2016 Trade Value: #1 to #10
| 2016 TRADE VALUE SERIES Introduction Hon. Mention #41-50 #31-40 #21-30 #11-20 |
And now here we are. After ticking through 40 of the most valuable players in baseball, we’ve come to the top 10, and what a remarkable list of players it is. The wave of young talent that has poured into baseball makes this group the best crop of talent I think I’ve ever seen in doing this exercise, and for the first time in a long time, there was actually a real question about who would rank #1. The top four, in fact, shifted around numerous times, and I didn’t settle on their final order until yesterday. And even at #5 and #6, you could make a legitimate argument that they belong in the conversation. This is a deep, strong, elite group of young players. With these kinds of stars already dominating at an early age, baseball looks to be in very good hands for the foreseeable future.
As a reminder for those who didn’t read the first four parts of the series, we’ve significantly upgraded the way we’re presenting the information this year. On the individual player tables, the Guaranteed Dollars and Team Control WAR — which are provided by Dan Szymborski’s ZIPS projections — rows give you an idea of what kind of production and costs a team could expect going forward, though to be clear, we’re not counting the rest of 2016 in those numbers; they’re just included for reference of what a player’s future status looks like. And as a reminder, we’re not ranking players based on those projections, as teams aren’t going to just make trades based on the ZIPS forecasts. That said, they’re a useful tool to provide some context about what a player might do for the next few years.
With those items covered, let’s get to it. Here is my take on the 10 most valuable assets in baseball.
| Team Control WAR Total | +13.5 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | 2018 |
| Previous Rank | #2 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 24 | +6.9 | Arb2 |
| 2018 | 25 | +6.6 | Arb3 |
Despite a bit of a struggle the last few months, Harper remains an offensive monster, as now a 130 wRC+ is seen as a disappointment from the 23-year-old. And if this were the old “who do you want to start your franchise around?” question, Harper would probably still be #2, where he ranked on this list a year ago. But this list considers the value that comes from a player’s contract status, and Harper is now just a couple of years away from hitting the free-agent market. No one thinks there’s any real chance he’s going to sign before he gets there, and he’s expected to crush the record for largest contract in baseball history, so it’s not like a team can trade for him with the expectation of locking up to a long-term deal. So, while Harper remains an elite player, any team giving up the farm to get him would be getting two expensive (but still a massive bargain for what he is, of course) arbitration years and the potential for a draft pick when he leaves after the 2018 season. A win-now team absolutely would love to add Harper to their lineup, and would pay dearly to do so, but the short-term window in which he could provide value causes him to fall to the last spot on the top 10 this year.
| Team Control WAR Total | +13.6 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | $21.9 M |
| Team Control Through | 2019 |
| Previous Rank | #3 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 29 | +5.1 | $8.8 M |
| 2018 | 30 | +4.5 | $11.0 M |
| 2019 | 31 | +4.0 | $14.5 M |
While the Diamondbacks’ decision to push in their chips was probably ill-timed, it is easy to look at their first baseman and understand why they’d want to build a winner around him while they still can. Goldschmidt is an elite player, an asset in every facet of the game, and the pre-breakout contract he signed gives the team the flexibility to use money that would normally be going to a player of his caliber and spread it around the rest of the roster. It’s not Goldschmidt’s fault that his teammates aren’t quite good enough to get him to the postseason; he’s done everything you could ask of a superstar, and has done it all while making a fraction of his actual value. The organization has talked about their three-year window, and even after this year, they still have three more years of Goldschmidt’s services to which they can look forward, though as a first baseman approaching 30, his best days might be behind him at this point. But even a Goldschmidt-in-decline is likely to be an All-Star, and given that and his contract, it’s understandable that the Diamondbacks aren’t even willing to entertain offers for their best player.
| Team Control WAR Total | +15.2 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | 2019 |
| Previous Rank | #14 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 26 | +5.2 | Arb2 |
| 2018 | 27 | +5.2 | Arb3 |
| 2019 | 28 | +4.8 | Arb4 |
Arenado’s continual improvement remains remarkable to watch. After transforming himself from a defensive liability into a Hall-of-Fame defender at third base, he’s now moved on to rounding out his offensive skills, taking walks to raise his OBP, the last real weakness he had left. Still just 25, Arenado now looks like an unquestionable star, and while teams will always have concerns about taking a hitter out of Colorado, I didn’t talk to anyone in the game who doubted Arenado would be a terrific player in any ballpark. With rare contact and power skills, elite defense, and an improving approach at the plate, Arenado is a franchise cornerstone. The biggest downside, at this point, is that he’s a Super-Two arbitration guy, so his final three seasons before reaching free agency could get fairly pricey; his home run and RBI totals will earn him some very nice paydays even before he hits the open market. But having to pay your superstar player arbitration dollars is still a nice problem to have, and teams would beat down the Rockies door if they thought there was any chance they’d make Arenado available. They won’t, because teams don’t trade guys like this until they have to.
| Team Control WAR Total | +19.1 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | 2020 |
| Previous Rank | #11 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 24 | +5.0 | Pre-Arb |
| 2018 | 25 | +4.9 | Arb1 |
| 2019 | 26 | +4.7 | Arb2 |
| 2020 | 27 | +4.5 | Arb3 |
So I guess those Andrew McCutchen comparisons weren’t that crazy after all. Despite his diminutive frame and plenty of questions about what kind of upside he possessed, Betts has turned into one of the best all-around players in the game, as he has a real shot at a 30-30 season this year. Still just 23, Betts has already accumulated +10 WAR in about two years’ worth of playing time, and with the added power this year, there’s no real reason to think he can’t sustain these kinds of performances. With one remaining pre-arbitration year, Betts will again be one of the biggest bargains in baseball next year, and then he’ll still have his three arbitration years after that. Betts combines youth, an excellent track record, and four years of low-cost team control before getting to free agency, which is why the Red Sox are thrilled they resisted calls to trade him over the last few years. By refusing to swap him for a short-term upgrade, the team ended up with one of the most valuable players in baseball as a long-term building block instead.
| Five-Year WAR | +22.6 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | $29.0 M |
| Team Control Through | 2021 |
| Previous Rank | #7 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 27 | +5.4 | $7.0 M |
| 2018 | 28 | +5.1 | $7.0 M |
| 2019 | 29 | +4.7 | $11.0 M |
| 2020 | 30 | +4.0 | $14.5 M |
| 2021 | 31 | +3.4 | $14.5 M |
It doesn’t show up in a list format, but for the record, there’s a pretty significant gap here: this is the beginning of the inner-circle tier, where a case could be made for all of the rest of the players to rank in any of the next six spots. The gap between #1 and #6 might be smaller than the gap between #6 and #7, in fact. So don’t take Rizzo landing here as any kind of knock against him: he’s amazing, and one of the most coveted players in baseball. His power and control of the strike zone make him one of the game’s most productive hitters, and he even plays a mean first base, adding value in the field as well. The only real knock on him relative to the rest of this top tier is his age. He’ll be 27 in a month, and while that’s not old, it’s older than the rest of the superstars with whom he’s hanging out; that age means there’s a bit more of a chance he’ll be less productive during the last few years of his contract. He’s an elite player and likely to remain one for a while, but just a little less likely to still be one in four or five years, so he ends up in the sixth spot on this year’s list. But make no mistake: he’s in the top tier of most valuable assets in baseball.
| Five-Year WAR | +31.7 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | 2021 |
| Previous Rank | – |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 23 | +5.9 | Pre-Arb |
| 2018 | 24 | +6.3 | Pre-Arb |
| 2019 | 25 | +6.6 | Arb1 |
| 2020 | 26 | +6.6 | Arb2 |
| 2021 | 27 | +6.3 | Arb3 |
If you took Mookie Betts, turned him into an elite defensive shortstop, and gave him an extra year of team control, you’d have Francisco Lindor. Okay, that’s not exactly true, as Lindor hasn’t had the power spike that 2016 Mookie Betts has had, but he’s hit for more power in the big leagues than many — myself included — expected, and even with just average power, Lindor does enough other things at a high level to be a superstar. In fact, if we were just going by past performance, you could easily argue that Lindor should be the top-ranked young shortstop on this list; no shortstop in baseball has played better since he got to the big leagues.
But Lindor ranks fifth because the things at which he excels are things for which teams pay less, and the thing at which he’s just okay is the thing for which teams pay the most; it would be just be a little bit tougher to get an owner on board with giving up the farm for a terrific-fielding line-drive hitter than a guy he can put in the home-run derby. This is no knock on Lindor, who is remarkable, but the game just values his skillset a little less than it values some others. I’m sure the Indians are just fine with that, however; it should also help keep his future salaries down a bit, and give them a better chance of keeping their franchise shortstop in Cleveland.
| Five-Year WAR | +35.4 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | 2021 |
| Previous Rank | #31 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 23 | +7.1 | Pre-Arb |
| 2018 | 24 | +7.1 | Pre-Arb |
| 2019 | 25 | +7.3 | Arb1 |
| 2020 | 26 | +7.1 | Arb2 |
| 2021 | 27 | +6.8 | Arb3 |
Among the inner-circle, Seager is the beginning of the guys who are right on top of each other. In an earlier version of the list, he actually ranked #1 for a while, as it’s really tough to do much better than a 22-year-old shortstop with a 144 wRC+ in his first 500 plate appearances in the big leagues. And despite talk that he’d have to move to third base, he’s more than held his own at shortstop, and talk of a position change has been tabled, making him an elite young hitter at a premium spot.
But as I began to poll my friends in the game, the overwhelming consensus was that Seager is just a tick behind the three guys in front of him. People love Corey Seager, but they love the others just a little bit more, so while I think the numbers make a pretty strong case for Seager, the industry consensus pushed him down to the fourth spot. But, realistically, I’m not sure the Dodgers trade Seager for anyone else in baseball in a straight-up swap right now, not even the guy across town. Seager might not be the team’s franchise player, given some pitcher the team also happens to have now, but they certainly have a guy who is capable of carrying the torch whenever it is ready to get passed.
| Five-Year WAR | +31.9 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | 2021 |
| Previous Rank | #4 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 25 | +6.7 | Pre-Arb |
| 2018 | 26 | +6.7 | Arb1 |
| 2019 | 27 | +6.4 | Arb2 |
| 2020 | 28 | +6.1 | Arb3 |
| 2021 | 29 | +6.0 | Arb4 |
Last year, when chatting with one of my best friends in the game about Kris Bryant, he told me that, no matter what I thought of Bryant, it was too low. The comparison with which he was comfortable? Mike Schmidt. Now, it’s unfair to expect anyone to live up to the premise that his natural comparison is the best third baseman of all time, but Bryant is doing his best to make my friend look pretty smart. The big concern about him after his rookie season was his contact rate, with a 30% strikeout rate suggesting he might be more all-or-nothing slugger than one of the best hitters of his generation, so what did Bryant do this year? Cut his strikeout rate down to nearly league average while also dramatically increasing his power output.
Now Bryant is just an offensive wrecking ball, and while no one is really buying the idea that he’s become an elite defender, too, as UZR is suggesting, Bryant certainly isn’t a liability in the field. The only real downside for the Cubs is that he’s going to be a Super-Two guy, hitting arbitration after next year, and his skillset means he will get paid a lot of money really quickly. But great young hitters don’t become available very often, and teams would pay through the nose to get their hands on Bryant if they could. But they can’t. Kris Bryant isn’t going anywhere.
| Five-Year WAR | +41.5 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | 2021 |
| Previous Rank | #5 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 22 | +7.9 | Pre-Arb |
| 2018 | 23 | +8.3 | Pre-Arb |
| 2019 | 24 | +8.3 | Arb1 |
| 2020 | 25 | +8.4 | Arb2 |
| 2021 | 26 | +8.6 | Arb3 |
I will admit that I came into this exercise not expecting Correa to rank ahead of Bryant or Seager, and thought he’d be in a fight with Lindor instead, with potential versus performance being weighed to split that particular hair. But in compiling the list, I specifically sent the “Correa or Seager?” question to a bunch of friends in the game, and the responses overwhelmingly came back in favor of Correa, to the point where I had a hard time finding anyone willing to take Seager’s side in that debate. And, interestingly, the forecasts back up the industry on this one, as ZIPS projects Correa to post the highest WAR of any player on the list during the remainder of his team-control years with his current organization, and his projected +42 WAR over the next five years is just +0.3 WAR away from the lead even factoring out controllable years.
In fact, ZIPS thinks that, by 2019, Correa will be the best player in baseball, full stop. While his 2016 performance hasn’t been quite at the level of some of the other guys in this inner circle, we also have to remember that he’s the youngest of the group, still just 21 years of age. He’s six months younger than Alex Bregman, who made this list by tearing up minor-league pitching, and hasn’t yet debuted in the big leagues. Correa hasn’t had the big breakout year so far in 2016, but seemingly everyone in baseball still believes it’s coming. So, on this one, I’m deferring to the people who actually work in the offices where these decisions are made. Seager and Bryant are amazing, but if given their pick of the recent young guys to hit the big leagues, it seems like Correa is the one that most people would want going forward.
| Team Control WAR Total | +32.2 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | $119.0 M |
| Team Control Through | 2020 |
| Previous Rank | #1 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 25 | +8.7 | $19.3 M |
| 2018 | 26 | +8.3 | $33.3 M |
| 2019 | 27 | +7.8 | $33.3 M |
| 2020 | 28 | +7.4 | $33.3 M |
Hey there, old friend. Well, you don’t turn 25 for a few more weeks, so you’re not really old yet. And here you are again, as good as ever. Maybe even better.
I know this is a kind of boring result, but I will say that this almost didn’t happen. The first version of the list I sent around to friends last weekend had him at #4, and no one really even objected to that, as there was a general agreement that Correa, Bryant, and Seager were legitimate options for the top spot. Even going into Thursday, Trout was still sitting down there, but a few conversations convinced me that, if we get back to the original question, Trout probably brings back a bigger package than any other player. None of these guys are getting traded, of course, and I’m not sure the Astros, Cubs, or Dodgers would trade their guy for Trout if given the chance; they like what they have, and taking on an extra $70 to $80 million in salary over the next four years while losing their best young player might not be worth it.
But trades of this magnitude require ownership to be involved, and not just in a minor way. And if there’s one guy in baseball for whom an owner would put rationality aside, it’s this generation’s Mickey Mantle. It’s the guy you could say is already 90% of the way to a Hall of Fame career. It’s the guy who is literally twice as valuable as free agents signing for $35 million a year.
While I think one could make a case that a lot of franchises could potentially be better off with Correa and an extra $20 million a year to spend on the rest of their roster, rationality will go out the window if the Angels ever do decide to put Mike Trout on the blocks, in a way that it wouldn’t if the same teams had a chance to land Correa, Bryant, or Seager. Yeah, those guys and the extra cash might do just as much to help you win while spreading out your risk a bit, but they’re not going to instigate an insane bidding war between competitive billionaires in the same way that Trout’s availability might.
So, it’s still Trout, but this time, just barely. And probably not for a lot of franchises. The ones on a budget are taking the cheap young kids. But there are enough teams that don’t need to worry as much about payroll space as they do the organizational legacy that I’ve been convinced that Trout is still the most valuable trade chip in the game. The Angels won’t get a Seager, Correa, or Bryant for him if they trade him, but no player in baseball clearly has the power to bring back more in return.
But if Seager keeps hitting like this, or Bryant shows he really is Mike Schmidt 2.0, or Correa has the breakout that everyone thinks is coming, we may very well have a new Trade Value King next summer. Having so many great young players to pick makes for a much more fun exercise.
| Rk | Pv | Player | Age | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | Mike Trout | 24 | +8.7 $19.3 M |
+8.3 $33.3 M |
+7.8 $33.3 M |
+7.4 $33.3 M |
|
| 2 | 5 | Carlos Correa | 21 | +7.9 Pre-Arb |
+8.3 Pre-Arb |
+8.3 Arb1 |
+8.4 Arb2 |
+8.6 Arb3 |
| 3 | 4 | Kris Bryant | 24 | +6.7 Pre-Arb |
+6.7 Arb1 |
+6.4 Arb2 |
+6.1 Arb3 |
+6.0 Arb4 |
| 4 | 31 | Corey Seager | 22 | +7.1 Pre-Arb |
+7.1 Pre-Arb |
+7.3 Arb1 |
+7.1 Arb2 |
+6.8 Arb3 |
| 5 | – | Francisco Lindor | 22 | +5.9 Pre-Arb |
+6.3 Pre-Arb |
+6.6 Arb1 |
+6.6 Arb2 |
+6.3 Arb3 |
| 6 | 7 | Anthony Rizzo | 26 | +5.4 $7.0 M |
+5.1 $7.0 M |
+4.7 $11.0 M |
+4.0 $14.5 M |
+3.4 $14.5 M |
| 7 | 11 | Mookie Betts | 23 | +5.0 Pre-Arb |
+4.9 Arb1 |
+4.7 Arb2 |
+4.5 Arb3 |
|
| 8 | 14 | Nolan Arenado | 25 | +5.2 Arb2 |
+5.2 Arb3 |
+4.8 Arb4 |
||
| 9 | 3 | Paul Goldschmidt | 28 | +5.1 $8.8 M |
+4.5 $11.0 M |
+4.0 $14.5 M |
||
| 10 | 2 | Bryce Harper | 23 | +6.9 Arb2 |
+6.6 Arb3 |
|||
| 11 | 8 | Manny Machado | 23 | +6.6 Arb2 |
+6.7 Arb3 |
|||
| 12 | 22 | Noah Syndergaard | 23 | +4.9 Pre-Arb |
+5.1 Arb1 |
+4.7 Arb2 |
+4.8 Arb3 |
+4.6 Arb4 |
| 13 | 35 | Jose Altuve | 26 | +5.5 $4.5 M |
+5.3 $6.0 M |
+5.1 $6.5 M |
||
| 14 | 17 | Josh Donaldson | 30 | +6.4 $17.0 M |
+5.6 Arb4 |
|||
| 15 | 6 | Chris Sale | 27 | +6.1 $12.0 M |
+5.7 $12.5 M |
+5.3 $15.0 M |
||
| 16 | 16 | Madison Bumgarner | 26 | +4.8 $11.5 M |
+4.7 $12.0 M |
+4.3 $12.0 M |
||
| 17 | 23 | Jose Fernandez | 23 | +6.1 Arb2 |
+6.3 Arb3 |
|||
| 18 | 19 | Corey Kluber | 30 | +3.9 $7.5 M |
+3.3 $10.5 M |
+3.1 $13.0 M |
+2.6 $13.5 M |
+2.3 $14.0 M |
| 19 | 18 | Buster Posey | 29 | +5.6 $21.4 M |
+4.9 $21.4 M |
+4.2 $21.4 M |
+3.7 $21.4 M |
+3.1 $21.4 M |
| 20 | 33 | Xander Bogaerts | 23 | +4.2 Arb1 |
+4.6 Arb2 |
+4.6 Arb3 |
||
| 21 | 10 | Chris Archer | 27 | +3.6 $4.8 M |
+3.5 $6.3 M |
+3.2 $7.5 M |
+2.9 $9.0 M |
+2.6 $11.0 M |
| 22 | 20 | Jacob deGrom | 28 | +3.7 Arb1 |
+3.5 Arb2 |
+3.2 Arb3 |
+2.9 Arb4 |
|
| 23 | 26 | Christian Yelich | 24 | +3.4 $3.5 M |
+3.2 $7.0 M |
+3.1 $9.8 M |
+3.0 $12.5 M |
+2.8 $14.0 M |
| 24 | – | Gregory Polanco | 24 | +3.3 $1.6 M |
+3.3 $4.1 M |
+3.1 $6.1 M |
+3.1 $8.6 M |
+2.8 $11.6 M |
| 25 | 41 | Jose Quintana | 27 | +4.2 $6.0 M |
+4.1 $8.8 M |
+3.8 $10.5 M |
+3.4 $10.5 M |
|
| 26 | – | Yoan Moncada | 21 | +2.7 Pre-Arb |
+3.1 Pre-Arb |
+3.2 Pre-Arb |
+3.2 Pre-Arb |
+3.4 Arb1 |
| 27 | 39 | Carlos Carrasco | 29 | +3.1 $6.5 M |
+2.8 $8.0 M |
+2.5 $9.0 M |
+2.2 $9.5 M |
|
| 28 | – | Jackie Bradley Jr. | 26 | +4.0 Arb1 |
+3.9 Arb2 |
+3.8 Arb3 |
+3.4 Arb4 |
|
| 29 | 25 | Starling Marte | 27 | +3.3 $5.0 M |
+3.2 $7.5 M |
+2.8 $10.0 M |
+2.5 $12.5 M |
+2.1 $13.5 M |
| 30 | – | George Springer | 26 | +3.5 Arb1 |
+3.2 Arb2 |
+3.1 Arb3 |
+2.8 Arb4 |
|
| 31 | 32 | Addison Russell | 22 | +4.0 Pre-Arb |
+4.1 Arb1 |
+3.9 Arb2 |
+3.9 Arb3 |
+3.8 Arb4 |
| 32 | – | Miguel Sano | 23 | +2.8 Pre-Arb |
+2.9 Pre-Arb |
+2.8 Arb1 |
+2.6 Arb2 |
+2.5 Arb3 |
| 33 | – | Nomar Mazara | 21 | +3.6 Pre-Arb |
+4.0 Pre-Arb |
+4.0 Arb1 |
+4.0 Arb2 |
+4.1 Arb3 |
| 34 | – | Danny Salazar | 26 | +3.3 Arb1 |
+3.4 Arb2 |
+3.1 Arb3 |
+2.9 Arb4 |
|
| 35 | 13 | Gerrit Cole | 25 | +3.7 Arb1 |
+3.8 Arb2 |
+3.5 Arb3 |
||
| 36 | – | Julio Urias | 19 | +2.5 Pre-Arb |
+2.9 Pre-Arb |
+3.1 Pre-Arb |
+3.5 Arb1 |
+3.4 Arb2 |
| 37 | – | Alex Bregman | 22 | +2.7 Pre-Arb |
+3.1 Pre-Arb |
+3.4 Pre-Arb |
+3.5 Arb1 |
+3.5 Arb2 |
| 38 | – | Andrew Benintendi | 21 | +2.2 Pre-Arb |
+2.7 Pre-Arb |
+3.2 Pre-Arb |
+3.4 Arb1 |
+3.4 Arb2 |
| 39 | – | J.P. Crawford | 21 | +2.9 Pre-Arb |
+3.5 Pre-Arb |
+3.6 Pre-Arb |
+3.8 Arb1 |
+4.1 Arb2 |
| 40 | – | Lance McCullers | 22 | +3.3 Pre-Arb |
+3.5 Arb1 |
+3.3 Arb2 |
+3.3 Arb3 |
+3.3 Arb4 |
| 41 | – | Lucas Giolito | 21 | +2.4 Pre-Arb |
+2.8 Pre-Arb |
+3.0 Pre-Arb |
+3.5 Arb1 |
+3.3 Arb2 |
| 42 | – | Trevor Story | 23 | +3.5 Pre-Arb |
+3.6 Pre-Arb |
+3.5 Arb1 |
+3.3 Arb2 |
+3.3 Arb3 |
| 43 | 12 | Joc Pederson | 24 | +3.1 Pre-Arb |
+3.2 Arb1 |
+3.1 Arb2 |
+2.9 Arb3 |
|
| 44 | 34 | Salvador Perez | 26 | +3.3 $3.0 M |
+3.3 $7.5 M |
+2.9 $10.0 M |
+2.7 $13.0 M |
+2.2 $13.0 M |
| 45 | – | Julio Teheran | 25 | +3.6 $6.3 M |
+3.7 $8.0 M |
+3.3 $11.0 M |
+3.3 $12.0 M |
|
| 46 | – | Alex Reyes | 21 | +2.7 Pre-Arb |
+3.0 Pre-Arb |
+2.9 Pre-Arb |
+2.8 Arb1 |
+2.7 Arb2 |
| 47 | – | Jake Lamb | 25 | +3.3 Pre-Arb |
+3.1 Arb1 |
+2.8 Arb2 |
+2.7 Arb3 |
|
| 48 | – | Rougned Odor | 22 | +3.7 Pre-Arb |
+3.8 Arb1 |
+4.1 Arb2 |
+4.1 Arb3 |
|
| 49 | – | Jon Gray | 24 | +3.4 Pre-Arb |
+3.5 Pre-Arb |
+3.2 Arb1 |
+3.2 Arb2 |
+3.1 Arb3 |
| 50 | 47 | Carlos Martinez | 24 | +3.7 Arb1 |
+3.9 Arb2 |
+3.5 Arb3 |
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
Roughly where would you put Brandon Crawford?
Crawford was in honorable mentions http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2016-trade-value-honorable-mentions/
About halfway between second and third base, unless a lefty with a tendency to pull ground balls is batting
WOW ZiPS is bullish on Correa. Is this a new revelation? I understand that he’s a 22 year old shortstop who’s running a 120 wRC–basically a magical baseball unicorn–but to project him as better than Trout’s age 25-28 seasons for the next four years? That’s a bold move.
Not saying it’s necessarily wrong or that projections broadly are bad/wrong, but something like that has to warrant further exploration to justify it. I have a hard time seeing how a projection system would peg a player with a lower offensive output and track record to trump a player that’s been the best in the sport since he was Correa’s age.
Especially at a time when Trout would be in the middle of his prime years.
We’re already seeing his prime years right now.
Yes, guys in the league as long as Trout don’t generally get better, and it’s not like there is any real room for growth. What’s he going to do? But I don’t see any reason to think he will start declining. To me, Trout is a true talent 9.0-10.0 WAR player and I’d but the over/under on his WAR advantage the next 4 years over Correa at 10 WAR and I’d take Trout.
I mean, I’d definitely take Trout on that bet, too, because we’ve seen him do it. We haven’t seen Correa do it yet. And like you said, I don’t really see a reason to believe Trout is going to decline in the next couple years.
I agree in taking the Trout bet. I think there’s a very good chance he outperforms Correa by that much over the next 4 years. But what room does he have to improve? I think he could absolutely add power. Trout is an offensive monster because he combines elite power with great on-base skills, league average Ks and elite BABIP, but his ISO generally floats around .250, and he’s generally expected to generate 35 HRs a year. What if he pumped that up to 50 HRs a year/.300 ISO? Could he do that while sustaining his K/BB rates? If he did that, he could flirt with 11-12 WAR.
Bondsian
I’ll go ahead and say it’s wrong.
Yeah I was amazed at that projection for Correa.
Those Correa projections seem awfully optimistic to me as well. What does Correa do that Seager doesn’t that gives Correa 1-1.5 WAR advantage per year?
Correa does have about 800 plate appearances compared to Seager’s 500, but then again, Seager does already have as much career WAR and only one run less of offensive value despite Correa’s headstart.
Perhaps it’s on the bases? Correa grades out as markedly better there, but probably not enough to justify that much more WAR. I doubt it’s his defense either–they’re both similarly sized and had the same grumbles about a potential shift to third. Maybe ZiPS is more optimistic that Correa won’t have to switch.
This would probably make an interesting article, or, at the very least, a podcast topic.
Seager is a half-year older.
I’d also imagine Dan included minor league numbers too.
Looking at primarily majority of PA in the season for the level
18:
Correa – A-Ball 147 wRC+
Seager – Rookie-ball 127 wRC+
19:
Correa – A+ 147 wRC+
Seager – A-Ball 155 wRC+
20:
Correa – MLB 133 wRC+
Seager* – A+ 167 wRC+
Correa has been a level above Seager at the same age basically always
They are both very good but Correa has the age advantage.
*Seager did reach AA at age 20 for 20 games
Looking at the ROS projections, ZIPs seems to think that going forward Seager is going to hit for less power and walk less (both less than he’s been doing and less than Correa), apparently weighting his minor league numbers more heavily than might be expected. That gives Correa a better expected wRC+ this year, with presumably a bigger gap going forward given his youthier youth. Combine with better baserunning projections (and worse defensive projections, but maybe Correa still counts as on the upswing of defensive improvement?) and I guess that adds up to 1+ WAR. Agree, seems strange.
In addition to age, I think it’s because Correa has been consistently excellent at every level since 2013 whereas Seager put up a good-not-great 106 wRC+ in 464 plate appearances at AAA last year. Those plate appearances weigh pretty heavily on Seager’s forecast. I strongly suspect that Seager’s forecast will catch up with Correa’s very quickly if Seager stays even with Correa over their next 300-500 big league plate appearances.
Yeah, this is too bullish on Correa. Lindor is 1.5 WAR ahead of him right now in 2016. Lindor is more likely to get to 8 WAR next year than Correa at this point. That said, we have a lot of good shortstops right now so this is nitpicking a little.
A broader point…it seems the list doesn’t really weight actual ML level performance enough. Seems like all those players in the 30s that haven’t played a lick of Major League baseball are all too highly rated when there are guys producing 4-5 WAR right now not on the list. Some of those prospects are going to bust. But maybe that is a flaw in ML trading evaluation as a whole (coveting prospects too much).
I was shocked by the Correa forecast myself, and asked Dan to double check that there wasn’t an error in the code or something, given how bullish it is on Correa’s future. But Dan said the system just loves Correa, as the history of guys who can hit like this at 20/21 in the big leagues is almost universally fantastic. The age really is the key thing to keep in mind here; it’s easy to forget how big of a leap guys can make early on, and at 21, there’s still a lot of room for growth.
Who else is in that group of guys that can hit like this at short at this age? The only one that comes to mind is A-Rod.
That is still an incredibly bullish projection. Since 1900 only 21 players age 22 and younger have posted 7.8+ WAR seasons.
Three of those season came from Mike Trout. (2012, 2013, 2014)
Ted Willaims (1941)
Eddie Collins (1909)
Stan Musial (1943)
Ty Cobb (1909)
Rogers Hornsby (1917)
Bryce Harper (2015)
Joe Jackson (1911, 1912)
Arod (1996, 1998)
Joe DiMaggio (1937)
Eddie Mathews (1953, 1954)
Cal Ripken (1983)
Dick Allen (1964)
Jammie Fox (1929)
Mel Ott (1929)
Johnny Bench (1970)
Hard for me to accept Correa is projected to be better than someone who literally is the best player his age ever.
FWIW, over the last calendar year Lindor posted an 8.5.
I am really confused by the Correa projections too. Correa’s 2016 offensive performance is actually worse than his 2015 performance despite running a slightly higher BABIP. How is guy projected to rack up 4.5 WAR this season projected to post 8+ WAR a season for the next 5 years? Improvement at Correa’s age is to be expected but he is projected to effectively double his value next season?
Is it possible that young, great, middle infielders like Correa are so rare that the only meaningful comps for projections to work with are Hall of Famers? We all know Arod and the others and we go to them when we look at Correa’s stats. How many young middle infielders show a lot of promise like Correa but ended up being slightly above average players? Or even fizzle out?
I have a lot of respect for Zips, and I know nothing about projections. But who is not surprised by these projections?
Correa’s ZiPS is just insane! I was not expecting that.
I was stunned enough to go to his player page for justification, its projecting almost double his current WAR pace in 2 years, talk about being bullish.
Given his salary, you would have a hard time convincing me that Trout is still a bigger chip than the 4 guys listed below him, he is no doubt worth the money, but it is a lot of money.
Would the Nats trade Trea Turner and Lucas Giolito (and throw in a couple more good prospects) for any of these guys? I’d say maybe Trout, but that’s it. He’s the only guy you give up two potential superstars for because he is basically two superstars worth of player.
Honestly, would anyone actually take a bet on Correa having more WAR than Trout over the next 4 years?
I’m fairly certain the Nationals would trade both of those two for any of Bryant, Seager and Correa without much question. Giolito is still a pitching prospect who isn’t exactly dominating yet this season and has health concerns, and Turner is a great prospect but he’s not a “potential superstar” on the level of those three.
OK, maybe I just hear more about those guys living in DC (I’m not a Nats fan, though). If that is the reason I’m getting downvoted, then I’ll just say I think the fact that Trout is considerably better than any other player, even considering the cost, a team would be more willing to part with a number of tippity-top prospects for him.
I would venture that a few teams would pay him 60m+ per year over a short period of time if that was the only contract option .
2016 Anagram Value: #50 to #1
#50: Czar Rats Lo Mein
#49: Joy ‘N Rag
#48: Grounder Doo
#47: Blake Jam
#46: Relax Eyes
#45: Injure To Heal
#44: Laser Vaporized
#43: Don Jeers Cop
#42: Rev. Rosy Trot
#41: U.S. Italic Logo
#40: LL Muscle Cancer
#39: Dwarf Crop J
#38: Brand New Diet Nine
#37: Rex Bagelman
#36: Our Jail Is U
#35: Gil Erector
#34: Zany Salad Ran
#33: Amazon Marra
#32: Mis Angelou
#31: Nerds Dial Souls
#30: Re Reggie’s Prong
#29: Margret Stalin
#28: Badly Jeer A Brick
#27: Ol’ Cars O’ Cars Car
#26: Canada Moony
#25: Jeans A No Quit
#24: Grape Colon Gyro
#23: Miley Critics: Hah!
#22: DJ Booger Mac
#21: Rich Crasher
#20: Dragon-Bear Sext
#19: Busty Repose
#18: Cory R. Luebke *
#17: Fond Sneeze Jar
#16: Sir Rougned R. Mamba
#15: Arch Isles
#14: Sad Old Johnson **
#13: Value O’Jest
#12: Angry Norse Dad, Ha? ***
#11: Handyman Coma
#10: Herpe Bar Cry
#9: Gout Pad Chills, MD
#8: Land Are A No-No
#7: I Seek Bottom
#6: Yo Razz Nothin’
#5: Scarf Ridin’ Colon
#4: Grocery Ease
#3: Tyra R. Binks
#2: Orca Corrales
#1: Turkotime
*courtesy of 2015 commenter “Corey Kluber”
**courtesy of 2015 commenter “mikecws91”
***courtesy of 2015 commenter “Marcus Tullius Cicero”
Honorable Mentions (in alphabetical order):
AA Sez “No Ranch”
Blond Banter
Cow Relay. Thanks.
Crap Matter ENT
Da Slimy Adze
Diaraia Colon
Dow Use Stamina
El Pink Rival
Eve Remain Nikki
Frond And Crowbar
Gallows Entry
Him Careful Mel
Lion Cloner Straws
LL Ben Leaks
Loan A Roan
Must Ram Carson
Non-Sandy Swabs
O Jolly Age!
O.J.’s Sore
On A Meat Ad
Potty Pie’s Stench
Roxy Buttonn
Statz Venem
Treat Rerun
Ur Amazon Cell
We R Slimy
Scarf Ridin’ Colon makes me unreasonably happy.
Thank you.
A picture is worth a thousand pounds.
https://twitter.com/IJuan24Q/status/754099007509573633
Worth +1000 too!
LMHAO!!!
I’m glad I don’t know and never have to interact with in real life whatever joyless people are downvoting this.
You are doing god’s work.
(applause for a week’s worth of fine work)
Every time Trout comes to the plate I’m going to yell “It’s Turkotime!”
For no.2 – Cloaca Errors, maybe?
Brilliant! Consider “Cloaca Errors” the early leader for most likely new Top 50 Anagram for 2017.
(My next best option for Correa was “Lore O’ Car’s Car”)
#5: Icon For C’land, Sir!
And I thought for sure that this year #3 was gonna be “Snarky Brit”.
A couple of good ones, duly noted. “Snarky Brit” beats my alternative, which was “Barry Stink”
Perfect!
You rang?
Mike Trout should be Kite Tumor
This list is almost as awesome as Dave’s. I think I’m going to have to change my roto team name to “I Seek Bottom.”
At the peak of Longoria’s trade value, where would he have ranked this year? 7th?
He was number 1 for at least four years. 2008-2011.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/mlb-trade-value-08-1-5/
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2009-mlb-trade-value-5-1/
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2010-trade-value-5-1/
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2011-trade-value-10-1/
Oh, bless you internet. The place where you can downvote verifiable facts.
I guess my answer was a little matter of fact. But when Evan Longoria signed his deal, it was one of the most team friendly deals of all time. Looking at it after the fact, it gave the small market Rays a great player with cost certainty at a well-below market rate – a deal which helped keep them competitive in the AL East. Or, as Dave Cameron wrote, “I might just have to retire his jersey if I keep doing this list going forward, because unless he gets hurt or takes a big step back, it’s hard to see anyone passing him for the next five years. His on field value puts him in the discussion with the best players in the game, but his contract is just so unbelievably team friendly that no one else comes close to his overall value to their club…. He’s going to be paid like a league average back-end starting pitcher through a potential Hall-Of-Fame prime. Agents, this is the template of what not to do with your best client going forward.”
This is exactly the opposite of running for president.
I voted up the answers that actually addressed the question.
These downvotes in particular are hilarious. Are they assuming you are wrong? Disapproving of the ranking you obviously didn’t create yourself?
In any event, seeing Matt Wieters and Rickie Weeks in the top 5 and 10 respectively made me flinch.
My, how the turn tables…
Surely higher than that. His peak was probably 2010, when he would have been halfway through a 7.5 WAR season, coming of a 7.1 WAR season, preceded by a 5.6 WAR rookie season, and was 24 years old. He was an elite offensive and defensive player. Basically, his profile looked a lot like Kris Bryant’s. Except he was also making only $1 million that year and was signed for another six years and $42.5 million. I think he’d probably have to be #1 at that point.
The contract Longoria signed in 2008 payed him 47.5 million through the 2016 season and 30 million of that was in team option over the last 3 years of the contract. At the time of the 2009 trade value column he would have put up about 9 WAR in 1.5 seasons and he would have a contract paying him about 47 million for 7.5 more years of control with team options to get out of the contract for 3 million prior to the 2014 season and 1 million prior to either the 2015 or 2016 season.
Dave considered Rizzo as a possible #1 with a contract paying 54 million for 5.5 more years of control. Looking at mid-season 2009 Longoria, we have a 23-year-old 3B that was a better player making less money for 2 more years of control compared to Rizzo.
2011 Longoria would be a 25-year-old with about 23 career WAR and the same amount of control remaining as Rizzo, Seager, Lindor, Bryant, and Correa for only 40 million dollars. Kris Bryant is a 24-year-old 3B with 11.5 career WAR and 5.5 years of control remaining for probably much more than 40 million dollars with him having 4 years of arbitration. 2008 Longoria is probably the only version from 2008-2011 that possibly wouldn’t be 1st this year.
Great series Dave. Again. Kudos. Hard to argue most of the top 25.
Curious what the industry consensus is on Correa’s defense Dave?
Key point here.
We should remember that the zips projections are likely using a default SS defensive adjustment for correa.
By the stats, Correa was like -2 runs on defense last year and is like +1-2 runs this year. So thus far he has been average. Almost all the value has been offense.
I guess his route to 8 WAR is if this changes significantly.
His UZR and DRS are both below 0 this season.
Those are the Def numbers, which include both Correa’s personal level of performance AND the position adjustment for a SS. So a roughly 0 Def value implies a well below average fielder at SS. UZR/150 has Correa at -8.1 to get to those total defensive runs.
People think he’s generally fine there. No one confuses him for a gold glover but the talk of moving him off shortstop has basically ended.
Keith Law is still suggesting that Bregman could push Correa off of short.
http://espn.go.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=5341
I guess we’ll see what happens when the Astros get around to calling up Bregman in the second half.
Dave, thanks for doing this. It is really an awesome effort. And thanks for coming into the comments and focusing an entire chat on the rankings – it’s a really stand-up of you to answer so many questions and responses to the list. I’m sure I speak for the majority of the people who have gripes and criticisms that we know you put a ton of effort into this and it shows.
Thank you. It’s certainly a lot of work, and the “lol he forgot Kershaw, what an idiot!” brigade certainly wasn’t much fun to deal with, but I appreciate the reminder that a lot of you guys enjoy the series.
Not that I would ever agree with anyone who says “what an idiot”, but I would have included Kershaw. Even with the contract and injury risk, I as a GM would give more for Kershaw than I would for, say, Carlos Martinez or Jon Gray.
With Kershaw walking away as a free agent this winter after he voids his deal? Your owner wouldn’t let you.
Where would Kershaw rank without the clause in his contract that allows him to become a free agent after being traded?
Without the void-if-traded clause, he’d still have the opt-out after 2018, so he’d have the same amount of years left as Harper/Machado/Donaldson/Fernandez. So probably somewhere in the 7-15 range; obviously more valuable than those guys, but also a lot more expensive.
True enough, I keep forgetting that option. Thanks for setting me straight Dave. Must be nice to be Mr. Kershaw and have your value depend on your own inclination.
lol @ Kerhsaw brigade. Reminds me of all the people who are Jays fans who keep telling the team to trade Bautista and Encarnacion, even after that particular situation has been spelled out for them.
Lindor moves from outside of the list to the inner circle. Wow. His defense is amazing and his bat is consistently consistent. Guy has untapped power potential too. If he could get 1-2 degree more loft on average, I swear he would hit like 50% line drives. I could also see him having a few years of more BB than K.
Kind of like a SS-playing Robbie Alomar.
Or a Gold-Glove worthy version of Derek Jeter.
When Lindor was coming up through the minors, I thought he’d be Vizquel if he didn’t develop power and Alomar if he did. I guess Jeter with defense is good as well.
Dave, you say “None of these guys are getting traded, of course, and I’m not sure the Astros, Cubs, or Dodgers would trade their guy for Trout if given the chance,” which, at first glance seems to be true. But the Astros have one thing the Cubs or Dodgers don’t have: The best shortstop prospect in baseball, who also happens to be MLB ready, today. I think, if I were running the Astros, that you would have to at least consider trading Correa and another legitimate prospect for Trout, if the Angels were willing to consider it.
I mean, this is a pipe dream, and it would be hard for the Astros to stomach replacing Carlos Correa with, although as well regarded a prospect as there is in the game, still an unproven rookie who is almost certainly a short term downgrade, but it’s a move that very likely makes the Astros better for the next 4 years, right? It would be one of those all time trades that shakes up baseball history forever, but I think the Astros would have to pull the trigger, right?
Bregman, when he becomes a regular, won’t be replacing Correa, regardless of where they slot him. He’d be replacing Valbuena. Maybe Gomez.
If he’s good enough to move Correa off short, Correa can still play 3B, CF or even RF. He’s a big boy.
I don’t think they would. Keep in mind that Trout will make $20 to $25 million more per season than Correa will, and so they’d be trading not just Correa, but whatever free agent they could get for that additional payroll space as well. What do you think they could buy with a 4/$80M contract this winter? Edwin Encarnacion takes that in a heartbeat. Or maybe it could get you both Josh Reddick and Rich Hill. Or it gets you most of the way to Aroldis Chapman.
The additional salary Trout will require could go to other valuable players, and those players might very well make up the gap between the two.
I think that additional salary slot matters more to the Astros than the Dodgers. So a team in the Dodger’s position would absolutely flip Seager/Correa for Trout, but a small-market team like the Astros would prioritize the saved money over the extra WAR on the field.
I agree that the Astros are more salary-conscious than the Dodgers, but I wouldn’t call them “small market” in terms of either metro area population or revenue potential.
The Houston metro area has 6.7 million people. The Astros have a 20 year, $1.6 billion TV contract ( http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/estimated-tv-revenues-for-all-30-mlb-teams/ ). It will likely take them a few good years to rebuild attendance after the down years of rebuilding, but the Astros were a top 10 attendance team back when they had sustained success (#7, #10, and #8 from 2004-6).
The Astros are somewhere in the upper half of teams in thinking about the payroll they could reasonably support, probably right around the edge of the top 10 teams (albeit well below teams like the Dodgers, Yankees, and Red Sox).
Small-market? Houston is one of the largest cities in the US — in fact, it’s the largest (city, not metro area) that doesn’t have two teams sharing it.
That anagram is great.
I have a question, what might Trout have made in arbitration, if he went year by year. I know he would have broken records, but what, like 20 million this year? close to 30 mil next year, his final arb year? Less than that? Thanks.
Clearly Harper and Machado are going straight to free agency, with guys like Rizzo and Goldschmidt and McCutchen signing extensions that cost them mountains of money (risk avoidance, value of the first 10 million, etc. sure I know) will be interesting to see which of the other guys sign extensions.
A lot of Trout’s value comes from defense and high OBP, something that arbiters don’t value as highly. Granted, his BA, HR, RBI and SB totals are also very good (basically, everything about him is great), but he’s hardly prime Bonds (or Pujols, to pick an analogy closer to home). He’s closer to a Heyward who found his projected power stroke and took every aspect of his game and made it 50% more awesome. He would do very very well in arbitration, but I doubt he would break records.
Again, this is not a knock on Trout. He’s better than prime Bonds or prime Pujols, and given the way that era adjustments work, he’s almost certainly better than prime Ruth. I legitimately and truly believe that we are seeing the prime of the greatest player who has ever played the game. But the salary arbiters are stupid and simply do not correctly account for player value. Trout is a perfect example of the type of player who has an enormous amount of his value locked up in aspects of the game that arbiters undervalue.
ZiPS is projecting 5 8-WAR seasons in a row. That is just…wow.
ZiPS usually seems more pessimistic than I would think. The Correa projection seems … bananas. Trout had 11.0 fWAR in his first 179 games. Correa has played 184 games and has accumulated 5.8 fWAR.
If you’re on board with the projections for Correa and Trout, then Correa is obviously more valuable. But the probability that Correa racks up 5 seasons of 8+ wins seems pretty low, given his profile. He doesn’t have a plus-plus defensive profile and nothing stands out in his batting profile that would put him at that level. Is ZiPS forecasting a .300 ISO going forward? Career to date OBP/ISO of .349/.217 don’t seem to point to the type of future batting lines that would drive multiple future 8 win seasons. Is it possible? Sure. But given that a pretty big improvement in batting would result in 8 win seasons, that almost certainly feels like a ceiling.
We’re pretty confident that Trout has an 8+ WAR ceiling. About how many non-Trout, non-Bonds guys could that have been said?
That is what’s so amazing. ZiPS regresses production *hard*. The only thing I can think of is that every player who has done what Correa has done has gone on to become an all-time great, so there aren’t any other options.
It’s not about the ceiling. Correa could be that type of player, but it far from certain. We’ve long passed the stage where there is any question that Trout is a 9ish WAR true talent player, and he’s 24 and it’s hard to believe he would age worse than almost every player in baseball history. He’s not Pablo Sandoval.
So far, Trout has had an 8 WAR floor.
The Correa projections are staggering (to a lesser extent, so are Lindor and Bryant). Is there any precedent for a guy with such a limited track record being projected to be a perennial MVP? What did Trout’s projection say 1/2 way through his first year?
Lindor feels more believable to me. He’s only 22, and projected for 6 WAR capping out in the mid 6’s through his prime. Doesn’t seem too outlandish considering he’s at 8.5 over the last calendar year.
Mookie is too low on your list. 🙁
Or: the fact that he is placed properly just drives home how much ridiculous, awesome young talent there is in baseball right now.
Or: the fact that there are players as good or better than him under control for longer at lower prices probably means that the next CBA needs to redistribute some more of the money to younger players.
I love Mookie, but look at the players that are above him. There’s no shame in being told that you’re “not as good as Mike Trout”. Correa, Seager, Lindor, Rizzo, Bryant… These are the players that future generations will look back on and remember as being truly great. Maybe Mookie will eventually earn his way into that conversation, but the fact that he isn’t there yet is hardly something to be upset about.
Also I’m very bullish on Bryant’s ability to improve. I think his contact management skills that we’ve seen this year are just the tip of the iceberg, given his swing mechanics. Give him a year or two and we might be breaking out the “Bonds without the steroids” analogies.
I’m excited to see how next year goes, with Harper and Machado only having 1 more year of control. It’ll be an interesting case study.
I’m a little surprised that there was so much debate about Trout being #1.
I love this list, I love ZIPS, I love Correa. And I would bet my house that Trout posts a higher WAR than Correa in 2019, barring a catastrophic injury.
(Also I love Trout. Lots of love to go around.)
I don’t understand how the ZIPs 2016 RoS numbers have him at a 4.1 WAR/650 pace, and then in 2017 he’s suddenly a 7.9 WAR player. I wouldn’t be surprised if there is some sort of calculation error at play.
Assuming I had significant equity in my house, I’m not sure I would bet it on a 1 year WAR competition btwn Trout and Correa. If you stretched the length of time on WAR from 2018 to 2020, then I would consider making that bet on Trout.
“Well, you don’t turn 25 for a few more weeks, so you’re not really old yet.”
OH IS THAT WHAT OLD MEANS NOW.
Signed,
Well-Beered 26-Year-Old
So if I’m as old as you and Trout combined for a few more weeks, that makes me….AAARRGHHHHHH
Signed,
Really Really Old Old
Hell, I’m 67. Can any Fangraphs reader beat that? I saw Koufax and Mays play.
Was everything sepia-toned back then, or straight black & white? I forget when the world got color.
(Oh wait. When Dorothy landed in Oz! How silly of me.)
Thanks, Dave. I had not noticed before that Machado and Harper are scheduled to hit free agency in 2019 for their age 26 seasons. Talk about leverage!
Revisiting a theme from the earlier rankings: does the Pomeranz/Espinoza trade indicate that the list may generally overrate prospects? Pomeranz wasn’t in the honorable mention category. And yet he fetched Espinoza, whom scouts have placed closely to Bregman, Benintendi, or Reyes in various publications. I recognize that these prospects are closer to helping Major League teams now but a) that’s not necessarily that valuable to a lot of teams right now (like the Padres, or DBacks, or A’s, or Braves or…) and b) it’s not like the publications don’t take bust potential into account.
I think if we examine this trade along with the Kimbrel, Giles, and Miller trades, we have to conclude one of two things. Either Dombrowski, Stewart, and Luhnow are all incompetent or MLB GM’s don’t value prospects quite as highly as this list would indicate.
Dave relies pretty heavily on ZiPS forecast when determining a prospect’s value. While Espinoza is a highly regarded prospect, I wouldn’t be surprised if his ZiPS forecast isn’t anything special given how young he is and how little minor league experience he has. So I don’t think the trade is incompatible with the rankings at all.
This list didn’t just include the highest-rated prospects. It included a specific group of prospects who are seen as safe bets for solid value and able to contribute in the short term, while also having the long-term superstar ceiling and endless cheap control that many prospects so desirable. As an 18-year old pitcher in A-ball, I don’t have to tell you how risky Espinoza and how far off from the majors. So even if he is rated right around Bregman or Benintendi, he would not be nearly as valuable in trade because a team is less certain of his contributions and is unable to convert what they trade away into near-term wins.
Prospects always should have greater potential long-term value than what they are traded for – otherwise, why assume that risk? – but in the case of Bregman or Benintendi, you wouldn’t trade their long-term value for lesser short-term value because they can provide you that short-term value as well.
You have to kind of revisit the fact that it’s trade value, not flat out prospect value.
The rankings where Espinoza has excelled most, BA and Law, tend to rate highly on upside, sometimes at the expense of proximity and ignoring attrition rates. Pitcher attrition rates are remarkably higher than hitter attrition rates which is why you might see a guy like Espinoza ranked as highly as Moncada or Benintendi based on pure upside, but not valued as highly in trade as the others.
In a vacuum, I’d rather have had Espinoza on my team than Moncada or Benintendi if I could 100% guarantee that all three would hit their upside, but when accounting for the reality of any hitter reaching their upside compared to a hitter (And then the major questions regarding whether Espinoza’s body will be able to withstand a full season workload), I’d have to give up Espinoza sooner than Moncada or Benintendi.
Keep in mind that there’s a difference between the process of deciding where a prospect should rank on a list and determining what his current market value to a team should be. Prospect analysts are naturally incentivized to bet on upside, and while timeline is being taken into account, their goal is to identify — as quickly as possible — the players who will eventually turn into high-end performers. But for a team, proximity to the majors is a big deal, and it’s why the Red Sox were willing to part with Espinoza; realistically, he wasn’t going to be contributing in Boston for 3+ years, so even with terrific upside, i think his current market value is less than what a “#15 overall prospect” would generally command.
In terms of long-term upside, maybe Espinoza is worthy of being in the same mix as MLB-ready hitters. In terms of present day trade value, though, he’s not that close to those guys.
In terms of the recent trades you cite, I actually think those deals all show the opposite of what you’re arguing; that teams are willing to pay a premium for cost-controlled young MLB players. The Red Sox gave up Espinoza for Pomeranz because he’s not just a rental. The D’Backs overpaid for Miller because he had three years of remaining control, and because their decision makers probably aren’t fit to be running a team. The Astros didn’t give up anyone who was anywhere close to this list for Giles, and Giles cost a ton because he was a cheap, controllable, MLB asset.
Those are the guys who I’ve ranked highly here. Bregman and Benintendi aren’t really prospects at this point; they’re big leaguers who just haven’t been called up yet. There’s a huge gap between guys like that, guys who can help you win today, and 18 year old pitching prospects in A-ball.
Benintendi is most surely still a prospect. Many prospects have matched his current performance and struggled and even failed to make the transition to the bigs.
Damaso, gotta at least halfway agree with you. For every Xander who looks big-league ready when first called up, there’s a JBJ who struggles way worse than their minor-league pedigree would suggest. When it comes to Benintendi, I’d listen really closely to what the scouts are saying about his readiness.
Now if you want a big leaguer who just hasn’t been called up yet, go visit Dilson Hererra (but don’t ask him what he thinks about Jose Reyes).
what benintendi is doing isn’t even in the same class as what xander was doing (a level higher and a year younger), and xander still struggled to make the transition.
Everyone struggles in different ways. I think the projection systems are high on Benintendi’s major-league chances mostly because of HOW he has been doing well in the minors (high contact, high walk rate, low strikeouts, good defense). Xander and JBJ had far more power, higher strikeout rates (especially JBJ) and worse walk rates going through the minors. They were still incredibly exciting, but in different ways, and especially ways that tend to be unduly magnified in the majors.
I’m pretty bearish on Benintendi’s chances in the majors this year. I’m sure he’ll see a call-up, and I would guess that he’ll run a 90-100 wRC+ with average defense and good BsR (so basically, a 1-1.5 WAR/600 player), but his call-up will have more to do with Boston’s win-now status paired with their atrocious left field depth than with any hype over Benintendi’s potential contributions.
JBJ might be a better illustration of your point, though. Polished college bat who tore through the minors, but then was absolutely lost in the bigs.
Fangraphs is turning into a dirty old man with all that drooling over younger and younger players. (that was a joke btw, lighten up Francis)
Shocked to see Correa above Bryant and Seager, considering what each player is actually doing. I’m sure no readers here were expecting that. Of course, we don’t have entire scouting departments informing our decisions.
I will say that I still don’t believe the Dodgers would trade Seager for Correa right now, though what Dave wrote here persuades me the Astros would not make that trade either. LA is getting too much from him right now, and teams tend to stick with their own franchise cornerstones.
The Cubs would also surely not trade Bryant for Correa, not just because Bryant is helping more now as they compete, but because they have a quality shortstop in Russell. Russell is certainly a better defender than Correa, and whatever you think about Correa, it’s hard to imagine you expect he’d be more valuable than Bryant if he moved to third base. That makes me wonder whether the Astros would swap Correa for Bryant. With another excellent shortstop ready to play right now, they might improve their team by getting max positional value from Bryant and Bregman, rather than moving one of their shortstops to third.
Ignore Russell, I could absolutely see the Cubs trading Correa for Bryant. I’m not sure the Astros would do it though. Correa is three years younger and plays short stop, and if need be, will move over to third. Bryant’s great, but between the age difference and Bryant (probably) costing more over the next five years because he’s Super-Two; the Correa over Bryant case can be made/seen. Same goes for Seager over Bryant (I’d have Bryant #4, Correa at #3, and Seager at #2 personally).
Part of the reason LA wouldn’t trade Seager for Correa is the incremental upside is actually pretty small on a total-team-year-by-year basis, and it’s at the same position (so you’re not giving up value in one area to plug a hole in another). And unlike an academic exercise like this — or the arena of fantasy baseball, where trading players requires nothing more than a click of the mouse — in the real world of actual front offices and dugouts, there’s what we might call “frictional losses.” Trading a player, especially mid-season, potentially disrupts the clubhouse (both interpersonal dynamics and whatever goes on in players’ brains in the middle of the night when they lie awake with the realization that no one is untouchable and no situation is permanent). And as you alluded to with “franchise cornerstone” it disrupts, however temporarily, the relationship between the team and the fans: all those kids who got Corey Seager replica jerseys the Dodgers were giving out in May would get over the trade eventually, but maybe they won’t be pestering their parents to go to another Dodgers game for a while. Those are all minor things, but they’re real, and they’re something that has to be overcome to move a really good player.
Imagine the frictional costs if the Dodgers traded Kershaw to whomever thought he had the highest trade value 😉
As far as “who thought he had the highest trade value”, just go find the Kershaw brigade that was loudly complaining about his inclusion on the “honorable mention” list. 🙂
If you accept those projections, I’m not sure how you can rank Trout ahead of Correa. I’m a major Trout fan and these rankings make no sense based on the projections/salary figures provided.
The rankings aren’t based on the projections. They are there as a piece of information, an object to provide context, but trade value isn’t just ZIPS forecasts divided by future costs.
Fair point. I wonder what folks around the league would say about these projections. Hypothetically speaking, as a GM would you give up more for Correa or Trout? I know you position on how the league would view that questions from this article. I just wonder how you personally see it.
As always, thanks for writing these. Always a fun series
Depends on the context of the team. If I’m a high-revenue club with plenty of money to build a team even after allocating $33 million a year to Trout, I’d probably lean towards him, assuming I had a win-now club. If I had a mid-level payroll or below, I’d take Correa and spread the savings around.
I’m not complaining I’m just curious about what separates mookie from rizzo because mookie has more WAR this year and I’d bet he’s better over the next few years than rizzo. Is it a combination of the extra year of control and teams paying more for rizzo’s skill set?
The league values middle of the order sluggers over all-around contributors, so Rizzo has the kind of skillset that gets executives to shell out a bit more. The extra year of control is also locked in at a very low salary; if Mookie remains this good, he’ll be making $30 to $40 million that year, in his first year of free agency, while Rizzo is still locked in around $15 million.
Thank you for the response I appreciate it. It’s awesome that you take the time to respond to your readers and help them understand your reasoning.
I have to admit, every time that I think I have Rizzo pegged as a fringe top-ten guy, he keeps adding even better stuff to his resume. That extra track record of great performance is probably another factor in him having a higher value than Mookie.
Rizzo has nicely made the jump from being a real good player with a great contract to being a great player with a real good contract.
My guess is Rizzo peaks in the series this year, he’s at the perfect point of control/cost and age right now.
Great player, great contract.
Au contraire, Dave, not a boring result at all. That Trout could be guaranteed so much money and could still bring back a bigger haul in a trade than any other player speaks to what an absurdly good player he is. It is also a sad commentary that no other Angels even ranked an honorable mention, and that trading Trout is even suggested because of the dismal state of their player development.
Curious if any other Royals would rank in the top 100? Guessing not given all the injuries and pending free agency.
Not sure I have a ton to add – ZiPS just freaking loves Correa. It thinks his defensive numbers ought to be better, that his hit profiles in majors and minors suggest a higher BABIP than he’s displayed, and he’s going to be 22. While it’s a highly sophisticated set of algorithms, it’s still just a large set of algorithms.
Why the modest BABIP/wRC+/WAR RoS projections for this year then? ZIPS is basically saying he will be twice as valuable per game next year than he will be for the rest of this season.
The 2016 RoS numbers appear to like him less than the 2016 preseason ZIPS (which is reasonable given he’s hit worse than expected).
I see that Correa’s WAR trends upwards through age 26, while Lindor and Seager are expected to have flat or slightly declining WAR by then. Is ZiPS expecting Correa to get more of his value from elite power vs. speed and defense, giving more weight to components that peak later?
I have to believe AJ Pollock would have been somewhere around 40-45 this year had he not gotten hurt in ST, yeah? Surprised to see he wasn’t in the Honorable Mentions at least, likely in the ‘hurt at the wrong time’ category.
Does ZIPS distinguish age gaps that are true year gaps, e.g. two players born in March of different years from calendar age gaps, e.g., Seager being considered 22 and Correa 21 when there is actually less than five months different between their ages?
Always wondered the knock-on effect for statistical projections that rely on ageing curves.
And they both were drafted in the same year out of high school. So they likely have very similar amounts of wear and tear on their bodies from playing baseball. There is virtually no difference in their ages baseball wise.
How far down the list do you have to go from #1 to get to a guy with half the value of Trout? I’m thinking maybe into the 20’s? Would love to see a relative value, where Trout is 100, and everyone else is valued relative to Trout (so a 70-value player + a 30-value player = Trout).
In reality the difference in trade value between the “inner circle” and say #21 is almost infinite. I can realistically envision a team trading a player like Archer and receiving a fair trade package in return. I cannot envision any plausible scenario where a member of the top 6 is traded for a fair return.
Love Yelich getting some respect
Dave Great series – too nitpick – Altuve is younger, has better zips, cheaper contract and plays a premium position than Goldschimdt. I think Paul is too high – anchoring bias since he was #3 last year?
I’d guess it’s based on Goldschmidt’s more consistent track record and, based on one of Dave’s comments above, that teams are much more willing to pay up for middle-of-the-order slugger types.
Despite the relative WAR projections, I’m guessing a big part of it is just the way a player like Altuve ages relative to a player like Goldschmidt. There is a lot more risk in an Altuve than there is in a Goldschmidt over those same three years of control.
Goldy has been pretty much the same guy every season for five seasons so he’s a fairly stable, known quantity. Altuve has only really found a next level this year and if ZiPS’ rest of season projections are any indication, it doesn’t believe in the new found power or the increased walk rate. Add that to the fact that Altuve is a fringe average defender and speed doesn’t age that well and you get a lot of risk with Altuve. If Altuve’s 2017-19 is more like Altuve’s 2015 than 2016, he’s still a really great player, but not an elite one.
We’re only talking about 4 spots so not like there’s a huge gap between them and I’m sure plenty of teams would prefer Altuve to Goldy for the reasons you mentioned, but in a vacuum I think all teams would prefer the stability and consistency of Goldschmidt to the risk of Baseball’s Corgi Jose Altuve. Of course, if Altuve maintains this power and walk rate through the rest of 2016, ZiPS may think differently.
Someone has to have a hat bet with Dan on those Correa projections, right? Damn… I thought I was pretty high on him.
I can’t help but wonder where Byron Buxton would be on this list if he hadn’t been a disaster thus far. He still has plenty of time to reach his potential but wouldn’t be shocked if he turns out to be Cameron Maybin 2.0.
Where is Jason Kipnis?
This is BS. Where’s Jered Weaver?
Glad to see you went with Trout. Hard to put a dollar value on a guy who realistically could be the best player ever.