Around the League: 2017 offseason edition / 2018 Season

Enscheff said:
$19M over 3 guaranteed years when they will be paying him $3M this year. That’s $16M over 2 years (one of which was going to be a cheaper arb year anyways) when Reed just signed for 2/17.

I don’t see any surplus value added with his deal. They took on all the risk of guaranteeing 3 years for a BP arm in exchange for not having to give him 4 years.

This is a move made by a team that thinks they are ready to compete.
Click to expand...

There is also an option which gives the team a chance to realize some additional value while limiting the downside. You may be right about the pricing for the third year being such that it does not increase expected surplus value. But at the same time it doesn't decrease it. It is pretty close to fair value. Where you have an increase is in the value derived from the option. We had a similar disagreement on the extension that the Brewers gave to Chase Anderson.
 
I'll give a highly stylized way of looking at these options to provide an idea of what they are worth. Suppose you have a player who has three expected outcomes worth 0 WAR, 2 WAR and 4 WAR, with equal probability. The expected value of having control of that player is 2 WAR. But if you have an option that allows you to eliminate the 0 WAR outcome, the expected value is 3 WAR. So that option increases the expected value by 1 WAR.

Of course, this is a highly simplified way of looking at how an option might be valued. But it gets at some of the issues involved.
 
nsacpi said:
There is also an option which gives the team a chance to realize some additional value while limiting the downside. You may be right about the pricing for the third year being such that it does not increase expected surplus value. But at the same time it doesn't decrease it. It is pretty close to fair value. Where you have an increase is in the value derived from the option. We had a similar disagreement on the extension that the Brewers gave to Chase Anderson.
Click to expand...

All of Hand’s trade value was tied into his 2 cheap arb seasons, and the flexibility to cut him loose if he got hurt or became ineffective, as BP arms are liable to do.

A large portion of that trade value is now gone, therefore his trade value decreased. It didn’t decrease a lot, but this was clearly not a move made to increase his trade value.

It is a perfectly defensible move for a contender to make. Whether or not the Padres qualify is open for debate, but I don’t consider them particularly close to playoff contention.

When the Padres are likely to contend they will have used up the most valuable years of Hand’s career on losing teams. That is not the way to maximize a player’s value.

We saw the Braves do the same thing with Teheran. Some folks saw it happening as it happened, and the rest had to wait until now to realize why it was dumb to keep Teheran. In 2-3 years folks will similarly realize it was dumb for the Padres to keep and extend Hand.
 
Enscheff said:
All of Hand’s trade value was tied into his 2 cheap arb seasons, and the flexibility to cut him loose if he got hurt or became ineffective, as BP arms are liable to do.

A large portion of that trade value is now gone, therefore his trade value decreased. It didn’t decrease a lot, but this was clearly not a move made to increase his trade value.

It is a perfectly defensible move for a contender to make. Whether or not the Padres qualify is open for debate, but I don’t consider them particularly close to playoff contention.

When the Padres are likely to contend they will have used up the most valuable years of Hand’s career on losing teams. That is not the way to maximize a player’s value.

We saw the Braves do the same thing with Teheran. Some folks saw it happening as it happened, and the rest had to wait until now to realize why it was dumb to keep Teheran. In 2-3 years folks will similarly realize it was dumb for the Padres to keep and extend Hand.
Click to expand...

Giving up the optionality that is inherent in the arb process does cost some. Although I would still argue overall the deal increases the amount of expected value, in part because in my view the contract that Wade Davis signed might represent a better comparable than what Addison Reed signed for. Hand is projected to have a lower FIP than Davis.
 
nsacpi said:
Giving up the optionality that is inherent in the arb process does cost some. Although I would still argue overall the deal increases the amount of expected value, in part because in my view the contract that Wade Davis signed might represent a better comparable than what Addison Reed signed for. Hand is projected to have a lower FIP than Davis.
Click to expand...

I think the point is the Padres signed Hand to the extension to contribute to the Padres, not to turn around and trade him. They are going to use at least his most valuable season (this upcoming season) on a losing team.

After that point his trade value will be much lower than it is now.

This is a poor use of resources, and it will be glaringly obvious in 2-3 years...just like it is now with Teheran.
 
Enscheff said:
I think the point is the Padres signed Hand to the extension to contribute to the Padres, not to turn around and trade him. They are going to use at least his most valuable season (this upcoming season) on a losing team.

After that point his trade value will be much lower than it is now.

This is a poor use of resources, and it will be glaringly obvious in 2-3 years...just like it is now with Teheran.
Click to expand...

Nothing precludes them from trading Hand at the trade deadline.
 
nsacpi said:
Nothing precludes them from trading Hand at the trade deadline.
Click to expand...

And you think he will be more valuable then with his new guaranteed contract and his most valuable regular season wasted than he was 24 hours ago?

That’s silly to suggest.
 
Enscheff said:
And you think he will be more valuable then with his new guaranteed contract and his most valuable regular season wasted than he was 24 hours ago?

That’s silly to suggest.
Click to expand...

To answer your question, yeah I think his value is added given the terms of the extension.
 
Cole to Astros. Pirates only get Musgrove and Moran.

Looks like the Astros have won the deal, but I'll wait until I see Enscheff's numbers before I solidify that statement.
 
WaitingFor2017 said:
Cole to Astros. Pirates only get Musgrove and Moran.

Looks like the Astros have won the deal, but I'll wait until I see Enscheff's numbers before I solidify that statement.
Click to expand...

To me, this deal is dependent on Musgrove becoming a viable #2/#3 SP for Pitt to have gained fair value. Not high on Moran.
 
Once you get to the last 2 pre arb seasons there ain't that much expected surplus value left for guys like Cole and Ozuna. Although in both cases you need to factor in that they will get you a draft pick once they hit free agency.
 
I don't think it helps a ton, but I still think that Hand now has a little more trade value. I think teams nowadays would view his extra year(s) of control as an asset, rather than viewing it as a risk. It only takes him through his age 30 season with the option. I think its reasonable to assume that his production stays good enough to justify the dollar amount. This is just my perception of the extension plus the idea of trading him. If there is some data that suggests otherwise I am open to it.

But ultimately I think Enscheff is mostly right in the sense that the Padres aren't planning on trading him. And him being a Padre for the next 4 years at that dollar amount is pretty silly, given where they are at.
 
Wonder how much it's for. Probably the minimum, but if they pay him anything over that, we save some money.

The Mets and free agent first baseman Adrian Gonzalez have agreed upon a deal, pending a physical, according to USA Today's Bob Nightengale.



No word on the terms, but it'll likely be a short deal with not a lot of money guaranteed. Gonzalez can afford to take less money for a better situation since he's still being paid $22.357 million by the Braves for 2018. For the Mets, the 35-year-old will be a mentor for first baseman of the future Dominic Smith.
 
NYCBrave said:
Wonder how much it's for. Probably the minimum, but if they pay him anything over that, we save some money.

The Mets and free agent first baseman Adrian Gonzalez have agreed upon a deal, pending a physical, according to USA Today's Bob Nightengale.

No word on the terms, but it'll likely be a short deal with not a lot of money guaranteed. Gonzalez can afford to take less money for a better situation since he's still being paid $22.357 million by the Braves for 2018. For the Mets, the 35-year-old will be a mentor for first baseman of the future Dominic Smith.
Click to expand...

Had to be the friggin Mutts. We’re paying him over $20 million to play for the Mutts. Ugh!!
 
Jay212033 said:
The Giants have taken a GIANT step forward this offseason if this trade goes through! Cutch and Longoria WOW!!!
Click to expand...

A few years ago that would have been huge, but both of them now are on the backside of their career. I expect them to be decent, but not what they used to be. And Cutch is a FA after the season right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top