Pirates DFA Ernesto Frieri

[Eminor3rd]

$3.8m and arb eligible. Biggest change is he started walking way more dudes. Striking out a few less but still above 8 k's per inning. We need to take a flyer on this guy if he falls to us.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/08/pira...assignment.html

Edited August 8, 2014 by Eminor3rd

[harfman77]

$3.8m and arb eligible. Biggest change is he started walking way more dudes. Striking out a few less but still above 8 k's per inning. We need to take a flyer on this guy if he falls to us.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/08/pira...assignment.html

 

Agree, relievers tend to be up and down, and Frieri still has a lot of talent even though his results this year have been less than effective. Great player to take a flier on and then hope for a bounceback season next year to trade him at the deadline.

[Balta1701]

So if we picked him up, the only way to keep him next year would be to offer him arbitration which would probably involve a 20% raise because arb usually does, meaning that he'd cost us $5 million next year to keep?

 

That seems ugh.

[brian310]

So if we picked him up, the only way to keep him next year would be to offer him arbitration which would probably involve a 20% raise because arb usually does, meaning that he'd cost us $5 million next year to keep?

 

That seems ugh.

 

Agreed

[Chisoxfn]

He probably makes his way through waivers.

[Chicago White Sox]

So if we picked him up, the only way to keep him next year would be to offer him arbitration which would probably involve a 20% raise because arb usually does, meaning that he'd cost us $5 million next year to keep?

 

That seems ugh.

I think you may be using the 20% average increase incorrectly, but either way, why couldn't we simply offer him a contract at his current salary and tell him to take it or leave it. Guys that get DFAed aren't typically looking at big free agent contracts.

[Balta1701]

I think you may be using the 20% average increase incorrectly, but either way, why couldn't we simply offer him a contract at his current salary and tell him to take it or leave it. Guys that get DFAed aren't typically looking at big free agent contracts.

Because he's not under contract for next year. We can offer him a contract to finish the year but to keep him next year we'd have to offer him a deal covering next year or be prepared to offer him $5 mil in arbitration. It makes no sense for us to get him for the last 1.5 months of this year and let him go next year if he has some success.

 

What's most likely is that someone will claim him, pay him a little bit for the rest of the season and he'll be a full free agent after being non-tendered this offseason. He could then be signed to a Felipe Paulino like deal for a much smaller salary in the offseason.

[Dick Allen]

He will be non tendered. It is amazing how other teams' crap looks so good. If you absolutely must have him, sign him when he's non tendered. He sucks so bad now, 2 contending teams want no oart of him.

[caulfield12]

It's not the WORST idea in the world.

 

Then again, we already paid Lindstrom and Downs $4 or 4.5 million or whatever (not to be closers at the time of signing).

 

That said, we'd do it only by providing him a trial as closer for 1 1/2 months and THEN deciding whether to offer salary arbitration for 2015.

 

Based on being traded and then basically released, it's hard to imagine he's going to automatically just get that 20% increase...not with that statline across two teams.

Edited August 8, 2014 by caulfield12

[Balta1701]

It's not the WORST idea in the world.

 

Then again, we already paid Lindstrom and Downs $4 or 4.5 million or whatever (not to be closers at the time of signing).

 

That said, we'd do it only by providing him a trial as closer for 1 1/2 months and THEN deciding whether to offer salary arbitration for 2015.

Based on being traded and then basically released, it's hard to imagine he's going to automatically just get that 20% increase...not with that statline across two teams.

That's how arbitration generally works. The team would probably offer something close to $4.5 mil, his side would ask for $5.5, and they'd settle somewhere in the range of a 20% increase in-between.

[caulfield12]

That's how arbitration generally works. The team would probably offer something close to $4.5 mil, his side would ask for $5.5, and they'd settle somewhere in the range of a 20% increase in-between.

 

If Frieri had anything close to resembling a decent season...basically, the question is would we be willing to pay him roughly the same amount we paid Matt Lindstrom to be a set-up guy this year? I think he ends up closer to $4.5 million than $5. That's not the most important question in the bigger picture, it's whether they can identify something (fixable and) wrong with him mechanically comparing this season and last.

Edited August 8, 2014 by caulfield12

[Dick Allen]

That's how arbitration generally works. The team would probably offer something close to $4.5 mil, his side would ask for $5.5, and they'd settle somewhere in the range of a 20% increase in-between.

There is no way a team would offer him $4.5 million. That is almost a 20% raise by itself.

 

Ernesto Frieri is a poor man's Addison Reed who happens to make 7 times the salary.

[Balta1701]

There is no way a team would offer him $4.5 million. That is almost a 20% raise by itself.

 

Ernesto Frieri is a poor man's Addison Reed who happens to make 7 times the salary.

Which is why no team is going to offer him arbitration. Which is why if you would consider him, you do so in December after he's been non-tendered.

 

No team is going to offer him less money in arbitration. They'd lose.

[Dick Allen]

Which is why no team is going to offer him arbitration. Which is why if you would consider him, you do so in December after he's been non-tendered.

 

No team is going to offer him less money in arbitration. They'd lose.

I don't necessarily agree with you about the arb loss. He has been awful. It all would depend on his number.

 

I do agree it makes no sense to claim him. Just wait until he's non tendered. I don't think anyone would even give him the 20% max deduction you can give him in arb.

[2nd_city_saint787]

Seems to give up a lot of HRs so if Hahn sticks with the whole ground ball theme, if that was really a theme, he's not a fit.

[Soxfest]

Sox have enough crappy bullpen guys that walk people already.

[Dick Allen]

Sox have enough crappy bullpen guys that walk people already.

He is a candidate to bounce back, but to pay him $1 million this year and then have an arb eligible player at his figure makes no sense. Someome will sign him in the offseason at a steep discount. If it is Hahn, fine.

[Eminor3rd]

So if we picked him up, the only way to keep him next year would be to offer him arbitration which would probably involve a 20% raise because arb usually does, meaning that he'd cost us $5 million next year to keep?

 

That seems ugh.

 

 

He will be non tendered. It is amazing how other teams' crap looks so good. If you absolutely must have him, sign him when he's non tendered. He sucks so bad now, 2 contending teams want no oart of him.

 

If he isn't worth the $5m, you just non-tender him. The reason other teams' crap looks so good right now is because we have the worst bullpen there is. I say take a flyer on the guy because he has a good arm and has been good before, so you might catch lightning in a bottle. And then you have someone for 2015

[harfman77]

He is a candidate to bounce back, but to pay him $1 million this year and then have an arb eligible player at his figure makes no sense. Someome will sign him in the offseason at a steep discount. If it is Hahn, fine.

 

You can also negotiate a deal in the offseason to avoid arbitration. This isn't some guy like Henry Rodriguez that has never been able to put things together, this guy has 71 career saves and 3.46 ERA and 3.74 FIP over 273 IP. This season has been a trainwreck for him, but he just turned 29 and is a good candidate to bounce back. He is likely to make around $4M next season, and that isn't really an obstacle given the teams current payroll obligations.