I can’t help but keep harping on Bill Dewitt’s comment that the JJ Wetherholt extension was hopefully the first of several. He made that comment in the press conference announcing JJ Wetherholt’s deal and it was probably somewhat of a negotiating strategy to get Wetherholt to sign in the first place. “You’re a part of our core and a couple of your teammates are too.” In the post looking at his deal, I immediately theorized on who the next extension could go to.
Of course my first instinct was that they would extend Jordan Walker. He’s certainly closer to free agency than Wetherholt. But there’s a roadblock with Walker in my eyes. I kind of get the feeling that the current popular perception has him as a better player than he’s actually played. He’s been worth 2.6 fWAR this year, held back by bad defense at a position low on the defensive spectrum. Does anybody think Walker is going to accept a team friendly extension based on him being a 3 WAR player? I don’t. And I’m not sure he should. He’s under no obligation to sign one and he’s reaching free agency at 28.
I believe any extension of Walker would have to come with the understanding that Walker will be a better player in the future, and I don’t know if I’m betting $150-200 million on that. I’ll put it like this. Imagine Walker as a free agent, and imagine he has basically this season for the next three years. Him being 28 would help a lot, but the 30-year-old version of this type of player in free agency is a player I want zero part of on a free agent deal. And Walker does not have four seasons proving this is the player he is, he has 500 PAs. I cannot imagine how a JJ Wetherholt extension works out poorly. I do not have that issue with Walker. That’s ultimately what gives me hesitation.
Oddly enough, my extension candidate for today is a very similar player to Walker in terms of productivity. Though they go about it in different ways, they have a very similar batting impact. Walker has a 129 wRC+, while Burleson’s day yesterday pushed him above Walker for a 130 wRC+. Both play positions low on the defensive spectrum and at least in theory, both grade as below average defenders. Even the baserunning difference hasn’t been that different – despite his speed and despite the fact that he’s stolen 16 bases, Walker hasn’t rated especially high by BsR so far in his career. Burly actually has a better stolen base success rate in his career and hasn’t gotten caught in his three attempts this year.
However there are differences that make me more okay with a Burleson extension. Burleson has less potential than Walker, but he’s quite a bit more reliable. He has a significantly bigger sample size to trust than Walker does. He’s also probably going to be cheaper. That’s kind of a tough combo to beat honestly, a more reliable bat who is cheaper.
On top of that, Burleson may even be underrated at the moment or at the very least, he may have reached another step, but it hasn’t been reflected in the numbers yet. His xwOBA this season is .383, which is quite a bit better than his actual wOBA of .361 and also better than last season’s .345. So maybe some hits haven’t fallen, flyballs have been just short, and it’s hiding that Burleson has become a better hitter. His improved walk rate and improved power suggest so. On top of that, I mentioned “in theory” both Burleson and Walker are bad defenders. I’m not buying it with Burleson. I’m not even saying he’s a good defender, I just don’t think he’s a bad one. I don’t necessarily trust OAA with 1B defense, and for now, I’m okay with trusting the eye test.
So really when it comes down to it, the reason I think an extension for Burleson might make more sense than one for Walker is a matter of perception. Burleson is perceived to be a good player with a limited ceiling while Walker is perceived to be – because he was one – an All-Star and a home run derby champ. The latter isn’t cheap. The former is most likely extremely reasonable.
I’ve defended the idea of extending Burleson for too long. Either you already agreed with me before I laid it out or you disagree with the idea of extending Burleson and I kind of doubt anything I’ve said has changed your mind. I’m kind of reasoning with myself honestly. A month ago, Burleson was a mere afterthought when I was discussing possible extensions – he was in fact lumped in with Ivan Herrera and they both merited a short paragraph. And today, here I am devoting an entire article to it.
Now that I’ve shared my reasons, let’s discuss possible terms. We have a ridiculously good comp who signed a deal not even a year ago, although he was a free agent. Josh Naylor coming off last season is pretty similar to the player Alec Burleson looks like now. Naylor’s deal starts at 29 and involves only free agent years, while Burleson’s extension would start at 28 and would involve at least two arbitration years. I don’t think there’s any reason to think Burly would cost more than Naylor. Naylor signed for 5 years, $92.5 million.
This is a rare situation where I actually think both the Cardinals and Burly’s agent would want to reference Naylor’s deal for a possible extension. The Cardinals because they can give him the exact same deal, but with the arbitration years baked in, so it would come up cheaper. And his agent, because I don’t know that 30-year-old Burleson is doing much better than that. That’s the other reason a Burly extension might make sense. It makes complete sense for both sides.
Okay, what are Burleson’s arbitration prices then? He made $3.3 million in his first year of arbitration. If the arbitration panel viewed him as exactly the same player, he’d make $5.3 million in his second year. They will probably raise their valuation of him due to improved counting stats. He’s already beat his HR total from last season and he’s 10+ runs and RBIs higher than last year despite 38 less plate appearances. And his advanced stats are better. His WAR is better. Because he’s at 1B instead of the outfield, his defense is better. He’s just a better player. So let’s say $7 million instead. If he doesn’t sign a deal, I’m going to go back to this to check my estimation. Josh Naylor made $10.9 million in his third arb year, so we’ll go with that.
Okay, now we’re getting somewhere. Naylor signed a deal for $18.5 million per year for 5 years. Burly is a year younger, so we get an extra year of his prime, so let’s up that to $20 million for his free agent years. That comes out to 5 years, $77.9 million. Let’s say 5 years, $75 million with incentives then. Ideally incentives that can only be reached by being worth the money. Here’s my structure:
2027: $10 million
2028: $15 million
2029: $15 million
2030: $17 million
2031: $18 million
As you can see, I give him more money in his arbitration years, and then the free agent prices fall below $20 million. That seems reasonable.
The main argument against signing Burleson probably has less to do with Burleson and more to do with, weirdly, the catchers. The Cardinals are definitely trading someone or someones, but there’s a pretty high likelihood someone is going to have to move to a different position and as we saw with Willson Contreras, 1B is the natural choice. I do understand that argument.
But really it comes down to Ivan Herrera. Neither Jimmy Crooks nor Leonardo Bernal are likely to have the bat to play 1B (or DH) and by all reports, there is no reason to think Rainiel Rodriguez is moving from catcher. He also happens to be quite short. That’s not necessarily ideal for a 1B. So then it’s really about if Herrera moves to 1B or not. And the timing of this post, admittedly, is going to be favorable to Burleson – Burleson has been a much better hitter this year, their projections are similar.
But really it comes down to that reliability question again. Herrera hits the ball on the ground a lot. We don’t know if Herrera will be a good 1B. The Cardinals may even decide to stick with this catcher/DH role for Herrera and roll with three catchers for the foreseeable future. Burleson just seems like a safer bet. My proposed contract is pretty reasonable and it’s hard to imagine he would be able to ask for much better than that honestly given the Josh Naylor framework. So I get it if you want to just let him hit free agency, but I do think Burleson might make sense as the next extension candidate.
(My first actual choice for next extension candidate is Masyn Winn, but that one is a bit more complicated to work out. I think the reason the Burleson extension hasn’t been done is almost entirely the Cardinals. I just find it hard to envision him not being open to something like this. Whereas Masyn Winn, I suspect Masyn Winn is waiting for his numbers to get better to ask for a better deal)