Sizing Up Baseball’s Class of Free Agents

Nov 06, 2015 · 18 comments
sam g (berkeley ca)
Once again (due to ageism and prejudice against fat people_ Bartolo Colon -- also a free agent-- is not even mentioned! Some team WILL offer him a multi-year contract worth ten of millions.
Barry (Peoria, AZ)
For Murphy as well as the other players older than 30, the caution flag flies solely because mature players want - and their union seems to demand - out of proportion length to go with sizable annual value.

If Murphy, Gordon or Cespedes accepted a three- or four-year deal, they might earn more, but would be likely to find no value at the end of that contract.

Conversely, the team that offers any of them a five-year or longer deal with similar huge annual numbers will be - like me - watching the World Series on television in October.

As the Royals and Mets proved this year, and others have in the recent past, overpaying for length works only for the player.

Build from within - it is cheaper and, in the long run, an easier business model to sustain.
JerseyJon (NJ)
Agree that this article is harsh on Murphy - yes he played way over his head NLDS and NLCS and struggled in WS. He is a consistent bat with inconsistent power, a guy that will give the Mets cover as DWright clearly is not going to play more than 100-120 games in a season ever again.
Depending on what the market throws at him - I think it is a mistake to disregard his potential contributions over the next 4-5 years. There is no reason to think his productivity will drop off as it is not based on superior athletic ability.
It would be great to see him in a Mets uni in the spring, but I am not hopeful.

Agree on Cespedes - even with his fade he will top of the market value and the Mets don't need another Bobby Bo contract on their hands.
Alan Chaprack (The Fabulous Upper West Side)
Of course Greinke and Cespedes had the best years of their careers; they've both just finished their walk years.

And, as Sparky Anderson once observed - and I'm paraphrasing between the quotes - "Give me 25 guys in their walk years and I'll win you a World Series every time."
Nicholas Conticello (New Jersey)
Imagine, if you will, the Mets' lineup as constituted without the free agents whom they used last season. The infield consists of Duda and Wright at the corners and two from among Herrera, Flores and Tejada in the middle. The outfield is Conforto, Lagares, and Granderson. d'Arnaud will catch. The bench includes Cuddyer, Campbell, Plawecki and/or Recker.

That's not quite as bad as the comedy act from mid-July, but very possibly Harvey, deGrom, and company will again find themselves needing to pitch shutout ball to win games. One can't expect August lightning to strike a second year running. Something has to be done in the offseason to shore up the offense.
fran soyer (ny)
I'm going outside the box here:

The Mets ought to go after pitching. Why ? 3 reasons:

The market. It's unfortunate, but the market is flush with pitchers and limited for hitters. All of the batters will receive a premium, making it less likely that any of them will be a bargain.

Wheeler. There's this assumption out there that Wheeler is going to be a starter in 2016. This isn't true. Perhaps he'll be ready by the trade deadline, and there's no more valuable chip at the trade deadline than pitching.

The bullpen. Short of Familia, the bullpen is average and needs an upgrade. Moving a starter to the bullpen is one possible solution. I'm sure Danny Duffy and Luke Hochevar ( and Wade Davis ) wanted to be starters at some point too, but I'm sure that they're happy to be WS Champion relievers this week.

Outside of maybe Upton and perhaps 35 year old Zobrist, no position player is worth the price. But there is easily room for a good starter.
Adirondax (mid-state New York)
The Mets had a truly remarkable season. They traded for a guy who had his season during the 2nd half, and their 2nd tier 2B had a two week hitting extravaganza that he will remember for the rest of his life. Mets fans, as well as other baseball clubs, will both know that Murphy's lunge at glory was just that. Not sustainable.

Good teams, like the Royals, have great defense up the middle. Plus great pitching. With Wheeler coming back, the Mets have the makings of a top tier pitching staff. They need help at the back end of their bullpen, but that can be had for a reasonable price with some head's up analytics and great scouting.

My best guess is the Mets are 2 years away from returning to the playoffs. Their run in the post season tournament was great, but they really weren't that good. The Royals exposed them in that way.

So management should keep on trucking', allow Cespedes to walk and save their pennies for great player development. Let's not forget that this was a team that needed an operating line of credit from MLB just to stay afloat a few years back.

Hey, it was fun while it lasted.
John Ombelets (Boston, MA)
This seems like a reasonable assessment of Cespedes and Murphy. The writer is not saying they're bums. Cespedes is a big risk at anything over 3-4 years, and if any Mets fan expects Murphy to keep hitting like he did in the playoffs, I have some land in Antarctica to sell you. Pay him for the player he's been, not for the player he was for two weeks. KC exposed his weaknesses.
Michael (Oregon)
Caveat...I am an Angels fan. But the amount of money spent (wasted?) on Albert Pujols and CJ Wilson's long term contract is not the reason I am suspicious of big money free agency signings. (I was incredulous and angry about the Pujols signing. I KNEW it was a mistake.)

Baseball owners are so wealthy they don't think clearly. My banker once told me, "Remember, the guys that lose money are people that make money doing one thing, think they are so smart they can do anything, and spend a fortune in a new field--one they are not familiar with--and lose money."

This article discusses several players that will ask for over $100 M and a long term contract. Repeat after me...Albert Pujols. These contracts are so large that even one mistake can hobble a team for years. I won't even touch upon the difficulty of predicting a player's performance. Every baseball fan is familiar with the inherent problems there.

If teams are just using hired guns to win a championship, they should sign players for indecently large contracts ONE YEAR at a time.
DWC (Brazil)
the huge mistake was Josh Hamilton for the Angles...but, your thesis is absolutely correct, Pujols is never going to be the St Louis slugger again. Hummm...Murphy is a true Met, probably not worth more than his $8 million, but he bleeds true blue...so, why not sign him to a 4 year deal for $30 million and be done with it. Let Cespedes go his way for goodness sake, and invest is young pitchers and young hitters that will grow in maturity.
marty (andover, MA)
Teams almost always make major, major mistakes by giving age 30 plus players multi-year (5 yrs or more) and multi-million dollar (upper 90 to well over 100 million) contracts. Just look at the Red Sox and Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval, two major mistakes the Red Sox would love to get out from under, as they were able to do a few years ago with the Dodgers. The Dodgers desperately wanted Adrian Gonzalez and had to take Beckett and Carl Crawford in the deal. Crawford at some $20M per year for 7 years may perhaps be the worst signing in recent baseball history...then again, how about Jayson Werth, Johan Santana, A-Rod's second Yankee contract, CC Sabathia's second Yankee contract, the Mark Teixeira contract, Jacoby Ellsbury, Cliff Lee, Ryan Howard, and on and on it goes. These are great contracts for the players, and I don't begrudge them getting every cent they can, but for the teams....well not so much...

But history shows teams will continue to shell out absurd, team-destroying contracts as the Scott Boras's of the world will always outwit, outfox team owners desperate for that WS ring (i.e. Prince Fielder and Josh Hamilton)
Harry (Michigan)
None of them are worth what their agents think. Pay for performance is the only way to pay athletes. It works very well in golf.
eaglone (New York)
Cespedes is obviously a streaky player, both on offense and defense.

Question is how to replace his dominance in August/September.

I love lagares but the hitting? And you're telling me that Dilson can replace Murph.

Absent both of them, the Mets are 2nd or 3rd in the NL East.
tlagee (Sydney, Australia)
Sounds like the Wilpons and Alderson got into this reporter's ear about disparaging both Murphy and Cespedes to Mets fans. This article is typical of the Mets organization in their attempt to save money. Any fan who has watched Murphy play over the past seven years has seen one of the best contact, line drive hitters the team has had. On a team that strikes out a lot, he is precisely the type of player you hold on to. But the Wilpons enjoy using the press to downgrade their players.
Michael (<br/>)
Murphy is like Howard Johnson -- a fan favorite who won about as many games with his bat as he lost with his glove.
Gene 99 (Lido Beach, NY)
Actually, stating that Murphy is an "adequate" fielder is an upgrade.
O. (Massachusetts)
The claim of author collusion with the Wilpons is just silly. The author was being kind to describe Murphy as an "adequate" fielder. He's barely that, and often a liability at 2nd.

He will assuredly try to parlay his post-season offensive hot-streak into a very overpriced contract. The Mets would be wise to pass.

I can only hope the Yanks don't foolishly sign him. I'd much rather see Refsnyder develop into an every day player than see Stone Hands Murphy in pinstripes.
Socrates (Verona, N.J.)
So long, Cespedes...the Mets can lose the World Series just as easily without you than with you and your embarrassing World Series at-bats, soccer ball fielding and base-running indifference.

Of course, getting to the World Series without your regular season bat would seem impossible, but I'm sure the Wilponzi's will figure out something.