Orbiting Cleveland: Ubaldo Jimenez will be back in 2014
The Cleveland Indians need to do everything they can to re-sign Ubaldo Jimenez
It may have taken some time, but it appears as if the Indians' offseason plans are finally becoming a bit clearer.
None of these moves could be described as big acquisitions, but it does at least signal that the Indians are trying to address their concerns and get... better.
Better — that's an interesting word to consider.
The Indians won 92 games last season and also earned one of the American League's Wild Card berths. Knowing that, it's not going to be that easy for the team to get much better; it's very difficult to win much more than 92 games in a season.
So let's consider that word one more time. Has this team actually positioned itself to be better in 2014?
Offensively, it looks as if that may be the case.
Also, we know the back of the bullpen was a problem area for the Indians in 2014. They did improve that a bit by acquiring the lefty Outman, and Axford will now be the closer. However, Axford has not been a closer since 2012, and he also has a career average of 4.0 walks per nine innings. Tribe fans can probably expect that Axford has a comparable performance to Chris Perez, and it's no guarantee that he will offer much more than that.
Also, it appears as if the Indians are banking on offensive players like Michael Bourn, Nick Swisher and Asdrubal Cabrera having much better seasons at the plate. It does seem likely that all three of these players could rebound, but what if then Yan Gomes, Carlos Santana and Jason Kipnis also have down years at the plate?
In all honesty, it seems fair to conclude that the offense has made a slight improvement with the addition of Murphy over Stubbs, and the bullpen does seem a bit more stable. The team now has two viable left-handers in Outman and Marc Rzepczynski, and that was not the case last season.
But there is one area where the team is noticeably thinner — starting pitching.
As of now, the rotation appears to be Justin Masterson, Danny Salazar, Corey Kluber and Zach McAllister. The fifth spot in the rotation will likely be decided in a battle between Carlos Carrasco, Josh Tomlin, Trevor Bauer and Marcum.
Sorry, that's simply just not enough.
The Indians have already lost Ubaldo Jimenez and Scott Kazmir, who both played integral roles in leading the team to the postseason last year. Do the Indians win 92 games without either of these two guys last year?
Kazmir has since moved on and signed a contract with the Oakland Athletics, yet Jimenez is still out there.
Now, get ready for one bold statement followed by a bold prediction.
The Indians need Ubaldo Jimenez to re-sign.
Ubaldo Jimenez will be a Cleveland Indian in 2014.
Sound a little too confident to you?
It may be, but this is something that really seems to be a logical fit.
The reality is that the Indians gained a whole lot of leverage when they extended a qualifying offer to Jimenez.
Jimenez was arguably the best pitcher in all of baseball during the second half of 2013, but he was also arguably the worst pitcher in all of baseball during the entire 2012 season.
His 2013 second half ERA of 1.82 with 100 strikeouts in 84 innings was mighty nice, but teams are still wary about trusting him moving forward. Now, if there were not a qualifying offer attached to Jimenez, then he likely would already be gone by now.
However, teams do not want to commit millions of dollars and also have to sacrifice a draft pick and money from their signing pool to sign Jimenez.
Of course, there is one team that does not have to sacrifice a draft pick to sign Jimenez: the Cleveland Indians.
Is it starting to make sense now?
As we get farther and farther into the offseason, it becomes more and more likely that Jimenez could return to Cleveland in 2014. He has previously expressed how happy he is in Cleveland, and the starting pitching market has yet to develop.
The other thing that cannot be overstated is the Mickey Callaway factor. Prior to this season, Jimenez was a mechanical mess. As noted earlier, he was easily the worst pitcher in all of baseball in 2012.
It was hard to even be cautiously optimistic heading into 2013, but Callaway somehow was able to work his magic. Jimenez's second half performance in 2013 was the best stretch of his career, and that says a lot because he was a pretty effective pitcher for many years in Colorado.
Jimenez likely realizes that he probably owes some of his success to Callaway, so he is probably open for a reunion in 2014, especially if the price is right.
Also, I want to be clear that it is also in the Indians' best interest to re-sign Jimenez. His performance during the second half of 2013 was not that of back-of-the-rotation or middle-of-the-rotation type starter. It was a bonafide ace-like performance; arguably the best performance that the Indians have seen from any pitcher in years.
Because of his history, there is always going to be some risk involved, but every move that the Indians have made this offseason has risk.
What if 2013 was the start of a trend and Murphy continues to struggle?
What if Axford is wild at the back of the bullpen and is removed from his closer's role by June?
Those are clear and fair questions. Questions also would surround the re-signing of Jimenez, but there is a marked difference between Jimenez and the team's acquisitions like Murphy and Axford.
Murphy is coming off a horrible 2013 season and Axford has not been a closer since 2012. In other words, the Indians are hoping that both of these players rebound and perform better than they did in 2013.
In comparison, Jimenez is coming off a brilliant 2013 season. Isn't it better to sign a player who is coming off success rather than failure?
There also seems to be a good chance that Jimenez's success could be sustainable. Take a look at the graph below. This shows Jimenez's velocity during the 2009 and 2010 seasons, when he was at his best in Colorado. In 2009, Jimenez went 15-12 with a 3.47 ERA, and he was even better in 2010 as he went 19-8 and posted a 2.88 ERA.
It's clear that this guy was an absolute flamethrower.
Yet, now here is a velocity chart for Jimenez's second half of 2013 where he went 8-5 with a 1.82 ERA.
The velocity is noticeably down from what it was in 2010. However, Jimenez had even better results during this stretch. One of the reasons for that was the fact that he was able to reduce his walks down to just 2.89 batters per nine innings while his career average is 4.0.
That's a good sign moving forward. It would be unrealistic to expect Jimenez to routinely post ERAs of 1.82, but it appears as if he can be a very effective starting pitcher. Callaway has stressed that the key for his success is repeating his delivery, and he seems to have taken that advice to heart.
There is no clear answer out there right now as to what Jimenez's salary in 2014 might look like. The reality is that the market has stalled, and that has to be a good thing for the Indians.
Look at the strides that Jimenez made in 2013, and now let's just speculate a bit. Let's say the Indians are able to sign Jimenez up for three years and $40 to 45 million. That type of contract would have seemed outlandish just two months ago, but it seems as if something in that neighborhood could become a reality.
Also, that contract is an absolute bargain if Jimenez continues to perform as he did during the second half of 2013. Aces do not come cheap, and Jimenez proved that he is still more than capable of being one.
We know the Indians seem to have an ace in the making in Salazar, but if they re-sign Jimenez, they could have a competent one-two punch for years to come.
The other reason why the Indians need to consider making a move on Jimenez is the fact that it is becoming less and less likely that Masterson returns to the Indians following the 2014 season.
Masterson will be eligible for free agency after this season, and there has been no news about a possible extension. If an extension is not reached by the beginning of the season, then it probably becomes a foregone conclusion that Masterson is traded at the deadline or leaves in free agency.
The Indians might be able to deal with the loss of one of the two pitchers, but there's no way they could survive the loss of most.
Also, the ironic thing is that while Jimenez may have more question marks (considering his up-and-down performance in recent years) than Masterson, but he also may have more upside.
The remarkable thing is that Masterson likely to get more money in free agency than Jimenez simply because he's been more consistent in recent years. So, in other words, the Indians might be able to re-sign a better pitcher (Jimenez) for a cheaper price than what it would cost to re-sign Masterson.
Masterson may just be the most important variable when it comes to re-signing Jimenez. If the Indians believe they can reach an extension with Masterson, then perhaps they stop pursuing Jimenez.
However, if they think Masterson is going to wait to test the free agent waters, then they need to do everything possible to re-sign Jimenez... and now.
The other variable here is Callaway. It would be interesting to have the opportunity to pick his brain, and the Indians front office has likely done just that. If Callaway could have just one of Masterson or Jimenez, who would he choose?
The Indians may ultimately have to make that decision.
Nonetheless, it's now December 20, and Jimenez's name has hardly even been mentioned among all the Hot Stove talk.
The market has been slow to develop, and it will probably stay that way until the situation with Japanese hurler Masahiro Tanaka is resolved. Still, we know that the goal this offseason is to get better. That means that the team needs to win more than 92 games in 2014.
Sorry, but there is no way that happens without another premiere starting pitcher in the fold.
Remember, Jimenez once said playing for Cleveland is like "heaven." He's always seemed to be an honest young man, so why should any of us not take him at his word now?
Steve can be reached via email at email@example.com.
Going at least 5 IPs and giving up 3 ERS or fewer:
This shows that Jimenez had more consistency throughout the whole year than one might think. The biggest problem early on was that he was throwing 100 pitches in 5 IPs, even though he was keeping the other team largely off the board throughout most of the year outside of April, really Jimenez' only bad month. Masterson's was June when his ERA was over 4.
Both of them had bad starts: Jimenez gave up 7 ERs in April to BOS and NYY, and 6 to DET (last start he gave up more than 3 ERs in a game the rest of the season; had 2 starts where he gave up 5 runs the rest of the season). Masterson gave 7 ERs in April to KC, 5 to MIN in May, and 5 to BOS in May. He also gave up 7 ER to NYY and 6 to BAL in June, 6 to DET in July, and 5 to DET in August.
Also, while Jimenez did beat the likes of MIN, CHW, and HOU, he also shut out TEX in July over 8 IP, kept OAK to 1 ER over 5.2 IP in Aug and ATL to 3 ER over 7.0 IP in Aug, 0 ER vs BAL in 6 IP and 0 ER vs KC in 7.0 IP in Sept.
Really, I don't think these pitchers are that different, and Jimenez might have the better stuff of the two. Plus, you can still trade Masterson and get quality for him, whether that's a frontline starter like Corbin or a near-ready pitching prospect in Bradley from Arizona - something on that order; you can't do the same now with Jimenez. Jimenez would be cheaper as well.
In addition, if you look at their career norms, and Masterson had more the outlier season in 2013 than Jimenez did:
Masterson's career numbers (2013 numbers in parentheses):
ERA: 4.03 (3.45)
BB/9: 3.5 (3.6)
K/9: 7.5 (9.1)
H/9: 8.6 (7.3)
ERA: 3.92 (3.30)
BB/9: 4.0 (3.9)
K/9: 8.3 (9.6)
H/9: 8.1 (8.0)
One other interesting stat: Masterson had 17 HBP and 8 WP, while Jimenez had 3 HBP and 8 WP.
Both could be in for a regression next year, and Jimenez had strikeout rates above 8/9 IP from 2009-2011, with 2012 looking more and more like an outlier. Masterson's only other year where his K rate was above 8/9 IP was 2009 (year he was traded to Cleveland), where 2013 looks more like the outlier. In terms of his BB rate, it's looking more like 2011 was the outlier; Masterson still hasn't regained that fine command from that season, where he pitched better than last year in my opinion.
The other three risks with trying to sign Masterson and losing Jimenez in the process:
1. Boston's rotation is getting long in the tooth with both Lackey and Dempster, so I fully expect them to be in the market for at least one starter, and you could argue that Masterson is up there or even better than Lester and Buchholz (not convinced about Buchholz's strong start last year and his injury issues). Combine that with John Farrell, Masterson's former pitching coach, being the manager, and I could certainly see Masterson bolting for Boston, with us reciving a low 1st-round draft pick in return.
2. Losing your top two pitchers from 2013 in successive years for two draft picks would be a PR nightmare for the Indians, just as the Indians are finally getting positive attention again.
3. You lose both of them, and you'll have to count on the likes of two of three long-term to be viable starters: Carrasco, Tomlin, Bauer. It'd be easier, and potentially better, if you only have to rely on one of the three to be in the rotation long-term. Plus, the starting market for pitchers is only going to get more expensive in the future, even for 4-5 starters. Add in that the only two viable starting pitching prospects over the next 2-3 seasons are Matt Packer and Joseph Colon, both questionable mid-rotation starters, probably better back-end starters, and both needing time, this leading to the Indians' current window closing before those two are ready to make an impact.
I think it's imperative that the Indians not lose both of them and sign a starter, and I think Jimenez is the less risky choice instead of gambling on Masterson, quite possibly losing both of them, then hoping those draft picks pan out in 3-5 years' time, when the Indians' current window largely shuts. You have to maximize the window by resigning Jimenez and trading Masterson or at worst, resigning Jimenez and taking the draft pick from Masterson.
Right now, it looks as IF teams are willing to wait out the Masahiro Tanaka saga. It has certainly slowed the mkt for Santana, Garza and Jimenez. There are also (mlbtrade)rumors the Yankees are trying to keep under the $189 M mark to avoid penalty, and go with in house arm, but there is the possibility they will move Suzuki or Gardner to save some cash to make a run at a SP.
Teams like the Yankees can just absorb the loss when they make a bad signing like Pavano, and sign the next guy. The Indians can't do that.
That being said, if you're going to take a long term risk on a starter, you can't do much better than Masterson and Ubaldo. Those guys take the ball every fifth day and never miss a start. It took a couple of years for Ubaldo to learn how to pitch without the upper 90's fastball, but not that he's done it he should be a very good pitcher for at least another 4-5 years. Somebody will give him that kind of a deal, and Masterson will get one, too. Very unlikely either will be with Cleveland.
Also someone said this in the comments: "The question is whether Ubaldo will be $15 million better than whatever starter he replaces, which will be the winner of the Tomlin/Bauer/Carrasco derby." I agree to an extent. The follow up question is this: Is Carrasco/Tomlin/Marcum/Bauer a better solution than blowing $15 million on Jimenez? That's the thing. Just as there are many question marks about the Indians 5th starter options, there are just as many with Jimenez. He had a nice showing the final 2 months of the season....but that does not instill confidence in me that he has turned the corner. If he proves it over the course of the next full season I would believe, especially it not being a free agent year.....that's why I would be leery about any significant spending on Ubaldo. If they end up doing it, fine, I will be happy they kept a piece from last year's rotation and be hopeful he really did revert back to his old form as a frontline pitching type. But I still wonder if they would even sign him if they wanted to because they may be looking at it as spending $15M on him and the uncertainties he brings versus spending $500K-$1M on their 5th starter options which have upside.
I think it's both, that is, value of the pick itself and leverage.
There's a huge percentage of first rounders that do make it to the show, the higher the pick, the more likely they make it statistically speaking.
I think there's a few things about their drafting that can be called into question. Before I do, I will say, I like Brad Grant, I think he's improved the system over his few yrs and has hit on a few talents, and in fact, there's more talent in the system now, then there has been in yrs.
This being said, you can only get what you pick. That is, they select low upside guys and that's exactly what they will get on the field. They have swayed from this in recent yrs, and it could pay off big with a few guys.
One area, I think they could improve is in the scouting and development departments. As a small mkt club this should be a high priority. It doesn't seem as if it has been, until recently, as they have made some changes to improve results.
Another area, I would call into question is their willingness to spend on the draft the last two yrs. they have spent money, bunt they have approached it trying to work within the constraints of the pool space they are given, but they let a few talents walk that I think they could have signed IF they had been willing to pay a little cash penalty to land the talent.
Herein lies the problem, They treat the pool space as a collective pool to be spent on the draft class. Then when it comes to pushing the envelop taking a cash penalty and getting better draft class by adding one / two more signings they have avoided paying the extra cash for that one player.
I think that view is a wrong line of thinking. The cash penalty, should, IMO, be viewed as a penalty on their entirety if their pool not for the allocation of funds designated to an individual. My point is, they should avoid draft pick penalty, but push the envelope to get higher qlty players. In so doing, they increase the probability of their return.
Sorry about the book, I will try to keep it to one chapter next time.
I agree that history shows that most 1 round picks do not pan out and a lot do not make it to the majors.
but using that logic, Jimenez, and Santana would already have been signed on the FA market if 1st round pick was not important.
Or the teams are using it as an excuse/leverage in order to drop price value that they are seeking.
I agree, Jimenez has a higher ceiling and has been more durable. By accounts Garza is completely healthy, and he offers consistency and #2 type upside. Plus, as far as I can recall Garza hasn't had surgery for the injuries he's incurred.
Justin Masterson is one of my favorite baseball people, he's a good natured guy and the things he does away from the field are even better. Those are just perks, as a Cleveland Indian it's his production from the mound. But because who he is away from the field and on the field, IMO, makes him a safer signing and possibly because of his character, he takes a team friendly deal for security long term.
This said, I think they have to offer him a deal something to the effect of 4 yrs / $60 with an option yr making it potentially 5 yrs / $75 M. IF he doesn't express interest in resigning then, IMO, they have to look to move him for now pieces. And in the meantime back fill his spot in the rotation with Garza or Jimenez.
My sense is that CA would like to keep improving and winning in this short term window, so I'd guess that extra first-round picks who take 2-4 years to develop aren't nearly as valuable as a stud like UJ you can run out there every five days. (and btw, there's no way the tribe is going to outbid the Angels, D-backs, Yankees or Rangers for Garza, we may want him, but there's simply no way imho that's going to happen)
Rocky's right, most first-rounders never pan out and it seems like the avg team hits the jackpot about once every 10 to 15 years. You can make that once every 20 to 30 years for this outfit.
I wonder why it is that they just can't draft well...?
I would go after Garza.
With payroll being tight maybe they should go after Baker and Hanson in order to provide depth to the starting rotation.
I don't want any longterm money tied up in a pitcher who only pitched well in the second half of a contract year. To me, a first round draft pick is far more valuable at this point than Jimenez will ever be for the Tribe. Calloway clearly has had some influence on him (as well as the rest of the staff), but I feel the Tribe should do everything they can to resign Masterson comfortably. And in the event Masterson can't be resigned, you pick up the pieces and find a replacement. What the Tribe can't afford to do is waste money on marginal players simply to give the impression that they are trying to compete.
But really, they've got to settle the Masterson situation soon, i.e. know if they are going to sign or trade. My hunch is that Justin's a goner, but who knows. I know that if I were him, there's no way I would sign. Instead, I'd pitch my tail off this year and get myself lined up for a 6-7 yr/ $110-130m deal.
There's no way the tribe's going to go there. So instead, I would feel real good about Jimenez at 3 years for $42m, with a $14m 4th year option. That's a good deal for both sides.
After 2014, the tribe can't make me a QO.
Remember- pending free agents traded mid season are unable to offered a QO so I make my agreement to include all teams with a 1 year offer...
In the old CBA players would sign deals with agreements that the club could not offer arbitration after the season. Do something similar here...
Jim Duquette of MLB Network Radio, (per mlbtraderumors) speculates the Tribe might have interest in Balfour. That would be a bit surprising, but I guess stranger things have happened. I guess they could sign to a deal and then trade him or someone else at the deadline. But none of that makes sense for a club that is reportedly tight on funds, why tie up funds on a player the team really doesn't need.
I favor Garza bc I think he's more of a certainty than Jimenez. BTW, bc he was trade mid-season he will NOT cost a draft pk or pool money. Garza was not eligible to receive the QO offer.
I believe that he'll be cheaper than Masterson.
He's more talented than Masterson.
He's more likely to sign than Masterson.
All he costs is money. Garza costs money + draft pick + bonus pool.
He's more likely to sign for a shorter term deal than Masterson.
I have the feeling that if Masterson makes it to FA, all the RedSux have to do is crook their fingers & he'll go shrieking after them like a teenage girl at a Bieber concert.
I'd be shocked if Masterson signs with the Tribe. Make as good an offer as you can, give him a deadline to accept & if he declines I'd say trade him or let him walk. Be sure to make the qualifying offer & take the draft pick.
counting the two catchers and two RF means we have three roster spots availlable aveles would be 11 giambi 12 there is spot for him.
A couple of notes.
First everything that I once thought would make Ubaldo a possible resign here is out the window with the recent Japan market veto. With the Tanaka deal nixed you still have clubs with lots of money to throw around who are desperate to land any semblance of a live arm.
Look at the B & C-list signings with the Royals and Twins in our own division. Twins GM Terry Ryan is no shrinking numchuck with it comes to throwing money at lousy pitchers - but he held his nose and did it. Because he had no choice.
I always thought since Ubaldo is a total roll of the dice with his mechanical issues, and he had some success here, when those big market teams like the Skanks and Rangers and name the rest would never take a risk - he would resign here for a reasonable hometown discount that doesn't make him look like a fool.
When a pretty shrewd shopper like Ruben Amaro is giving Formerly Fausto 3-4 million for a year to eat innings?
Nothing in this market will actually surprise me...
Except us being able to retain the mess that can sometimes become Ubaldo...for anything that makes sense money wise.
I would love to have him back for 10 million on a year but Tony is right - any one year deal is like surrender for Ubaldo and it's unlikey to get him at 15 million if he did surrender.
And there is no comparison as far as I am concerned. Ubaldo at his best doesn't belong in the same conversation with Masterson because Ubaldo at his worst is always just a game or even an inning away.
Keeping Masterson is the right move.
Rememeber this - a lot of people discount the price we paid for Ubaldo because White ended up hurt and Pomeranz wound up a mess.
It's possible the Rockies screwed him up - and he may yet pan out - AND - White may surprise and come back as well.
Don't over value the risk of Ubaldo - or the possibility of Ubaldo - because he dazzled during 10+ starts against the likes of the Royals, Twins, White Sox and Astros - during an exiting Aug and incredible Sept.
If I was Ubaldo I would sign for a one year deal. If he has better year than last year than he would be just as marketable next year as the other pitchers mentioned.
I think if the mkt is slow, 3/$39 M will get Jimenez, might have to go $4/52 (similar to Edwin Jackson's deal). I think they will look to make another move to take advantage of some falling prices. IF they find the right deal for ACab (maybe Bourn - doubtful) they would seemingly jump in one Jimenez or Garza. That (moving ACab) could be tied to Stephen Drew's mkt, but IF the Tribe ate a small part of ACabs deal or took a bad lesser contract back, they might get a deal done, without losing the flexibility to make a splash.
I think it's pretty simple... offer Masterson a 4 yr deal with a vesting 5 yr option that he can hit reasonably (say 600-700 IP) unless he just blows up his arm. Here's how they could lay it out... 4 yrs / $58 M + $2 M buyout (guarantees him 4/$60M) + $15 M vesting option total contract: 5/$75 M.
Yr 1 - $10.75 M ($1 M more than he's projected in arb).
Yr 2 - $15.50 M
Yr 3 - $15.75 M
Yr 4 - $16.00 M
*Yr5* - $15.00 M
I think they need to make Masterson an offer, IF he doesn't accept. Then offer similar to Jimenez and Garza sign one, and then flip Masterson for young controllable big league ready players.
Tomlin and Carrasco have gotten through their TJ surgeries and should be ready to go. Bauer has revamped his mechanics (again) and the reports are positive.
I'd be willing to gamble that with three rolls of the dice we get one big winner. I think the front office feels the same way. I don't think they'll sign Ubaldo even if his price comes down to something like 3/39. It might have to get to the point where nobody is offering him more than 2 years and $22 million, which is where we would come into play.
I'm fine if they resign Ubaldo....but I still can't see it if they have to dump payroll (Cabrera or Bourn). So, the question then is, would you rather resign Ubaldo and trade Masterson and Bourn/Cabrera and get back some young players....or keep Masterson for 2014, take a shot on Carrasco/Bauer/Tomlin for the the spot, keep Bourn/Cabrera and also get a first round pick.
That's too complex for me lol. I just look at it simply as if they resign Ubaldo, then Masterson is probably as good as gone. Just can't see how they can afford four players on the roster making $12M or more a year.
Almost as if CA were going down his Christmas shopping list and checking his wishes off as he got him.
RF - check
CL - check
SP depth - check
3rd C - check
LHRP - check
I'm looking for more pitching...
Axford > CPerez
Outman > Hill
But the SP is lacking, Marcum can help if he is healthy, but counting on Salazar, Kluber, McAllister and whoever wins the fifth spot, is a mistake. The Tribe needs to upgrade their SP, and they haven't done that yet. They have added depth in Marcum and Cloyd, but I don't think we should expect anything from either.
The longer Jimenez remains on the mkt, the more likely the Indians resign him, IMO. Jimenez only made $5.7 M last yr, as such, I could see a scenario where they resign him for 3-4 yrs, potentially with a vesting option that is more backloaded a la the Michael Bourn contract.
There has been some speculation the Tribe will resign Jimenez and then deal Masterson, I think it should be on the table. I'd even add Matt Garza to the mix, we know the Tribe had interest last yr. I think it could be reasonable for the Tribe to go 3-4 yrs with a vesting option at more $ for Garza or Jimenez and then move Masterson for younger controllable players. Maybe something like 3/$48 M with a vesting option $12 M for Jimenez (or Garza). Then flipping Masterson to AZ for Trevor Cahill and David Hernandez. Point being, there could be more going on than meets the eye.
There is no doubt that when he's on his game, he is the better pitcher than Masterson. Clearly, Masterson has been much more consistent over the last three seasons, but when Jimenez is on, it's scary. That was the case last season, and that's also been the case many times when he was in Colorado.
Ideally, it would be nice to for the Indians re-sign both Masterson and Jimenez. But my fear though is that Masterson they lose both of them. That is not something they can afford. They need to get a pulse on how likely it is that they will re-sign Masterson. If he expresses that he wants to wait until next offseason, then they need to go after Jimenez now and big time.
If, and this is a big if, Jimenez has come full circle, then this could be one of the greatest contracts in recent memory.
I just don't have a lot of faith in finding out either way. Maybe he turned a corner, maybe he didn't. But that's still going to be at least a three year and potentially $10M per risk to take....something I am not comfortable doing. We will see.....but if I have to have one or the other, I just use any Ubaldo money to try and resign Masterson who is a better and more consistent pitcher. And not such an enigma.
Looking at his recent history, with the Cleveland Indians, would you give him a three year contract and would you pay $10 million a year?
Is Jason Knapp, SP, talking with the Cleveland Indians. Reading an earlier report, it was nice to see him coming back to pitching. Does he have an interest in coming back to Cleveland?
now im not saying we don't resign him, however im not in favor of overpaying for him for 4 years just to see him go 12-14 the next three and a half years til we trade him...
I know the rotation has a couple of serious holes and he would help to anchor the rotation... just find it rather funny that there has been no heat on ubaldo at all in the hot stove coming off a contract year.