Got a dozen questions in the first mailbag of 2016. The first ever RAB mailbag was posted back in July 2010. Someone asked me how Nick Johnson’s wrist rehab was going. Good times. Our email address for mailbag questions and anything else is RABmailbag (at) gmail (dot) com.
Many asked: What about Chris Johnson?
Lots of people asked about Johnson, even before he was released a few days ago. The Indians designated him for assignment on December 17th and released him five days later, eating the $17.5M left on his contract. I didn’t realize this is the rule, but because Johnson has 5+ years of service time, he still would have received his full salary if he elected free agency after clearing waivers. I thought players forfeited the remainder of their contract once they elect free agency. That only applies to guys with less than five years of service time.
Anywho, I do think Johnson is a good candidate for that final bench spot. He’s proven he is not an everyday caliber player these last few years, but he does mash lefties — .326/.354/.391 (108 wRC+) in 2015 and .372 (!)/.405/.499 (154 wRC+) from 2013-15 — and can play both corner infield spots. Not well, he is a butcher in the field, but he can play them once a week to rest guys. Again, we’re talking about the last bench spot. Johnson would give the Yankees a real backup third baseman and another option to help them against lefties.
Because the Indians released Johnson, any team can sign him for the pro-rated portion of the league minimum. It’s super low risk. The Yankees could sign him, and if they decide at some point he’s no longer worth a roster spot, they can cut him with no strings attached. Joe Girardi is typically very good with platoon matchups, so as long as Johnson is limited to spot starts in the field and at-bats against lefties, he could be a nice weapon off the bench. And if it doesn’t work out, it doesn’t work out. Cut him and move on.
P.J. asks: What is the chance that Tanaka exercises his opt-out clause after the 2017 season and what kind of deal would he be looking for? He will only be 29 years old heading into the 2018 season. Assuming his arm doesn’t fall off and he remains relative healthy he most certainly should be able to get a deal both much longer and for a lot more dollars than the $67MM over the following 3 years he would be entitled to if he doesn’t opt-out.
If he stays healthy these next two seasons, I think it’s a lock Masahiro Tanaka will opt out of his contract. That $67M he’d be walking away from ain’t much these days. Yes, everyone knows about his elbow, but if Tanaka stays healthy in 2016 and 2017, it’ll be less of a concern come free agency time. Johnny Cueto, for example, landed a six-year contract worth $130M this offseason at age 29 despite some red flags with his elbow. That seems like a starting point for Tanaka. Plus the market is going up, remember. As long as Tanaka stays healthy — a big if for any pitcher — I think Tanaka’s opting out.
Jarrah asks: Would you rather Chapman weren’t suspended and played the entire season with NYY before becoming a FA, or have him suspended for a month and gain another year from him? He’s a great asset, but it seems plausible the Yankees could cover his absence for the month of April.
I’m probably in the minority, but I’d rather Aroldis Chapman just play out the season so the Yankees can get their draft pick and move on next offseason. The domestic violence stuff really bugs me — no arrests were made, but he also admitted to firing a gun eight times in his house, wtf? — and while I fully acknowledge he’s a tremendous baseball player, I kinda don’t want to root for him as a person. It’s one thing to give a guy a second chance following drug or alcohol addiction. But alleged domestic abuse? Nah. If the suspension tacks on another year of team control, I’d hope the Yankees take advantage by trading him for a young starter. That’s how I feel. You don’t have to agree with me.
Arjun asks: Assuming that one day the Yankees go back into the free agency market, the rise of the opt out has to be a net positive for them, right? Young players signing extensions meant fewer stars made it to the market but opt outs mean that the trend should reverse over time. Do you think that opt outs are generally good for the Yankees as a macro trend?
Yes, I think so. Those opt-outs will allow some good players to re-enter the free agent market and make them available to the Yankees, who one day will spend big on free agents again. (I think.) That said, isn’t the entire argument in favor player opt-outs is that they give the team the potential to walk away and let someone else pay for his decline? Why be the team that pays for the decline in that case? After all, these players are available right now. They’re only going to be older and closer to the end of the line by time the opt-out rolls around.
Seb asks: Does Raisel Iglesias, in your opinion, fit the mold of a young starting pitcher under team control beyond 2018 that would be a good addition? Would he be available at the right price and could that price be Brett Gardner?
I’ll answer the last question first: no. The rebuilding Reds are not taking on 32-year-old Gardner. If they trade Iglesias, it’ll be for prospects. Iglesias, 25, had a 4.15 ERA (3.55 FIP) in 95.1 innings across 16 starts and two relief appearances for the Reds last season, the first year on his seven-year, $27M deal. His strikeout (26.3%), walk (7.1%), and ground ball (47.2%) rates were very encouraging. Here’s some video:
Iglesias is worth a longer look in a non-mailbag format. I do think he’s an interesting outside the box starter candidate, especially since his contract is so affordable. It’s long, yeah, he still has six years to go, but an average annual value of $3.86M is nothing. That’s affordable even if he winds up in relief long-term. The Reds may consider Iglesias part of their core going forward. He might be tough to pry loose.
Michael asks: Given the current market, what kind of contracts do you think Starlin Castro and Adam Warren would have earned in hypothetical free agency? I have to assume Castro would be worth a good deal more than his current wages but I’m really not sure what Warren would get with so much back-end free agent pitching.
Yeah, I think Castro would get quite a bit more than the four years and $41.5M left on his contract. He is still only 25 and even though he’s been pretty bad two of the last three years, he has natural hitting ability and is athletic enough to play the middle infield. Castro wouldn’t get Jason Heyward money, but would six years and $100M with an opt-out after three years make sense? Maybe it’s more like five years and $80M. Either way, Starlin would get way more than his current contract.
Warren’s free agency would be really interesting. He’d surely market himself as a starter, but he’s never had a chance to spend a full MLB season in a rotation, so his career sample as a starter is only bits and pieces stitched together. Warren has shown he is a very good reliever at worst though. The Royals signed Joakim Soria to a three-year, $25M contract this offseason that includes $12M in incentives based on games started (no, really). Maybe that’s the framework for Warren’s deal? I’d give him that contract in a heartbeat, personally.
Ethan asks: Looking at the recent Ken Giles trade remarks you made, you mentioned Mark Appel and how he is a backwards prospect. I can see the negatives in him, but wouldn’t he be a cheap option as another starter that the Yankees obviously desire. I could see him as a first call AAA back-up for an inevitable injury to one of the Yankees pitchers this next year. What would the Yankees have to trade for him?
Appel had a 4.45 ERA (4.30 FIP) in 141.2 innings split between Double-A and Triple-A this past season. The scouting reports all indicate he still has good stuff, but is way too hittable because he lacks deception and his command is shaky, causing him to come over the heart of the plate too often. If he was Joe Prospect instead of Mark Appel, Former No. 1 Pick, he’d be just a guy to keep an eye on. He’d be a younger Ivan Nova.
Now a young Ivan Nova can be pretty valuable, though Appel would be considered a big disappointment if that’s all he became. The trade was good for him, I think. He gets a fresh start with an organization that didn’t prop him up as the pitching centerpiece of their look how smart we are rebuild. If the Yankees can pick Appel up as a depth arm and not as the solution to their young pitching problem, then do it. He’s worth the flier. Expectations have to be readjusted for Appel though. He’s a back-end guy until he figures out how to stop giving up loud contact to minor leaguers.
Michael asks: With regards to Cashman’s buy-low policy, is it possible he’s been doing this longer than we’ve fully realized? I went back through MLBTR’s transaction tracker as far as the A-Rod trade, and the only instances I could find where he bought high on a player were Xavier Nady (lol) and Michael Pineda. Swisher, Granderson, Abreu, even the first Justin Wilson trade (4.20 ERA and too many walks in 2014)…should Cashman be picking stocks?
Yes this has been going on for a while now. The difference now is Cashman focusing on young players. In the past he targeted veteran players like A-Rod and Nick Swisher and Curtis Granderson. The A-Rod and Swisher trades stand out as Cashman’s best buy low deals. The Rangers had little leverage with A-Rod after their deal with the Red Sox fell through, so the Yankees swooped in and got age 28-31 A-Rod while Texas paid a big chunk of his salary. Pretty great. The Yankees have been trying to buy low on players for years now — to be fair, every team has, but some have been more successful than others — except instead of veterans, the Yankees are now looking for young players who’ve not yet had sustained success as the MLB level. (Castro’s the notable exception here.)
Justin asks: With the Brewers presumably in sell mode, and the Yankees in need of relief help, what about Michael Blazek as a trade target? How well do the Brewers match up in a trade?
The Brewers are tearing it all down and are in the early stages of a full blown rebuild, and they’ve focused on prospects in recent trades, not big leaguers. Matching up isn’t really a problem. The Yankees have all kinds of prospects to offer. It’s just a matter of the two teams agreeing on a package, which is true of every trade.
Blazek, 26, is the guy the Brewers got from the Cardinals in the John Axford trade a few years ago. He’s had some control problems in the minors (10.7 BB% in 376.2 innings at Double-A and Triple-A) but settled down last season, throwing 55.2 relief innings with a 2.43 ERA (3.17 FIP) for the Brewers. Blazek struck out 21.2% of batters faced and walked 8.1%.
I’m not really sure how to value five years of a good reliever — Blazek’s not Ken Giles or anything — especially one whose history of average control is only about one year. This question was sent in before the Chapman trade, so the need for bullpen help isn’t as great now. The Yankees are set at the back of the bullpen and I think I’d rather see the Yankees give some of their young arms a chance rather than give up pieces for a guy like Blazek.
Frank asks: Do we have any stats on Chapman pitching more than 3 outs in any game over the last year or so?
Chapman has appeared in 324 big league games (all relief appearances) and he’s recorded four or more outs 29 times. Only eleven of those 29 multi-inning appearances have come since 2013. Chapman got four or more outs four times in 2015, five times in 2014, and twice in 2013. Here’s the game log. He has a 0.54 (~1.36 FIP) with a 43.9% strikeout rate in 50 innings in those 29 multi-inning appearances, so yeah, Chapman’s dominated in those spots.
Closers don’t throw multiple innings very often these days — Andrew Miller recorded four or more outs eight times in 2015, but four of those were in the final month, when the Yankees were trying to make the postseason — so it’s not surprising to see Chapman throw multiple innings so few times. I don’t know of any physical reason why he couldn’t do it on occasion. That’s just reliever usage these days.
Dan asks: If Justin Upton can be had on a 1 year deal (and assuming the Yanks can find a satisfactory trade for Gardner), should the Yankees sign him? His righty power would be a really nice asset, and he’ll be highly motivated to not have similar issues as a FA next year.
I don’t think Upton will have to settle for a one-year contract but yes, if he’ll take one, sign him up. The Yankees wouldn’t even have to trade Gardner to make it work. Just think about to our Heyward conversations — rather than trade someone, the Yankees could rest Carlos Beltran and A-Rod (and Gardner and Jacoby Ellsbury) a little more often and have them split time at DH. Not ideal, but doable. (It’s only a matter of time until someone gets hurt anyway.) I’d rather have Yoenis Cespedes on a one-year deal than Upton — comparable hitter, better defender and base-runner, no draft pick attached — but the question didn’t ask who I’d rather have, so I’m not sure why I wrote this. Like I said though, I think Upton will get paid in due time.
Jamie asks: Would you say ERA is a flawed stat for starting pitchers at this point, or just doesn’t show the whole picture? How much am I missing by looking at ERA for starters and WHIP for relievers? Meaning, do I need to learn FIP?
It’s a little of both. ERA is flawed and it doesn’t show the whole picture. I don’t think it’s useless though. If anything, ERA might be getting underrated, especially when evaluating past performance. (It doesn’t have much predictive value though.) WHIP is okay. The biggest problem with WHIP is it considers a walk equal to a home run, etc., and we know that’s not the case. Limiting base-runners is good in general. A little more context would help though.
FIP is really pretty simple. It’s on the same scale as ERA — so a 3.00 FIP is good and a 5.00 FIP is bad — and it considers strikeouts, walks, and homers only. Getting strikeouts while limiting walks and dingers is a pretty great way for a pitcher to be successful, right? Right. We still haven’t found a good way to measure quality of contact and things like that, which absolutely impact a pitcher’s performance. A lot goes into it. Is the pitcher giving up rockets? Is the defense making the plays it’s supposed to make? Stuff like that. Personally, I look at both, ERA and FIP. There’s no need to pick one or the other. They’re both useful in their own ways. I can’t say I’m much of a WHIP guy though.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.