October 29th, 2020: Options, World Series, Rule Changes, Mailbag

Offseason Plan update: It will be published Monday. I want to see the options decisions around the league (most are due tomorrow) as well as free agent contract predictions from MLBTR and FanGraphs crowdsourcing just to make sure I’m in the ballpark. Thanks as always for reading and your support. Now here are Friday morning's thoughts Thursday night (I'm going to be busy tomorrow and did want y'all to wait around).

1. Hand and Wong options declined. Most option decisions are due tomorrow, including Zack Britton’s and Brett Gardner’s, but other teams around the league have gotten a head start on things. Some option decisions were expected, like the Mariners declining Dee Strange-Gordon’s $14M option. Others were not, like the Cardinals declining Kolten Wong’s $12.5M option and Cleveland declining Brad Hand’s $10M option. Those were shockers.

A few things about that. One, the Wong and Hand decisions are further indications this will be a rough winter for free agents. They are good-to-great players worth the salaries that were declined. That their teams declined the options rather than pick them up and try to trade them is telling. They weren’t willing to risk getting stuck with them. There are only a few ways to shed salary in this game and declining options is one of them. The Cardinals and Cleveland weren’t willing to pass this up. Can’t be a good sign for free agency.

Two, Wong is an elite defender at a hard-to-fill position and he’s a consistent .350 OBP guy. Not a star but a solid player, and for me, he’s Plan B should DJ LeMahieu sign elsewhere. The gap between Plan A and Plan B is massive, but yeah, I’ll take Wong at his likely price over any other free agent middle infielder (Didi Gregorius, Andrelton Simmons, etc.) at their likely price. I want the Yankees to re-sign LeMahieu. Short of that, Wong is the top option in free agency.

Three, Cleveland technically put Hand on waivers. They haven’t officially declined his option yet because they’re hoping some other team claims him so they don't have to pay his $1M buyout. Sheesh. Wild Card Series Game 2 blown save aside, Hand is still one of the top relievers in the game, and right now he’s available on waivers. Claim him, pick up the option, and you have an elite reliever on a one-year deal worth $10M. Crazy.

Cleveland is not a stupid organization. If they put Hand on waivers and are willing to lose him for nothing, they surely shopped him around first and were willing to take whatever they could get in return, but no trade came together. Similar to Blake Treinen last year, teams know Hand will soon be available for nothing but cash, so why trade for him? Had Cleveland picked up the option, they would’ve had some leverage, but they weren’t willing to do that.

Four, the Yankees absolutely should claim Hand -- they’ve had interest in him at various points, most notably at the 2019 trade deadline -- but I don’t expect it with payroll coming down. They might try to sign him as a free agent and I hope they do. I just don’t think the Yankees (or any team) will claim Hand and pick up the option. Everything points to a slow free agent market and that means bargains will be out there, even with great players.

Five, Hand’s option being declined suggests Britton is overpriced at $13M a year. They are both excellent lefty relievers but Hand is more than two years younger, and a smart (albeit cheap) team just walked away rather than pay him $10M next year. Their 2019-20 numbers real quick:

They go about it in different ways -- Britton is the game’s preeminent ground ball pitcher and Hand is a more traditional strikeout reliever -- but they’re both excellent. The market just told us Hand is not worth $10M. Does that mean Britton is not worth $13M? It’s pretty easy to connect the dots with these two. The younger pitcher is heading for free agency.

The Yankees have to decide on Britton’s two-year, $27M club option today, and over the last few weeks I’ve assumed the Yankees would pick it up. Now I’m not so sure. Britton can fall back on his one-year, $13M player option, but declining the two-year club option allows the Yankees to avoid paying him $14M in 2022, his age 34 season. And, if they decline their option and Britton tests free agency, Hand represents a viable alternative. Britton would no longer be the clear cut top reliever on the market. Hand’s situation complicated the Britton option decision, me thinks.

UPDATE: Andy Martino reports the Yankees have exercised Britton's option. Britton seems to have confirmed it himself.

And six, it’s probably going to be tough to trade Adam Ottavino and his $9M salary if Hand was deemed too rich at $10M. This isn’t an apples-to-apples comparison because Hand was a few days away from free agency when Cleveland shopped him, and that isn’t the case with Ottavino. You want him? You have to trade for him. There’s no waiting to sign him. But, why would you trade for Ottavino when Hand is sitting in free agency? (Because you missed out on him, duh.)

The Yankees shouldn’t trade Ottavino just to trade him, but among their seven guaranteed contracts, he’s the most tradeable. He has the least money remaining (attractive to other teams) and he’s the easiest to replace (helpful for the Yankees). Hand’s option being declined suggests there may not be a big market for Ottavino though, at least not unless the Yankees eat a bunch of money, and what’s the sense in paying a good reliever to pitch for another team?

Cleveland’s decision to buy out Hand has a domino effect on the Yankees (Hand is available, Britton’s option, Ottavino’s trade value, etc.), but mostly, the Hand decision and Wong decision are further evidence this is going to be a painfully slow and penny-pinching offseason. Payrolls are going to come down and we’re starting to see teams put their cost-cutting plans into action, even though it's costing them good players.

2. World Series thoughts. The Dodgers are World Series champs. They were the best team in baseball on paper coming into the season and they were the best team in baseball on the field during the season. The Dodgers do everything the Rays do and are everything the Rays are, just with better players. They are what the Yankees should be.

There aren’t many Yankees ties to that Dodgers team. Only a few Dodgers 40-man roster players and personnel spent time in pinstripes:

• Outfielder Terrance Gore (spent a few weeks with Triple-A Scranton in 2019)
• Bullpen coach Josh Bard (Aaron Boone’s bench coach from 2018-19)
• Pitching coach Mark Prior (spent 2011 in the Yankees’ minor league system)
• Bench coach Bob Geren (played for the Yankees from 1988-91)

I’m happy Clayton Kershaw got a ring to complete his legacy (he was great in the postseason too) and I’m happy Mookie Betts made the Red Sox look even worse than they already looked. Here are a few quick thoughts on the World Series and the postseason in general now that it’s over.

Postseason offense

Teams averaged 4.65 runs per game and 1.28 home runs per game during the regular season. What do you think those numbers were in the postseason? I’ll tell you: 4.40 runs per game and 1.50 homers per game. Fewer runs but more homers. That continues a trend that has existed since Wild Card play began in 1995.

Because run scoring goes down in the postseason but the homer rate goes up, the long ball is incredibly important in October. It’s damn near impossible to win without them. Michael Kay will spend another 162 games next season saying you can’t rely on homers in the postseason, but don’t listen to him. Homers are exactly what you should rely on.

Arozarena’s records

Randy Arozarena will either be the next big star or the greatest one-hit wonder in MLB history. Or, most likely, he’ll settle in and be something in the middle. Good, but not as good as he was in October, because no one’s true talent is a 53.6% HR/FB rate. That’s insane.

Arozarena set several counting stat records this postseason but he did have the benefit of more games. He batted 86 times this October, tied with 1997 Omar Vizquel for the most plate appearances in a single postseason. Here are Arozarena’s records and the previous record holder:

• 10 homers (several tied for second with eight in 56-80 plate appearances)
• 64 total bases (David Freese had 50 in 71 plate appearances in 2011)
• 29 hits (Pablo Sandoval had 26 in 78 plate appearances in 2014)

With MLB likely to expand the postseason permanently, many postseason records will fall in the coming years, the same way postseason records fell in the mid-to-late-1990s after the Wild Card was introduced. Derek Jeter and Bernie Williams are all over the single-season and career postseason leaderboards. Lots of records are going to fall in the coming years and that’s fine. The game changed, and we can still appreciate things that were accomplished in the past.

Tampa’s biggest problem this postseason was that Arozarena had no help. He hit .377/.442/.831 in their 20 postseason games and the rest of the Rays hit .189/.268/.345. It’s a miracle they got as far as they did. Credit their pitching. It’s annoying the rest of the Rays stunk so bad and the Yankees still weren’t able to beat them.

Pulling Snell

I understand the logic. I do. Just about every pitcher performs worse the third time through the order, including Blake Snell (especially this year), and the Rays are all about giving the other team as many different looks as possible. Pulling their starter before he goes through the lineup a third time is what they do, even with guys like Snell. The Rays were just being the Rays. Nothing more, nothing less.

But man, I could not get on-board with pulling Snell at that point. This isn’t a second guess, I thought it was the wrong move at the time. When he’s on, Snell is as good as any pitcher in the game, and he was on in Game 6. Nine strikeouts among 18 batters with an average exit velocity of 78.4 mph on nine balls in play. He allowed three (3) balls out of the infield.

"I was pretty happy (they took him out) because he was dominating us and we just weren’t seeing him,” Dodgers manager Dave Roberts told Adam McCalvy after Game 6. “Once Austin (Barnes) got that hit and they went to the pen, I think that Mookie (Betts) looked at me with a little smile."

“Analytics” is a buzzword people use to assign blame when bad things happen, but that was not an analytics failure. That was a managerial failure. Rays manager Kevin Cash failed to take the data that was right in front of him (Snell dealing and Nick Anderson being hot garbage in the postseason), and use it to inform his decision along with the analytics. The analytics were not wrong. They just weren't aware that Snell pitched as well as he had.

Anderson admitted to being fatigued after the game and there were indications he wasn’t right the last few weeks (his fastball spin and movement has been out of whack). If he were still NICK ANDERSON, then maybe I could get on board with pulling Snell. If Cash went to Diego Castillo or Pete Fairbanks, maybe I could get on board with it. Instead, Cash treated Anderson like the guy he was in the regular season, not the compromised reliever he was the last three weeks.

"I am definitely disappointed and upset," Snell told Jesse Rogers. "I just want the ball. I felt good. I did everything I could to prove my case to stay out there, and then for us to lose, it sucks. I want to win, and I want to win the World Series, and for us to lose, it just sucks.”

Snell is the staff ace and that game, that moment, is what he’s been dreaming about pretty much his entire life. Every pitcher wants to deliver for their team in a big spot in the World Series and Snell was doing it. When he’s right, he can dominate any lineup, and I would trust him to go through the lineup a third time. Pitchers still do it! Quite a bit, actually. Put the game in the hands of your best and most talented players. Cash did the opposite.

Analytics are not the problem here. I mean, look at the team that won the World Series, and the teams that have been in the World Series the last few years. Dismiss analytics at your own peril. Ultimately, the Rays lost because they scored one run despite the Dodgers needing 7.1 innings from their bullpen in Game 6. There’s little chance they were going to win 1-0. The offense was the real problem.

The Snell decision was the turning point in the game, however, and it will go down as Cash’s "leave Zack Britton in the bullpen" moment. Decent chance that was Snell’s final start as a Ray too. His salary jumps to $10.5M next year and Tampa typically trades players when they get this expensive. That is true even in non-pandemic times. Now? Who knows. If that was the end, what a crummy way for him to go out.

Manfred has to go

What an embarrassment Rob Manfred is to the sport. He will not discipline Justin Turner in a meaningful way for breaking COVID-19 protocols because he is spineless, and he used his World Series interview time to tell us we should feel bad for the owners. The commissioner is supposed to spend World Series week promoting the game and its crown jewel event. Instead (via Barry Bloom):

“We are going to be at historic high levels of debt,” Manfred said. “And it’s going to be difficult for the industry to weather another year where we don’t have fans in the ballpark and have other limitations on how much we can’t play and how we can play.”

Manfred claims clubs have amassed $8.3 billion in debt and nearly $3 billion in operating losses but there is no reason to believe him. There’s basically no chance that is all new debt related to the pandemic, and $3 billion in operating losses spread across 30 teams is survivable. The Mets are in the process of being sold for $2.4 billion right now. Baseball will survive. I promise.

To the larger point: I don’t care. I don’t care how much money teams are losing or how much debt they’re taking on, and I can’t imagine I’m alone. And yet this shill of a commissioner made the rounds earlier this week trying to get me to feel bad for the owners because apparently the pandemic only affects them. It is insulting and tone deaf.

Baseball needs an ombudsman. Manfred is an abject failure as steward of the game and there needs to be an adult in the room. I’ll do it for $500,000 a year plus expenses. In all seriousness, MLB is heading into a bad place and Manfred is at the wheel. He clearly does not have the guts to stand up to his bosses (the owners) and do what’s best for the game.

3. 2020 rule change review. There were times I didn’t think MLB would be able to pull it off, but the 2020 season has been completed, and it was unlike any other season in history. I hope we never see anything like it ever again, for many reasons. There were moments the season didn’t feel real to me and I had to remind myself, “oh yeah, these games count.”

MLB and the MLBPA agreed to several rule changes to facilitate the 2020 season and make it safe. Some of the rule changes were on the radar for years and will become permanent. The pandemic didn’t will them into existence. It simply hastened their arrival. The only question is will we see them in 2021, or will we have to wait until the next Collective Bargaining Agreement?

“People were wildly unenthusiastic about the changes. And then when they saw them in action, they were much more positive,” commissioner Rob Manfred told Ron Blum recently. Sounds like he’s saying people didn’t hate the changes as much as they expected, which is hardly a ringing endorsement, but that’s about all Manfred has at this point.

“We made a number of one-year changes this season under unique circumstances,” MLBPA chief Tony Clark told Blum. “We are gathering feedback from players and we’ll bring that to the league at the appropriate time. Obviously, protecting health and safety will remain among several important considerations as those talks unfold.”

MLB needs the MLBPA’s approval to make these rule changes permanent -- it is no accident Clark called these “one-year changes,” he’s making sure everyone knows the union has the leverage -- so we’ll see how negotiations go. For now, I just want to review the rule changes, and tell you what I liked and what I didn’t like. Let’s get to it.

Universal DH

Fun fact: The National League (4.71 runs per game) outscored the American League (4.58) this season. First time that’s happened since 1974. Did anyone miss watching pitchers hit this year? I’m sure a few did, but I doubt it was a majority of fans. Here are the numbers:

• Pitchers in 2019: .128/.159/.162 (-18 wRC+) (in over 5,000 plate appearances!)
• NL DHs in 2020: .235/.319/.412 (96 wRC+)
• AL DHs in 2020: .229/.314/.410 (97 wRC+)

Blame those big ballparks in the AL Central and AL West for AL DHs having a lower OBP and a lower SLG than NL DHs but a higher wRC+. Anyway, the universal DH is long overdue. Pitchers don’t just stink at hitting, they’re worse at it than ever before, and they’re not going to get better. They focus their training on pitching, not hitting. The universal DH is an obvious keeper. More jobs for veteran players, more offense for fans. Everybody wins.

“I like it because we have the DH, so anytime we play a National League team Giancarlo (Stanton) or somebody is not available,” Aaron Boone said during a radio interview earlier this month (via Kristie Ackert). “So, I liked that. So I’m all in on the DH now.”

28-Man Roster

The 25-man roster was supposed to become a 26-man roster this season, but the pandemic forced a change of plans. Twice. The original plan was a 30-man roster for two weeks, then a 28-man roster for two weeks, then a 26-man roster the rest of the season. MLB and the MLBPA agreed to skip the final cut and stuck with 28 players through the end of the postseason.

I am pro-large rosters but there is a point where the roster is too large and 28 players might be it. Guys like Erik Kratz and Ben Heller sat on the active roster for long stretches of time this season without playing -- Heller spent 28 days on the active roster and made only six appearances -- so at some point it’s overkill. 28 players might be that point.

It made sense to carry extra players during this pandemic season to reduce injury risk. In a normal season, I think 28 players are probably a few too many, at least outside the September roster expansion period. I think 26 players is a good number going forward. (I have no reason to think MLB will agree to permanent 28-man rosters anyway.)

Extra Innings Tiebreaker Rule

I admit it, I really enjoyed the extra innings tiebreaker rule, though I’m not sure if I enjoyed it so much because I thought I would hate it and didn’t, or if I genuinely enjoyed it as much as I think I did. Get what I’m saying? The automatic runner created action and upped the intensity immediately, and there wasn’t an overwhelming number of bunts. That’s what I was worried about.

“I think the players like it,” Manfred told Blum. “I think it’s really good from a safety and health perspective that keeps us from putting players in situations where they’re out there too long or in positions they’re not used to playing.”

I didn’t miss marathon extra innings games. Those are more fun in theory than reality. There’s a point in extra innings where it goes from “this is exciting!” to “let’s get this over with already,” and it’s earlier than you may think. The extra innings rule promotes action, and when you keep the other team off the board in extras, it feels like you’ve really accomplished something.

My one quibble is the rule puts the home team on the defensive because they have to bat last. The road team gets the chance to strike first. There’s not much you can do about that though. Maybe the compromise here is playing 1-3 normal extra innings before going to the tiebreaker rule? I enjoyed it though and I would be fine with the extra innings tiebreaker becoming permanent, which is absolutely not something I would've expected a few months ago. Liking this rule is a surprise to me.

“I think in hindsight, I really enjoyed -- in the regular season anyway -- the tenth-inning thing,” Boone said during his radio interview. “I think that’s something that potentially could continue to stick.”

60-Game Season

A shortened season is coming but it won’t be that short. The 60-man schedule was out of necessity and should not stick. No way. Never. It’s too great a change to the fundamental nature of the sport. The MLBPA has been pushing for a 154-game schedule for quite some time and I think they’ll eventually get it, and chopping eight games off the schedule isn’t the end of the world. No one wants a 60-game season each year though. Next.

(I’m legitimately surprised there hasn’t been at least one “the 60-game season is great, keep it forever!” column. I figured we’d get one at some point, but not yet as far as I know.)

Regional Play

This will never happen for competitive balance reasons and also for marketing reasons. MLB needs the Yankees, the Dodgers, Mike Trout et al flying around the country to help promote and grow the game. Cutting regional fan bases off from in-person looks at two-thirds of the talent pool is a straight up bad idea. This was done for safety reasons amid the pandemic. That’s all.

That said, I think there are some real benefits to regional play. Travel is greatly reduced and that ostensibly equals fresher players and a higher caliber of play. A full 162-game regional schedule would allow rivalries to really thrive -- imagine if the Yankees and Rays played 30 games this year instead of 10? -- including geographic rivalries across league lines.

Also, there’s the possibility of postseason matchups with teams you haven't seen all year, like the Yankees and Cleveland in the Wild Card Series, and that’s a fun little wrinkle. And hey, regional play would reduce the sport’s carbon footprint. That’s a noble cause. Full-time regional play won’t happen and I don’t endorse it, but there would be some benefits.

Seven-Inning Doubleheaders

This was a weird one. Everything felt rushed in seven-inning games. Give up a solo homer in the third to fall behind 1-0? Well that’s really like giving up a homer in the fifth because the game is two innings shorter, and suddenly you’re counting the outs for your offense. Maybe it was just me, but it felt like you were in high-leverage situations as soon as the game started.

Seven-inning doubleheaders were necessary this season because teams played so many doubleheaders -- the Yankees had six, including four in a 10-day span at one point -- but I don’t like this rule moving forward. Doubleheaders are uncommon -- the Yankees played seven in 2019, their most in nearly 40 years -- so play the full nine innings. Unless you’re going to charge fans seven-ninths price to watch these games, no. This was fine during the pandemic season. No thanks during a full 162-game season.

“I think in this season the seven-inning doubleheader thing made some sense and I liked it,” Boone said during his radio interview. “I could see that being something moving forward.”

Expanded Postseason

Like it or not, a permanent expanded postseason format is coming. Maybe it won’t be 16 teams, but there will be an expanded postseason. There is way too much money to be made to pass up the opportunity. More postseason games equal more revenue, and the MLBPA can leverage the expanded postseason into other concessions. It’s going to happen. You are forewarned.

“I like the idea of -- and I’m choosing my words carefully here -- an expanded playoff format,” Manfred told Blum. “I don’t think we would do 16 like we did this year. I think we do have to be cognizant of making sure that we preserve the importance of our regular season. But I think something beyond the 10 that we were at would be a good change.”

I have several long-term concerns with an expanded postseason. It would cheapen the regular season, first and foremost, and the last thing we need is more meaningless baseball. Secondly, it gives teams even less incentive to put the best possible product on the field. Why spend more money when the only difference between 88 wins and 96 wins is postseason seeding?

In the short-term, I found the Wild Card Series overwhelming as a fan. Eight postseason games in one day was not fun. I mean, it was, but I couldn’t pay attention to all eight games, and I didn’t like that. I greatly prefer being able to focus on one game at a time and watch the entire story arc of the series play out. Overlapping postseason games isn’t great. I didn’t enjoy it.

I am bracing for a 14-team postseason format where the No. 1 seed in each league gets a bye to the LDS and the other six teams play a best-of-three Wild Card Series, which is what MLB floated last offseason. I’m hoping for something like this:

• Wild Card Game 1: WC2 vs. WC3
• Wild Card Game 2: WC1 vs. Wild Card Game 1 winner
• ALDS 1: DIV1 vs. Wild Card Game 2 winner
• ALDS 2: DIV2 vs. DIV3

Not getting my hopes up. There’s only one extra game there and MLB would be leaving too much money on the table. We’re getting a best-of-three Wild Card Series. I have no doubt. I just don’t like that the regular season will be cheapened, and that there will be even less incentive to win. There’s too much “let’s just make sure we’re good enough to get in, the postseason is a crapshoot anyway” in this game as it is (ahem, Yankees).

“I don’t think you can do that many teams getting in as far as 16 out of 30 teams making the playoffs in a 162-game season,” Boone said during his radio interview. “I think it does probably cheapen the season. I think it was necessary this year in the 60 games setting. I think there’s something too though, in a smaller scaled playoff format that you know the best-of-three makes some sense. I just don’t think we should get too carried away with so many teams being involved, moving forward.”

No Off-Days In Postseason

I loved this so much. We only had it for the LDS and LCS rounds, but I loved it. Teams had to use their entire roster -- this postseason really drove home the point that no team trusts their fifth starter -- and the pace was tremendous. It was relentless. One game right after the other with no breaks. That’s how baseball is supposed to be played! Off-days ruin the flow and change the strategy so much. Postseason baseball is a different animal. I am all for off-day-less postseason. This ruled so much.

This is almost certainly never going to happen though. Travel necessitates off-days, and after a 162-game regular season, asking players to play that many intense postseason games with no in-series rest is really pushing it. Everyone will get overworked, not just pitchers. Player health and safety is important. As much as I’d love no off-days in the postseason, it’s not really feasible unless the games are played at a neutral site, and even that’s pushing it.

Neutral Site Postseason

There is merit to a neutral site World Series. MLB could make it a big event with showcases and all sorts of other cool stuff each year because they could actually plan ahead. The World Series is the sport’s crown jewel and picking a neutral site each year, marketing the hell out of it, and turning it into a grand spectacle is at least worth considering. Kick the idea around, you know?

“We have to be forward-thinking about how we create a game that has attention above all other sports,” Scott Boras told Tyler Kepner recently. “It’s already given us an indication of what the current, traditional approach has provided, and that is that baseball does not receive the attention of the Super Bowl. Well, let’s create a product that does receive the attention of the Super Bowl, and let’s create something that allows for a World Series week and brings commerce and corporate interaction and all those things that come to a city for the Super Bowl — but we can actually deliver four to seven games as opposed to one.

There is some merit to a neutral site World Series but not a neutral site anything else. Baseball is a regional sport and fans should get to experience postseason games in the team’s home ballpark. The players want to play postseason games in front of their home fans too (and sleep in their own bed at night). No postseason games in Yankee Stadium? No. Come on. I don’t love it, but I acknowledge a neutral site World Series is worth considering. No more than that though.

(The three-batter minimum rule was put in place before the pandemic. That’s not going away. From 2017-19, there were 0.92 relief appearances of two or few batters faced per game. In 2020, that was down to 0.58. The fewer mid-inning pitching changes, the better. Also, it creates another layer of strategy. My preference would be to let teams do whatever they want with their roster to spark innovation, but this rule is fine with me. I’ll live.)

4. Rapid fire thoughts. Some winter ball news: Miguel Andujar, Domingo German, and Gary Sanchez will all suit up for Toros del Este in the Dominican Winter League, according to Diego Guzman. The 50-game DWL season typically runs from late-October through late-December, though I’m not sure what their schedule looks like this year. Anyway, I’m glad all three guys are playing winter ball. Andujar needs at-bats, German needs innings, and Sanchez has about a million things to work on, including his confidence. This is his first winter ball stint since 2013, mostly because catching a full season then playing winter ball isn’t a thing many guys do. The abbreviated regular season gives him a chance to play winter ball. Go out and mash, Gary … The Wynston Sawyer saga took another turn earlier this week. He has been outrighted off the 40-man roster, the Yankees announced. That means he’ll become a minor league free agent. The Yankees added Sawyer to the 40-man roster in mid-September but didn’t carry him in their postseason player pool. I have no idea what this was all about. Very weird. Whatever. It’s over now … And finally, a Jasson Dominguez update: He’s still jacked. At this rate MLB is gonna make the kid take performance-reducing drugs.

Mailbag Questions of the Week

Chris asks: Could the Rays try to flip Snell while his value is high? He's approaching the priciest 3 years of his contract, and the Rays have certainly made similar moves before. I know recency bias is high, but would he make sense for the Yankees, and what would the prospect cost look like?

I mentioned this earlier and yeah, Blake Snell is approaching the point (i.e. he’s getting expensive) where the Rays usually trade their top players. He has three years and $39M remaining on his contract and Tampa has run a $60M payroll the last few years. I can’t imagine that’s going up after the shutdown. One player eating up 20% of payroll isn’t a thing the Rays usually do.

Snell, 28 in December, ran into some homer problems during the regular season (3.24 ERA and 4.35 FIP), but he’s a true talent 30% strikeout rate guy, and the World Series showed everyone he can be the ace on a contending team. When he’s on, Snell is as good as just about anyone in the game, and the other 29 teams would love to have him, including the Yankees.

I have a hard time believing a Yankees-Rays trade is possible right now. Two intradivision rivals making a blockbuster when both are World Series contenders? It never happens. Hypothetically though, two recent trades stand out as potential framework for a Snell trade:

• Chris Sale (three years of control): Traded for a top five global prospect (Yoan Moncada), a top 30 global prospect (Michael Kopech), and two top 20 organizational prospects (Luis Basabe and Victor Diaz).
• Jose Quintana (3.5 years of control): Traded for a top 15 global prospect (Eloy Jimenez), a top 100 global prospect (Dylan Cease), and two top 30 organizational prospects (Bryant Flete and Matt Rose).

The established framework is two studs and two secondary pieces. Sale then was better than Snell now -- Sale was coming off five straight +4 WAR seasons (with three +6 WAR seasons in there) at the time of the trade while Snell has had one +4 WAR season in his career -- but we’re in the ballpark. Getting a pitcher like Snell should hurt.

The Yankees don’t have a top 15-ish prospect to headline a Snell package. Jasson Dominguez could be that guy in time but isn’t yet, and neither Deivi Garcia nor Clarke Schmidt is at that level. The best substitute is Gleyber Torres, no? Torres, Garcia or Schmidt, plus other stuff is the Sale equivalent for the current Yankees, I’d say.

I don’t expect a Yankees-Rays trade to happen but yeah, I’d happily take Snell. I wouldn’t give up Torres but I’d make just about anyone in the farm system plus other young big leaguers (Clint Frazier, Miguel Andujar, etc.) available to get it done. Snell is really good and he’s affordable. Alas and alack, he plays for a team that Yankees are extremely unlikely to trade with right now.

Julian asks: I just saw Carl Edwards Jr. elected free agency, should the Yankees consider him a target as a low risk, high upside bullpen piece?

A forearm strain limited Edwards to five appearances this season (4.2 IP, 2 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 1 BB, 6 K) and he elected free agency after the Mariners dropped him from the 40-man roster. The last few years haven’t been kind to the 29-year-old:

• 2016-18: 3.03 ERA (3.12 FIP) with 34.3 K% and 13.5 BB%
• 2019-20: 7.06 ERA (4.78 FIP) with 26.3 K% and 14.7 BB%

It’s a small sample and injuries (he missed time in 2019 with a shoulder problem) contributed to his ineffectiveness the last two years, but the bottom line is Edwards hasn’t been good in two years now. Doesn’t mean he can’t be good going forward, just that he hasn’t been the last two years. He’s a reclamation project.

Edwards is an O.G. spin rate guy -- he had sky high spin rates when we all started to learn about spin rate -- but he hasn’t spun the ball quite as well the last two years, particularly his curveball. It’s well-below-average spin now, in fact, which is a problem. Edwards has always walked guys, so that comes with the territory. The question now is does he have the stuff to make up for it? The last two years and his declining spin suggest no.

I can’t imagine Edwards will get a guaranteed MLB deal at this point. There’s no such thing as a bad minor league contract so by all means, sign him. He is only 29 and he would remain under team control as an arbitration-eligible player in 2022, so why not? Maybe Edwards gets healthy this offseason and you luck into 50 good innings or something. I wouldn’t want him to be the bullpen addition this winter, but I’d take him on a minor league deal. Sure.

Matt asks: If you could put together an all-time roster of Yankees who were on the team for only one season, what would it be?

Fun question! Also easier to research than I expected. WAR isn’t the be-all, end-all, but it works well for an exercise like this. My only rule is the player had to play exactly one season with the Yankees. Not 162 games across two seasons or something like that. Also, I am omitting Gerrit Cole because he will spend more than one season in the pinstripes. Here’s the team:

Catcher: Ken Sears (+0.5 WAR in 1943). Real thin at catcher, probably because good catchers are hard to find and tend to remain with the team more than one year. Sears played only 60 games with the Yankees that year and was eventually traded to the St. Louis Browns. He played 67 MLB games total. Mike O’Berry is second with +0.3 WAR in 1982.

First base: Buddy Hassett (+1.7 WAR in 1942). Former random Yankee Doug Mientkiewicz is right behind him at +1.4 WAR in 2007. Hassett hit .284/.325/.364 in 132 games in what proved to be his final season in the big leagues. He spent most of his career with the Dodgers and Braves. Shoutout to John Olerud here (+0.6 WAR in 49 games in 2004).

Second base: Harry Niles (+0.9 WAR in 1908). This was back when the Yankees were the Highlanders, and Niles was traded to the Red Sox in the middle of that 1908 season. Only 95 games as a Yankee. If we stick to Yankees era players only, the leader here is Brian Roberts at +0.7 WAR in 2014. Huh.

Shortstop: Otis Johnson (+1.1 WAR in 1911). Johnson was a utility infielder who happened to play most of his games at shortstop. Among full-time shortstops, the leader is the late Tony Fernandez at +0.9 WAR in 1995. Someone named Ernie Courtney managed +1.0 WAR in only 25 games in 1903. He had a 121 OPS+ thanks to a .266/.351/.418 batting line. Really.

Third base: Aaron Boone (+1.4 WAR in 2003). Boone was a +1.4 WAR player in only 54 games with the Yankees? Who knew? He hit .254/.302/.418 with six homers in those 54 games, plus one pretty important homer in October. Todd Frazier (+1.1 WAR in 2017) and Yangervis Solarte (+0.9 WAR in 2014) are the runner-ups.

Left field: Jesse Hill (+1.7 WAR in 1935). The Yankees originally acquired Hill in a trade with the Hollywood Stars of the Pacific Coast League. He hit .293/.362/.390 during his lone season in pinstripes, then was traded to the Washington Senators for Bump Johnson. Killa Cam Maybin is our runner-up at +1.6 WAR last year.

UPDATE: I'm an idiot. Mike Tauchman has been on the team two years now, so he doesn't qualify for this exercise.

Center field: Ray Demmitt (+2.1 WAR in 1909). Demmitt hit .246/.340/.358 as a Yankee and that worked out to a 120 OPS+ in those days. He was then traded for a Lou Criger, who hit .188/.291/.217 as a Yankee. D’oh. The Yankees have had a few good one-year center fielders, including Harry Rice (+1.8 WAR in 1930) and former random Yankee Kenny Lofton (+1.4 WAR in 2004).

Right field: Bobby Bonds (+5.4 WAR in 1975). The MVP of our one-year Yankees team. Bonds hit .270/.370/.512 with 32 homers in his lone season as a Yankee, earning him an All-Star Game selection and MVP votes. The Yankees got him from the Giants for Bobby Murcer before the season and traded him for Ed Figueroa and Mickey Rivers after the season. Roy Cullenbine (+1.5 WAR in 1942) is the runner-up in right field.

Designated hitter: Jack Clark (+2.8 WAR in 1988). The Yankees didn’t get the San Francisco or St. Louis versions of Clark, but they did get a .242/.381/.433 batting line and 27 homers. Clark requested a trade after the season because he didn’t get along with manager Lou Piniella, and was sent to the Padres. Eric Soderholm (+1.8 WAR in 1980) and former random Yankee Glenallen Hill (+1.4 WAR in 2000) are the other notables at DH.

Starting pitchers: Jack McDowell (+4.0 WAR in 1995) and Jon Lieber (+2.7 WAR in 2004). Lieber was solid, not great, but declining his $8M option after the season never made much sense to me. As for McDowell, I am obligated by internet laws to share this whenever he is mentioned:

McDowell had a 3.93 ERA in 217.2 innings as a Yankee. Too bad he sullied it with the middle finger incident and the whole “walk-off loss to end the ALDS” thing. Mike Torrez (+2.4 WAR in 1977), Bobo Newsom (+2.2 WAR in 1947), and Mike Morgan (+2.0 WAR in 1982) are the only other one-year Yankee starters at +2 WAR or better, not including Cole.

Relief pitchers: Grant Jackson (+1.9 WAR in 1976) and Bobby Keefe (+1.7 WAR in 1907). A couple recent Yankees come close here, including Justin Wilson (+1.5 WAR in 2015), former random Yankee Kerry Wood (+1.5 WAR in 2010), and Luis Ayala (+1.3 WAR in 2011). Don’t sleep on Rick Reuschel (+1.6 WAR in 1981) either.

(Send your requests for Tuesday's random Yankee series and questions for Friday's mailbag to RABmailbag at gmail dot com.)