You are viewing the chat in desktop mode. Click here to switch to mobile view.
X
2025-26 Top 50 Free Agents Live Chat
powered byJotCast
Prev Page View Full Chat Next Page
Steve Adams
9:40
Don't love the player. But someone's going to pay him more than we would. The end.
Vince
9:40
Your estimate of $400m/11y for Tucker seems high to me, maybe because I’m not as familiar with him, because he doesn’t seem to have the impact of other players who have reached that number.  How much of his estimated guarantee is due to the weakness of the FA class?  
Also, for Steve, you
Tim Dierkes
9:41
I don't think weakness of the FA class had much to do with it.  Tucker is a very good player.  The idea that he might sign the fourth-largest contract in MLB history is deceiving, because of inflation.
9:42
I am in the Chicago area and saw firsthand how weird and disappointing Tucker's second half was.  I don't feel great about the 400 mil prediction, but also did not have the conviction to put him lower.  My colleagues helped make his case and it remains strong.
9:43
I wrote some stuff in my mailbag about how I can see Tucker's market failing to materialize, but at that point I hadn't given enough consideration to the Blue Jays.  I think he has the Jays, Dodgers, and Yankees as three fairly likely big market suitors.  If for whatever reason two of those take different paths, Tucker will not get 400 mil, in my estimation.
Steve Adams
9:44
Tucker is 29 and does everything well. He's had a couple pretty fluky injuries that were exacerbated certainly by Houston's ... less-than-stellar ... track record with managing injuries (and, to a lesser extent, that also happened in Chicago).

He probably is the quietest superstar in the game, but Tucker is a bankable source of 4-5 WAR every season even including the past two injury-shortened years. A full season of a healthy Tucker is probably comfortably worth 6+ wins. Teams pay for youth.

Tim wanted him lower, and I can't say I'll be shocked if he signs for "only" 350 or so, but this player is so, so good, and with teams like the Giants, Jays, Yankees, Phillies and Dodgers all standing as viable landing spots, yeah I think he gets a mega-deal.

As Tim is referencing, focusing on the trade market for bats or simply prioritizing pitching for some of his major potential suitors could throw a wrench into the 400+ contract, but I don't see any real way he signs for under 300
And I tend to prefer erring on the side of aggression when it comes to the very top free agent(s)
Tim Dierkes
9:46
I did come in at 400 mil in my independent Tucker prediction.  But when we all kind of landed there as a consensus, I stress-tested that a lot because I'm really not sure.  I have also written in my mailbag, Excel Sports Management hasn't really had guys where taking the Boras path of three years and $120MM with two opt-outs was chosen.  We don't know if Excel would accept something in that 300 range for Kyle.
Astros fan
9:46
How did you come up with Verlanders salary? To me his age makes him too large of a risk to decline or be injured to give him that much.
Steve Adams
9:46
He just got 15MM coming off a 91-inning season with a 5+ ERA
9:47
Then he went out and had this season, complete with a monster finish. He has to have earned a raise (or he should have). I suggested putting him at the QO value and we all more or less agreed.
Tim Dierkes
9:48
I started at 16 there and I assume a few of the guys talked me up.  But we have seen some very mediocre guys get 15.  Verlander had a really nice finish, he's a famous future HOF, he's slowly driving toward 300 wins.  Ultimately I felt like his stature meant he should indeed get more than a million bucks over Alex Cobb.
Steve Adams
9:48
Also, and this is silly, but $22MM just ... isn't much in today's MLB climate.
Tim Dierkes
9:48
Whether that's 18, 20, 22, I don't know, but sub-18 does feel wrong to me.
Steve Adams
9:48
Certainly not on a one-year deal
The Fonz
9:48
Does the weird F. Valdez incident from earlier this year impact his free agency?
Tim Dierkes
9:49
Our team voted no on that.
Steve Adams
9:50
I don't have much to add beyond that. I've been asked and answered this in basically every chat I've had on the site since the cross-up.

Framber Valdez is one of the best left-handed pitchers (best pitchers, period) in the game and I don't think one perceived scuffle (if it was even that) with a teammate is going to cost him significantly in free agency. He's too talented.
Joe
9:50
Why didn’t the Rays pick up Fairbanks’ option and trade him?
Tim Dierkes
9:51
My assumption is that no one wanted to trade for him at 11 mil.  The Rays could've dealt him just to get out of the buyout, as the Cubs did with Kittredge.  From what I've seen on Twitter, Fairbanks' reputation outstrips his current abilities.  This was the first healthy season of his career, he's at 97 and not 99 these days, and his K% has been average the last few years.  He'd a fine reliever, that's about it.
Steve Adams
9:53
I like him a bit more than Tim, but he is more name value than performance/positive trend lines right now. He was healthier this season but also took notable steps back in velo, K%, swinging-strike rate, etc.

I won't be surprised if Fairbanks ends up around 1/11 or the 2/18 we predicted. But teams are wary about plopping down significant expenditures on day one of the offseason if they're at or close to market value. We've seen this in the past. Colin Rea last year. Brad Hand with Cleveland a few winters back.

I suspect Fairbanks wasn't viewed as having much surplus value, and the Rays preferred to just pay the $1MM buyout as opposed to exercising and then finding minimal trade value as the offseason wore on
Guest
9:54
Who makes the final call on the years/$ amounts? Are each of you assigned certain players and you get the final call?
Steve Adams
9:54
At that point, you either have a sub-$100MM payroll with a reliever (possibly a declining one) taking up $11MM of it. Or you have to eat more than the $1MM buyout just to trade him for a negligible return.
Tim Dierkes
9:54
I make the final call, but I like to come to something close to a consensus.  On certain players we will have one dissenter, but mostly all four were at least begrudgingly on board with what we put out there.
Salary floor
9:55
Any belief a salary floor will be included in the next CBA? I could see that greatly impacting free agency
Steve Adams
9:55
We collaborate and try to have a consensus. But at the end of the day, Tim started MLBTR and he writes the checks. If he wants to be wrong about Robert Suarez getting three years -- just like he was wrong about Robert Stephenson getting four years :) -- that's his right!
(Tim has also very correctly pushed several guys over the line against pushback in the past. I'm just needling him here haha)
Tim Dierkes
9:56
I feel better than ever about Robert Suarez getting three years.  If he gets three and 40+, Anthony Franco has to buy me a Robert Suarez shirsey of his new team.  So in my mind that's already in my wardrobe
Steve Adams
9:56
I've got framed James McCann and Travis d'Arnaud shirseys in my office
The TDA one is a Dodgers shirsey! (He had one PA as a Dodger)
Tim Dierkes
9:56
yes!  At least I came through on those.  We had to add an apostrophe to the custom TDA one
anyway, the salary floor question.
9:57
I don't think that can happen without a cap.  In talking with the team, we do not think a cap happens in this CBA.
Steve Adams
9:57
I don't see a salary floor and don't think it would have the intended effect most fans seem to.
Trader Jim
9:57
When you guys make these predictions, how much weight do you put on a team's proclivity to not want to give up draft pick compensation?
Tim Dierkes
9:58
For me, if the GM basically said they wouldn't sign a qualified FA (which I'm guessing the union would take issue with), then I'd account for that.  Otherwise I didn't let it be an overriding factor on a fit I liked.
10:00
To be fair, there are a lot of FA for whom I think the QO will be a problem: Gallen, Imanaga, Grisham, maybe King and Woodruff.  Torres so much so that we predicted he will accept
Steve Adams
10:00
In terms of market value, a Tucker/Bichette, zero thought. The QO has repeatedly proven not to be a major deterrent for the top stars. For others, it matters greatly. We had Gleyber signing a three-year deal, but as soon as he got the QO, we all said on our group text "So Gleyber accepts? Right? Right."

Team-wise, yeah, it has to come into play a bit. There are clubs who seem loath to sign a qualified FA or who, at least in one specific offseason, kind of signal that they're really against it in the short-term.
Sparky
10:00
On Bregman, the piece said "There seems to be an expectation the Red Sox will get it done", yet all four of you predicted he'd go elsewhere. Can you clarify?
Tim Dierkes
10:01
Interesting contrast.  Part of that might be me writing that Bregman thing several weeks ago.  But it's also that in this case I think the media might be wrong
Connecting…