Qualifying Offer to be $15.3 Million

[Seth Stohs]

Per AP and MLB Trade Rumors, the Qualifying Offer for pending free agents will be about $15.3 million. That is an increase from the $14.1 Million that it was a year ago. 

 

Are there any free agents, outside of Jon Lester and Max Scherzer, who would not accept the one year, $15.3 million qualifying offer from their team?

[Linus]

Stephen Drew?

[Steve Lein]

Yikes.  Why would anyone even bother offering it to anyone besides those two?!  Definitely would be idiotic for most to reject it after what transpired last year!

[Linus]

Its hard to believe the Drew fiasco was just last year.  My how things can change......

[Winston Smith]

Should get an offer:

Scherzer

Shields

Victor M

 

Maybe:

Melky

Russell Martin

Cruz

Ervin Santana 

 

Lester can't he was traded

[SwainZag]

Its hard to believe the Drew fiasco was just last year.  My how things can change......

 

Didn't the Twins take Burdi with the pick they would have lost?

[Seth Stohs]

Thanks for the reminder... Lester was traded in-season which means he can't be offered arbitration.

[Dman]

I would add Cruz to that list.  He was a wild card last year as no one knew how he would perform after being off of PEDs.  I don't think he will accept the qualifying offer and I think a team would snatch him up perhaps his old team in Texas or the Yankees.  If the O's want him they need to do the right thing.

[bird]

Didn't the Twins take Burdi with the pick they would have lost?

 

This is an example of a move a team declined to make that provided multiple benefits: a top 10 prospect, a potential impact player getting an earlier chance perhaps, and a bunch of cash.

[Willihammer]

Hanley too

[Rosterman]

Jared Burton?!

[ashbury]

Jared Burton?!

Yes, I foresee the Twins buying out their team option on him for 2015 and then offering him the $15.3M.

[kab21]

This is an example of a move a team declined to make that provided multiple benefits: a top 10 prospect, a potential impact player getting an earlier chance perhaps, and a bunch of cash.

 

Stephen Drew wasn't as interesting but Ervin Santana definitely was. 

[kab21]

Definitely getting an offer

Scherzer

VMart - 15M is a fine deal for him.  The scary thing is committing to him for 3-4 years at that amount.

Shields

Ervin

Hanley

Robertson - elite closer and the Yankees will pay him regardless

 

Probably - these are the guys that could find themselves in the Ervin/Drew/Morales situation if they decline

Sandoval - this could be an interesting situation.  He's too good not to give an offer but other teams might be lukewarm to signing him.

Martin - one year contracts don't hurt teams but this might be too much for the Pirates payroll.

Melky - pretty likely - Toronto isn't poor

Cruz - same as Melky

Liriano - more likely than Martin since pitching is so important

KRod - less likely than the rest of the list

 

Unlikely

Cuddyer - on a different team possibly but the Rockies will look to rebuild

Asdrubal - similar to Drew last year and not eligible

Torii - do the Tigers pay a little extra to avoid a multi year contract and keep the gang (minus Scherzer) around for another year?

Masterson - edit not eligible

Volquez - I'm not seeing it

Joba - not for a non-elite RP'er

Janssen - he's not that good as a closer

[stringer bell]

Masterson got traded to the Cards in midseason--not eligible.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

So far, every player that has been offered the QO has declined it - it is likely that teams really only offer it to players seeking multiple year Free agent deals. I think in most cases they offer it with the hope it will be declined.

 

This year could be different based on what happened to Cruz, Santana, Drew, and Morales. The multi-year deals just weren't there for them, so if a player thinks the market will be tough again, they might be asked by the agent to just take the money.

 

The Pirates will definitely offer it to Martin - they want him to sign long term, but they don't want him going to another team for nothing in return.

Robertson with the Yankees is an interesting one - I think the Yankees are probably the only team that would pay 15MM to keep a reliever. Granted, Robertson is pretty good.

V-Mart should get the offer, it's win-win for the Tigers. The QO is about what he'd be seeking annually, anyway.

The Royals should offer it to Shields, might as well get something back for that investment if they can't re-sign him.

[bird]

Stephen Drew wasn't as interesting but Ervin Santana definitely was. 

Definitely agree. Ervin Santana would not have been enough to convert the Twins into a winner in 2014, even with the other off-season moves. But it's perhaps a different story here in 2015, and he may not have the qualifying offer price tag.

[Steven Buhr]

If you're the Pirates, I think you have an interesting dilemma with Liriano. With the price of pitching (at least good pitching), if you really believe your coaches have made Liriano a top guy, might he be worth $15 mil for another year? If you're offering it to Martin, maybe you simply can't afford it, but I would think you might at least pause to consider.

 

Could also just be that I've remained a fan of a team that has been so pitching starved for so long, that the idea of letting any pitcher with legitimate talent that you can envision sending to the mound in a postseason game walk away for nothing is just really difficult to imagine.

[nicksaviking]

If you're the Pirates, I think you have an interesting dilemma with Liriano. With the price of pitching (at least good pitching), if you really believe your coaches have made Liriano a top guy, might he be worth $15 mil for another year? If you're offering it to Martin, maybe you simply can't afford it, but I would think you might at least pause to consider.

 

Could also just be that I've remained a fan of a team that has been so pitching starved for so long, that the idea of letting any pitcher with legitimate talent that you can envision sending to the mound in a postseason game walk away for nothing is just really difficult to imagine.

Yeah, can you imagine the the hellfire that would rain down on the Twins if they had Liriano and Martin (and their Pittsburgh production of course) and they didn't either re-sign or give a QO to both?

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

Liriano is another interesting case -  would he get 15.3MM/yr on the open market? Possibly, but he's probably on the low end of 12-15MM annually given his inconsistent track record.

 

I would think that Liriano might not decline a QO - it would be a nice raise from what he made in 2014.  

[kab21]

So far, every player that has been offered the QO has declined it - it is likely that teams really only offer it to players seeking multiple year Free agent deals. I think in most cases they offer it with the hope it will be declined.

 

This year could be different based on what happened to Cruz, Santana, Drew, and Morales. The multi-year deals just weren't there for them, so if a player thinks the market will be tough again, they might be asked by the agent to just take the money.

 

It's not about whether or not a player can get the QO amount in a multiyear contract.  The QO will be higher (per season) for several of these mid tier FA's.  Teams don't have a problem with overpaying for a single season but they are going to think long and hard about whether or not to give guys like Liriano, Martin, Cruz, VMart, etc multi-year deals.  That risk almost disappears if they keep them with a QO. 

 

So far there is only one year of data and it's pretty obvious that those FA's (and agents) misjudged the market (badly).  It's possible that this QO system traps some players on teams.  Almost like a form of restricted FA.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

I have seen more than one person compare the Qualifying Offer to the old Reserve Clause. I don't think it is quite that, but it certainly does benefit the team to offer it, and doesn't really benefit the player unless they were sure they couldn't get a better deal on the open market.

 

Being tagged with the QO makes a player less appealing to other teams.

 

 

Teams don't have a problem with overpaying for a single season

 

I think some teams do have a problem with overpaying for any amount of time (the Pirates, in particular, have an unwritten internal rule that they limit the % of payroll assumed by any single player) - sometimes a team will overpay without meaning to do so (a bad contract fueled by an underperforming player), but I think in general the QO is not offered to players if a team thinks they will accept. It's more about attempting to gain additional leverage on the negotiations and if a player walks, the team is rewarded with a comp draft pick...  

 

I wonder what the MLBPA thought was in it for the player to accept the provision in the first place. . .

[kab21]

Allow me to further clarify.  Teams don't have a problem overpaying for a one year contract provided that they actually have payroll space.  But many teams are willing to spend a little extra on short term deals (like the Twins with Pavano a few years ago).  The Pirates are likely in a not enough money if both players accept so they might not make both offers.  But at the same time it might be completely impossible for the Pirates to retain either player since the Pirates would have to commit 3-4 years of 10+M/yr and that could completely sink the team financially if either/both got old quickly.  I think the Pirates are more against locking up two older non-elite guys to long-ish contracts. 

 

It's really just a modification of the old arbitration system with a lower draft pick penalty.  If anything this should be an improvement for the MLBPA since middle of the road (5-8M/yr players) aren't getting offers.  In addition some high profile deadline trades can't be offered.  Overall there are likely to be far fewer players affected so the MLBPA actually won with this system but there is going to be a tier of players (4-5 each year) that loses.

 

Plenty of players ended up in arbitration in the old system.  Last year's results don't mean anything as far as whether or not teams will only offer to players that will decline it.  It does give the team more leverage though.  I could see VMart signing a 2 yr deal while he could probably get 3+ yrs in FA with no draft pick attached. 

[TheLeviathan]

Its hard to believe the Drew fiasco was just last year.  My how things can change......

 

No one would have expected Santana and Escobar, but Drew was the turd many of us thought he was.  Just a very bizarre way for things to play out.

[Linus]

Allow me to further clarify.  Teams don't have a problem overpaying for a one year contract provided that they actually have payroll space.  But many teams are willing to spend a little extra on short term deals (like the Twins with Pavano a few years ago).  The Pirates are likely in a not enough money if both players accept so they might not make both offers.  But at the same time it might be completely impossible for the Pirates to retain either player since the Pirates would have to commit 3-4 years of 10+M/yr and that could completely sink the team financially if either/both got old quickly.  I think the Pirates are more against locking up two older non-elite guys to long-ish contracts. 

 

It's really just a modification of the old arbitration system with a lower draft pick penalty.  If anything this should be an improvement for the MLBPA since middle of the road (5-8M/yr players) aren't getting offers.  In addition some high profile deadline trades can't be offered.  Overall there are likely to be far fewer players affected so the MLBPA actually won with this system but there is going to be a tier of players (4-5 each year) that loses.

 

Plenty of players ended up in arbitration in the old system.  Last year's results don't mean anything as far as whether or not teams will only offer to players that will decline it.  It does give the team more leverage though.  I could see VMart signing a 2 yr deal while he could probably get 3+ yrs in FA with no draft pick attached. 

This is correct.  What the agreement really does is benefit every free agent except the top handful.  This group of middle tier free agents who now have a complete, unfettered free market in which to sell their services.  Its also had the effect of killing the value for players at the trade deadline as the new team can no longer get draft pick compensation for their rental.  You literally are trading for the services of a player for two months, which ain't worth much in the way of prospects.

[Linus]

If you're the Pirates, I think you have an interesting dilemma with Liriano. With the price of pitching (at least good pitching), if you really believe your coaches have made Liriano a top guy, might he be worth $15 mil for another year? If you're offering it to Martin, maybe you simply can't afford it, but I would think you might at least pause to consider.

 

Could also just be that I've remained a fan of a team that has been so pitching starved for so long, that the idea of letting any pitcher with legitimate talent that you can envision sending to the mound in a postseason game walk away for nothing is just really difficult to imagine.

Well, this is nearly the same scenario that played out with the Twins.  You have an enigmatic, talented, erratic starter that you can't live with (at QO pay) and you can't live without.  Are you paying for the first half Liriano or the second half?  I might be able to fathom overpaying for one year but I am at the point where I would never give the guy a long term contract for big money.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

It's not good for an older player that thinks they are worth 10-15MM per year and are looking for a multi-year deal.

 

Any player like that is going to have to take the QO or expect to face the same fate as Drew and Morales this past off season.

 

Most teams won't risk a draft pick for a player in that age group and tier of earnings if there are other options out there.

 

I think it works fine for the super stars, they will find a multi-year deal somewhere with the draft pick being less of an issue. It works fine for younger Free agents too, as a team might be fine with losing a draft pick if they can lock a guy up for their prime years.

 

But the average to just above average veteran is losing out a bit. It's smart for the team to go year to year on a decent to good player north of 30 years old, but the player I'm sure would prefer to get more years to cover a potential career ending injury or even just decline.

 

Since I am fan of the Twins, I think it's good - the team can offer the QO to retain a player and avoid a more costly / lenghty extension that will bite them in the end. If I was just a fan of specific players, I would probably think it was unfair.

 

Take Cuddyer - I think if the Rockies offer him 15.3MM for one year, he pretty much has no choice but to take it. With his injury history he may want someone to give him a multi-year deal (and would sign for less than the QO), but the unappealing injury history is made even less appealing when it means losing a draft pick to sign him for a risky multi-year deal. Or worse for Cuddyer, the only deal he might be able to get on the open market is a one year deal for less than the QO, and without Coors to boost his numbers, it will be very hard to turn that make-good contract into a multi-year deal. This off-season is probably Cuddyer's last chance for a multi-year deal. If that's what he really wants, he's probably hoping to not even be offered the QO. I think 15MM would be a very generous deal for Cuddyer, but he probably prefers years with higher totals (even 2/20 would be better than 1/15) because who knows if that 2nd year will ever happen for him?

 

The QO is a kiss of death to a veteran that is not a star.

[Linus]

It's not good for an older player that thinks they are worth 10-15MM per year and are looking for a multi-year deal.

 

Any player like that is going to have to take the QO or expect to face the same fate as Drew and Morales this past off season.

 

Most teams won't risk a draft pick for a player in that age group and tier of earnings if there are other options out there.

 

I think it works fine for the super stars, they will find a multi-year deal somewhere with the draft pick being less of an issue. It works fine for younger Free agents too, as a team might be fine with losing a draft pick if they can lock a guy up for their prime years.

 

But the average to just above average veteran is losing out a bit. It's smart for the team to go year to year on a decent to good player north of 30 years old, but the player I'm sure would prefer to get more years to cover a potential career ending injury or even just decline.

 

Since I am fan of the Twins, I think it's good - the team can offer the QO to retain a player and avoid a more costly / lenghty extension that will bite them in the end. If I was just a fan of specific players, I would probably think it was unfair.

 

Take Cuddyer - I think if the Rockies offer him 15.3MM for one year, he pretty much has no choice but to take it. With his injury history he may want someone to give him a multi-year deal (and would sign for less than the QO), but the unappealing injury history is made even less appealing when it means losing a draft pick to sign him for a risky multi-year deal. Or worse for Cuddyer, the only deal he might be able to get on the open market is a one year deal for less than the QO, and without Coors to boost his numbers, it will be very hard to turn that make-good contract into a multi-year deal. This off-season is probably Cuddyer's last chance for a multi-year deal. If that's what he really wants, he's probably hoping to not even be offered the QO. I think 15MM would be a very generous deal for Cuddyer, but he probably prefers years with higher totals (even 2/20 would be better than 1/15) because who knows if that 2nd year will ever happen for him?

 

The QO is a kiss of death to a veteran that is not a star.

That's the whole point - no veteran that is not a star is ever going to receive the qualifying offer.  The problem isn't the system - its that the player isn't worth what he thinks he is.  It doesn't matter what Cuddyer wants, it matters what the market will bear for him, and it will be a complete free market in this scenario.

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

Last year several veteran players received the offer, declined, and had to settle for contracts that weren't worth the QO - Nelson Cruz, Ervin Santana, Kendrys Morales, Stephen Drew . . .  

 

Cruz and Santana might get close to the AAV of the QO this year.

 

I agree that the problem is that the player has to realize their market value. If a team offers a QO this time around, I think there might actually be a few takers unlike in past years.

 

The system provides maximum leverage for a team to retain their veteran players - that's ... good? for the Team, yes. For the player, too bad for them.

 

Again, without saying that it is good or bad in general, I don't see the benefit from the Player's Union perspective, unless players start taking the QO. So far no one has.

[Linus]

Last year several veteran players received the offer, declined, and had to settle for contracts that weren't worth the QO - Nelson Cruz, Ervin Santana, Kendrys Morales, Stephen Drew . . .  

 

Cruz and Santana might get close to the AAV of the QO this year.

 

I agree that the problem is that the player has to realize their market value. If a team offers a QO this time around, I think there might actually be a few takers unlike in past years.

 

The system provides maximum leverage for a team to retain their veteran players - that's ... good? for the Team, yes. For the player, too bad for them.

 

Again, without saying that it is good or bad in general, I don't see the benefit from the Player's Union perspective, unless players start taking the QO. So far no one has.

Actually the system provides no leverage for a team to retain their veteran players except the absolute stars.  If you want to use Cuddyer as an example, he won't receive the qualifying offer so he can go out in the marketplace and get the absolute best deal he possibly can with no draft pick compensation of any sort dragging down his value. If the Rockies are crazy enough to extend that offer, Cuddyer would take it in a heartbeat and laugh all the way to the bank.  And, for the mega stars, it has no negative baggage because any team willing to sign a Zach Grienke to a mega deal is not going to worry about the draft pick loss as it will be a minor factor in the overall scheme of things.

 

Bottom line is this: going forward very few players will receive the QO which will give them the best chance to sign a contract for the absolute maximum the market will bear.