Hand up, I really wanted the Cubs to sign reliever Robert Stephenson this offseason. I felt like they could use one more impact arm (accurate), and I felt like Stephenson was one of the best available (about that … ). When the Angels got him for three years and $33 million, I was pretty miffed that the Cubs weren’t willing to take that risk. We know they had interest, but not at that level. It’s a lot for a reliever, yes, but it felt like a really good risk for the Angels.
Well, that word “risk” means certain things, and one of them is that the guy could break. Maybe even before he throws a pitch for you:
The specifics aren’t out yet on Stephenson’s elbow injury, but if he’s missing the year, it ain’t good. Not what you want for your big offseason free agent signing.
So, was I wrong to want Stephenson in the first place? Well, it’s a little hard to beat me up when it’s an injury that sinks a deal on a guy who’s been healthy the last five years. But I do think it’s fair to chide me a little for being too glib about that word “risk.” Spending significant money on a reliever is risky primarily because of the volatility of the role, but it’s also true that the injury risk is (1) acute for the role, and (2) potentially more damaging since you maybe could have gotten the same performance internally for no extra commitment at all (i.e., even if the guy had been healthy, maybe that volatility thing would’ve kicked in).
Ultimately, I guess we just say from a human perspective that we hope Stephenson recovers well enough, and we also say thaaaaaaank goodness the Cubs didn’t sign him.
A final note, though: the Angels’ deal had a hedge built in, with them getting a super cheap ($2.5M) team option at the end of the deal if he misses time with an elbow injury. So now, if he comes back healthy and effective, the Angels will get a cheap year tacked onto the end.