Top 111 Free Agents: Nos. 10-1

Leave a comment

This concludes a series of columns looking at this winter’s free agent class. I’m listing each player along with his age, as of next April 1, and his place in the previous edition of these rankings from May.
Nos. 111-91
Nos. 90-71
Nos. 70-51
Nos. 50-36
Nos. 35-21
Nos. 20-11
10. Ben Sheets (31) – Prev. NR – Because he had yet to sign, Sheets was ineligible for the May edition of the rankings. Now he comes in at No. 10, even though he’s missed the entire year. The original hope was that he’d return from surgery to repair a torn flexor tendon in August, but it was always something of a long shot. Unless there have been setbacks we just don’t know about, it should be assumed that he’ll be at full strength next spring. Sheets has lost his best stuff and it’s probably never coming back, but he was good enough to post a 3.09 ERA in 198 1/3 innings last year. Since he’s not coming off one of the big three surgeries (Tommy John, labrum or rotator cuff), he should find some multiyear offers on the table. However, he may prefer to take a one-year pact in the hopes of landing something like $75 million for five years next winter.
9. Jose Valverde (32) – Prev. #7 – Valverde added an extra birthday recently, sort of. He had been listed recently as having been born in 1979, but the correct 1978 date was also out there and that’s the one that was used here in the original rankings back in May. Valverde has dealt with injury issues this year, but he’s avoided arm problems and posted a 2.12 ERA in 51 innings. He’s the only available closer worthy of a four-year deal, and he’ll probably receive around $10 million per season.
8. Aroldis Chapman (22) – Prev. NR – Chapman, who defected from Cuba in July, is expected to be granted free agency within the near future and he should prove extremely popular, given that he’s one of the five hardest throwing lefties in the world. Reports have had him clocked as high as 102 mph, and he didn’t seem to have much trouble throwing 98 mph in the World Baseball Classic. As a pitcher, he still has a long way to go, and anyone who signs him expecting him to be a quality starter in 2010 will probably be disappointed. He’d be more likely to help as a reliever initially. Because his ceiling is so high and the team that signs him will have him for at least six years — seven if he opens 2010 in the minors — he’s going to be a very rich man. I’m guessing he’ll get around $50 million.
7. Adrian Beltre (30) – Prev. #6 – Beltre’s Mariners tenure will be labeled a disappointment, but thanks in part to his terrific defense at third, he justified his $13 million salary each of the last three seasons before his injury marred 2009. He didn’t recover as hoped from offseason shoulder surgery, struggled throughout the first half and then underwent another surgery in June. Upon returning in August, he hit .390 in nine games and then went down with a bruised testicle. Now he’s back struggling again this month. Beltre is still pretty young, and he’s been very durable aside from this year. He’ll probably receive a smaller deal this time around and prove to be a pretty good value for whatever team that lands him.
6. Tim Hudson* (33) – Prev. #8 – What was in doubt at the beginning of the year seems settled now: Hudson’s $12 million option will need to be exercised mutually by both the team and the player. Any doubt that the Braves would pick up their end should have been erased by the quick and impressive return Hudson has made from Tommy John surgery. Hudson, though, will be able to do better elsewhere. For 2010 alone, there’s a good argument to made for a fully recharged Hudson over any other available free agent starter, particularly if John Lackey ends up working deep into the postseason.
5. Chone Figgins (32) – Prev. #17 – Figgins picked a great time to have his most valuable season to date. He was a better hitter in 2007, when he finished at .330/.393/.432, but he played in just 115 games then. After following that up with a 685 OPS in a 116-game season in 2008, his stock hit a new low. However, he’s bounced back to bat .301/.399/.401 this year and he hasn’t missed any time at all. Odds are that he’ll be viewed primarily as a third baseman this winter, but the Yankees and Cubs are possibilities to consider him as an option in center field, at least for a year or two. Those additional suitors should help him get a deal worth in excess of $50 million for four years.
4. Manny Ramirez* (37) – Prev. #5 – After another scorching start, Ramirez seemed to be in line to decline his $20 million player option for 2010. However, the steroid suspension, at least as much as his subsequent decline, changed everything. He’s remained one of the NL’s better hitters since returning from the 50-game ban, but his .279/.393/.517 line in 70 games since returning pales in comparison to the nearly 1200 OPS he posted in his first 80 games with the Dodgers. Barring an outstanding postseason, it’s doubtful that Ramirez would do better than $20 million out on the open market.
3. John Lackey (31) – Prev. #4 – Lackey has missed the first six weeks of each of the last two seasons due to elbow problems, but he keeps on bouncing back strong. This will be his fifth straight year with an ERA under 3.80 and perhaps the third in which he’s had at least three times as many strikeouts as walks (he’s at 135/46 right now). Whether he’ll reemerge as a 200-inning guy is the question. It’s a good sign that he’s never had any in-season recurrence of problems once he’s returned from the DL, not to mention a testament to the way the Angels have taken care of him. There’s a good chance Lackey will stay put. The Angels will have plenty of cash available with Figgins, Vladimir Guerrero and Bobby Abreu all potentially coming off the books, and keeping Lackey should be the top priority.
2. Jason Bay (31) – Prev. #3 – The middle two months were nothing to brag about, but Bay has come back with 16 homers and 41 RBI since the beginning of August. He’s now established new career highs in both categories, and his 930 OPS would rank as the second-highest mark in his six full seasons. Bay is 16 months older than Matt Holliday and a weaker defender, so the difference in contracts should be significant. Nevertheless, he’s clearly the No. 2 free agent available and he could potentially receive $75 million-$80 million over five years this winter. The Red Sox tried to sign him during the first half and couldn’t come to terms, so odds are that they will take a long look at Holliday this winter. Bay and the Red Sox seem like a good fit, though, so something should be worked out.
1. Matt Holliday (30) – Prev. #1 – Holliday would have ranked as the No. 1 free agent even had he finished the season with the .286/.378/.454 line he posted with the A’s before being traded back to the NL. Still, that he has come in at .356/.414/.630 with the Cardinals certainly won’t hurt him in contract talks. Holliday did seem to be figuring out AL pitchers towards the end of his stay in Oakland, so he shouldn’t be afraid to go back if the money is right. All things being equal, though, he’d probably prefer to stay in the NL. It’s going to be extremely difficult for the Cardinals to come up with the cash when they still have Albert Pujols to worry about. He’s likely due about $100 million for six years.

Mike Matheny tried to have his own son picked off at first base

PHOENIX, AZ - AUGUST 26: Manager Mike Matheny #26 of the St Louis Cardinals looks on from the dugout during the first inning of a MLB game against the Arizona Diamondbacks at Chase Field on August 26, 2015 in Phoenix, Arizona. The Cardinals defeated the Diamondbacks 3-1. (Photo by Ralph Freso/Getty Images)
Ralph Freso/Getty Images
Leave a comment

Cardinals manager Mike Matheny has a son, Tate, who was selected by the Red Sox in the fourth round of the 2015 draft out of Missouri State University. Tate, an outfielder, spent the 2015 season with Low-A Lowell and last year played at Single-A Greenville.

Now in spring camp with the Red Sox, Tate is trying to continue his ascent through the minor league system. On Monday afternoon in a game against his father’s Cardinals, Tate pinch-ran after Xander Bogaerts singled to center field to lead off the bottom of the fifth inning. Mike wasn’t about to let his son catch any breaks. Via Derrick Goold of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

That’s right: Mike tried to have his own son picked off at first base. That’s just cold, man.

Tate was erased shortly thereafter when Mookie Betts grounded into a 6-4-3 double play. Tate got his first at-bat in the seventh and struck out.

Do we really need metal detectors at spring training facilities?

sloan-metal-detector-1
Craig Calcaterra
9 Comments

MESA, AZ — Over the past couple of seasons we’ve, more or less, gotten used to the sight of metal detectors at major league ballparks. And the sight of long lines outside of them, requiring us to get to the park a bit earlier or else risk missing some of the early inning action.

Like so much else over the past fifteen and a half years, we’re given assurances by people in charge that it’s for “security,” and we alter our lives and habits accordingly. This despite the fact that security experts have argued that it’s a mostly useless and empty exercise in security theater. More broadly, they’ve correctly noted that it’s a cynical and defeatist solution in search of a problem. But hey, welcome to 21st Century America.

And welcome metal detectors to spring training:

scottsdale-metal-detector

Beginning this year, Major League Baseball is mandating that all spring training facilities use some form of metal detection, be it walkthrough detectors like the ones shown here at the Giants’ park in Scottsdale or wands like the one being used on the nice old lady above at the Cubs facility in Mesa.

I asked Major League Baseball why they are requiring them in Florida and Arizona. They said that the program was not implemented in response to any specific incident or threat at a baseball game, but are “precautionary measures.” They say that metal detection “has not posed significant inconvenience or taken away from the ballpark experience” since being required at big league parks in 2015 and believe it will work the same way at the spring training parks.They caution fans, however, that, as the program gets underway, they should allow for more time for entry.

And that certainly makes sense:

sloan-metal-detector-2

I took this photo a few minutes after the home plate gate opened at Sloan Park yesterday afternoon. As I noted this morning, the Cubs sell out every game in their 15,000-seat park. That’s a lot of wanding and, as a result, it could lead to a lot of waiting.

But the crowds here all seemed to get through the line pretty quickly. Perhaps because the wanding is not exactly a time-consuming affair:

Not every security guard was as, well, efficient as this guy. But hardly anyone walking through the gate was given a particularly thorough go-over. I saw several hundred people go through the procedure soon after the gates opened and most of them weren’t scanned bellow the level of their hip pockets. I went back a little closer to game time when most people were already in the park and the lines were shorter. The procedure was a bit more deliberate then, though not dramatically so. This is all new for the security people too — spring training just started — and it’s fair to say that they are trying hard to balance the needs of their new precautionary measures against the need to keep the lines moving and the fans happy.

On this day at least it seemed that fan happiness was winning. I spoke with several fans after they got through the gates and none of them offered much in the way of complaint about being wanded. The clear consensus: it’s just what we do now. We have metal detectors and cameras at schools and places of work and security procedures have been ratcheted up dramatically across the board. That we now have them at ballparks is not surprising to anyone, really. It’s just not a thing anyone thinks to question.

And so they don’t.