We all know the answer. Cohen is going to offer him $100 million a year for 6/7 years and dare him not to take it. He may want to stay on West Coast but there's no way he turns down Cohen

Someone is going to regret whatever deal he signs and my god I hope it’s the team I root for.

Pretty impressive the agents are coalescing around the same number, even if I find that number really surprising.

I was thinking it'd be at least 25% higher.

Just take whatever an All Star caliber hitter and an All Star caliber pitcher would command and add them together. Say, Trea Turner's yearly payout combined with Carlos Roden's for 10 to 12 years.

Ohtani isn’t a free agent until after the 2023 season, so his next contract could be affected by his performance, or perhaps more likely, injury. Another season like his last two gets Ohtani a record-setting contract, but an injury could change his outlook. Perhaps the Angels will make that point with a record-setting offer before Ohtani hits free agency, but the sale of the team may complicate that.

Ohtani has made it clear he wants to play for a winner. So whoever makes the playoffs or is damn close has a real shot at getting him if they pony up the cash. I'd say any contract starts at 10 x $50 per. It'll be for age 29 to the end of his career. If healthy that means 3-4 years of 7-10 WAR a year, then 6-7 years of 5 a year I'd think = worst case of 56 WAR and a HOF induction as a member of the team that signs him, assuming reasonable health of course. Best case is 70 WAR and inner circle HOF (when adding his 20+ already - could be a 100 WAR player with luck). Of course, the real worst case is he gets hurt and is limited to DH'ing and is a 2-4 WAR player for 10 years = 20-40 WAR total and edge of the HOF or is so badly hurt the team pays for 0 WAR but injuries that bad are rare.

So who signs him? SD, LAD, Angels, Mets, Yankees all have to be in the conversation. SF has shown they are willing. Dark horses are Houston, Toronto, and if they have a good year in 2022 Detroit, Cubs, White Sox, Texas, Boston, maybe Seattle (hard to picture them going that nuts on payroll though). But as I said he wants a ring as his #1 thing, so the first 5 I listed have to be his top choices - teams that were in the playoffs this year and have the budgets to stay there (outside of the Angels who just get listed because he is there already). It'll be interesting for sure.

Let's not overstate his offensive accomplishments. As a DH, he's just not that valuable of an offensive player, just 3.4 last year, 4.9 the year before (which I think includes a small boost to Rpos as a pitcher). That puts him more in the JDM class, somewhere below Freeman. If he was just a hitter, I don't think he'd be looking at an 8-year deal ... maybe but I don't think so. Call it something like 6/$140-150 ... possibly higher given some of this offseason's deals.

As a pitcher, last year was outstanding, the year before that just very good and of course he's yet to crack 170 innings. So sure, Rodon seems close enough and quite convenient, that's 6/$162. So add those together and we're at 6/$300-315.

Is there really a reason to sign him for longer than 6 years other than to defer out that 6/$300 which means not close to $50 AAV? I honestly don't see a particularly good one. That pitching track record does not call for anything like a 10-year deal, I'm not sure any pitching track record could. That's not the sort of hitter you sign for 10+ years. I can see an argument that, since he does both, there's a pretty good chance that he'll still be good at at least one of them for ages 36-38. That sounds true enough to me but that suggests maybe another 3/$75-90 ... or 3/$60 with incentive clauses (or escalators) based on PA and IP that could drive it quite high.

Now I agree, some team is gonna go nuts here so there's no way you're getting him for less than 10/$400 minimum (and most likely substantially more than that). And obviously if anybody buys my 6/$315, spreading that out to 10/$400 looks fine to me and again he'd want escalators or opt-outs for sure. To make my offer viable, I'm gonna have to do something like a $100 M signig bonus paid out in equal installments over 10 years -- i.e. he gets that last $40 even if he opts out after year 6. I think that would put him on 6/$280 if he opted out, 10/$400 if he didn't, at least $50 maybe $100 M of escalators if he's still an elite pitche or an effective two-way player at year 7. If he wants me to move the team to the West Coast, that's fine. :-)

In short, I don't think I'm winning the Ohtani auction. I'll agree with Jose I'll be very happy if the Cubs do.

So who signs him? (...) Dark horses are Houston, Toronto, and if they have a good year in (2023) Detroit

And a Merry Christmas to you!

Just take whatever an All Star caliber hitter and an All Star caliber pitcher would command and add them together. Say, Trea Turner's yearly payout combined with Carlos Roden's for 10 to 12 years.

I don't think so. Three reasons. 1) You'rer packing all the risk into one guy, so if he's hurt you lose both players. That will force a discount. 2) He's a DH. That's worth a lot less than a good position player. Ohtani who can't pitch gets like half Trea Turner's deal. 3) I think he's far more likely to stop pitching (basically a career ending injury) than a normal pitcher. Given any kind of injury that doesn't effect his batting, he can voluntarily stop pitching, and still get paid. Or if you do want him to have surgery and rehab, you lose the hitter too.

Basically you take the contract for a top DH, and add the contract for a super injury prone very good starter. I'm not sure he breaks the record by much, if at all.

I was thinking of something like this - and I agree with Walt above. 8 years seems like the max years fos value. Make it 10 to spread things out.

Here’s my thought, and I don’t know of the legality re: contract structure.

10 years $25 million for the batting side.

A base of $10 for the pitching side as long as he pitches at least 20+ innings.

Then $5 million for reaching 50 innings; and 80 innings. So, an additional $10.

Then 7.5 for reaching 110 innings and 150 innings. So, an additional $15.

That means a healthy, productive two-way player can max out at $60 million. And if he transitions to closer, his salary of $40 million as a hitter/closer is still in line with current closers.

But, there is some wiggle room if there is an injury that limits his throwing.

This actual numbers could vary a bit, for sure, but a structure like that would be unique, and considering his status as a true unicorn, it might make some sense to approach it that way.

Not sure he wants anything to do with that unless the top dollars $60 per year - is more than what he’s offered in a conventional contract. But, I’m sure hoping the Halos get creative and find a way to keep him. He’s a blast to root for.

I think he gets $500 million, but spread out over 12-13 years.

Here’s my thought, and I don’t know of the legality re: contract structure.

10 years $25 million for the batting side.

No one has ever come close to paying that kind of money for a DH.

If any MLB player has the ability to sell tickets beyond what they contribute to wins it's Ohtani.

I'd like to note that the estimates are from agents who have something of an interest in exceptionally high estimates of Ohtani's worth. (Or any players' worth, since they tend to set the market for each other.) If you want to use their estimates as the basis of a prediction, I'd start with them and then adjust your prediction down a fair bit.

If any MLB player has the ability to sell tickets beyond what they contribute to wins it's Ohtani.

Yes, but then teams only get to keep 55% of that revenue.

I think Ohtani (if he's healthy and plays at the same level this year) will get one of the 10/350 contracts. I don't think he gets significantly more than any other star. There's too much extra risk, and a DH just isn't worth that much.

Damn, Snapper mirrored my exact thoughts in 10 and 15. The only thing I would add is that I hate roster constructions that have an elite talent at DH. Maybe that's baked into the idea that you don't overpay for a DH, but I prefer lineups that use the DH as a half-day off for regular players. It allows so much more flexibility. You can carry 4 real OF, or have a really strong defensive-minded utlity infielder that gives the other starters a break. The Mets are doing it perfectly. Vogey as a platoon DH is good enough to play, but also not too good to prevent sitting. McNeil can play both 2nd and OF, so the Mets can have 8 legit players for 7 spots.

Cohen is going to offer him $100 million a year for 6/7 years and dare him not to take it.

This is the strangest definition of "dare" I have ever seen.

Re #16 ... Sorry, this one turned into a real ramble ... hopefully 2 or 3 useful sentences in there somewhere. I'm surprised my heresy has gone over so well.

That was becoming more and more true as teams pushed to 14 pitchers on a 25-man roster. Now with a 13 pitcher limit on a 26-man roster, it is a lot easier to carry either a full-time DH or a part-timer like Vogelbach. Which isn't to deny that from the very beginning, teams have generally not seen a need for a full-time DH so it's obviously not that closely tied to roster or bullpen size.

Prior to the universal DH, the min requirements for a full-time DH (not named Harold Baines) was to consistently put up an OPS+ around 125. With the universal DH, that should drop some. Now obviously if you've got 3 110 OPS+ or better bats as the 3rd-5th best hitters on your team, you'd love it if at least 2 could play LF and 2 play 1B and then you can rotate, mix/match, give other guys a half-day off, etc. But if you've got a Vogelbach, you use him and you only use him as a DH. Vogelbach's problem is that, like most solid but not good LHB, he can't hit LHP not that anybody has ever been silly enough to give him much of a chance.

The Cubs are going with Franmil Reyes as, presumably, near-full time DH. If he returns to his historic norms, he's too good of a bat not to play but you really need a desperate set of circumstances for it ever to make sense to trot him out to LF. The Cubs have to put somebody at DH every day and Franmil's bat will be the obvious solution almost every day; given the Cubs offense, Franmil's bat has to play almost every day (until he proves he's toast) and every day the only logical place to play him is DH. The universal DH should make it easier for guys like Franmil and Vogelbach to hang on. The 26th man and 13-pitcher limit should make it easier for those guys to hang on.

You're the Mets (my sympathies). Canha is a bit banged up and could use a couple of days at DH. But, assuming the starter is RHP, Vogelbach is as good a hitter as Canha but can't replace Canha in the field. So you might as well give Canha two full days off (or sub him for DV when the LHP comes in) -- that's better for Canha without hurting the team. Still, sure, even better if Vogelbach can not embarrass you in LF so you can keep both bats in the lineup. But if there's a guy out there with a 110 OPS+ bat who can play a decent LF, he's probably the near-starting LF on some other team even if it's the Reds (see the Wil Myers thread).

It's a weird, unexpected (to me) trick that teams have pulled off over the last decade -- the number of players who reach a qualifying 502 PA has dropped (so more bench use) while the number of bench slots has gone down. Teams have gotten quite used to resting/rotating the lineup when they were using just 12 position players. Forcing them up to 13 will, at least temporarily, make it easier for them to carry a bat-only player.

Historically, the number of qualified batters per team has run about 1 higher in the AL than the NL which made sense given the DH. You might think that the universal DH would push up NL full-time resulting in a short-term bump up in the # of qualified batters. That didn't happen, it actually continued its slow descent (136 in 2019, 133 in 2021, 131 in 2022) so any DH effect there might have been apparently was overtaken by the 13th position player. It would be interesting to look at whether we are seeing a number of part-time DH/PH-only (or nearly) players like Vogelbach.

Ohtani's interesting. He's got the speed for OF so if he'd been bat-only, he probably would be RF (with that arm). The defense and baserunning isn't Mookie-level and, even if he concentrated just on developing the bat, he probably wouldn't hit like Judge. But Springer or Nimmo might be reasonable comps for that Ohtani -- he'd probably be a bit better with the bat, they'd be better with the glove. Nimmo just signed through 37 but at $20 AAV; Springer signed through 36 at $25 AAV a couple of years ago. That puts Othani the OF at maybe 8/$200 or 9/$210 or so; deduct either some years or AAV for being a DH. Hard for me to see that guy doing better than the current equivalent of JDM's 5/$115 --probably around Springer's 6/$150.

As a position player, he's not Judge or Trout or Mookie or probably not even quite Freeman. It's far from clear you'd prefer him to Swanson or Story (or pre-2022 Bryant or Baez). That's quite "ordinary." I do like Rodon as a Q&D pitching comp -- excellent when healthy but not so dominating you'd take the risk of a 9-year contract.

But it's also true that, over the next 5 years, he probably projects to 35-40 WAR which is probably $350 before we even start talking about what value he might produce in the deferred years (because nobody is paying a $70 AAV).

But it's also true that, over the next 5 years, he probably projects to 35-40 WAR which is probably $350 before we even start talking about what value he might produce in the deferred years (because nobody is paying a $70 AAV).

How would you account for the added correlation risk, Walt? Usually when your best SP gets hurt, one of your best hitters doesn't go to the DL with him.

How high will it go? Hard to say, but I polled nine agents — not his own — to find out, and here are the responses.

Agent A: “He will definitely beat Trout, and you have to go from there.” (Mike Trout signed a 12-year, $426.5M deal)

Agent B: “Should get $400M-plus to a winner.”

Agent C: “$430 [million] to $440 over 10 years.”

Agent D: “10 times 45 [million]”

Agent E: “I think he goes to $500M or so, probably 12 years.”

Agent F: “$500M for 13/14 [years]— $250M per position”

Agent G: “475 [million]to 525 over 13 seasons.”

Agent H: “11 times 50 = $550M. Sounds crazy but he has the ability to consistently be a 9/10 WAR player.”

Agent I: “It sure seems like something that starts with a 5 in front of it.”

Ohtani’s stardom extends beyond his pitching and batting and into the international sphere.

Word is Ohtani will indeed shoot for $500M plus, and who would blame him? He’s one of the best pitchers in baseball, and also one of the best hitters, and as a bonus, might be tied for the fastest guy on his team (that would be with Trout).

We've got a drop dead gorgeous 21 year old Eurasian goddaughter who's fluent in Japanese. Now all we have to do is get her to like baseball, and we might be set up for life! (rubs hands in anticipation)

We've got a drop dead gorgeous 21 year old Eurasian goddaughter who's fluent in Japanese. Now all we have to do is get her to like baseball, and we might be set up for life! (rubs hands in anticipation)

Yeah right. She won't give you a penny!

The problem I'm having with the suggestion in 16 re flexibility is: If Ohtani is listed as a pitcher but can also dh doesn't that give you MORE flexibility that the hypothetical mets players being suggested?

Snapper. I don't get your question re injury risk? Isn't that already baked into all of these projections? What diff does it make if you have 2 4-war guys each with say 25% injury risk vs one 8-war guy with the same risk level? Thats a push isn't it?

I mean as a general proposition. If youreelooking to win a world series you might prefer the 8-war guy as having more liklihood of having that one big year. But as a general proposition the expected value of both those sets is exactly the same.

No?

If any MLB player has the ability to sell tickets beyond what they contribute to wins it's Ohtani.

oh yeah.

At first I was going to say he's particularly valuable in markets with significant Asian populations, but he seems to fascinate damn near everybody.

also, an Ohtani injury doesn't have to mean you lose both Ohtanis. a strained shoulder or a leg injury in some cases still gets you one Ohtani...

I mean maybe the thinking is if he's playing two substantially different positions theressmore chance for injury. Maybe?

Snapper. I don't get your question re injury risk? Isn't that already baked into all of these projections? What diff does it make if you have 2 4-war guys each with say 25% injury risk vs one 8-war guy with the same risk level? Thats a push isn't it?

I mean as a general proposition. If youreelooking to win a world series you might prefer the 8-war guy as having more liklihood of having that one big year. But as a general proposition the expected value of both those sets is exactly the same.

No?

You have 100% correlation between the injury risk of two 4-WAR players. That's bad. As a rule, you don't want correlation between assets in a portfolio. Zero correlation is great. Negative correlation is better. Standard portfolio theory would suggest that Ohtani should be worth less than a 4 WAR DH and a 4 WAR SP.

He doesn't have the advantage of an 8 WAR player in concentrating that value in one lineup spot. He still uses two. So, an 8 WAR hitter is worth more than Ohtani b/c you can still get positive WAR in the rotation spot.

if you have an 8 war player with a risk of 25% of missing the season what is his expected value?

Is it not the exact same value as 2 4-war players with the same risk?

He doesn't have the advantage of an 8 WAR player in concentrating that value in one lineup spot. He still uses two.

but he only uses one roster spot. Does that count for something?

what if you had a team of 40 2 WAR players and I had a team of 20 4-WAR players? You would insist you had the better team right? By how many games? 5? 10? 15?

How would you account for the added correlation risk, Walt?

Not a clue. As Howie notes, some injuries might be correlated, others not. Ohtani the pitcher missed all of 2019 while Ohtani the hitter produced 2.5 WAR. I can also see an argument that the dual roles make it more likely he will still be productive 6+ years from now -- he has X (X<1) chance of being done as a hitter and Y (<1) chance of being done as a pitcher but only a XY chance of being done as both (if independent).

Isn't that already baked into all of these projections?

Not really. I'm not sure the projections do a good job incorporating injury risk to begin with. But even if they were, with no precedent for a pitcher-hitter, you'd either have to assume the risks are independent (surely some aren't) or they are perfectly correlated (clearly not) or just take a stab at how correlated they are. (In case it's not clear, if Ohtani tears his ACL running the bases, he's done as a pitcher and a hitter for that year and maybe a bit more. But if he tears the UCL in his right elbow, it might not slow him down much at all; if he tears his left elbow then done as a pitcher until rehab but might keep hitting -- those are fairly independent.)

I mean maybe the thinking is if he's playing two substantially different positions theressmore chance for injury. Maybe?

Snapper can answer but yes, this sort of correlation also makes sense. Say an average elite pitcher misses one entire season out of every 10 or a 10% chance per year. For position players this is probably more like 1 in 20.

My guess that Snapper's main "correlation" risk is ... the baseline then is that, in any given season, there is a 15% chance that Ohtani will suffer a major injury in any given year. There are now potentially two meanings of "independence." The one is that pitching injuries don't affect his availability as a batter and vice versa -- in short, in a 10-year contract, you migth expect 9 healthy pitching seasons and 9.5 healthy batting seasons (where "healthy" doesn't necessariy mean 32 starts and 650 PA, just means "no major injury"). No big deal. But if they were completely "dependent" such that a major pitching injury also means he doesn't hit that season and vice versa then you expect just 8.5 pitching seasons and 8.5 batting seasons. The truth would surely be somewhere in between.

But yes there's the other type of potential dependence I think you are querying here. Because he bats, runs the bases, etc. then he is being asked to do more than other pitchers, he's more tired than other pitchers (the point of the 6-game rotation), etc. so presumably he is at greater risk of a major pitching injury than your average pitcher is. I think that must be true. I'm not sure it works the other way but certainly pitching puts the legs through a work out so he may be more suscepitble to a hitting/running leg injury that most batters. That's surely one reason he DHs pretty exlusively.

So you DH him to reduce position player injury risk; you put him in a 6-game rotation to hopefully reduce his pitcher injury risk. Both hopefully reduce his level of tiredness compared with how tired a normal full-time hitter and starting pitcher -- he's surely more tired anyway but hopefully not by much.

The problem I'm having with the suggestion in 16 re flexibility is: If Ohtani is listed as a pitcher but can also dh doesn't that give you MORE flexibility that the hypothetical mets players being suggested?

In that bit, I was just talking DHs in general, nothing to do with Ohtani. Sorry I didn't make that clear but I didn't take #16's comment as being specific to Ohtani.

In some thread last year, I broke down that, as long as they stick with a 6-game rotation, Ohtani's dual role actually offers no additional lineup flexibility. (At least until most teams move to a 6-game rotation. That doesn't mean it's a bad idea, it means its benefits are in keeping Ohtani fresh.) But any such potential effects are pretty minimal anyway -- either a 9th relief slot (probably how most teams would do it) or the opportunity to carry a 3rd C or a defense/PR specialist. And of course if we're gonna end up paying Ohtani like 2 players then he doesn't help payroll flexibility at all.

what if you had a team of 40 2 WAR players and I had a team of 20 4-WAR players? You would insist you had the better team right? By how many games? 5? 10? 15?

Assuming a 26 man roster with six zero WAR players to fill it out, 20 4-WAR players would give you 8 position players, a DH, a utility player and 10 pitchers. Depth would be a problem in case of injuries, but presumably not too many players with 4 WAR are missing many games, and filling their spots temporarily with six 0.0 WAR players wouldn't hurt you all that much. And the quality of play you got from the 4.0 players on the field at any given time would more than make up for the lack of deep depth.

Obviously you can take this too far. A team with four 10 WAR players and 22 with no WAR would be more like Eddie Feigner's King and His Court than a viable baseball team. But I'd take (20 x 4) + (6 x 0) any day over (40 x 2), especially since you can only have 26 players available on any given day, giving my team an advantage of 80 WAR to 52.

Isnt Snapper's underlying premise flawed from the get go? He wants to analyze player value in terms of risk management.

Arent those two entirely different things?

If I was to tell a baseball fan you can win one world series and then be in last place for 4 years would you take that? I would. I think most would.

BUt if I tell a middle age couple they can double their money but its 25% likely they will lose it all. Of course they wouldnt do that.

SO SURE: I wouldnt tell a middle age couple to invest in one 8-war Ohtani bond instead put it in 2 4-war Nimmo bonds.

I guess by Snapper's principles the Pirates are the best team in MLB.

STandard Portfoloio Theory. LOL

Obviously you can take this too far. A team with four 10 WAR players and 22 with no WAR would be more like Eddie Feigner's King and His Court than a viable baseball team.

Too late to edit, but I meant to write four 20 WAR players, which would make for quite a Core Four, but would still leave the depth problem unaddressed. Putting all four of those players in the starting lineup would make for a hell of an offense, but who'd be doing the pitching?

In some thread last year, I broke down that, as long as they stick with a 6-game rotation, Ohtani's dual role actually offers no additional lineup flexibility.

Im having a hard time grasping this. I know you tried to above, but can you try again to put explain in general what your argument was last year?

Because it seems to me that when Ohtani is pitching and DHing, you've saved one roster spot right there. So if thats 1/6 days, that's 0.16 roster spots you gain. WHen he's DHing OK he can't pitch so I guess there's no gain there. So I guess its a small gain of 1/6.

Has anyone explained why he doesn't play RF? I know Walt suggests the wear on the legs that may be it. But I dunno. He played RF sparingly in JPN if I recall. One would think he'd be really great in the field too, but I dunno.

I think he DH’s because they don’t want him making right field throws when he is recovering from his last pitching effort.

If you have a 6 man pitching rotation that means you're carrying an extra pitcher thus not saving a roster spot.

If you have a 6 man pitching rotation that means you're carrying an extra pitcher thus not saving a roster spot.

Hmm. I guess that's right. If they were a 5 man would he provide roster flexibility?

He would presumably allow you to mess with the rotation to get "optimal" matchups and guve starters extra rest.

Standard team on any given day has one SP, 8 relievers, 13 position players and 4 guys sitting on their ass doing nothing.

Ohtani with a 6-game rotation:

When Ohtani pitches, the team has Ohtani the SP, 8 relievers, Ohtani and 12 position players and 5 guys sitting on their ass doing nothing.
When Ohtani doesn't pitch, the team has the SP, 8 relievers, Ohtani and 12 position players and 4 guys sitting on their ass doing nothing.

So one out of 6 games, the Angels have an extra SP doing nothing. I suppose that makes them better suited to survive a 20-inning game. The rest of the time, they have the same availability as a typical team.

With a standard rotation and an extra reliever:

Ohtani the SP, 9 relievers, Ohtani + 12 position players, 4 guys doing nothing
SP, 9 relievers, Ohtani + 12 position players, 3 guys doing nothing

This team gets one extra reliever every game. If they carry an extra position player instead, it's 8 relievers but 13 non-Ohtani position players every game.

So the 6-man rotation removes any roster flexibility advantage of Ohtani.

Obviously given SPs do nothing on their day off, the effective roster for a game is really 22 players. Ohtani does effectively expand his team's roster to 27 on the days he pitches (but only those days) but the 6-man rotation still reduces the effective roster to 22 on those days. In a 5-man rotation, the roster flexibility would be the equivalent of running a 4-man rotation -- i.e. effective roster of 23.

Ohtani with a 6-game rotation

Saw an article someplace suggesting Ohtani would try the 5-man rotation this year, to maximize his value in his walk year and as a free agent. Wouldn’t be that much of change if his team gives him extra days of rest for off days & the All-Star break.

I haven’t read the whole thread yet but a few points:

1. I don’t see anyone giving him a $500mm contract. As others have noted, he’s a great player but a higher injury risk than either just a DH or just a pitcher. (But pitching increases the risk of an injury that prevents him from doing either.)

2. That being said, he wouldn’t be a DH if he wasn’t also a pitcher, right? In other words, he’s not an old player skills guy who would be expected to age poorly, and if he could no longer pitch effectively there’s still a good chance he could play the outfield. I would look at contracts for good hitting OF rather than just DHs as part of the exercise here.