St. Louis Cardinals: Sluggish offseason, a cause and effect expose

The extremely sluggish free agent market this offseason has had an impact on virtually all teams, including the St. Louis Cardinals. It is Dan’s turn to expound on his theories for the slow offseason.

Three key factors slowing the offseason

Writers and baseball insiders focus on the flawed free agent class; the prowess of next year’s free agents; the luxury tax; and general managers being smarter.  My take is different.

The slow offseason is being caused by three primary factors:  (1) the performance gap between high-end minor league players and MLB veterans is smaller; (2) tanking teams are willing to sell reasonably-controlled young assets in trade; and (3) Scott Boras.

First, because of better data on minor league players and performance, and because minor league players are more advanced than ever, teams are opting for players making the league minimum with six years of MLB-level control instead of veterans who command much higher salaries.

Why would a team spend exponentially higher amounts of money on a veteran who will soon decline when the difference in production between that player and a top prospect is marginal, at best?

The analytics-driven front offices of today are here, and the front offices that paid for past performance are mere vestiges of yesteryear.

The new front offices will not do that deal. The analytics-driven front offices of today are here, and the front offices that paid for past performance are mere vestiges of yesteryear.  Front offices no longer want to pay for past performance when a player is entering (or will be entering shortly after the deal is signed) his decline.  The tension between age and commanded dollars for free agents reached its tipping point this year and teams have not budged (er, adjusted) – nor will they.

Second, there are only a handful of teams in each league in any given year that actually plan to compete.  The remaining teams are employing the Chicago Cubs’ and Houston Astros’ model of tanking and dumping salaries to build assets and draft picks (Jerry Dipoto said there is more competition for the number one pick in the draft than there is for the world series this year – and he’s right).

Thus, with only a few teams requiring the resources of free agents, demand is down, and the teams who are competing for free agents have the leverage.

The bad teams who will take, but do not need, free agents also have leverage to force salaries down since there is no salary floor or minimum spending requirements in MLB.  Unless MLB or MLBPA do something about tanking, super teams and the squeezing of free agents will continue.

Third, super-agent Scott Boras badly misread the situation and market, and other agents followed suit.  Boras traditionally waits out tough markets and that paid dividends for some of his best free agents (a la Prince Fielder).  But, that strategy is not working this year.  Scott failed to adapt to the market and recognize the new environment in which he operates, and it will cost his clients dearly.

Scott cannot bully teams into submission anymore because so few teams intend to compete.  Scott fell victim to assuming what would happen in this market, and teams are refusing to accommodate his hollow assumption.

The oft-discussed luxury tax “burden”

Finally, articles discussing the competitive balance tax and other salary-cap-type measures are correct that not exceeding the competitive balance tax is a factor in the slow offseason.  But, that is not a predominant factor because so few teams operated at those salary levels before the tax was in place.

The real driver is that tanking teams refuse to spend money – which is ironic because many of these same teams are receiving huge dividends and payments from the revenue sharing protocols under the current collective bargaining agreement (revenue sharing teams are essentially paying Jeter’s salary in Miami, for example).

The poorly-negotiated CBA (from a player’s perspective) is the clear driving force here.  The problem is that other than through the grievance procedure, players have no recourse until the deal expires after the 2021 season.

Players need to urge a salary floor and penalties for tanking teams to make those teams spend more money.  Until that happens, it will be slow offseasons for all but the marquee, young free agents (think Manny Machado and Bryce Harper).

Larry, am I off the mark here?  What is driving the slow offseason from your perspective?  How is it that a guy who bashed 45 home runs last year and had over a .900 OPS remains unsigned? How do two former aces not have deals yet?  Why is the best first baseman in baseball still unemployed?

I would love your comment on my thoughts, above, and on whatever I’m missing so we can figure this mess out.

The extremely sluggish free agent market this offseason has had an impact on virtually all teams, including the St. Louis Cardinals. It is Larry’s turn to expound on his theories for the slow offseason.

A blowhard’s rebuttal

Larry: Dan, I have little issue with what you said, so I’ll stop here. Wait, I’m a blowhard, so no I won’t. Instead, I’ll try to build on what you had to say and put a St. Louis Cardinals sheen on it all. Each of your three points played into the Redbirds’ decision making, I believe, and in very interesting ways, some I find quite questionable.

Let’s start with the performance gap between ready or almost-ready prospects and veterans who find themselves in this lagging free-agent market. The St. Louis Cardinals have, as we know, a ridiculous wealth of up-and-coming pitching, both for starter and reliever slots.

In fact, while I won’t go player-by-player, one could argue that there are a dozen or more arms with the equivalent of one year or less of total major-league experience, or with none at all, who could play into the St. Louis Cardinals’ fortunes in the coming year. That’s a great place to be, and this stable of potential should prove out for the team for years to come.

Is the upside of young talent enough to forego the high-priced top starters and closers? That’s the question Cardinal Nation is asking. Your point, Dan, was that the young guys are a better investment than is overpaying the middle or lower tier of free agents. I wholly agree, but does the complement of strong young arms substitute for the top tier?

The answer is probably no. One can see the great promise of Luke Weaver while not comparing him at this stage of his career to a Jake Arrieta or Yu Darvish. Sure, Weaver could turn out to out-perform one of those guys, but there’s hardly a high degree of certainty that they will.

That’s why the Luke Gregerson and Miles Mikolas signings were very strange ones to me. Again, just as they did with Brett Cecil last year, the St. Louis Cardinals frenetically entered the market early to nab a couple guys who are….what, exactly? In Gregerson’s case, a really good pitcher with limited experience and success at closing?

Same with Miles Mikolas. A fine two years in the Pacific Rim made teams eager to grab Mikolas as a budget arm for rotation depth. That’s well and good, but it doesn’t seem to fit with the pattern of bellying up for the premium guys while letting the lower level guys go by. Is the marginal benefit of Mikolas, or even the insurance value to protect against a young guy failing in his first or second big league outing, worth it?

The St. Louis Cardinals are missing the mark on free agent valuation

In some ways, the St. Louis Cardinals’ approach to these guys has been to grab them if their cost doesn’t exceed the team’s valuation for them. But is that really the way to be playing this market?

Let me give an example to prove up my way of thinking. Mikolas and Gregerson will cost the team together somewhere in the neighborhood of $12M this year. So how would you feel if the team were to have instead invested in Wade Davis for $17M, or the still unsigned Greg Holland at a similar price? Or alternately, what if the team had gone with their existing bullpen but signed a top starter such as Darvish or Arrieta?

Truth be told, the St. Louis Cardinals could really afford BOTH the top starter and reliever, given their hugely increased TV budget, and the one-time bonus all teams are getting from the Disney-Fox transaction. They’re still under their 2017 Opening Day payroll by a good margin.

You can see where I’m going with this. Bargain hunting only goes so far, and while it might insulate you from the under-performance of a rookie, it doesn’t elevate your potential by any great shakes. By nibbling around the edges rather than landing the big fish, the St. Louis Cardinals’ free agent moves seem more like insurance purchases than contention builders.

Which brings me to your second point. The St. Louis Cardinals definitely took advantage of the trade option with their acquisition of Marcell Ozuna, and that was a deft move, barely making a ding in the reservoir of pitching prospects the Redbirds command.

And there was the talk of them playing for either or both of Chris Archer and Alex Colome of the Rays, either of which would have satisfied the upside potential that neither Gregerson nor Mikolas seem to provide.

It’s entirely possible there’s more in the way of trade coming.  You referenced the teams that are playing the rebuilding game as the Cubs and Astros did. Well, with the free agent market so slow, the dumpers (think the Marlins but with brains) should be more than willing to jump in feet first, for fear that contenders can get bargain basement free agent deals without sacrificing their next-gen prospects.

There’ still time for the Cards to avail themselves of the trade game, and they have definite needs, most notably that closer and also an upgrade at middle infield depth. But when one’s needs are that precise, it makes waiting, either on trades or free agents, that much more perilous.

The Boras factor and the CBA

As for Boras, I don’t know what to say. The guy has had a magnificent run, and well, he’s a good enough huckster I suppose he’ll persuade his clients this year that he did all he could do. Still, Boras has to realize that he has contributed in part to where we have arrived….if the top FAs get top dollar, there isn’t necessarily room for the less talented to climb above the bottom rungs.

The CBA is indeed a big bummer for the players, and we saw this week that the MLBPA even questioned the tactics of both the Pirates and Marlins, questioning their moves and whether they’re trying to field competitive teams. But honestly, that argument will never win, as teams can conjure up any number of explanations for how they’re rebuilding.

I agree with you that a team salary minimum is essential, and I would argue a significant bump in the individual player’s major league minimum as well; otherwise, the rich could just keep getting richer at the marginal player’s expense.

In summary, if the St. Louis Cardinals don’t make any more moves, then I think that while they have a fine and competitive team, they will have been out-dueled by others.

The Ozuna deal was great, but jumping into the Mikolas and Gregerson signings showed a pretty bad misread of the market. I think they will both be decent, but I don’t think either is what we needed, compared to the higher profile arms that, as we’ll see, will come in at below expected prices.

The extremely sluggish free agent market this offseason has had an impact on virtually all teams, including the St. Louis Cardinals.

On cost and cockiness

Dan:  Larry, per usual, you make excellent points about the St. Louis Cardinals nibbling at the margins instead of hunting bigger game.  I posit that the decision to make value plays for Gregerson and Mikolas as opposed to making a big splash for an Arrieta, Darvish, or Holland come down to the two Cs:  Cost and Cockiness.

First, as to cost, I mentioned that the St. Louis Cardinals would rather have young players instead of more expensive, yet proven, veteran free agents.

There are exceptions to that rule, however.  One of those exceptions is when the cost for a high-performing veteran dips so low that the mentoring and intangible value of having a veteran leader for your young players outweighs the necessity to differentiate on cost.

Enter Luke Gregerson.  His market fell so low that the St. Louis Cardinals paid significantly more than the cost of a rookie for his veteran presence and leadership.

Mikolas does not fit that mold.  With Mikolas, the St. Louis Cardinals saw an opportunity to sign an innings eater for insignificant dollars.

Why does this create an exception to the cost rule, you might ask?  Well, the biggest risk you have with young, cheap starters is durability and innings coverage.  Thus, the Cardinals mitigated their risk, at a low market price, in violation of my cost theory.  They made an exception to fill a need on the roster that the young guns could not fill.  Thus, necessity overpowered cost.

Second, as to cockiness, it appears that playing on the margins is related to John Mozeliak’s faith in the team he has – as currently constructed.  If the St. Louis Cardinals thought they needed an Arrieta, Darvish, or Holland, they would go sign one of them.

As you mentioned, they have plenty of money available.  Such a move, however, would violate the rule of cockiness and would require an implicit admission by Mo that the expensive free agents will out-perform players he drafted.  Mo was not willing to make such a concession (see, e.g., cockiness).

Finally, the slow offseason does not affect the current St. Louis Cardinals as much as former St. Louis Cardinals.  The players feeling the impact of the slow offseason are exemplified by former St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Lance Lynn.  Lynn, along with Trevor Rosenthal and Seung Hwan Oh, remain unsigned.  This, despite Lynn’s durability and established resume as a solid three and potential number two in a rotation.

The factors we have outlined above are really taking a toll on these players, and, frankly, I feel bad for them.

Are the winds of change blowing?

Will this change?  You mentioned the MLBPA complaining about the tanking Pirates and Marlins and you also mentioned that the teams can conjure up any excuse to dismiss such claims.  You were right.  MLB recently issued a statement that they have no concerns with how the Pirate and Marlins spend their money.

How does this relate to the slow offseason?  MLB’s response provides the tea leaves that one must read when predicting how MLB will deal with any claim of team collusion affecting the free agent market.

The players are in for a long, uncomfortable free agent experience.  What you are seeing this offseason is the new normal, and I do not see a compelling reason as to why it will change until the CBA expires and players get another shot at fixing this mess.  You are right, Larry, the rich will continue getting richer at the expense of the very players that got them there.

The extremely sluggish free agent market this offseason has had an impact on virtually all teams, including the St. Louis Cardinals.

Larry:  Dan, great points all around.  I hope I was clear that I don’t have much issue with the valuation of either Gregerson or Mikolas.

That’s not really the question, though; it’s whether they were necessary or even desirable additions BEFORE the team determined if a high-level closer, starter or utility player was available. And whether the expenditures on those guys would cut into the budget for true game changers.

There are two ways to look at this. Some would say, if you find a value-add in an area of the team that needs refinement, take it, it won’t hurt you, and could help you immensely over the course of a tough and potentially injury-laden season. Fair point of view, no doubt.

But that analysis suggests either that (1) the early and marginal acquisitions don’t impact your budget to buy in on the top-level guys, or (2) that you have no intent to buy in on the top-level guys, budget aside.

I think we’ve established that the Cards have the wherewithal to play in the higher range of the free-agent sandbox even with their acquisitions to date. Whether they have the desire to do so remains the huge question.

Closing remarks

Many analysts have refused to assume that the St. Louis Cardinals are in their Opening Day configuration, no matter what Mo or DeWitt say.

More from Redbird Rants

• Cardinals Rumors: 3 pros and cons of signing Carlos Rodon
• What’s next for the St. Louis Cardinals after Contreras signing?
• Report: Cardinals Emerge As Mystery Team for Carlos Rodon
• Cardinals: Trade targets after signing Willson Contreras
• Reflecting on the 2013 Cardinals’ top 30 prospects

That’s likely because the team has, in the DeWitt Era, played things extremely close to the vest, and sometimes seem to be less interested in deals or signings the more their intentions become known. Having witnessed lots of Cardinal seasons and deals, I’m willing to suspend judgment til we get to the start of the race, but not really beyond.

As for the MLBPA, that’s a lingering question that could hurt baseball for several years if an early fix isn’t found. Resentment among players will build, both those quality guys whose big paydays are rounding down, and more importantly the guys for whom a union really means the most, i.e., the ones who are straddling the major-minor fence. A few years being left on the sidelines will impact the remainder of their lives.

So there we have it, the impact of this painfully, terribly, awfully, despicably, historically slow Hot Stove League season on MLB at large and the St. Louis Cardinals in particular. As always, Dan, thanks for your precision, wit, analysis and (gulp) patience. May the Spring Be With You!

Next: Will Milwaukee's moves force the Cardinals to action?

Dan:  Larry, it has been a true pleasure once again.  And, hey, only a couple weeks until pitchers and catchers report!