Thanks as always for your mailbag inquiries. We can’t get to ’em all, but you’re always welcome to try again in any of our three weekly chats: Tuesdays at 2pm CST with Steve Adams, Wednesdays at 6:30pm CST with Jason Martinez and Thursdays at 2pm CST with yours truly.
If his $13MM option gets declined, what is the free agency outlook for Clay Buchholz? – Jon R.
Well, this all begins and ends with the desperately thin starting pitching class available this winter — though that may be a bit overstated as a driving force for salaries. The low supply is probably more a matter of timing, and a reflection of extensions, than it is pure scarcity.
That being said, the low supply could well play a notable role, especially if several teams decide that Buchholz — moreso than, say, Andrew Cashner — is the bounceback candidate worth targeting. Even in a free agent class rich in pitching last year, plenty of guys got paid; there’s little reason to think that the market will fall this winter.
So, what’s the positive case for Buchholz? It’s fairly straightforward, really: the 32-year-old has had productive major league campaigns in the past, and carries a second-half ERA of 3.59 and has limited opponents to a .234/.302/.347 batting line over those 52 2/3 innings. Plus, it’s arguable that he might benefit from moving beyond the constant scrutiny and the saga-like rises and falls he has experienced of late in Boston.
I’m not quite ready to pin a number on Buchholz, but I do think he’ll sign as a starter and I wouldn’t be shocked if he’s able to command a multi-year deal if his option isn’t picked up. Of course, he may prefer to rebuild his value on a one-year pact; that’s a risky proposition for any pitcher, especially one at his age, but I’d expect he could secure a single-season contract for something in the ballpark of his option price.
It’s obvious the Giants need to upgrade their bullpen this offseason. With 3 (Sergio Romo, Javier Lopez, and Santiago Casilla) all free agents at year end who do you see them targeting in free agency? – Michael C.
In some ways I have to dispute the premise of your question. The Giants’ pen has had some notable lapses, at the back end and at inopportune moments, but overall has been an approximately average unit with a 3.72 ERA. Apart from all those blown saves and a rather low strikeout rate — the San Francisco pen is one of only five with less than eight K/9 — it has been an unremarkable unit.
Now, that’s not to say that there’s nothing to do here. But I make the point because I’m not sure that the Giants are facing much more than a fairly typical number of bullpen openings for a hopefully-contending team.
That may not be as soothing to you as it is to me, but you can also take solace in the fact that most of the Giants’ best relievers this year remain cheap and controllable. And Romo, Lopez, and Casilla combined to earn $19.5MM this year, so there’s a lot of reliever salary coming off the books. All said, there’s a solid-enough base to add onto here, and it ought to be possible for Bobby Evans and co. to pursue a top-tier closer and bolster the remainder of the relief corps this winter.
Brian Dozier is having a career year and most GMs will see that. What would an expected return for him be? How many teams will even be in the market for a defensive deficient 2nd baseman with a little pop in his bat? – Thomas M.
“A little pop”?! Dozier has 42 long balls and a .284 isolated slugging percentage. He’s second in all of baseball in both categories, putting him in the company of lumbering sluggers like David Ortiz, Mark Trumbo, Edwin Encarnacion, and Nelson Cruz.
Dozier isn’t a premium defender, but UZR and DRS have both generally graded him firmly in the vicinity of average. So, imaging being able to take Encarnacion — look it up their batting lines are quite similar — and plug him in at second base, confident that you’d get sturdy glovework.
Sure, we can expect some regression, but he now has a new ceiling that you can’t ignore. Even with a step back, there’s a ton of value here. That’s all the more true given that Dozier is owed just $15MM over the next two years, which is not only enticingly cheap but also represents a very limited commitment to a player who won’t turn thirty until next May.
We will surely examine this question in greater detail and from many angles as the offseason gets underway, but for now, suffice to say that I see Dozier as a legitimately excellent trade chip. Realistically, he’s a good enough asset that many teams could pursue him even if they do not, strictly speaking, have a “need” at second base.
Mark Melancon is viewed by many as an inferior pitcher to Aroldis Chapman and Kenley Jansen, but he is has been just as good in ERA and some other statistics, such as saves. Will he end up getting more money than thought because of this? – Nicolas C.
You can’t look past results and focus only on the peripherals, any more than you can do the opposite. I’m not going to argue that Melancon is better than Chapman or Jansen, but I’m also not going to ignore his 1.82 ERA over 287 frames since the start of 2013 — or the 2.26 FIP in that span which supports the results.
Ultimately, in terms of the comparisons, there is none — but that’s because of an entirely different factor. Jansen turns 29 at the end of this month, with Chapman not far behind him. But Melancon is already more than halfway between his 31st and 32st birthdays.
But your question, really, is a bit different. As I take it, you’re wondering if teams will reach for Melancon because of his gaudy results, even though he doesn’t carry the huge fastball or strikeout rate that we might prefer to see. (Remember, he also doesn’t walk anybody.)
I do think Melancon will be paid handsomely — I agree with MLBTR’s Mark Polishuk that he is a strong candidate for a four-year deal — but that’ll be a reflection more of the ever-evolving valuation of relievers than a return to some knee-jerk day of yore when saves paid. The bottom line is that Melancon remains extremely effective and has been for some time, and he’s going to get rewarded for that. The open market always carries the potential for inflating a given player’s salary, since it is a bidding situation (and one with nebulous organizational valuations and ownership prerogatives in the background), but I don’t see any reason to expect that Melancon will not be valued properly.
Totally didn’t answer the Dozier question.
I respectfully disagree.
The trade return question is posed often, and I dislike responses on the order of: “one top X prospect and another Y type prospect.” That’s just nonsense, most of the time, and I say that with the knowledge that I’ve probably used it as a crutch myself. Not only is it all dependent upon individual teams’ scouting assessments, trade talks take place in a fluid market situation that involves multiple teams and also free agents. And prospect valuation isn’t as simple as checking the rankings. We could discuss specific prospects w/r/t a specific trade target, but obviously that wasn’t presented here.
So, I find the whole idea of “expected return” to be largely a misnomer. Instead of making something up, I addressed his points regarding Dozier’s value given his overall profile and the context of his big campaign. I suppose I could’ve run through the entire league thinking of teams that could pursue him, but I think that’s best saved for later. Plus, I just added a note on that: I think he’s good enough of an asset that he doesn’t need to be chased by teams looking to fill in at a position.
I totally understand what you are saying and your decision process for the response. But, there were 2 questions:
1) What would an expected return for him be?
2) How many teams will even be in the market for a defensive deficient 2nd baseman with a little pop in his bat?
In the response, neither was answered. You did address your decision making process above and I completely respect that, but if you did not want to provide hypotheticals that are just guesses and conjecture, perhaps this question should not have been included.
I love MLBTR and read this site religiously. Similar to the mild complaints in the Live Chats, people are not necessarily looking for an analysis of the player or situation but instead something more quantifiable. Because that is omitted and those two types of answers are drastically different, people feel that the question was not answered and feel frustrated and/or annoyed.
I want to close by saying that I totally respect you, Jeff, Tim, and the others as you guys provide the best baseball coverage of any outlet on the planet. In no way am I taking a shot at you guys or your work, but simply trying to effectively communicate constructive criticism that others have brought up in the past.
Rabble, rabble, rabble!
Politely well stated, my friend! The question wasn’t answered as it was posed, but justification for that augmented answer was clearly given. What’s to argue here? He could have simply picked a different question, but at least felt the need to comment upon Dozier’s percieved value. What is lost on me is the first commenter’s response insinuating some injustice had been done with that answer. I mean, what now?
Always happy to discuss these things in a constructive manner! The mailbag, like the chats (but on a different timeline for answering), presents challenges because so many of the questions we get are difficult to answer. I’m looking for stuff that I can offer something on — not just a factual yes/no, and not something so broad that it deserves a full post. (“What is [team x] looking to do this winter?”)
So, in this case I decided to take off of the original question — which I left as asked rather than modifying it — to give some thoughts on the subject. I realize I didn’t directly answer it, strictly speaking, but I feel that I covered the ground that I was comfortable with in answering the question, if that makes sense.
With Mauer entrenched at 1B and with the Twins large amount of DH options, it would not surprise me to see a team trade for Dozier with the eye of moving him to 1B, being that there’s too many quality 2B defenders out there and his bat is playing as a traditional 1B, plus his turning 30 next year will most likely be the start of him having to look to move anyway.
With their prospects, Boston could easily get him and move him to 1B and Hanley to DH. Looking at both 1B and 2B landing spots, he’s also a great fit for the Mets, Yankees, Dodgers (if they move Utley to bench), Rockies (imagine him at 1B in Denver?) or Rangers (same thing as Rockies). Being that he’s on a cheap 2/15 deal right now, I think he’d bring in 2 of any of those teams top 5 prospects plus another piece or two. He’s the kind of guy youd want to lock up too.
The problem with Dozier is the same problem with Encarcion… Both right handed and that would make the Boston lineup too righty.. Check it out guys, still say the obvious answer in Boston is Sam Travis.. Platooning with Travis Shaw at first and Moncada and fat boy at third.. If your hung with him you might as well see it thru !
But they would fit in with that short porch in left. That park is meant for them
Dozier has a .870 OPS against righties and .999 OPS against lefties, you throw R/L lineup splits out the window when they’re this good.
I just hope Dozier does not become the next Dan Uggla. I am a fan of Dozier and I hope his success continues.
Why not? Having 7 excellent seasons at the highest level is nothing to sneeze at. Dozier is at 3 and having 4 more would be quite the career.
They do both have tons in common in body type (although Dozier is slightly smaller and can steal bases but Uggla was a great player for the better part of a decade, that’s plenty to aspire to.
I don’t think you can really predict Sudden Talent Loss Syndrome.
With the starting pitching market so thin this winter, I’d be shocked if the Sox don’t pick up Buchholz’ option. Not only would he make a reasonably priced back of rotation option, the fact that he’d only be on a one-year deal would make it a very low risk-high reward option. Furthermore, they could always flip him for help elsewhere if they saw a reason to. There are plenty of teams that would gamble on a Buchholz type pedigree/contract combo. He won’t win you the Cy Young award. But he might be a key piece for a team looking for depth.
With Pomeranz in the pen for the rest of the season, Bucholz is the odds on favorite for a couple starts in the playoffs. His performance there will go a long way in DD’s decision making process where a great or awful performance will pretty much force his hand one way or the other
I agree that he is in line for playoff starts. However, I think it would be shortsighted to not pick up his option even if he performs subpar in the postseason. Did you see the kind of contract James Shields landed after he couldn’t deliver for KC? Whether DD picks up the option with intent to keep him or to trade him, barring an absolute disaster of a month, he should have his option picked up either way. Then again, what do I know?
I hear what you’re saying on the short-sighted part, and I agree with you that at $13mil for the season there is a lot of value to be had there regardless of what happens in October. I’m just thinking that with the Boston media, public perception is a powerful influencer on personnel decisions, and bringing back Buchholz at a not-insignificant salary after two disastrous post-season starts that gets the Red Sox knocked out might be too much for the PR-driven ownership.
Apparently you know nothing if you think James Sheilds didn’t deliver for Kansas City.
I don’t understand the defensive knocks on Dozier. He would currently the best defensive SS on the Twins roster if he hadn’t been moved to 2B. The pitching staff is brutal and constantly gives up rockets off the bats of the opposition. When the UZR starts incorporating exit velocities into their algorithms, I will definitely buy into that metric.
Being the “best on the team” is pretty meaningless, it just means better than like 2-3 guys, when there’s dozens of overall better defenders out there.
The metrics aren’t saying he’s bad just somewhere to average to slightly above, but he’s been quite good from what I’ve seen. Never had reason to complain about his defense.
I don’t see any scenario, short of some kind of mental breakdown, where Buchholz’s option is not picked up. The second half has shown that the upside with Clay– he continues to put out quality starts with flashes of excellence — would justify the $13M level; it seems to be about the going rate for a 2 WAR level starter these days. The downside is that he’s a decent but wildly overpaid bullpen piece for a year, as he pitched quite effectively out of the pen when he was demoted from the rotation. The Red Sox can afford to pay a 7th inning guy $13M. It won’t break their back.
And, more significantly, there isn’t a compelling option to fill the back end of the rotation right now in the system (Owens having not stepped up the way they had hoped), and not a lot of free agent starters — let alone marquee starters — that will be on the market.
It’s astonishing that right at this moment, Rick Porcello is a staff ace and Cy Young candidate, and Clay Buchholz has been a more consistant and reliable starter down the stretch than David Price. Up is down, left is right, backwards is forwards…..