Hot Stove League Archives - Page 2 of 278

The Yankees and Severino have discussed an extension, and time is running out to avoid an arbitration hearing

February 14, 2019 by Mike

Barring a surprise Manny Machado or Bryce Harper signing, the Yankees are done with big offseason additions. They are not done with their major offseason business, however. The Yankees and staff ace Luis Severino have their arbitration hearing coming up tomorrow — it is literally the last arbitration hearing on the schedule this year — which will determine his 2019 salary. The Yankees offered $4.4M. Severino countered with $5.25M.

The players have fared well in arbitration this year. They’ve won six of the nine hearings to date and all three starting pitchers won their hearing. Here’s the list:

Gerrit Cole: $13.5M over $11.425M
Trevor Bauer: $13M over $11M
Alex Wood: $9.65M over $8.7M

It seems to me the Yankees will have an easier time defending their number than Severino will his, but what do I know? Perhaps the starters going 3-0 in hearings this year (and teams winning more hearings overall) is a sign the tide is shifting and players and agents now have the upper hand. Then again, starters went 5-5 last year and players went 12-10 overall, so maybe it doesn’t mean anything.

Severino is a Super Two based on his service time, meaning he will go to arbitration four times instead of three. And because arbitration raises are based on the player’s previous year salary, the $850,000 difference between Severino’s number and the Yankees’ number this year represents a sum of money much larger than $850,000. It’ll carry over into future years and could equal upwards of $10M across his four arbitration years.

Let’s use Cole and Bauer as a template. Their average raises during their arbitration years is roughly 85%. Some years it was closer to 80%, other years it was closer to 90%. For the purposes of this exercise an 85% ballpark number will work. Applying an 85% raise to Severino during his four arbitration years gives us:

	Severino wins hearing	Yankees win hearing
2019	$5.25M	$4.4M
2020	$9.5M	$7.9M
2021	$17.0M	$14.3M
2022	$30.6M	$25.7M
Total	$62.3M	$52.2M

(Update: Like the idiot I am, I calculated the salaries with an 80% raise, not 85%. My bad. Let’s roll with it.)

See why that $850,000 this year is not just $850,000? There will be a lot on the line tomorrow. Moreso for Severino. An arbitration hearing win would potentially equal a life-changing windfall over next few years. The Yankees? Yeah, they want to save cash, but they wouldn’t even notice that $10M hit spread across four years. The extra $10M always means more to the player than the team.

Severino said yesterday he wishes he could’ve avoided arbitration — “I don’t think any player wants to be going through arbitration,” he said to Kristie Ackert — and, according to Jon Heyman, the two sides have discussed a long-term extension. They’re not said to be close to a deal and it should be noted they could agree to a long-term deal at any time, even after a hearing. They could rip up the arbitration ruling and work out a new deal.

Yesterday morning the Phillies avoided arbitration with their ace Aaron Nola prior to their arbitration hearing. They cut it close — Nola’s hearing was scheduled for yesterday afternoon — but they got a deal done. It’s a four-year contract worth $45M, plus a club option. The deal can max out at $56.75M. Here is the salary breakdown:

2019: $4M plus $2M signing bonus
2020: $8M
2021: $11.75M
2022: $15M
2023: $16M club option with $4.25M buyout

My quick and dirty math earlier showed Severino could make upwards of $52.2M during his four arbitration years, so, based on that, four years and $45M would be a pretty good deal for the Yankees. Severino would get a real nice guaranteed payday and, even if a fifth year option were exercised, he’d still hit free agency at age 29. The Yankees would get cost control over Severino’s arbitration years and a club option for a free agent year. A win-win? Eh, not quite.

Nola isn’t a perfect benchmark for Severino because Nola is not a Super Two. He was in his first of three years of arbitration-eligibility this winter. His contract buys out three arbitration years, one free agent year, and potentially a second free agent year. The same contract for Severino would buy out four arbitration years and potentially one free agent year. Long story short, being a Super Two means Severino has greater earning potential. The extra arbitration year is big.

It has been seven years since a starting pitcher signed an extension in his first year of arbitration-eligibility as a Super Two. The Nationals gave Gio Gonzalez five years and $42M with two option years back in 2012. That was an eternity ago in baseball years and the market has changed. Similar to Nola, Gio doesn’t really help us figure out an extension for Severino. There are no good contract benchmarks at Severino’s service time.

Severino is will earn at least $4.4M this coming season. That’s his worst case scenario. Nola’s worst case scenario was $4.5M (he filed $6.7M), so even though he took a lower 2019 base salary ($4M), the $2M signing bonus makes up for it on the front end. Starting there, perhaps this extension framework makes sense for the Yankees and Severino?

2019: $4M plus $1M signing bonus
2020: $6M
2021: $9M
2022: $13.5M
2023: $18M
2024: $20M club option with $3.5M buyout

That is five years and $55M guaranteed ($11M luxury tax hit) with a sixth year club option that could push the total value to $71.5M. It puts $5M in Severino’s pocket this year (including $1M right away), buys out his four arbitration years for $33.5M total (it’s a 50% raise each year), one free agent year for $18M, and it gives the Yankees control of a second free agent year. Severino gets a lower 2019 base salary, but the signing bonus puts his total earnings in year one at something close to his filing number.

My table above shows Severino could, in theory, pull down $52.2M over his four arbitration years even if he loses a hearing. Why settle for $33.5M across four arbitration years then? Because it’s $33.5M guaranteed. It’s $55M guaranteed, really, across the entire contract. If Severino gets hurt or his performance collapses, forget it, he’s not making $52.2M during his four arbitration years. He might not even make $33.5M in that case. That’s the entire point of an extension. The player gets the guaranteed money and the team gets a discount/cost certainty.

The Yankees have been stingy with extensions in recent years, especially with players who are years away from free agency, so it would take almost a complete reversal to lock up Severino now. I totally get why they might go year-to-year with him. Pitchers are always and forever injury risks, and these days that big free agent payday probably isn’t going to be there. The Yankees can reduce risk on their end by passing on an extension, which is what they’ve been doing a long time.

That all said, Severino’s salaries could blow up quick in arbitration. He doesn’t even have to get better. Remaining a 130 ERA+ guy who goes to the All-Star Game and strikes out 200-something batters each year will pay very well. If the Yankees are that worried about future payroll, this is the time to lock up Severino. The earlier he signs, the bigger the discount, and if the two sides can avoid tomorrow’s hearing in the process, then even better.

Wednesday Notes: Andujar, Sanchez, 60-day IL, Britton

February 13, 2019 by Mike

Baseball is in the air. Pitchers and catchers reported to Tampa today and Spring Training has begun. Position players are due in camp Monday and the Yankees will play their Grapefruit League opener one week from Saturday. Hooray for that. Anyway, make sure you check out Matt Foley’s piece on Adam Ottavino’s makeshift training facility in Harlem. Here are some other notes to check out.

Marlins wanted Sanchez and Andujar for Realmuto

According to Ken Rosenthal (subs. req’d), the Marlins wanted Gary Sanchez and Miguel Andujar during J.T. Realmuto trade talks earlier this winter. The deal might’ve been expanded to include utility man Miguel Rojas and possibly another Marlins piece as well. Rosenthal says the Yankees wouldn’t trade Sanchez for Realmuto straight up because he’s younger and under control twice as long. Sanchez and Andujar? Nah.

The Marlins traded Realmuto to the Phillies last week for a three-player package that included top pitching prospect Sixto Sanchez and big league catcher Jorge Alfaro, which is decidedly less than Sanchez and Andujar. Rosenthal indicates the Yankees wanted to acquire Realmuto and flip him to the Mets for Noah Syndergaard, which is something we heard back during the Winter Meetings. Talks never gained traction though. Sounds like the Yankees wanted to do all that while subtracting as little from their MLB roster as possible.

Disabled list is now the injured list

The disabled list has a new name. It will now be known as the “injured list” at the suggestion of advocacy groups for the disabled. MLB never did formally announce the change, but teams are using “injured list” in press releases, and it doesn’t get more official than that. There have been no other changes to the DL IL as of now. The MLBPA is pushing to go back to a 15-day IL to help curb roster manipulation. That could happen soon.

“The principal concern is that using the term ‘disabled’ for players who are injured supports the misconception that people with disabilities are injured and therefore are not able to participate or compete in sports. As a result, Major League Baseball has agreed to change the name ‘Disabled List’ to be the ‘Injured List’ at both the major and minor league levels,” said MLB’s senior director of league economics and operations Jeff Pfeifer to the Associated Press. An overdue change, this is.

60-day IL is now open

Quick procedural note: Teams can now place players on the 60-day injured list to open up a 40-man roster spot. I know this because earlier today the Diamondbacks put Taijuan Walker (Tommy John surgery) on the 60-day IL to make room for free agent signing Caleb Joseph, and the Athletics put Sean Manaea (shoulder surgery) on the 60-day IL to make room for free agent signing Brett Anderson.

The Yankees have two 60-day IL candidates in Jordan Montgomery (Tommy John surgery) and Didi Gregorius (Tommy John surgery), and potentially two more in Jacoby Ellsbury (hip surgery) and Ben Heller (Tommy John surgery). Next time they need a 40-man spot, I imagine Montgomery will be first to go on the 60-day IL. I should note that, if you put a player on the 60-day IL in Spring Training, the clock on the 60 days does not start until Opening Day. You can’t put a guy on the 60-day IL now and get credit for 40-something days during Spring Training.

Zach Britton is now Zack Britton

Here’s another name change: Zack Britton is now going by Zack with a K instead of Zach with an H. The Yankees announced it last week. “I was born Zack, with a ‘ck,’ but I didn’t know until I went to get a passport it was really with a ‘ck.’ My parents had told me it was with a ‘ch.’ I am blaming my parents,” Britton joked to Kristie Ackert. “The Orioles always just put the ‘ck’ on any legal documents and I went by ‘ch,’ with everything else.”

Ackert says the Yankees and Britton had to rewrite their contract this offseason to change Zach to Zack. Sounds like all his paperwork with the Orioles over the years was correct, but everyone around the league thought it was Zach, and it wasn’t until he signed with a new team that it came to light. Anyway, Britton says going by Zach never bothered him. So far DL/IL has tripped me up more than Zach/Zack, but dude, if you’re going to change your name, don’t change one letter. Go full Giancarlo.

Teams will wear MLB 150 jersey patches this year

Earlier this week MLB announced all 30 teams will wear an “MLB 150” patch on their sleeve this season to celebrate the 1869 Cincinnati Red Stockings, the first ever professional baseball team. They were the first team with an entire roster of salaried players. Teams will also wear the patch on the side of their caps on Opening Day. The patches are pretty snazzy. Here’s a look:

(@MLB)

“We’re excited to recognize the 150th anniversary of professional baseball by honoring our history while celebrating the game and the great players of today. The MLB 150 patch will be a continuous reminder on the field of the link everyone involved in the game today has with the storied history of professional baseball and MLB,” said commissioner Rob Manfred in a statement. Celebrating the first salaried team while clubs simultaneously work to suppress player salaries is something else.

Having to pay the core in a few years is not a good enough reason to pass on Machado and Harper

February 11, 2019 by Mike

The Yankees open Spring Training on Wednesday and, barring a massive surprise, neither Manny Machado nor Bryce Harper will be in Tampa. They remain unsigned partly because the Yankees opted to spread the money around this offseason rather than go for one or two huge signings. You can win that way. Rarely do you regret signing a star-caliber player in his mid-20s though.

Anyway, with Harper and Machado still on the market, Hal Steinbrenner was asked about signing the duo last week, and gave a bit of a defensive answer centered around the team’s expenses. “(There’s) no discussion of our costs, that’s always the problem. I hear everything about our revenues, I hear nothing about our cost,” Hal said to Ron Blum. Unless the Yankees open their books (lol), we’ll never know their expenses. C’est la vie.

As part of the Harper and Machado discussion, Steinbrenner gave another payroll-related reason to pass on the two: The Yankees will have to sign their homegrown core at some point. From Blum:

“I have to look at the big picture, and it is my responsibility — that my family expects, my partners expect — not just to look at the present but to look at the future, too,” he said. “Three, four, five years from now we get a lot of homegrown kids that we love, our fans love, that are going to be coming up for free agency.”

Of course ownership has to keep an eye on future payroll, and yes, the homegrown core is about to get expensive. Luis Severino reached arbitration for the first of four times as a Super Two this offseason. Aaron Judge and Gary Sanchez will hit arbitration for the first time after 2019 and then Miguel Andujar and Gleyber Torres (Super Two) after 2020. The kids grow up fast, man. A few thoughts on this.

1. Are we really supposed to believe this? Let’s be real here. “We have to sign our core in a few years” is a pretty lame excuse to not pursue Machado or Harper or whoever else. It will sound especially silly if Machado or Harper wind up taking short-term contracts, which is possible, but I don’t think likely. A short-term contract would render this excuse completely moot. Some facts:

Hal is arguing the Yankees can’t sign 26-year-old Machado and Harper now because they’ll have to pay 31-year-old Judge and 30-year-old Sanchez down the line, among others.
The Yankees walked away from 31-year-old Robinson Cano, at the time the best second baseman in baseball and at his absolute peak, even though he was a homegrown star of the first order.
The Yankees have one contract on the books beyond 2021 (Giancarlo Stanton) and potentially only two beyond 2020 (Stanton and Adam Ottavino) depending how a few opt-out clauses and vesting options play out.

Also, who’s to say these guys will be worth signing in a few years anyway? Severino could break down (pitchers are known to do that), Sanchez and Andujar could be designated hitters, who knows how Judge will age at that size, so on and so forth. I know we’re supposed to be all optimistic about young players but damn man, things take a turn for a worst all the time. That’s the harsh reality of baseball. The 2015 rookie position player WAR leaderboard:

Kris Bryant: +6.1 WAR (he’s awesome!)
Matt Duffy: +4.4 WAR (huh)
Francisco Lindor: +4.0 WAR (he’s awesome too!)
Odubel Herrera: +3.8 WAR (oy)
Jung Ho Kang: +3.7 WAR (eep)

Two outta five ain’t bad, I guess. But do you see why it’s not a great idea to make decisions based on payroll hypotheticals three or four years down the line? Especially when you’re a win-now team and on the very short list of legitimate World Series contenders? I’ll be sick to my stomach if the Yankees waste this window because future payroll took priority over putting the team in the best possible position to win right now.

2. Why not sign them to extensions? This is the other thing. The Yankees could give themselves long-term cost certainty right now by signing some of their young players to extensions. And maybe they’re trying. Spring Training is typically extension season. That’s usually when we see clubs lock their guys up long-term, so get ready for a flurry of extensions across the league in the coming weeks.

Perhaps the Yankees will be among the teams to sign one of their core young players long-term before Opening Day. Would be kinda cool. The Yankees have been very stingy with extensions over the last 20 years, however. They have signed one (1) player to an extension several years prior to free agency this century. That is Robinson Cano’s four years (plus two club options) deal in February 2008, when he had just short of three years of service time. That’s the only one.

The Yankees signed Brett Gardner (February 2014), Javy Vazquez (January 2004), Derek Jeter (February 2001), and Andy Pettitte (January 2000) to multi-year extensions this century but those four were all one year away from free agency at the time of their deal. It was time to act, you know? The Yankees signed Cano four years prior to free agency. He was where Judge, Sanchez, and Severino are right now as far as years of control go.

The Cano extension was a smashing success. The Yankees never regretted it for a second. That doesn’t mean they all work out well, of course. A Chien-Ming Wang extension in February 2008 would’ve been a disaster. Someone could always go all Grady Sizemore on you. Signing anyone long-term involves risk and the Yankees avoiding extensions all these years tells us they want to avoid that risk. The tend to push the big payday off as long as possible.

To be fair, the Yankees haven’t had many young players worth extending over the years. There was Gardner and, uh, David Robertson? That’s about it. The Yankees definitely have young players worth extending now though, and if being able to sign them down the road is truly a big enough concern to pass on Harper and Machado*, then gosh, getting these guys signed as quickly as possible (potentially at a discount) seems worthwhile, no?

* The unwillingness to sign Harper and Machado because the kids will eventually need be signed does not jibe at all with the Nolan Arenado stuff we’ve heard, but I digress.

Given the state of free agency, waiting to sign young players long-term makes total sense to me because that big free agent payday might not be there down the road. That’s the entire point of an extension, right? To lock a young player up now at a salary lower than what he’d make as a free agent. Well, those free agent paydays are disappearing, so why take the risk? If Severino breaks down or Judge forgets how to hit, the Yanks can walk away no strings attached. That’s not possible with an extension.

Current contract commitments are not really an issue. All those free agents the Yankees signed this winter signed relatively short-term deals. Masahiro Tanaka’s and Jacoby Ellsbury’s huge contracts go away in two years. Stanton, who could opt out in two years but probably won’t given the state of free agency, is the only long-term contract on the books. It’s impossible to look at the roster and think the Yankees will be held back by onerous deals in a three years given their current commitments.

For all intents and purposes, Hal told us the Yankees won’t sign Harper and Machado because they want to make sure they can have an aging and expensive core in a few years. That’s what it boils down to, right? Can’t sign those free agents now because we’re really looking forward to paying Judge $35M a year from ages 31-35! Give me a break. And what happens with the young players in a few years? I’m looking forward to hearing the Yankees can’t sign Judge in 2021 because they’ll have to pay Everson Pereira down the road.

More than anything, I hate that the young players are being used as an excuse to pass on Harper and Machado. The kids have done absolutely everything asked of them. It’s been remarkable and fun. Now they’re a reason to pass on great players? How unfair. I was under the impression that one of the benefits of having cheap young (great) players is being able to use the available payroll space to supplement them with more high-end talent. Guess that was my mistake.

It is more clear than ever before that avoiding big money deals is a top priority — that applies to every team, not only the Yankees — and any excuse will do. Having many great young and cheap players is now being cited as a reason not to spend on free agency. How in the world did baseball get here?

The Yankees overpaid Brett Gardner, but he was the best fit among low-cost free agent outfielders

February 6, 2019 by Mike

The Yankees made their first notable move of the offseason three days after the World Series ended. They declined Brett Gardner’s $12.5M club option for 2019 and re-signed him to a one-year deal worth $7.5M. Add in the $2M buyout of the option and Gardner gets $9.5M in real dollars. His luxury tax hit is $7.5M because the buyout was taxed as part of his previous contract.

In the weeks since it has become clear Gardner made out very well relative to his peers. Nick Markakis was an All-Star last season and he had to settle for one year and $6M. Yesterday Curtis Granderson took a minor league deal with a $1.75M MLB salary. Other veteran outfielders like Adam Jones and Carlos Gonzalez remain unsigned and they’ll be lucky to get Markakis money at this point, nevermind Gardner money. It’s hard out there for a free agent in his mid-30s.

Financially, the Yankees probably want a do-over on Gardner’s contract. It seems like they could’ve re-signed him at a lower rate had they waited out the market. That said, the Yankees are already over the $206M luxury tax threshold, so saving $2M or $3M isn’t a big deal. It is real money, but the Yankees have plenty of real money, and they don’t seem to be adhering to a strict payroll mandate like last year. Are they spending as much as they could? No. Is Gardner preventing them from spending more? Nah.

Even on an overpriced contract, Gardner was the best fit for the Yankees among this offseason’s group of declining-ish veteran free agent outfielders. None of them project to be impact players in 2019 …

Gardner: +1.2 WAR in 407 plate appearances per Steamer
Jones: +1.0 WAR in 513 plate appearances
Gonzalez: +1.0 WAR in 410 plate appearances
Markakis: +0.9 WAR in 580 plate appearances
Granderson: +0.3 WAR in 186 plate appearances

… but Gardner is far and away the best defender of the group, which is not a small thing in Yankee Stadium’s spacious left field, and he’s also best able to play center field. Jones was arguably the worst defensive center fielder in baseball before the Orioles moved him to a corner late last year. CarGo, Granderson, and Markakis haven’t played center in years. Gardner’s defense slipped a bit last year but was still comfortably above-average (+10 DRS).

There is also some hope Gardner’s offense will rebound a bit this coming season. His exit velocity (87.3 mph) last year was his best since Statcast launched in 2015 and his hard-hit rate (32.9%) was second best. The key differences between 2018 Gardner and 2015-17 Gardner was more pop-ups (Under %) and fewer bloop and seeing-eye singles (Flare/Burner %), crushing his average on balls in play (career low by far .272 BABIP). Here’s the batted ball data:

We’ve done the “Gardner is done!” thing before. He had a 96 wRC+ in 2016, we all wondered whether this was the beginning of the end, then he responded with 21 homers and a 108 wRC+ in 2017. Gardner is older now, and he was especially bad in the second half last year, but the contact quality was still typical Gardner. Perhaps a little tweak can turn those pop-ups back into singles. No one is expecting 20+ homers again. But a .250 AVG and a .340 OBP? Doable.

The thing is, even if Gardner is now a below-average hitter, the Yankees are in position to trade offense for defense — for what it’s worth, Steamer projects Markakis (102 wRC+) as the best hitter in that veteran group and Gardner (97 wRC+) the worst, so the spread is small — and defensively, Gardner was the second best one-year contract option available behind Billy Hamilton, who can’t hit a lick. Gardner had a 90 wRC+ last year and was bad. Hamilton has a career 70 wRC+. There is a minimum acceptable standard for offense, even for No. 9 hitters, and Hamilton doesn’t meet it.

There’s also this: Gardner’s clubhouse skills and leadership have value. How much value, exactly? It’s impossible to say. But when everyone from Aaron Judge to CC Sabathia praises Gardner for being a leader and a mentor, it’s hard to ignore. Granderson and Jones have also long been lauded as great teammates and clubhouse guys. They’d also be coming into a new situation — Granderson doesn’t know this group of Yankees — whereas the Yankees know Gardner fits right in. Intangibles may not be measurable, but they do have some value to a team.

There is also something to be said for taking care of your own. The Yankees needed some sort of one-year stopgap outfielder this winter. Someone to at least back up Aaron Hicks in center. They could’ve either re-signed Gardner, who’s been an important member of the team for nearly a decade now, or saved some cash and signed some other club’s castoff who projects to give similar production. Players notice these things and appreciate it.

Had the Yankees not re-signed Gardner as quickly as they did, they would’ve instead waited out the market and … probably re-signed Gardner anyway. Likely at a lower rate, saving a few million bucks, but the roster would’ve been right where it is today. Gardner is not stopping the Yankees from signing Bryce Harper (no one actually believes this, right?) and the one-year outfield alternatives all kinda stink. Jones, Granderson, Markakis? Meh. Can’t count on them to be average on either side of the ball at this point. Gardner will at least save runs in the field.

In a perfect world the Yankees would sign Harper and bump Gardner to the bench, which is where he found himself late last year once Judge returned and Andrew McCutchen took over left field. That seems very unlikely to happen. The next best thing is a lower cost left fielder who can play center field when necessary, and not stand in Clint Frazier’s way should Frazier prove to be ready for a full-time gig. Gardner meets the criteria. Pretty much no other free agent outfielder did (or does). Add in the clubhouse skills and the fit is even more obvious.

Given the current market, there’s no doubt the Yankees paid more to retain Gardner than necessary. I couldn’t possibly care less about the Steinbrenners saving money though, especially now that the Yankees are over the luxury tax threshold. Gardner at $3M vs. Gardner at $7.5M makes no difference to me. He’s not preventing a Harper signing and the Yankees would need a Gardner type even if they sign Harper. Given their roster needs, Gardner was the best low-cost outfield fit, and overpaying a bit on a one-year contract won’t make or break the 2019 Yankees.

The Giants are one of the few possible trade suitors for Jacoby Ellsbury and they’ve “talked about” a deal

February 5, 2019 by Mike

The Yankees won 100 games last season despite getting nothing — literally zero plate appearances and zero defensive innings — from their third highest paid player. Jacoby Ellsbury was hurt all year but don’t blame him for his contract. That’s on the Yankees. How could he say no to that offer? The team’s success without Ellsbury shows how little the Yankees need him right now. He’s a non-factor.

Ellsbury had season-ending hip surgery in August and he is questionable for Opening Day according to Brian Cashman’s most recent update, which came in October and is not all that recent. The Yankees do have an open bench spot and Ellsbury could slot in there. It’s also possible Ellsbury has already played his final game as a Yankee. He’s so far out of the picture right now that the club could release him once healthy and move forward with Clint Frazier (or someone else) in that bench spot.

Despite his lost 2018 season, there have been some trade rumblings involving Ellsbury this winter. The Yankees and Mariners discussed an Ellsbury-for-Robinson Cano swap at some point, and Cashman said other clubs have asked about Ellsbury in what he called “money-laundering” scenarios. A bad contract-for-bad contract swap, basically. Ellsbury is still on the roster, so obviously those conversations didn’t go anywhere, but they did happen.

According to Buster Olney, the Giants have “talked about” Ellsbury as they pursue outfield help. Talked to the Yankees about Ellsbury? Only talked internally about Ellsbury? Who knows. San Francisco has considered Ellsbury. That much we know. Whether they engaged the Yankees in trade talks is another matter. Let’s talk about this a bit.

1. What do the Giants have to offer? As you’d expect, Olney says a bad contract-for-bad contract swap would be the likely outcome. You can forget unloading Ellsbury’s entire contract, or even most of it. Maybe the Yankees would eat enough salary to turn him into a $5M per year player and get a prospect back? I suppose. Some cash savings and a prospect is a good outcome in my book.

Anyway, the Giants have a lot of bad contracts right now. They’re currently where the Phillies were in 2012. Lots of money tied up in declining players with a crash coming. The crash has come already, really. San Francisco lost 98 games in 2017 and 89 games in 2018. Ellsbury is owed approximately $47.5M the next two years with a $21.86M luxury tax hit. Some possible matches:

Johnny Cueto: $68M through 2021 ($21.67M luxury tax hit)
Jeff Samardzija: $39.6M through 2020 ($18M luxury tax hit)
Brandon Belt: $51.6M through 2021 ($17.2M luxury tax hit)
Brandon Crawford: $45.6M through 2021 ($12.5M luxury tax hit)
Evan Longoria: $73.18M through 2022 ($11.17M luxury tax hit)

Hard pass on Longoria, who is signed for another four years and is declining every way possible. Offensively (.285 OBP in 2018), defensively (-4.4 UZR), you name it. Crawford has slipped a bit since his 2014-16 peak but is still a quality two-way shortstop and those are tough to find. I don’t see why the Giants would trade him for Ellsbury. It doesn’t make sense for them on the field or financially.

Buster Posey is recovering from his own hip surgery and will presumably see more time at first base going forward. That figures to make Belt expendable and Ellsbury-for-Belt would work for the Yankees. They’d get a lefty first base bat and the total salary is close to a wash, though it’d be spread across three years rather than two. Ellsbury and Greg Bird for Belt? Maybe? Possibly? I feel like San Francisco could fetch more for Belt. Maybe I’m wrong.

Ellsbury-for-Cueto would be very complicated. For starters, Cueto is recovering from Tommy John surgery and is unlikely to pitch this year, so he does nothing for the 2019 Yankees. He’d be a pickup for 2020-21. Secondly, Ellsbury and Cueto have nearly identical luxury tax hits, but Cueto has another year on his contract and more money coming to him. I think the Giants would jump all over a straight-up trade given the money situation.

An Ellsbury-for-Cueto deal would require some work to make both sides happy financially. I could see the Yankees taking on salary in exchange for a lower luxury tax hit (i.e. Ellsbury-for-Belt). Taking on salary for the same luxury tax hit though? Nah. From a baseball perspective, the Yankees would swap an outfielder they don’t really need for a potential 2020-21 rotation option. Someone to replace CC Sabathia next year and provide depth. Could be cool?

To me, Ellsbury-for-Samardzija is the most realistic scenario. A straight up trade would give the Yankees a serviceable swingman and save money, so, in that sense, go for it. The Yankees would presumably have to eat money to make this work though. The Yankees trade an outfielder they don’t need for a possible swingman. The Giants trade a starter they (probably) don’t need for an outfielder. Both sides would deal from depth to address a weakness.

San Francisco has several bad contracts on the books and multiple outfield openings, so, on paper, they’re probably the best fit for an Ellsbury trade. That doesn’t mean a trade will happen, of course. Ellsbury-for-Samardzija makes the most sense and seems most doable to me. Ellsbury-for-Cueto would be really complicated, Ellsbury-for-Belt or Ellsbury-for-Crawford strikes me as a bad fit for the Giants, and Ellsbury-for-Longoria gets a hard no from me.

2. What about Ellsbury’s insurance? This might be the single biggest hangup in an Ellsbury swap. The Yankees have insurance on Ellsbury’s contract — they reportedly recouped $15.9M of his $21.14M salary last year — though that doesn’t help the luxury tax situation. It does save the team real dollars though. Why trade Ellsbury for Samardzija when you could potentially save millions through insurance, and sign a Samardzija-caliber pitcher on the cheap?

We haven’t had an update on Ellsbury’s hip surgery rehab in a while now and it could be that he isn’t expected to miss enough time for the insurance policy to kick in. Usually the player has to spend so many days on the disabled list before the insurance company starts to pay out. In a screwed up way, Ellsbury missing time makes him less valuable to other teams (because he’s still hurt) but more valuable to the Yankees (because insurance pays out).

3. Couldn’t the Giants just sign a free agent? I mean, yeah. This is what I don’t understand. Cot’s says the Giants are $34.4M under the $206M luxury tax threshold. Couldn’t they just sign Adam Jones or Curtis Granderson for $5M or so and get a healthy outfielder without going through the hassle of a bad contract-for-bad contract trade? If they could unload future dollars with a Cueto or Longoria deal, I’d get it. Otherwise … why?

Perhaps money in San Francisco is tighter than I realize. They did reset their luxury tax rate last year, so that’s good, but they also saw attendance decline for the fourth straight year. The World Series(es) honeymoon seems to be over. Plus every team is cutting payroll nowadays. Why sign a free agent when you could trade for some other team’s busted player and not add payroll? Unless it’s a Cueto or Longoria situation, where significant future dollars are cleared up, I don’t get whey the Giants would want Ellsbury over a free agent. Then again, it’s not my job to get it, so there you go.

4. Would Ellsbury waive his no-trade clause? Beats me. The Giants are pretty bad, but they are closer to Ellsbury’s home in Arizona and his family in Oregon, plus there is a (much) clearer path to playing time with San Francisco than there is with the Yankees. For what it’s worth, Samardzija (eight teams) and Belt (ten teams) have limited no-trade clauses. Crawford has a full no-trade clause and neither Longoria nor Cueto have no-trade protection.

* * *

Olney’s report is quite vague (isn’t every hot stove rumor vague these days?) so it’s unclear how much interest the Giants have in Ellsbury. Is this something they kicked around the office the way every team discusses every player each offseason? Or did they have sincere “hey, this could work for us” talks? The rumor passes the sniff test in that the Giants need outfielders and they have ammo for a bad contract-for-bad contract trade.

On paper, the Yankees have no real use for Ellsbury right now. That was even more true last year, yet there was Jace Peterson in left field nine games into the season, and Shane Robinson in right field much of August. If the Yankees can work out a bad contract-for-bad contract trade and turn Ellsbury into a piece that better fits the roster, great. If not, they’ll wait until he’s healthy and recoup as much as insurance money as possible in the meantime, then figure out whether he fits the roster.

The Yankees and the Myth of the Onerous Long-Term Contract

February 2, 2019 by Bobby Montano

The time for bad Spring Training photos is almost upon us, but 16 teams have not yet signed a free agent. Of those that have, 23 have not signed a player to a contract longer than two years—only 10 out of 77 players who have inked a deal this offseason are guaranteed a job after the 2020 season. One common rationale for this phenomenon is that teams are wising up after decades of handing out long-term deals. That those deals are onerous for teams has become conventional in many baseball circles, but there’s only one small problem with that line of thinking: it’s completely wrong.

The Yankees are a useful case study here: They’re the richest franchise in the sport and have been at the center of some of the game’s richest contracts. It’s worth going through the 7 largest contracts in Yankee history (all of which come after 2001) and examining how each of those contracts actually worked out for the Bombers. Doing so puts to rest the idea that the Yankees have somehow suffered as a result of big spending.

7. Jason Giambi (7 years, $120 million)

The Yankees signed Jason Giambi after their 2001 World Series defeat—having bested Giambi’s Oakland A’s in consecutive ALDS—to replace the beloved Tino Martinez at first base. Giambi’s 7-year, $120 million contract is the 55^th largest of all-time and he more than lived up to his end of the bargain.

Across his seven years in pinstripes, the Giambino slugged .260/.404/521 (143 OPS+) with 209 home runs and 619 walks in 3,693 plate appearances. That he missed roughly half of the year with injury in both 2004 and 2008 limits his overall WAR total (22.1 by Baseball-Reference), but he was a 4 win player per 650 AB with the Yankees. Giambi was a lot more productive than he gets remembered for.

His early-season walk-off grand slam in the bottom of the 14^th inning with the Yankees down 3 against the Minnesota Twins and two home runs off Pedro Martinez in Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS are two of his more memorable moments. The Yankees never won a World Series while he was in town, so he is often forgotten among recent Yankee greats, but Giambi was a middle-of-the-order force on a team that went 680-455 (.599 winning percentage) during his tenure in the Bronx.

It’s safe to say that Giambi was worth every penny.

6. Jacoby Ellsbury (7 years, $153 million)

Jacoby Ellsbury penned a 7-year, $153 million deal with the Yanks fresh off a World Series victory with the rival Red Sox in 2013. He was only the 18^th player in MLB history to receive a contract worth over $150 million, and he was supposed to inject life into a dormant Yanks offense. But this one, as we all know, has not gone according to plan.

Ellsbury has missed considerable time due to injury and has been mostly bad when healthy. His .264/.330/.386 (95 OPS+) line with the New York is well-below what the Yankees hoped for, and he has only been worth 9 wins in pinstripes.

But it’s important to remember that Ellsbury was often injured and only infrequently an above-average hitter for Boston. Although the argument at the time was that speedy outfielders tended to have softer declines than many of their peers, it’s clear that he was never the player the Yanks expected. His 8-win MVP-runner-up 2011 season with Boston was clearly an outlier at the time and looks even more so now—this particular contract speaks more to an organizational failure by the Yankees than it does Ellsbury.

5. Masahiro Tanaka (7 years, $155 million + $20 million posting fee)

The Yankees gave Masahiro Tanaka a 7-year, $155 million contract just weeks after locking up Ellsbury in a series of moves that was meant to revitalize an aging, stale Yanks group. Tanaka, though, has clearly done his part at the top of the rotation.

Despite a dance with Tommy John, Tanaka has been a reliably above-average arm for the Yanks. He owns a 64-34 (.653) record, posting a 3.59 ERA (118 ERA+) with 9 K/9 and 1.7 BB/9 in 824.1 innings pitched (15.6 bWAR) since the start of 2014. He may seemingly always give up a home run, but that should not detract from the fact that the Yankees are lucky to have him take the mound every five days.

A fierce competitor, Tanaka has been lockdown in October, with a 1.50 ERA in 30 innings pitched. His 7 shutout innings against the Cleveland Indians in Game 3 of the 2017 ALDS quite literally saved the season, he was lockdown in both his ALCS starts against the Houston Astros, and he was the only Yankee to win a postseason game this year against Boston. If it’s a big game, you feel comfortable with Tanaka on the mound—and it’s clear that the Yankees shouldn’t regret his deal.

4. CC Sabathia (7 years, $160 million)

The Yankees gave Sabathia a 7-year, $160 million contract following their disappointing 2008 campaign and Sabathia’s legendary one, and he would eventually leveraged an opt-out into what amounted to a 2-year extension following 2011. CC was expected to be the type of ace to carry the Yanks back to the promised land. He did just that in his first try, and he has become one of the most beloved Yankees of the current generation in the process.

CC owns a 129-80 (.617) record with the Yanks, powered by a 3.74 ERA (115 ERA+) in 1,810.2 innings pitched. He’s been worth 30 bWAR, and only 9 pitchers in Yankee history will have won more games in pinstripes than CC when all is said and done.

I wrote all about CC Sabathia last week, so I’ve said about all I can say about him, but one thing is clear: the Yankees absolutely do not regret allowing him to call the Bronx home for final 11 seasons of his Hall of Fame career.

3. Mark Teixeira (8 years, $180 million)

Teixeira’s shocking 8-year, $180 million contract came on a day when most of us expected him to sign with the Red Sox. Instead, the Yanks swooped in and found Jason Giambi’s replacement. Teixeira was a 3-win player per 650 ABs across his 8 years in pinstripes but saw his final few years plagued by frequent injury.

Still, Teixeira hit .248/.343/.479 (118 OPS+) with 206 home runs across 3,522 plate appearances with New York, averaging 35 home runs every 162 games. Teixeira was also a sterling defender at first base, thrice winning the Gold Glove in pinstripes.

His huge 2009 campaign, in which he slugged .292/.383/.565 (141 OPS+) with 39 home runs, netted him 2^nd place in the AL MVP voting, and his 11^th inning walk-off home run against the Twins in Game 2 of the 2009 ALDS was a key moment in the Yanks’ World Series run. Teixeira made the Yankees better for the better part of 8 years, and he was an instrumental player on a 103-win championship team. Big free agent signings are supposed to help you win World Series, and Teixeira did just that. The Yankees should not regret this one either.

2. Derek Jeter (10 years, $189 million)

Derek Jeter inked his first major deal following the 2001 campaign, receiving almost $200 million across 10 years. This one’s easy: a first ballot Hall of Famer and all-time great Yankee, there is no doubt that the Jeter deal made the Yankees a better team.

Across the terms of this contract, Jeter hit .308/.378/.436 (115 OPS+) with 304 doubles and 141 home runs, overall totaling 37.5 bWAR. Jeter was a part of too many big Yankee moments to name, but his 3,000 hit off David Price and July 1, 2004 catch against Boston in which he flew into the stands stick out as two of his top moments over this deal. Jeter is one of the best players in baseball history, in the conversation for the best shortstop ever, and the Yankees certainly don’t regret this deal in the slightest.

1. Alex Rodriguez (Two 10-year contracts)

Alex Rodriguez, were it not for Barry Bonds, might just be the most controversial baseball player in league history. Under constant media scrutiny over his love life, relationship with the Yankee captain and former friend Derek Jeter, steroid usage and at-times contentious relationship with the league and organization, A-Rod divided baseball (and Yankee fans) as nobody else could. But amid the noise, one thing is clear: Rodriguez was worth the money.

A-Rod signed two major deals in his career, and the Yankees were at the center of both. For the purposes of this exercise, let’s analyze the two separately.

10-year, $252 million contract (Offered by the Texas Rangers, Yankee from 2004-07)

By far the largest contract ever handed out at the time, the first A-Rod deal is often pointed to as an example of big contracts gone awry. That is absurd. I repeat: that is absurd.

A-Rod was simply nothing less than one of the most productive baseball players in baseball history across his first 10-year deal, slugging .304/.400/.591 (154 OPS+) with 329 home runs, 3 MVPs, 7 ASGs and 56.4 bWAR. (For perspective, Bernie Williams was worth 49 bWAR in his entire career.) If anything, this deal was a bargain for both Texas and New York.

For the Yankees, his three-home run, 10 RBI performance against the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim and towering walk-off grand slam against the Indians as the Yanks scored 6 runs in the bottom of the 9^th (all with two outs) stand out as signature moments during this stretch.

Although the Yankees only rostered Rodriguez on this deal for the 2004-7 campaigns, he managed to win 2 MVPs and smash 173 home runs in four years. He was blamed for the Yanks’ failure to win the World Series and often caught the ire of fans, but it’s clear that expecting more (on-the-field, anyway) from Alex Rodriguez was unrealistic. He was as good as you can be.

10-year, $275 million contract (Offered by Yankees following A-Rod’s 2007 opt-out)

The second A-Rod deal, on the other hand, is much more complicated. It was the last time we saw Hank Steinbrenner, and this mega-deal came even as Brian Cashman publicly said the organization would let Rodriguez walk if he opted out. Instead, A-Rod opted out during the final game of the 2007 World Series to much outcry, and the Yankees re-signed him anyway. While A-Rod wasn’t the same player at the end of this deal, he was comfortably above-average the whole time. Not to mention, the Yanks wouldn’t have won the 2009 World Series without him, and they’d never have been able to replace him.

The Yankees were scuffling a bit amid huge expectations in April of 2009, and the Yanks were without their injured (and recently scandalized) All-Star third baseman. When he returned in early May, he slugged a three-run home run in Camden Yards in his first at-bat and the Yankees never looked back. A-Rod hit 30 home runs and drove in 100 runs despite missing over a month, and was absolutely an essential component of the Yankees postseason run.

His 2-run, game-tying home run off Joe Nathan in the bottom of the 9^th of Game 2 of the 2009 ALDS is one of the defining moments of that era, but he also hit the go-ahead home run in Game 3, hit another game-tying home run in extra innings in the Game 2 of the ALDS and had the go-ahead hit in the top of the 9th inning of Game 4 of the World Series to give the Yanks a 3-1 lead. Without A-Rod, there’s no 2009 title. It’s that simple.

Despite the fact that the second contract was scandalized by more steroid allegations, a lawsuit against the Yankees, and a full-season suspension, A-Rod actually hit .269/.359/.486 (123 OPS+) with 178 home runs over those final years, and had one final great campaign in 2015. Even during his down years, A-Rod was better than most other players in the league. Given his repaired relationship with the Yankees, it’s fair to say that the team and player have both moved on from any hostility—and fans should too.

Alex Rodriguez is the recipient of two of the most misunderstood contracts of all-time from a baseball perspective, and it’s time we all acknowledge a simple fact: he was well worth the money.

Special Mention: Giancarlo Stanton (13 years, $325 million)

Giancarlo Stanton received a 13-year, $325 million contract from the Miami Marlins in 2014, with the Yankees acquiring him following the 2017 campaign. It’s too early to say whether or not this deal will work out for New York, but the early indications are a resounding yes.

Across the first four years of the deal, Stanton has hit .265/.350/.557 (143 OPS+) and has hit 151 home runs. Even his relatively down year last year with the Yanks was extremely productive, and he figures to be a major force in the middle of the Yankee lineup for at least two more years, depending on whether or not he exercises his opt-out following the 2020 season (if I were him, I would not). More to come on this one, but if the recent history of large NYY contracts is any indication, they won’t regret this at all.

Conclusions

What this shows us is that the big, onerous contract that we hear so much about is largely a strawman: it barely exists. Of the 7 largest contracts in Yankee history, only one of them (Ellsbury) is a true albatross, and again, that speaks more to a failure by the Yankees than it reflects poorly on Ellsbury. He’s the same player he always was. In other words, 6 out of 7 (85%) have significantly improved the Yankees and made them a better team.

But there’s another key point buried in here. Most of these deals came in relatively close proximity to one another. The Yankees signed Giambi one year after giving Jeter his 10-year deal; they added Teixeira and Sabathia in the same offseason; they signed Tanaka and Ellsbury in the same offseason; they added Stanton despite having Ellsbury’s and Tanaka’s deals on the books, underscoring how the deal isn’t prohibitive at all. This tells us that fears that the Yankees cannot offer another long-term mega deal (or two!) if they want to re-sign their own developed core are unfounded. (Granted, the data has always shown that it was unfounded.)

Despite what we often year about large contracts and long-term financial obligations, the reality is that the Yankees simply haven’t suffered, financially or on-the-field, as a result of any of their major deals in the last 20 years. If anything, those deals are a major reason why the Yankees have not had a losing season since 1992—and the Yankees, and their fans, would be wise to remember that.

The Dodgers and A.J. Pollock may have set the market for the Yankees and Aaron Hicks

January 31, 2019 by Mike

Three years and three months ago the Yankees swung a trade that was maybe a tad confusing at the time and has since played a major role in the team’s return to prominence. The Yankees sent John Ryan Murphy to the Twins for Aaron Hicks in November 2015. They traded a 24-year-old catcher coming off a .277/.326/.406 (100 wRC+) season for a 26-year-old outfielder with a career .225/.306/.349 (82 wRC+) batting line in parts of three MLB seasons. Hmmm.

Murphy was blocked by Brian McCann and the Yankees had Gary Sanchez coming, so catcher was a position of depth in the organization. Center field was not. Not with Brett Gardner and Jacoby Ellsbury entering their mid-30s. The Twins gave up on Murphy after 90 plate appearances and Hicks, following a tough year as the fourth outfielder in 2016, has broken out as a cornerstone player the last two years. His ranks among the 87 outfielders with at least 800 plate appearances from 2017-18:

OBP: .368 (11th)
wRC+: 127 (18th)
Baserunning runs: +9.6 (10th)
WAR: +8.2 (12th)

There’s a reason Hicks was a first round pick (14th overall in 2008) and ranked by Baseball America (subs. req’d) as the 19th best prospect in baseball in 2010. It’s because he’s a great athlete with loads of tools, and had the ability to do exactly what he’s done the last two seasons. That’s become a top 15 outfielder in baseball. Hicks was struggling with the Twins, the Yankees took a chance on his upside, and have been rewarded handsomely.

Next offseason Hicks will be rewarded handsomely, though probably not as handsomely as he would have been a few years ago given the current state of free agency. Hicks will hit the open market next winter as a just turned 30-year-old switch-hitting center fielder who gets on base, has power, runs the bases well, and saves runs in the field. He has an impact in all phases of the game and those guys are hard to find. The Yankees should want to sign him long-term.

With another strong season in 2019, Hicks could’ve gone into free agency seeking Dexter Fowler (five years, $82.5M) or Lorenzo Cain (five years, $80M) money not that long ago. That was the going rate for an above-average two-way center fielder. Hicks will hit free agency one year younger than Fowler was when he signed his deal, and two years younger than Cain. In a “normal” free agent climate, yeah, five years and $80M would’ve been market value.

The market has changed. For whatever reason teams are steering clear of free agents, even great ones like Manny Machado and Bryce Harper. “Why get better when you can get cheaper” is a pretty common hot stove theme these days. With a huge 2019, a year even better than 2017-18, yeah, maybe Hicks can still put himself in position for an $80M or so contract next winter. It just seems so unlikely now, no matter what he does this season.

Last week the Dodgers signed A.J. Pollock to a contract that might’ve set the market for Hicks. It’s a complicated contract — I swear, every big money contract the Dodgers give out is complicated — but these are the nuts and bolts:

Four years with a $12M luxury tax hit.
Pollock is guaranteed at least $45M.
Pollock can opt out following year three.
Pollock has a fifth year player option.

Pollock turned 31 in December, so he’s a year older than Hicks will be when he hits free agency next winter. He’s also had more injury problems in his career. Hicks is no stranger to the disabled list himself, but all his injuries are muscle pulls. Pollock has played only 237 of 486 possible games the last three years because he’s had muscle pulls and broken bones (hand, elbow, thumb). Age and injury history are advantage Hicks.

We don’t know what Hicks will do in 2019 yet, but we do know his 2017-18 seasons were kinda similar to Pollock’s. Look at the numbers:

Same number of games, similar batting average, same strikeout rate, same isolated power, both above-average baserunners and defenders. The biggest difference between the two is Hicks walks a lot more. Literally more than twice as often as Pollock. The numbers say he’s been a better defender and baserunner too, hence a 3.5 WAR difference between the two the last two years.

Had Hicks hit free agency this winter he and his representatives could’ve said he deserves more than Pollock, and they absolutely would’ve been correct. Hicks didn’t hit free agency this winter though. He’ll hit free agency next winter, and who knows how his 2019 season will play out? I think he’ll be fine. He’s only 29 and he’s obviously talented. At age 29, there’s a chance 2019 will be the best year of his career.

There also risk involved with waiting a year until free agency. Hicks could get hurt, or his performance could slip, or the free agent market could get even worse. Rather than wait, Hicks could jump at an extension now. By time the season ends he’ll have made $13.5M between MLB salaries and his draft signing bonus. Take away taxes and agent fees and all that and it’s still a lot of money, but Hicksie might want to lock in long-term security for Baby Hicksie.

Hicks has already signed a one-year, $6M contract for 2019. The Yankees can now sign him to an extension that begins in 2020 without affecting their 2019 luxury tax payroll. Put the Pollock contract (four years, $45M with some bells and whistles) in front of him and it goes like this:

What’s in it for Hicks? Peace of mind and long-term security, for starters. He also gets an opt-out if things go well and a player option if things don’t. Also, no need to sweat free agency, which is increasingly unfavorable to players. Waiting until January or February to sign is no fun.
What’s in it for the Yankees? Long-term control of a very good player and cost certainty, which is a big deal for payroll planning. There’s no bidding war and it’s one less core player the Yankees have to worry about signing (Didi Gregorius and Dellin Betances are also impending free agents).

The downside for Hicks is he could sell himself short. What if he does have a career year at age 29 in 2019? A career year for Hicks could be something like .300/.400/.550 with 35 homers, 15 steals, and +8 WAR. That would set him up for a large free agent payday, even in this market. As for the Yankees, the downside for them is sinking a lot of money into a player who could lose value. That’s the sort of risk every team takes with every big money signing though.

A few weeks ago Brian Cashman said he’s planning to discuss extensions with Hicks as well as Gregorius and Betances. With the free agent market being what it is, it makes more sense for the Yankees to wait on an extension than ever before. Even with a great year, chances are Hicks is not looking at a massive payday next offseason because massive paydays don’t really exist anymore. The Fowler and Cain contracts are probably his free agent upside and that’s not something that will make or break the Yankees financially. (They’ll pretend it will though.)

I think Hicks is a better player than Pollock — the numbers back me up on this — plus he’ll be a year younger when he hits free agency than Pollock was, so I think getting Hicks at Pollock money would be a pretty great deal. The sooner the Yankees can get it done, the better. Hicks doesn’t have to worry about free agency or long-term security, and the Yankees don’t have to worry about center field for another few years. An extension in Pollock’s range could work for both sides in this free agent market.