Non-Phillies Hot Stove and Off-Season News/Notes

andyb 2022-12-01 23:09:50 UTC #21

Everybody has $30 million more to spend:

Aquapong 2022-12-02 00:30:40 UTC #22

Eflin gets 3 years/$40 mil from the Rays.

zambonir 2022-12-02 00:59:28 UTC #23

Guess that's how they spent it!

Pretty reasonable deal for Eflin, we all liked to imagine he'd be cheaper (with incentives) but would you rather have him or Kyle Gibson or Clevenger?

BaseballCat 2022-12-02 00:59:36 UTC #24

Eflin sad - for what ever reason, he was one of my favorites. Glad he got an important last out in playoffs. Eflin-yeah One last time️
Wanted to type Ef….

zambonir 2022-12-02 01:00:30 UTC #25

I predict a team other than the Rays will be paying him $18 million in year 3 (assuming he's healthy).

fish 2022-12-02 03:46:17 UTC #26

By the career stat line it is, perfect age to try to hit on him, but I don’t know how you sign the guy to a multi year deal for that much without ignoring that the reason he’s missed so much time is because of a chronic condition. Good for Zach.

zambonir 2022-12-02 14:00:20 UTC #27

Agree but I think that reflects the market. Not actually a huge supply of available healthy similarly aged/pedigreed pitchers, and any healthy pitcher can easily miss half of a three-year deal with one bad break.

Had he actually held up over the last two years he would have gotten a QO and $60 million not $40 million, or at least $45.

I do think it's a bit curious there's no protection for the Rays in Year 3; at $11 million per for the next two seasons he's both a bargain and low-risk (though perhaps less so for a team with Tampa's payroll).

The Rays being the Rays perhaps they actually do think there's something they can work on with him mechanically that will put less stress on his knees (in addition to improving his pitching again).

Philsmania 2022-12-02 15:24:21 UTC #28

Yeah, the Rays will turn him into a CYA winner in 2023 and after another solid season in 2024 will trade him for a bevy of prospects. Frankly, this siging makes me wonder if the Phillies shold have tendered him the QO and if they likely would have gotten the extra pick.

I would say that Ef was fair trade return for phranchise icon Jimmy Rollins.

zambonir 2022-12-02 17:54:19 UTC #29

I think he would have had to take the QO. A good year would have gotten him an even bigger three-year guarantee, and he couldn't have known there was $40 million (let alone $18 in Year 3) waiting for him even if he figured there was $30-36.

The NBC article posits that the Phillies were never going to pay this kind of money because they are only looking for a 4th starter (given Ranger is #3 and Painter might also be that good once installed). So it will be interesting to see if that is indeed how they proceed with whomever they do so sign.

allentown 2022-12-02 20:36:08 UTC #30

I'm sure that's what Rays management is telling itself, but the bottom line is that no team understands Eflin's medical condition and what has been required to keep him on the field as the Phillies do. I think "the Phillies only needed a #4 starter" is a weak argument. The Phillies would LOVE to have another #1, 2, or 3 starter -- certainly could have used one in the WS. If they thought Eflin could be a legit #2/3 starter they would have extended or QOed him. They don't. I think DD is likely stunned that the Rays would gamble on Eflin's knees for 3 years. He has to be considered in the same bracket as a 35+-year old pitcher.

Taudawg 2022-12-02 21:30:01 UTC #31

I would think this move takes Seattle out of the SS market. Maybe?

zambonir 2022-12-02 23:36:42 UTC #32

That seems somewhat overstated to me. He made 20 starts/2.0 WAR last season before surgery and might have returned to the rotation this year had there been more time. I could just as easily see him pitching and staying healthy for 2-3 years - as he did once before - as going down again quickly.

As far as what the Phillies need, we'll see. Are they really going to go after a Rodon or even a Quintana? The CW has been that they were always going to settle for a lower-end stopgap guy. And the market - and one of the smarter front offices - says Eflin wasn't in that category. If the Rays are right, the Phillies' erred in not extending him. But he's gone now, and Gibson (not that we wanted him either) is apparently close to settling on a new team, so I'm just curious to see what they have in mind.

allentown 2022-12-02 23:41:03 UTC #33

I stand by the two points of what I wrote: 1) the Phillies would LOVE to have another legit #2 or #3 SP and 2) if the Phillies believed that Eflin could be a legit #3 SP for even just this coming season, then they would have QOed or tried to extend him.

I don't for a minute think the Phillies let Eflin go because they are only in the market for a #4 SP

zambonir 2022-12-03 00:01:59 UTC #34

I guess I just disagree with that. I think the Harper injury makes a SP upgrade more worthy of consideration, because you can never have enough, but the off-season plan seemed to be, spend big on a SS, get one medium and one high-end bullpen piece, and sign a #5 caliber SP to a one-year deal while expecting Painter step in and Falter to contribute. Of course that's also what Dombrowski has said publicly. Actions will speak louder.

I agree that Eflin is not plainly a #3 caliber starter, but the contract is. They will have to give out a three-year deal or kiss $18-20 million if they want someone as good or better (and a lot more if better means Rodon or Verlander). If they do that, that says they didn't think Eflin was worth it. If they don't and just bring back Thor or some other one year $10 million guy (what Matt Boyd just got, apparently to star again), that says they weren't swimming in that pool regardless of whether you think Eflin is in it.

andyb 2022-12-03 01:07:56 UTC #35

Well this one rachets up the risk factor:

BREAKING: Right-hander Jacob deGrom has signed a five-year, $185 million contract with the Texas Rangers, sources tell ESPN. Physical is passed. Deal is done. Includes conditional sixth-year option that would take total deal to $222 million. Full no-trade clause. A massive haul.
— Jeff Passan ( @JeffPassan ) December 3, 2022

zambonir 2022-12-03 01:16:40 UTC #36

Haha yeah. Clearly injury history and risk is barely being considered. If you like the pitcher you takes your chances.

Verlander's gonna get three years for sure now. Heck, Thor's price probably just went up. Probably makes a Nola extension harder too. Why would you give up the leverage of the open market?

allentown 2022-12-03 03:43:49 UTC #37

$37 million a year for 5 years for DeGrom? Seems a huge risk to me. He was worth that in 2019, not since and I doubt he will be at ages 35-39. FAR, FAR safer to give Correa his $330 mill or Turner $300 mill. Texas has maybe a 15% chance this deal works out for them. Insanity! I guess we won't be getting a significant SP.

bkeich 2022-12-03 08:34:33 UTC #38

... but the good news is that the Mets lose their best player, even if he isn't worth what they might have paid.

Aquapong 2022-12-03 13:26:52 UTC #39

That’s a crazy amount for a pitcher with recent injury history. The Rangers have never been risk averse though.

zambonir 2022-12-03 13:30:57 UTC #40

Mets would have had Degrom for 30.5 million this season (he took the opt-out) and they had a $32.5 million option for 2024 (which became moot). Clearly his agent know what he was doing while everyone else thought one-year $40 million or whatever.

ZIPS crudely projects him to only pitch 110 innings a year and put up around 3.0 WAR for the first three years. That's worth it if you think he can actually do better; maybe not worth the risk if not (but for Texas the star power and message it sends about competing is intangible).