Yankees third baseman Ryan McMahon celebrating with teammates at Yankee Stadium
Yankees third baseman Ryan McMahon celebrating with teammates at Yankee Stadium
Getting something useful out of Ryan McMahon’s contract doesn’t have to mean getting a prospect worth bragging about. I’d be willing to accept a very small return if the Yankees can move part of his salary and put a better hitter at third base.
Mike Axisa of RAB Thoughts suggested the Cardinals as a possible destination, with New York covering much of the money. His proposal comes with sensible limits: no expectation that St. Louis absorbs the entire $16 million, and no promise of a top prospect coming back.
“I just think there’s a chance the Cardinals would take McMahon at, say, $5M next season,” Axisa wrote.
The $5 million is his hypothetical price, not a Cardinals offer. Nothing in that suggestion establishes negotiations between the clubs. It does give the Yankees a more realistic outcome to investigate than demanding somebody rescue the entire investment.
Yankees third baseman Ryan McMahon throwing against Arizona in September 2026
September 2026 Yankees archive; trade proposal, not a completed Cardinals move. Sep 19, 2026; Phoenix, Arizona, USA; New York Yankees third baseman Ryan McMahon (19) throws the ball to first during the sixth inning against the Arizona Diamondbacks at Chase Field. Mandatory Credit: Arianna Grainey-Imagn Images Credit: IMAGN IMAGES via Reuters Connect
The Yankees would still be paying for the mistake
McMahon is owed $16 million in 2027, the final year of his contract. Under Axisa’s example, the Yankees would retain $11 million while St. Louis took responsibility for $5 million. New York would transfer $5 million of the obligation, not wipe $16 million off its books.
That distinction matters when judging the next move. Paying $11 million for McMahon to play elsewhere might be tolerable. Paying that amount and then spending heavily on a replacement who barely improves the position would be much harder to defend. The trade and the replacement have to be evaluated together.
McMahon hit .213/.279/.357 with 11 homers this season. He struck out 106 times in 360 plate appearances, a 29.4% rate. The Yankees have enough evidence to question whether another year of the same assignment is their best use of the position.
I wouldn’t let a disappointing prospect return kill a deal that otherwise makes sense. If a buyer assumes real money without requiring New York to surrender a useful young player, the savings can be the meaningful return. The Yankees shouldn’t need a recognizable name coming back to make the transaction look better.
A cheaper McMahon still needs a willing buyer
For the Cardinals, the appeal would be trying McMahon for one season at a much lower cost than his current salary. They would still have to believe his bat can recover enough to justify the roster spot. Paying him less doesn’t fix the strikeouts, and another front office may prefer its own alternatives.
My limit would be attaching a worthwhile prospect just to move the money. I’d rather keep McMahon in a reduced or competitive role than sacrifice longer-term talent simply to make an expensive departure possible. Nor would I treat Axisa’s $5 million example as an established market value.
Explore the subsidized trade before deciding on a release. But before accepting one, the Yankees should be able to explain who gets the third-base at-bats, why that player improves the offense and what the entire change will cost. Saving part of McMahon’s salary only helps if they use the opening well.