 most of the year. Will he be as effective when that drops in the next couple of years to 87-88?
The Fan has already built a case on why Lee would probably not be worth his salary for the next few years, even at face value. But then add to that the loss of draft picks in compensation for signing him as a Type A free agent and the whole thing sours in this Fan's mouth. The Yankees and other bidders should think long and hard about signing Lee (who has a history of back troubles by the way) to a four year, big bucks contract. The Rangers would be better served letting the Yankees or others overbid for Lee's services.
Cliff Lee has been a stud for the last three years. But let Pedro Martinez stick in your memory bank as just one example of why giving big bucks to an aging pitcher isn't a good idea...no matter how many times he's beaten you in the post season.
First of all, Cliff Lee is going to want a Sabathia-like deal and who could blame him. This is Lee's first real crack at free agency and he's going to shoot for the moon. Why else would Lee and his agent react so swiftly to the story that Lee's wife was abused by Yankee fans? Lee and his agent need the Yankees to drive up the price to ensure that Lee gets the best deal possible. The Rangers want to resign him and if their "lifestyle points" don't equal the money he can make elsewhere, it won't cut it. The Rangers will have to come close to matching Lee's market value to keep him.
Let's say that Cliff Lee will command $20 million a year for four years. That seems conservative in light of the Santana and Sabathia deals. But let's use $20 million. Lee would probably earn that in the first two years of his contract. Or at least he would come close to that kind of performance. But if you place any value in PECOTA projections, here is their projections for Lee for the next four years:
- 2011 - $15.3 million
- 2012 - $13.1 million
- 2013 - $12.2 million
- 2014 - $11.6 million
That does not look like a good value projection based on a contract that pays Lee $20 million a year for the next four years. Cliff Lee will be 33 next year. A four year contract will take him to age 37. When considering signing such a pitcher, the Fan's mind drifts back to Pedro Martinez. Martinez was dominant right up to his 35th year. At age 33, he posted a WAR of 4.8. The following year, he was even better and his WAR went up to 5.4. But Martinez never topped 1.0 again in his career after that. That is the real problem with signing Lee long term at this point in his career. Lee relies on pinpoint control of his fastball and cutter. His curve is great at times, but really, he relies on the accuracy of his fastballs. He has been throwing 91-92 most of the year. Will he be as effective when that drops in the next couple of years to 87-88?
The Fan has already built a case on why Lee would probably not be worth his salary for the next few years, even at face value. But then add to that the loss of draft picks in compensation for signing him as a Type A free agent and the whole thing sours in this Fan's mouth. The Yankees and other bidders should think long and hard about signing Lee (who has a history of back troubles by the way) to a four year, big bucks contract. The Rangers would be better served letting the Yankees or others overbid for Lee's services.
Cliff Lee has been a stud for the last three years. But let Pedro Martinez stick in your memory bank as just one example of why giving big bucks to an aging pitcher isn't a good idea...no matter how many times he's beaten you in the post season.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)