UPDATE: Phillies designate Scott Mathieson for assignment

Leave a comment

UPDATE: Matt Gelb of the Philadelphia Inquirer kept his promise to explain the Mathieson situation and it appears he isn’t going anywhere. Here are the specifics.

Problem is, Mathieson cannot be optioned without going on waivers.
Here is my understanding of Mathieson’s situation:

There are four types of waivers, the rarest being optional waivers.
They are required when a team wishes to option a player who has options
remaining but is more than three calendar years removed from his
major-league debut. Mathieson falls under that category; he made his
debut on June 17, 2006. And he has options left.

So the Phillies had to place Mathieson on waivers regardless. Will they
lose him? Almost certainly no. Optional waivers are revocable, which
means if a team puts a claim in for Mathieson, the Phillies can pull him
back.

Well, I’ve learned something today. How about you?

1:59 PM: Todd Zolecki of MLB.com confirms that Mathieson was designated for assignment, while Matt Gelb tweets that there is a “very small chance” that the Phillies will lose him through a loophole. My head hurts. This has nothing to do with my personal fandom, I swear, but it would be pretty entertaining to see the Mets put in a waiver claim here.

1:47 PM: Well, that was fast. Scott Mathieson was just called up from Triple-A Lehigh Valley on Friday, however he was designated for assignment on Saturday in order to make room on the roster for catcher Dane Sardinha, according to Matt Gelb of the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Mathieson reached cult hero status among some Phillies fans after multiple Tommy John surgeries, posting a 2.43 ERA and 34/12 K/BB ratio over 29 2/3 innings with the IronPigs this season, however he failed to impress in his season debut against the Twins on Friday night, allowing two runs on three hits and a wild pitch with the bases loaded in the ninth inning. The 26-year-old fireballer was yanked after throwing 23 pitches.

There’s some uncertainty as to what this roster move actually means, as Mathieson has options remaining. Assistant general manager Scott Proefrock told Gelb that it was “a procedural move,” but wouldn’t elaborate further. I’m stumped.
 

The Marlins have made a “monster offer” for Kenley Jansen

LOS ANGELES, CA - OCTOBER 18:  Kenley Jansen #74 of the Los Angeles Dodgers delivers a pitch against the Chicago Cubs in the eighth inning of game three of the National League Championship Series at Dodger Stadium on October 18, 2016 in Los Angeles, California.  (Photo by Sean M. Haffey/Getty Images)
Getty Images
1 Comment

OXON HILL, MD — The morning after Aroldis Chapman signed for a record $86 million, the Miami Marlins are reported to have made similarly lucrative offer to the other top free agent closer, Kenley Jansen.

Jeff Passan of Yahoo says that the Marlins have made “a monster offer” of five years and more than $80 million to Jansen. This despite the fact that the club is coming off of a 79-win season and, tragically, lost their top pitcher Jose Fernandez in a fatal boating accident, which will substantially harm their competitive prospects. While it seems like a stretch to say that the Yankees will compete for a playoff spot, thereby making such an historically large investment in a closer a bit suspect, the Marlins doing so is even more questionable.

Meanwhile, the Nationals are said to be interested in Jansen as well, though Chelsea Janes of the Washington Post says the Nats are “uncomfortable” with the financial commitment signing him would require.

Jansen most recently pitched for the Dodgers and there have been no reports that they’re totally out on him, but there has been nothing to suggest that they are pushing hard for him either.

Jansen, 29, finished this past season with 47 saves, a 1.83 ERA, and a 104/11 K/BB ratio in 68.2 innings. That’s not quite Aroldis Chapman good, but he seems poised to collect something close to Aroldis Chapman money.

The Yankees are paying $86 million for a one-inning reliever

chapman
18 Comments

OXON HILL, MD — The Yankees signing of Aroldis Chapman late Wednesday night came as something of a surprise. And the money — $86 million — was something of a shock. Yes, we knew that Chapman was going to break the bank and likely set a record as the highest paid relief pitcher in history, but seeing it in black and white like that is still rather jarring.

In the coming days, many people who attempt to analyze and contextualize this signing will do so by pointing to the 2016 playoffs and the unconventional use of relievers by Terry Francona and the Indians and Joe Maddon of the Cubs. They’ll talk about how the paradigm of bullpen use has shifted and how relief pitchers have taken on a new importance in today’s game. Chapman’s astronomical salary, therefore, will be described as somehow more reasonable and somewhat less shocking than it first seems.

Don’t buy that jive for a second.

Yes, Andrew Miller and, to some extent, Chapman himself were used unconventionally in the 2016 playoffs, but not long into the 2017 season we will see that as an exception, not the rule. And not just because Chapman showed himself unable to hold up to that level of use in the playoffs. It will be the exception because the Yankees have shown no inclination whatsoever to deviate from traditional bullpen usage in the past and there is no reason to expect that they will do so with Chapman in the future.

As you no doubt remember, the Yankees had Chapman, Dellin Betances and Andrew Miller for the first half of 2016. Such an imposing back end of a bullpen has rarely been seen in recent history. All of them, however, were used, more or less, as one-inning-a-piece guys and no real effort was ever made to break any bullpen usage paradigms or to shorten games the way many applauded Terry Francona for doing in the playoffs.

Miller pitched 44 games for the Yankees, totaling 45.1 innings. He pitched more than a single inning on only three occasions. Chapman pitched 31 games for the Yankees, amassing 31.1 innings. He was used for more than one inning only twice. Betances worked in 73 games, totaling 73 innings. On 11 occasions he pitched more than one inning.  It was unconventional for a team to have three relievers that good, but they were not, in any way, used unconventionally. Nor is there any reason to expect Chapman to be used unconventionally in 2017, especially given that Miller is not around and Chapman has shown no real ability to be stretched for multiple innings for a sustained period.

None of which is to say that having Chapman around is a bad thing or that he is any less of a closer than his reputation suggests. It’s merely to say that the Yankees paying Chapman unprecedented money for a closer should not be justified by the alleged new importance of relief pitchers or that changing role for them we heard so much about in the playoffs. Indeed, I suspect that that changing role applies only to pitcher use in the playoffs. And I do not suspect that this transaction alone pushes the Yankees into serious playoff contention, making that temporary unconventionality something of a moot point in New York for the foreseeable future.

It is almost certain that the Yankees are paying $86 million for the same one-inning closer Aroldis Chapman has been for his entire seven-year career. His contract may or may not prove to be a good one for New York based on how he performs, but don’t let anyone tell you now, in Decemeber 2016, that it’s better than you think because Chapman will somehow transform into a 1970s-style relief ace or something.