October 24th, 2025: Okamoto, Bellinger, Domínguez, Volpe

The World Series begins tonight and either the Blue Jays will win their first championship since their back-to-back titles in 1992 and 1993, or the Dodgers will become the first repeat champions since the 1998-2000 Yankees. A real no-win situation for Yankees fans, eh? Too bad the Blue Jays and Dodgers can’t both lose. Anyway, I’m going with mailbag questions today. I logged some good Offseason Plan hours this week, plus this is the weird time of year when the Yankees aren’t playing but also the offseason hasn’t begun yet, so there’s only so much to talk about (unless you care that Cody Bellinger, Jazz Chisholm Jr., Aaron Judge, Ben Rice, and the Yankees as a team are Silver Slugger finalists). Thankfully, you all keep me swimming in content. Let’s get to today’s mailbag-only post.

Sam asks: As I'm sure you've seen, Kazuma Okamoto is being posted this offseason. I've seen some people try to connect him to the yankees as like a Plan C given what happens with Bellinger and Tucker, but I would make the case that he makes sense for the yankees, even if they do sign one of those two OF's. Okamoto seems to play mostly at the corners, with a little outfield. With McMahon and Rice, presumably, starting at the corners next year, doesn't it make sense to have a right-handed hitter with some power, low K% who can play two positions and fake it a bit in the OF?

Earlier this week the Yomiuri Giants announced they will post Okamoto, their longtime star. The Giants have never posted a position player before*, but they were a .500 team this year and Okamoto is a year away from international free agency. They could either post him now and receive millions via posting fee, or watch him leave for nothing in a year. So, they will post him when the time comes this offseason.

* Hideki Matsui left the Giants as an international free agent way back when. He wasn't posted.

Okamoto, 29, hit .327/.416/.598 (210 wRC+) with 15 homers and as many walks as strikeouts (11.3%) in 69 games around a significant non-throwing elbow injury suffered on a collision at first base. Excluding the 2020 pandemic season, Okamoto averaged 142 games a year from 2018-24. That’s in a league with a 144-game schedule. The fluky elbow injury this year was the first real injury of his career.

There’s not a whole lot out there about Okamoto, a righty hitter and righty thrower who played third base earlier in his career and has seen more time at first in recent years. Here's part of FanGraphs’ scouting report, which is the most current I can find:

Okamoto's most resonant and interesting skill is his extreme ability to pull the baseball. His spray chart looks like Isaac Paredes', with all kinds of fly balls peppering the left field foul pole. Some teams' regression models seem to have found that hitters with high rates of pulled fly balls are more stable performers … He can cover the heart of the zone from east to west, but he isn't a barrel control savant or anything like that; Okamoto is clearly a power-over-hit guy. His hands are very strong, capable of putting a charge into the ball even when he doesn't square it up … But whether Okamoto can actually perform like he has against big league fastballs is up for debate. His spray chart against fastballs has been more balanced to all fields and less pull-heavy. When you limit his opponents' sample to fastballs 94 mph and above (only about 200 pitches across all of 2024; the average NPB fastball was 90-91 mph), his numbers fall off a cliff. As a likely first base-only big league defender (he has seen time at third base and in the outfield each of the last couple years, but has overwhelmingly played first base), Okamoto has very little margin for error on offense. He's a potential option for teams in need of a power bat, but this evaluation is worried enough about his fastball issues to put him comfortably south of the average starting first baseman in MLB.

It feels like every Japanese or Korean hitter is said to have issues with velocity, but they don’t see much of it in NPB or KBO, so it’s all small sample data. We can’t make conclusions based on that. Okamoto turned around a 99 mph fastball from Roki Sasaki a few years ago and blasted it out to right-center (video). The way he inside-outs that fastball at the knees is, dare I say, Judgian. The power’s legit.

The World Baseball Network folks say the “knock on Okamoto is his defense, and where he would fit on an MLB field is an open question.” He played 140 games at third base in 2022, then, by 2024, it was 140 games at first base. The usual progression is third base in your 20s and first base in your 30s. Okamoto’s already shifting to first base. You usually don’t go back the other way once that happens. I’m not sure how much of a third base option he really is.

The Yankees need a right-handed hitting corner infielder to complement Ben Rice and Ryan McMahon. If you think Okamoto can play third base, even only 30-40 times a year, then he could fit as a first/third/DH option. Is he up for that? Would he really make the jump to MLB in the prime of his career to be a role player with the Yankees? I gotta think Okamoto will land with a team that guarantees him a starting spot.

We have a pretty good comparison for a contract: Masataka Yoshida. Yoshida came to MLB at age 29, the same age Okamoto is now, and he was a similar “best hitter in NPB with defensive questions” type. The Red Sox gave Yoshida five years and $90M, and he signed a week into his 45-day posting window. When a Scott Boras client signs that quickly, you know the team blew away their expectations (see: Ellsbury, Jacoby). Yoshida has worked out poorly for Boston. Okamoto is said to be a Boras client too, by the way.

If we call it 4-5 years at $15M to $18M annually for Okamoto, then I’d say I’m out based on the little I know about him. Historically, the right/right first base aging curve is awful (there’s a reason Pete Alonso couldn’t get paid last winter despite being a lock for 34+ homers each year), and it will have to be starter dollars for a role player. The Yankees can afford it, but eh, that doesn’t mean it’s smart.

I would be surprised if the Yankees showed serious interest in Okamoto, especially if it does end up being Yoshida money. I think they see themselves as being set at first and third bases and will bring in a righty complement, but not at those dollars. The Padres seem like a good fit for Okamoto, though they figure to spend whenever money they have available on pitching. The Mariners, maybe? I dunno.

Eric asks: Are we overstating Cody Bellinger's market? The same concerns Bellinger had when he signed the original 3/80 were that he didn't have great underlying savant numbers (exit velocity, barrel, etc), and the same questionable underlying metrics existed in 2025 as well. 

Yes, I think hi market is being overstated. I’ve seen 6-8 years floated for Bellinger and there’s just no way, right? This is a player who was non-tendered three years ago and took a $27.5M player option last offseason despite having a good 2024, presumably because he and Scott Boras didn’t think a long-term deal would be out there. Bellinger was better in 2025 than he was in 2024, but he’s a year older too. How much has changed, really? There’s also this:

• 2024-25 Bellinger at Yankee Stadium: .302/.365/.544 (151 wRC+) in 337 PA

• 2024-25 Bellinger everywhere else: .256/.313/.416 (101 wRC+) in 824 PA

There are other ballparks that favor left-handed pull hitters (Baltimore, Cincinnati, etc.), though Bellinger’s skill set is one that is more valuable to the Yankees than it is to most other teams. That figures to limit his market a bit and it doesn’t mean the Yankees should pay him more either. A player’s market value is what teams are willing to pay him, not what his production says he’s worth.

There is a lot of blue on Bellinger’s Statcast page but he has outperformed his exit velocity and expected stats three years running now. It’s not a fluke. It’s a skill. Guys like him, who make a lot of contact and pull the ball in the air a ton, are the guys who are better than their otherwise underwhelming contact quality says they should be (Isaac Paredes is the go-to example here). Here’s Bellinger:

The $5M buyout on the $25M player option makes it a $20M decision for Bellinger, and surely he can beat $20M this offseason even without a long-term deal. Teoscar Hernández got three years and $66M at age 32 last offseason. Christian Walker got three years and $60M as a 34-year-old first base only guy. Bellinger can get at least that, right? I think so. Does three years and $75M work? Four years and $90M?

Bellinger could end up with six years if the Yankees do the “add two years to lower the luxury tax hit” thing again, though a) they haven’t done that with Boras clients, and b) Bellinger might not be up for it because he could still have another contract coming to him. When DJ LeMahieu did it (and even Max Fried), it was reasonable to assume he was signing his last contract that offseason anyway, so what’s another two years?. I don’t think we can say that with Bellinger. He could still have another contract coming in 3-4 years.

Free agents take the outlier contract, not the average contract offer in line with projections, so maybe 6-8 years at $25M+ a pop really will be out there for Bellinger. It only takes one desperate team. That is the kinda contract that I’m saying thanks Cody, and moving on. If it’s 3-4 years, I’m more receptive. I do think Bellinger’s market (and importance to the Yankees) is being overstated right now, which tends to happen with good players in the early days of the offseason. Reality will set in soon enough.

Steve asks: Please bear with the hypothetical that both Skubal and Skenes are available via trade this winter. Do the Yankees match up better with the Tigers, who have young position player depth in the minors and may need young arms to sync up primes with the young bats, or the Pirates who have a reputation for developing pitching but need Major League bats? I won’t throw out a sucky trade proposal, but I wouldn’t have anyone off limits to trade away.

If it’s Tarik Skubal or Paul Skenes, you have to prioritize Skenes because it’s four years of control vs. one, even if it will cost you (a lot) more prospects. As for matching up, yes, I think the Yankees match up better with the Tigers for the reason Steve laid out. They need pitching, something the Yankees can spare at the prospect level, whereas the Pirates badly need bats. Only three of the top 20 or so prospects in the system are position players right now (George Lombard Jr., Spencer Jones, Dax Kilby).

The Tigers have a young, controllable player at every position other than shortstop, second or third base (depending where Colt Keith plays), and maybe right field. Their pitching is pretty thin though. There’s a reason they’ve had to run bullpen games and openers the last two postseasons. Unless the Yankees trade Cam Schlittler for Skubal (worth considering), I’m not sure the Yankees can give Detroit a slam dunk 2026 starter (Luis Gil and Will Warren aren't fronting a Skubal trade package). Still, I think there’s a better chance they match up with Detroit for a Skubal trade than I do the Pirates for a Skenes trade.

(If the Pirates trade Skenes, they have to get the most/best possible talent back, regardless of position. Trading that guy and potentially shortchanging yourself because you’re trying to fill specific needs is how you wind up in perpetual builds like the one the Pirates are in.)

Eddie asks: My gut tells me at least one but probably two of these guys gets traded this off-season, who do you think it is? Who would you trade?

Clarke
Gil
Jasson
Spencer
J.C.
McMahon

I think Ryan McMahon’s at the bottom of the list (the Yankees didn’t get him only to trade him immediately) with Clarke Schmidt right above him (no one’s trading for a non-elite injured pitcher). This is how I’d rank them in terms of how likely they are to get traded:

1. J.C. Escarra (most expendable of the bunch, teams need catchers)
2. Jasson Domínguez (they’ve been willing to talk about him for years)
(gap)
3. Spencer Jones (not sure he’d fetch a ton, honestly, the whiffs aren’t a secret)
4. Luis Gil (they wouldn’t trade him last offseason and it’s not like they can spare pitching now)
4. Clarke Schmidt
6. Ryan McMahon

I’d trade any of these guys and I’m sure the Yankees would too, but only in the right deal. I can’t say I agree with Eddie that it feels like at least one of these guys will get moved this offseason. I don't think it's inevitable. It definitely wouldn’t surprise me if it happens though. These six guys are among the most movable/replaceable in the organization. (Jones wouldn’t even have to be “replaced” because he’s not an MLB player right now.)

Jason asks: Has Dominguez completely been ruled out as a centerfield option moving forward? He played nearly 300 games at the position in the minors and he played a dozen games in the majors there in 2023 and 2024 before moving to left full time this past season. It's a small sample size for sure, but I believe we were told it was his natural position coming up and a plan to sign Tucker to play left and move Dominguez to center seems more appealing that a Grisham or Bellinger in center and Dominguez in left plan.

Here’s a fun one: Cody Bellinger and Trent Grisham played 1,439.1 of 1,439.2 possible innings in center field in 2025. Who played the other 0.1 innings? It wasn’t Jasson Domínguez and it wasn’t Aaron Judge either. It was … Paul Goldschmidt! But not really. The Yankees played a five-man infield with the winning run on third in the tenth inning against the Red Sox on June 13th, and as part of the alignment, Goldschmidt was considered the “center fielder.” Anyway, the Yankees got walked off that game. So it goes.

As for Domínguez, it sure seems like the Yankees have ruled him out as a center fielder, no? I’m not sure the idea that it’s his “natural” position and thus he would be better there defensively holds true. Domínguez doesn’t get great reads or take good routes, and he’s uncomfortable at the point of the catch, especially when he’s on the move. I can buy him being more comfortable in center than in left, though I don’t think that would take him from bad to even average. It would be more like bad to less bad, if anything.

El Marciano had a .257/.331/.388 (103 wRC+) line this year that was split into .274/.348/.420 (116 wRC+) against righties and .204/.279/.290 (63 wRC+) against lefties. That’s not terrible, especially for a rookie who played the entire season at age 22, but he’s gonna have to do more than that to hang around as a below-average defensive corner outfielder. The lack of power surprises me most. Only 10 homers in 429 plate appearances? Defensively though, yeah, seems like the Yankees don’t view as a center fielder.

Lynn asks: I’ve heard Aaron Boone and Joel Sherman both compare Anthony Volpe’s early career to Dansby Swanson’s. In your opinion, is this a legitimate comparison?

Swanson is everyone’s go-to “see? our disappointing prospect could turn out okay!” example. He hit .243/.314/.368 (75 wRC+) during his age 22-24 seasons with the Braves. Volpe hit .222/.283/.379 (85 wRC+) during his age 22-24 seasons. Swanson did that from 2016-18, when there was more offense league-wide, hence the better slash line but worse wRC+. Relative to the league, Swanson then was a worse hitter than Volpe now.

I see two issues with the Swanson/Volpe comparison. One, Swanson is fantastic defensively. He still is at age 31. It is what it’s supposed to look like: smooth, effortless, instinctual. Even when he wasn’t doing much at the plate early in his career, it was clear Swanson could play short in the big leagues. Volpe is a good defender too, though there are times he looks like a second baseman playing short. There’s a lot of effort in his defensive game and it’s not particularly graceful. It works, but sometimes it looks like it won't forever.

And two, the Braves were at the tail end of their rebuild when Swanson was a young player. They lost 93 games in 2016 and 90 games in 2017, then got back to contending in 2018. The Braves were in position to let Swanson work through the learning curve. The Yankees are trying to win a World Series and that isn’t always conducive to letting a young player find his way. At some point, you have to put winning over an individual player’s development. (The Yankees did that with Jasson Domínguez late in the season.)

Not counting 2020, Swanson’s first league average season as a hitter (not even above average) was 2021, his age 27 season. If that’s the timeline we’re looking at with Volpe, well, Volpe’s age 27 season will be 2028, which will also be Aaron Judge’s age 36 season, Max Fried’s age 34 season, Gerrit Cole’s age 37 season, etc. Volpe following Swanson’s career path doesn’t align with the Cole/Fried/Judge era’s core best years and thus best chance to win a World Series.

Maybe Volpe follows the Swanson path. That’s the best case scenario right now, right? Shortstops who play this much at this age and hit this poorly typically never hit though. They settle in as glove first guys and that’s fine, there’s a place for glove first shortstops on championship teams, but I can’t imagine the Yankees were planning to fall back on Dansby Swanson comparisons when they made Volpe the shortstop three years ago. 

Jared asks: Am I crazy or is getting a catcher an offseason need that no one's talking about? Obviously Wells isn't going anywhere, but Rice is probably moving to first and we depleted our catcher depth at the deadline. Are we really running it back with two lefties in Wells and Escarra and no great prospects waiting in the minors?

I would like a righty hitting backup catcher to pair with Austin Wells, but the Yankees seem comfortable with two lefty hitting catchers, so I’m not sure a new backup is high on the offseason to-do list. They definitely need a Triple-A catcher. Maybe two. Rafael Flores and Jesus Rodriguez were traded at the deadline and there’s no near-MLB-ready catcher prospect in the system. The Triple-A catcher doesn’t have to be a big name. Alex Jackson was the guy most of last year. Someone like that is fine.

One catcher prospect to watch: Manuel Palencia. A $187,500 bonus guy as an international free agent in 2019, Palencia got to Double-A this season, though he wasn’t ready for it. He played 39 games in Low-A and 16 in High-A around a major injury the last two years (I think it was Tommy John surgery but I’m not 100% certain) before moving up to Double-A to help cover for all the trades at the deadline. The inexperience showed: .239/.268/.291 (65 wRC+) in 37 games above rookie ball in 2025.

Palencia turned 23 last month and the Yankees sent him to the Arizona Fall League to make up for the time he lost to the injury. He’s 3-for-19 (.158) so far, but he’s hit a ball 111 mph and had strong contact data this season. Palencia is an aggressive hitter, though it’s a low strikeouts/low walks profile more than a high strikeouts/low walks profile:

His arm is his best tool and the Yankees are so good at helping catchers with the other parts of catching (throwing, blocking, etc.) that I have to figure Palencia is making progress there for the Yankees to send him to Double-A. Yeah, they needed a body in Double-A, but they’re not gonna send an actual prospect there unless they think he could handle it defensively.

Palencia is Rule 5 Draft eligible this winter and there’s no chance he’ll stick on an MLB roster next season, but the Yankees have done a developmental 40-man roster stash the last few years. Rodriguez last year, Agustin Ramirez the year before that, Everson Pereira and Oswald Peraza a few years ago, etc. Those guys were in or barely out of Single-A when they were added to the 40-man. Maybe Palencia’s next? Hmmm.

I’m getting sidetracked. Yes, I think the Yankees need a right-handed hitting backup catcher, and they definitely need Triple-A catching depth. It doesn’t seem like they mind two lefty hitting catchers though (three if you count Ben Rice). I’m certain the Yankees would agree they need catchers for Scranton in 2026 but I don’t think they’d tell you a righty hitting backup is much of a priority.

Stephen asks: Do you think MLB should take a page from NBA's book and stipulate all drafted players need to spend one year at least in college? It would help the college game and also ease the burden on MLB's hollowed-out low minor leagues.

No, I don’t think so. Players should have the freedom to make their own decision about their future. For a pitcher, that one forced year in college could cost them thousands (maybe millions) in signing bonus money with injury rates being what they are. Also, this is kinda happening already. The draft is so college heavy now because teams have more data on those players (both traditional scouting and analytically), so that's who they're prioritizing. Fewer than 20% of the picks in the top 20 rounds the last two years were high school players, the two lowest totals in draft history. The best high school players always get taken and paid early. The rest are getting squeezed into college more and more with each passing year. This is happening organically. We don’t need a rule to make it official. Let players make the decision for themselves.

Keith asks: If the secret to LA's success is based on Ohtani's deferral of his salary why not ask Judge to do the same? He is the captain. Did the Dodgers luck out with Ohtani's willingness to do that (it seems foolish on his part for many reasons)? Why aren't Hal, Cohen and Boston doing this with signings?

It’s not Aaron Judge’s responsibility to make sure there’s enough payroll space to fill out the roster and yes the Dodgers got lucky because Shohei Ohtani offered the deferrals (it wasn't their idea). Ohtani is a 1 of 1 situation that doesn’t apply to any other player. If he wasn’t making $100M a year in endorsements, he wouldn’t defer as much salary as he did. The other deferrals the Dodgers have (Mookie Betts, Freddie Freeman, etc.) are in line with other deferrals around the league. Nolan Arenado, Rafael Devers, Francisco Lindor, Chris Sale, Christian Yelich, and lots of others have deferred money. Why don’t other teams do it? Because the player has to agree to it, first and foremost, and most guys want their money now. Also, the CBA requires teams to set that money aside to ensure the deferrals can be funded* (the Dodgers have to put $68M a year aside for Ohtani) and most owners don’t like having a big pile of cash off to the side that they can’t touch.

* This is a rule because the Diamondbacks deferred a ton of money to build their 2001 team, then had trouble paying it off. They had to slash payroll in the mid-2000s/early-2010s to pay players who had long been retired. You don’t get to defer money and then figure it out later these days. The deferrals must be funded along the way (teams can collect interest in that money in the meantime).

AJ asks: You wrote that the lesson to learn from the Dodgers is to go after the As rather than the Bs and Cs.  Would you consider Alex Bregman to be one of the As at this point?  He's not the same hitter he used to be, but he's still been a pretty consistent 120 wRC+ and 4 WAR player since 2020. Good AVG, low K%, a history of postseason success...there's risk involved with a soon-to-be 32-year-old, and fans will always hate him, but doesn't that seem like the sort of "just win" move that we ought to make?

No, not at this point in his career. I would have taken Bregman on the contract he signed last offseason (one year with two player options), though I assume he’ll look for a longer term deal this winter, and I don’t want to go there for a guy who turns 32 in Spring Training and is a poor fit for Yankee Stadium. Bregman was sneaky mediocre after coming back from his quad injury (.250/.338/.386 and 100 wRC+ in 269 PA) and there’s some red flaggy stuff under the hood against higher end velocity. I think Bregman is a better player than Ryan McMahon. I mean, duh, though I don’t see the Yankees going here. If he’s willing to do another short-term deal, we can talk, but I’m not signing this guy to a “rest of his career” contract.

Emiliano asks: Let’s say the salary cap is agreed. An let’s say is 190 million (whatever). How do you think this will work for teams that are already over that number with a number of multi year commitments? They just have to shed payroll whatever it takes or they’ll have a period to adjust? 

When the NHL and NHLPA agreed to their salary cap in 2005, they cut existing player salaries 24% (!) to help teams get into compliance. Could you imagine Rob Manfred asking the players to take a 24% pay cut? I kinda hope he does just to see the reaction. Also, NHL teams were given amnesty buyouts that allowed them to buy out a player’s contract and not have it count against the salary cap (the player still got paid). That’s how the NHL allowed teams to get under the salary cap back in the day.

I know Emiliano just pulled a number out of thin air, but 15 teams were over $190M for luxury tax purposes this year. The salary cap would have to be much higher. $230M? I dunno. Short of the players taking a 24% pay cut, the salary cap would have to be phased in to give teams a chance to get into compliance, right? If $230M is the agreed upon number, then you start at $300M in Year 1, $275M in Year 2, $250M in Year 3, and then $230M in Year 4. Maybe you give each team one (or two?) amnesty buyout too. They can release a player and pay him, but it doesn’t count against the salary cap. A friend of mine covers the NHL and likes to remind me that agreeing to a cap is not even half the battle. Agreeing what revenue counts toward setting the cap, and how the cap actually works, is a bigger challenge.

Larry asks: I was reading your recent post when you said It's good team vs. good team, and a good team has to lose. Well, after the 2023 season you posted my question in which I essentially said the playoffs are a crapshoot. Hal will pay for a team that makes the playoffs and after that it's all chance anyway. Back then you agreed with me, and now you said any team can lose 3 of any 4 games. So doesn't this just confirm what we both said back then. So, again this offseason, won't Hal just pay for a team which makes the playoffs, but no more?

Patreon’s internal search function stinks, so I can’t find Larry’s 2023 question. I think there’s a difference between the postseason being a crapshoot and any team being able to lose 3-4 times out of 5-7 games. There will always be an element of randomness in this game (regular season and postseason) but you can build rosters that are better set up for success in the postseason. Power arms and power bats, bullpen depth so you don’t run the same 1-2 guys into the ground, etc. That stuff tends to be a common theme among World Series winners, but even that doesn’t guarantee success.

The Yankees seem to employ the “be good enough to get to the postseason every year and hope you run into a title along the way” strategy and they’re very good at the first part while not doing the second part in a while. For fans, it’s frustrating, because it seems like there’s an area of the team that can be improved every offseason but goes unanswered (third base going into 2024 and 2025, left field before that, etc.), and we can see the Yankees are not the best team they could be. They’re still good enough to contend though. They really lean into the “build a good team and hope it all lines up in October” thing and so do a lot of teams. They’re not alone. I see no reason to think this offseason will be different. This is what the Yankees do.

Andrew asks: Have there been any updates on the “new” MLB jerseys that debuted last season? From what I can tell, the sweat-stain issue was addressed, and maybe the oversized name lettering on the back too—or have I just gotten used to that? The one that always stood out to me is the lack of custom sizing. It feels wrong that big leaguers would be stuck wearing ill-fitting uniforms. Has there been any reporting of progress on that front? 

Late last year MLB announced they’re rolling back those uniform changes. No more small names, sweat stains, see-through pants, etc. They're going back to the pre-2024 uniforms. Some teams got their “old” uniforms back this year. Others are still waiting because Fanatics, which manufactures the uniforms for Nike, didn’t have enough time to make all the uniforms for this season. It looked like the Yankees got their “old” uniforms back and everything was okay this season? I can’t say I was paying attention to it. Those amateurish uniforms we saw last year are out though. Every team is expected to be back to their “old” uniform by next year.

(Send your questions for Friday's mailbag to RABmailbag at gmail dot com. The random Yankee series is on hiatus, but feel free to send in requests for when it returns.)