When this offseason started, the Miami Marlins made news by trading away three high-profile players –not for baseball reasons, but purely to cut costs. Later, the Braves and Dodgers made a curious trade of players who neither team had much interest in playing – guys like Matt Kemp, Adrian Gonzalez, and Scott Kazmir – again, not for baseball reasons but as a contract swap to better balance their books

Meanwhile, it’s obvious during the slowness of this offseason that many teams – including traditional big-spenders like the Yankees and Dodgers -- are trying to stay under the competitive balance tax of $197M, because doing so this year will trigger a reset that will benefit them financially for years to come. Some of these teams are trying to thread an impossible needle – to sign a FA pitcher like Darvish or hitter like JD Martinez – and yet still try to stay under the CBT. Others have internally imposed budgets that restrict them from spending too much. Further, many of these teams want to save some dry powder for next year’s stellar free agent class, so they’re just not in the mood to spend much money this year, as much as they’d like to improve their teams.

In other words, money talks this year. It’s more important than ever. Many teams are, in fact, stuck – they would like nothing more than to jettison a bad contract to free up some funds for more productive reasons.

And you know who’s not stuck? The A’s.

As of this writing, the A’s payroll for 2018 sits at $56M. Which is absurdly low, even for them. Most years, the A’s are in the 80s; they’ve said publicly they estimate they’ll end up somewhere in the 70s. So we know they’ve got about $20 million more they can spend this year. And next year, another $18 million comes off the books as they move on from Lowrie, Joyce, and Casilla.

Why would the A’s take on someone else’s problem?

To buy prospects. Think of it like a trade chip. Some smart guys at Fangraphs put together a way to place a dollar value on each type of prospect (hitter, pitcher, prospect grade). I’m not sure how robust their model is, but I understand they back-tested it over many years, applied to it to today’s dollar values (including inflation targets), and allowed for plenty of risk, since prospects are always unpredictable and many of them bust.

This got me thinking: instead of trading for a prospect, why not just buy one? You could. And the way you do it is by taking on the negative value of a bad contract. In theory, you could just match up the values. For example, if you took on a contract that’s carrying a projected $14 million of negative value, you could in theory attach a 50-grade pitching prospect, who, according to Fangraphs, is worth $14 million, to that deal. You just bought a prospect.

Why would the A’s want to "buy" prospects?

Because they’re laser-focused on stockpiling young talent, to build a championship team for the early 2020s. I know many AN types would love to use the payroll headroom to sign an impact player to help right now – on a guy like, say, Lorenzo Cain. But I think that would be a waste of money, because, let’s be honest, while we all want to see an improved team in 2018 and are secretly hoping for a wild card, that longshot hope should not dictate strategy. There’s a wave of young talent coming that will continue to build the core of the next great A’s team – Puk, Barreto, et al – so let’s build around those guys and focus on making that team as great as it possibly can be.

So what else do we need for the next great A’s team?

By my reckoning, we need to fill three more long-term holes:

• Outfielder – probably to play LF
• Starting pitcher
• Left-handed reliever

And also if possible, two short-term holes:

• Catcher
• Left-handed reliever

The infield feels pretty set. Most of us are projecting Chapman-Mateo-Barreto-Olson. (There’s less of a bust rate with position prospects.) The OF, however, has some uncertainty, because we don’t really yet know what we have in Fowler, and we’re not sure if Powell is a regular. Beck and Lazarito are too far away. Pinder seems like a super-utility guy. Mayyyybbbeee we convert Neuse into a left-fielder. Maybe. In my view, we need one more solid long-term guy to hold down LF. Murphy feels like a lock to be the future catcher.

On the pitching side, while we do have some promising arms coming up in Puk, Holmes and Kapreilian, the reality is that pitchers bust out all the time. Resting your hopes on only three guys feels foolhardy. And after those three guys, the prospects get iffier. Manaea’s controlled years extend until 2022, so he’ll be around; and maybe one of the current crop of Cotton, Mengden, Blackburn and Hahn sticks. But if you figure on a 50% bust rate for the prospects, the future rotation figures to be:

• One of Puk/?
• One of Kapreilian/Luzardo
• Manaea
• One of Holmes/Shore
• Let's reserve the fifth slot for one of Cotton/Mengden/Blackburn/Hahn, whichever one steps up

Depth:

• Fillmyer/Chalmers/Ruiz/Jefferies

So realistically we’ve got four and a half slots filled. But the one that worries me the most is the top one. You don’t win championships without an ace, and unless Kap or Luzardo can turn into aces, it feels like a lot to put on Puk – if he goes down, we’re toast. So one more TOR pitcher is a must in my view.

On the relief side, the only lefty in the ‘pen as of now is Coulombe. Sure, maybe we sign Tony Watson, but even if we do it’s a short-term fix. We still need a long-term solution there, since we have a ton of righty relievers.

Trade chips

Our current trade chips are obvious: Lowrie and Joyce, both of whom are in walk years. Lowrie, thanks to his surprise 4-win season, carries about $10 million in surplus value; Joyce, thanks to his consistent left-side hitting, carries almost $6 million in surplus. After that, there’s not much. If you squint, Hendriks and Hahn carry a small amount of surplus trade value. Casilla is fairly valued. Unless you dip into Graveman or Semien (it’s too early to think about trading either of those guys), this is what we’ve got to work with using traditional means.

So I say we use non-traditional means: Let’s use our payroll headroom to buy some prospects to fill these future holes by taking on a bad contract. So who are the candidates? Let’s take a look.

The bad, the ugly, and the ugliest

Here’s a list of no-good terrible contracts, with an estimate of their negative value (calculated by using this formula, then averaging out the inputs of bWAR and fWAR). Note that in many cases, these guys have a small amount of positive baseball value, which means that if we took them on we could in theory play them to help get us some wins; others have no baseball value at all, which means the rational thing to do is to release them and eat the money; sometimes they project to have a little bit of value for a year or two before it turns ugly. So I’ve calculated the value in terms of both a playing scenario and a release scenario.

Name	Team	Years	$ owed	Projected WAR	Value if playing	Value if released
Pujols	LAA	4	114	-7	-165	-114
C Davis	BAL	5	115	0.5	-107	-115
M Cabrera	DET	6	184	1.7	-168	-184
Choo	TEX	3	62	1	-52.5	-62
Wright	NYM	3	47	0	N/A	-47
Tomas	AZ	3	46	-17	-63	-46
Chen	MIA	3	52	0	-52	-52
Tulowitzki	TOR	3	58	1.3	-46	-45
Castillo	BOS	3	36	-1.3	-52	-36
Kemp	LAD	2	38.5	-1.1	-50	-38.5
Ellsbury	NYY	3	68	2.9	-38.5	-68
Hughes	MIN	2	26	-.4	-31	-26
H Ramirez	BOS	1	22.75	.4	-19.2	-22.75
Kazmir	ATL	1	17.6	0	N/A	-17.6
Martin	TOR	2	40	2.5	-15.7	-40
Span	TBR	1	15	0.4	-11	-15

My goodness, those top (bottom?) three contracts are sure ugly. They’re not going anywhere. Looking at these, it’s no wonder no one wants to overpay for a free agent anymore. There’s all kinds of value destruction on this list.

Finding a match

Now let’s whittle that list down to reasonable targets for the A’s. The criteria: the trading partner should ideally be in win-now mode, and the player not a factor to help them win this year. That team’s priority will be to go all-in by signing a free agent or trading for an expensive veteran; they won’t mind losing prospects as much.

I also don’t think there’s much of a match with the Rangers, Blue Jays or Red Sox. None of those teams care about the CBT, and their prospects don’t line up well with what we’re looking for. That leaves us with these six options:

Name	Team	Years	$ owed	Projected WAR	Value if playing	Value if released
Wright	NYM	3	47	0	N/A	-47
Tomas	AZ	3	46	-17	-63	-46
Kemp	LAD	2	38.5	-1.1	-50	-38.5
Ellsbury	NYY	3	68	2.9	-38.5	-68
Hughes	MIN	2	26	-.4	-31	-26
Span	TBR	1	15	0.4	-11	-15

In my view, four of these carry a reasonable mix of risk and reward; two are riskier. Let’s explore.

Reasonable option 1: Diamondbacks/Yasmany Tomas contract

The trade proposal:

Casilla + take on Tomas’ contract for SP Taylor Clarke, OF Marcus Wilson, LHRP Jared Miller and $9 million ($3M per year over three years)

Tomas is owed a total of $46M over the next three years, and since he’s consistently been a bust, performing below WAR value, he’s a release candidate. However, he does have two option years, so in theory we could stash him at AAA then maybe bring him up in 2020 as a DH to replace Davis. Still, that’s no guarantee, so we have to project him as having zero baseball value.

This makes sense for the D’backs because they clear a net total of $31M off their books. Who wouldn’t want that? It frees them up to sign JD Martinez, or Lorenzo Cain if they miss out on JDM. And since they’re in win-now mode, and the prospects they lose are not their top ones, it’s relatively painless for them.

The return:

• Starting pitcher Taylor Clarke, 50-grade; their third-best prospect (I figure their top two are off-limits), who may not have ace potential but has above-average stuff, great control, great mound presence, and projects as at least a solid #3 in MLB.
• OF Marcus Wilson, 45-grade; who has speed, defense, a decent hit tool, and high OBP, and who had a breakout year in A-ball as a 21-year-old, slashing .295/.383/.446. Could be an excellent leadoff hitter/left fielder.
• LHRP Jared Miller, 45-grade; who held AAA hitters to a .147 avg. with a 0.83 WHIP in 2017, and who has lefty closer written all over him

Budget impact: minimal

Taking on Tomas brings us up to $69.5M in 2018, but because Arizona takes Casilla’s $6M and kicks in $3M (to even out the value), we’re back down to $60.5M, not much more than where we started. In 2019, Tomas’ raise is only an additional $2M (and keep in mind we lose Joyce and Lowrie’s $12M, so now we’re at $50.5M excluding other factors); and in 2020 that goes up another $1.5M. Easy peasy. And we get three good prospects out of it!

Reasonable option 2: Mets/David Wright contract

The trade proposal:

Lowrie + Joyce + take on Wright’s contract for OF Brandon Nimmo, SP Thomas Szapucki, SP Marcos Molina, and $15 million ($5 mil per year over three years)

It’s obvious to Mets fans that Wright will never play again, so moving his contract would be a godsend for them. It would free them up to fill the remaining holes on their 2018 roster while staying under their self-imposed budget. Wright is owed $47M over the next three years, and our trade proposal adds still more value by throwing in Lowrie to fill their 2B hole on a budget, and Joyce as a necessary LHH OF bat to replace the position player we’re asking for.

The return:

• Brandon Nimmo has 1st-round pedigree, former top-prospect status, and several useful tools. In 2017, as a 24-year-old rookie, he hit .260/.379/.418 while earning positive defensive numbers in LF. More interestingly, he mashed right-handed pitching to the tune of .281/.404/.474, for a 135 OPS+. He also has five years of control. Alderson didn’t want to trade him for one year of McCutchen, but a David Wright salary dump is an altogether different conversation, and in this scenario I think he’d be available – especially if you throw in Joyce as a one-year replacement.
• Thomas Szapucki, 50-grade, has electric, TOR stuff. He’s gettable because he’s an injury risk – he’s currently out for all of 2018 recovering from TJS, so he’s on a similar schedule as Kapreilian. If he comes back okay, he’s a steal.
• Marcos Molina, 50-grade, also has great stuff, also just came back from TJS, and is also an injury risk. He’s another 50-rated pitcher who, if he can stay healthy, projects as high as a #3 starter

Although most experts rated Nimmo as a 45, the KATOH guys liked him more, and the fact that he’s had some early MLB success leads me to value him as a 50. Even so, this trade comes with a fair amount of injury risk baked in, and there’s really no discount for that applied. Therefore it’s a great deal for the Mets. They save $32 million AND improve their 2018 roster by getting Lowrie to cover 2B AND part with prospects who are injury-prone. To even out the value somewhat for the A’s, the Mets kick in $5 mil per year over the next three years.

Budget impact: moderate

Taking on Wright’s 2018 salary of $20M brings us up to $76M in 2018, but because the Mets take both Joyce and Lowrie, then kick in $5M, we’re back down to $59M, not much more than where we started. There’s plenty left for a catcher, a fill-in 2B, and/or a veteran LHRP. And the beauty of this deal is that Wright’s contract is front-loaded – he’s owed only $15M in 2019, so the budget actually goes down by $5M, so we’d be down to $54M – and keep in mind Casilla comes off the books so we’re down to $48M. In 2020, Wright goes down again by another $3M, which brings us down to $45M. Mind you, I’m not counting arb raises and such – just giving an idea how affordable this deal is. And again, we’re up three good (albeit risky) long-term players!

Reasonable option 3: Twins/Phil Hughes contract

The trade proposal:

Liam Hendriks, Ryan Dull + take on Phil Hughes contract for OF Brent Rooker and LHRP Tyler Jay

Hughes is owed $26M over the next two years, and if you played him he’d be worth even less. So he’s a release candidate. The Twins are both a small-market team who need to optimize their budget and also a win-now team that needs every advantage it can get. This move frees up $26M which can be applied to a FA starter like Darvish, and also gets them two quality relievers in Hendriks and Dull (their bullpen was dreadful in 2017 and is their primary area of need; Dull still has options so can be stashed).

The return:

• Rooker is beloved on AN. He has the potential to be a stud LF, having hit for a 166 WRC+ in his first pro year in high-A. True, he is old for a prospect at 24, but he got a bit of a late start in college and appears to be a real hitter.
• Tyler Jay has pedigree, having been drafted sixth overall in 2015. He brings electric stuff but also high injury risk – the guy just can’t stay healthy. If he somehow can, he’s got LHRP closer all over him.

Budget impact: moderate

Taking on Hughes’ 2018 salary of $13.2M brings us up to $69.2M in 2018, but the Twins take on about $2.5M for Hendriks and Dull, so we’re back down to $66.7M. There’s some left for a catcher, and/or a veteran LHRP. And of course $18M comes off the books in 2019, so we’d be down to $48.7M (not counting arb raises). And this time we’re up two exciting long-term prospects.

Reasonable option 4: Rays/Denard Span contract

The trade proposal:

Renato Nunez + take on Denard Span contract for OF Joshua Lowe

The Rays reluctantly took Span from the Giants to even out the value in the Longoria trade. They don’t usually carry bad contracts, and while this is only $11M of negative value, it’s still something the Rays wouldn’t mind shedding. They could also use a 1B to replace LoMo. Nunez would fit the bill as a righty platoon bat with Brad Miller there. He’d likely get more playing time in Tampa than he would in Oakland. I’m not totally convinced the Rays would agree to this deal, which is why it’s option 4.

The return:

• Lowe is a 50-rated toolsy outfielder with speed and a quick LH bat. He projects as a future CF, but of course could easily slide into LF if Fowler becomes entrenched. He has the potential to be a long-term impact player but is a few years away. This is a relatively low-risk, high-reward trade for the A’s and suits the Rays needs this year.

Budget impact: minimal

Taking on Span’s 2018 salary of $15M brings us up to $71M in 2018, but it would trigger a Joyce trade, so we’re back down to $65M. There’s some left for a catcher, and/or a veteran LHRP, and next year Span would come off the books, along with Lowrie and Casilla, taking us down to $53M.

Risky option 1: Yankees/Jacoby Ellsbury contract

The trade proposal:

Lowrie + take on Ellsbury contract for SP Chance Adams and $12 million ($4M per year over three years)

Ellsbury’s case is somewhat unique, in that he projects to have positive baseball value over the remaining three years of his contract – so he’s playable; it’s just that, based on his salary, he has $38.5M in negative value. He’d basically take over Joyce’s role for three years. The other issue is that he has a NTC, so he can void any trade. There are some reports that he’d be willing to waive it, but it’s not clear if he’d do so for the A’s.

From the Yankees team point of view, they’d love to unload his contract so they can both get under the CBT for this year and still be able to sign a free agent, such as Darvish. They also want to stay under the CBT so they can save money for next year’s free agent crop/Machado. They’ve also made it clear that they’re willing to trade Adams and help kick in money to any team willing to take Ellsbury; meanwhile, they’d be filling their temporary 2B hole cheaply with Lowrie included here, so in theory they’d be agreeable to this package. On the budget side, this takes them down to $151M this year – plenty of headroom left for them to sign Darvish.

The return:

• Chance Adams is the Yankees’ top pitching prospect, a 55-grade righty who is ready to break into the major leagues right now. In fact, he can compete for a rotation slot in 2018, and has a future as a possible TOR starter. In that sense, he’s probably the highest-quality starter we could target in any of these deals. He brings a 65-grade fastball, above-average control, and demonstrated success at every level of the minors: in AAA in 2017, he had a 2.87 ERA, held batters to a .197 average, and delivered a 1.08 WHIP across 115 IP. There is more risk with this trade because, with only one pitcher coming back as a return on our investment, it’s quite possible he could bust out and leave us with the Ellsbury bill and nothing to show for it.

Budget impact: moderate

To soften the blow of taking on Ellsbury’s contract and even out the value, the Yankees kick in $4 million per year over three years. That means we’re actually paying $17M/year for Ellsbury; and we lose Lowrie, so the net result is an increase in the payroll to $67M – still some room to sign a LHRP and/or a catcher or a temporary 2B to fill the role until Barreto is ready. It would also trigger a Joyce trade, which would take us down to $61M. And next year we save another $6M when Casilla comes off the books. There is a $5M buyout in 2021, but that’s of minimal concern.

Risky option 2: Dodgers/Matt Kemp contract

The trade proposal:

Casilla + take on Matt Kemp contract for C Yasmani Grandal, SP Mitchell White and $10M ($5M in each of 2018 and 2019)

While Kemp is technically owed $43.5M ($21.75M in both 2018 and 2019), it turns out that the Padres are on the hook for paying $5M of that ($2.5M in each year). So the A’s would take on the Dodgers’ portion of his remaining salary of $38.5M. Since Kemp has negative baseball value at this point (even as a DH), he’s an immediate release, and therefore that money will be eaten. On the A’s side, Casilla has a negative value of about $2.5M, but he does have some baseball value, and the Dodgers could use him in the bullpen, so that means the A’s are taking on a net of $36M. Grandal has positive value of almost $12M, White as a 50-grade pitcher brings about $14M, and the Dodgers cover the remaining $10M.

For the Dodgers, the net result is that their payroll goes down in 2018 from $193M to $171M, freeing up quite a bit of room under the CBT for a FA signing or trade. They really want to reset this year so they can afford to re-sign Kershaw next year (well, afford is a relative term in their case, but it would save them a lot of money in taxes over the years).

The return:

• Grandal would obviously fill the A’s gaping short-term hole at catcher for 2018, and buy time for Maxwell to get himself together and Murphy to further marinate until he’s ready.
• Mitchell White has the upside of a #3 starter. He’s done nothing but get guys out at every level. At AA in 2017, he pitched to a 2.57 ERA and a WHIP of 1.07. He’s already had his TJS, so there’s some injury risk.

Budget impact: moderate

Taking on the Dodgers’ portion of Kemp’s 2018 salary brings us up to $75.2M in 2018, but the Dodgers kick back $5M and take on Casilla’s $6M, so we’re down to $64.2M. But we also pick up Grandal’s $7.9M salary, so we’re back up to about $73M. We still need a veteran LHRP, but there’s not much left. The good news is that another $20M comes off the books in 2019 (Lowrie, Joyce, Grandal), so we’d be down to $53M (not counting arb raises). And in this scenario we’ve only netted one long-term prospect in White.

Summary

By my count, we have four strong options, which would net us excellent future prospect value, fill most of our needs, and not wreck our budget, as well as two more that carry a slightly less appealing risk/reward mix. In my view, doing one of the top four options would be a smart use of the A’s payroll headroom this year. And we’d have lots of leverage, as teams would be competing for us to take their bad contract, so it’s possible we could play them off of each other to get an even better return. Invest in the future, folks!