NY Yankees News, Information & Community

Hot Stove Rumors: Reliever Market, Gray, Harrison, Profar

December 31, 2018 by Mike

As expected, hot stove news has slowed to a crawl over the holidays. It’s been pretty quiet this last week or so and it’ll probably stay that way for another few days, at least until Yusei Kikuchi’s 30-day negotiating period expires Wednesday. The Yankees had interest in him at one point. The J.A. Happ signing may’ve changed things though. Anyway, here are the latest hot stove rumblings.

Yankees focusing on bullpen

According to Jon Heyman, the Yankees are focusing on the bullpen as they wait for Manny Machado to make his decision. Zach Britton, Adam Ottavino, and David Robertson are all in play and it is possible the Yankees could sign more than one top reliever. Part of me wonders if the Yankees will blow it out and spend a ton of money should they manage to sign Machado, leading to two reliever signings. Once they’re over the luxury tax threshold, might as well go all out, you know? Otherwise they might stick to the luxury tax threshold (again).

Ottavino and especially Britton have been connected to the Yankees pretty much all offseason. Things have been oddly quiet with Robertson, however. There was that weird postseason shares story, which, if you’re a conspiracy theorist, could’ve been planted to turn fans on Robertson as the Yankees let him walk. Wouldn’t be the first time a team has done that. I don’t think that’s the case though. I very much prefer Robertson to literally every other free agent reliever on the market. Hopefully the two sides can hammer out a deal at some point.

Brewers and Padres still after Gray, Reds fading

The Brewers and Padres remain involved in Sonny Gray trade talks, report Jon Morosi and AJ Cassavell. The Reds, meanwhile, are starting to fade out of the picture after adding Tanner Roark and Alex Wood in recent weeks. I guess Cincinnati doesn’t want to dip into their farm system again to acquire another one-year rental. Eleven teams were in on Gray earlier this offseason and the Yankees have since whittled that list down to the most serious trade suitors.

I am surprised 2018 is just about over and Gray is still a Yankee. Chances are the Yankees are waiting until the right deal comes along — Spring Training is still six weeks away, so there’s no rush — though I suppose they could’ve decided to keep Sonny as a sixth starter/swingman, or that Brian Cashman’s public trade declarations have backfired. It seems to me the Yankees and Gray have reached the point of no return. He’ll be traded at some point. Maybe to the Brewers or Padres, or maybe somewhere else entirely. I’ll be surprised if Gray’s still a Yankee when pitchers and catchers report on February 13th.

Yankees still “in play” for Harrison

The Yankees are among the teams still “in play” for free agent infielder Josh Harrison, reports Heyman. He’s a popular guy, apparently. Heyman list both contenders (Brewers, Dodgers, Nationals, Phillies) and rebuilders (Giants, Rangers) among his suitors. The Yankees could use Harrison at second base before shifting him into a true utility role once Didi Gregorius returns from Tommy John surgery.

Harrison, 31, hit .250/.293/.363 (78 wRC+) with eight homers and three steals in 97 games this past season. He’s a year removed from a .272/.339/.432 (104 wRC+) batting line — that was propped up by an uncharacteristic 23 hit-by-pitches though — and can play pretty much any position, which is not nothing. The Yankees have had trade interest in Harrison in the past too. There are better middle infield options on the board right now (Machado, Jed Lowrie, DJ LeMahieu, etc.) and my preference is going after those guys before settling for Harrison.

Yankees had interest in Profar

Before he was traded to the Athletics, the Yankees had interest in Rangers infielder Jurickson Profar, reports Gerry Fraley. They weren’t willing to give up much to get him, apparently. Texas received four good but not great Double-A prospects plus international bonus money in the three-team trade. The A’s gave up an okay big league reliever (Emilio Pagan), a good Double-A prospect, international bonus money, and a Competitive Balance Round draft pick in the deal. Oakland won’t miss any of that.

Profar, 25, hit .254/.335/.458 (108 wRC+) with 20 homers and ten steals this past season. Shoulder injuries wrecked his 2014-15 seasons and he finally started to look his old tippy top prospect self in 2018. Profar was the position player centerpiece of my 2018-19 Offseason Plan because I think he’s on the cusp of breaking out as one of the game’s best players. The Yankees have had interest in him in the past and I was hoping they’d make a run at him again this offseason. Alas. It didn’t really happen.

Fan Confidence Poll: December 31st, 2018

December 31, 2018 by Mike

2018 Regular Season Record: 100-62 (851 RS, 669 RA, 98-64 expected record), second in ALE
2018 Postseason Record: 2-3 (22 RS, 29 RA), won WC Game, lost ALDS

Wrestling with Rotation Ideas

December 30, 2018 by Matt Imbrogno

Every year I’ve written about the Yankees–since August of 2008–I’ve written that they could use an improvement to the starting rotation. This, being a truism, is applicable to all teams, but it seems to perpetually apply to the Yankees. Over the years, they’ve done a great job of amassing great lineups and lockdown bullpens, but truly elite starting has generally eluded them.

In terms of true talent, the Yankees do have a more-than-formidable top three in Luis Severino, Masahiro Tanaka, and James Paxton. Additionally, there are worse fourth and fifth starters in baseball than veteran J.A. Happ and borderline-Hall of Famer CC Sabathia. Despite that solid base of talent, there are still question marks with each one. Severino and Tanaka have bouts with inconsistency. Paxton and ‘good health’ don’t often go together in a sentence. Happ and Sabathia are, well, old.

Given the other truism about there never being too much pitching, should the Yankees consider aiming for a six man rotation? Maybe.

The internal options the Yankees have for the sixth starting spot–mainly Sonny Gray and Luis Cessa–are inadequate. Despite the fact that I’m higher on Gray than most, it’s hard to imagine him being a part of the 2019 team. As for Cessa, I just don’t see it happening for him as a starter. Nothing he’s done in his cups of coffee have shown he’s worth some sort of guarantee. There’s no point in having a sixth starter if he’s not any good, right?

However, if the Yankees do manage to swing a trade for an elite starter, then the Yankees should roll with six men. Adding one of, say, Corey Kluber or Noah Syndergaard (however unlikely) would make it worth it for the team to add an extra starter to their plans. They could also rejigger their rotation as needed, keeping the best pitchers on track regularly, while allowing others to get extra rest or play around with matchups.

Even if the Yankees stick with a five man rotation, they can start the year off by manipulating the rotation to give themselves a favorable matchup and give their best pitcher–Severino–an extra start in the month.

If they stay 1-5 in the order listed above, Severino will get six starts in March/April, pitching against Baltimore, Detroit, Houston, Boston, Kansas City, and San Francisco. There are some benefits here. Severino gets some extra rest at times and is still able to line up with Houston and Boston, two teams whom the Yankees’ll be racing with all year. And given that some of Severino’s struggles last year may have been due to fatigue, those days of extra rest may help.

On the other side of things, the Yankees can keep their ace on his regular rest and pitch him after four days, regardless of who’s lined up to pitch. This would give him seven starts total in the month, swapping out Houston for the White Sox and adding a start against Anaheim late in the month.

So what’s more valuable? An extra start in general or a start against a tough team and potential Wild Card opponent? I think the gut reaction is to say he should start against Houston. They’re obviously a hard team to beat and you could use all the firepower possible. But on the other hand, it’s more likely you’re going to beat the White Sox and Angels, especially with Severino pitching. Thinking about the probabilities, I think you take the two starts over the one.

The game against Houston is in Houston, which means it’s already tougher to win, before considering the quality of the opponent. The game against the White Sox is in New York, which is a big advantage for the Yankees, especially considering the quality of the opponent. The game against the Angels is in Anaheim, which increases the difficulty, but it’s not nearly as difficult as beating the Astros in Houston. Take the almost guaranteed win against Chicago and gamble against Anaheim; that seems more likely to lead to two wins instead of one.

Whether the Yankees add another starter or not, there will be plenty of questions about their rotation at the start of and throughout 2019. It’s what held them back in 2018 and they’ll need it to improve–whether by performance or addition–to make 2019 as successful as 2017 and 2018.

The Yankees Can Afford to Sign Both Bryce Harper and Manny Machado

December 29, 2018 by Bobby Montano

When Brian Cashman called the Yankees a “fully operational Death Star” during the Winter Meetings, he wasn’t lying: the team’s talented young roster is fresh off of a 100-win season and back-to-back postseason appearances. If you factor in the acquisition of the often-dominant James Paxton and the rumor that the Yankees are believed to be the frontrunners for 26-year old superstar Manny Machado, you’d be excused if you believe him. But a closer look makes it clear that the Yankees have operated at less than full financial capacity, their biggest competitive advantage, for quite some time—and that they can add both Bryce Harper and Manny Machado and still reinvest less revenue into player salaries than they did in the last decade.

Brett Borzelli of Pinstripe Alley wrote up a very astute analysis of the team’s financial situation and its league-wide implications a few days ago based on some newly-released data. You should read the entire piece and the underlying data yourself, but I think it’s important to pull out three key points:

1. Team payroll has decreased: The Yankees paid their players $226.2 million in 2004, and it remained relatively steady (in real numbers, not those adjusted for inflation) around that figure until last year, when it plummeted to $193 million.

2. Team revenue has increased: In 2004, the Yankees took in $264 million in revenue. That number climbed to $375 million in 2008 and reached about $620 million in 2017. Based on league revenue figures, attendance/ratings and overall team performance, it’s a safe bet that revenue increased again last year.

3. Therefore, the Yankees are investing less in the team than at any point in the last two decades: The best way to consider team spending is as a percentage of overall revenue, and by that standard, the Yankees are clearly failing. The 2004 team reinvested roughly 85 percent of its revenue into player salaries while the 2018 version, based on some crude calculations, reinvested less than 30 percent, less even than the Tampa Bay Rays.

To put this in context, consider this: had the Yankees simply maintained the 2004 salary as a baseline and stayed constant, their 2017 payroll would have been $300 million. Had they maintained the same ratio of revenue to payroll as that year (85 percent), their 2018 payroll would have been $526 million, more than double what it is now. Viewed in this context, the Jacoby Ellsbury albatross and the Alex Rodriguez extension have been far less financially inhibiting than we often think.

But instead, after the 2017 Yankees emerged out of nowhere to reach Game 7 of the ALCS, the Yankees cut $50 million in salary from 2017 to 2018 when factoring in the team’s luxury tax penalty. The high-profile acquisition of Giancarlo Stanton and his 10-year, $325 million contract—which, by the way, is less than he is worth and will likely prove to be a financial asset to the Yankees over the course of the deal—obscured this in the eyes of many fans and analysts, but the fact remains the same: the Yankees cut $50 million in player salary last year.

A well-coordinated PR campaign by Hal Steinbrenner and other team executives have helped shape a narrative that the Yankees are “still the Yankees” and will “spend when they need to” but that they “don’t need a $200 million payroll to win.” Some variation of that austerity platform has been deployed for at least the last five years, even as the team has suffered by letting some generational talents pass by.

Consider the 2014-15 offseason, when the Yankees didn’t even consider adding Max Scherzer—the type of pitcher we always hear the Yankees “need”—because his contract demands weren’t “realistic” under the team’s financial framework. Team President Randy Levine was characteristically blunt at the time: “The chances of us bringing in a guy for six [years] and $25 million or over, in my opinion, is virtually none.” That philosophy, to varying degrees, has applied to other top-of-the-rotation talents including Jon Lester, David Price, Yu Darvish and Jake Arrieta. (It even applied to the decision not to sign Yoan Moncada back when the farm system was starved for talent.)

The decision not to pursue Scherzer—who, by the way, has a 2.71 ERA (156 ERA+) and 11 K/9 in 878.1 innings pitched since signing with Washington—is clearly the most egregious, but it’s far from the only notable decision. In August 2017, the Yankees reportedly discussed Justin Verlander with the Tigers, but not in a serious manner because, according to Buster Olney (subs req’d), they “wanted [him] but had to let him pass by on waivers because they didn’t have the payroll flexibility to spend.” Verlander, of course, virtually eliminated the Yankees singlehandedly that October and sported a 2.52 ERA in 214 innings last season.

It is clear by now that the Yankees do in fact have the “payroll flexibility” to do whatever they want and that they have actively chosen to inhibit themselves. There is no indication that this offseason will be any different: the Yankees are still beating the austerity drum. They passed on Patrick Corbin, not even extending an offer because the two parties were so far apart financially. And in the Manny Machado sweepstakes, it’s long been reported that the Yankees will not offer him a contract worth $300 million or more—if Machado, who is believed to prefer (subs req’d) the Bronx, really wants to be a Yankee, he’ll need to accept less guaranteed money. His superstar free agent counterpart in Bryce Harper, also believed to prefer the Bronx, is likely in the same boat.

But the Yankees can afford to pay both. Assume both of them receive $35m per year, the high end of what they’re expected to get. That would add $70m to the payroll, bringing it to about $260 million before adding supporting pieces and another bullpen arm. If we assume the final payroll ends up around $280-90 million, they’d pay about $35 million in luxury tax—bringing the payroll to a total of $320 million, right around the 2004 payroll adjusted for inflation (and a fraction of the team’s revenue, which has soared since then). There is even enough flexibility here to account for future pay raises for the Yankees homegrown stars.

Much can change in the course of a few weeks (here is the part of the article where I am supposed to bring up Bubba Crosby and Mark Teixeira), but it remains highly unlikely that they make a move to sign both superstars, even though there isn’t a single compelling baseball reason not to do so. But there is no excuse, financial or otherwise, not to add at least one of the two superstars, who have yet to hit their prime. In other words, the next few weeks serve as a litmus test for the new-age New York Yankees: is the organization more concerned with its bottom line than it is with producing the best possible on-field product? I still think that Manny Machado ends up in pinstripes, but that may just be wishful thinking: a survey of the team’s financial data and recent actions does not exactly inspire confidence.

RAB Live Chat

December 28, 2018 by Mike

For better or worse, the Yankees seem to believe they’re set at first base going into 2019

December 28, 2018 by Mike

All offseason long the focus for the Yankees has been pitching, pitching, and more pitching. Starters, primarily, but also bullpen help as well. And they need a Didi Gregorius replacement too. Almost everything we’ve seen and heard this winter has revolved around pitching and a middle infielder to replace Gregorius. That’s pretty much it.

Despite positional uncertainty, we’ve heard basically nothing about the Yankees looking for first base help this winter. Nothing other than Brian Cashman essentially shooting down speculation the Yankees could sign Bryce Harper to play first base. That has been the extent of the team’s first base rumors this offseason. Cashman saying Harper is a non-option at the position.

At the moment the Yankees are slated to go into next season with Luke Voit at first base and Greg Bird trying to reclaim the position. Cashman and Aaron Boone both kinda sorta indicated Voit will be the starter next year during their end-of-season press conferences, but stopped short of calling him the starter outright.

“(Voit) certainly came over here and was given that opportunity and took it and kicked the door in,” said Boone. “I’m sure there will continue to be competition on all kinds of levels. The one thing with Greg that I never lost is we’ve seen him be an impact player at times in his career … This year, in a lot of ways, was a little bit of a lost season for him.”

At the very least, Voit’s late season performance has earned him a long look in Spring Training. I am forever skeptical when it comes to 27-year-old rookies, especially when they’re right-handed hitting first basemen, but the Yankees owe it to themselves to find out whether Voit is a late bloomer a la Nelson Cruz and Jesus Aguilar, you know?

As for Bird, who knows? He’s now into his arbitration years and the idea that he’ll be a left-handed hitting complement to the right-handed Aaron Judge and Gary Sanchez is fading with each injury. That said, it wouldn’t surprise me to see him wrestle the first base job way from Voit at some point next year. We’ve seen Bird do some great things. Not often enough, but we’ve seen flashes.

Given the lack of rumors to date, the Yankees seem to believe they’re set at first base with Voit and Bird. Mike Ford and Ryan McBroom are the Triple-A first base depth and both were just passed over in the Rule 5 Draft, so the rest of MLB doesn’t view them highly. Voit and Bird it is. Three things about this.

1. There’s only room on the roster for one of these guys. A Voit/Bird platoon isn’t going to happen. I mean, it might, but probably not. The Yankees have fully embraced the eight-man bullpen/three-man bench lifestyle and using two of those three bench spots on a backup catcher and a first base only guy doesn’t make much sense, especially since the other first baseman is another first base only guy. It really limits roster flexibility.

2. Adding a first baseman at the deadline should be easy. There are always more first base types than roster spots. Last offseason we saw Lucas Duda, Logan Morrison, and others wait until Spring Training started to sign. I’m sure others are facing the same fate this offseason. Here’s a quick list of potential first base trade deadline targets on rebuilding teams:

Blue Jays: Justin Smoak
Orioles: Mark Trumbo
White Sox: Jose Abreu and Yonder Alonso

The Brewers aren’t rebuilding but we should include Eric Thames in here seeing how he’s stuck behind Aguilar and also Ryan Braun, who’s started playing first base. Thames as well as everyone listed above would be a rental pickup. No contract obligations beyond 2019. If necessary, the Yankees shouldn’t have much trouble finding a first baseman at the deadline, at least in theory.

3. The Yankees have offense to spare. Even with the relatively unproven Voit at first base and Tyler Wade penciled in as Sir Didi’s replacement, FanGraphs projects the 2019 Yankees as the second highest scoring team in baseball. The run prevention is expected to improve next year with J.A. Happ and James Paxton replacing Sonny Gray and the fifth starter parade, so, in theory, the Yankees can roll the dice at first base.

I don’t love this line of thinking, but the Yankees are in position to try Voit and Bird at first base, and see what happens. Maybe Voit is actually the next Cruz or Aguilar. Or maybe Bird manages to stay healthy and hit. If it happens, great. If not, well, the Yankees have enough offense to get by, and there should be plenty of first base options available in July. Point is, the Yankees can afford to be patient.

* * *

This current free agent class is really thin on first base help and that probably helped convince the Yankees to commit to Voit and Bird. The best free agent first baseman on the market this winter was probably Steve Pearce. Had Abreu or Paul Goldschmidt or Matt Carpenter or someone like that been a free agent this offseason, I imagine we would’ve heard much more about the Yankees looking for an upgrade at first base.

Instead, the free agent market is mostly barren, and Voit hit well enough (more than well enough, really) this past season to buy himself another look next year. The Yankees were in this same spot with Bird a few years ago, right? He performed well late in 2015 and it was enough to convince the Yankees they didn’t need to import first base and DH depth behind Mark Teixeira and Alex Rodriguez. Bird was the guy. That didn’t work out, unfortunately.

First base has been a black hole in the Bronx since 2015. From 2016-18, the Yankees received a .230/.306/.426 (95 wRC+) line from their first basemen. Among the 30 teams that ranks 28th/26th/25th (26th). First base has been a real problem since Teixeira’s (and Bird’s) last good season in 2015. And yet, the Yankees seem content to go into next season with Voit and Bird at the position. There have been very few first base rumors this winter.

Sitting out the first base market this offseason could very well — and very quickly — prove to be a mistake. I would stop short of calling it a potential colossal mistake because there is always first base help available, but the Yankees are taking a bit of a risk here. They’re using their resources (payroll space, trade chips, etc.) to address other needs and winging it at first base. There’s still plenty of time to make a move, but right now, Voit and Bird are the answer.

Mailbag: Machado, Torres, Rivera, Harper, Stanton, Drury

December 28, 2018 by Mike

There are eight questions in the final mailbag of 2018. The inbox was kinda empty during the holiday week, so the pickin’s were slim. Send your questions to RABmailbag (at) gmail (dot) com.

Can’t sleep, mascot will eat me. (Rob Carr/Getty)

Trevor asks (short version): Granted looking backward isn’t the same as looking forward but I worry about a Jason Heyward comp for Machado. Is there some other underlying number (exit velocity, out of zone chase rate, etc.) that leads you to believe that he is a different guy? An extra 20 HR is significant but a 10 year $300 mil contract seems insane to me. I say that as someone who would be ok with $400+ mil for Harper.

Other than hitting free agency in their mid-20s, I don’t see many similarities between Jason Heyward and Manny Machado. Machado was a much better hitter through their age 25 seasons and especially so in the seasons leading up to free agency, and while both are splendid defenders, Machado did it on the infield (at third base) while Heyward did it in the corner outfield. Some contact quality numbers:

	Machado	Heyward
Free Agent Season	38.6 Hard% and 40.0 GB%	29.1 Hard% and 57.2 GB%
Two Years from Free Agency	39.5 Hard% and 42.1 GB%	26.4 Hard% and 45.5 GB%
Three Years from Free Agency	35.4 Hard% and 37.3 GB%	29.7 Hard% and 43.7 GB%

Heyward didn’t hit the ball nearly as hard as Machado in the years leading up to free agency and he had trouble getting the ball airborne. He had a shoulder injury early in his career and became a ground ball machine after that. The Braves and Cardinals both tried to get him to hit the ball in the air more often but no dice. It just didn’t happen and his offensive production never matched his physical ability.

Machado? Machado knocks the crap out of the ball and he hits it in the air. Good things happen when you hit the ball hard and in the air. Also, Machado is doing this as a right-handed hitter, meaning he doesn’t have the platoon advantage nearly as often as the left-handed hitting Heyward. Heyward’s offensive collapse is nearly unprecedented — he went from an 118 wRC+ before free agency to an 85 wRC+ since free agency while in his mid-20s — and he’s had such a weird career arc that I’m not sure he’s a reasonable comparison for any player, let alone one as good as Machado.

Steve asks: Why do so many people think its a good idea to move Gleyber Torres back and forth between 2B and SS? He’s 22 and clearly a budding star. He’s been asked to learn 2B and seems to be growing into the position quite well. Why not simply keep him there or decide he moves back to SS permanently? The back and forth cannot be good for his development. There are other solutions. What am I missing?

I stressed out about this stuff once upon a time but I don’t think it’s a big deal anymore. Lots of guys move around and change positions early in their big league careers. Gleyber is smart enough and athletic enough to make it work. My preference would be replacing Didi Gregorius with another shortstop and keeping Torres at second because that does seem to be his long-term home with the Yankees (assuming Gregorius is signed long-term). If he has to move over to shortstop for a few months while Sir Didi rehabs from Tommy John surgery, so be it. There are far more second basemen available than shortstops right now, so Torres at short likely gives the Yankees a better team while Gregorius is out. I wouldn’t sweat it. Gleyber’s natural position is shortstop and he’s picked up second base fairly quickly. Taking advantage of that versatility won’t hurt him.

Ross asks: Given that only better teams are in the postseason, and Rivera’s ridiculous numbers spanning 2 decades, if Mariano Rivera has never pitched a regular season inning, would his postseason performances alone be worthy of Hall of Fame induction?

No. Mariano Rivera is arguably the greatest postseason performer in baseball history, maybe sports history, but it’s still only 141 career postseason innings. And, as a closer, Rivera was largely dependent on his teammates doing their job (i.e. getting a lead or at least keeping it tied) to put him in position to do his job. There is more to life than the postseason. You’ve got to get there first and Rivera helped the Yankees do that! On a rate basis, he is far and away the greatest run preventer in baseball history. If you replaced his 1,283.2 all-time great regular season innings with 1,283.2 league average regular season innings but kept the postseason performance, I wouldn’t give him my Hall of Fame vote. As good as Rivera was in October, it’s not enough to make me disregard everything else.

Chris asks: Hi, isn’t the main reason the Yanks are not going all in for Harper now because they traded for Stanton last year? By acquiring Stanton, the Yanks took on a massive long-term contract for a corner outfielder, which has the effect of crowding out that spot for Harper. In retrospect, wouldn’t the Yanks be a lot better off if they had passed on Stanton last year and signed Harper now?

The main reason the Yankees are not going all-in on Bryce Harper is ownership’s unwillingness to spend at a level commensurate with the team’s market size and revenue. Brett Borzelli put together a post earlier this week showing the Yankees rank near the bottom of the league in percentage of revenue spent on player payroll. They can afford Harper and Giancarlo Stanton (and fit both into the lineup) and choose not too. I know this because the Yankees have run much higher payrolls in the not-too-distant past than the payroll they have right now, and revenue is only going up. (Payroll has come down in the ten years since the new Yankee Stadium opened. How is that okay?)

Stanton’s contract is a convenient excuse not to spend. The luxury tax is a convenient excuse not to spend. That’s all the luxury tax is. It has nothing to do with competitive balance. MLB only pretends to care about that. Nearly half the league isn’t even pretending to be competitive and no one at MLB seems to care. The goal of the luxury tax is to give the owners a higher percentage of revenues and it is working splendidly. To answer the question, I’d rather have Stanton at a $22M luxury tax hit than Harper at a $35M-ish luxury tax hit. But don’t blame Stanton for the Yankees not signing Harper, assuming they don’t sign Harper. It’s on ownership.

One’s already a Yankee. Now the other should be. (Greg Fiume/Getty)

Dan asks: Big fan of Stanton and not sure why so much hate towards the guy…Anyways, what are the chances you see him opting out in 2020? Two years to perform, potential record breaking contracts this offseason and next, but short timing of the new labor agreement, probably unlikely overall, correct?

Right now, with two seasons to go until the opt-out, I don’t think Stanton will use it. He’ll turn 31 that offseason and he’d be walking away from seven years and $218M. (The Yankees are responsible for $188M.) I just can’t see it, even if he has a few more MVP caliber seasons between now and then. Everything happening in baseball right now points to player salaries and payroll coming down, and I don’t think Stanton would risk walking away from that much money. I sure wouldn’t. His opt-out decision is due the offseason before the current Collective Bargaining Agreement expires, so the luxury tax system and everything else will be the same as it is right now. If the opt-out came under the next CBA, then maybe he’d opt out. Right now, I don’t see it, but a lot can change in two years.

Mark asks: Can you explain the qualifying offer? I know it is $17.9m for 2019. But does it count if a team offers $25m for one year? or $36m for 2 years? Or does it have to be the exact $17.9 for only one year?

The qualifying offer is set at the average of the top 125 salaries in baseball each offseason. That was $17.9M this offseason. It’s a straight one-year contract. Teams (or players) can’t continue tacking on years at that average salary, and any other offers — say a one-year offer at $25M — are made independent of the qualifying offer. The qualifying offer is exactly a one-year contract at the average of the top 125 salaries each offseason, and once a player receives the qualifying offer, he can never receive it again. It’s a one-time thing.

Jackson asks: Charlie Morton’s contract is two ($30million)years and a vesting option in the third year for as little as $1million if he spends a lot of time in the DL during the first two years or as much as another $15 million if he stays healthy. For aav purposes, during each of the first two years, does Tampa Bay take an annual hit for: a) $15 (30/2), b) $15.5 (31/2), c) $11.33 (31/3), or d) none picture above? Would option”c” be considered a circumvention of the cap? If not then couldn’t the Yanks, or any team lower aav by putting in a small vesting option at the end of a lengthy term?

This is all hypothetical because the Rays are nowhere close to the luxury tax threshold and luxury tax hits don’t matter to them. They’re all about real dollars. Anyway, the answer is (a). Morton’s vesting option is not a guaranteed contract year and there’s no buyout, so, for luxury tax purposes, this is a straight two-year deal worth $30M, or a $15M luxury tax hit. If the option vests, the Rays will absorb a luxury tax number in that season at whatever salary Morton receives (the vesting option salary is a sliding scale based on days on the disabled list in 2019-20).

There’s no real way to manipulate the luxury tax with option years. A team could try to front-load a contract with an opt-out clause, say, for example, a five year contract worth $50M with this structure:

2019: $23.5M
2020: $23.5M (player can opt-out after the season)
2021: $1M
2022: $1M
2023: $1M

That’s a five-year deal worth $50M with a $10M per year luxury tax hit, but, functionally, it’s a two-year contract at $47M with a three-year, $3M insurance policy. MLB would flag something that blatant as luxury tax circumvention. A vesting option wouldn’t change anything since it’s not a guaranteed contract year for luxury tax purposes. There’s no way to use one to lower the luxury tax hit.

Jon asks: Seems like it could be awkward, but is there any chance Brandon Drury could fill the second base hole? Yankees viewed him exclusively as 3B, but he played plenty of second in AZ.

I don’t see it. Even beyond the whole “have to trade with the Blue Jays to get him back” dynamic, the Yankees did not seem to like Drury at second base. He was crushing the ball in Triple-A when Gleyber Torres went on the disabled list this year and they didn’t try him at second. Drury started four games at second base this past season and that was only to give Neil Walker a breather (or someone else a breather with Walker changing positions) while Gleyber was out injured. I thought the Yankees should’ve used Drury at second base more often but they don’t seem to like him there, so I can’t see them trading with Toronto and then putting him at a position they don’t feel is his best.