Rule 5 names to watch (it is so boring these days I am not sure we need a separate topic).
Phillies on the list are Castellano and McGarry. Castellano seems a much better bet to be chosen though still a longshot that he would stick with anyone.
I'm a little surprised it's the Mets since they also just signed Montas but my initial reaction is that this seems like a pretty good deal so long as Holmes agrees to go back to the bullpen should he fail as a starter. That's a scary bullpen of that's where he ultimately ends up.
For 3 years and 38 million as a 32 year old? Seems like a pretty big leap of faith- I’d be more concerned about him holding up under the bigger work load. I reckon they just set the price for Hoffman. If they are trying the Dodgers strategy of loading up on arms hoping for half a season each, if you don’t care about money then I guess that’s not a bad idea.
It seems as if the track record of veteran relievers being converted to starters is bad. What is the success rate? Anyone regret not pursuing Jordan Hicks?
Hicks actually produced a career high in bWAR last year (only 0.9 but that is about Hicks more than it is about starting). Track record on converting relievers is not awful, especially when you consider the reward is a pitcher throwing 3 times as many innings potentially. If it works 25% of the time it is probably good for the team because of the innings you are getting and the potential discount of a starter at reliever pay rates. It kind of worked with Schilling remember.
I don't think starting will affect what Hoffman gets paid at all. He is still looking at a 3 year deal for somewhere in the $10-$15 AAV range. Starting matters because that might be how Hoffman chooses a team depending on their willingness to let him start (or a shot at it anyway). He'll still get paid like a late inning reliever though.
MLBTR had Hoffman at $44 million four years which is a bit long but then again the Phillies, particularly, might prefer that to $45 three years. It's not really clear who is behind the idea of him starting - teams expressing interest or his agent marketing him, and if the latter, is it something he prefers? Because you're right the number shouldn't be that different and wasn't really for Holmes either.
Any GM would prefer $44/4 to $45/3. It's a no-brainer. Even if you hate him in year 3, you can nontender after that season and have save a cool $mill
You can't non-tender but teams like the Phillies would rather eat $11 million in hard cash than carry the $15M AAV.
Hoffman might get three years with a fourth-year option - that you can you walk away from with only the buyout counting towards the AAV. Meanwhile Holmes got an opt-out after Year 2 which I guess is supposed to allow him to get a richer new deal as a proven starting pitcher if it works out, or keeps him paid in Year 3 in either role if not.
Things are gonna roll now. Does Scott set the market, do the Phillies with Hoffman or will someone get traded first?
Honestly, while it's not my money and I'm all for players getting their fair share from ridiculously wealthy owners, this number seems ridiculously high. I get Ohtani because he's basically 2 players in one, but Soto? If it's in the $700 million range than that's almost double the previous record setting contract (other than Ohtani).
These owners really are doing that well. I wonder if collectively they are feeling good about the next round of media deals in the streaming era.
And yeah the big numbers are deceptive because of the years. They don't want to give him a $400 or 500 million contract if it means a higher AAV.
And Ohtani's barely getting any of that money for years, instead the Dodgers merely have to set it aside, but can invest it, and they get to keep the returns.The fact that you have to actually have and account for the money each year explains why more teams aren't doing it, both because they don't have the cash nor the appetite for the sort of investments the new breed of rich guy owners have.
