Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Tuesday, February 14, 2023
The San Diego Padres have further bolstered their rotation, agreeing to a deal with right-hander Michael Wacha, sources confirmed to ESPN.
After seven seasons with the Cardinals, this will be Wacha’s fourth team in four seasons. He had middling seasons with the Mets and Rays before rediscovering his form with the Red Sox last season. He went 11-2 with a 3.32 ERA in 23 starts.
|
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. DL from MN Posted: February 14, 2023 at 02:02 PM (#6117102)--Seems like a low annual salary for someone projected for 1.4 WAR and who was expected to make something like 2/$20 mil.
--The descriptions I read were something like "could reach a value of 4/24," which is even lower.
--Very unusual for a player making such a low salary to get signed for the long.
--Was there any team in baseball who wouldn't have wanted him on this deal?
Perez, 32, 1.8 WAR: 1/20
Anderson, 33, 1.8 WAR: 3/39
Walker, 30, 1.5 WAR: 4/72
Stripling 33, 1.4 WAR, 2/25
Eflin, 29, 1.4 WAR, 3/40
My guess is the chances of him earning 24 million over 4 years are virtually nil. I'd bet it's something like 2/20 with a couple of outrageously low mutual options or something like that.
Would that hold up to scrutiny? Seems like it would be struck down as an obvious attempt to subvert the luxury tax.
Steamer 154 IP, 4.40 FIP, 1.5 WAR
Some of the difference is IP, but even adjusting for that only gets ZIPS up to about 1 WAR in 154 IP--a number Wacha hasn't touched in years. So maybe MLB teams are with ZIPS on this one, in which case this deal makes a lot more sense.
It's player options that are counted for CBT purposes because the assumption is the player will take something over nothing. But, yeah,
There's got to be some limit to what is permissible. I mean, the league isn't going to let 1/$21M with three $1M player options go through.
Vaguely related: Can anyone remember an instance of a team and player both agreeing to pick up a mutual option?
I think it would. My (very limited) understanding of the rules on such things is that there are retroactive adjustments when options are exercised. So even if it's rated as a $6 million AAV right now it would be changed to $10 million if/when the options are rejected.
I don't know any specifics here so even if my numbers are off a bit I feel confident in my initial statement that whatever happens it won't be Wacha making $24 million over 4 years. Maybe it's 2/8 with 4 million options or something like that. As NaOH points out there is going to be a point where the league steps in.
Aramis Ramirez and the Brewers both exercised it in 2015. That's the only one I can remember.
Mutual options actually seem worse, though. They're essentially saying that if both sides that the player's value is exactly what the option is, then they will both pick up the option. If that's the case, then they would sign for that amount anyway, so the option accomplishes almost nothing.
"Look, Michael, if your arm falls off in Spring Training, you'll get another $26 million, and your career will be over.
"If you are healthy and effective, you'll get another $39.5m, with a chance at one more contract after 2025."
Good for him - I hope he stays healthy, and I appreciate his contribution to the Red Sox last season.
I think he has to either bottom out or really sparkle for one side or the other to pick it up. The problem for the Padres is they don't really get him for 3/39.5, they get him for 2/32, given his recent performance and contracts is it likely that he is going to be worth such a contract? I'd say no. Conversely, how bad would he have to be to make his player option worth it? He got 7 million last year after ERAs of 6.62 and 5.50 in 2020 and 2021 (and 4.76 in 2019). I think the likeliest scenario for either option involves the words "Tommy" and "John." Other than that I think it's highly unlikely he pitches poorly enough to pick up his option. Likewise I just don't think he's likely to pitch well enough at his age and track record to be worth 2/32 (though if he does the Pads will win the division with room to spare).
For him to end up a free agent, he has to be worth more than 3/18.5 with two opt-outs, but less valuable than 2/32. That middle area between those two seems like prime Wacha real estate. Seems like his market would be somewhere around the 2/16 to 2/20 that he was predicted to get this offseason. Maybe I'm underestimating the value of those options, I declare this a one-year deal!
Either way, this is an interesting alternative to incentive-laden deals. Instead of a 3-year, $20 mil deal with incentives that could take it up to 3/$42 mil, you do it with options and put off the tax hit.
Between this and the Darvish deal (which seems fairly bogus), San Diego is getting extremely creative with staying under the tax threshold.
I believe player options are included in AAV - so his tax hit is $6.5M each of the next 4 years. There's got to be retroactive accounting that goes on though, just haven't been able to find an example. Paxton's deal last year is still listed as a 1 yr $10M deal, which makes no sense. It should have been 2 yr $5M per.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main