I've been assuming that Turner would re-up with Dodgers which leaves the field open for Correa. I'm guessing the Rangers are out and maybe the Padres are out. I've read stories that almost every team from the Orioles to the Yankees will be interesting. If indeed, 10/325 was on the table for him, I'm guessing he can beat that (counting the $35 million 1 year Twins deal). Boegart and Swanson seem to be a cut or two or three down.

I'm guessing he will blow the doors off as Judge and Turner are likely to re-up.

Maybe. He's pretty well addressed the fragile question after playing all of 2020, 640 PA in 2021 and 590 in 2022. But otherwise he didn't do anything this year to make him a more attractive FA and, if DRS is to be trusted, the defense was muuch worse. I thought he was gonna blow the doors off last year but instead he obviously couldn't get the deal he wanted ... nothing's really changed so why should he get that deal now? Last year's SS market was highly competitive with Seager, Story and Baez also availalbe ... and this year it's X, Swanson and Turner.

Which is just to say I ain't making any kind or prediction this time -- he might get anywhere from, say, 3/$120 with opt-outs to 10/$375.

Turner might very well return to the Dodgers but I woulda thought that deal would be done by now so I assume they aren't gonna work something out in the next three weeks and he will at least officially hit FA even if he does eventually re-sign with the Dodgers.

Anyway, 2022 bWAR:
Xander 5.7
Dansby 5.7
Correa 5.4
Turner 4.9
Seager 4.1
Story 2.5 (396 PA)
Javy 2.6 (630 PA)

Their "replacements":
Nico 4.5
Lux 2.5 (sorta Seager's replacement)
Pena 4.8 (for Correa)
Jose Iglesias 1.2 (467 PA for Story)

For those that missed it, in the 2nd half, Javy hit a almost normal Javy line of 268/310/413 which is about a 104 OPS+. He also had a bizarre H/R split, hitting a pathetic 220/266/337 in Detroit and a still not great but much better 253/289/440 on the road. Anybody got an explanation for that?

I've read stories that almost every team from the Orioles to the Yankees will be interesting.

The Orioles already have Gunnar Henderson and Jorge Mateo on the roster, both of whom are very good defensive SS, plus Jackson Holliday who's a couple three years away. Why would they pay Correa $30-$40 million a year for the next five years?

I've read stories that almost every team from the Orioles to the Yankees will be interesting.

The Yankees passed on last year’s crop of free-agent shortstops, not wanting to block their own prospects, although money was likely some factor, too. The prospect issue is even more compelling now, with three of the Yankees top six prospects shortstops, not including late-season call-up Oswaldo Cabrera, a shortstop who has seen action all over the field, mostly in the outfield of late. It always possible that they could reverse course, but it doesn’t seem all that likely.

Correa is the only one of the free-agent-to-be shortstops who won’t have a Qualifying Offer attached, so that could give him a leg up on the competition.

Yankees: Have upcoming prospects they have already shown commitment toward, IKF gave them 2.9 WAR, Judge may cost them a lot

No Need or No Strong Need For A SS
Astros
Braves
Brewers
Cardinals
Indians
Jays
Mariners
Mets
Orioles
Padres
Pirates
Rangers
Rays
Royals
Tigers
Yankees

Could Use Him But Won’t
A’s
Marlins
Reds
Rockies

Conceivable But Doubtful
Dodgers: Maybe if Turner goes elsewhere.

White Sox: Could let Anderson go, but doesn’t seem like they’re ever in on the upper echelon, high-cost free agents like Correa.

Red Sox: Doesn’t seem like a Bloom move

Have A Big Need At SS And Money
Angels
Cubs
DBacks
Giants
Nationals
Phillies
Twins

Edit: Forgot Swanson will be a free agent for the Braves.

I think most folks see X more as a long-term 2B or 3B option ... which might actually work to his advantage at the moment. As to Correa, Turner and Swanson ...

The Yanks are a logical landing spot for one of the SS but that was true last year. Much higher chance if they don't re-sign Judge; much lower if they do. TB, (#3) Balt and probably Bos are out. DRS says Bichette's defense was terrible so a move there would put Tor into the mix.

Minn remains an option but Det, CWS, KCR, Cle definitely not.

Hou (Pena), Oak ($), Tex, Sea (Crawford long-term) definitely not. I guess never count out the Angels but signing Correa for 10/$350 (or whatever) would seem to rule out a long-term Ohtani deal.

In 2022, the average AL SS had 1.3 WAA. Bichette, Franco, X, Mateo (with Gunnar coming), Rosario, Anderson, Correa, Baez, Witt, Pena, Crawford, Seager -- plus Story and Semien shoved over to 2B. They are all under long-term control except X, Correa and Tim Anderson (probably FA in 2025).

The SS market is friendlier in the NL but they still averaged 0.7 WAA there. Dansby, Lindor, Adames, Turner, Hoerner, Kim/Tatis, Edman, Rojas, Cruz. There will be plenty of demand around 24-25 (only Lindor, Tatis and Cruz are under control for lots of years) but Braves and Dodgers are the only two teams with immediate demand (or can Grissom handle SS?) Among the teams with lousy SS, the Giants and Phils are the only ones that might spend this offseason.

Unless we are about to see a lot of good, young-ish SS move to 2B/3B, there really aren't many teams in demand -- LAD, Atl, Phi, SFG, NYY, Minn and the random lousy team that decides it's time to make a splash.

Do the new anti-shift rules put more or less emphasis on SS defense?

EDIT: NZ generic colas on the way.

White Sox: Could let Anderson go

I believe this would start a rebellion among Sox fans -- Anderson is very popular. Anderson also seems popular among fellow players so it's possible that one of the big FA SS would be willing to defer to him and move elsehwere ... or maybe Anderson would be fine with moving.

Back to the bigger picture: These things are often largely flukes but across MLB, teams got an average 1 WAA out of the SS position. Only 7 teams got genuine sub-par production. The average SS had a 96 OPS+ ... that includes the backups so the average starting SS was probably at least 100, maybe 105. This is not your father's SS.

There was very little offensive differentiation last year (other than C):

C -- 88 OPS+
1B -- 111
2B -- 98
3B -- 105
SS -- 96
LF -- 105
CF -- 95
RF -- 102
DH -- 101

Leaving aside 1B and C, in raw OPS terms that was just a range of 692 (SS) to 725 (LF/3B). If that's the new reality (who knows?), how much more valuable is Correa the 130 OPS+ SS than George Springer the 130 OPS+ CF/RF?

Walt's info, above, is very interesting. The relatively narrow range between positions (outside of catcher) really jumps out. Also, I feel like teams are not doing this DH thing right. I mean, aren't there a lot of guys who lack a legit defensive position (either because of lack of ability, or age, etc) that could give you at least 110+ OPS at a cheap price?

Dodgers, Braves, and Red Sox are all in the same boat. Could resign their guy, or could need a replacement (maybe the Dodgers are ok moving Lux back to SS, maybe not).

I would quibble that the Cubs *need* a SS; Hoerner was really good this year and graded out surprisingly well defensively (I say that, because I didn't think he would be good there and didn't think he had the arm. But he could also slide over to 2b, where he's been a gold glove finalist before (both Hoyer and Ross have already publicly talked about having discussions with him about moving positions). That being said, I'd be surprised if the Cubs don't sign one of the big FA SSs.

I think the changes to the shift place more emphasis on D because infielders are going to be on their own more often in the future vs having had a lot of help over the past few years. The question is how much different it'll be. A return to the olden days of normal positioning is really a return to the days when there were some defensive wizards and some guys like Jeter and Roy Smalley and Steve Sax and Alfonso Soriano and Gary Sheffield standing around the middle infield waiting to hit. Teams lived with it before and will again when they think the offensive gains are worth it. But it will affect the lives of those uber defensive guys who lost value in the shift years when positioning provided a buffer against range issues. Some of them will find jobs when the hitters get too expensive.

Teams seem to like being able to rotate guys through the DH semi-resting them.

Correa has 10 more bWAR than Turner at roughly the same age and is coming off his two best seasons. Swanson had a great year but it's his first all-star year. He looks a lot like a guy who had a good contract year, buried in a lineup of good hitters who will fall back to being 2-3 WAR player. That's a HOF trajectory for Correa. Correa may not be the best defensively but he's better than Turner.

judge is likely going back to Yanks.

There's no one else on the the free agent market who can move the needle offensively like Correa unless Arenado opts out.

O's...Why would they pay Correa $30-$40 million a year for the next five years?

For his bat. And he's good enough in the field.

Walt's info, above, is very interesting. The relatively narrow range between positions (outside of catcher) really jumps out. Also, I feel like teams are not doing this DH thing right. I mean, aren't there a lot of guys who lack a legit defensive position (either because of lack of ability, or age, etc) that could give you at least 110+ OPS at a cheap price?

With the smaller rosters due to increasing size of the bullpen, the DH isn't really as much of a position as it's a spot to rest a player. We've lost a lot of specialization because of the increase bullpen size, and we are probably losing the ability to have a full time DH, at a time in which the full time dh is actually a thing teams need to include in their planning. But a DH that can't sometimes play the field is ultimately a liability to the team because they can't then rest a player.

Teams have decided to go with multi-position players over a dedicated DH. I would not be shocked at all, that if you dig through the rosters of teams, that almost every team had at least two players who played nearly a full season while routinely playing multiple positions.

I believe [letting Anderson go] would start a rebellion among Sox fans...

I noted they could let him go just because the team has an option on him for 2023 and '24. While you're not wrong, in defense of letting him go he's 30 next year and his games played the last four seasons suggest maybe he's injury jinxed: 123, 49 (Covid year, equal to 132 in a regular year), 123, and 79. So he's missed nearly a third of Sox games the last four seasons.

FWIW - Correa has (seemingly) been a great clubhouse guy, is well-loved by the players to all appearances, and even seems to like it in MN (as does his wife). None of which means much, unless the Twins pony up the big bags of cash*, but still nothing bad about Correa has been reported locally.

* To be clear, this is the Twins, so it is very unlikely they will hand over said fat stacks of green.

Maybe not the best place to ask but I see some mentions of DRS and bWAR here, so:

Does anyone prefer DRS over the new version of UZR at Fangraphs, which uses Statcast? It seems to be to be obvious that the latter would be more reliable but of course, I could be wrong. What, if anything, is the advantage of DRS?

Does anyone prefer DRS over the new version of UZR at Fangraphs, which uses Statcast? It seems to be to be obvious that the latter would be more reliable but of course, I could be wrong. What, if anything, is the advantage of DRS?


I think there are three metrics at Fangraphs: DRS, UZR, and RAA (which is the statcast number). For Correa they are +3, +1, and -2 respectively. Seems like they're all well within the margin of error.

SS deals are kind of all over the place:

Lindor 10/300+
Seager 10/300+
Semien 7/175 opt out
Story 6/140 weird opt out
Correa 3/105 opt-out palooza

Age and quality obviously account for a lot of this but it just seems weird to me that there's deals over 300 and ones less than 180 with nothing in between. Makes it hard to guess what's coming.

But if I had to guess:

Correa: -- 10/300, with one opt out around year 3-4.
Turner: 7/210 -- will be 30, shorter deal at very good money.
Bogaerts: 7/180 -- Red Sox buckle and lock in the face of their team.
Swanson: 8/160 -- Braves do their mind control thing.

You left out Baez 6/140. I'm pretty sure the Tigers would deal the remaining 5 seasons for a prospect.

Correa: -- 10/300, with one opt out around year 3-4.
Turner: 7/210 -- will be 30, shorter deal at very good money.

Man, Turner's is the MUCH better deal at those prices. There's like 15 months age difference, and Turner has been every bit as good and more durable than Correa. I'd take Turner at even money. I don't think what Correa did at age 20-22 really matters anymore.

I can't wait for Correa to join Trout and Rendon on the Angels IL next year.

You left out Baez 6/140. I'm pretty sure the Tigers would deal the remaining 5 seasons for a prospect.

whoops sorry, I combined him and Semien somehow. I don't think Semien has an opt out but Baez does.

Man, Turner's is the MUCH better deal at those prices. There's like 15 months age difference, and Turner has been every bit as good and more durable than Correa. I'd take Turner at even money. I don't think what Correa did at age 20-22 really matters anymore.

You may well be right. What do you think they each will get?

I think the changes to the shift place more emphasis on D because infielders are going to be on their own more often in the future vs having had a lot of help over the past few years.

I think that's probably right but it could work the other way. First because the whole point of the shift was (to try) to position guys where more balls are hit so if your SS is now responsible for fewer balls, his potential defensive impact is reduced. Second because you maybe need a more "flexible" player to play on both sides -- I tend to doubt it matters but you never know. Small sample obviously but the Cubs used Hoerner in short RF and he made some outstanding plays out there, I think he might at least be one guy whose defensive value is reduced by the shift rules.

DHs: full-time DHs have always been rare. Platoon DHs obviously were more common back in the days of smaller bullpens. But the addition of the 26th man and the restriction of 13 pitchers has provided some relief to that pressure and maybe we'll see some platoons even. Mainly ... no, there is not a big supply of excess 110 OPS+ hitters (certainly not 30 of them) and most of them are perfectly adequate or better fielders. We used to like to think so because of the whole Ken Phelps thing and we sang the praises of Roberto Petagine (flashback!) but surely it wasn't ever true.

If you can hit that well, you're in the majors and starting somewhere at least 2/3 of the time. He struggles to find regular PT but Vogelbach has been in the majors (off and on) since 2016, has 1400 PA over the last 4 years, one season of which was even entirely in the NL. If they ever did, these guys are not escaping notice anymore. There are a lot of late bloomers every year who (out of "nowhere") start doing that at 27 so maybe they could have done it a year or two earlier but they also tend to fade very quickly. Overseas boomers from Cecil Fielder to Eric Thames to ByungHo Park get their shot.

What I thought we might see (kinda surprised it wasn't always so) was a shift towards better defenders (in some absolute sense) by using full-time DHs. There are probably 1000 guys who can play 3B better than Patrick Wisdom, how could it possibly be a better idea to dole out 23 DH starts to Rafael Ortega and 9 to Yan Gomes rather than Wisdom with a good glove at 3B that day? And once you start down that road (and in this example, once you decide not to re-sign Contreras), the mediocre full-time DH bat of Wisdom starts to make more sense.

So sure, you want some days at DH for Judge and Trout and even Ian Happ but I'm still not sure that justifies Franmil Reyes having 181 career starts in the OF (301 at DH) or Yordan with 104 (250)? Maybe the DH penalty is real or players just get bored/distracted so teams want to give these guys at least some time in the field.

On the other hand, take Alvarez, that ratio works out to 5 DH starts for 2 OF starts which, conveniently enough, works out to giving other guys a partial day off about twice a week. Quite possibly giving, say, Judge and Rizzo each a day a week at DH helps keep them fresh but you don't want to sit Stanton 28% of the time (on the days he's healthy). So even "full-time" DHs that can hit will probably be picking up at least 30-40 starts in the field every year.

Trends are simply away from full-time play anyway. There were only 130 qualified batters this year, which has been dropping slowly for about a decade. Of those 130, 73 had a 110 OPS+ or better and another 27 were 100-109. So with the exception of a few defensive specialists, if you want a full-time role, you gotta hit. Unqualified batters with a 110 OPS+ or better were some old/injured guys (Pujols, Harper) and late bloomers (Meneses) and rookie/young guys (Harris, Nootbar). Trayce Thompson and Mike Brosseau are probably the closest we can come to a potential hidden 100-110 bat that you could pick up to be a full-time DH. If you want 400+ PAs, you better put up at last a 100 OPS+ but if you can put up a 110, you're pretty much guaranteed at least 500 PAs when healthy.

Also, with Harper, Schwarber and Castellanos, the Phils have pretty much cornered the market on true DH talent. :-)

You may well be right. What do you think they each will get?

7/240 for Turner, and I wouldn't be surprised if Correa signs another pillow deal.

For his bat. And he's good enough in the field.

Carlos Correa -- OPS+ 140 / 5.4 WAR
Jorge Mateo -- OPS+ 81 / 3.3 WAR
Gunnar Henderson -- OPS+ 123 / 1 WAR in 116 ABs

Are teams now paying $35 million for 1 or 2 WAR? Seriously?

Also, please remember that besides the two SS above the Orioles have Joey Ortiz (Fangraphs #81 prospect) who may be the best defensive SS in the entire system, and just put up a .967 OPS at AAA Norfolk. Oh, and the #1 pick in this year's draft as well, who also happens to be a SS.

The Orioles certainly have needs, but a $35 million shortstop aint one of them.

I'm not sure the Giants would spend money on a SS. They unwisely gave Crawford an extension last year so they're kind of stuck with that.

Also, with Harper, Schwarber and Castellanos, the Phils have pretty much cornered the market on true DH talent. :-)

You left out the oafiest of their lumbering oafs, that is Rhys Hoskins and his lead glove.

I don't think somebody is giving Alec Bohm enough credit...

Also, I feel like teams are not doing this DH thing right. I mean, aren't there a lot of guys who lack a legit defensive position (either because of lack of ability, or age, etc) that could give you at least 110+ OPS at a cheap price?

That's because the Phillies have all of them.

A whole team of DHs seem to be the new market inefficiency. Phils are almost in the NLCS and might not have to face Dodgers.