Braves Trade Heyward, Walden to Cardinals for Miller and Tyrell Jenkins

nsacpi said:
I think there is some upside from Miller and Jenkins as you describe. The most likely outcome however is that Miller is a 2-2.5 WAR pitcher per year while with us and that Jenkins does not pan out. In that scenario we get a surplus (Miller's output minus his salary) of 5 WAR. The Cardinals get Heyward's surplus this year of about 3 WAR (he is being paid as a 1.5 WAR player and I'm expecting him to be a 4.5 WAR player) plus a surplus of about 1 WAR from Walden over his two years of contractual control, plus the value of a the draft pick which from the various studies I've looked at is worth about 2 WAR. So the Cardinals net 6 and we net 5 WAR. Those are obviously my estimates. Other people will have a different view.

There are two other aspects to this. One is upside and downside relative to the point estimates. I think our end of the deal has more of both because of the longer period we have the players under contractual control. The other is the discount factor. Most of the surplus for the Cards will accrue in 2015. Ours is more spread out over the future, so you want to discount that to some extent.

Bottom line is that this trade is more favorable for the Cardinals.

I like doing this kind of analysis because it takes the emotion out of it. Heyward has been my favorite Brave the past few years. I can see his flaws as a player as well as his strengths. But I liked the way he played and how much he cared. I tried not to let that enter into the assessment above. As I noted, other people could reasonably reach different conclusions about the appropriate valuations of the players involved as well as the draft pick. It isn't a slam dunk for the Cards, but chances are it will work out better for them.

Oh one more thing. If you think there was any significant probability that Heyward would have agreed to a below market deal to stay in Atlanta the trade becomes much worse from our perspective.
Click to expand...

If you believe what Bill James has said recently then WAR is not a reliable metric to use at this point in time. Any analysis that leverages this information would seem to be unreliable.
 
thethe said:
If you believe what Bill James has said recently then WAR is not a reliable metric to use at this point in time. Any analysis that leverages this information would seem to be unreliable.
Click to expand...

I understand the various criticisms. It is sort of what Winston Churchill said about democracy "the worst form of government except for all the alternatives."

Having said that I'm all ears for alternative ways of assessing the trade.
 
nsacpi said:
I understand the various criticisms. It is sort of what Winston Churchill said about democracy "the worst form of government except for all the alternatives."

Having said that I'm all ears for alternative ways of assessing the trade.
Click to expand...

this might be the most difficult trade to assess in braves history. way too much up in the air. does heyward sign with the cards? is miller a good pitcher or is he falling off? will the minor leaguer turn out to be something? and of course, are these new and improved outfield metrics legit? if defense is being overvalued, then heyward is the most overrated player ever while becoming a free agent at just the right time.

2 years ago WAR basically had Mike Trout about to beat out a triple crown winner in one of the great offensive season's in generations for the MVP. now it's in question? i really don't blame the braves for taking a step back from the great heyward defense hysteria at this time. if you believe teams will reevaluate how they run their organizations with more emphasis and money going toward hitting, then how can you also justify paying heyward the mega bucks? if the trend is for pitching to get better and better, then doesn't that at the same time start to devalue defense along the way? the trends tell me that paying heyward elite money for his defense just doesn't make sense, even if his awesome defensive metrics are legit. obviously if he starts to hit like people think he might that changes things, but five years later we're still waiting for that to happen.
 
chipchildress said:
this might be the most difficult trade to assess in braves history. way too much up in the air. does heyward sign with the cards? is miller a good pitcher or is he falling off? will the minor leaguer turn out to be something? and of course, are these new and improved outfield metrics legit? if defense is being overvalued, then heyward is the most overrated player ever while becoming a free agent at just the right time.

2 years ago WAR basically had Mike Trout about to beat out a triple crown winner in one of the great offensive season's in generations for the MVP. now it's in question? i really don't blame the braves for taking a step back from the great heyward defense hysteria at this time. if you believe teams will reevaluate how they run their organizations with more emphasis and money going toward hitting, then how can you also justify paying heyward the mega bucks? if the trend is for pitching to get better and better, then doesn't that at the same time start to devalue defense along the way? the trends tell me that paying heyward elite money for his defense just doesn't make sense, even if his awesome defensive metrics are legit. obviously if he starts to hit like people think he might that changes things, but five years later we're still waiting for that to happen.
Click to expand...

I think it does make sense to discount the WAR numbers of players with a disproportionate amount of their value tied to their defensive metrics. The question is how much. What I did with Heyward was value him as a 4.5 WAR player, though he has been over 5 in two of his part three seasons, and over 6 in one of them.
 
i just can't help but wonder, however, if as more and more good pitching comes on the scene and more and more analysis is used to position the defense and so on, isn't it the natural course of progression that the elite defensive player will have his value fall a bit along the way? shouldn't defensive positioning and whatever else is going into the surge of pitching dominance close the gap between the average defensive player and the elite one?

maybe heyward saves 5 runs a month this year. next year he's just as good but that might only be 4 runs as teams figure out better ways to position their fielders and how to pitch and so on. just a theory, but that does seem like the trend, no?

which means we'll be right back to looking at 30 home run guys as super studs in no time. the guy on espn that said gattis would be your typically overrated 30 home run guy seems pretty arrogant and short sighted to me. i mean, if he's the worst defensive player in the league which he could be, then maybe. then again, if the braves are giving the guy better and better chances to make plays then they ever could have given ryan klesko, then maybe not...
 
chipchildress said:
i just can't help but wonder, however, if as more and more good pitching comes on the scene and more and more analysis is used to position the defense and so on, isn't it the natural course of progression that the elite defensive player will have his value fall a bit along the way? if defensive positioning and whatever else is going into the surge of pitching dominance, doesn't that close the gap between the average defensive player and the elite one?

maybe heyward saves 5 runs a month this year. next year he's just as good but that might only be 4 runs as teams figure out better ways to position their fielders and how to pitch and so on. just a theory, but that does seem like the trend, no?

which means we'll be right back to looking at 30 home run guys as super studs in no time. the guy on espn that said gattis would be your typical overrated 30 home run guy seems pretty arrogant and short sighted to me. i mean, if he's the worst defensive player in the league which he could be, then maybe. then again, if the braves are giving the guy better and better chances to make plays then they ever could have given ryan klesko, then maybe not...
Click to expand...

I think shifts are a bigger issue for valuing infield defense. Less so for outfield. A big chunk of Heyward's defensive value was the number of potential doubles that he cut off and held the hitter to a single or in some cases turned into outs. An interesting wrinkle is that a defender's value is somewhat tied to what kind of pitching staff you have. A high K staff will devalue defense in general. A high groundball staff will boost the value of good infield defense, a fly ball staff will do the same for the outfield. It is no accident that Simmons numbers on defense dropped off when Hudson and Medlen were replaced by Harang and Santana and that Heyward's numbers went up. One of the subtleties involved in building a team efficiently is to make your defensive strengths complement your pitching staff. For what its worth, Shelby Miller is an extreme fly ball pitcher. It should be interesting with Gattis out there.

Teheran and Minor are also extreme fly ball pitchers. Wood is the only one who is a ground ball pitcher. So it would appear that our defense is not going to be well matched with our staff.
 
NYCBrave said:
People are emotional right now, I totally get it. For many, their favorite player was traded away and it doesn't make sense. The comments in the media by Jason and Hart don't make it easier to swallow.

I still remember how I felt when Justice and Grissom were traded away, that one sure hurt.
Click to expand...

Not hijacking, but that deal and Millwood-for-Estrada were far worse than this one (even though Estrada turned out to be better than originally anticipated).

I'll probably leave this thread alone after this post because nothing is going to be solved here. I was on record as wanting to keep Heyward and trade J. Upton (if one was going to be traded) because I think Heyward's all-around game is better and I thought (and still think) that the return on J. Upton would be better.

Heyward is a very good player (I think Rob Neyer's characterization of Jason as an "outstanding" player goes a shade and a half too far) who is brimming with tools. Absolutely stellar defensively. Whether it's the changing nature of the game in overall terms of offensive erosion or just Heyward, his offensive game hasn't come together the way many of us had hoped it would given his stellar rookie and third seasons. The beaning probably contributed as well, but the dramatic fall-off in his power numbers is troubling. Maybe he turns that around.

This reminds me a lot about discussions we used to have about Andruw Jones. Jones had some flaws in his offensive game, but whenever they were mentioned, those making the criticism--however slight--were told they were basically out of their minds and that Andruw should just be accepted for who he was as a player. It was all "take it or leave it." I feel the same way here (except that Andruw was a more proven player than Heyward). Heyward needs to successfully make some adjustments if he is going to reach his full potential. That can be said for almost every player, but in Jason's case, successful adjustments would take him from above average to truly great. I am not insinuating that Heyward is too stubborn to consider making adjustments or that the Braves' hitting coaches have been misunderstood geniuses. I just think when you're Jason Heyward and your isoSLG is lower than Gregor Blanco's (.114 to .113), something's not quite right with your game (and no, I'm not equating Heyward to Blanco). Seasons vary and Heyward's power was down markedly this year, but is the power slide from his stellar 2012 a real and lasting trend or something that can be fixed?

Good luck to Heyward. I don't know if the Cards sign him long-term or not. My guess is that unless he's blown away by an offer, he will test free agency, especially given the size of the Stanton contract. That contract is going to seriously change the economics of baseball.

We'll see how it shakes out.

PS--For those who believe we are close to contending and that 2014 was the aberration, what if 2013 was the aberration instead? Given the holes in the rotation we had (and perhaps still have to some extent) coming into the off-season and the likely continued presence of M. Upton and C. Johnson in our line-up in 2015 (compounded by a tight budget), what are/were the realistic chances that a return to 2013's level of performance is/was likely?
 
nsacpi said:
I think shifts are a bigger issue for valuing infield defense. Less so for outfield. A big chunk of Heyward's defensive value was the number of potential doubles that he cut off and held the hitter to a single or in some cases turned into outs. An interesting wrinkle is that a defender's value is somewhat tied to what kind of pitching staff you have. A high K staff will devalue defense in general. A high groundball staff will boost the value of good infield defense, a fly ball staff will do the same for the outfield. It is no accident that Simmons numbers on defense dropped off when Hudson and Medlen were replaced by Harang and Santana and that Heyward's numbers went up. One of the subtleties involved in building a team efficiently is to make your defensive strengths complement your pitching staff. For what its worth, Shelby Miller is an extreme fly ball pitcher. It should be interesting with Gattis out there.

Teheran and Minor are also extreme fly ball pitchers. Wood is the only one who is a ground ball pitcher. So it would appear that our defense is not going to be well matched with our staff.
Click to expand...

these are interesting points regarding matching up pitching staff tendencies and outfield defense. with the higher turnover rates with pitchers, though, it's probably pretty difficult or at least dangerous to try to match the two up in the long term. i still can't help but wonder if we're not going to see more and more extreme outfield positioning going forward though which i think will change some of the thinking about elite defense along the way.

in a similarly related thought, i guess the tony gwynn types of the world will see their values start to come back up since they'll be the guys that you can't shift on. a few years ago they were thought of as weak OPS guys and batting average was just a trick of the eye. so with that said, i'd be looking for as many singles hitters that use all fields as possible right now! those doubles guys are going to be seeing fewer and fewer of those fall in or get by. also, the home run hitter like a gattis will be more and more valuable since there's no cutting those balls off.

in short, we're going back to singles, walks, and home runs paired with good pitching. the braves way, right? my guess is that that's the formula going forward. and the cycle will be complete.
 
With Simmons apparently part of our long-term plan and Heyward gone, it would make sense to build a more ground ball oriented staff. From this point of view Wood is a keeper. Hale btw is a ground ball pitcher. Lester to some extent. One more wrinkle to consider.
 
jpx7 said:
#BravesWay
Click to expand...

51h%2BKzSX7kL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
 
My problem is not trading Heyward away. I actually agree with many here that we had at best a 50/50 chance to resign him. It's that we traded him to the Cardinals first because I really don't like them (Drew trade anyone), and most importantly I think there was no need to include Walden. We could have saved him for another trade. Heyward for Miller and Jenkins. And if STL demanded Walden I would have asked for Kong for example. Heyward had too much value and the deal we got could have been better.

I was actually thinking of these deals:
1) Upton brothers and Minor for Walker and Jackson.
2) Gattis, Walden and 2 prospect to TB for Myers.
 
nsacpi said:
I understand the various criticisms. It is sort of what Winston Churchill said about democracy "the worst form of government except for all the alternatives."

Having said that I'm all ears for alternative ways of assessing the trade.
Click to expand...

Well, you can't really do it with a single currency, which is what I know you're trying to do. I feel like you can assess all the elements of the deal the way you did except for the valuation of Heyward's defense. I would agree that Heyward is the best defensive right fielder in baseball. I think that's prolly worth one of them WAR thingys a year above his offensive value.

As an aside, I am glad that the granddaddy of them all, Bill James, has come out against WAR in its current form. Too many people used it as gospel and were unwilling to discount the defensive side of the number, as I suggest.

So if you add one WAR to his offensive value, you get 3.8. That seems about right to me. What is it now, $5m per WAR? So $18-19m. That's about right, as long as there's not a premium for potential.
 
Twilo73 said:
My problem is not trading Heyward away. I actually agree with many here that we had at best a 50/50 chance to resign him. It's that we traded him to the Cardinals first because I really don't like them (Drew trade anyone), and most importantly I think there was no need to include Walden. We could have saved him for another trade. Heyward for Miller and Jenkins. And if STL demanded Walden I would have asked for Kong for example. Heyward had too much value and the deal we got could have been better.

I was actually thinking of these deals:
1) Upton brothers and Minor for Walker and Jackson.
2) Gattis, Walden and 2 prospect to TB for Myers.
Click to expand...

I like the first deal. My desire to keep the good Upton is superseded by my desire to lose the ****ty Upton.

Incidentally, I live in Seattle, and if the Braves deal Upton up here for a young stud pitcher, the one to get is Paxton. 96, full command, lefthanded, good secondary stuff. Telling you, this guy is no joke.
 
nsacpi said:
With Simmons apparently part of our long-term plan and Heyward gone, it would make sense to build a more ground ball oriented staff. From this point of view Wood is a keeper. Hale btw is a ground ball pitcher. Lester to some extent. One more wrinkle to consider.
Click to expand...

Interesting thought. Peraza helps, right? And I like Freeman regardless of what the metrics say. Really, the only one who's not trending towards ground balls or a ground ball pitcher is Teheran. And he's just an anomaly. I wouldn't build any differently because of him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top