2016 Trade Value: #21 to #30
| 2016 TRADE VALUE SERIES Introduction Hon. Mention #41-50 #31-40 |
We’re now halfway through this year’s trade value list, and today’s crop is an interesting group, comprised almost entirely of outfielders and pitchers, many of whom have signed long-term deals at bargain prices, relative to the current market rates for players of their abilities. This group skews a little older than the last ten names we discussed, but the oldest player here is still 29; youth is still a near-requirement for making this series.
As a reminder for those who haven’t read the first two 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. And for prospects who haven’t yet been called up, we have to guess when they’ll become arbitration eligible, since we don’t actually know how their organizations will handle the service time issue yet.
With those items covered, let’s get to the middle of the list.
| Team Control WAR Total | +12.6 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | 2020 |
| Previous Rank | – |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 27 | +3.5 | Arb1 |
| 2018 | 28 | +3.2 | Arb2 |
| 2019 | 29 | +3.1 | Arb3 |
| 2020 | 30 | +2.8 | Arb4 |
Springer’s transformation from a swing-and-miss slugger into a quality all-around player has been pretty amazing; he’s raised his contact rate from 61% to 74% over the last couple of years, a stunning improvement in a number that generally doesn’t move that much. He’s managed to retain his power despite getting his swing under control, and now, he’s become one of the best outfielders in baseball, providing value at the plate, on the bases, and in the field. The only reason Springer is even this low is that he took some time getting to the big leagues, not debuting until he was 24, so despite just being in his third year in the majors, he turns 27 in a few months, so he doesn’t have the long-term upside of some of the other young guys ahead of him. But he’s a terrific player and should remain one for the rest of his arbitration years, making him one of the most valuable players in the game.
| Five-Year WAR | +13.9 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | $26.5 M |
| Team Control Through | 2021 |
| Previous Rank | #25 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 28 | +3.3 | $5.0 M |
| 2018 | 29 | +3.2 | $7.5 M |
| 2019 | 30 | +2.8 | $10.0 M |
| 2020 | 31 | +2.5 | $12.5 M |
| 2021 | 32 | +2.1 | $13.5 M |
Perhaps one of the most unique players in baseball, Marte is a combination of skills you don’t see all that often. He’s one of the fastest players in baseball, but plays left field, a position traditionally manned by lumbering sluggers. Marte doesn’t walk at all, but has a career .344 OBP anyway, thanks to his ability to sustain exceptionally high BABIPs by racking up infield hits and avoiding infield flies. He strikes out more than most teams would want from a guy whose not really a power hitter, yet he racks up enough extra base hits to remain an excellent hitter. Like Springer, he’s one of the best all-around outfielders in baseball, though unlike with the Astros situation, Marte’s never really going to get that expensive; the long-term deal he signed in 2014 ensures that. While Marte might not ever get the public recognition he deserves as a high-end player, teams definitely would love to have him, especially budget-conscious teams that need star players at role player salaries.
| Team Control WAR Total | +15.1 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | 2020 |
| Previous Rank | – |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 27 | +4.0 | Arb1 |
| 2018 | 28 | +3.9 | Arb2 |
| 2019 | 29 | +3.8 | Arb3 |
| 2020 | 30 | +3.4 | Arb4 |
A year ago, Bradley was in Triple-A, and it was basically impossible to imagine that he’d be considered one of the most valuable players in the game 12 months later. But since this list was last published, Bradley has played 143 big league games, and hit .285/.368/.545, good for a 139 wRC+, and with his defense in CF, that adds up to +6 WAR in less than a season’s worth of playing time; over that time, only Mike Trout has been a more productive CF on a per-game basis. The addition of power to his game has transformed him as a hitter, and now he looks like a guy who is going to hit while also adding substantial value in the field. Even if he won’t sustain his current offensive numbers, an above average hitter who plays elite defense in center field is a coveted thing, and with Bradley having four prime years of control after this season, the Red Sox would be able to extract a ransom for him if they chose to make him available. They won’t, though, because he’s one of the main reasons the 2016 Red Sox are contending for a playoff team, and he’s now a cornerstone of their team going forward.
| Team Control WAR Total | +10.6 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | $16 M |
| Team Control Through | 2020 |
| Previous Rank | #39 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 30 | +3.1 | 6,500,000 |
| 2018 | 31 | +2.8 | 8,000,000 |
| 2019 | 32 | +2.5 | $9.0 M |
| 2020 | 33 | +2.2 | $9.5 M |
An earlier version of this table had Carrasco’s contract information incorrect. It has been updated.
Three years and six days ago, the Indians designated Carrasco for assignment, putting him through waivers to get him down to Triple-A, meaning any team in baseball could have grabbed him for nothing but a small waiver fee. After figuring out how to command his stuff in the bullpen, he’s now in year three of dominating as a starting pitcher, and thanks to the extension he signed with Cleveland last year, he’s going to get paid like an okay middle reliever for the rest of his career. In terms of production at a low cost, it’s hard to find many better values than Carrasco. But he’s a high-risk arm, already having had Tommy John surgery, and never having thrown more than the 183 innings he racked up last year, so while the long-term cheap contract is nice, it’s probably not wise to expect Carrasco to still be pitching well by the time the deal expires. But even if he doesn’t have long-term durability on his side, Carrasco is a very cheap frontline starter, and in a market starved for controllable arms, he’d be a big time target if the Indians started listening to offers.
| Five-Year WAR | +15.6 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | TBD |
| Previous Rank | – |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 22 | +2.7 | Pre-Arb |
| 2018 | 23 | +3.1 | Pre-Arb |
| 2019 | 24 | +3.2 | Pre-Arb |
| 2020 | 25 | +3.2 | Pre-Arb |
| 2021 | 26 | +3.4 | Arb1 |
The best prospect in baseball, the market has already put a high value on Moncada once, back when he came with more uncertainty and was even further from the big leagues. 15 months after signing Moncada for $31.5 million, plus paying another $31.5 million in penalties because of the deal, Moncada looks to be worth well more than what Boston paid, and is generally considered to be the best prospect in baseball at this point. Overflowing with upside, Moncada looks like a potential franchise player with both speed and power, and while he doesn’t offer the present value that most of the rest of the players on this list do, people in the game think he could be a regular as early as next year, and be a star not too long after that. Given his upside, it’s very unlikely the Red Sox trade him; if they do, they’re going to have to get back a pretty great player, because Moncada’s now the kind of prospect that doesn’t get traded very often.
| Team Control WAR Total | +15.5 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | $16.8 M |
| Team Control Through | 2020 |
| Previous Rank | #41 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 28 | +4.2 | 6,000,000 |
| 2018 | 29 | +4.1 | 8,850,000 |
| 2019 | 30 | +3.8 | $10.5 M |
| 2020 | 31 | +3.4 | $10.5 M |
Still one of the most incredible stories in baseball — Quintana joined the White Sox as a minor league free agent, which is basically unheard of for a guy this good — Quintana just continues to get better every year, adding more velocity and increasing his strikeout rate again in the first half of the year, as he continues to move away from being seen as a strike-thrower who is getting by with average stuff, and is now starting to be viewed as a legitimate front of the rotation starter. Like Carrasco, Quintana’s long-term contract will keep his salaries well within every team’s budget for years, but unlike Carrasco, Quintana is a guy who you can count on to give you 200 innings a year, at least as much as you can count on that from any pitcher. His combination of durability and sustained success, while figuring out how to add velocity instead of lose it, has made him one of the best pitchers in baseball, and a guy that the White Sox could charge a ransom for if they became inclined to sell.
| Five-Year WAR | +15.6 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | $32.0 M |
| Team Control Through | 2023 |
| Previous Rank | – |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 25 | +3.3 | $1.6 M |
| 2018 | 26 | +3.3 | $4.1 M |
| 2019 | 27 | +3.1 | $6.1 M |
| 2020 | 28 | +3.1 | $8.6 M |
| 2021 | 29 | +2.8 | $11.6 M |
The Pirates other outfielder, Polanco has had a breakout first half, adding power to his game and turning himself into a valuable hitter, in addition to the value he already provided in the field and on the bases. Now looking more like a complete player, Polanco is living up to the promise he showed a couple of years ago, when he ranked #30 on this list. But Polanco isn’t really making a leap from off the list last year to up this high simply because of a strong first half; he also signed a long-term deal a few months that gives the Pirates the rights to his services through 2023, so he’s signed for up to seven more years after this one, and at prices that reflected the risk he carried before he put together this strong first half. The contract looked like a nice deal for the Pirates at the time, but if Polanco sustains this breakout, it will end up being one of the most team-friendly deals in baseball over the next decade. Good luck getting the cost-conscious Pirates to give him up now.
| Five-Year WAR | +15.5 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | $48.0 M |
| Team Control Through | 2022 |
| Previous Rank | #26 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 25 | +3.4 | 3,500,000 |
| 2018 | 26 | +3.2 | 7,000,000 |
| 2019 | 27 | +3.1 | 9,800,000 |
| 2020 | 28 | +3.0 | 12,500,000 |
| 2021 | 29 | +2.8 | 14,000,000 |
Yelich is, in some ways, Polanco with a longer track record. They are different hitters, as Yelich continues to hit too many groundballs to become a legitimate source of power, but by not putting the ball in the air, he’s able to sustain the highest BABIP of anyone in baseball, making him an on-base machine in a time where that skill is becoming increasingly scarce. Overall, though, both Yelich and Polanco are quality 24-year-old corner outfielders, and both are signed to long-term deals at prices that every team could easily afford. Yelich gets the slightest of nods here due to the fact that he’s performed at this level for more than three months, but really, both are highly valuable young building blocks, and which one you prefer is really a matter of taste. The Marlins are certainly happy to have Yelich in the fold, and while you never count on anyone staying in Miami their hole career, he’s probably the least likely Marlin to get moved any time soon.
| Team Control WAR Total | +13.3 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | – |
| Team Control Through | 2020 |
| Previous Rank | #20 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 29 | +3.7 | Arb1 |
| 2018 | 30 | +3.5 | Arb2 |
| 2019 | 31 | +3.2 | Arb3 |
| 2020 | 32 | +2.9 | Arb4 |
Over the last couple of years, deGrom has risen from overlooked prospect to frontline starter, and even with his velocity taking a step back this year, he’s been as dominant as ever, establishing himself as one of the premier pitchers in the game. If this list was solely performance based, deGrom would be knocking on the door of the top 10. But as Mets fans have had plenty of reminders this year, pitchers are risky, and they break a lot; deGrom has already had Tommy John surgery, back in 2010, and with the industry consensus putting the shelf life of the repaired ligament at around seven years, deGrom may come with more risk than most. Despite having four years of team control remaining after this season, most of deGrom’s value may come from what he can do in the next few years; he’s good enough to justify this placement even with the big long-term health concerns, though. Even if he’s viewed as a short-term asset, there aren’t many who will pitch better than deGrom while he’s still healthy enough to throw with his right arm.
| Five-Year WAR | +15.8 |
| Guaranteed Dollars | $20.3 M |
| Team Control Through | 2021 |
| Previous Rank | #10 |
| Year | Age | Projected WAR | Contract Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 28 | +3.6 | 4,750,000 |
| 2018 | 29 | +3.5 | 6,250,000 |
| 2019 | 30 | +3.2 | 7,500,000 |
| 2020 | 31 | +2.9 | $9.0 M |
| 2021 | 32 | +2.6 | $11.0 M |
A year ago, Archer cracked the top 10 by taking a huge leap forward, striking everybody out and becoming a legitimate ace. He’s carried over most of his strikeout gains this year, but everything else has been off; the walks are up, his BABIP has spiked, and his home run rate has nearly doubled. By themselves, maybe these wouldn’t be that big a deal, but when they all happen simultaneously, they’re something of a red flag, which is why Archer falls ten spots this year. But even with his somewhat-concerning first half, Archer still looks like one of the best young pitchers in baseball; the stuff is still good and he’s still missing bats, so he can probably correct the command problems and get back on track. And if he does, well, he’ll be a #1 starter making #6 starter money. This probably isn’t the right time for the Rays to trade Archer, given that he could increase his value again with a strong second half, but if they do decide to take advantage of the lack of pitchers on the market, odds are good they’ll get a crazy return for him; the upside and the contract make him insanely valuable.
| Rk | Pv | Player | Age | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | 10 | Chris Archer | 27 | +3.6 4,750,000 |
+3.5 6,250,000 |
+3.2 7,500,000 |
+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 3,500,000 |
+3.2 7,000,000 |
+3.1 9,800,000 |
+3.0 12,500,000 |
+2.8 14,000,000 |
| 24 | – | Gregory Polanco | 24 | +3.3 1,600,000 |
+3.3 4,100,000 |
+3.1 6,100,000 |
+3.1 8,600,000 |
+2.8 11,600,000 |
| 25 | 41 | Jose Quintana | 27 | +4.2 6,000,000 |
+4.1 8,850,000 |
+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 6,500,000 |
+2.8 8,000,000 |
+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 5,000,000 |
+3.2 7,500,000 |
+2.8 10,000,000 |
+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 3,000,000 |
+3.3 7,500,000 |
+2.9 10,000,000 |
+2.7 13,000,000 |
+2.2 13,000,000 |
| 45 | – | Julio Teheran | 25 | +3.6 6,300,000 |
+3.7 8,000,000 |
+3.3 11,000,000 |
+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.
Let the Chris Archer discussion commence…
I am surprised that Archer is higher than Quintana. Archer is more inconsistent than Quintana, who has been good for the past 4 years. I understand that Archer is under team control for1 more year, but I’d rather have Quintana. I think there is a real risk that Archer is on a serious decline.
It’s an extra year of control but also, over those first 4 years assuming team options are executed, Quintana would be paid 37.8MM, where Archer would only cost 27.5MM. That’s a pretty significant difference.
The main reason I would be leery of Archer is the lack of diversification, as his value comes entirely from his slider. It is one of the better breaking pitches in the game, but his fastball and changeup both have significantly negative value. Not only does that mean he’s going to struggle in any outing where he doesn’t have a good feel for the slider, but it also means that he’s forced to rely on it heavily over the course of a season, which isn’t great news for his long-term injury outlook.
I’m more excited for the complaining about the number of Red Sox on the list…
Also, I know it’s splitting hairs at this point, but I would give Polanco the edge over Yelich. He’s signed for an extra year for less money, which, when taking the team that would actually be trading him into account, would seem to make him slightly more valuable (or at least harder to pry loose).
I think Dave loaded this section up with Red Sox so he could sneak Archer through 😉
surprised that more guys would want JBJ over Springer. i know small differences…
Yelich might even be underrated by current metrics. If you follow Tony Blengino’s work analyzing batted ball profiles, you could conclude that his great numbers at the plate so far are still not approaching his realistic potential, and his UZR/DRS discrepancy leaves me wondering if fWAR and DEF may be undervaluing his production in the outfield. I really like Polanco, but if I had to pick between the two I’d be taking Yelich in a heartbeat.
Let me see if I can divine the top 20 off the top of my head without checking anything.
Betts
Bogaerts
Machado
Lindor
Kluber
Sale
Trout
Correa
Syndergaard
Harper
Fernandez
Bryant
Rizzo
C.Seager
Goldschmidt
Arenado
Bumgarner
Posey
Missing two (probably obvious ones).
Donaldson and Altuve would be my two guesses.
Donaldson is only signed for next year, so I doubt he makes it.
Donaldson is under team control through 2018 (his last arb year); his last contract he signed was just for 2016 and 2017.
Thanks for that, I wasn’t sure how long Donaldson was under team control for. Donaldson and Altuve are probably my missing two then.
The interesting thing about Donaldson is that while he won’t sign a contract after 2018 for more than 1/3 what Harper will get (with Machado probably right behind him), they are actually pretty close in trade value, because you’re only talking about the next 2.5 years. I think it can be hard to disassociate trade value from future value. Future value after free agency is almost worthless.
I had to check too as at first I thought he was just controlled thru 2017. But yeah Cots at least shows thru 18 with ’18 up for arb yet.
My mistake, I thought he was a FA in 2018, not 2019. Still, given his age, I think his place on the list is in doubt, since he would be the oldest member of the list.
He will also likely put up his second straight 8+ win season. With two and a half years left on his contract at say 43 million (assuming 20 million in his arbitration year) he should be able to put up a significant surplus value. Hell, he could be putting up surplus value by time the all-star break comes around next year.
Longo? Career resurgence. He’s not as cheap as he used to be, but he’s still cheap.
The talent on that list makes me gurgle…
How about Kenta Maeda at pretty darn cheap? Perhaps not enough of a track record yet, though.
I also thought Kyle Seagar might show up on this list.
Here is a suggestion that some people may find helpful. For the arbitration years, maybe you could include an estimate of what the expected salary would be.
There’s really no way to know how the arbitration will play out with any of these guys. They’ll be underpaid, but their performance year to year and what they received in the past play such huge roles.
We can make educated guess based on their expected performance and compare them to comparable players. Much of this exercise is educated speculation. This seems like a reasonable addition. I’d like to see it.
But the things that are valued are not the same as what makes you valuable in fWAR. Stuff like pitcher wins and stuff has such a huge effect.
I don’t know why but this entire group felt underwhelming.
So 3/5 of the Cleveland rotation makes the list. Those Carrasco and Kluber deals should keep the team competitive for years to come. In a bizarro world way, the Indians’ staff is like the Pittsburgh outfield. Great, underrated, low-cost/WAR players signed long-term. And, unless I’m missing someone obvious, Carrasco and Kluber are the two oldest players on the list.
Loaded youth is fun. Over half of Boston’s 2018 lineup could be from this list (Assuming Betts and Bogaerts are top twenty).
And yet, they are still in second place to a team expected to win 20 games this year or something like that.
The butthurt is STRONG with this O’s fan…
They’ve improved on last year’s team by 7 games in the first half and are in line for a playoff spot, I’m not sweating what the Orioles are doing right now, especially with them only having a 2 game margin right now. There’s also the matter of the long term, which is what the youth movement matters to (O’s have one of the worst farms in the MLB, Sox have one of the best AND one of the best young cores).
maybe they should use that epic trade value to get some players that can win.
Aren’t you a Blue Jays fan? Last I saw the standings, the Sox were ahead of the Jays in the loss column.
“Loaded youth is fun” – sounds like Roger Clemens
Just a brief edit: Carrasco’s deal is reported for the wrong years. He makes $4.5M this year, $6.5M in 2017, and so on. Just need to move everything up a year.
Thanks for catching that. That mistake makes Carrasco a little bit less valuable, but probably not dramatically so, since not that many people expect he’ll still be a quality pitcher in five years, given his history of arm injuries. Reduces the upside a bit, but most teams trading for Carrasco would be doing so because of what he is now and maybe for the next few years. But with our overestimation of his year of control, I could see an argument for moving him down a few spots, maybe even into the mid-30s, if one wanted to make that case.
2016 Anagram Value: #30 to #21:
#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
* repeat from 2015
and #27 will probably be the best once again.
Yes! Ol’ Cars O’ Cars Car! I say that one to myself every single time Carrasco is brought to my attention. And laugh. I say something like, “There he is again, Ol’ Cars O’ Cars Car.” That’s what I say. Thanks for bringing it back.
“Ol’ Cars O’ Cars Car” is the first anagram to have itself retired, like a uniform number or hurricane. Won’t even try to do another one for Carrasco.
“DJ Booger Mac” isn’t retired, however. I simply couldn’t come up with a different anagram that was nearly as good.
Major Bed Cog?
Good one. If I had thought one that good I probably would have used it this year, since you could at least make a case for it vs. DJ Booger Mac.
I think Leonard Nimoy says that in Civ 4 when you discover the automobile.
Jeremy’s… iron?
J. Remy son ire
These need to be listed from 50 to the current number, the same way Dave has the cumulative list at the end of the article.
2016 Anagram Value: #50 to #21 (Plus Honorable Mentions):
#50: Czar Rats Lo Mein
#49: Joy ‘N Rag
#48: Grounder Doo
#47: Blake Jam
#46: Relax Eyes
#45: Injure To Heal
#44: Rise Vapor Daze
#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
Honorable Mentions:
Ur Amazon Cell
Da Slimy Adze
We R Slimy
Potty Pie’s Stench
Lion Cloner Straws
AA Sez “No Ranch”
Him Careful Mel
Blond Banter
Frond And Crowbar
Eve Remain Nikki
On A Meat Ad
El Pink Rival
Roxy Buttonn
O Jolly Age!
Non-Sandy Swabs
Diaraia Colon
Dow Use Stamina
Gallows Entry
LL Ben Leaks
Treat Rerun
Statz Venem
Loan A Roan
Must Ram Carson
Crap Matter ENT
O.J.’s Sore
Cow Relay. Thanks.
Dave, or anyone else who might be knowledgeable, could you please compare the trade value of Moncada to that of Han-Ram when he was traded in ’05? I know this is difficult, but I’m wondering if they would be close.
The market is different in a way that makes it borderline incomparable. For comparison’s sake, BA had Hanley as #10 going into 2005 (Only two guys ahead of him on the list have had better careers, Felix and Mauer), when he was in AA. Moncada is number one right now and also in AA.
Hanley struggled in his first full season of AA and tumbled to #30 for 2006’s list.
On a talent for talent level, they both have similar overall upside. The problem with comparing their trade value is a lot more complex, though, because you have to account for the current market. Amateur scouting was a lot less refined ten years ago and, more than anything, prospects weren’t valued nearly as highly. Prospects were viewed almost exclusively as trade chips by the big budget teams from around 2000 to 2010 or so and it was considered shocking, at the time, when the Red Sox held on to so many guys that former their 2007-2013 core (Not for lack of trying either, the Sox almost traded Lester, Ellsbury, and Buchholz multiple times).
In a theoretical sense, Moncada is worth a lot more now than Hanley was then because of that market difference. A guy with potential franchise player upside is worth a ton these days when back in 2005 (When Hanley was traded), it cost the Red Sox Hanley AND Sanchez (Another top 50 in 2006) in addition to having to take back Lowell as a salary dump (It gets forgotten because of how well he performed, but the deal was essentially Hanley, Sanchez, and taking Lowell’s dead weight) for just one year of Josh Beckett.
That would be along the lines of the Red Sox trading Moncada and Espinoza for Strasburg and Werth going into this season, something that would be considered a pretty dramatic overpay for one season of an elite pitcher with injury issues and a salary dump.
That’s a pretty good overview of the situation, and the changes that have happened in terms of league context.
A couple of corrections:
-Boston never “tried” to deal Lester, Ellsbury, or Buchholz. Those were just names teams asked for. Lester was the one Boston at least seriously considered dealing, but Buchholz was the guy you ask for that the other team never really considers, and I don’t much buy how available Ellsbury really ever was (when higher end prospects have already played in the majors for 33 games with a .900 OPS and then gone on to spark a championship and win tacos for everyone, you don’t really deal that player). So sure, there was talk at times of those players being traded, but they never were precisely because Boston tried very hard NOT to deal them, and in the end succeeded in not doing so.
-The hypothetical package for Strasburg and Werth would be more Moncada and Kopech than Moncada and Espinoza, as Espinoza is far too highly regarded in terms of both rankings and perceived upside to be matched with Anibal Sanchez (at the time).
I went with Espinoza over Kopech as Kopech has severely damaged his value with the PED suspension and his idiotic ST actions. Espinoza’s worth more than Sanchez was, but Kopech is probably worth less than Sanchez was.
As to the trades, there’ve been multiple reports that Buchholz was on the table for Felix Hernandez at least once or twice and Ellsbury was reportedly available for Johan Santana, but the Mets wanted both him AND Lester.
“tried to trade (for a young Felix Hernandez)” is not exactly just trying to dump somebody out the airlock.
The Red Sox most certainly did try to deal Lester. He was the key prospect going to Texas in the failed Alex Rodriguez trade.
Wasn’t Beckett under team control through 2007 when the Sox acquired him? He was a September callup in 2001.
Anyway, look at the Samardzija trade. Things really haven’t changed that much.
I have to admit, I just don’t get it with Quntana. He’s got a career 3.77 xFIP and 3.85 SIERA to go along with a 1.24 WHIP. That seems like a really good middle of the rotation guy, not an elite asset to me.
Mid 3s FIP with 200+ IP 3 years in a row when the AL average FIP is in the low to mid 4s over that time. Being a solid #2 and being paid less than a back end starter for 4 years is insanely valuable.
Edit: Just for a comparison, very similar to when the Rays traded James Shields to the Royals but if it were done with 2 additional cheaper years.
The FIP-xFIP discrepancy over the last two years was due to a suppressed HR/FB%, which was probably more luck than skill given that he posted a well below average IFFB% rate during those seasons. His ERA has annually beaten his xFIP, so maybe there’s a skill xFIP is not capturing, but I don’t know what it is given that Quintana is one of the worst starting pitchers at inducing soft contact. The guy is durable and consistently solid, which I agree has considerable value, but I have to agree with Jackie that I just don’t see him as the twenty-fifth best trade value in the major leagues.
Since becoming a full time starter in 2012, he is 131/197 in hard contact % and 19/197 in medium contact %, so while his soft contact % is low, he is good at inducing medium contact and limiting hard contact. His HR/FB% is also 19/197 over that period and has never been above 10.5% (or above league average), suggesting that it is likely a genuine skill related to his limiting of hard contact, and not just luck.
His soft contact% is very poor and he’s just a little better than the median (-0.9%) in allowing hard contact. Medium contact is better than hard contact, but being “good at inducing medium contact” is not a positive. Quintana’s 10.5% HR/FB% in 2012, 10.2% in 2013, and 9.0% so far in 2016 are roughly close to the ~10% you would expect for a pitcher. The 2014 and 2015 results stand out as outliers with no obvious explanation other than luck, given that his IFFB% was low in both of those seasons (since a high IFFB% can suppress overall HR/FB%).
2014 and 2015 aren’t quite the outliers you make them out to be.
MLB Starting pitcher HR/FB% vs. Quintana for his career:
2012 MLB 11.8 Quintana 10.5 delta 1.3
2013 MLB 10.8 Quintana 10.2 delta 0.6
2014 MLB 9.8 Quintana 5.1 delta 4.7
2015 MLB 11.6 Quintana 8.6 delta 3.0
2016 MLB 13.4 Quintana 9.0 delta 4.4
He has also been below league average for hard contact among starting pitchers for each year but the current one. This seems to be more than just luck to me.
HR/FB%, like BABIP, is not something that pitchers have much control over. What influence they do have comes from IFFB%, and as noted, that didn’t benefit Quintana in 2014 or 2015. So yes, it was luck.
As I noted, he is slightly better than the league median during his time in the major leagues (Quintana – 28.5%, Qualified starters – 29.4%). He’s a little better than average at suppressing hard contact while being well below average at inducing soft contact and ranking near the top in medium contact.
You’ve always been down on Quintana for reasons that don’t make much sense.
For starters, his HR rate being slightly below average (in the positive) while pitching in the ballpark he does is an accomplishment. What else does the guy have to prove to warrant a top 25 trade value when he’s cheap and under team control? Arguing that he hasn’t been able to suppress HR’s for his career, when his FIP and ERA are nearly identical for his carer while his xFIP is .3 runs higher is baffling.
Since 2013, Quintana has the 6th highest fWAR among SP’s – behind only, Kershaw, Scherzer, Price, Kluber and Sale. Since 2014, he’s 7th with Arrieta ahead of him.
At what point does digging into hard contact numbers, and IFFB% rates become completely worthless in comparison to his true outcomes? He’s also 15th in FIP since 2014.
He has a FIP/xFIP discrepancy for his entire career, not just two years, and he’s pitching in a home run launching pad.
I don’t even understand how you can present a valid argument that the 6th most productive pitcher over a 4 year period, and the 7th most productive over a 3 year period, who is currently making peanuts compared to market value and is under control for 3+ years does not warrant a top 25 position. Not only that, but Quintana has showed improvement, not regression, as he has aged. At what point is his sustained health and success real to you?
I was confused by this comment since I haven’t ever been “down” on Quintana, so I googled his name and mine and FanGraphs only to bring up the “ace” discussion from February where you argued that Quintana was better than “Thor/Harvey and Degrom.” Compared to that hyperbole I can see why you would think that I’m “down” on him, but I’m not. I’ll repeat now what I wrote then: “Jose Quintana is a very valuable starting pitcher yet he is clearly not an ace.”
From the link I shared above:
“Specifically, pitchers generally don’t have much control over how often fly balls leave the ballpark. They play a major role in allowing those fly balls to begin with, but the difference between a ball clearing the fence and dying on the warning track is largely out of their control and it generally takes several hundred fly balls allowed for that luck to balance out. As such, HR/FB matters because it tells us if the pitcher is allowing more home runs than we might expect given their batted ball profile. If a pitcher has allowed 200 fly balls during the season, but has allowed just 10 home runs, it’s very likely that he’s been a little bit lucky given that almost no one can consistently run a 5% HR/FB. League average is around 10% and true talent for almost every pitcher is about 8-12%.“
And just as I discussed with you then, proving your worth over a four year span, and proving durability, it an incredibly valuable trait. While Quintana doens’t have the stuff of Harvey/Degrom/Thor, he has proven an ability to be a top tier starter (as noted, top 6 in baseball in 4 years) while pitching every fifth day.
Harvey is now out for the second time in his career, Degrom has shown regression stuff wise, and Thor has repeatedly had arm issues throughout the season.
To argue that the 6th and 7th best pitcher over a 3-4 year period is not an ace just seems wrong to me; I don’t quite understand what your definition of an ace is. I didn’t then and I still don’t today.
Production, at the end of the day, is all that matters. Production over a four year period is very tough to be a fluke, and given his consistent improvement it would appear his success has been warranted.
I don’t know how he clearly isn’t an ace; in fact, I can not fathom how you can even make such a blanket statement contrary to the actual statistical production he has accumulated. You would not argue against the ace status of any of the 6 pitchers ahead of him on the fWAR rankings over the past 4 years, but you argue against him because his stuff does not blow you away. That has always seemed poorly reasoned.
As I keep explaining, Quintana’s recent FIP overrates his performance, in part because it doesn’t adjust for his luck on home runs allowed over 2014 and 2015. fWAR is based on FIP. While Quintana’s durability and consistently above average performance does have considerable value, his actual results have not been elite.
and as I pointed out, he has outperformed his xFIP every single season of his career, while his career ERA is nearly identical to his career FIP, meaning that using FIP to calculate his WAR is an accurate valuation of his skill set. He’s easily outperformed his xFIP in nearly 900 innings; at what point do you stop calling it a luckt?
Career:
ERA: 3.43
FIP: 3.45
xFIP: 3.77
One of those three is not like the other two.
We’re also now on 500+ innings of home run suppression. This year he was even lower before he gave up three to the Braves on a 90 degree day with the wind blowing out in a bandbox. At some point, the adjustments he has made have to count for something to you.
That’s not what it means, as his FIP has gone through a much wider range than his ERA. Quintana’s actual results were significantly worse than his FIP in 2014 and 2015 yet better than his FIP in 2012 and 2013.
Please stop misrepresenting what I’m saying, particularly when I have a direct quote that makes it very clear: “His ERA has annually beaten his xFIP, so maybe there’s a skill xFIP is not capturing, but I don’t know what it is given that Quintana is one of the worst starting pitchers at inducing soft contact.” I’m saying that the HR/FB% rate was lucky, as explained in the FanGraphs link I provided. I’ve already said that there may be a reason why he’s consistently beating his xFIP.
He’s going to put up 3 straight seasons of ~5 fWAR, and is under team control at cheap prices for another 4 years after this one (but not 4 guaranteed years, as if his arm were to somehow explode, the 3rd and 4th are team options). That is an elite asset.
To add to this point, he’s sixth in WAR since 2013, his first full season in MLB. Ahead of names like Bumgarner, Hernandez, and Grienke. He’s still only 27.
And no major league team would take him over Bumgarner, Hernandez, or Greinke.
Given his contract and age, I think every single team would take him ahead of Hernandez and Greinke.
If you include the contracts then yes, Quintana is superior, but that’s not what you were arguing. You were saying that on the basis of WAR, Quintana has been a better pitcher than Felix and Greinke since 2013. No one besides you and perhaps Quintana’s family believes that. You’re putting blind faith in fWAR when you really shouldn’t.
Worth noting that a “really good middle of the rotation guy” who puts up 200 innings every year under contract until 2020 can also be an elite asset.
…because 800 innings of actual production matters far, far more than what flawed projection systems say “should” have happened?
All his xFIP vs. FIP discrepancy tells us at this point is that he’s got a better HR/FB rate than the league average.
In what world is xFIP or Sierra more valuable than the actually production he has had over 4 years? At what point do we accept that he is better than those two metrics may evaluate him as. Also, in what world is a really good middle of the rotation guy 6th in WAR over a 4 year period?
Dave, could the $63M already paid towards Moncada be a similar hindrance to the Red Sox as the Dodgers have with Kershaw? It’s apples-and-oranges, but isn’t Moncada worth WAY more to the Red Sox because they’ve already paid $63M for his services and (I believe) that doesn’t transfer.
Does that add or decrease his value to other teams? It seems like other teams might see value in the Red Sox being on the hook for the risk and say, “Okay, yeah, this guy stacks up against our American minor leagues.” That might have some value in and of itself with some of the recent Cuban struggles as well.
Not a criticism at all, just curious how that wrinkle affects his value. Thanks for the great work!
It has no relevance to other teams or the Red Sox really. What it did do is set a precedent for what an elite prospect would cost in a somewhat free market condition. It’s not perfect as there are a limited number of opportunities to add this type of guy, so it might have inflated the cost versus a true open compensation.
It probably makes the Red Sox less likely to want to trade him (but that’s more on his prospect status than the money they already paid). Going forward once he is promoted to the majors he will be treated financially as any other prospect that’s promoted. He’ll have his three+ years of cheap service and then arbitration.
The $63MM is like a posting fee: It’s paid already and doesn’t go toward the luxury tax. It was the Sox essentially flexing their financial muscle to buy a prospect that the consensus was huge on. While it’s unlikely the Sox trade him because of his sheer upside, I don’t see it as a hindrance should something wacky (Like Trout or Sale or something inconceivable) were to come along.
Oops, edited.
I have a hard time believing Moncada has much more than about $66 million in surplus value, and you’d be trading for only future value. I think we need to slow down a bit, he’s played 16 games above A ball (obviously he hit great since coming to America). But I doubt all the teams that weren’t willing to come close to $63 million (the Yankees reported were willing to go to $54 million) are going to value him so much higher now simply because he’s crushed A ball and A+ ball as a “20 year old” and “21 year old.”
If you believe in ZIPs as much for a guy that just cracked AA as the guys that are around him on this list that have $50+ million in surplus value, I guess this makes sense, but I just don’t see anyone trading these guys, or some of the guys from yesterday, for a guy that is not even ready for the big leagues until mid-2017. Would the Pirates trade Marte for Moncada? I don’t think so.
Keep in mind that the cost to sign Moncada wasn’t a reflection of his market value to all 30 teams; a bunch of them simply don’t have the operating cash flow provided by ownership to spend $63 million in cash. Even when teams are signing long-term deals, they’re doing so because they can defer the costs until they can be offset by future revenues; the list of teams that had the ability to just write a check for $63 million and have ownership approve it was very small.
But that’s no longer what it would take for a team to acquire Moncada, so now you’d have bidders that weren’t in the last round for his services, since his future financial obligations are just arbitration years down the line. So not only has the risk associated with his future value gone down, but there would now be 29 bidders to acquire him, not three or four.
The estimated surplus value of the top prospect in the game, which Moncada is generally agreed to be, is something like $100 million. He’s definitely worth more now than what he signed for last year.
With a high upside guy like Moncada, would confirmation bias come into play more than for a higher floor/lower ceiling type of player, and as a result give him a higher trade value in the current team’s eyes? In other words, if Moncada had the same expected future value as Benintendi, but with a higher upside and lower floor, is Boston more likely to demand more for Moncada?
Those are good points, but two counterpoints:
1. Even with a smaller number of teams, there are still a few that could have done this. Shouldn’t the winner’s curse have a mitigating effect on this? Yes, there are more teams that could be in on it, but in general the winning team in a bidding war is paying far more than most teams believe is justified.
2. I’m not saying you are wrong that Moncada is worth $100 in surplus value, but it seems odd to just say “top prospect equals about $100 million” and then because Mondaca is generally considered the top prospect, well, there you go. Perhaps he is on the lower end of top prospects? He’s not Bryce Harper 2012 as a prospect. A large percentage of top prospects going back 10 years have been mediocre or bad.
Would you trade him for Homer Bailey, whose worth $100 million? So would I.
So Mancado is worth $100 million too.
what’s interesting about moncada is that everyone seems to be assuming that he’ll have defensive value, when that’s far from a sure thing.
Very true, not a sure thing at this early stage. A lot of similarities to Alfonso Soriano, who never quite got the hang of playing the middle infield.
Moncada isn’t going to playing middle infield, though.
Considering he’s pretty much a lock to remain with the Red Sox, he’ll be moving to a lower level defensive position, almost certainly 3B. He reportedly has a plus arm, so he should transition fine.
Even if he were moved off of the Red Sox somehow, scouting reports have him as probably destined for 3B or corner OF eventually anyway.
I like Mazara a lot more than most of the names in front of him. I realize that trade value is largely about perception, and it may be that Mazara’s blend of talents isn’t quite perceived to be as valuable as others. It does seem that his ZIPS projections are better, and subjectively I like him somewhat better than the projections.
I’m glad to see there hasn’t been any bashing of Moncada’s place on this list yet, but just in case it starts I’ll note the primary key defense of the selection, and it comes from the final line in his entry here: “it’s very unlikely the Red Sox trade him; if they do, they’re going to have to get back a pretty great player, because Moncada’s now the kind of prospect that doesn’t get traded very often.”
If you go back and peruse, say, the BA Top 100, it’s pretty clear that that sentiment is accurate. The top guy or two is essentially never parted with, precisely because the combination of high upside, high floor, and cheap contract is too good to part with. On top of that, historically it appears that the mindset is a wise one…these top-ranked guys essentially never bust (at least, not until you go back to the early ’90s). Many eventually disappoint by not becoming stars, but they all at least become quality everyday players; when your floor is a valuable starter at minimal salary, and there is a significant chance of true stardom, it becomes really tough to find an available asset worth exchanging that for.
Dave,
Love the addition up top of the links to all the different trade value pages.
Thanks
Thanks for the full list at the bottom!
In the Honorable Mentions article, the first group was described thusly:
“Track Record Just A Bit Short
All…are having excellent seasons, and if we just accepted that what they’ve done in the first half of 2016 is their new established level of performance, they’d all easily belong. But each has some history that makes it wise to not quite yet accept that this is what they’ll do going forward, and…[some] churned through some of their service time getting to this point, so any team trading for them would be acquiring a guy a bit closer to free agency than some other breakout stars of 2016”
And here is how Jackie Bradley Jr. compares to that group:
Career (* – rookie season)
SP Sanchez (23): 29gs, 75era-, 2.8fwar/32, 5.4r9war/32, 4.1avg
1B Belt (28): 2407pa, .342babip, 131wrc+, 4.0war/650
OF Piscotty (25): 613pa, .352babip, 131wrc+, 3.8war/650
CF Ozuna (25): 1750pa, .332babip, 108wrc+, 3.6war/650
CF Bradley (26): 1129pa, .305babip, 94wrc+, 3.4war/650
1B/OF Myers (25): 1366pa, .318babip, 115wrc+, 3.1war/650
(SP Fulmer* (23): 13gs, 49era-, 3.9fwar/32gs, 7.9r9war/32, 5.9avg)
(C/OF Contreras* (24): 93pa, .385babip, 153wrc+, 5.4war/650pa)
(SS Diaz* (25): 334pa, .329babip, 141wrc+, 4.7war/650)
This Season
CF Bradley (26): 344pa, .342babip, 140wrc+, 6.2war/650
CF Ozuna* (25): 353pa, .349babip, 136wrc+, 6.1war/650
1B/OF Myers (25): 379pa, .317babip, 135wrc+, 6.0war/650
SP Fulmer* (23): 13gs, 49era-, 3.9fwar/32, 7.9r9war/32, 5.9avg
SP Sanchez (23): 18gs, 68era-, 4.4fwar/32, 6.4r9war/32, 5.4avg
C/OF Contreras* (24): 93pa, .385babip, 153wrc+, 5.4war/650
1B Belt (28): 364pa, .355babip, 154wrc+, 5.0war/650
SS Diaz (25): 334pa, .329babip, 141wrc+, 4.7war/650
OF Piscotty (25): 357pa, .337babip, 130wrc+, 4.4war/650
now granted, the rookies are hard to compare, and Belt is in a different situation entirely, but otherwise the rest of the group seems uncannily comparable to Bradley – and if anything are younger, with as many or more years of control.
And yet here Bradley sits in the top 30.
Those guys might have a beef, but it’s with all the minor leaguers who have been ranked the last two days. A 5/6 win CF with 4 years of control is absolutely not put of place this high.
Sure but I think the relevant point there is that bradley specifically has the kind of extreme spotty track record that fits the description of that honorable mention category perfectly.
Award of excellence, in the first part of the group description:
“In the short term as a whole
All … Once upon a time, if we accept the fact that things in 2016, when he had to create a new installation, because they have been used for the first time. But you can’t do is not specified, this is how they hide some of the League’s history. Teams of people in emerging markets a little bit, but no worse than some of the other issues in 2016, with the stars “(some) white matching orders
Chenglongbuladeliershi word here:
Other (*-forest the following times)
SP Sanchez (23): 29gs,75era,fwar 2.8/32/32,r9war: 5.4 4.1
Figure 1 (b) (28): 2407pa. 342babip,131wrc war + 4.0/650
Piscotty(25):613pa? 352babip,131wrc war + 3.8/650
Ozuna CF(25):1750pa? 332babip,108wrc war + 2.2/650
Bradley CF (26): 1129pa 305babip,94wrc, war + 3.4/650
Figure 1 (b), miles (25): 1366pa. 318babip,115wrc war + 3.1/650
(* SP(23):13gs,3,9-49era fwar / 32gs,r9war 8/32,5.9,Ltd? Manufacturing)
((C)/kongteleila * (24): 93pa,385babip,+ 5.4 153wrc/650pa)
(SS, Diaz * (25): 334pa,329babip,+ 141wrc/World War II 650 4.7)
In the winter
Bradley CF (26): 344pa 342babip,140wrc, war + 6.2/650
Ozuna CF *(25):353pa? 349babip,136wrc war + 6.1/650
Figure 1 (b), miles (25) 379pa. 317babip,135wrc war + 6.0/650
* SP (23): 49era,3.9 fwar,13gs/32,r9war 8/32,5.9, Ltd
SP Sanchez (23): 18gs,68era,fwar 4.4/32,r9war/32 6.4,5.4, Ltd
(?)* kongteleila(24):93pa? 385babip,153wrc war + 5.4/650
Figure 1 (b) (28): 364pa. 355babip,154wrc war + 5.0/650
SS Diaz (25): 334pa + 329babip,141wrc war 4.7/650
Piscotty(25):357pa? 337babip,130wrc war + 4.4/650
Current version is easier to compare numbers and rookie is completely different, but they are also the group, it is a glimpse of Bradley-if the young, such as one or more control.
But Bradley sat above 30
wrc/WorldWarII is a helluva stat.
When we say “5/6 win CF” are we talking about the past year, or over his 4 year career?
Both are true, after all.
I know for a fact that we’re not talking about his projections
Fine, a year of elite play isn’t enough? What’s the goalpost?
When he was this catastrophically awful for a full year of games before that breakthrough?
I want to see 1000 PA of above average offensive play from Bradley before putting him near Ozuna. At the moment, you can literally divide his career in half at 565 PA of transcendentally terrible offense, and 565 PA of great offense.
and then overall, as if by magic, his overall line sports a regular babip with around league average production.
I think you are vastly overstating the effect of BABIP, here.
Last year he has the exact same ISO and BB, plus a K rate 7 points higher, with a neutral BABIP, and it resulted in a 120 wRC+.
He would have to be mid-30s Adam Dunn for his BABIP to make his production league average.
“At the moment, you can literally divide his career in half at 565 PA of transcendentally terrible offense, and 565 PA of great offense.”
Sure, but I think the conclusions you’re drawing from this are backwards. A seasons worth of a .250 ISO/10% BB rate are incompatible with a seasons worth of being the worst hitter in baseball. Its almost impossible that they could spring from the same level of talent. So if you’re going to draw a line, one has to be more relevant than the other
Damaso, completely independently of Bradley’s merits: can you stop using WAR/650 and WAR/32 GS for player comparisons? It completely ignores the ability of a player to stay healthy or their capability to deliver a full season of innings (this has been a recurring theme with your posts).
You’re giving Wil Myers, who is a good hitter when available, a lot of credit by using WAR/650, as this year will be the first time in four tries that he passes 90 games in a season. Sanchez (who is having a great year), seems to be on an innings limit, and the Jays have talked about temporarily moving him back to the pen to constrain his use in 2016. You can’t just extrapolate a performance out to a full season when it’s likely that a player will need an injury or innings replacement at some point. You did the same thing with Michael Saunders in the all-star roster post, using WAR/650 and ignoring that he’s never healthy enough to deliver 650 PA.
There’s a reason WAR is a counting stat and a good measure of production. Being available in the lineup is important.
I prefer to keep performance and health separate in any analysis. I don’t see any benefit in mashing them together. IMO it only confuses the issue, given that health is no way as projectable as performance.
If there are specific health issues to consider (and the evidence bar is pretty high for that), then sure i’d factor it in – but as a separate issue, much in the same way as age or contract status.
To be honest, i’m surprised that so many are comfortable with not having a war rate stat to easily reference, given that we use rate stats for literally every other counting stat, and deem it valuable. and more valuable, for that matter. I also find that writers end up making their own rate stat for war anyways (i.e. “he had this much war over his last x games”)….so it’s weird imo that we haven’t standardized this yet.
Seriously – is there any other counting stat that we don’t have (and prefer) a rate stat for?
A guy that puts up a 130 wRC+ for 162 games is more valuable than a guy that puts up 130 wRC+ for 90 games – that is what WAR captures and that’s what turning it into a rate stat eliminates.
You don’t need WAR to acount for that difference, you can just acknowledge the difference in sample size yourself. WAR would be a crude to to use to measure that difference anyways, given that there are 3 very different issues when it comes to comparing players with significantly different amounts of playing time:
1.Sample Size. The bigger the more reliable, the smaller the less reliable. This simply a confidence issue.
2.Usage. Part time/platoon/sheltered players can put up similar stats as fulltime players, without actually being nearly as good.
3.Health. Smaller samples may be the result of injury. This may or may not indicate a measurable and predictive skill or lack thereof for a player.
These three factors have to be considered whenever comparing players with similar rate stats, whether that’s wrc+, uzr/150, or war/650.
Also, health is a skill. Lots of people have put work into determining potential injury risks, aging patterns etc. your annyoing
Also, change your name to something new and stop always being an asshole. Even when you have a halfway decent point (I’m a huge JBJ fan but particularly don’t see how he differs so much from Myers – better defense for JBJ, but Myers was never a disaster like JBJ). But my instinct when I see your name is to cringe. Also, stop writing comments that are always anti-red sox. I’m not a red sox fan at all (my love of JBJ is because of college), but it still annoys the hell out of me.
but I’m an asshole.
Or mute him with BanGraphs:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bangraphs/jbklgbooodaeiefiamgacpccjbfelpaj?hl=en-US
I think you should do me the courtesy of at least naming that thing after me.
I actually find it far more annoying that everyone tends to cry about him being mean to the Red Sox, rather than trying to engage with his usually well-argued points, which are always grounded in numbers.
Why on Earth does Marcell Ozuna come in less highly than Bradley, who’s nearly a year older, came up at the same time, and has 4 less career WAR?
It doesn’t make any sense, if you go by the numbers
Agreed. From a reader experience, the biggest waste of space and time is having to soft through all the people complaining about / insulting Damaso or constantly trying to link people to their idiotic mute filter.
And that’s coming from a Red Sox fan from canada who can’t stand the Jays.
Bradley is regarded as a slightly better defender, and a better baserunner. There’s also an argument to give Bradley a slight nod with his bat. The projection systems are about even. He’s been better in 2015 and 2016. Splitting hairs, but I think it’s a defensible position.
I actually see potential with Damaso. He has lots of good points. But they are buried in his inflammatory rhetoric. My guess is that he’s a smart teenager.
I doubt he’s a teenager, he’s been around for years and years. He may have been a teenager when he started here, but considering he’s never really improved one way or the other, I’d bank him as in his thirties.
At least Damaso didn’t inspire a drinking game, like certain other commenters.
Ever diso or big cool whatever?
The problem with Damaso for me is just the made up statistics. WAR/162 games, IP/starts, etc…it is obvious that he is arguing backwards. He wants a player A to seem better than player B so he finds statistics that nobody uses to show it. The reason he likes WAR/162 games is that the Jays had/have a lot of players with high WARs over a small period. This allows him to argue that Goins is more valuable than Hosmer (seriously) that Travis is a 6 WAR player, that the Jays have better young talent than the Cubs, that Stroman is a 9 WAR pitcher, etc…
On the Jays site I go on sometimes, he posts even more like this (and I know it’s him despite a different username because nobody else uses the “statistics” he does). It’s the patent dishonesty even absurdity of the exercise that rightly brings scorn.
I make no apologies for valuing IP/GS very highly, or for deriving a war rate stat where non exists. I think both are crucial stats, to be honest.
And suggesting these basic stats would somehow unfairly favor the jays is just silly. There is no reason to believe they would.
And I hate goins, for the record.
I don’t know what to make of Bradley, and I imagine a lot of teams feel the same. He has been great over his last 157 games yet was atrocious over his first 164. You would give more weight to the recent performance, and it’s entirely possible that he merits this ranking, but I imagine that there is still a level of uncertainty surrounding him that would prevent other teams from valuing him this highly.
Yeah. If the Sox offered Bradley for Rougned Odor, straight up, Jon Daniels would start cracking up.
Uh, you sure about that? He has the age advantage and a bit more control, but Bradley is the better player and seems to be aware that you’re allowed to walk.
Bradley’s 4 years older and doesn’t have nearly as strong an offensive track record.
They have nearly the same career wRC+ and Bradley’s has been 15 and 40 points higher the last 2 years. That’s an indefensible argument.
Over the past single calendar year, not the past two years.
For the previous year and a half before that, Odor had a 90 wRC+ as a 20/21 year old playing everyday, while Bradley had a 32 wRC+ as a platoon OF.
You can split a wooly mammoths worth of hairs and it doesn’t change the fact that they have a 4 point difference in career wRC+ and Bradley has been a vastly better hitter for a while. So saying his track record is significantly worse is just wrong.
If you want to keep flogging his rookie season, that’s your business, but it’s getting sillier every day.
Odor literally has double Bradley’s wRC+ in their careers before 7/29/2015!
But yeah, I’m “splitting a wooly mammoth’s worth of hairs”
Is the issue that I define track record as being anything before the past calendar year?
Jackie Bradley has been very good over the past year after being catastrophically awful for the two years before that. Rougned Odor has been a good player over the past year, and was an average-ish one for the year-plus before that.
Rougned Odor is 22, Jackie Bradley is 26. They have the same level of team control, and ZiPS and Steamer project them for very similar RoS performances. One is clearly more valuable than the other.
I was just sticking to hitting, but JBJ has actually been worth 2 more wins in almost exactly the same amount of career games. And that includes his garbage start that your entire premise rests on. Of course, Odor could get better as he ages, but you seem to think the fact that Bradley did exactly that makes him LESS valuable.
I believe that Odor can put up Bradley’s August 2015-2016 numbers.
I don’t believe that he’s capable of putting up Bradley’s 2013-July 2015 numbers.
I also believe in a 22 year old’s ability to improve his patience more than a 26 year old’s ability to maintain his defense.
I’m pretty sure that plate discipline is the least likely thing to improve, right? I think expecting a guy with a history of poor discipline to make that notoriously rare and difficult improvement is a much sketchier proposition than expecting a guy at 26 to just keep doing what he’s been doing defensively.
My two cents on JBJ’s offensive outlook:
If you totally throw out his terrible offense early in his MLB career, and focus on his minor league record as the basis for his production over the last 12 months, then his ranking isn’t unreasonable. If you put a lot of weight on those early struggles, he falls into the “short track record” group.
Bottom line is that there’s still a broad range of outcomes for Bradley. I’d say his current career averages represent his new floor, and his excellent last 12 months is his ceiling offensively.
I get that Carrasco strikes out tons of guys, but at some point we have to considee that he’s 29yrs old and yet to complete even one full season as an SP, and has only come close once.
But Aaron Sanchez, #swooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooon
It appears that you will be contributing to Kyle Hendricks being the most underrated player in baseball. This as he is on his way to another 3 plus WAR season with 190-200 innings pitched.
No they’re not.
5 Red Sox in the top 50, with 2 of them prospects? http://i.imgur.com/NnoGhN1.gif
Not sure how JBJ is on here while Brandon Crawford misses the cut because “teams still don’t pay for defense.” Bradley has less of a history of hitting than Crawford, who’s put up a 116 wRC+ over the last 1.5 seasons (230 games, 907 PA). In the justification for Bradley, it’s written that “Even if he won’t sustain his current offensive numbers, an above average hitter who plays elite defense in center field is a coveted thing…” What about an above average hitter who plays elite defense at shortstop? Not a coveted thing? The only possible explanation, for me, is that Crawford is already 29 and is locked up through his age 34 season. But that’s not mentioned in the article. What’s more, Crawford’s contract only pays him a very reasonable $12.5M/year based on AAV. It just seems like some players get preferential treatment while others are overlooked. I guess it shouldn’t surprise me that Crawford, second in the N.L. in fWAR (4.2), didn’t make the All-Star team.
Not to mention that Bradley’s only put up an above average UZR in CF once in his career.
Over 2000 innings in CF now with an 8.7uzr/150.
Yet the “elite CF defense” label handed to him as a prospect without ever being earned still sticks to him like glue.
It’s a more accurate assessment of him than anything you’ve ever posted.
By DRS he is 13th since 2014 among all outfielders, in less innings than 8 of the players above him.
We’re not talking about “outfielders.”
We’re talking about center fielders.
Bradley is a very good CF, who has spent a ton of time in the corners because he only recently started hitting well enough to be anything more than a 4th OF.
Brett Gardner had nearly double the raw DRS of Franklin Gutierrez and Michael Bourn from 2009-2011, when he was playing LF. That didn’t make him a better CF than they were.
Since entering the league in 2013, Bradley has the 12th most DRS and UZR among CFs, with the 15th highest UZR/150 and 14th highest DRS/150. Among players with similar sample sizes, he’s better than Mookie and worse than Kevin Pillar.
He’s a very good CF (assuming that the most recent data is noise, and the power jump didn’t come from added muscle mass that has reduced his range). He’s not elite.
I’m mostly on board with this, I said all OF since he has played all over the outfield in his career this far.
However, I don’t think it’s fair to include 2013 if we’re only looking at CF since he only played 16 games in CF that season and it skews his DRS low. If only using 2014 through 2016, he’s 9th in DRS and UZR/150 with a minimum of 1000 innings. I think it’s fair to say he is not one of the best 2 or 3 defensive CF in the game, which is basically, Kiermaier, Pillar, and Cain, but I think he’s firmly in the second tier with Legares, Martin, Hamilton, Pollock.
JBJ was 13th in defensive value among OFs last year despite playing only 74 games. Only player ahead of him to play less than 100 games was Leonys Martin with 95 games played.
In 2014 he was the 7th most valuable defensive OF. Only player ahead of him with less playing time was Jarrod Dyson.
1. we can stop with the “of all OF” since the top of these lists are all CFs. that’s just an attempt to spin.
2. 13th is most definitely not elite.
3. you can’t spin his fewer innings to credit his defense over guys ahead of him without crediting tbose with fewer innings below him.
Over his career so far he’s put up an 8.7uzr/150 and a 13.7drs/150 in CF. Both are solid average to above average numbers, but neither are close to elite. And he’s likely at his defensive peak.
Those are well above-average defensive numbers, not solid average.
It’s insane that saying “He’s a 65 defender, not an 80 defender” is somehow construed as an attack on the guy.
8.7uzr/150 puts him borderline top 10 amongst starting CF, but closer to the median (around 0) guys than the top5 guys (20+).
OF defense=/=CF defense.
A +5-10 CF usually becomes a +20 cOF, if they make the shift during their prime.
The scouting reports that you guys are complaining about are several years old now. He was an incredible CF when he came up, merely above average now.
he has never, at any point, put up incredible defensive numbers.
ever.
+20 in a season and a half is pretty damn incredible. Or at least, considering the accuracy of defensive stats, it’s close enough that the scouting report was perfectly reasonable.
Who’s complaining about scouting reports?
I’m literally agreeing exactly with the statement “He was an incredible CF when he came up, merely above average now.”
The only people “complaining” are the ones trying to claim that the 2013 scouting reports cited in this article should trump 3 years of defensive data in the evaluation of JBJ’s performance, and accusing anyone who disputes that of an anti-Sox agenda.
not to mention that this article again plainly states that bradley provides elite CF defense right now.
that’s what’s being argued with. not old scouting reports.
A couple of notes on Marte –
His OBP is also helped by his propensity for drawing HBPs, a skill he’s shown throughout his professional career.
A speedster in left is not that unusual – think Lou Brock, Vince Coleman, Tim Raines, et al. It’s where the guys with the speed but not the arm for CF end up.
Carl Crawford, Rickey Henderson…
John Olerud: “Who?”
Juan Pierre, Johnny Damon…
Well, Damon was primarily a CF until 2006, but yeah.
Yeah I thought lumbering sluggers went to RF.
As a Red Sox fan, Moncada above Carrasco, Bradley, Marte, Springer and Salazar is insane
I love Moncada. I love him about as much as I loved Mookie when he was a 21-year old in AA (I’m a Red Sox fan too). But even with my bias, I wouldn’t have put Mookie in the top 75 for that summer’s trade value list, much less the top 30.
It has to be with how Boston and the other teams view Moncada’s upside. Is he really a switch-hitting middle-infield version of what Bo Jackson would have been if he only played baseball? Or is he just a speedier version of Arquimedez Pozo? Most insiders are probably focused on the first one.
There are always a few prospects on this list but they seem high across the board this year.
Thing is, I bet if you put all of them on the FA market right now, they would command similar contracts. Dave said above that the Red Sox paid $63 MM to get him – and that was only against a handful of other teams. Between every team bidding on him, and Moncada increasing his value due to his play in the minor leagues, you have to think he would blow past $63MM now.
Sure, but what would someone like Mazara get if he was declared a FA tomorrow?
Probably a lot? He was an extremely highly regarded prospect before 2016 who dominated the minor leagues. He’s been so-so this year but I doubt that’s enough to sink him.
Again, I use Moncada as a bit of a bench mark. He was 19 and had never played a game in the US, and his cost was $63MM. Guys who destroy the minors before they turn 21 and are universally regarded as one of the best prospects in the game would get quite a bit more than Moncada did, I would think.
Darren Dreadfort, I think you’ve just asked the perfect question for valuing guys who still have most or all of their years of club control left.
I’ve been reading through these lists just waiting patiently for Adam Eaton and his steal of a contract to be way up this list, then when he didn’t appear today checked the honorable mentions. Eaton listed under “Teams Still Don’t Pay for Defense”. What? Wasn’t Eaton a 5 oWAR player last season?
He’s also been below average on defense for his career at center field, he’s now above average at RF. But his career wRC+ is 110, and he’s missed a lot of time.
I don’t think Eaton the bat-first center fielder was considered valuable enough for the list. The contract is amazing but he’s been more of a 3-4 fWAR player than a 4-5 like Quintana, who has a similar-ish contract. This year his fWAR has gone way up but that’s entirely due to defense in right field, where his bat doesn’t play so well (especially not the worse 2016 version). I think a bigger concern than just the trade value of defense is the small-sample nature of his RF metrics. I like his case as a CF better.
Quick question:
Where are these WAR projections coming from?
They pretty clearly have nothing to do with the ZiPS/Steamer/Depth Charts RoS projections, which put Bradley pretty firmly in the 3 win range going forward.
Intro piece says they’re 5 year zips numbers from Dan. I’m assuming they’re updated for 2016 performances.
Hm. Why is Bradley’s RoS so low, then? Maybe they’re giving him a defensive input of +10 rather than the +3 it is now.
Trying to comp Eaton and Yelich. Eaton is due $38.4 thru 2021 and Yelich $61.8 thru 2022. 2 of Eaton’s years are options vs 1 of Yelichs so a little extra value there. Eaton’s accumulated 9.8 WAR (33.9 Off/ 4.3 Def) over the last 2.5 years compared to 9.2 (44.6 Off/ -5.5 Def) for Yelich. I know you mentioned teams don’t pay for defense, and that is how Eaton has compiled his 2016 WAR, but that isn’t necessarily his track record. I like both of these guys, but I’d take Eaton.
Yelich is 3 years younger, so you’re paying for Yelich’s peak years and more of Eaton’s decline, should each age normally.