In a new article, John Erardi says that the Reds should not extend Phillips nor Cordero, and trade Chapman.
Good arguments can be made on both sides for extending Phillips or Cordero. However, his argument for trading Chapman is just plain wrong.
Really? The Reds are not likely to get $30M of value out of Chapman?And while we’re on the subject of Chapman, what are the chances the Reds are going to get their $30 million worth out of him over the next three years? Not likely.
First, they really only signed him to a $25.5M deal, with a $5M player option in 2015. And this assumes that they received no value from him up to this point.
Even if that is true, I think it is easy to imagine Chapman earning $25.5 over the next 3 seasons. That basically would mean that he would be an average starting pitcher over the next three seasons, since it would take around $8M a year to get a league average starting pitcher.
Or from a pure WAR point of view, he needs to average 1.85 WAR over three seasons to earn the whole contract. He actually has earned 1.2 WAR so far according to Fangraphs, so he really only needs to average 1.5 WAR, which is what Homer Bailey did this year.
Why is that not likely? I think it is highly likely, and probable that Chapman will put up numbers similar to what Bailey put up this season, over the next three years. It possible that he doesn't, but the odds are that he will, meaning it's silly to trade him.