Offishial news, 6/8/23: Another convincing sweep; Sánchez as a "complete hitter"

[Ely Sussman]

View full article

[Guest OneRegend]

"Bruce Sherman reluctantly accepted Derek Jeter’s plea for the Marlins to sign Avisaíl García in free agency. “That, along with revenues falling well short of Jeter’s expectations…was at the core of Sherman’s dissatisfaction with Jeter,” Geffner reports, leading to Jeter’s departure before García even played his first Marlins game. Their breakup was “more nuanced” than Sherman’s desire to pinch pennies—Jeter insisted their player development department would be able to produce homegrown impact bats and he wasn’t able to deliver on that, leaving free agency as the last resort."

 

That makes Jeter's tenure look even worse than it already was in retrospect. That said, Sherman is also partly to blame for even agreeing to let such an unmitigated disaster in Garcia aboard. He's not as innocent as Geffner claims.

 

I don't care if Garcia hit 50 HRs in a season before signing with us, he doesn't deserve a 4-year deal. All it takes is one look at how often he chases pitches out of the zone, and at how inconsistent of a player he's always been. Sure, he might be okay as a role player, but this is exactly the type of player you sign to a 1 or a 2 year deal, not to "try to" have him carry your team on a 4 year deal. There's far too much risk involved, and here, regression to the mean reared its ugly head. And I'm not even going to go over the offensive environment change going from American Family Field to loanDepot Park, even though that would further cement my point.

[Ely Sussman]

Yes, there's never been any clarity on why they felt it required a 4-year deal to get him. Would have been a reasonable gamble even at that salary if only the length wasn't so overwhelming.

[Guest Eudaldo Farré]

In Sherman’s defense, how could he question the length of the contract from a baseball standpoint?

 

He has to rely on his baseball people in this case Jeter. If anything he shows he was willing to commit $52mm over four years. Unfortunately in the wrong guy.

[Guest Thomas Joseph]

I agree but with the full disclosure that I think three or four years should be the maximum of any contract in MLB, and even then, very limited. Of course, this only applies because the contracts are fully guaranteed. I dislike speaking so definitely as to say that for every long-term deal (how is that defined?) that provided appropriate value to the team (not just statistically because I do think there are intangibles worthy of consideration) there are many that do not. Perhaps this is familiarity bias, but it appears so to me. Just this year, we had Hosmer, MadBum, and Hicks. A quick check at Spotrac shows nearly every team is hooked, although relativity is quite different for the Marlins than the Mets. It's not my money, so I alternate between laughing and being frustrated that my team is hamstrung by stupidity.

[Guest Thomas Joseph]

Ely, I left a comment that addresses my thoughts on contract lengths. Ciao,

[Ely Sussman]

MLB financial structure severely underpays players during their 6 pre-free agent years. The new CBA took incremental steps to correct that (raising league minimum salary and paying out bonuses to top pre-arbitration players), but still a long way to go. That's why most owners don't hesitate to pay premiums for free agents: they still profit comfortably overall.

[Guest Thomas Joseph]

That might be so. It is a very interesting, if layered, discussion. I don't know what an acceptable ROI is for an MLB team. I figure most comes through team value appreciation, but I realize owners are not hurting! In any case, owners apparently approach player contract length with differing strategies - AAV appears to be the trendy one. I know David Samson advocates for free agency for all players every year after the initial control term. We know that both sides oppose that, even if it might protect the owners from themselves. As a fan, with no direct stake, I do know that (whether self-imposed or based on actual financial prudence) bad deals have concomitant contemporaneous repercussions for many teams. We have to figure swallowing Garcia's contract, perhaps Segura's, plus the $30m owed on the Stanton trade are probably quite germane to the Marlins' fortunes for this and a few upcoming seasons. A consequence of reducing team control years will be even more MiLB team contractions/consolidations. Speaking of Samson, he discussed self-insurance versus insurance for these big contracts. Strasburg and DeGrom are apparently not covered by insurance. One is and the other is likely to be among the biggest write-offs in MLB history. We will have to wait for the disposition of the spate of mega-length deals recently signed. My Samson-inspired "Wait to See" is that many will end up being Cano-esque (behavior/production) and Strasburg-esque (injury) disasters.

[Guest Kevin]

Good write up, Ely. I'm happy to see Arraez keeping it above .400 and especially happy to see Sanchez' continued development over the past few seasons.

[Guest OneRegend]

It would have been perfectly reasonable to hand a 4-year deal to a player with a track record of consistency, and/or, at the very least, a player who isn't ranked in the 4th percentile of all players in chase rate. Why they chose Avisail Garcia, among many other options they had, to try and carry their team is baffling to say the least.