Charlie Morton is a tough player to describe. A former top prospect who didn’t become an All-Star till age 34, who finally came back to the team that originally drafted him and helped lead them to a World Series. He veers between looking unhittable and serving up meatballs, which now that I think of it is a pretty good description of many a fifth starter.
He just turned 41 this fall, which I should know because he and I are very nearly the exact same age.
He’s frustrating if you expect him to be more than he is. But actually, the season he had last year is more or less what we expected.
In Charlie Morton’s player review from one year ago, I wrote:
This year was a mirror image of the one previous. In 2023, Morton’s xERA regressed by almost the same amount as it had previously improved, which explains the frequent heartburn of watching his starts last year! Despite the sparkling ERA, something was amiss in his components this season. While his home run rate fell to a near-career low, his walks climbed to a career high and his strand rate rose to its second-highest mark ever…
Per baseball-savant, he was in the second percentile for fastball run value, which is especially astonishing as his velocity remained in the 64th percentile. So, it felt like a tightrope walk a lot of the time.
For what it’s worth, ZiPS projects Charlie for a 4.09 ERA and 2.4 WAR next year – that’s basically a 3/4 starter, and well worth the $20 million salary. And the system does not see too much variability around that mean: his 80th-percentile outcome is 3.5 WAR (3.35 ERA), 20th-percentile is 1.1 WAR (4.95 ERA), or roughly a #2 starter versus a #5 starter…
Of course, his 20th-percentile prediction isn’t his absolute floor, it’s just what currently seems like his likely floor among the most probable range of outcomes. After all, he’s 40, nine months older than Max Scherzer, and pitching ineffectiveness is like bankruptcy: it comes gradually, then suddenly. So despite Morton’s extraordinary durability and seeming predictability, there are no sure things.
For what it’s worth, his ERA was 4.19 but his FIP was 4.46, so he was worth exactly 1.1 WAR, the 20th-percentile projection, but his RA9-WAR was 1.9. So he was the 1-2-WAR pitcher we thought we were getting, and he was the most durable pitcher on the team – the oldest man on the staff actually led the team in starts.
The season he had in 2024 was pretty similar to the one he had in 2022, when he had a 4.34 ERA and was worth 1.4 WAR. In particular, his homer rate spiked again in 2024, after unaccountably plummeting in 2023. His strikeouts also eroded to their lowest mark in a decade, as did his fastball velocity.
For what it’s worth, ZiPS projects Morton to have more or less the same season next year that he had this year – 4.29 ERA, 4.40 FIP, 149 IP, 1.4 WAR – if he chooses to play another season, and it seems like the Braves are highly likely to bring him back if he decides he wants to.
And I’m torn. The Braves have the same need for depth in 2025 that they had coming into 2024 – Grant Holmes was a wonderful surprise, and Spencer Schwellenbach was a revelation, but the remainer of the Ynoa/Anderson/Smith-Shawver/Waldrep crew does not seem likely to offer much room for immediate optimism.
We could use another year of Morton’s durable inconsistency at the back end of our rotation. But… there’s more risk. He routinely struggled to get out of the fifth inning last year, and he’s 41 now. The precipice nears.
If he agrees to come back on a one-year, $10 million deal, I have no doubt that AA will ink it, and I’d be at peace with that; that would more or less pay him a market rate to be a one-win pitcher.
But we need far more than Morton can provide us. He provides insurance, depth, and the kind of veteran presence that adds a bit of wisdom to a happy clubhouse. He doesn’t provide the kind of production that wins enough ballgames to make a clubhouse happy.
We’re going to need to spend money this offseason.
We should spend it on Max Fried.
If we’re not going to sign Fried, we need to trade for Crochet. I would rather keep the prospects and sign Fried. Fried has mostly been a huge disappointment in the postseason (with notable exceptions including WS game 6), but that kind of thing can be fluky. We will have a hard time doing better than Fried, and if we let him walk, we will spend just as much on various stopgaps to replace his innings.
I’d also like to see Fried return. Liberty Media is very rich from The Battery and can afford to pay the salary cap ahem luxury tax penalties.
They can afford to pay Charlie too. Sign both. Someone’s going to get injured.
Morton’s ZIPS projection is pretty similar to Ian Anderson’s, just with fewer innings:
4.12 ERA/4.17 FIP/1.1 WAR/89.7 innings
I’m not crazy about Anderson but he’ll probably give you similar production for a much lower price. AA would be better off upgrading the top of the rotation.
Fried is one of my all-time favorite Braves — it’s also not my money — but his recent injury history terrifies me. His upcoming deal has real potential to blow up on someone.
Update: As soon as I hit post, I saw this great FanGraphs article on Fried.
Losing him will hurt, but I still maintain the injury risk is too great.
I sure like the idea of solving the OF issue by signing Laureano and Hays. Both hit lefties and can platoon with Kelenic and either one could cover for Ronald in RF until he is ready to return and any of the three would make a good 4th OF. I like the idea of a Murphy/Baldwin tandem if Baldwin can catch and call a good game (the hitting would be a bonus even though I think TdA had the best hitting approach of any Brave last year and I hated losing him). That leaves SP and SS to improve assuming the rest can remain injury free (Olson, Riley, Albies, Harris). Ultimately SP may solve itself if Strider comes back strong. I wish there were real money to spend on SS (like Adames or someone big to trade for). I have some faith in Anderson’s return and development of SP prospects. If Schwelly can be great then why not AJSS or Hackenburg or Murphy or Ritchie or (eventually) Caminiti. We may not need such a long term SS or OF if Perdomo or Guanipa solidify. I think we need to have some patience.
I don’t think the problem with spending a lot of money is only about budget concerns. Given the state of the farm system I think a huge concern is losing spots in the draft.
That’s a good point. While I think most prospects are busts (as they are), AA is an absolute shark when it comes to trading them for actual big leaguers.
It has been three years since Ian Anderson was a productive major leaguer. I’m a fan and I’m rooting for him, but he has to be the Plan B for 5th starter.
I have the same opinion I did last year on Charlie. I’d love to have him back, but probably not for what it costs us. It’s not just the money and the luxury tax and the draft spots; it’s the opportunity cost of not being able to spend his salary on the rest of the roster. It’s very difficult for me to believe that we couldn’t have spent his $20 million better last year.
Charlie was expensive for what he was last year, but they were paying for the certainty of knowing that he was highly likely to stay healthy and to perform within a known range of outcomes. If he comes back next year, he won’t cost that much, but I can totally appreciate that paying a 41-year-old for iffy performance is a luxury not a necessity.
However, I can’t take on faith that Ian Anderson will “probably give you similar production for a much lower price.” It’s been years since he threw a pitch in the Show, and the last we saw of him was pretty unplayable. I just don’t think we can bank on him.
That piece on Fried is terrific, KIP – thanks for linking!
Yeah, Ian needs to prove he’s healthy and can pitch again in the big leagues before anyone should be confident he can replace Steady Charlie. I continue to be surprised that people think getting a guaranteed 30 starts is an easy thing to find in modern baseball.