See what I did there? “Moore” to this deal? I shoulda been in advertising. If Sterling Cooper were real, and I was alive 50 years ago, I’d be kicking Paul Kinsey’s tail up-and-down the office with my zingers. Right?
I digress.
I have been pondering Matt Moore’s 8-year deal for several days and there is something about it that isn’t quite right. Sure, Moore is a phenomenal talent. Sure, the Rays and Moore have a joint interest in sharing the risk of Moore’s future. So, it makes sense that everyone just assumes this fits the Rays business model of locking up young talent long-term at below-market prices. Predictably, all the analysis has put Moore right in line behind James Shields, Scott Kazmir, Carl Crawford, Evan Longoria, and Wade Davis.
But this deal is different.
Shields/CC/Kazmir, and to a lesser extent Davis, were established Major League entities when they signed their extensions. Longoria had only played 6 games in the big leagues but, those 6 games came after a long stint at AAA that pushed back his arbitration clock an additional year. None of that is true for Moore. In fact, he doesn’t even have any significant time in AAA.
But, experience isn’t what makes the Moore deal unique, it’s the timing. It makes no sense. Why do this deal in December rather than, say, March or May?
Think about it. Everyone and their mother knows that the Rays are likely to trade a pitcher this offseason. There are six starting pitchers for five spots (Shields, Price, Hellickson, Davis, Niemann, Moore). Friedman has to deny that he is going to trade a starter to ensure that any market exists for the starter he has to trade. He has to drive down supply by convincing the league that he’ll keep all six. (At some point, there was some discussion of converting one of the six to a closer role but, that ended when we brought back Kyle Farnsworth.)
Moore was the x-factor keeping the trade demand for Niemann/Davis artificially high. There was a legitimate reason to start Moore in AAA despite his 2010 success. A team might be inclined to buy Niemann/Davis at a fair or inflated price if they really believed Moore would be in AAA. This deal ended Moore’s flexibility right in the heat of the hot stove season. By signing this deal, Moore is guaranteed a 2011 roster/rotation spot. That necessarily drives down the trade price of Wade Davis or Jeff Niemann, right? If another GM knows we HAVE to move or release a pitcher, instead of just wanting to move one, he’s going to pay less. Still with me?
That’s why a December announcement is so bizarre. The Rays absolutely undermined the market for their assets by increasing supply. (and, based on this morning’s paper, it was the Rays, not Moore, that opened the conversation) That is so non-Extra-2% it’s crazy. They have to have thought of this problem. So why do it when they could have accomplished the exact same long-term end with Moore in March?
My first thought was the stadium issue. Perhaps the Rays were hoping to combat some negative storyline that has been developing about their failure to invest in the future of the team. Perhaps the Moore extension would be seen as “hey, we’re in this for the long-haul, are you [local government official]?” But, that can’t be it because there hasn’t been a significant stadium story since October and, no one is talking about baseball stadiums in December.
That leads me to one, crazy, wildly speculative conclusion. Pardon me for a moment while I put on my tin-foil hat to keep the government from reading my thoughts. The Rays didn’t care about the market-price for Wade Davis or Jeff Niemann. They announced this deal to drive UP the trade price of David Price.
A few weeks ago, I suggested that the Rays should trade David Price. In my mind, he could be the ultimate “sell-high” candidate at this point. He really hasn’t developed a second pitch and, it seems like teams are onto his fastball. Also, his delivery reminds me a lot of Scott Kazmir, which makes me worry about injuries in a way that I do not worry about Shields/Hellickson/Moore/Davis.
With Moore, a potential front-of-the-rotation guy, locked up until my toddlers are in Middle Schoool, the Rays can have an open discussion about Price’s trade value without generating a torch-and-pitchfork market bubble. They have to know that trading David Price will be unpopular, even if it makes baseball sense. (Hell, I am afraid that the guy on the sidewalk in front of my house is going to throw a bring at me for even typing this.) But, locking up their number 1 (Shields) and numbers 1a and 1b (Hellickson and Moore) blunts the impact of Price’s departure. Having Moore in the tent opens the door for Friedman to shift the conversation from Davis/Niemann to Price when other GMs call. Is this a totally insane discussion?
I have no idea what is going to happen. And I am open to any other ideas for an 8-year December extension for a AA starting pitcher. Seriously. Tell me what you think is going on. Because I feel like I am taking crazy pills.
One rule, though. When you comment below. Please begin your comment with a disclaimer warning us whether or not we need our tin-foil hat before reading. After all, we don’t want the government to know our secrets. Right? [I fear I have said too much already].
Tin foil = no.
I dunno man, I get what you’re saying, and it is somewhat logical, if not freakishly terrifying…but I’m not sure it even makes much baseball sense. Look, I swore after the Kazmir/Soriano/Pena/etc moves that I hated at the time then saw how they panned out that I would never doubt the FO again. But if they moved Price right now, I really think that could knock the wind out of the already fickle fanbase.
We didn’t recover our casual fans last season from the firesale of 2010 (ok, to us insiders that’s not what it was, but ask a casual fan and that’s how they saw it). But the end of last season simply HAD to get some more people interested. Get rid of our superstar pitcher, ESPECIALLY when Shields pitched out of his mind last year (no way he sustains that, is there?) and Davis and Niemann are still so inconsistant and I’m not sure we have any better numbers at the Trop next season.
I think the 2010 Shields is a lot closer to his actual ability than the 2009 Shields. The SABRists convinced me of this using BABIP. I can elaborate but, the numbers seem to conclusively show that Shields was wildly unlucky in 2009.
As for Price. Are we sure he is a “superstar?” I’m not. He’s a strikeout pitcher without a put-away pitch. I like him. I like rooting for him. But I am not convinced he is a definite number 1 starter.
You’re right, however, about the casual fan. Casual fan thinks Price is a star, therefore, Casual fan will be pissed if we trade Price. Unless, we trade Price for another legitimate star. Right? What if we traded David Price for Justin Morneau, straight up? Doesn’t that flip the story? You cannot trade Price for prospects. But that undermines the entire idea anyway. We are selling Price high, so we need a huge amount in return.
I can see the logic in locking Moore into a highly cost controlled deal as a precursor to trading Price, but I cannot see how it affects the trade value of any of their pitchers. As was stated, every GM knows that the Rays are dealing a SP and there will upwards of a dozen teams willing to part with top talent to get the Rays excess. Signing Moore hasn’t changed the supply or the demand for SPs by the other 29 teams.
Every GM thinks the Rays have to deal a SP. But, they weren’t sure until Moore got his deal. Before the contract, Friedman could legitimately claim that Matt Moore would start the year at AAA. It fits the Rays past practice with other young stars (see Jennings, Desmond, and Longoria, Evan). So, a GM that is interested in acquiring Davis or Niemann would have to sweeten the pot enough to convince Friedman not to hide Moore in AAA. He’d have to provide the Rays with enough compensation to make it ok to lose a year of control on Moore. But, now that bargaining strategy is gone. Therefore, there is no reason to sweeten the pot.
Did I explain that any better the second time?
I guess the questions is, why would a team part with top talent for something they know is “excess?” If you wanted Davis/Niemann, and you know they cannot make our roster, don’t you just wait for them to get cut? Why part with anything, much less top talent?
Your argument is based on the false idea that the Rays assets will lose value by signing Moore to a long term deal. Your article also does not give any credit to the Rays for locking up a player whose value will more than likely continue to rise given his talent ceiling (according to scouts a lot smarter than you or me). Finally, you fail to acknowledge the economic conditions in which the Rays play under, which are just not good. Poorly written and lacking in facts but filled with hyperbole and appealing to the masses. B-
For the record, I think the Moore deal is a good deal. I didn’t want to write about Moore’s deal because I think it is a universally accepted move. No reason for me to pile on something that can be read elsewhere. I was just thinking through the implications of the bizarre timing of the announcement of the deal. Sorry if that wasn’t clear.
Moreover, I didn’t mean this post as any sort of critique of the front office. I think it would be a good idea to trade David Price. I wrote that several weeks ago.
As for the value of the Rays’ assets, why is it a false idea that the other starting pitchers went down in trade value? I tried to flesh out the thought a little in response to tenaciousdeucer (that is a hilarious name by the way) above. We now HAVE to move a guy. That necessarily drives down the price. Right? Tell me where you think I’ve strayed.
As for the hyperbole, well, that is probably a fair assessment. I mean, I have only been told that 8906577890 times in the past.
Dave.
Check out the post from Chris that I posted this morning. I think it has more of what you were looking for in the Matt Moore deal.
Mark
Price to Reds for Alonso, Grandal, plus a couple lower level lotto tickets. Fills the holes at 1B and C for the Rays, and the Reds really are the only team that can do both.
On the baseball, this is a great move. Addresses our needs, addresses Cincy’s needs, everyone wins. But, to Merrill’s point from a few days ago, does this move pass the public smell test? Are Yonder Alonso and Yasmani Grandal household names? Do they get the fan base excited about the addition instead of pissed about the subtraction? In full disclosure, I worked in baseball for 8 years, follow it very closely, write a blog about baseball, and I had to google the spelling of each player’s first name. Not a good sign that average fan is going to love it. Right? If that is a consideration for the Stus (which is questionable), then I think it can’t happen.
That is what takes me back to Justin Morneau and Joe Mauer. Minnesota is stuck in a rut. Both players had injury issues. Mauer is locked into a long-term deal (but probably cannot be dealt by the Twins because he is the hometown kid). Maybe one of them fit. Right?
Full disclosure: I’m not in tune with the Rays as I’m not a fan. Was directed here via espn’s sweet spot blog. That being said, I am not sure I agree with the assertion that the signing matters. There’s a couple of reasons.
For one, they could get creative and find some way to keep them all. It might not be the best baseball move but if they are intent on doing it they could.
Secondly, the other GM’s aren’t stupid. They know the Ray’s talent maybe as good as the Rays do and that the best place for Moore is the majors. Signing him doesn’t really tip the Ray’s hand because I’d assume GM’s already knew this was the plan when they re-signed Shields.
Thirdly, even if the above wasn’t true the only thing that the Ray’s have to do to shift the negotiating power back in their favor is to get multiple teams involved. If you are a playoff contender and you need starting pitching where you going to go? Most teams don’t have an abundance and few are willing to sell off this early on what they do have. Are you going to give up a truck load of top prospect for a Danks, Gio, or a Garza? Because there’s not a lot of talent on the market right now.
Fourthly, to go along with the first one, some team is going to have an injury. If they hold on to all 6 they can wait and still make a strong negotiating hand during the season.
Well, welcome.
I think I addressed the second and third points in other comments but, the first point has sparked my creative juices. (Sorry about that, let me get a towel). What if the Rays did keep everyone. A 6-man rotation! Now that is so Maddon it makes perfect sense. Right? Right!?
I am getting excited. I need to think about this more. Check back tomorrow or the next day, and bring your tin foil hats for another wild trip into Mark’s bizarre psyche…
IF price goes I want a Shortstop and Catcher 1B types are findable
Also Mark I Love the qoute ” Locked up till my toddlers are middle schoolers”
Last What do you think of Luke Scott who was non tendered by the orioles He has a lot better OPS than I think damon is worth (5.75 Million) Believe it or not but scott Can hit 265 and still put up a 350 OBP neither of which damon did and he can match his HR total. I like this move as a Buy low option.
I like Luke Scott the ballplayer. I dislike Luke Scott the knucklehead. Not because he is opinionated or outspoken. Because he is not funny when he is opinionated or outspoken. Remember when got into that bizarre exchange with Garza a few years ago in the press?
If we sign Luke Scott, I picture him climbing the bell tower and shooting a bunch of people the first time David Price puts bubble gum on his hat or something. I’m not sure if his personality fits our clubhouse. But I really don’t know him. Maybe all the losing in Baltimore made him jaded.
Also, thanks for the kind words. Funny how the crumb-gobblers become the sole prism through which you view time (particularly sleep time).
Yes agreed mark, I do remember he is outspoken about stuff. But now looking at the trade the reds and padres made i dont think David price is equal to latos but the padres made quite a return if we had that kind of return we would be looking good for 2013!!!
There it is lol^ I would say this was a buy low it is more on the fringe of fair to above especially when he missed most of’11 the catch is how well he does then take his option year
Damn the internet and its perpetual memory.