Can the M’s Upgrade Their Rotation?
Yes, I mean, the answer to that is pretty straightforward. WILL they is a bit trickier, and doesn’t lend itself to clear, definitive answers. And after years of doing this, I’m drawn to definitive answers, as nothing else in this forward-looking, saber-y, projections-and-stuff blog leads to them.
But we can’t just leave the post there; we’re going to have to wallow around in the much of “will they?” and laugh about it in a few weeks once the definitive answer comes. The past two to four weeks have helped to shake things out, not just the teams who might be vying with the M’s to buy talent (welcome, Oakland), but the types of players each team may want to acquire. The shift in the way they acquire players is clearer now, too. The M’s have traded just about everyone save for their last two first-rounders, and without marquee names to move, the M’s strategy has been more about taking on salary. That’s not a critique, by the way. The M’s have a barrier, and they’ve been creative in surmounting it. The M’s got Mike Leake and cash for a so-so prospect because St. Louis, flush with a bunch of prospect arms, wanted the payroll flexibility. When the M’s wanted to acquire a set up man, they got Alex Colome in part by giving up Andrew Moore, but also by taking on Denard Span’s contract (and have watched Span outperform Colome quite handily). The M’s big names – especially Kyle Lewis – have red flags now, so setting aside the fact that the M’s would be loath to trade away a potential star for a rental, Kyle Lewis might not get it done. But the team has money, and if they’re serious about giving themselves the best chance to win in 2018, they could spend it. With Manny Machado finally moving (to the Dodgers), Deadline season is well and truly upon us. Will they M’s be a part of it, or did they shoot their shot back in May?
There’s a problem here, though. The M’s – like most teams – would like to stay below the self-imposed luxury tax threshold, which is at $197 million this year, and rises to $206 million next year. The M’s aren’t in serious danger of exceeding it this year, but they’ve actually committed more money than any team in the division for 2019. That is, they start planning for 2019 with over $125 million in guaranteed expenses, way more than the Astros (under $80 M), the A’s (of course), and more than the Angels, the team with Albert Pujols on a back-loaded deal through 2021. This has given the M’s stability; with the exception of Nelson Cruz, a big chunk of the M’s talent is under contract for years to come. But it means the M’s may see constraints on how much they can add in future years.* All of that to say that, just as the M’s have limitations in marketable prospects, they have limitations (perhaps self-imposed) on the kinds of multi-year contracts they can take on, too.
Another limitation in this year where parity up and died is supply. There are a *lot* of downright awful teams out there, but the problem is that these teams already shed tradeable talent; it’s why they’re awful! Teams like, say, the Marlins don’t have pitchers (or hitters) under long-term contracts now. They shed their biggest over the winter in the Giancarlo Stanton trade. They can get a mint for JT Realmuto now, and the M’s could probably use him, but they’re not going to be serious players for guys with multiple arb years remaining. That’s why the M’s haven’t been connected with Michael Fulmer, the Tigers hurler who may net Detroit a big prospect haul: the rebuilding Tigers want premium prospects for a guy like that. The same may be true for teams like the Twins who have a couple of starting pitchers on one-year pillow contracts. The lack of long term commitments mean the contract itself is affordable to every team in MLB, meaning it may be harder (but not impossible) for the M’s to compete. The M’s best shot at acquiring a starter or impact reliever is to take on a big free agent contract, but that’s hard to find on teams that are already well out of the race.
Learning from the most recent Rays trade, the M’s could compete for one player by taking on another’s contract, too. That would push their offer up the list with many teams, but that runs into another constraint. I’m assuming here that the M’s want to at least explore an extension for Nelson Cruz. He’s been, by just about any measure, one of the most important, successful free agent acquisitions the M’s have ever made. If he’d sign a two-year deal here, I think the M’s would try to move heaven and earth to make it work – he’s been instrumental in fostering the team’s positive culture as well as hitting loads of dingers. But taking on too many contracts now would make that more difficult. I don’t think it’s impossible, but it’s a constraint that the M’s are no doubt aware of.
So what to do?
1: Get Cole Hamels+
Hamels will be a free agent at the end of the year, and while Ryan Divish pooh-poohs the idea here, he’d be a good fit. He’d be a huge boost to the M’s rotation in a playoff series, especially if James Paxton pitches in the wild card game. He wouldn’t imperil any deal for Nellie, as his 2019 option is only $6 M. And without years and years of club control, the Rangers can’t really expect big-time prospects in exchange for Hamels, who’s currently having a so-so season.
But if Hamels won’t get MUCH, he’ll still drive a decent return. I can’t imagine the M’s would give up Evan White/Kyle Lewis for two months+ of Hamels, but then, I don’t know the M’s thinking on what the proper balance is between “win at all costs in 2018” and “we can be good in 2019, too.” There’s a way to get Hamels without giving up too much, though. Get Shin-Soo Choo, too. Choo’s having a great year, but is owed another $42 million through 2020. I imagine the Rangers wouldn’t mind off-loading that commitment, and that Choo would waive his limited no-trade deal (not sure if Seattle’s on his list of blocked teams) to come back to the area he lived in for years. A year ago, Choo’s salary looked like dead money. This year, that’s much less true. As such, taking on an aging Choo for ~$50 million may not be seen as such a big offer. But the Rangers are now in a full-on rebuild, as Hamels and Beltre could both by free agents this winter. Where would the M’s play Choo? They already have an All-Star at DH *and* RF, Choo’s two positions. Moving him to 1B would block the one spot the M’s could use Robinson Cano at, especially if they don’t want to yo-yo Dee Gordon back to CF. But hey, that’s for Scott Servais to figure out.
Cost in talent: Moderate
Cost in 2019-2021 contracts: $6M option buy-out; $20 M 2019 option.
Likelihood: 10%
2: Take on Jordan Zimmermann’s deal
It made so much sense at the time. Jordan Zimmermann had been remarkably consistent as a National, and thus his 5 year, $110 million deal with Detroit seemed a good fit for the win-now Tigers. Almost immediately, everything fell apart: Miguel Cabrera faltered, Victor Martinez got hurt/fell off a cliff, and Zimmermann himself started to struggle at the big league level. His K rate plunged, and with it his strand rate. It had been above 74% in every full year in DC, but it’s never been terribly close to 70% in Detroit. Despite their commitment to Cabrera, the Tigers seem set to selling everything off, including Michael Fulmer, who won’t even reach arbitration until next season. If they’d rather have prospects than pay Fulmer a comparative pittance, then they’d probably love to escape the last two-plus years of their commitment to Zimmermann.
Importantly for the M’s, Zimmermann is actually starting to pitch well again. His strikeouts are back, and his command’s improved. The problem is that he’s been hit hard by injuries over the past few years, and apparently got a “nerve-blocking injection” in his neck over the All-Star break, which sounds like fun. Still, we’re talking about an All-Star caliber pitcher who probably won’t command a lot in trade as long as the M’s are willing to take on most/all of his deal. He’s owed more than Choo, so this could interfere with their pursuit not only of Cruz, but several other players who’ll become available in the 2018-19 off-season – guys like Hamels, JA Happ, and the one-year contract folks like Jake Odorizzi.
More importantly, this would require some serious input from the M’s coaching AND training staff. Can Mel Jr. help Zimmermann continue to do whatever it is that enabled these promising 2018 results? Can the M’s keep him relatively healthy through 2020? Unless the M’s know exactly what changes he’s made and how to help coach him, I think they stay away. If they see something they could work with, this would be an interesting move, and it wouldn’t be a rental contract of the sort Divish reports the M’s owners hate.
Cost in talent: Moderate/low
Cost in 2019-2021 contracts: Moderate/high
Likelihood: 15%
3: It’s Happ-ening dot gif
Since last we saw JA Happ, he’s enjoyed a remarkable late-career renaissance, first in Pittsburgh immediately after leaving the M’s, and then again in Toronto. Happ started his career as a fairly average pitcher in terms of strikeouts, but he always had some annoying control issues. Towards the end of his first stint in Toronto, something seemed to click, like he was poised to unlock some bat-missing strategy, but we never really saw that in Seattle. Instead, he settled back in as a perfectly reasonable (if boring) low K middle of the rotation guy. Traded at the deadline, he went to Pittsburgh and instantly struck out more than a batter an inning while cutting his walk rate. After being in the high teens/low 20s in K%, he shot up to 27%+ in what was admittedly a small sample. It was large enough that the Blue Jays signed him to a three year deal, though, and while his K rate fell back to earth initially, it’s over 26% for 2018, good for a K/9 of 9.99, which is stunning even taking into account the whiff-prone era we’re in. Happ is no longer a bottom-of-the-rotation guy.
That’s a blessing and, if you’re an M’s fan, something of a curse. Happ’s in the last few months of his three year deal; he can walk away at the end of the year. Because of that, his contract is cheap enough for any team to take on. That’s going to make talent in terms of prospects the key determinant of where Happ finishes the year. Who can offer more? Well, the Yankees apparently want pitching, and they’ve got more brand-name prospects to offer Toronto. So too could one of the NL contenders, like Philadelphia, who lost out on the Machado sweepstakes. It’s too bad, because Happ makes a lot of sense in Seattle, which is why he’s been linked to the M’s in trade chatter. It just seems like other teams could fit better, especially if the M’s don’t want to give up one of their few premium prospects for a rental.
Cost in talent: Moderate
Cost in 2019-2021 contracts: 0
Likelihood: 10%
4: Nate Eovaldi? Nate Eovaldi.
Nate Eovaldi of the Rays is like Happ, but with the risk and reward amped up. The oft-injured fireballer has thrown 51 IP this year, and none in 2017 as he rehabbed from surgery. He tantalizes with plus velocity and a four-pitch mix, but the results have always lagged behind the scouting reports. Still, what he’s shown in very limited duty this year make him intriguing as a short-term boost to a rotation. He’s throwing more of his secondaries and relying less on his straight-but-speedy fastball, and his K:BB ratio has never been better.
All of that’s true, but his overall season line (again, 51 IP) is right in line with his frustrating career marks. Sure, much of that has to do with his last start, a 2 2/3 IP disaster that saw him give up 8 runs to the Twins, of all people. But on the other hand, the hot streak that saw him shoot up trade target boards was really based on just his three starts before *that*. Small samples are always intriguing, but his career numbers don’t scream “maybe trade your top prospect for this?”
Again, this is the type of pitcher who would be an interesting risk if the bidding comes in lower than expected (8 runs to the Twins?) AND if the M’s coaches have some sort of a plan to improve upon the intriguing raw material that Eovaldi represents. If there’s a mechanical or repertoire change to make, or a change in his delivery to amp his deception, sure, maybe you go for it. Failing that, it seems like a massive risk to ask a frustratingly inconsistent starter to add consistency to your rotation. That hasn’t stopped the M’s from exploring the idea, and I’m glad they’re doing so. I just don’t see it happening, despite the history of deals between these two clubs.
Cost in talent: Moderate
Cost on 2019-2021 contracts: 0
Likelihood: 15%
I get that it feels gross to even worry about contracts. I get that it’s silly to get too fixated on prospects at the expense of putting the best possible team on the field right now. But while there has to be some sort of balance, the M’s are very clearly in win-now mode. They can make a splash in this market if they want to give up Lewis plus some of their relief arms, but given the returns we’ve seen for Machado and now Brad Hand/Adam Cimber (a big-time, high-minors, top-50 hitting prospect+), sprinkling Warrens and Festas over the proposal may not be enough. The question is are they willing to give up Kyle Lewis?
* The M’s CAN exceed the threshold, of course. Depending on exactly how the hypothetical contracts worked out, it might make sense to blow past it for one year, without triggering the larger penalties meted out to teams who exceed it three straight years.
Comments
7 Responses to “Can the M’s Upgrade Their Rotation?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Marc, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Hamel’s buyout is for 6 million. The option is 20 million. He even has a 24 million dollar vesting option.
I would certainly love to see Zimmerman show up in a M’s jersey.
Here’s another interesting question:
Who are we sitting down?
Marco : 10-5 3.41
Leblanc: 5-1 3.63
Paxton: 8-5 3.70
Leake: 8-6 4.22
Felix: 8-7 5.15
It’s weird because the staff has never felt as good as these (admittedly non-saberfriendly) numbers show.
Is this team really going to send King Felix to the pen to fling Eovaldi or one of the expensive options into the backend of the rotation. Is that what we want as fans?
This is an organization that let Griffey sleep on their bench, brought back Ichiro basically to retire a Mariner, and starts the reanimated corpse of Dave Valle as their starting 27 (!) year old catcher.
(Holy cow, Zunino is already 27. Thats the scariest stat of all.)
Regardless, It’s a lot easier for the Mariners to admit they need rotation help than its going to be for them to admit Felix Hernandez is not having a season worth of being in the rotation.
I feel sick just typing out that sentence.
According to Cot’s Baseball Contracts, Zimmermann has a full no-trade clause through the end of this season. Easy to think he would be willing to waive it to get out of Detroit.
In terms of what it would cost us to acquire him, not sure. Maybe Vogelbach + low-level filler? I would think they’d just be happy to unload his contract
Chris Tillman was DFAd today by Baltimore.
Steve –
Isn’t that what I wrote? If you want Hamels option, it’s $20M. If you want to buy out the option, it’s $6M.
NotfromBoise –
No need to sit anyone; they’ve already said they want to move to a 6-man rotation in part to manage Marco’s innings. Given the number of DL trips between Pax/Felix, I imagine they’ll need more than 6 anyway.
Barnard –
I’m thinking Vogie + filler would be fine. I was hoping for more like the Mike Leake deal – the M’s got cash added, and all they gave up was a low-level SS.
Grayfox –
Yes, yes he was. In general, I’m all for kicking the tires on ex-Orioles, just because I think their pitching instruction is non-existent to downright harmful. That said, the combination of gut-churning results and reduced stuff tells me it’s not worth it. Who’s development time does he take away from (never mind rotation spot)? No, there’s no one super important at Tacoma, but I just don’t see a fit.
Dipoto today talked about focusing more on situational relievers, so get ready for Zach Britton rumors! To me, if it’s a situational righty they want, why not try Wyatt Mills? I can’t quite imagine spending anything in talent to get a ROOGY, esp. given the delta between an available ROOGY and Mills can’t be too big.
According to Dipoto he is looking for someone to eat innings not necessarily to replace anyone. Erasmo just pitched 2 innings in Tacoma. 23 pitches/19strikes. 2FO/1GO/3K’s. If he is healthy????
Sorry Marc, I didn’t understand. I thought you were suggesting he was affordable with an option at 6 million. I needed to see “buyout”.