Andrew Miller to Cardinals

[Eye Black]

This sounds pretty close to a done deal at this point. Most recent updates from MLB Trade Rumors...

 

6:55pm: Yahoo’s Jeff Passan reports that the two sides are close to a multi-year deal. Miller, according to Passan, has received multiple two-year offers but has been seeking a three-year deal. It’s not yet clear whether the Cards went to three years or made a sizable increase to the value of a two-year offer. USA Today’s Bob Nightengale tweets that the Cardinals could announce a deal with Miller as soon as tomorrow.

 

6:49pm: The Cardinals are closing in on a contract with left-handed reliever Andrew Miller, reports Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic. Derrick Goold of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch had reported shortly beforehand that the Cards were still looking at Miller and Zach Britton, and that there could be some movement in the market before the holiday week. Miller is represented by Frontline’s Mark Rodgers.

[StearnsFTW]

Could be a huge upside signing for the Cards. They could be pretty damn good next year.

[clancyphile]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[SRB]

Greg Holland 2.0

[CheezWizHed]

Greg Holland 2.0

 

One can only hope!

[wntrtxn21]

Miller made $9M each year for the last 4 years. Waaay out of the Brewers range for a relief pitcher.

[long ball]

He was injured and ineffective last year. If he bounces back to the pitcher he was between 2014-2017 then that's a huge addition for the Cardinals. If he's somewhere in between then he's still a useful pitcher.

[brewmann04]

left hope he a shell of his former self but Cards don't like not being in the postseason.

[jerichoholicninja]

I will be curious to see if Miller is totally out of gas or if last year was just a down year. If he's done as a dominant pitcher, it makes an interesting study in how long a guy can be used a multiple inning reliever and maintain high levels of success. He's only got 4 seasons of dominance. Obviously his age is probably a factor, but let's just say following similar usage the same thing happens to Hader or any of the other guys in the league that are starting to take on that role. Is it worth it for a club to use and abuse a guy and only get 4 or 5 good years out of him. Or, more importantly, are players going to be accepting of that role that could severely limit the length of their careers and earnings potential. I'm sure Boras is putting together binder of information on the subject already.

[ewitkows]

11 the first year and 11.5 the 2nd with a 2.5 mil buyout

[KeithStone53151]

Frankly, I'm a bit disappointed they didn't pay him more. I know he had a down year, but I think a bounceback is too likely for such a low contract.

 

This isn't THAT much more than the 2/$16 deals that were handed out left and right last year...and to a lot of very mediocre relievers that had a good season. I believe Swarzak came in around there...

[Eye Black]

Updates from MLB Trade Rumors...

 

10:41am: Rosenthal tweets that Miller will be guaranteed $25MM over the next two seasons with a $12MM vesting/club option for the 2021 campaign. Miller will be paid $11MM in 2019 and $11.5MM in 2020, and the option carries a $2.5MM buyout. He’ll receive a full no-trade clause as well — something Heyman suggested was a priority for the left-hander last week.

 

Per Rosenthal, the option will vest if Miller pitches a combined 110 games between the 2019-20 seasons. He can earn another $500K annually based on incentives.

 

10:34am: The Cardinals and Miller do indeed have an agreement, tweets Fancred’s Jon Heyman. Frank Cusumano of KSDK News in St. Louis tweets that it’s a two-year deal with a vesting option for a third season.

[ewitkows]

no trade clause. If he sucks, they are stuck with him

[sveumrules]

I will be curious to see if Miller is totally out of gas or if last year was just a down year. If he's done as a dominant pitcher, it makes an interesting study in how long a guy can be used a multiple inning reliever and maintain high levels of success. He's only got 4 seasons of dominance. Obviously his age is probably a factor, but let's just say following similar usage the same thing happens to Hader or any of the other guys in the league that are starting to take on that role. Is it worth it for a club to use and abuse a guy and only get 4 or 5 good years out of him. Or, more importantly, are players going to be accepting of that role that could severely limit the length of their careers and earnings potential. I'm sure Boras is putting together binder of information on the subject already.

 

I'm not sure Miller would be the best case study for this since he already had about 359 innings in MLB plus another 319 in MiLB as mostly a starter before converting to relief full time.

 

Once he did make the switch he was used situationally for three seasons. 163 games/133 innings from 2012-14.

 

Even once his usage increased, it doesn't really compare to someone like Hader. From 2015-17 peak Miller pitched 187 games/198 innings. Hader is at 90 games/129 innings career.

 

In 2017 Miller pitched on zero days rest 15 times, one days rest 14 times, two days rest 14 times, three days rest 4 times & four days rest 5 times.

 

Compare that to Hader in 2018 at zero days rest 5 times, one days rest 11 times, two days rest 15 times, three days rest 10 times, four days rest 7 times & five days rest 4 times.

[trwi7]

no trade clause. If he sucks, they are stuck with him

 

The same would be true if he didn't have a no trade clause.

[Thurston Fluff]

no trade clause. If he sucks, they are stuck with him

 

The same would be true if he didn't have a no trade clause.

 

I think the better thing for us is they suck, he refuses to be traded and they are stuck paying him.

[HiAndTight]

Miller made $9M each year for the last 4 years. Waaay out of the Brewers range for a relief pitcher.

 

So not just out of their price range, but so far out that you feel the need to accentuate that by using 3 A's?

 

 

But in short...no, he's not our of our price range. He was well within it. If David Stearns thought he was the missing piece, there is zero doubt in my mind they'd be willing to pay this.

 

 

You really think if...say Hader was a free agent, they would say, "no, 9 million per year is waaay out of our range?" Of course not. I'm not sure where these things come from. The deal Patrick Corbin signed wasn't "out of their range," much less waaay out. It's just a matter of the risk. They certainly can't absorb bad contracts like other teams. They can't make huge mistakes. 2 years and 25 million for a pitcher like Andrew Miller....very little risk, a ton(better version of Josh Hader arguably) upside.

 

 

The Brewers draw well, they have an owner that's willing to spend. They CAN afford to sign Free Agents and it's a pet peeve when people take it SO far and act is if they can't afford anyone of substance one year after signing Cain and being in the Darvish sweepstakes.

 

 

I don't know if the Brewers were interested, if they were if they didn't like the medicals, if they were but he wasn't...there are a lot of unknowns. What isn't...is that they can afford to sign a pitcher of his caliber to this type of deal and they can ESPECIALLY afford to sign one to a deal that averages 9 million per year. I mean....Cleveland did, right? So...why wouldn't we be able to? No team in all of baseball has fans who spend more per capita on their team.

 

This is probably about 2.5 paragraphs longer than it needed to be....but like I said, it's a pet peeve when we just dismiss reality and act like our team is poor and can't pay anyone.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Miller made $9M each year for the last 4 years. Waaay out of the Brewers range for a relief pitcher.

 

So not just out of their price range, but so far out that you feel the need to accentuate that by using 3 A's?

 

 

But in short...no, he's not our of our price range. He was well within it. If David Stearns thought he was the missing piece, there is zero doubt in my mind they'd be willing to pay this.

 

 

You really think if...say Hader was a free agent, they would say, "no, 9 million per year is waaay out of our range?" Of course not. I'm not sure where these things come from. The deal Patrick Corbin signed wasn't "out of their range," much less waaay out. It's just a matter of the risk. They certainly can't absorb bad contracts like other teams. They can't make huge mistakes. 2 years and 25 million for a pitcher like Andrew Miller....very little risk, a ton(better version of Josh Hader arguably) upside.

 

 

The Brewers draw well, they have an owner that's willing to spend. They CAN afford to sign Free Agents and it's a pet peeve when people take it SO far and act is if they can't afford anyone of substance one year after signing Cain and being in the Darvish sweepstakes.

 

 

I don't know if the Brewers were interested, if they were if they didn't like the medicals, if they were but he wasn't...there are a lot of unknowns. What isn't...is that they can afford to sign a pitcher of his caliber to this type of deal and they can ESPECIALLY afford to sign one to a deal that averages 9 million per year. I mean....Cleveland did, right? So...why wouldn't we be able to? No team in all of baseball has fans who spend more per capita on their team.

 

This is probably about 2.5 paragraphs longer than it needed to be....but like I said, it's a pet peeve when we just dismiss reality and act like our team is poor and can't pay anyone.

 

You are so, so right. The only ones putting budgetary restrictions on this team are fans. Attanasio has shown that he's willing to spend on the right pieces. Just because Stearns smartly attaches a value to every player he has interest in, and doesn't exceed that, doesn't mean that the team is cheap or has no money to spend. The lack of fiscal responsibility is how you get in the situation the Mariners are in, and the Diamondbacks to a lesser extent.

 

Of course, if we are still sitting here with the same holes in the lineup and pitching staff come March, I'll probably think a bit differently.

[HiAndTight]

Frankly, I'm a bit disappointed they didn't pay him more. I know he had a down year, but I think a bounceback is too likely for such a low contract.

 

This isn't THAT much more than the 2/$16 deals that were handed out left and right last year...and to a lot of very mediocre relievers that had a good season. I believe Swarzak came in around there...

 

 

2 years and 14 million(I had to look it up). But that's close enough given the enormous gulf between the two.

 

 

Salaries are just down in the FA market the last couple years. Remember when a 500 million dollar deal was almost expected this off-season and then next with 3 players worthy? Right now would anyone be surprised if they didn't crack 270?

 

 

Anyway, I had a bit of a fantastical hope that the Brewers would EITHER go all in and sign Corbin this year, splurging while they had some money and then when their younger guys started to get more expensive, they'd have Braun coming off the books, and then after that, I figured, lets make our strenth a...super strength so to speak by going after Andrew Miller and being able to throw two extremely dominant lefties out there 3-4 times a week combined without burning either one out too much.

 

But Stearns knows what he's doing and even if he was interested, as much as it disgusted me to say this, St Louis is a far bigger FA destination than Milwaukee...and we already have a Andrew Miller.

 

 

 

All that said, he was injured last year, but still posted over 11 K's per 9 and had an FIP of 3.59.....so while that's definitely a down year, I think it's telling of just how good this guy is that people were disapointed with just really good instead of great from him. His BABIP against was 80-100 points lower the previous three years when he was dominating as well(which I know if factored into FIP).

 

 

That kinda tells me from the outside that he just had a bad start to the season, one thing led to another and it was a bit of a lost year. That term "shoulder impingement" however would cause a great deal of consternation if I was the Brewers GM.

[HiAndTight]

Miller made $9M each year for the last 4 years. Waaay out of the Brewers range for a relief pitcher.

 

So not just out of their price range, but so far out that you feel the need to accentuate that by using 3 A's?

 

 

But in short...no, he's not our of our price range. He was well within it. If David Stearns thought he was the missing piece, there is zero doubt in my mind they'd be willing to pay this.

 

 

You really think if...say Hader was a free agent, they would say, "no, 9 million per year is waaay out of our range?" Of course not. I'm not sure where these things come from. The deal Patrick Corbin signed wasn't "out of their range," much less waaay out. It's just a matter of the risk. They certainly can't absorb bad contracts like other teams. They can't make huge mistakes. 2 years and 25 million for a pitcher like Andrew Miller....very little risk, a ton(better version of Josh Hader arguably) upside.

 

 

The Brewers draw well, they have an owner that's willing to spend. They CAN afford to sign Free Agents and it's a pet peeve when people take it SO far and act is if they can't afford anyone of substance one year after signing Cain and being in the Darvish sweepstakes.

 

 

I don't know if the Brewers were interested, if they were if they didn't like the medicals, if they were but he wasn't...there are a lot of unknowns. What isn't...is that they can afford to sign a pitcher of his caliber to this type of deal and they can ESPECIALLY afford to sign one to a deal that averages 9 million per year. I mean....Cleveland did, right? So...why wouldn't we be able to? No team in all of baseball has fans who spend more per capita on their team.

 

This is probably about 2.5 paragraphs longer than it needed to be....but like I said, it's a pet peeve when we just dismiss reality and act like our team is poor and can't pay anyone.

 

You are so, so right. The only ones putting budgetary restrictions on this team are fans. Attanasio has shown that he's willing to spend on the right pieces. Just because Stearns smartly attaches a value to every player he has interest in, and doesn't exceed that, doesn't mean that the team is cheap or has no money to spend. The lack of fiscal responsibility is how you get in the situation the Mariners are in, and the Diamondbacks to a lesser extent.

 

Of course, if we are still sitting here with the same holes in the lineup and pitching staff come March, I'll probably think a bit differently.

 

 

Exactly. We can absolutely spend the money. We just CANNOT afford to spend the money on the wrong guy. And as a fan it's really easy to look at his numbers, remember his electric post-season and say, "he's a stud, sign him." Luckily, teams do a little more investigative research into players than that. And again, players have to WANT to come here. LoCain almost certainly could have gotten what the Brewers paid him elsewhere. He wanted to come back(lucky for us, but I'm pretty sure people would have said there's no way we can pay two OF'ers ~20 million dollars a year) before that signing.

 

 

Now I don't want to end this by disagreeing with you...but I kinda will. If they still have the same holes(that we percieve to be holes) to start the year next year, I don't think it'll be because of an unwillingness to spend. I think it'll be because they simply aren't interested in the pitchers who are interested in them.

 

Two things I would like to see though;

 

1-Jeremey Jeffress shipped out for a couple of really good prospects. Not Vlad Jr type ridiculous proposals, but two guys in the 60-125 range at least. I think his value is high, I think DJ helped him become the pitcher he is and I think he's a prime candidate to regress big time.

 

2-I'd like to see them go after another dominant reliever. A Britton maybe...a guy from the left side to compliment Knebel in the back of that pen. Without the Rockies spending 110 million on 3 relievers contracts(though we wouldn't be able to afford one of the best for 9 million) it seems like the market for them has cooled a bit.

[HiAndTight]

no trade clause. If he sucks, they are stuck with him

 

The same would be true if he didn't have a no trade clause.

 

Nah, one of the powerhouse teams that is struggling with their pen would take a chance hoping he can put it back together if he struggles with them early on.