Donaldson in 2019

[Enscheff]

We all know 2 things about the Braves:

1. They have had a dumpster fire at 3B since Chipper retired.

2. They don’t shop at the high end of the FA market.

Knowing those 2 facts, it may be odd to see me suggest the Braves should make a run at signing Donaldson next offseason. In fact, I’m usually the one poking fun at folks who suggest the Braves could be going after one of the Top 5 or so FAs.

This is the one case I think there’s a decently strong chance the Braves could be in the running for a top end FA. I’ve been suggesting for about a year now that the Braves could be serious suitors for Donaldson’s decline years. Why Donaldson? Why now?

The obvious answer is that the Braves have finally bottomed out the payroll after the Kemp deal, and they have the spending capacity to add $25M/year player. Using the 20% rule of thumb and a projected $120M-$130M payroll over the near future, the Braves should be able to handle a $25M salary without hampering the rest of the roster too much. Now add in the fact AA knows him well, and the chances tick up another notch.

I’ve thrown around projections like 15 fWAR and $150M as figures I see likely for his production over the next contract Donaldson signs that pretty much carries him through the rest of his career. This Jays blog just did an excellent job projecting Donaldson’s decline years based on the various components of his game (ignore their insistence on spelling it “defence”): http://jaysfromthecouch.com/2017/12...projecting-josh-donaldsons-next-five-seasons/

Their final projection for his decline years is basically what I suggested: 11-17 fWAR with a value of $100M-$150M.

This analysis projects him spending time at DH, which obviously won’t happen with the Braves, but the plan with the Braves will likely be for him to slide over to 1B for the last 1-2 years of the deal after Freeman leaves for a monster FA deal. In that scenario Donaldson will produce a little more fWAR due to playing defense.

In conclusion, I think signing Donaldson to a 5/140 or 6/150 deal is not only a real possibility for the Braves, it is one I would fully support.

 

[thewupk]

I suppose it fully depends how the rest of the team does in 2018 to see where the Braves stand in terms of being competitive. But if all goes as planned then 2019 does seem like the season to start making that push for the playoffs. Get a good FA signing and trade some prospect capital to hopefully get another good player at below market value. Donaldson has always seem like a good target as he should still be good but not break the bank like Machado/Harper.

 

[thethe]

I'd rather break the bank on harper. If it's 40M a year then so be it. I don't want to give 30+ year Olds big money in FA.

 

[Enscheff]

I'd rather break the bank on harper. If it's 40M a year then so be it. I don't want to give 30+ year Olds big money in FA.

Giving $150M to Donaldson with an AAV of $25M is plausible, but still not very likely.

Giving $400M+ to Harper with an AAV of $40M is not even a remote possibility.

The Yankees and Dodgers just spent the last 2 months bending over backwards to reset their luxury tax penalties. They did so for one reason: to sign mega FAs next offseason.

The Braves will not be outbidding the Dodgers, Yankees, Phillies and maybe Cubs or Astros for Harper or Machado.

 

[thethe]

Giving $150M to Donaldson with an AAV of $25M is plausible, but still not very likely.

Giving $400M+ to Harper with an AAV of $40M is not even a remote possibility.

The Yankees and Dodgers just spent the last 2 months bending over backwards to reset their luxury tax penalties. They did so for one reason: to sign mega FAs next offseason.

The Braves will not be outbidding the Dodgers, Yankees, Phillies and maybe Cubs or Astros for Harper or Machado.

I get your logic and it obviously holds merit. I would not make a decision giving a 30+ year old along term contract at 20+M per year. Playing with fire in that situation.

While it's highly remote to sign Harper long term the braves will technically have the flexibility as long as the pitching develops as many think it will. It would kill our monetary flexibility but I think it's possible to fit under a 120-140M payroll where a large portion is cheap for the next 5 years

 

[thewupk]

I get your logic and it obviously holds merit. I would not make a decision giving a 30+ year old along term contract at 20+M per year. Playing with fire in that situation.

While it's highly remote to sign Harper long term the braves will technically have the flexibility as long as the pitching develops as many think it will. It would kill our monetary flexibility but I think it's possible to fit under a 120-140M payroll where a large portion is cheap for the next 5 years

Harper is going to sign a huge deal. He will be making ~40 million well into his 30's. So instead of a 30+ year old making 25 we would have one making 40 million.

 

[thethe]

I would give him a buyout at 30 years of age and front load the money a bit while we have a cheap core.

Personally I think Harper will be a great hitter until his late 30s so I wouldn't mind paying him

 

[thethe]

Meant option

 

[Enscheff]

I would give him a buyout at 30 years of age and front load the money a bit while we have a cheap core.

Personally I think Harper will be a great hitter until his late 30s so I wouldn't mind paying him

You mean an opt out?

Were you paying attention to just how much value a player loses when they have an opt out clause in their contract during the Stanton fiasco?

Folks who think giving a player an opt out clause is somehow going to be a win for the team are...wrong, to put it as nicely as possible. This notion they somehow benefit the team is comical, and it’s strange that it still persists in contract discussions.

The Braves are not going to sign Harper or Machado.

 

[thethe]

You mean an opt out?

Were you paying attention to just how much value a player loses when they have an opt out clause in their contract during the Stanton fiasco?

Folks who think giving a player an opt out clause is somehow going to be a win for the team are...wrong, to put it as nicely as possible. This notion they somehow benefit the team is comical, and it’s strange that it still persists in contract discussions.

The Braves are not going to sign Harper or Machado.

Why would we care about his value? The plan wouldn't be to eventually trade him.

 

[Enscheff]

Why would we care about his value? The plan wouldn't be to eventually trade him.

Do we really have to go over why an opt out is bad value for a team again?

The whole “limit the upside while assuming all the downside risk” still isn’t clear?

 

[nsacpi]

grow your own stars...use payroll to plug in gaps with competent productive players

that should be the mantra of any small or mid market team

pass on Donaldson

pass on Harper

pass on Machado

 

[Enscheff]

grow your own stars...use payroll to plug in gaps with competent productive players

that should be the mantra of any small or mid market team

pass on Donaldson

pass on Harper



pass on Machado

Agreed.

I don’t see Donaldson as particularly likely, but he is the only impact FA signing that is at least plausible for the Braves.

 

[thethe]

Do we really have to go over why an opt out is bad value for a team again?

The whole “limit the upside while assuming all the downside risk” still isn’t clear?

But it would be more about taking advantage of our payroll flexibility in the next 5 years. You offer him 40+ annually until he is 30 and lower it to 30M for another 5-7 years. THe idea is that it incentives him to use the option and get another contract at a higher AAV during that span. For the Braves they get prime Harper and effectively leverage their payroll flexibility. If he doesn't exercise the option they still have a top 5-10 hitter of all time throughout his 30's where he will still be elite.

 

[thethe]

grow your own stars...use payroll to plug in gaps with competent productive players

that should be the mantra of any small or mid market team

pass on Donaldson

pass on Harper

pass on Machado

Right now we are lucky we have two potential home grown stars. Not sure we can bank on that as a blanket strategy though.

 

[BeanieAntics]

Right now we are lucky we have two potential home grown stars. Not sure we can bank on that as a blanket strategy though.

How many stars do you need on a team? Right now it looks like we have Freeman for sure, Ozzie with a good chance, and Acuna with a good chance. We also have Gohara and a few more pitching prospects that should provide high value off the mound. Do we need to fill the other positions with stars? I think the better route would be to surround those guys with guys who will provide solid value for low to mid range contracts. Guys like Ender are perfect. Say what you want about missed opportunities during the rebuild, but we are set up to have several very talented and very cheap pieces for a good while. Instead of squandering an insane portion of that flexibility on one player, I think the better route would be to look for the best value possible on the market and maintain as much financial flexibility as possible. Having almost half our payroll tied in to 2 players (Freeman and Harper) is just a bad idea.

To be fair, though, I don't think I like the idea of Donaldson either.

 

[Horsehide Harry]

grow your own stars...use payroll to plug in gaps with competent productive players

that should be the mantra of any small or mid market team

pass on Donaldson

pass on Harper

pass on Machado

I've been pushing a modified version of this for the last three years. I wanted the Braves to shed as much money as possible and trade everyone possible for as much top end young talent as possible. Then you don't have any veteran payroll heading into 2019 but DO have (assuming the FO is worth anything at drafting, signing IFA, raiding other teams farms through trade, playing smart on the rule 5 and waiver wire) then coincide the first wave of young talent with a couple of top end FA signings, front loading their deals so that when the young talent begins to get expensive the older talent is becoming less expensive and/or is coming off the books altogether.

I think the 20% rule is a good rule for teams operating in a conventional way - ie. a team made up of a few youngsters, a big group of ML veterans in various stages of their contracts and arbitration, then whatever FA you sign.

OTOH, if the vast majority of the team is making near ML minimum and will be controlled for the next 4-6 years, then it gives you a bit of cost certainty to play at the higher end of the market. That all assumes that the youngsters are good enough to be attractive from a W/L standpoint for veterans to want to be a part of it.

It's somewhat the way the 90's Braves dynasty was built.

 

[nsacpi]

Right now we are lucky we have two potential home grown stars. Not sure we can bank on that as a blanket strategy though.

There is no guarantee obviously. But the preferred path forward imo is to see if we can develop an homegrown core. The Elite Six to me are likely to be Freeman, Inciarte, Albies, Acuna, Gohara and Soroka. We need to be patient. It is our best chance for having a long window of contention.

 

[nsacpi]

OTOH, if the vast majority of the team is making near ML minimum and will be controlled for the next 4-6 years, then it gives you a bit of cost certainty to play at the higher end of the market. That all assumes that the youngsters are good enough to be attractive from a W/L standpoint for veterans to want to be a part of it.

I think we will have some financial flexibility starting next off-season. But we have to be careful how we play it. I am interested in guys on 2-3 year deals rather than 5+. This would allow us to retain flexibility to hold on to as much of the homegrown core as possible as they get expensive. Obviously you are not going to sign top end free agents on 2-3 year deals. But we can trade for some pretty good players that have that much time left on their contracts. Some of them could be relatively inexpensive in terms of prospects if there is not much expected surplus value left in those contracts.

As an example, if we decide we need a third baseman next off-season, I'd rather trade for Eugenio Suarez (who will have two more years of contractual control left) than try to sign Donaldson or Machado. I'd offer the Reds a choice of Teheran/Folty/Newcomb. Presumably one or two of them will have done something in 2018 that will make them a good "trade high" candidate. Bring in one of Wright/Soroka/Allard to replace whoever we trade away in the rotation. Rinse and repeat when it comes to acquiring a left fielder.

 

[Hudson2]

There is no guarantee obviously. But the preferred path forward imo is to see if we can develop an homegrown core. The Elite Six to me are likely to be Freeman, Inciarte, Albies, Acuna, Gohara and Soroka. We need to be patient. It is our best chance for having a long window of contention.

I’d add Wright to that group to. With his pitch arsenal he should be a 1 or 2.