2015 Trade Value: #50 – #41
With the introduction out of the way, let’s get into the list. We’ll do 10 guys per day, wrapping up with the top 10 on Friday. Today, we’ll start with the bubble guys who made the cut, but keep in mind, the gap between players in this tier is quite small, and you could reasonably argue to rearrange them in just about any order you wanted. And a good number of the guys who missed the cut are very similar in value to these 10, so don’t get too worked up over a guy appearing in this group versus another guy who was an honorable mention. These guys are all very good, but this is the part of the list where the actual ranking matters the least.
In addition to the player’s biographical information, I’ve added a summary of his contract situation, and as a new feature this year, Dan Szymborski has provided me with five year ZIPS forecasts for all of the players on the list, which I’ve listed along with their 2016 projection. Of course, not every player listed is under control for the next five years — some are locked up well beyond that time frame — but this should offer you a pretty decent view of what a player is expected to do both in the short-term and the longer-term, according to Dan’s forecasting system.
For the contract details, I’m only displaying future obligations beginning with their 2016 salary. I’ve tried to ensure that these are as accurate as can be, but they were also collected manually, so there probably will be some mistakes; there are plenty of weird clauses and options that make aggregating all this information particularly annoying. Also, we’re not including things like All-Star bonuses or incentive escalators, as this is intended to give more of a big picture view than be a precise accounting of the exact cost of a future player. A few hundred thousand here and there won’t change the rankings.
Also, keep in mind that some players have contracts that give them a guaranteed minimum, but they are also able to opt-into arbitration when they are eligible. This is pretty common now with prominent international signings, and so some of these guys will probably earn more than their contracts currently call for, but I’ve still just included the guaranteed minimum in the future salary commitment because we don’t know for sure that they’re going to opt into arbitration yet.
Finally, we’ve also included a nifty little graphic at the bottom that visualizes a lot of the information contained below, so if you want to see the projections and contract status for everyone together, you can get a summary of that at the bottom. The chart goes out five years, so some players have additional value beyond what’s displayed, but it should give you a good overview of what each player offers going forward.
Alright, on to the list.
#50: Jorge Soler, OF, Chicago
Controlled Through: 2020
Guaranteed Dollars: $18 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +2.4
Five year ZIPS WAR: +12.6
Last Year: Unranked
Soler’s first season as the Cubs starting right fielder hasn’t gone that well, with injuries and a surprisingly low power output limiting him to more potential than performance. But Soler remains one of the most intriguing young power hitters in the game, and a few hundred poor at-bats doesn’t wipe away the tools and the minor league performance. He’s still just 23, and while his contact problems might keep him from ever becoming an elite player, he looks like a quality above average regular for the foreseeable future. And he possesses the skillset that teams will overpay to acquire, as young middle-of-the-order hitters are just not really available on the market anymore.
Soler is one of the guys who can opt into arbitration, so he will probably make more than $18 million over the next five seasons, but even with a couple of arbitration raises, he’s still going to be a significant bargain. The Cubs have a ton of premium pieces, so it’s easy to overlook Soler in the crowd, but he’d be the best young talent on most clubs in baseball.
#49: Joe Panik, 2B, San Francicso
Controlled Through: 2020
Guaranteed Dollars: None
2016 ZIPS WAR: +2.7
Five year ZIPS WAR: +14.5
Last Year: Unranked
Perhaps the player least like Soler in all of baseball, Panik is a low-tools guy who has simply forced his way onto this list with a remarkable performance since getting to the big leagues. With elite contact rates and a steady stream of line drives, Panik has been a +5 WAR player in his first 158 games in the majors, and while there remains reasons to be skeptical that he can sustain his 2015 power spike, he doesn’t need to in order to remain a quality asset. An underpowered Panik still does enough to be an above average second baseman, and if he does keep running an ISO close to .150, he’s Matt Carpenter 2.0.
With two more pre-arb years and three arbitration years — and a skillset that won’t rack up huge arbitration paychecks even when he gets there — Panik is create a ton of value for the Giants over the next five seasons. Hitting on guys like this is why the Giants keep winning, and while Panik might have the lowest ceiling of any guy on this list, he’s a high-floor guy at a very low cost, and he’s in the midst of forcing everyone to re-evaluate what his ceiling might actually be.
#48: Jonathan Lucroy, C, Milwaukee
Controlled Through: 2017
Guaranteed Dollars: $9.25 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +4.3
Five year ZIPS WAR: +18.2
Last Year: #14
A year ago, Lucroy was one of the most valuable trade chips in the game, but with a contract that is getting closer to expiration and a lack of power even after returning from the disabled list, he’s not quite the trade chip he was 12 months ago. Lucroy remains one of the best catchers in the game — and if you give him full credit for the estimates of his framing value, he’s probably more valuable than the projections suggest — and is signed to a ridiculously cheap contract, but it covers just two more seasons, and his current performance would cause some potential suitors to take a bit of a pause before putting a massive offer on the table.
But even with his current struggles, Lucroy is about as valuable as anyone with two years of team control remaining gets. There’s only one other potential 2017 free agent on the list (and you’ll see him very soon), so the slide from last year’s ranking is mostly about the fact that 1/3 of his contract has been consumed since this list was published last summer. He remains a highly valuable asset, but his value is only diminishing as he gets closer and closer to the free agent market.
#47: Carlos Martinez, SP, St. Louis
Controlled Through: 2019
Guaranteed Dollars: None
2016 ZIPS WAR: +2.9
Five year ZIPS WAR: +17.3
Last Year: Unranked
After an uninspiring performance in the bullpen, based largely on some real problems against left-handed hitters, I was among many skeptics who didn’t think Martinez was going to turn into a high-quality starter. Upon taking on the larger workload, however, he’s raised his strikeout and groundball rates while figuring out how to get lefties out, and now looks like one of the better young starters in all of baseball. The command still needs work, and he needs to show he can sustain this over a full season, but the early returns are quite excellent, and the Cardinals look pretty shrewd for refusing to include him in a deal for a veteran over the winter.
His time in the bullpen means that he’s running lower on controllable years than a normal 23 year old starter, but the Cardinals still have his rights for one more pre-arbitration season and all three of his arb years. If he keeps this level of performance up, those arbitration years could get on the pricey side, but of course, St. Louis will happily pay him as long as he keeps pitching like he is now. Martinez’s success is one of the main reasons the team has kept winning even without Adam Wainwright, and he’s probably moved himself out of the trade chip category and squarely into the team’s core group to build around.
#46: Todd Frazier, 3B, Cincinnati
Controlled Through: 2017
Guaranteed Dollars: $7.5 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +4.6
Five year ZIPS WAR: +18.2
Last Year: Unranked
One of the breakout stars of 2015, Frazier’s first half power surge has turned him from a good player into one of the game’s premier sluggers. And considering that he doesn’t strike out that much for a power hitter and plays quality defense at third base, the overall value he provides makes him legitimately one of the best players in baseball.
But like Lucroy — the only other 2017 free agent on this list — the fact that the Reds would only be selling two years after this one somewhat limits his value. Even though he pre-sold his next arbitration year for $7.5 million (a regrettable move, in hindsight) so he’ll remain well priced even after this breakout, his final arbitration year will likely bring a significant paycheck, so there’s really only one crazy bargain season left before he starts to get expensive. And because Frazier came up as a bit of an older rookie, he’s already 29, so he’s not exactly a future building block anymore. He’s a present value play, and he has enough to generate a lot of interest, but the limited control years and age push him down further on this list than just his 2015 performance might suggest.
#45: Dallas Keuchel, SP, Houston
Controlled Through: 2018
Guaranteed Dollars: None
2016 ZIPS WAR: +3.8
Five year ZIPS WAR: +17.3
Last Year: Unranked
Keuchel’s maturation into a dominant starter has been something to behold, but given his performance since the start of last year, he’s clearly earned the #1 starter label. He’s essentially become a left-handed Brandon Webb, mixing an absurd groundball rate with solid walk and strikeout numbers, so while you might not ever look at his stuff and think he’s an ace, he’s certainly pitching like one.
But as a performance-over-tools guy, there’s always going to be a little bit of a discount compared to guys who were projected as stars based on their physical abilities. And with just his three arbitration years left after this season — the last couple of which aren’t going to be super cheap, given his 2015 breakout — Keuchel probably wouldn’t bring back the kind of return that his performance would merit. But I’m sure the Astros will be perfectly happy to just keep in Houston anyway.
#44: Jason Kipnis, 2B, Cleveland
Controlled Through: 2020
Guaranteed Dollars: $45.5 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +3.8
Five year ZIPS WAR: +17.7
Last Year: Unranked
Kipnis’ up-and-down career is currently at a peak, as he’s found his power stroke while cutting back down on his strikeouts in a remarkable first half, answering many of the questions raised by a poor 2014 performance. Once again, Kipnis looks like one of the best offensive middle infielders in the game.
And because the Indians locked him up a couple of years ago, he’s going to remain a bargain for the next few years, and even when his contract begins to escalate in price, the deal remains pretty friendly to the organization, as the 2020 season is a team option, giving additional upside without much risk. But Kipnis is also a 28 year old second baseman with questionable defensive skills, so by the end of his deal, he might be an underpowered corner outfielder. Given his age and skills, he’s probably better viewed as a medium-term asset than a long-term building block, but he offers a lot of present value at a low price, and if the Indians decided to put him on the block, there’d be a very long list of suitors.
#43: Yan Gomes, C, Cleveland
Controlled Through: 2021
Guaranteed Dollars: $22 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +3.9
Five year ZIPS WAR: +16.8
Last Year: #50
After a breakout season in 2014, Gomes missed the first couple months of 2015 with a knee injury suffered during sprain training, and hasn’t looked entirely healthy even since his return; the Indians certainly weren’t planning on him hitting .216/.234/.327 this year. So, like Lucroy, his 2015 performance is dragging down his value, but there are still plenty of reasons to think that he remains a well above average big league player, especially when his work behind the plate is factored in.
And his contract makes him a remarkable bargain even with the offensive struggles. He’s due just $20 million in salary over the next four years, then has two team options for another $20 million combined in years five and six; even if he’s nothing more than a part-time player by that point, he still might be worth $10 million a year, given baseball’s economy. For a team with a limited budget, Gomes is a highly valuable asset, providing on-field value at a very minimal cost, so even if he never gets back to his 2014 peak, he remains a very valuable part of the Indians future.
#42: Byron Buxton, OF, Minnesota
Controlled Through: 2021
Guaranteed Dollars: None
2016 ZIPS WAR: +2.7
Five year ZIPS WAR: +17.6
Last Year: #38
If Buxton could stay healthy, he’d likely be ranked significantly higher than this, as both scouts and ZIPS see a star in the making. But as the injuries continue to pile up, it’s becoming fair to question how the lost development time will affect him, and whether he’ll ever play enough to live up to the substantial hype. The tools are there for Buxton to be a high-level player, and any team looking to the future would love to have him for his upside alone. But he is also a very high risk asset, with more bust potential than just about anyone else you’ll find in this series.
But with six years of team control remaining, three of them at the league minimum, Buxton doesn’t have to be a star right away to justify his placement here. Even with an adjustment period, he offers substantial long-term rewards, and he’s close enough to providing real value in the big leagues that teams could justify paying through the nose to acquire him. It’s an extreme risk/reward play, but when the reward is this high, so is the price.
#41: Jose Quintana, SP, Chicago
Controlled Through: 2020
Guaranteed Dollars: $23.25 million
2016 ZIPS WAR: +4.0
Five year ZIPS WAR: +19.2
Last Year: #37
Quintana remains one of the more remarkable stories in baseball, as the White Sox signed him as a minor league free agent after the 2011 season, and then helped him develop into the game’s most consistent starters. Like Keuchel, this is performance-over-stuff, and he’ll never blow anyone away with what he throws, but we’re on year four of Major League hitters not being able to figure him out, so at this point, it’s pretty clear that he’s doing a lot of things right.
Unlike Keuchel, Quintana isn’t a frontline guy, and probably never will be; he’s maybe more akin to someone like Doug Fister. But there’s nothing wrong with steady, solid, above-average performances, and the extension Quintana signed last year means that he’s going to make heavily reduced salaries the next three years, plus the White Sox get team options on what would have been his first two free agent years. There isn’t necessarily star potential here, but he’s a very good pitcher at very good prices, and every team in baseball would love to have Quintana in their rotation.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

Great layout.
Top 40 maybe???!!??
How the FUCK does Yan Gomes have more value than Todd Frazier?
Years of control matters.
Not when one guy is hitting .220 and one guy is a fucking MVP candidate. Retard.
Just like you don’t have more value than your brothers Blackie and Red…
Johnny is right of course. I mean look at the batting average. Case is rested.
Los, the .234 OBP and 53 wRC+ matter as well. Gomes’ defensive contributions also appear to be suffering, while he turns 28 later this week. It’s hard to understand why he ranked #50 last year but somehow went up a few spots during this so-far disastrous campaign as a replacement level player.
The 16.8 WAR projection over the next five seasons appears wildly optimistic to me. Gomes’ breakout involved a likely unsustainable BABIP and because of the late start to his career, he’s already entering his decline phase. I cannot envision a realistic scenario in which he averages 3.36 WAR in his age 29 through age 33 seasons.
I’m actually not a Gomes fan. I don’t believe that he is a top 50 trade value. However, it is not because he is hitting .220. Knee injuries for catchers scare the hell out of me but what is more predictive? 150 PA this year or the 800 PA the last two years?
the author said: “the gap between players in this tier is quite small, and you could reasonably argue to REARRANGE THEM IN JUST ABOUT ANY ORDER YOU WANT.”
so, flip those rankings, and quite crying in your whiskey.
Frazier is projected for 8.7 WAR in the next two years, for maybe 15 million (assuming that the arbitrator is insane and goes with his current contract for his final year). Throw in a bit for this year and figure about 8 million per WAR you’d get a surplus value of less than 70 million.
A similar calculation for Gomes, even assuming he produces no value at all this year gives a surplus value of over $110 million. And there’s some additional value in the hedge against risk that much of his money is a team option for the final year.
Now, you may disagree with the projections, or with the assumed value of a WAR, or with the assumption that WAR is linear in cost/value, or you may think that a “win now” team will sell their entire system for Frazier regardless of the short contract duration, or you may think there’s something else wrong about these calculations. You might well be right about some or all of that.
I might even agree with some or all of that (note: I do, Frazier’s value is understated by this sort of calculation). I’d bet that Dave agrees that Frazier’s value is understated by that calculation.
But by the calculation I give, which isn’t totally unreasonable, the values aren’t even particularly close and Gomes is the more valuable piece. It’s not hard to see how Dave got them in the order he has them, he gives a very nice table at the end that gives most of the information you need to see why he concluded that.
Doug, the problem with your calculation is that the five year Gomes projection is insane. Accumulating 16.8 wins above replacement in Gomes’ age 29 through age 33 seasons isn’t remotely realistic.
These are good points ,Doug. But where I disagree is the fact that you seem to be equating projected surplus value with trade value. And those are not the same things. If the list was called “Most Valuable Contracts” in baseball, then Gomes would make more sense. But can you really see a team putting together a premier prospect package for Gomes? There are a lot of teams that have a better catcher already on the roster which would limit the market, anyway. Few teams have a better third baseman than Frazier, and even if they did, his bat plays anywhere and he can play all the corner positions.
Don’t want to give the wrong impression here; I love this series and look forward to it every year. It just seems like sometimes it’s more of a “best contracts” list rather than a “highest trade value” list.
Spot on, tct. You’re absolutely right that this is a “best contracts” list rather than a true “trade value” one.
BABIP isn’t a reason to write off hitters. Not on its own. Gomes’s BABIP, throughout the minors, has always been extremely high. BABIP has little predictability, not zero predictability.
Or in other words: it’s not just his 2014 this projection is based on.
Johnny is an a-hole, but Gomes is hitting worse than AJ this season, and that’s a problem. This seems like a crazy ranking.
I was wondering if Grandal had a shot to make the list with his breakout this season, but I can’t imagine him going higher than 40. And with that said, how is Gomes still this high? Whoah.
150 PAs isn’t a refutation. Gomes has been bad, certainly. But the 150 most recent PAs are meaningful only insofar as they are the 150 most meaningful. They do not completely negate the entirety of his MiLB career, plus 2013 and 2014.
As for my part, I don’t know to what degree to weight in-season PAs. I don’t think myself qualified at all to make that determination. Which is why I defer to Szymborski, he of ZiPS and the minuscule RMSE. Not to say that people in the comments have no ethos – MGL, for instance, posts here and has immense insight – but if one’s going to critique the in-season weighting of data, you need more than just an offhand ‘he’s hitting poorly.’ ZiPS has been tested. It is not perfect, but it has blown fans’ projections out of the water every time. That is the burden you must overcome to make this argument.
And hell, I want you to make it. Educated stuff in the comments is always fun.
Robert Hombre, the argument has already been made and concluded. For Yan Gomes to reach the ZiPS five year projection while incorporating the usual half win per season decline phase, we need to assume that as a 28-29 year old catcher in 2016 he will match his career high of 4.6 wins. Even if you start him at 4 wins in 2016, which would still be extremely optimistic, the decline phase leaves him 1.8 wins short of the five year projection.
Yan Gomes matching his production in 2013/2014 would mean resuming a BABIP north of .320 when he’s not young or fast, and prior to this season, didn’t hit an unusually high number of line drives. Sometimes a high BABIP is achieved by avoiding pop-ups, yet Gomes ranks 13th worst among catchers over the last three seasons in IFFB%, so it’s not that. You might think it’s a high percentage of hard hits, but Yan only ranks 16th at his position in that category during that time period. So on what basis would we expect a BABIP north of .320 when he isn’t fast, doesn’t hit an unusually high percentage of line drives, hits a higher than average percentage of infield fly-balls, and doesn’t have an unusually high number of hard hits?
He’s also not discerning at the plate, as his O-Swing of 36.7% ranks 9th worst among catchers. His Z-Swing minus O-Swing difference is only 30.1%, 5th worst among catchers, which matters because it indicates the ability to differentiate balls from strikes. I genuinely have no idea why ZiPS would project 16.8 wins above replacement for Yan Gomes in his age 29 through age 33 seasons, but the ZiPS system is producing numbers from a system for all major leaguers. We’re not. We’re looking individually at one player and asking whether or not that projection is the most likely outcome, and I have yet to see one single person say that they believe it will happen. This is one of those cases where we’re arguing pointlessly, because none of you even believe the side you’re supporting.
Yeah, years of control matter. But I think we sometimes over rate how much they matter. Are 6 years of a 2-3 win player more valuable than 3 years of a 4-5 win player? It’s hard to say cause there are a lot of other variables there. But my first instinct would be to take the better player.
In the Gomes/Frazier comparison, the extra years you would get from Gomes would be in his early thirties. Maybe he’s still productive, but maybe he breaks down like many catchers before him have done. Are those post peak years really valuable enough to off set the difference in present value between the two players?
I don’t really have a problem with the ranking, because I try not to get too worked up about subjective internet lists. But I think the Frazier/Gomes comparison is really interesting in terms of how much we value years of control. I certainly wouldn’t trade Frazier for Gomes, but I am much higher on Frazier than anyone at Fangraphs. He didn’t even make the list last year, while the guy he is very similar to, Josh Donaldson, made the top 20.
I always think about it this way
Player A: Projects to give you about 6 WAR over 6 years for a total of 6 million dollars.
Player B: Project to give 18 WAR over 6 years for a total of 50 million dollars.
UGH! Why did it submit that as a post instead of starting a new line?
Anyways would it, in a vacuum, make sense to trade player B for player A? Sure. But you can’t have 18 player As and a bullpen if you plan to win games. And teams may lose money if they lose games. So if you have to dish out some extra cash for every additional win, it may very well be worth it.
At $6mm/win player A gives you have $30mm in excess for player A and $58mm for player B. So Player B is more valuable even if his $/War is lower.
Ahem.
I have to agree with the angry bottle of Scotch. If the Indians called the Reds and offered Gomes for Frazier, Jocketty would respond by hanging up.
That says more about Jocketty to be honest. The Reds should want the extra years of control. Again, I think there are some concerns with Gomes and Gomes and Mesoraco don’t make sense on the same team going forward but if the Reds can trade a 2.5 year asset for a 5.5 year asset that does have some upside, they should be looking to do it.
What upside? I think because people aren’t that familiar with Gomes, they don’t realize that he turns 28 next Sunday. He is not a young man, and minor league innings behind the plate are not any easier on the knees. No rational person would trade Todd Frazier for Yan Gomes. It would not happen. Again, I get that this ranking is due to Dave trusting a wildly optimistic five year projection for Gomes, but we should be able to recognize that it is indeed wildly optimistic.
Over/Under on Gomes accumulating 12 wins over the next five seasons: I’m taking the under without any hesitation.
Just as a thing, Gomes has been hurt for much of this season, and has looked better of late, his Hard% has been on an upward climb for much of the season. I’m a bit worried about his walk rate, he seems allergic to walks right now, but hopefully he’s just been pressing due to injury and that will improve as he gets confidence back.
I also wanted to note that he has very few innings on his knees for a 28 year old, he only started catching in 2012 and hardly caught in the minors or majors before that. He has had a very weird path to the big leagues and it isn’t all that hard to believe that he will have a bit of a different aging curve because of it…
DavidK, your information is incorrect. Gomes began catching in college, although that wasn’t his primary position, but he has been a catcher throughout his minor league career. All of his appearances in the field during the 2009 and 2010 seasons were at catcher, and all but 20 games in 2011 were at catcher.
jdbolick-
Hmm.. yeah, it looks like he was a backup catcher for most of college and played a lot of middle infield, though he did catch more in the minors than I thought, though it appears it was mostly as a backup and he did play some other positions. In 2012 he played all over the place for the Bluejays. I’d still be a little less concerned than usual about knees going compared to other catchers (given that many of them were primary catchers for all of college and minors, he still would have far fewer years of catching on knees than others), but not as much as originally thought, thanks for the info though, looks like it’s somewhere between the two views. I’d remembered pieces that they were converting him to catcher, but maybe it was ‘everyday catcher’ sort of thing.
Yeah, that’s silly.
Guess you missed this part: “…keep in mind, the gap between players in this tier is quite small, and you could reasonably argue to rearrange them in just about any order you wanted.” So here’s a pro tip: when you make your own personal trade value list, put Todd Frazier ahead of Yan Gomes. You’ll feel great.
A .218/.234/.327 slash line makes you one of the top 50 player values in the game?
Guess my future’s bright after all!
he probably actually thinks that
that makes your comment funny
A decent point, lost to the way it was made. Let this be a lesson, folks.
Gomes is a good defensive catcher with power making little money under team control until 2021. The rankings are also based on “projections” not just what he’s doing at the 2015 all star break.
Fraizer is having a great season but he’ll be a free agent in a year and a half. Also most of Frazier’s value is his power so taking him out of that great hitter’s park might disrupt that.
Frazier has 2 and a half years left. And as for his power, yeah GABP helps his homer totals. But he’s also leading the NL in doubles too, so he wouldn’t be completely destroyed by a large ballpark.
Correction: he’ll be a free agent in 2 1/2 years
Lighten up, Frances. You’re having a hissy fit over one guy’s opinion on the internet.
Besides, it’s estimated trade value rather than just value, and that seems to be more about the player’s current contract status and years of control rather than playing ability.
Boy, it didn’t take long for someone to ignore all the warnings about how you could rearrange these guys pretty easily, how there’s no real difference between 2 consecutive rankings, and how just because 1 guy is ranked above another doesn’t mean the 2 teams would necessarily make the trade.
Reading is your friend, Johnny. At the Bleacher Report, you’re probably accustomed to just looking at the rankings and then screaming at people. Here, it’s typically best to read and attempt to educate yourself first and then — and this is just a suggestion — consider that someone else might have a defensible opinion. Then you could offer a reasoned critique (if you’re capable) or just move along. It’s really not worth the stress you’re doing to yourself to explode into a rage just because your favorite player was ranked 1 spot too low.
Dave, I was looking at some of your past trade value lists to see some numbers, and one thing I wanted to test was on average, how many years of control do the players on your list have. For players that haven’t made the big leagues yet, what year should I use for those guys for “Controlled Through?” Would it be six, seven, eight years after the current year?
Depends on when they’re called up. Guys like Buxton, Bryant, and Russell have six years left after this one, because they were held down past the point at which they’d accrue a full year of service time. Guys like Jose Fernandez and Jason Heyward were brought up on Opening Day, though, so they’d only have five years after their first one. Usually, though, for prospects who haven’t debuted, I assume that the team will hold them down past the service time window, so they effectively get seven years.
Dave Cameron literally might be retarded.
You’re stealing my thing.
You’re drunk on tonic water, sober up young man. Stop drinking Perrier.
It appears there are a few of us, guy
FanGraphs, please delete these slur-filled comments. This kind of hate speech created a hostile and entirely inappropriate atmosphere at FanGraphs. The word “retarded” should never be tolerated here.
FG really needs to moderate comments more. Bigoted trolls are create a terrible environment. A bunch of down-votes does not negate that.
cass, politically correct sensitivity is retarded.
Nothing to do with political correctness. It has to do with respect. You are showing nothing but callousness to people with developmental disabilities and everyone who gives a damn about being respectful and compassionate.
It is the definition of political correctness, cass. Substituting “mentally challenged” for “retarded” on this website wouldn’t affect the disabled in any way. People like you who look for ways to be offended will always find them, no matter how much speech ends up being moderated. Your rant isn’t about compassion or respect, it’s about obnoxious self-righteousness.
mmm yes, please, tell me why I’m complaining. after all, who better than you to say that? certainly not me.
as someone who has relatives and friends with developmental disabilities, I can attest that this isn’t about sanctimoniousness — if it was, I think I’d find something better for my ego than complaining anonymously on a website — but about keeping this comment section civil and welcoming to anyone who wants to discuss or learn.
Coming onto the message board of a baseball analytics site to complain about the word “retarded” is without question about sanctimoniousness. The word has been used as a medical and legal classification for over a century. Arbitrarily deciding that after all that time it is now offensive and must be replaced with “disability” is political correctness without actual purpose. If you go out of your way to be offended by everything then you’ll never have time for anything else, because the world is most certainly not a sanitized place where vocabulary is carefully chosen to spare everyone’s feelings. Save your indignation for things that actually matter.
The meaning and connotations of words change. “Retarded” is no longer used as a medical diagnosis and is strictly used now as an insult. Even if were still being used that way, unless Johnny Walker is a medical professional, he is not qualified to make such a diagnosis.
Pot, meet kettle.
who wants to be friends and go blaze one?
Just like literally is no longer in the dictionary, because people don’t use it literally!
Regardless of political correctness, insulting other people instead of providing evidence to create discourse is counterproductive. Regardless of what names or words you use, if you’re attacking someone based on their opinion, it’s creating the wrong environment here.
jdbolick has the upopular but entirely accurate view here.
This idea that there is an objectively correct “atmosphere” or “environment” for comments here is false and absurd on its face. That’s nothing more than political correctness and cass’ suggestion that it’s not PC but is instead “about respect” betrays a deep misunderstanding of what PC is. Literally everyone who has ever advocated for PC has used “it’s about respect” as a justification.
Regarding the controversy over the word “retarded.”
It was once a politically correct term. A little background:
“Imbecile was a medical category of people with moderate to severe intellectual disability, as well as a type of criminal.[1][2] The term arises from the Latin word imbecillus, meaning weak, or weak-minded. It included people with an IQ of 26–50, between “moron” (IQ of 51–70) and “idiot” (IQ of 0–25).[3]
The meaning was further refined into mental and moral imbecility.[4][5] The concepts of “moral insanity”, “moral idiocy”,” and “moral imbecility”, led to the emerging field of eugenic criminology, which held that crime can be reduced by preventing “feeble-minded” people from reproducing.[6][7]
“Imbecile” as a concrete classification was popularized by psychologist Henry H. Goddard[8] and was used in 1927 by United States Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in his ruling in the forced-sterilization case Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927).[9]
The concept is closely associated with psychology, psychiatry, criminology, and eugenics. However, the term imbecile quickly passed into vernacular usage as a derogatory term, and fell out of professional use in the 20th century[10] in favor of mental retardation.
In recent decades, the phrases “mental retardation”, “mentally retarded”, and “retarded” initially used in a medical manner, are regarded as derogatory and politically incorrect much like moron, imbecile, cretin, dolt and idiot, formerly used as scientific terms in the early 20th century. On October 5, 2010, President of the United States Barack Obama signed Senate Bill 2781, known as “Rosa’s Law”, which changed references in many Federal statutes that referred to “mental retardation” to refer instead to “intellectual disability”.”
Methinks the mission is futile.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imbecile
I love the table at the end. Would be fun to project future value based on the trade value ranking and check back to see how closely the contracts signed/trade results match. I think the hypothesis right now is that teams are “underpaying” for years of control- and it would be fun to test that
The data in the table is cool. It would also fun to have it as a little graph of the two time series — but maybe the whole projection + contract data set will be released at the end to play with visualization…
Great work; I really like the table.
This layout/format looks really nice this year. I’m surprised to see Soler on the list, but the argument for him does make sense, and he does have a ton of potential with some moderate big league success already.
Hey Dave;
Stumbled onto a very small error in the Lucroy blurb…. remove the “his” after for.
“and if you give him full credit for his the estimates of his framing value,”
Yes. I actually read all of them. Nicely done.
another nit:
“Astros will be perfectly happy to just keep in Houston anyway.”
missing “him” before “in Houston”
I agree w/ the others that the table at the end is really helpful.
2014 Soler is on the list for sure, not sure 2015 Soler should be: not a lot of walks, lots of Ks, below average D, and not-likely-sustainable BABIP.
Buxton feels low, but the injuries are troublesome. That said, I’m pretty sure the Sox would move Quintana for Buxton, but the Twins wouldn’t.
The BABIP is a bit high, but I think his ranking is appropriate. Soler projects to have above-average power and pure bat (40% Hard-hit, high LD%), and nothing in his history suggests that he’s a true ~30% strikeout hitter. A realistic peak for him is .275 with 30+ HR ability, while not being a negative in the field or on the bases. I feel that most teams would pay a lot for that.
True, and 2014 Soler sure did look like that player. Looked at his batted ball a bit more, and even with the high BABIP, he’s probably been unlucky on HR/FB so yeah, I guess he stays.
Still, have to be concerned about the K rate this year, if it’s just an odd fluctuation, then whatever, but if pitchers have figured something out…
Nah, if anything he is being way undervalued. When he starts learning to elevate the ball better look out. The ball comes off his bat like a rocket launcher. Teams would be taking numbers in the Cubs lobby to get a chance at this young man.
I like Soler’s Z-Contact%. The issue for him going forward is if and how soon he starts laying off pitches out of the strike zone. That uncertainty leaves a lot of variability in his potential value over the short-term, but he still has a pretty high floor for a young slugger.
Love the layout improvement.
Not gonna quibble over a single placement on the list like some other people.
Fangraphs could really, really use a copy editor though.
Jeff Sullivan said recently that they do have copy editors. Obviously, they are not catching everything. I know they want to get it right, but I hate posting a public comment just for a grammar or spelling error. It would be nice if they could add an email address just to submit corrections, so that the readers could help them out without making a public deal about it.
Hank G’s comment times a million. Also, if the 2 options were a) volume and speed of posts versus b) fully-polished grammar and writing, I’d choose (a) all day long.
Sure, but those aren’t the options. The posts all get edited before being published. It’s absolutely incredible the amount of errors that get through, for a site this big. The copy editor needs to be fired. There’s comments like this fixing obvious grammar and spelling errors on just about every single post here.
Perhaps you should check your own grammar. “There’s comment like this…” Should read “There are comments like this…” People who live in glass houses. 🙂
Lol jeff^
How does glass houses apply here? I don’t have a copy editor. If I did I would have expected him to fix that.
As in, I’m not putting the blame on the writer for the errors. His job is hard enough. That’s why he has a copy editor 🙂
How DO glass houses apply*
“But there’s nothing wrong with steady, solid, above-average performances, and the extension Quintana signed last year means that he’s going to make heavily reduced salaries the next three years, plus the White Sox get team options on what would have been his first two free agent years. There isn’t necessarily star potential here, but he’s a very good pitcher at very good prices, and every team in baseball would love to have Quintana in their rotation.”
Indeed – Quintana is 12th in MLB in WAR among SPs from 2013-2015. A lot of value in a guy who stays healthy and is above average. 10th last year in WAR, inside the top 30 again this year. He’ll continue to be seriously underrated by the public at large as long as his team continues to have the magical ability to not score when he starts, or blow leads after he leaves the game, something that has gone on for so long that you start to wonder if he has Shleprock’s cloud over him.
Yeah, Quintana’s being crazy underrated here.
He’s a true #2 on an insane deal.
Would be nice to see the age listed by each player too Dave. Excited for this year’s series!
LOUD ANGRY WORDS!!!
Why isn’t Jose Quintana a “frontline” guy? He put up a 5 win season last year and is essentially the same pitcher this year. He’s been better over the past 2+ calendar years than many pitchers who would be easily characterized as ‘frontline.’ Projections like him going forward too.
Yeah, he’s a rock-solid #2, by whatever method of WAR you choose.
It’s especially ironic considering Dave’s spiel about Keuchel being underrated by analysts for not being a huge tools guy.
I already have a problem with your exclusion of Arrieta. He is 5th in baseball in WAR on pace for 6 plus this season. A cy young contender and controlled for 2 and a half years at around 20 million. Gold Jerry gold.
Of course he is not good enough to make an all star team.
Good luck with Martinez and that elevated walk number and an 86% strand rate. Yoradano Ventura part two.
Eh, he did make the honorable mention piece. Doubt Dave would quibble much as he noted if you wanted to swap him in for one of these guys.
Arrieta’s proven he’s not a HR/FB luck guy this year, but he’s also never given a major league team 160 innings. Sure, he’s going to blow by that this year, but previous walk issues+last year’s crazy low HR/FB+slightly low BABIPs+lack of innings means you can make at least decent argument for him not to be in the top 50.
But I agree, I’d put him in the top 50.
Hmmm I wonder if you’re a Cubs fan, Ron… Regarding the elevated walk rate for Martinez, his issue has always been walking LH batters. His change-up has made him much more effective against LH batters with its late movement down and away. He’s always dominated RH but now he’s learning how to get both out. Even with the high strand rate, he’s still had a really good 1st half for a 23 yr old first year starter.
So does Harper pass Trout this year? What does everyone think?
No. Everyone thinks ‘No’.
But in fantasy rankings, maybe! Unless your league uses BsR and advanced def stats.
With Harper’s breakout season (so far) this year, and the fact that he’s going to make $5 million next year against Trout’s $16 million, it should be close.
It seems almost unbelievable to say it, but the 2019 and 2020 seasons for Trout, when he is making $33 million, carry a lot of surplus value. I’d say an extremely conservative price for a WAR would be, what, $6 million per? That means $33 million is the rate for a 5.5 WAR player. Trout will probably project to be worth closer to 8 WAR for each of those seasons.
Even if you can talk yourself into believing 3 years of Harper for ~$30-35 million is better than 3 years of Trout for $68 million, the extra years, even at a very high salary, make Trout easily the more valuable contract.
Yeah. It’s hard to accept, intuitively, that any player can be worth $33M several years out. I’m trying to come up with some argument for Harper over Trout, but barring a horrific injury, Trout wins and it’s less close than I thought initially.
Considering it is already over 6 mil per war that is really conservative. In 2019 you are probably closer to 9 mil/win with tv deal level inflation.
2015 Age would be an awesome addition near the player name.
Maybe next year…
This is a great series but I also love the annual post of the worst contracts in baseball. Maybe you’ve gotten that post confused with this series.
AJ Pollock was on pace for 6+ WAR/600 last year.
AJ Pollock is currently on pace for 5.5 WAR/600 this season.
AJ Pollock is currently controlled through 2018 (currently, standard arb years).
He belongs in front of everyone 45-50, at a minimum. And I’m sure you can argue better than 45.
Aside from the fact that he was listed in the “just missed” piece and therefore you are breaking the rules by complaining, I think if you’re being fair you at least acknowledge that he is an outfielder with a career 113 wRC+ and even with high BABIPs in 2014 and 2015 his offense is closer to good than great.
Good to very good offense with elite defense under control for 3.5 more years at minimum cost seems like top 50 value to me.
As a White Sox fan, I think I’d probably trade Quintana for Rodon, and I absolutely love Q.
Walk much?
But that Slider!
It’s Sale-esque.
Steven Piscotty whiffed on that pitch last night while the ball struck him on his left foot.
The main thing there is that if Rodon does turn out to be better than Quintana, he’s also going to cost a lot more than Quintana once he hits arb. And even if Rodon doesn’t turn out to be clearly better than Quintana, he might end up costing more than Quintana in arb. We know Quintana is a very good pitcher they have on a cheap contract. Rodon might be outstanding, a true ace, but there’s still work to be done to get there.
Of course, if Rodon finds fastball command, the Sox will happily pay him the arb numbers since they’ll be getting another ace to go with Sale and Quintana (who doesn’t look like what we thing of in an ace, but at worst he’s a #2) for a rather ridiculous troika of lefty starters.
That table is awesome. Lets get that for all players and lets add arbitration estimates. Make it happen fangraphs.
Like they say above, should this be a “Most team friendly contract” list instead of a “trade value” list?
Not meant snarkily…
What would you say is the meaningful difference?
It gets around the problem of angry people saying “I would never in a million years trade Yan Gomes for Todd Frazier.”
That’s always addressed in the intro and those things are also products of each team’s position depth and knowledge of their own players, and sometimes positional preference.
Whether either the Indians or Reds would trade Gomes for Frazier specifically is totally irrelevant to the series.
I’d say that the respective trade values in a trade value column are pretty relevant.
“Trade Value” columns are designed to attract people and create discussions. They always get clicks because fans will always want confirmation of their own biases, and passionate about the “You’re missing Player X on my team who’s super awesome and I don’t know who these other scrubs are but I would never trade my guy for them” argument.
Fan will never agree on this regardless of wording, but they also scoff at the fact that Cole Hamels can’t bring in anything less than 3 uber-prospects from the Dodgers or the Astros. Most fans don’t think about things that deeply. It’s why most thought the Padres won the offseason.
In the end this is just a fun article that’s meant to entertain and get people to gripe and stuff and we all love to pretend our guy’s getting shafted. And by that I mean I won’t accept anything less than top-3 ranking for Carlos Correa and top-10 ranking for Jose Altuve.
Completely ridiculous hypothetical to try to illustrate the difference;
Let’s say you have a perfectly average 2 win player in his prime and, for some strange reason, he decides to only take a salary of one dollar per year for the next five years. Great contract, right? Lots of surplus value.
But how much trade value would he have? By definition, at least half of the teams should have a player just as good or better already at his position. And I would guess that many of the other teams have a prospect that they think could be just as good, or have a guy who is close enough to being a 2 win player that they wouldn’t want to give up a lot of talent to get a small upgrade.
I’m not saying that he wouldn’t have any trade value. But I can’t imagine that he would be more sought after than an above average or elite player on a neutral, or more fair, contract. And that’s what the Frazier vs Gomes discussion is about. I just don’t see any evidence that teams will give up more talent in a trade to get an average player with a great contract than an elite level player on a shorter or more player friendly contract.
The most recent trade of an elite player was Donaldson, last year’s number 17, tell me about how he brought vastly more than you’d expect from his contract’s surplus value?
IIRC, the discussion at the time was that it looked like he’d drawn LESS than you’d expect from simple surplus value.
Isnt Buxton the easiest example here? The Twins could trade him straight up for more than half of the list. It’s not a trade value list.
John Lackey, a 2+ win pitcher playing for the league minimum, fetched a reliever and an awful contract.
Why do you think those are substantially different? A contract is team friendly precisely because it’s a contract most teams would like to have; a contract is a good trade value if there are lots of teams who’d like to have it.
Mid-season, when there are few if any free agents available and teams have a better idea where they are on the win curve and the “win now” teams are the main buyers presumably shifts the values around some (making short term deals for high WAR players more valuable than they’d be in the off season), but I haven’t seen any data that shows the value shifts all that much; or that suggests that a player a team would consider worth paying X dollars for to hire as a free agent isn’t still considered to be worth roughly X dollars (minus his contract cost) as a trade chip.
I’ve been hearing Phillies fans for quite awhile telling me what a valuable trade chip Hammels is because he’s a front of the rotation starter, while other people tell me the contract is roughly in line with his expected value, and the bulk of MLB appears to be going with “trade value is in the surplus value”.
Because like I said above, its pretty self evident that it flat out is not the case.
Lets use Josh Harrison for example. He projects to be about a 2 WAR player making about 25 million from 2016 to 2018. He likely has more surplus value WAR/$ model than Hamels. Do you really think that he could command more in a trade than Cole Hamels? I bet 30 out of 30 front offices would offer more in terms of either prospects or current MLB assets for Hamels.
There are at least 5 teams that wouldn’t take Hamels and his contract (If upon arrival he received a full. NTC.)
Some teams don’t want a market rate ace, it’s a lot to budget for.
I expect the Phillies could get something for Hamels, as I said, short contracts for good players are at a premium mid-season.
But, so far, those with faith that Hamels will bring a big return have been being disappointed by the 29 MLB organizations unwilling to send such a return for him.
Meanwhile Harrison would definitely bring a return. Not a big one, but something.
In short, I find your assertion that Hamels is obviously worth more in trade lacking in evidence. The Phillies have been shopping him for quite awhile, without getting what they consider a reasonable offer, and at least in the off-season, why SHOULD they get a reasonable offer? Everyone who wants a pitcher at free agent prices during the off-season can buy one without giving up prospects.
It doesn’t matter if the return isn’t what RAJ has been willing to take up to this point, thats hardly relevant as to whether or not he would still get a bigger return than Josh Harrison. And he would, for all but the handful of teams that just flat out couldn’t get the green light to take on his salary.
And no, not everyone can sign a Cole Hamels caliber pitcher in free agency and tack on 4 wins to one roster spot during the offseason. There isn’t an unlimited supply of wins to buy during free agency.
Come on dude, lacking in evidence? I’m a Mets fan who absolutely hates Hamels but there’s plenty of evidence. Look at the deals involving Cliff Lee, Greinke, Halladay, and Johan Santana and it becomes quite obvious that aces, regardless of contract or years of control, command a much larger return than anything the Pirates could hope to get for Harrison.
And the fact that Philly has been shopping but have yet to make a deal is not in any way indicative of his trade value. For all we know, teams have offered terrific packages that have been turned down. I mean, we all know who their GM is…
Surplus value doesn’t take into account the value of getting more value (WAR or otherwise) out of a single roster spot; you don’t base it solely on surplus value, although that’s a consideration.
@Yinka
Basically that. People like Doug at times don’t realize that “excess value” and “value” are not the same thing. Hamels would command a bigger return because he is more valuable, not because his contract come with more excess value.
I better see 5 Tigers. Cabrera, Martinez, Iglesias, Verlander, Mccann.
Haha, that’s a good one.
Verlander? Oh, I get it. This is sarcasm.
And Martinez and Cabrera were addressed in the Honorable Mention post.
How far back would you need to go to include a Mariner? I got time… The
Nintendo guy croaked so I could trade Felix and no one would care…
Miller will make the top 50. League average offense with upside from a true shortstop who makes league minimum? Even Z could sell that.
Brad Miller is one of Dave’s favorite players. He’ll probably come in somewhere around the top 25.
Fucking Quintana… that creep can roll man
8 year olds, Dude.
Interesting as always Dave. My question is how did you go about discounting the value of future production? Obviously different teams would weigh the ability to help in 2015 differently, but generally speaking, a win in the near term is more attractive than a win 3+ years down the road. To use an example from the comments, a player like Frazier derives all of his value from near term wins, while Gomes and the other controlled players see a larger portion of their value derived from future performance. Just wondering about your methodology on this
dom – how would you? what is the appropriate risk premium for MLB salaries?
in theory I would assume that it should approximate the expected inflation rate for free agent $ per WAR, as this would be your relevant substitute market… thoughts?
it would be different for every team. Teams like Detroit and Toronto would (should) place a massive amount of relative value on 2015 wins while rebuilding teams would have much different view of what they would find attractive. Maybe they would find a 2015 win like 5 times more attractive than one in 2017? Maybe even more? I have no idea
They as in Detroit Toronto type teams
“Hitting on guys like this is why the Giants keep winning…”
The Giants are such flirts.
But, winning.
You guys realize the big red numbers draw people’s eyes to those posts, right.
I’m trying to draw attention to your post.
Is Josh Donaldson going to be severely discounted again just because Billy Beane traded him?
We know Dave is a big fan on mine, and you can conservatively pencil me in for 5WAR/season…am I top 10?
Agree with everyone who LOVES the table!
Have to quibble, though, with the characterization of Quintana as “not a frontline guy” and implicitly clearly inferior to Keuchel.
According to this very website, since the start of 2013, Q ranks 12th in fWAR among all pitchers, right between Grienke and Bumgarner. Are neither of them “frontline guys”?
Over the same timeframe Quintana ranks above such notables as Strasburg and Samardzija, Arrieta and A.J. (Burnett), Sonny Gray and, yes, Dallas Keuchel.
It’s possible to be a frontline guy even when you’re the #2 starter in your own clubhouse. You just need to have Chris Sale as a teammate.
I was about to make a lazy comparison of Quintana to Mark Buehrle.
Then I dug into what has made Quintana successful with the White Sox:
– His K% of 19.3% is below the MLB average of 20.0% over the same period (per Baseball Reference). This is the “not frontline” part of Quintana
– However, his BB% and HR% have been better than the MLB averages over the same period (6.5%/2.1% vs. 7.8%/2.5%). This combination puts him about 0.25 runs/9 better than average.
– Then, note that Quintana has also been above average as a fielder and in stopping the running game, by about 10 runs or 0.15 runs/9 innings.
I guess the comparison with Buehrle didn’t turn out so bad after all. And a 3yr/$23.3M deal with 2 club options for peak Buehrle would be an absolute steal
There is no way in hell anybody is trading Buxton for Quintana.
Quite possibly true, in part because teams love their own prospects and thus usually value them higher than outsiders.
But if Buxton becomes a perennial 5-WAR guy starting next year, he’ll make so much during the arbitration process that his overall “profit” for the next 5 years won’t match Quintana — provided Q continues to be an annual 4-WAR starter, of course.
That’s how cheap Quintana’s contract is. He’s Madison Bumgarner’s doppelganger, but on a distinctly better contract. Which is why he is at worst one of the top 20-25 trade values, not #41.
This is the same franchise that got sick of waiting on Carlos Gomez to deliver on his considerable talent-
Giving up the key piece from their Yohan deal (terrible trade in my opinion as 2008 Twins clearly take the Central outright) to get 1 season of JJ Hardy.
I’ll chime in here and agree with the simple but very true point that no front office would give up Buxton for Quintana no matter the team’s roster needs. Buxton is 21 and has been described by prospect mavens as having an upside on par with Trout. Heck, there is a Marc Normandsin article from 2 years ago that argues Willie Mays comparisons aren’t insane. This ranking seems way to bearish.
Buxton hasn’t done a thing yet. I hate to break it to you, but most big prospects doesn’t work out as expected. You know what you have in Quintana in terms of production and contract. Buxton is still a crap shoot. Don’t hold your breath until Buxton becomes Willie Mays.
Buxton has been ranked the #1 prospect before 2014 and 2015 by the majority of prospect experts. And both years have been particularly strong years for prospects in general. I don’t know how he falls below seager and Russell, let alone Quintana, especially considering the reports about his ceiling just a few months ago. A sprained wrist he gets from sliding into second knocks him down below them?
His ranking was based on projection.
When you consider that Kris Bryant led all of professional baseball with 43 HR’s in 2014 and that this year Carlos Correa is probably the best SS in all of baseball already we all know that that #1 ranking is nonsense.
Not sure if it was mentioned in the incoherent ramblings about Frazier vs Gomes above, but Gomes didn’t suffer his injury in spring training. He got hurt on a Rajai Davis slide during a regular season game in April. He’s hit the ball much harder lately, so hopefully he’s fully healthy after the extra rest of the All Star Break.