FA Pitchers

Suppose we sign someone like Price. There are various scenarios about the contract. Scherzer got 210M over 7 years. I'm guessing Price would command the same. Maybe backloaded like Scherzer.

Let's look at a backloaded scenario. Effectively, this would mark a reversal of what the team has done so far. For example in the Johnson-Swisher-Bourn trade we sacrificed some of the 2016 budget to free up money for 2017. Signing Price to a backloaded deal would allow us to add more than the 4 WAR that I'm assuming we can get for 25-30M. It would improve the team from one that currently projects 75-80 wins to one that projects to win 80-85 games in 2016. There is a cost of course to a backloaded deal which is that you get less bang for the buck in subsequent years.

Even in a non-backloaded scenario, the best bang for the buck comes in the early years before the aging curve starts to catch up to Price. So maybe it is a bargain in 2016-2017, neutral in 2018-2019 and a drag on the teams changes in the last 2 or 3 years. A non-backloaded deal would also imply that virtually all of our spare budget would be tied up in Price. To create any additional budget we would have to deal away some players making meaningful salaries.

It could also be that I'm underestimating how much spare budget we have in 2016. So signing Price might leave us with some additional money to spend. In a scenario where we have more money, the question has to be asked whether we would be better off spending that kind of money on a hitter or spreading it out in a different way rather than going for Price.
 
To me the only FA pitcher worth spending money on is Price.

If we lose out on him, I wouldn't be opposed to some gamble signings and hope for a rebound

There's some good quality in the depth so if we lose out on number 1, I'd look at number 6 later in the offseason.
 
I think a backloaded contract is a bad idea for the team right now unless the payroll is going to jump to 150 million in 2017 and stay that high. 5-6 years from now is when the current rookies are going to be hitting free agency and others that come up in the next few years will be in arbitration. I really like the idea of signing Greinke or Price as I think both will be aces for the foreseeable future but I dont like the idea of going beyond 5 years. I would offer something like 5 years 150 million with a team option for 30 million and a 10 million buyout. So either 5 years 150 million or 6 years 170 million. That might not be the most overall money but it might be more per year than anyone else offers.
 
I'm looking forward to another offseason where folks insist on cooking up insane scenarios that allow the Braves to sign a guy they have no hope of signing.
 
There are quite a few things to like about Leake. He is relatively young for someone hitting free agency (27). He had success in a hitters ballpark. He has a high ground ball rate. He isn't a big strikeout pitcher, but has consistently produced strikeout to walk ratios around 3 to 1. He has command of five pitches (fastball, cutter, curve, slider, change). And his velocity has been stable to up slightly in recent years. If we can get him for 12M/year or less on a 3 year deal with an option, it would be a pretty good signing.
 
nsacpi said:
There are quite a few things to like about Leake. He is relatively young for someone hitting free agency (27). He had success in a hitters ballpark. He has a high ground ball rate. He isn't a big strikeout pitcher, but has consistently produced strikeout to walk ratios around 3 to 1. He has command of five pitchers (fastball, cutter, curve, slider, change). And his velocity has been stable to up slightly in recent years. If we can get him for 12M/year or less on a 3 year deal with an option, it would be a pretty good signing.
Click to expand...

I think Leake would be a pretty damned good building block.
 
Latos is another one hitting free agency while relatively young (27). He has a bigger arm than Leake and better strikeout numbers. Also a career strikeout to walk rate of about 3 to 1. Not as much as a ground ball pitcher as Leake. I'd be interested in him on similar contractual terms as Leake.
 
I'd do flips for Latos at $12-14MM per year. He has the best chance of being an absolute steal IMO.
 
nsacpi said:
There are quite a few things to like about Leake. He is relatively young for someone hitting free agency (27). He had success in a hitters ballpark. He has a high ground ball rate. He isn't a big strikeout pitcher, but has consistently produced strikeout to walk ratios around 3 to 1. He has command of five pitches (fastball, cutter, curve, slider, change). And his velocity has been stable to up slightly in recent years. If we can get him for 12M/year or less on a 3 year deal with an option, it would be a pretty good signing.
Click to expand...

I like Leake a lot as well, but I think he's going to be a lot more than 12M a year. There's also a very good chance he stays with the Giants.
 
yeezus said:
I'd do flips for Latos at $12-14MM per year. He has the best chance of being an absolute steal IMO.
Click to expand...

Latos is a realistic option. If we can talk him into a 2-3 year deal to build his value up and hit the market again at 30 he'd make a lot of sense.
 
yeezus said:
I'd do flips for Latos at $12-14MM per year. He has the best chance of being an absolute steal IMO.
Click to expand...

Latos has more upside than Leake. He had a reputation as a flake in his first couple years in San Diego, but seems to have matured.
 
Chico said:
I like Leake a lot as well, but I think he's going to be a lot more than 12M a year. There's also a very good chance he stays with the Giants.
Click to expand...

I think Leake tops out at $16MM per. He may sign a deal that has him getting that by the end of it, too. Like $12, 12, 14, 16, 16 or something - I could see that. I doubt he gets an AAV of $16MM, but I think it's possible for the high-end. $12MM is also possible to me.
 
nsacpi said:
Latos has more upside than Leake. He had a reputation as a flake in his first couple years in San Diego, but seems to have matured.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I knew he had some maturity issues.
Then again, didn't Leake get in trouble for stealing, or something?
 
Last off-season, the going rate for starting pitchers was about $6M per projected WAR. Some got a bit more, others less, but that was about the mid-point of the free agent contracts. I don't see that changing much this off-season given the glut of starting pitching on the market. I think Leake and Latos will both be priced as 2 WAR/year pitchers, maybe a little more. Now of course the idea is to identify a pitcher who will do a little better than the market consensus. And I think both Leake and Latos are good candidates to do that. But if we are patient and avoid the idea that we need to sign a particular pitcher, I think we can get a pretty good one at 6M per projected WAR.
 
Seems like Latos has really struggled recently though... I wonder if its just temporary or there's something more there.
 
Sticking with the L's, there is another pitcher with a somewhat different profile that I like as well. John Lackey. He is older (36). With him I'd be willing to do 2 years with an option. His velocity has been remarkably consistent since he came back from TJ surgery (which caused him to miss 2012). He has shown an ability to do well in big games. Has a little bit of a rep for being a jerk at times. But no one doubts his toughness and competitiveness. I do wonder if after pitching in the WS for the Red Sox and being on a very good Cardinals team he would consider a team in our current situation. Would be worth finding out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top