Jason Heyward hasn’t maintained the power output that many once predicted, but he’ll hit the market at a very young age while playing at quite a high level and should be paid accordingly.
Strengths/Pros
There’s a lot to like about Heyward’s all-around game, as he rates as a positive in essentially every area. His tools are undeniable, and he’s turned them into tangible production in most regards.
Heyward’s best single attribute might be his glove. Ultimate Zone and Defensive Runs Saved ledgers are filled with big numbers, as he’s consistently rated as an outstanding right fielder. Since he debuted in 2010, Heyward has easily paced all outfielders in accumulated UZR (Alex Gordon’s 68.3 UZR is second to Heyward’s 96.2). Though his arm is more solid/good than great, he excels in the range department and isn’t prone to mistakes. Given his age and remarkable consistency, this is about as bankable a skill as one could hope to find.
Another often-underappreciated source of value is the basepaths, and Heyward excels there, too. He’s a fairly consistent source of twenty stolen bases, and more importantly, draws excellent overall marks. Indeed, Heyward ranked fifth in all of baseball in 2015 in Fangraphs’ BsR metric (the baserunning component of fWAR) and sits in the top thirty since his rookie year.
Heyward isn’t quite as outstanding with the bat — if he was, we’d be looking at Mike Trout’s theoretical free agent case — but he’s hardly a liability. He’s reached base at a solid .353 clip and walked at a strong 10.8% rate for his career. Though Heyward’s power has not returned to its peak 2012 levels (27 home runs, .210 ISO, .479 SLG), he’s significantly cut back on the strikeouts since and now sits at about a 15% K rate, well below the league average.
Having only just turned 26, it’s not at all out of the question that Heyward could still tap into some pop, particularly since he’s shown the ability to do so at the major league level. His HR/FB rate did land at 12.0%, near his historical norm, after it fell to 6.5% in 2014.
It’s also worth noting that Heyward has also continued to improve in the plate discipline department over the years, showing that he’s continuing to hone his craft. His chase rate and overall swing percentage have dropped every year since 2012, and his contact numbers have risen: in his most recent campaign, he posted a 93.8% in-zone contact rate.
By measure of wRC+, Heyward has been 18% better than the league-average batter over his career and was slightly north of that in 2015, when he slashed .293/.359/.439. He’s been a consistently above-average performer at the plate, apart from a fairly mild sophomore slump, and also shown the ability to hit the ball to all fields. All said, there’s a lot to like about Heyward at the plate.
But the biggest reason that Heyward’s free agent guarantee will likely place at or near the very top of the market is his age. Though he’s already racked up six full years of MLB service, Heyward won’t turn 27 until next August, making him a rare free agent who still could have much of his prime ahead of him. For some context, consider that Alex Gordon — another top free agent corner outfielder this year — had his breakout 2011 campaign in his age-27 season. Gordon, one of Heyward’s chief competitors this winter, is a full five years older.
The total package makes Heyward one of the game’s best overall players. He hasn’t put up a single huge season, really, but consistently registers excellent campaigns. Somewhat quietly, he’s accumulated more fWAR since 2010 than any outfielder not named Trout, McCutchen, or Bautista. (He sits 11th overall among position players.)
That’s due in part, also, to his solid record of durability. Heyward has averaged 139 games and 572 plate appearances per year — good, but not great — but has mostly missed time due to bad luck (e.g., appendectomy, broken jaw).
Weaknesses/Cons
There’s really no broad area in which Heyward fares particularly poorly, but there are certainly some rather significant factors that hold down his value.
The power conundrum certainly rates at the top of the list. As discussed above, it is a huge question for him. His established 27-homer upside remains tantalizing. Were he a reliable source of 25 home runs, his earning power would be astronomical. But, that’s not how things have shaken out in recent seasons. Heyward’s isolated power hasn’t exceeded .150 in either of the last two years, and he hasn’t popped more than 14 long balls since his 2012 campaign.
As a result, some teams looking at the idea of committing huge money over a lengthy term will certainly feel some uncertainty. If you believe that Heyward has settled in as a 12-to-15 annual home run level of power, then any fall-off in his speed and defense could leave him as an even less exciting player than he already is. Two fairly recent, seven-year free agent deals with non-power-hitting, average-OBP outfielders — Jacoby Ellsbury ($153MM) and Carl Crawford ($142MM) — have fallen flat.
We discussed Heyward’s increasing contact tendencies above, and that does have some benefits (e.g., his improving strikeout numbers). But the list of elite contact makers is also riddled with slap hitters, and there are some concerns in Heyward’s batted-ball profile. Last year, his groundball/flyball ratio was way out of whack when compared to career norms. After consistently hitting in the range of 45% groundballs against 35% flyballs annually, Heyward saw his groundball rate shoot up to 57.2% while his flies plummeted to 23.5%. That could be a one-year blip, but it’s not the most encouraging sign to see so many balls hitting the ground.
Likewise, Heyward has traditionally struggled against left-handed pitching. He increased his output to about league-average in 2015, but he’s running a .230/.309/.351 batting line for his career. When weighing a decade-long commitment (or thereabouts), it’d probably be preferable not to be wondering whether and how soon you’ll need to find a platoon mate.
Personal
Heyward was born in New Jersey but grew up in Georgia and excelled there as a high school ballplayer. He wears the number 22 to honor the memory of his former high school teammate, Andrew Wilmot.
As Peter Gammons explored in an interesting 2010 piece, Heyward is the product of a well-educated and thoughtful family. Even as his son participated in competitive youth baseball, Heyward’s dedicated father made sure the focus remained on having fun. Even as he was just entering the big leagues, Heyward drew rave reviews from teammates, coaches, and scouts for his hard work, and he’s only enhanced that reputation since.
“I love to play. I love to play hard,” Heyward himself explained. “I try to play the right way. I was brought up by parents who taught me to treat everyone with respect, to treat them the way I want to be treated.”
Market
Heyward is a special free agent because of his age and consistent level of production. That his annual earning power isn’t exceptional could keep more teams in the hunt than might otherwise be the case, and of course some will see an opportunity to buy up still-undervalued skills.
It’s hard to completely rule out any large market clubs, because other roster moves could always be made to free space for this kind of opportunity. Organizations such as the Angels, Tigers, Giants, and Mariners have the means and, quite possibly, the need for Heyward. The Cardinals don’t generally chase top-of-the-market free agents, but just had him for a year and gave Matt Holliday big money under similar circumstances. There’d be a nice fit with the White Sox, Orioles, Astros, Royals, and Padres, if they’re willing to spend beyond their typical levels. Meanwhile, big spenders such as the Yankees — but also, theoretically, including the Cubs, Dodgers, Rangers, and Nationals — could make room for Heyward if they feel the opportunity is just too good to pass up.
Expected Contract
There’s a range of possibilities here, as always, but I’m guessing Heyward will command a longer deal at a slightly lesser average annual value. Ellsbury’s deal came at just under $22MM in AAV, and even Crawford cracked $20MM annually (five years ago). It’s hard to put Heyward in the same production bracket as Robinson Cano (ten years, $240MM), and you could argue that he’s not as valuable a free agent as was Prince Fielder (nine years, $214MM), depending upon how one values defense and baserunning. But those signings show that super-length contracts at still-significant AAVs can be had.
It’s important to note, also, that Heyward looks like a prime candidate to negotiate an opt-out clause into his deal. Given his age, he’d probably see value in having the right to return to free agency after a reasonable stretch. (After all, as MLBTR’s Steve Adams points out, even five years from now Heyward will still be younger than Gordon is as he hits the market this winter.) And Heyward is represented by Excel Sports Management’s Casey Close, who has guided clients such as Zack Greinke and Masahiro Tanaka to opt-out arrangements.
My prediction: ten years, $200MM.
Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.
You are spot on there, its kind of wild to think that he could get $200M and it might even end up a bargain if he stays healthy, as in 5 years $20M won’t be that much to live up to, especially after his upcoming age 26-33 peak seasons, he won’t be losing a step or anything by the end of the deal either, unlike every contract given to anyone over 30.
why do you feel that the only direction future salaries can go is up? most felt that way about their real estate value, and learned their lessons. with higher def TV and escalating ticket prices, at some point advertising and attendance is going to peak. The players next contract might actually take into consideration the average player, instead of just the superstars, and change the disparity in contracts. 20MM may become an anchor contract in 5 years. Could happen, is all I’m saying.
I had it at 10 years and $200 as well. I really hope the Yankees are able to move Gardner and get in on Heyward. I know people will think it’s crazy, but I really would like them to get younger and more athletic in RF. They have Judge, but hey if he pans out or not at least they would have something stable there. Plus next years crop of FA’s doesn’t look so hot. If they are going to spend any money at all, I hope they spend it on Jason.
Be careful what you wish for. Gardner is an excellent player… Would love to have him on the Tigers. Not sure why you would give up on him.
not a yankees fan, but it seems the last thing they need is another left handed bat. Cespedes seems like a much better fit than Heyward.
I will always remember Heywards soph year and Chipper Jones calling him out for basically being soft.
He’s a guy I think the NYM, Os, etc…should definetly more than entertain. His floor is what will drive the big payday like shown above, but I still believe a real like AZ or NYY who have a ton of money for one reason or another will land the solid abv avg MLB, but below his contract that will be soon signed.
In Heyward’s “soph year” he was TWENTY ONE.
Is it fair to judge anyone when they are 21?
I don’t know what the Cardinals will do. They want Heyward, but the amount of money to get him back would require Mo going out of his comfort zone to get him. They did trade Shelby Miller to get him, so it doesn’t make much sense to let him walk after one year, but they also need to improve parts of their offense.
Even with all their injuries last year, they won 100 games… Even without Heyward they have Holliday – Grichuck – Piscotty – Jay – Bourjos – Pham and Moss. They have Gonzales, Cooney and Lyons in their wings as Starters and get Wainwright back healthy. Their “needs” is depth at most, maybe a reliever like Clippard…. but they are loaded more than any of the returning playoff teams.
They can let him go and be all right yes. Although Moss is a guy I hope they don’t keep, or use primarily as a pinch hitter
The Cards need to sign Heyward, but only if the price is REASONABLE. Holiday is in deep decline and there is no guarantee that Grichuk and Piscotty can repeat their success from last season long term. On the other hand, I don’t see the Cards getting in a bidding war. As with Holiday and McGwire, I think the Cards will rely on their great history and fan base to lure Heyward back at a slightly reduced rate of pay.
$20M/year for Heyward is absurd. Whoever gives him that much will be regretting it.
Yeah he’s just a consistent 5-to-6-win player who turned 26 two months ago.
Did you want to offer any explanation for why you think twenty is “absurd”? Any market data points that make it a bad suggestion?
This just goes to the difference between WAR and the eye test. I am not anti-WAR by any means, but Jason Heyward is a good reason why some people despise that stat. He is nothing more than a slightly above average outfielder by the eye test. And he’s nothing special at the plate at all especially for a corner outfielder. He is definitely a good young player, but he is not a top tier outfielder, in my opinion. I’ve been wrong before and I’ll be wrong again, but I have been right before too.
I’m all for adding scouting into the equation, but I’ve never heard of anyone not loving him defensively.
Let’s not forget what the Cardinals — one of the league’s best and most consistent organizations — gave up a pretty significant haul just to get one year of him.
That’s less than what Carl Crawford makes. Might want to lay off the hyperbole there, champ.
Uh yeah, The Crawford deal isn’t an example of a good deal.
Not sure why people use bad deals to justify prices.
Bad deal, good deal, mediocre deal…doesn’t matter what they become, past deals + inflation set the current market rate.
That’s not how it works.
Yes, yes it is. This season’s free agents will base their future contracts on what the past has said they are worth.
Free agents don’t get to base their contracts on anything.
They aren’t priced like pop-tarts. They can establish an asking price but the clubs get to decide where values are set.
Baseball players are commodities, you are obviously not an econ major.
That is a very wrong statement. That is how it works. How else would it work?
There are zero valuation models that work that way.
Can you think of any asset appraisals that use this formula?
Not only isn’t it used anywhere but it doesn’t make sense and is completely unsustainable.
I think the Tigers would be a fantastic fit for JHey. Him, J.D. and Gose would make an excellent outfield and should they want a different dynamic vs. lefties, Rajai is available.
It also gives them options should they want to stay competitive or rebuild.
Of course, it’d be crazy to do this if funds are tight, as pitching should take priority.
Tigers NEED Starters and Relievers… Moya should be ready to start and Collins is a good 4th OF – They can always replace Davis with a guy like Drew Stubbs or one of many decent much cheaper choices like Venable, Brown, Bryd, Rasmus, Pearce or Young.
He’s definitely a fit and a guy who make that Tigers lineup very long, they could use him and get a pitcher as well, they’re always spending money.
Heyward would be an excellent fit in Detroit because:
1. The OF is so large they need two premium defenders.
2. Defeating KC means having premium defense. You have to have an answer for a team that constantly puts the ball in play against any type of pitching.
The problem is to make it work, they have to trade JD for two pitchers… so they can address that weakness too.
There are several really good comparables that teams should consider before writing a $200M check.
Crawford carried similar defensive chops. He crushed Heyward in SB’s – easily could count on 50+. His offense was climbing steadily – peaking at a nearly 370 wOBA. He posted 7.7 fWAR in his platform season. In the 5 years since he has a combined fWAR of 6.1.
Michael Bourn didn’t have the bat of Crawford or even Heyward. At his best, he was a league average hitter. However, he played a more premium position and put up better defensive numbers then either Crawford or Heyward. And he was a burner capable of 50+ SB’s like Crawford. From 2009 to 2012 he saw his fWAR range from 3.8 to 6.2. Pretty similar to Heyward’s last 4 years. Since signing his FA deal … 2.1 fWAR over 3 years.
I’m not saying that Heyward will turn out like Crawford or Bourne. However, we have 2 (and you can call it 3 with Ellsbury) recent examples of defensive specialists who were excellent base runners with lighter batting skills who have completely fallen off the cliff. I’ve heard it said so many times that bats fade but gloves and legs will still bring you value. I’m not sure that’s the case.
There is no way that I come even close to paying Heyward something like 10/$200M. Just because the Yankees and Red Sox thought that paying $20M/year was a smart idea for Ellsbury and Crawford doesn’t mean that other teams should.
Ellsbury’s decline last year was because of injury… I think he rebounds just fine next year. Crawford’s reasons are all because of injuries as well…
I think any team offering him 10 yr / 200 Mil comes with a opt out after the 4th year… but all long term contracts are a risk because of injury, not so much lack of production thru age.. Bourn too suffered many injury riddled seasons.
How do injuries not count in discussing the risk of a long term contract?
Isn’t the risk all about injuries? I don’t think guys forget how to play they just lose the ability to compensate for the ever increasing physical toll.
That’s kind of the thing, isn’t it. I would say that Heyward’s career is injury-prone — not that he gets injured a lot, but that his most valuable skills are more likely to be affected by injury.
Guys that just flat out hit tend to be more durable in that sense. Speed and defense go first.
I think injuries certainly have to be considered, especially for pitchers, but I’m not sure I see anything to indicate he’s injury prone. Seems like he’s been unlucky a few times to me.
I agree that he does not seem to be injury prone, but a 10 year vs. a 5 year contract exposes a team to twice the risk of an injury.That’s creating dead money in a deal and the sooner the injury happens the worse your exposure is.
Some team may very well have to go 10 years to get him, but your “cons” listed makes it a hard pill to swallow.
The opt. out clause could be looked at as a team positive, since he would have to be doing well to think he could get more on a new deal. You get 4 or 5 solid, prime years and lose the exposure to injury or fall off of the later years.
Yes, there’s certainly more exposure to all kinds of risks, especially because of the added uncertainty. And I agree that teams will prefer a somewhat shorter deal (though that’s usually the case when it comes to long FA contracts). Certainly fair to think he’s not worth it.
I know of some smart baseball people who take your perspective on the opt out. Feels like more of a negative for a team to me, but I can see how it can be beneficial for the club as well.
I also can see the negative, in that you don’t want to lose a
productive player. But it could be possible you could resign him if the new numbers work for you and the player. It would be similar to dealing with any “FA to be” on your team. You would have the inside track with new contract talks and higher $$$ would get the OK from the Union.
For me, the issue is that a team is holding a ton of downside while the player has a lot of upside. E.g., Greinke gets to run back to FA when the Dodgers would love to have the rest of his contract. But if he just had mid-season TJ surgery, LAD would be left holding the bag.
I don’t mean injury prone in that sense — I just mean that IF he were to start running into injuries, his tools are more susceptible to decline than someone who’s best tool is his bat. Guys that just plain hit can stay useful through injuries a lot more if their moneymaker is their zone awareness, pitch recognition, etc.
First of all, you can’t compare Crawford and Heyward, in anything. Totally different kinds of athlete. Heyward’s hitting ceiling is so much higher than Crawford or Bourn and he’s not even a similar kind of hitter either. In fact, these three players have little in common other than being outfielders. Very suspect research done here, sorry but I disagree entirely. Heyward on a 10/200 deal is a very wise investment in player output even if you dont believe he has 30+ HR power or not, but it also has extremely good odds of being value for money to boot, he could outperform $20M a year in his sleep right now — fangraphs has a 2 WAR player being worth a little under $15M a year. Heyward at 6.0 WAR last year was valued at $48.4M. If he keeps doing what he does and turns the power on, he’s a perennial MVP-level player, absolutely worth $20M a year.
First off, a 2 WAR player is not worth $15 million a year, but that’s a different argument for a different day. You are also correct in that you shouldn’t compare Crawford and Heyward because Crawford was a much superior offensive player than Heyward. If you don’t believe he has 30 HR power, then you have common sense. The guy has hit 38 in the last 3 seasons COMBINED. And as far as being a perennial MVP-level player, I don’t consider 2 years of barely getting MVP votes being an MVP-level player, but I guess you can if you want.
Your opinion is not based in reality, every year fangraphs does 1 WAR per FA $ calculations. Not sure what it was last season but I’m sure it was at or above 7.5M per.
Where to start with this … how about we look at offense over the 2 years prior to hitting the FA market:
Player A: 306/360/473 … 34 HR’s … 107 SB’s … 22 Defensive Runs saved … 128 wRC+
Player B: 281/355/411 … 24 HR’s … 43 SB’s … 34 Defensive Runs saved … 115 wRC+
Player C: 284/348/388 … 11 HR’s … 103 SB’s … 47 Defensive Runs saved … 104 wRC+
I don’t see ANY scenario where player B (Heyward) is better than A (Crawford) or C (Bourn). Crawford is significantly better with the stick (+13 wRC+) and contributed nearly twice as many SB’s as Heyward. Heyward only beats Crawford on defense by 12 runs saved.
If you value defense higher then Bourn should be your pick. He’s only 11 points lower in wRC+. Again, more than twice as many SB’s. And he bests Heyward with 13 more defensive runs saved.
As for WAR and value … Crawford put up 13.6 fWAR in his 2 seasons prior to FA. Bourn was at 10 fWAR. Heyward was at 11.2.
So, I’ll say it again. They are all similar players. They derive most of their value with their legs and their gloves. Their batted ball profile varied from solid to league average. The real difference between the three is age not talent. Bourn was 4 years older but even then he only managed to get a 4 year deal @ $12M AAV. Crawford was all of 2 years older than Heyward when he hit the market.
In any event, if you want your club to drop $200M on the guy power to you. I think it’s foolish to make this the 10th highest contract ever in MLB history but who knows. I could be wrong. We have lots of great examples where long term contracts to averagish hitters have worked out well.
There is one main difference between Heyward and all the players you mentioned. Heyward is 4 years younger than all of them when heading into his free agent years. Can’t expect the same kind of decline for that reason alone. 20 million a year for 10 years wouldn’t be unreasonable for a player heading into his age 26 season as a free agent. That’s what the market will demand. And because of his age, there are zero comps available to argue for or against that contract. It is an entirely new situation that we’ve never seen before. His baseball card stats may not look like he’s earned that money, but the intangibles and peripherals demand it.
Crawford was 28. Heyward will be 26. Certainly there is a gap there but it isn’t huge.
I’m not really even arguing about the money. Just pointing out that there are some very recent examples of similar profile players who have crashed and burned. Given the current debates around how accurate base running and defensive metrics are one might approach the situation cautiously.
Crawford signed in December 2010 – he was 29.
Heyward is 3 years younger than Crawford was.
It’s a huge gap and general managers aren’t going to “approach the situation cautiously,” the vast majority of them know they have to win now to still be around in 10 years when said hypothetical contract expires.
The article states: “Organizations such as the Angels, Tigers, Giants, and Mariners have the means and, quite possibly, the need for Heyward. There’d be a nice fit with the White Sox, Orioles, Astros, Royals, and Padres, if they’re willing to spend beyond their typical levels. Meanwhile, big spenders such as the Yankees — but also, theoretically, including the Cubs, Dodgers, Rangers, and Nationals — could make room for Heyward if they feel the opportunity is just too good to pass up.”
I have to really disagree to a lot of those clubs being bidders on Heyward.
The Astros have Marisnick / Gomez / Springer / Tucker / Grossman / Gattis
The Dodgers have Crawford / Pederson / Puig / Ethier / Van Slyke / Ruggiano
The Nationals have Werth / Taylor / Harper / Robinson / Moore / Dekker
The Padres have Myers / M. Upton / Kemp / Liriano / Jankowski / Renfroe
The White Sox have Cabrera / Eaton / Garcia / Thompson / Shuck
The Cubs have Schwarber / Soler / Coghlan / McKinney / Almora / Alcantara
The Cards have Holliday / Grichuk / Piscotty / Jay / Bourjos / Pham / Moss
The Giants have Aoki / Pagan / Pence / Blanco / Parker
The Tigers have Moya / Gose / JD Martinez / Collins
The Mariners have Smith / Miller / Cruz / Jones / O’Malley / Romero
The Angels have the need and means.
The Phillies have the need and means (even to out-bid all)
The Tigers have the need for a less expensive OF and more towards SP
The Orioles have the need at too many places to spend 200 mil on 1 player.
The Royals – ditto (too many needs, not enough money)
The Padres are in need of SS and SP
The Cubs need a CF, not Heyward, and they will go hard after another top SP.
The Mariners, Angels and Phillies are the 3 teams with the most need for a corner OF as well as can afford 200 Mil.
The best fit for Heyward is actually the Phillies.
Great Hitters Park / Can offer the most $$$ / Would be huge part of a Quicker rebuild. With the addition of a good young OF (Heyward or Upton) and a couple starters… The Phillies can easily be a .500 team next year, and into contention in 2017.
I appreciate your detail in responding, but respectfully, I think you’re missing the part where Heyward is better than the in-house options. And the part where I said many of those teams would have to shift pieces to make it work. And frankly, you are citing a whole bunch of players who would never factor into a decision of this magnitude.
Astros: could deal some younger players for pitching; Gattis not an OF for them
Cubs: same
Dodgers: really think they’d be limited from making it happen if they want him?
Nationals: would likely need to punt Werth or use JHey or Harper in CF for a year
Padres/White Sox/Giants/Tigers/Mariners: come on, those groups of players are not keeping those teams from adding a premium corner OF if they want to
I considered mentioning the Phillies but they have made really clear they don’t intend to spend that much on a FA this year, so I’m taking them at their word. (And Phillies easily to .500 next year? You have them signing multiple significant free agent pitchers in addition to adding Heyward?)
so you’re saying 200 million is something those teams would and or should consider for a moderate improvement in right field?
I would be hard pressed to make a case that any of those teams would be better off spending that money on Heyward instead of one of the other actually available free agents who happen to fill a real current need.
I can’t see many teams getting so infatuated with him to trade a good right fielder just to give him 200 million and still have all of the same weaknesses they had going into the off-season. That’s how a GM get’s fired.
Hey fans! I upgraded our defense in right field! I think that will get us over the hump!
I normally wouldn’t do this, but since I wrote the post and the comment …
You obviously have no interest in understanding how actual front office people think about the game. And that’s not just some kind of sabermetric-vs-scouting statement. Defense has always been valued, as has baserunning. Age and – in a harder-to-assess way, durability – matter because of what they tells us about the future. That’s not super novel, really.
If you want to scan stat sheets for wins and dingers and throw up your hands about everything else, then have at it. But if that’s the case, there really isn’t anything to discuss. Just pull up last year’s box scores and tell us who’s good.
The guy disagrees with you, you don’t have to belittle him or talk to him like an idiot. The last time I checked, none of us including you, were actual front office people. We all have a right to our opinion, because opinion is all this is anyway.
If he’d been remotely polite, I wouldn’t have. I interact with readers on here all the time and am always respectful.
I don’t claim any special knowledge or authority because I write for the site. Take my arguments as I make them. I realize it’s the internet and I have to bite my tongue. And I’ve got no interest in belittling someone. But if you make repeated sarcastic comments about something I wrote, I certainly reserve the right not to bend over backwards to be friendly in response.
Thanks for interacting with the readers, by the way… that doesn’t happen at any of the other places I regularly post.
Was I disrespectful in mocking what a GM would be saying after spending 200 million to upgrade a position the fans didn’t feel was the teams problem? That wasn’t intended as an insult to you. It was an example of how it would sound when you were explaining the investment. Sometimes ideas sound good into you try to explain them to the principals.
isn’t that a little over sensitive either way though?
Let me know if there was something else I said you found excessive.
What makes you say I have no interest in understanding how a front office is run?
Is it that I disagree with something, that I question it or that I have different opinion?
I can’t even imagine how you decided I didn’t value defense, base running, intangibles or anything else just because I don’t value them enough to decide Hayward is worth 200 million dollars. The difference between giving them no value and deciding he’s worth a top 10 or 20 all time contract even though he’s a bit weak in most normal baseball stats strikes me as a little weird. I can’t really visualize any kind of rating system that would makes sense of your valuation.
You have to admit you are giving someone top value based on secondary stats.
You shouldn’t feel the need to defend anything you say but it would be nice to hear why you think my perspective of paying that much for a moderate improvement in the face of bigger needs is so insignificant when compared to the factors you list.
How about you explain your point, how I’m wrong or how a front office really thinks instead of dismissing me as not even caring about how things work, learning anything or even discussing the subject?
I might’ve been oversensitive after a long day and spending a lot of time writing this, it’s true. So, apologies for being cranky.
I was sort of responding to all of your comments at once here (I believe I read them all at once while approving them in moderation). You mentioned “bizarre sabermetric” concepts, etc, when I think Heyward fares well in virtually all areas regardless of one’s way of approaching the game.
There are certainly good arguments to be made that he’s not worth $200MM or $20MM annually over a shorter term. And there’s plenty of room to disagree on how to value players, both generally and on a team-by-team basis. So I’m more than happy to have that discussion and have folks disagree with my views.
(Side note: Bear in mind, also, that these pieces are predicting what will happen, not saying what we think should. There are lots of predictions you’ll see on here, but you won’t necessarily always see our internal discussion of whether we think the numbers we expect are good investments.)
Anyway, I mostly felt you were being dismissive toward my post and comment. If your sarcasm was directed at hypothetical GMs, and not me, then I don’t have any issues with how you responded. It’s always hard to interpret things written on the internet. Thanks for explaining.
I see them signing enough FA pitchers on a 1 yr contract then flip them at the deadline… Pitchers such as Fister, Latos. Norris, Hill, Cahill should be available on 1 year deals.. They need 3 more starters, with only Nola and Eickhoff guaranteed slots in the starting 5.
The Phillies should play Ruf & Howard as a true LH/RH platoon in 2016.
Franco has a full year at 3B – SS & 2B will be used by Galvis, Hernandez, Sweeney and Blanco – all 4 players are all switch-hitters.
Rupp will get to be the starting Catcher, but Knapp & Alfaro both looking to be ready to be there come 2017. Ditto JP Crawford, Nick Williams and Brady Quinn. Herrera impressed as a rule 5 draft Rookie last year, and Altherr looks solid as one of the 2 corner spots.
The part in which you said you take the Phillies Brass at their word about not spending big on FA I believe was telling the fans not to think about the Pitchers such as Price, Grienke or Cueto… and not a guy like Cespedes because he is already 30 – That spending big long contracts for a 30 year old is not rebuilding…. but to say a 26 year old Heyward or a 28 year old Upton wouldn’t be a good move would be a lie…
And look at the Phillies record in the 2nd half last season.. They went 34-37…. Even with the horrible starters like Harang, Williams, Buchanan and Asher and reliever De Fratus ended up going a combined 5-20 with an ERA of 6.40 in 222.1 IP / 299 H / 158 ER / 77 BB / 133 K’s
And I didn’t even add in Murray – Roberts and Loewen’s stats in because I’m not sure they won’t be returning with impressive Springs
(doubt Loewen returns – and he had a 6.98 ERA in the 2nd Half)
Do you Really Think the Padres will spend 200 Million on Heyward? They need a SS (Desmond?) and at least 1 good starter to replace Kennedy…
Dodgers will either re-sign Greinke or add another 150-200 on a starter, plus address the glaring holes in the BP. They hardly need or want Heyward in my opinion. The Tigers… Starters and relievers and maybe after that, a lower cost OF – Giants need to replace 3 starters… and they could have just took on Byrd’s 8 Mil option and gotten a guy that still hits 25 HR a year. / White Sox… Pitching needs there too trumps any 200 Mil OF since they have Cabrera / Eaton / Garcia and Thompson as their top 4 OF’s.
Mariners – Angels – Phillies – those are the only three that in My Opinion will seriously go for Heyward and Upton, with the Phillies having the biggest wallet of them all…
34-37 in the second half – 5-20 from players that won’t be back…
Yeah, I can easily see the Phillies as a .500 team next year with Heyward OR Upton… and 2 or 3 starters among the non-elite added.
All that said… Be HONEST… When it comes time to guess where the top 50 FA’s end up, will YOU be picking Heyward to land in any of those other teams you mentioned?
I mentioned teams that were plausible. Like I said, could’ve mentioned Phillies but I don’t think that’s where their focus us. Do I expect the Padres to sign him? No, I don’t. But I also don’t think he’ll land with the Phillies. Haven’t decided who to pick, but it may not be one of your favs.
You need to lay off the Phillies kool aid, though. Their roster is basically as bad as any in baseball for purposes of immediate contention. If they sign three or four veteran starters on one-year deals, several of them will probably be terrible. For every nice surprise in an Odubel Herrera, there will be a young player who disappoints.
That’s not to say I don’t like the team’s overall outlook. They’ve started to build back young assets and have loads of cash. But they are among maybe a handful of teams least likely to be a contender this year. They’d have to spend way more than I expect they’ll be interested in spending to move the needle. Fans are already prepped for a disaster year, so it’s not like there are expectations.
Anyway, my Phillies outlook piece will be coming soon, we can debate further there!
I look forward to it…
Jason Heyward is, at worst, the second best player on each of those lists of players. He’s the best on most of them.
I never said he wouldn’t be… just that the 3 teams that can best afford him AND fills a dire need are the Phillies, Angels and Mariners.
Why would the Phillies sign him. They are in rebuild mode. Really??
Because Heyward is only 26 – That IS Rebuilding, wouldn’t it be???
One other point that actually weighed in why I didn’t discuss them: would he go there?
Why wouldn’t he? Its a great hitters park, he’d get most likely the most money if the Phillies want to outbid them all, they can. It wouldn’t be hard to convince him that the Phillies are an up and coming team with a good 2nd half last year, a new GM and President that cares about bringing back a winner to Philly… As a lifetime Braves player and last year with the Cards, he knows the Phillies as well as any player, he gets to stay on the East Coast and the NL.
The Phillies could offer the most money, give him 10 years with a 4 year opt out… Convincing him to come to Philly isn’t that hard a sell really… Phillies have a bright future, they are a young team getting younger after next year when Howard and Ruiz are done.
If he did sign, he would be the lone big contract on the entire team come 2017.
Fact is, If money is the factor, Phillies can offer the most.
Second – He is young, which factors into his decision where the team he signs with will be in 4-10 years… and the truth is… The Phillies have the prospects and young players now plus this year’s #1 overall pick to go with a payroll that they would never worry about hitting just under the luxury tax limit, where they had been for all those years they finished in 1st place 7 consecutive years with 2 WS appearances and 1 WS Championship… Heyward saw all that… played for the Braves during that time… and knows that they can get back there by adding players such of his caliber… that’s why…
He could get the most money if any team outbids the others.
“I feel your pain”. Rebuilds suck, esp. for big market teams. At least the Philly’s got a ring out of their run. Just maybe started to tear it down maybe a couple years late. Signing Heyward now would have been like the Cubs signing him 1 or 2 years into theirs and would have most likely cost them drafting Bryant and Scwarber and signing Soler. Unfortunately, having had McPhail in Chicago, don’t think he is up to it. So may be in for years of also rans. Suggestion, find a good MiLB blog and embrace the future!
There’s some logic in that but why would he sign with Philly?
It may not be obvious on the surface, but Heyward’s skill set fits the Cubs’ needs like a glove. His D/contact hitting/base running skills are exactly what they need to balance a swing-and-miss line-up, help manufacture more runs, and stabilize a shaky outfield defense. One outside the box strategy might be to spend on Heyward, then package Soler in a trade for quality, young controllable pitching, instead of buying an ace this offseason
They need to replace Fowler (or re-sign him)…. why trade Soler when you have no need to? Plus the Cubs have McKinney and Almora almost big-league ready.
Adding Price I think is the priority for the Cubs because they tasted how close they were to going to the World Series… Arrieta and Lester is a good 1-2 punch, but they need better than what they have as their #3 to win in the playoffs..
I have to see Arrieta do it again to Believe what I saw last year from him ! He’s more likely to revert back to his Baltimore Days .
Which is why the Cubs need to spent 180-200 to get Price this Offseason.
Agreed, Heyward fills all the boxes Theo mentioned in his final press conference. Flexability and $ wise he would be a great fit in CF and leading off for years. If Cubs spend big $ it will be here, not on a Price price.
Then the can deal from the farm and still have a ton of flexability to sign a Leake, Lackey, Carrasco etc.
We forget Soler played very few minor league games before he basically HAD to be brought up, based on his contract. His defence will improve. As will Schwarbers, who basically never played OF.
Good player but I don’t get the excitement. Youth isn’t a skill. 15-20 home runs isn’t power and 20 steals isn’t speed.
He’s a good all around player who isn’t a lead off hitter, isn’t a clean up hitter and doesn’t play a skill position.
I’m sure someone will overpay him based off some bizarre sabermetric overvaluation of a thought to be under appreciated skill set but it will be a mistake. You don’t throw 20 million a year at players who don’t make any special difference anywhere.
The Yankees would be better off with Gordon and I’m not so sure that isn’t true will all clubs.
Wait, you’re arguing against Heyward and saying teams should prefer Gordon? They are, like, the exact same player, except for age. R
They are both reasonably above-average hitters with mediocre power, outstanding defense, good baserunning, and good reputations.
Oh, there is one other difference, related to age: at the point in his career where Heyward is now, Gordon was coming off of a .215/.315/.355 season in which he was demoted to Triple-A.
Gordon will probably be close to half the total dollars for one.
I think Gordon is a better hitter. leader and more of a winner. I think the defense is close enough.
How is anyone coming off a 2010 season? You’re getting a little desperate with that one.
About half the total $ wouldn’t surprise me, agreed. You can certainly argue that Gordon is a better player right now. And you can prefer to invest in him over a shorter term. Many teams probably will. There’s room for opinion in there, and also room for clubs to decide what kind of investment they want to make.
My point re Gordon’s 2010 wasn’t made in reference to his outlook — I agree it’d be irrelevant to that. I’m just saying that he improved by leaps and bounds after that year and began raising his status to where it is now. Heyward, meanwhile, has already been highly productive for years.
So, the point was w/r/t Heyward and his value: there’s still room to dream on some more upside and some good reasons to believe he’s a good investment over such a long term.
And Gordon could well cost as much or more annually than Heyward.
Every front office prefers to pay a little more per year in exchange for a shorter deal.
That’s as universal as preferring the younger player to the older player given equal production.
That’s largely true, and obviously Heyward could command more annually on a shorter deal, although to some extent I do believe there’s an annual value range that teams tend to stick to based on expected production.
The point here, really, is that a 10-year deal for Heyward will not only buy his next five years, but also the same five years that clubs are hypothetically going to give Gordon. The first five should be total prime years.
There’s way more risk in buying those last five years right now, of course, but you can argue that a) you’re getting a player less likely to decline over the next five years b) at a lower AAV (keeping more $$$ free) c) while adding distant years that will probably look much cheaper when we get there (assuming continued inflation, even if it slows).
Don’t see anymore 10 year contracts anymore. Definitely see 7 years for Heyward at $20+. I thinks it’s gonna be a surprise team that signs him. It’s not going to be St. Louis.
The money is still flowing, no? I don’t see any reason we won’t see deals of that length (though I’d be interested in hearing your reasoning).
The economy for one
No teams adding 100 mil to payroll this year like the dodgers is 2
lack of track record for those deals panning out is 3.
He will get 200+ for 10 years. As a cub fan let fowler walk and get draft pick and go for heyward. Assuming we can still afford price/Zimmerman and leake or lackey. if not maybe pick up Gordon from royals. With his age and war he will get paid $$$. Cards to cheap and have great young outfielders so they won’t get in bidding war.
Since the last major league expansion prior to the 1998 season 3,861 individuals have made their mlb debut, their average age was 24.88. Heyward is entering Free Agency in his age 26 season. That = he’ll SEE THE MONEY!
I would not be shocked if he signs for less years at a higher AAV allowing him to enter FA again when he is still relatively young. Maybe 7 years @ 25 M per or something in that neighborhood. TV money is still going to allow a number of GM’s to dump that kind of payroll into a solid defensive 26 year old with a career 114 OPS+.
Crawford got 20 Mil per 60 months ago (that is an eternity in baseball years and he was entering his age 29 season w/ a career 107 OPS+).
I don’t understand why you guys have such a hard on for the guy. ALL year long you all have been saying 200M+ for 8-10 years depending on the day. He’s not a player that’s going to command that much.
I don’t see him getting more than 150M. I honestly don’t see the cardinals doing better than 6 years 125-130M.
The fact is, clubs don’t value defense the same way they value offense. I like the guy, I hope the Cards re-sign him, but not at a higher price point.
We’re just assessing the market best we can, though I’ll admit I do like him as a player. And Cards obviously valued him quite highly in that trade.
Fair enough Jeff. I also like him as a player, I just don’t believe it’s going to be as large of a contract as people have been saying. Defense simply isn’t valued as highly as offense.
Time will tell!
As a Braves fan, I was excited at the potential of Heyward being someone who could bring 25-30 hrs and a .280 ba. ( the new found saber metrics are beyond my understanding and not part of my “analyzing” a player). That being said, Heyward has turned into a good/ solid player but not what I expected.
Personally, as a Braves fan I would like to see the Cubs sign Heyward and deal Soler + to Atlanta for Tehran. This would help both teams. I’m just not sure what the Cubs could/ would add to go along with Soler.
The Cardinals need to re-sign Heyward, but only with a REASONABLE contract. Holiday is in deep decline and there is uncertainty about Grichuk and Piscotty over a full season, though they both appear to be future stars.
That being said, the Cards will not pay Heyward $200 million. And in my opinion, no one else will either. I think 6/$150 is the best Heyward will get from the Cards, and with their great tradition and fan base it just may be enough to lure Heyward back to St. Louis. It worked with Holiday and McGwire, who both turned down more money to return to the Cardinals.
I think 6/150 is still higher than they’re comfortable with, but I agree with your comment. I think 6/135 is the highest they’ll go, or perhaps I should say that I hope that’s the highest they’ll go!
Very insightful article Jeff. Thanks!
What the Tigers SHOULD do is trade JD Martinez and get two young, high upside pitchers (similar caliber to Fulmer/Norris)… then give Heyward a 10 year contract. Norris, Fulmer and two more pitchers (at that level) would put the Tigers on the Mets arm “stockpiling” track while still having Verlander and Sanchez.
What the Tigers WILL do is overpay two mediocre, older pitchers and then lock up JD for to a contract that will be similar to Heyward in AAV after his arbitration years. This plan will be both more expensive and will not give them the same output and Heyward and two young pitchers.
Thanks man! Your plan would certainly be more fun to cover, so I’m all for it.