Today marked the deadline for players to receive one-year, $15.3MM qualifying offers, and after nine players receiving a QO in 2012 and 13 players receiving the offer last offseason, 12 players have been extended a qualifying offer by their teams in 2014. They are:
- Max Scherzer (Tigers)
- Victor Martinez (Tigers)
- David Robertson (Yankees)
- Melky Cabrera (Blue Jays)
- James Shields (Royals)
- Hanley Ramirez (Dodgers)
- Pablo Sandoval (Giants)
- Nelson Cruz (Orioles)
- Russell Martin (Pirates)
- Francisco Liriano (Pirates)
- Michael Cuddyer (Rockies)
- Ervin Santana (Braves)
Should these players reject the offer and sign with a new team, their former team will stand to receive a “sandwich” round draft pick as compensation. Those new teams, in turn, will have to forfeit their top unprotected draft pick. If a player rejects a QO but ultimately re-signs with the same team, no draft pick shuffling occurs.
There will be 11 protected picks in this year’s draft, as the picks of the teams with the 10 worst records are protected under the CBA, and Houston’s comp pick for failure to sign Brady Aiken is protected as well. The D’Backs, Astros, Rockies, Rangers, Twins, Red Sox, White Sox, Cubs, Phillies and Reds will all have their first-round selections protected. Those clubs will instead forfeit a second-round pick to sign a free agent with draft pick compensation attached. Teams can sign more than one free agent that has rejected a QO, as the Orioles did last winter in signing both Ubaldo Jimenez and Cruz. In that instance, Jimenez cost the team its first-round pick, while Cruz cost the club its second-round selection.
The players listed above will now have one week to decide whether or not to accept the QO and play on a one-year deal worth $15.3MM, or instead to or reject the offer in search of a larger guarantee on the open market.
The word “guarantee” is the key to that sentiment: while many will focus on whether or not the players can top that average annual value on the free agent market, more often than not, a player is concerned primarily with maximizing the amount of money he can earn over his prime seasons. Few players are ever sold on the idea of playing on a one-year deal when a multi-year guarantee can be had. Single-year contracts, on the free agent market, are often reserved for older players who don’t know how long they wish to continue playing (e.g. Hiroki Kuroda last winter), players coming off massive injuries (e.g. Corey Hart last winter) or players who have significantly underperformed in a contract year (e.g. Chris Young last offseason).
While upon first glance it might make sense to suggest a player with a spotty track record, such as Liriano, should accept the offer, there’s more downside for him in accepting than in rejecting. Even if Liriano is faced with a cold market, he’d likely be able to find a one-year contract at an AAV north of $10MM, if not a one-year offer commensurate with the total sum of the qualifying offer, as Santana did last offseason when signing a one-year, $14.1MM contract with the Braves. Whereas the downside in accepting is “settling” for a one-year deal a few ticks below the QO level, the upside in rejecting is finding perhaps a three-year deal that could more than double the guarantee he’d otherwise receive. This risk/benefit calculus generally points toward testing the market.
The one case for accepting in this year’s class, that I see, would be that of Cuddyer. Though a solid veteran bat coming off a strong pair of seasons in terms of his rate stats, Cuddyer has defensive limitations and injury questions that will also drag his stock down. He played in just 49 games in 2014 and will play next season at age 36. MLBTR’s Zach Links only pegged his free agent stock at $22MM over two years in his recent Free Agent Profile for Cuddyer. It does seem there’s a real chance that Cuddyer could come in significantly lower than $15.3MM on a one-year deal if he rejects, and the upside may not be much greater for him as a two-year deal may have been the realistic ceiling anyhow.
Reports on whether or not any player will accept the offer should be filtering in over the next week, but those looking for a quick resource to check the status of each can use MLBTR’s Free Agent Tracker (the provided link is already filtered to show only free agents that have received the QO, and their status will change from “Received” to “Rejected” or “Accepted” upon a decision being reached).
Cuddyer, Santana and Robertson should accept
Robertson can get a multi-year deal easily. If from no one else, then the Yankees. No reason to accept.
Santana, maybe. Cuddy, definitely.
I’m sure even with a down year a team would still risk a multi year deal for him next off-season. Pocket the 15 now and get a multi year deal next off season.
Couldn’t he also take the qualifying offer and work out an extension for the 16-19 seasons as well?
When has that ever happened in history? If he has a down year, his value will go down. And thus, the price someone is willing to pay him will go down. It’s just common sense.
Relief pitchers/closers are the most volatile commodities in baseball. No reason to risk it. This is his big pay day opportunity, and he will take it. It really is that simple.
D-Rob has to be looking at least to double the 15 million guarantee. Think about it. If he is offered 3-30 does it really make sense to take it when you can get half that for one year.
After all Brian Wilson got 2 years 20 million after missing nearly two complete years due to a 2nd Tommy John surgery. Likewise other closers and relief pitchers have gotten millions despite injuries or poor performance the year before.
I find it hard to believe that after even a poor or injured year D-Rob couldn’t get 2 years 15 million bringing his 3 year total to 30 million.
Do you really think a team will offer more then 3-30?
Yes, it does make sense to take the 3/30, because it’s more money, and RP is volatile.
Second, and more importantly, he will make more than 30m.
The reason for him rejecting is not the ceiling though… it’s the floor. The LOWEST amount he can get this off season is what? I’d say 12m?
So the risk is only 3m, if he had accepted the QO.
And the highest amount he can get is, let’s just say, 50m, although I’ve seen higher projections.
So, he’s basically risking 3m, to make 35m more. That’s a risk you HAVE to take. Small risk, huge reward.
Just for the heck of it . . . Joe Charboneau
Qualifying offer won’t hurt Shields, Scherzer, Martinez, Cruz and perhaps Sandoval and Ramirez. The rest should really consider accepting this year.
For $15.3, Cruz should be on the accept list. DH’s just don’t get paid like position players do. He still has a history of injury when he plays the field and his defensive metrics were never all that great. Is there a chance he gets a 3/$45 somewhere?
Cruz has the same rate stats as last year, only he traded the steroid questions for the one less year of prime. I don’t think his market will be better, 33 year old getting a 4 year deal is easier to stomach than giving a 34 year old a 4 year deal.
You thing he gets 3 years? How long do these guys have to get a deal done with their own team? It’s going to be interesting to see who’s left.
I think there is a 5 day period where players and their teams can talk and then players can talk with anyone.
Don’t know. Some GM may very well look at the 40 home runs, and ignore the fact he is a year older, is even more of a dh now, and had essentially the same rate stats.
He can get 3 years, it is just at what price that would be.
He’s a lock for 3 years. The only question is if he gets a 4th.
122 and 137 wRC+ are “the same rate stats”…..?
.266/.327/.506 vs .271/.333/.525
That is within the normal variation.
Offense declined again, however. I’ll trust wRC+ over his actual lines. All Major Leaguers hit .257/.322/.403 in 2013 for a .318 wOBA and .725 OPS, and .255/.318/.393 in 2014, for a .315 wOBA and .711 OPS. Cruz boosted his line from an .359 wOBA/.833 OPS to a .370 wOBA/.858 OPS, despite offense declining. I also believe Arlington is a slightly more favorable offensive environment, though I may be wrong. All in all, 137 wRC versus 122 wRC+. Cruz also did so over 222 additional PA, and it’s inherently harder to keep up a good batting line over more playing time as regression comes into play and normally brings one’s batting line further down to earth. Cruz is clearly in a way better position than last offseason. A 1.5-win, 450 PA platform season or a 3.9-win, 680 PA platform season?
.266/.327/.506 vs .271/.333/.525
You may see that line as slightly better, but that is just normal year to year variation, not being a better player.
He still puts up exactly the same numbers, just the league around him has changed, does that offset it enough to make up for the fact he is a year older?
Camden Yards and Arlington are both very hitter friendly environments.
That WAR change is actually deceptive. His defense is bad enough that he made more WAR by playing as a DH than when Texas was making him play RF, him playing the field was costing him WAR, but he is now a much less flexible player as a DH.
Is it really harder to keep up a good batting line when you go from a fulltime outfielder to a DH? It doesn’t always bring you down to earth with larger samples. It better tells you what type of player he is.
Better offensive line – let’s not pretend an overall .025 bump in OPS isn’t somewhat meaningful to begin with – combined with worse league offense, and another year removed from the doubts of the PED suspension >>> aging one year, to me. I do believe it offsets it. I think you are severely underrating how much of a deterrent questions about him playing outside of Arlington + injury/defense/PED concerns crashed his market. It also didn’t help he set out seeking 75 MM. 137 wRC+ vs. 122 wRC+ is not insignificant. We differ here. I believe an artificial .025 OPS jump combined with a leaguewide .014 OPS drop makes Cruz’s 137 wRC+ very valuable. He projects to be a DH going forward for the most part anyway, or at least a partially-full-time DH, so that’s a point in his favor if you believe his defense was *that* bad..
Although I agree with you that there are a lot of questions with Cruz; the AL tends to have deeper pockets and someone will offer him a multi-year contract. As sad as it sounds, 3/$45 is relatively cheap if he keeps his production up the next couple of years. Braves fan here, so if Santana accepts his offer, he’d be our highest paid player next year while we are paying Uggla and trying to figure out what do with BJ.
With what he went thru last offseason… Sorry to say, but I’d be surprised if he declines the offer
Perhaps Sandoval and Ramirez but definitely not Cruz and Martinez? Since when are DHs in their mid-30s more valuable than position players at 30 or younger with good excellent/bats?
The bats of Sandoval and Ramirez are not even comparable to Cruz and Martinez of last season. They were the best hitters on their team. They’ll get their money. Sandoval and Ramirez are younger but with inferior bats and aren’t especially amazing players defensively.
Wait the 2014 WRC+ of Han-Ram was 135 and his career WRC+ is 133 but he is an inferior bat to Cruz who had a 2014 WRC+ of 137 and a career WRC+ of 118. That doesn’t make much sense at all.
Yes Nelson Cruz did beat Hanley in wRC+, SLG, WAR wOBA and ISO in 2014. What is it that you’re arguing? Nobody is signing Hanley over Cruz because he was better 2007-2010. Their career wRC+ is of no importance. Free agency is dictated by recent numbers and Cruz had a career year.
He beat Hanley by 2 points in WRC+ which measures overall offensive production. That is a negligible difference. What about 2013 when Hanley had a 191 WRC and Cruz had a 122 WRC+. Those are recent numbers and shows Hanley over the last two years has been the better hitter just like he has been for his career.
Also in 2014 Cruz beat Hanley by .5 in WAR because he played 30 extra games. First year since 2010 when Cruz had a WAR over 1.5 and only third year over 2.9 while Hanley has only had one year under 2.9.
Look Cruz is a good hitter but over last two years Hanley has been better when adjusting for ball park factors, Hanley has had a much better offensive career, Hanley is younger, Hanley plays a premium position for offense, and Hanley is widely considered better by teams, fans, and everyone!
If Cuddyer and Liriano turn them down they should have their heads examined. Even Santana would probably be better served accepting it and hitting the weaker SP market next year.
Please explain how the 2016 class is weak, when it features guys like David Price, Johnny Cueto, Doug Fister, Jordan Zimmerman, Mat Latos, Rick Porcello, Jeff Samardzija, Yovani Gallardo, etc. This is a weak class with just Shields, Lester and Scherzer as the Aces.
Right, but at the same time some guys could be snagged off that. Next winter has better top talent, Price/Cueto/Zim than the top 3 this year, and much better secondary talent. Porcello vs McCarthy is like a joke.
But the likelihood of all of those guys actually reaching the market are pretty slim though. But at the beginning of this year (spring training) I never would have thought that the Lester would have hit the FA market.
This winter was originally supposed to have Verlander, Felix, Kershaw, Lester, Scherzer, how it has sunk.
Yep…could have been a fun winter had all of them had even a small chance of hitting the market.
Well, uh, I guess Verlander would’ve been interesting, but he wouldn’t have gotten a huge deal.
Who is likely to sign an extension? The only possibilities I see are Porcello, Gallardo, Cueto and Fister. Price looks like he wants to test it, much like Scherzer did. Zimmermann has already rejected many extension proposals supposedly, Latos needs to prove he can remain healthy, and Shark simply ain’t signing an extension unless he’s traded elsewhere. Iwakuma is also on next year’s free agent market, and I believe Zack Greinke has an opt-out of his contract, though I might be wrong.
Not sure we know anything about Price right now. He was not yet offered. Scherzer took a big risk that not every player would be willing to take.
Tigers best move may be to bi-pass Scherzer completely and tell Price, he was their first choice. I actually think there is a good chance he would sign.
I don’t think Price will see the market next year as he will get the 6 years 144M that Scherzer was offered last year. I also think Iwakuma is going to get signed before hitting the market.
Why should Liriano have their heads examined? past 2 years has had a sub 3.40 era. He may not be what he once was, but I think he could get $30MM+ guaranteed.
I agree with you. BUT he should look to stay in the NL. 5 times in the AL, he posted 5+ ERA’s
Cuddyer should perhaps accept. Liriano is 30 and has had serious injury problems. He can almost certainly get a 2-3 year deal at $10MM+/year. If he accepts the $15MM QO, he may earn only $15MM for the rest of his career.
A lot more risk-taking by the clubs than I would have expected. Cuddyer, Santana and Liriano would need to get at least two years and mid twenties to make it worthwhile to say no. Robertson’s a separate case, since he’s probably not with $15.3, but the Yankees would probably live with him accepting or negotiate with him if he didn’t.
Zero chance Liriano accepts. Almost zero chance on Santana. Colorado would probably be okay paying Cuddyer $15MM for one year.
Really, Cuddyer? Sigh.
Robertson will wait for a bit and decline, but then sign a three or four year deal with the Yankees. Cruz should take it.
I guess I look at Robertson as a win-win situation really. You offer it to him and if he accepts you have your closer back on a 1-year deal. Yea, he will be overpaid, but it’s still a 1-year deal. If he declines and signs elsewhere you get the draft pick for a closer. If that happens I would expect the Yankees to seriously go after Miller (although I secretly hope they do regardless).
Certainly. I wouldn’t mind if they could get miller though as the new closer. The thing is that if Betances becomes closer now, he is going to cost an absolute fortune going through arbitration with all the saves he will have by then.
Yknow, extending Betances might not be the worst thing because of what you said. Kind of like what Oakland did with Doolittle.
I would definitely look into that. Get the cost certainty.
What happens with the draft pick when a team make a QO to a player but he rejects it and signs elsewhere but then that same team signs a player from another team that also rejected a QO???
If you sign a player who rejected a QO then you lose your first round pick (unless protected). If a team then signs a player you gave the QO to and they rejected, then you gain a supplemental pick in the 1st round. If you then sign another player who gets a QO then you lose that pick.
The draft pick LOST is the first round pick, unless…
1. Its in the top 10.
2. The team already gave up their 1st round pick.
In those scenarios, its a second round pick (or next round in which they have a pick).
The draft pick GAINED is a sandwich pick between the 1st and 2nd round. For example, the Tigers will get two back-to-back picks in between the rounds if they lose both VMART and Scherzer.
Not too much of a difference, but it’s actually eleven picks protected this year, as the CBA language was changed to make it “ten worst records” not “top ten picks” because of the fact that three straight years now there’s been a top-11 pick belonging to a team due compensation from the previous year (Appel, Bickford, Aiken)
Because of the Mets from a prior year, right?
If their pick isn’t protected they would lose their first round pick for signing the player and then gain a pick after the first round for the player that left.
If you assume the value of the draft pick equates to an average of $6MM penalty, then it WILL be hard for Liriano to get $10MM for a one year contract, because it will effectively the cost the acquiring team $16MM, not 10.
If you are Lirano and reject, then you have to hope a bad team tries to sign you… or the acquiring team takes on another QO player.
But that is also a cost that current teams don’t have to bear. GM’s care about there jobs. Many won’t be around in 5 years when that cost is relevant.
Right. Liriano will get something like 3/$36MM.
As a Tigers fan, I am looking forward to getting one pick, maybe two, even if they sign big FA players.
Instead of VMART, they could sign Headley and get a similar WAR player (more defense, less offense).
Instead of Scherzer, they could sign Lester. Similar resumes, Scherzer a little better, but Lester a lefty.
If they do that they get two top players AND two top draft picks.
The problem is that if they lose Vmart as well as Scherzer, its because they cant afford them. That would mean they can’t afford Lester or Headley either.
Actually, the Tigers may not want to pay over $65MM for VMART (age 36 in Dec), but would be fine to pay Headley (age 30) $50MM. (Saving $15MM).
Also, they already offered Scherzer $144MM (He wants closer to $200MM). They may be perfectly willing to give that $144MM offer to Lester and then trade Price (or vice versa, sign Price and forget about Lester).
Unless the rules changed, only the first 10 picks overall are protected. It isn’t the 10 worst records, it is the 10 first picks. If you have the 10th worst record but the 11th pick due to another team getting a compensation pick, you lose the protection. This is why the Mets filed a complaint when they were talking about signing Bourne. The Mets had the 10th worst record but the 11th pick in the draft, so they lost their protection.
top 11 are protected this year.
Says who? The rules would have to change for that to be true, and I haven’t heard anything about the rules changing.
They announced it earlier this year (basically because of the problem with the Mets 2 years ago) – I forget when. But if you click on the link to the right labeled “Reverse Standings” under MLBTR Features, they’ll show you the draft order with the teams that have a protected pick.
He’s right top 11 are protected this year. Don’t know why but just go with the flow.
Says the MLB. They changed the rule.
No rules have changed, Astros failed to sign the 1st overall pick in 2014 so now they get the 2nd overall pick to make up for it in 2015. The 10 worst records still get protected picks but because of the Astros the 1st 11 are protected.
Yes, and it wasn’t always the case that it was the 10 worst records. Until a few months ago it was top 10 picks.
“Previously, the CBA had called for the “Top 10″ picks to be protected, but changes have been made that will protect the picks of the teams with the 10 worst records, regardless of whether or not comp picks are inserted into the first 10 selections.”
This is a quote from MLBTR written by Steve Adams in July.
The blue Jays got the same thing in the 2014 draft. The eleventh pick was protected.
The Blue Jays’ had the 11th pick protected because they had the 10th pick the year before. Picks you have as compensation for failing to sign a pick the year before are automatically protected.
Last year’s was different. The compensation picks are protected anyway and the Jays recieved one that happened to be the 11th pick for the failure to sign Bickford. The rule change I was explaining was that the picks with the ten worst records get protected even if there are compensation picks in the top 10.
Last year 11 were protected. The rule is the 10 worst records from the previous season are protected, plus any unsigned picks that were protected from the year before.
Huh? there are no compensation picks in the top 10, so what are you talking about?
What are YOU talking about?
Derpy said: “If you have the 10th worst record but the 11th pick due to another team getting a compensation pick, you lose the protection.”
That scenario doesn’t exist. If you have the 10th worst record, you have the 10th pick (unless you tied for 10th worst record and lose the tie breaker). There are no compensation picks in the top 10 to push you to the 11th pick. So, what is Derpy talking about???
The Houston Astros have a compensation pick in the top 10 this year for not signing Brady Aiken last year.
I stand corrected. Totally forgot about the “unsigned pick” compensation.
This has now happened three consecutive years with Appel (Pirates, # 8, 2012), Bickford (Blue Jays, # 10, 2013) and Aiken (Astros, # 1, 2014) and although Bickford’s selection didn’t result in a top-10 worst record not getting a top-10 pick, it did result in the top-11 picks being protected.
That rule actually was changed last offseason, as others have mentioned. You just missed the change, I guess.
yankees dont got time for no first round draft pick
What happens if a team signs a player attached to a QO but later acquire one of those competitive balance picks via trade. Do they lose the pick? Or do they lose their highest pick at the time of the signing?
A one-year contract doesn’t really have an AAV, it just has a value.
it has an aav just like any other contract. It is just incredibly easy to calculate.
Nope. An average expresses the central (median) or typical (mean) value of a set of numbers. A set means a collection of distinct entities. There is no set of one, so no average.
Do one year contracts count against the luxury tax?
An average is literally just the sum of the individual values times the weighted probability each occurs. If a value’s probability is one – i.e., there’s only one value – then the average can be the value, as is the case here.
Wait, if the team that signs the player loses their top pick, but the team that lost the player gets a sandwich round pick, what happens to the original pick? Like… Let’s say the Cardinals are supposed to draft 20th, but they sign Nelson Cruz after he turns down his QO. So, the Cards lose their 20th pick, the Orioles get a sandwich pick, but where does that 20th pick go?
It disappears, every team moves up one spot in the order from that 20th pick on. Basically that 20th pick becomes the sandwich pick.
Hmm. I’m an extremely avid baseball fan, and for some reason, I have never came across that information.
They keep changing things, by next off season it could be different again. Part of keeping a competitive balance, but not to be confused with the competitive balance picks that’s a different thing.
Welp. Looks like I was wrong on Robertson.
This process is very unfair to the players. There is practically no penalty to a team making an offer they know will be turned down. They make these offers to players they wouldn’t mind having back knowing that they have just affected the open market for that player making it likely they will come back. If they do come back the team doesn’t even lose its first round pick. A way to stop this nonsense would be to treat all teams the same. If a team makes an offer and then resigns the player then they should lose their first unprotected pick and receive a sandwich pick in its place.
Yikes Cuddyer and Santana should accept those offers
Agree about Cuddyer. He could put up big stats if he, Tulo, Cargo, et al can stay reasonably healthy and in the lineup. That would position him for a last contract (AL as DH?) of probably two years
Liriano loves it in Pittsburgh. There’s a good chance he signs the QO
Are you sure there are 11 protected picks? With Toronto’s Bickford comp pick, only the top 10 picks were protected; the team with the 10th-worst record didn’t have a protected pick.