Analyzing the major trades

Printable View

07-31-2017, 03:49 PM
Enscheff

Analyzing the major deadline trades

Gray for Dustin Fowler, Jorge Mateo and James Kaprielian

Gray with a calculated surplus value of $60M-$65M.

Preseason, Fowler (FV 50, $20M), Mateo (FV 50, $20M) and Kap (FV 55, $22M) totaled $62M.

Based on preseason values, this trade is almost spot on from a surplus value standpoint. Of course, a lot has happened since the preseason...Fowler's knee and Kap's elbow both exploded.

How much does those injuries hurt the value of those player's? Hard to calculate, but we know the A's tend to over value guys who are nearly MLB-ready. It's stands to reason the A's but a premium on being MLB-ready that almosat equals the discount applied to guys being injured, resulting in a wash value-wise.

Darvish for Willie Calhoun, A.J. Alexy and Brendon Davis

Darvish with a calculated surplus value of ~$25M.

Calhoun (FV 50, $20M) plus the 2 filler guys total $25M+.

Based on surplus values, this trade is almost exactly spot on.

Calhoun was a guy many people were saying has no defensive position at the MLB level...basically a mini-Schwarber. The Dodgers were wise to trade him to the AL rather than do what the Cubs did with Schwarber, who has now lost the majority of his trade value.

Avila and Wilson for Jeimer Candelario and Isaac Paredes

Avila is projected to produce ~0.5 wins or less in a backup role at a cost of $700k, and has a surplus value in the range of $5M-$10M.

Wilson is projected to produce about 1 win this year at a cost of $900k, for a surplus value of ~$19M. Assuming he is a 1-1.5 WAR guy next year, and earns a final arb salary of $5M, he has a 2018 surplus value of $5M-$10M. Total surplus value of $24M-$29M.

Total surplus value of Avila and Wilson is in the range of $30M+.

Candelario (FV 50, $20M) and Paredes (FV 40, ~$5M), plus a cash or a PTBNL totals ~$25M+ (depending on thePTBNL or cash amount).

Based on surplus value, this trade appears to be almost perfectly even.
07-31-2017, 04:17 PM
msstate7

Pretty good break down.

Can you give me the surplus value of Adams with an ops of .865 on august 1st? Lol
07-31-2017, 04:17 PM
Freshmaker

Yep good trades all. I wish the Braves had moved a few vets out, I guess there weren't a lot of offers
07-31-2017, 04:22 PM
Enscheff

Quote:

Originally Posted by msstate7

Pretty good break down.

Can you give me the surplus value of Adams with an ops of .865 on august 1st? Lol

A 1-1.5 WAR per year platoon bat at 1B who will be paid $4M-$5M in 2018 is worth about a FV 40 prospect.

Someone like Juan Yepez.
07-31-2017, 04:24 PM
msstate7

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enscheff

A 1-1.5 WAR per year platoon bat at 1B who will be paid $4M-$5M in 2018 is worth about a FV 40 prospect.

Someone like Juan Yepez.

Nice
07-31-2017, 05:02 PM
SJ24

Good stuff.

Enscheff, where are you getting your $ amount?

The article you linked me (the point of pittsburgh) suggests a pitcher ranked from 26-50 (Kaprielian is ranked 43) would have a surplus value of $29.8 million.

I assume this is on Fangraphs somewhere?
07-31-2017, 06:45 PM
50PoundHead

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freshmaker

Yep good trades all. I wish the Braves had moved a few vets out, I guess there weren't a lot of offers

I think we have to face the fact that the guys we would try to move were all a tier lower than the front-line guys that were traded (Darvish, Quintana, Gray, Reed, Watson). If those trades hadn't gone down, the teams in pursuit of pitching might have inquired about our guys. Thought maybe the Royals would have preferred someone like Markakis to Cabrera, but Cabrera is a pure rental and Markakis has that darn extra year on his contract that has come back to haunt us again.
08-01-2017, 08:01 AM
thewupk

Quote:

Originally Posted by SJ24

Good stuff.

Enscheff, where are you getting your $ amount?

The article you linked me (the point of pittsburgh) suggests a pitcher ranked from 26-50 (Kaprielian is ranked 43) would have a surplus value of $29.8 million.

I assume this is on Fangraphs somewhere?

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valui...100-prospects/

The article you were looking at is for 2016 values. The one on fangraphs was the updated one for 2017. The guys from point of pittsburgh worked with fangraphs to rework it. Instead of where they are ranked on baseball america they are now valued on the type of FV prospect they are. Because obviously not all 1-10 prospects are created equally and the updated list now reflects this.
08-01-2017, 09:16 AM
SJ24

Quote:

Originally Posted by thewupk

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valui...100-prospects/

The article you were looking at is for 2016 values. The one on fangraphs was the updated one for 2017. The guys from point of pittsburgh worked with fangraphs to rework it. Instead of where they are ranked on baseball america they are now valued on the type of FV prospect they are. Because obviously not all 1-10 prospects are created equally and the updated list now reflects this.

Thank you!

So- another question: what about the guys who just missed the top 100 cut? Surely they aren't lumping all non-top 100 prospects together, are they?
08-01-2017, 09:46 AM
Super

Quote:

Originally Posted by SJ24

Thank you!

So- another question: what about the guys who just missed the top 100 cut? Surely they aren't lumping all non-top 100 prospects together, are they?

FWIW one of the prospect writers said basically everyone between 75 and 100 is basically the same.
08-01-2017, 10:59 AM
Enscheff

Quote:

Originally Posted by thewupk

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valui...100-prospects/

The article you were looking at is for 2016 values. The one on fangraphs was the updated one for 2017. The guys from point of pittsburgh worked with fangraphs to rework it. Instead of where they are ranked on baseball america they are now valued on the type of FV prospect they are. Because obviously not all 1-10 prospects are created equally and the updated list now reflects this.

I like this method much better than valuing by ranking, though I still don't like the fact that it is claiming the worst 55 prospect is worth almost 2x as much as the best 50 prospect.

I am going to attempt to make smoother curve based on the number of players at each FV rank, rather than this step function with buckets that are too large (in my opinion).
08-01-2017, 11:01 AM
Enscheff

Quote:

Originally Posted by SJ24

Thank you!

So- another question: what about the guys who just missed the top 100 cut? Surely they aren't lumping all non-top 100 prospects together, are they?

The table gives values all the way down to FV 45. I usually assume FV 40 guys are worth ~5M, and anyone rated lower than that is essentially zero (when compared to players worth ten of millions).

Those values can be used to assign value to every player appearing in a team's prospect list.