2021 Trade Value: #11 to #20

Design by Luke Hooper

As is the annual tradition at FanGraphs, we’re using the week after the All-Star Game to take stock of the top 50 players in baseball by trade value in anticipation of next week’s trade deadline. For a more detailed introduction to this year’s exercise, as well as a look at those players who fell just short of the top 50, be sure to read the Introduction and Honorable Mentions piece, which can be found in the widget above.

For those who have been reading the Trade Value Series the last few seasons, the format should look familiar. For every player, you’ll see a table with the player’s projected five-year WAR from 2022-2026, courtesy of Dan Szymborski’s ZiPS projections. The table will also include the player’s guaranteed money, if any, the year through which their team has contractual control of them, last year’s rank (if applicable), and then projections, contract status, and age for each individual season through 2026, if the player is under contract or team control for those seasons. Last year’s rank includes a link to the relevant 2020 post. One note on the rankings: particularly at the bottom of the list, there’s not a lot of room between players. The ordinal rankings clearly matter, and we put players where they are for a reason, but there’s not much room between, say, 35 and 60. The magnitude of the differences in this part of the list is quite small. Several talent evaluators we talked to might prefer a player in the Honorable Mentions section to one on the back end of the list, or vice versa. We think the broad strokes are correct — but with so many players carrying roughly equivalent value, disagreements abounded. Thanks are due to Sean Dolinar for his help in creating the tables in these posts. At the bottom of the page, there is a grid showing all the players who have been ranked up to this point.

As we enter the top 20, you’ll see commentary from both of us for each player. And now, to the next group.

Five-Year WAR +23.5
Guaranteed Dollars
Team Control Through 2025
Previous Rank #23
Year Age Projected WAR Contract Status
2022 24 +4.8 Pre-Arb
2023 25 +4.9 Arb1
2024 26 +4.8 Arb2
2025 27 +4.6 Arb3
Pre-Arb
Arb

For the last three years, Bichette has attacked baseballs early and often, a style that leads to loud contact but not a ton of deep counts. It’s not what you’d call a plus approach, and we had several evaluators question its sustainability, but his numbers speak for themselves. It’s a weird skillset, but that’s no knock on Bichette; most players who swing this much aren’t this good at avoiding whiffs. He’s been grounder-heavy this year, which is a slight worry going forward, but we were comfortable treating him as an easy plus bat given two-plus years of evidence. If you want to question something about his game, it would be his defense; he’s been dicey at short, though it’s more an issue of errors than range.

Still, how many hitters with this kind of thump do you know who can fake shortstop? There aren’t many, and most of them are pricey, nearing free agency, or both. Bichette doesn’t even hit arbitration until the 2023 season, so you can have your proverbial cake and pay it a below-market salary too. If you want to place Bichette lower than this, it’s because you either think he’s a second baseman or think he’s a below-average hitter, and while we moved him slightly lower on the list to reflect those risks, I don’t think either is particularly likely. – BC

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

It feels like baseball analysis is still making a transition away from the binary of thinking that players who walk are strictly good and players who don’t are strictly bad. Would improved plate discipline make Bichette a better player? Of course it would. Is he still good despite having a low walk rate? Unquestionably, and very good at that.

Bichette goes up to the plate looking to hit, and it works for him. He has no profound weaknesses versus a particular pitch type or location, focuses on hard contract to all fields, and is showing more power than ever in 2021. He’s a plus runner, and while he’s probably more of a 45 defender at short, his offense for the position more than makes up for it. Still just 23 years old, and not entering arbitration until 2023, Bichette is a star now, and one lined up for considerable improvement over the next four years. – KG

Five-Year WAR +13.8
Guaranteed Dollars
Team Control Through 2024
Previous Rank #28
Year Age Projected WAR Contract Status
2022 29 +3.4 Arb2
2023 30 +3.0 Arb3
2024 31 +2.7 Arb4
Arb

Woodruff is the first player on the list I gave serious thought to putting in the top 10. Three years of arbitration salaries — albeit years two through four thanks to his Super Two status — is a lot of control for someone pitching like an ace right this minute. ZiPS isn’t in love with his production, but if we were making this list based off of projections alone, it would be kind of boring. Woodruff is absolutely seen as a top 10 pitcher in the game, and now that he still looks great after the sticky stuff crackdown, rumors (warranted or not) that he’s a Spider Tack creation carry less weight.

Some team sources we spoke to thought that the team control alone should place Woodruff in the top 10. The reason he’s this low on the list isn’t because he’s not great — I don’t have anything bad to say about his pitching — but because everyone above him on the list is either better, on a preposterously team-friendly contract with plenty of years of control, or both. This is where things started getting heavy — enough so that no one from here on out will realistically be moved. – BC

Early in my baseball career, somebody in the industry I greatly respect (and who has been a part of championship organizations as a key decision maker) said something that has always stuck with me: “Players can change, often in unexpected and dramatic ways, both good and bad.” It really should be a mantra for those who follow prospects and draft picks, and it’s also true of big leaguers. These are human beings and sometimes they get dramatically better or worse for reasons we can’t quite (and often will never) put our finger on.

Woodruff certainly wasn’t expected to ever rank so highly on a list like this when the Brewers selected him in the 11th round of the 2014 draft. He was a big guy with some stuff, but he also began that spring as Mississippi State’s Friday starter and ended it as a mop-up reliever with an ERA approaching 7.00. Nobody could have predicted Woodruff developing five plus pitches or anything close to above-average command and control, but here we are, and he’s one of the best pitchers in the game despite only making the very fringes of a handful of Top 100 lists as he blossomed in the minors. His 2021 season will assuredly produce an impressive platform for his second year of arbitration in 2022, but any player with this ability prior to free agency is a hefty bargain. – KG

Five-Year WAR +13.5
Guaranteed Dollars
Team Control Through 2025
Previous Rank HM
Year Age Projected WAR Contract Status
2022 26 +3.0 Pre-Arb
2023 27 +2.9 Arb1
2024 28 +2.7 Arb2
2025 29 +2.5 Arb3
Pre-Arb
Arb

When the Diamondbacks swapped Jazz Chisholm Jr. for Gallen, many thought that they got the better end of the trade, but I don’t think those many expected Gallen to perform at this level. Through 37 major league starts, he’s been a front-of-the-rotation stud, though it doesn’t always look like he has that kind of stuff. As it turns out, he just has a combination of good-enough stuff, excellent command, and feel to pitch (I know, it’s vague) that works out to dynamic production. He’s also around for four more years after this one, including one for roughly the league minimum, about as much as control you can reasonably expect out of someone with his established level of competence.

Whether you’d take an extra year of solid pitching or a higher top end in Woodruff was something that various people we talked to had differing opinions on. No one thought Gallen was better than Woodruff, but that extra year was worth enough that the two felt like a toss-up overall. I wouldn’t hate swapping them, particularly given that team control is worth slightly less with pitchers than hitters (there’s a higher likelihood of injury), but in the end, the siren song of extra years was too strong for us to ignore. – BC

Zac Gallen has been a well above-average pitcher since he debuted in 2019, and while the Diamondbacks gave up quite a bit to acquire him, the deal still looks like one of Mike Hazen and company’s strongest moves during his Arizona tenure. “I thought he was a No. 3 starter, but he has way out-performed that,” said one National League scout. He’s down a bit this year but still quite good, and some occasional bad bouts with his command could be attributed to a minor elbow strain followed by a hamstring issue.

When healthy, Gallen is among the kings of the secondary pitches, but his four-seam fastball, which he throws less than half the time, also performs well above it’s 93-95 mph velocity thanks to fantastic pitch shape. Once he gets ahead in the count, hitters struggle to guess what is coming, as his curveball, changeup and new slider are all capable of finishing an at-bat without contact. Gallen doesn’t reach arbitration until 2023, and while Chisholm would look awfully good at shortstop in Arizona right now, there’s no reason to think the D-backs would take back that deal. – KG

Five-Year WAR +16.0
Guaranteed Dollars $5.5 M
Team Control Through 2023
Previous Rank #43
Year Age Projected WAR Contract Status
2022 27 +3.6 $5.5 M
2023 28 +3.5 Arb3
Arb

It’s possible that we’re getting caught up in Ohtani-mania on this one, as no one even close to him has so few years until free agency. But no one even close to him has anywhere near the star power, or the two-way ability, or really anything resembling Ohtani’s multifarious excellence. In fact, we didn’t get much feedback on Ohtani’s slot in the rankings at all; most people we talked to thought he was reasonable around here, or potentially couldn’t figure out a value and knew it was all academic anyway given that the Angels are about as likely to trade him as they are to voluntarily put Anaheim back in their name.

I don’t really have much else to say about this one, aside from a general plea to not pay too much attention to the ZiPS forecasts for him here. How in the world are they supposed to handle someone truly without precedent? The year he’s having right now is absolutely bonkers, and he might never recapture it, but the chance that he’s the best DH in the league and also a number two starter is simply too great to ignore. – BC

You are assigned to write a couple of paragraphs about Shohei Ohtani. Where do you start? You can write about the player himself, who has seemingly achieved the impossible by being one of the top hitters and pitchers in baseball this year. But it doesn’t stop there — there’s so much to say about the most interesting man in baseball. Beyond his play, there’s his marketability. Front offices measure success by wins and losses, but owners and ownership groups measure it by profit, and there’s no player who would mean more to a team’s bottom line than Ohtani, and it isn’t all that close. He increases attendance, boosts merchandise sales to a degree like no other, and is still earning just $5.5 million in 2022. That fact leads us to another interesting aspect of Ohtani, namely, what he will make in 2023, a salary that will likely be decided by an arbitrator. Arbitration revolves around comps. Teams, with the help of MLB’s labor relations department, work to establish comparable players and then argue that if Player A is like Player B and Player B earns X, the transitive property says that Player A should get X as well. Agents work in a similar manner, finding Player Bs with higher salaries. Ohtani is a truly unique player, one for whom there simply are no good comps. There aren’t even any “kind of OK if you squint” comps. It will be an arbitration like no other should it come to a hearing, as there is no precedent for two-way players in the process, and one could logically argue that the player-side should try to dictate a separate salary for both his hitting and pitching and simply add them up for a recommended number.

Ohtani’s talent alone had some sources arguing for a top 10 placement on this last, while many others wanted to see some sustained durability, as Ohtani is in his fourth year in the majors and only recently crossed the 100 career innings threshold. Meanwhile, as a hitter, he has turned into a left-handed version of prime Giancarlo Stanton, where the strikeouts pile up but you have no reason to care as the other-worldly power more than makes up for it. The end result is elite-level run production. All that the Angels (and quite frankly, the rest of baseball) can hope for at this time is continued health and availability in both roles. – KG

Five-Year WAR +14.9
Guaranteed Dollars
Team Control Through 2026
Previous Rank
Year Age Projected WAR Contract Status
2022 25 +3.1 Pre-Arb
2023 26 +3.2 Pre-Arb
2024 27 +2.9 Arb1
2025 28 +2.9 Arb2
2026 29 +2.7 Arb3
Pre-Arb
Arb

I can’t speak for Kevin, but I spent hours puzzling over Hayes’ peripherals, his batted ball quality, his approach — whatever I could dig up, both in terms of his major league performance and scouting reports. He was without a doubt the player I had the hardest time placing, and I think that if we’d spent a few more weeks making the list, he might have ended up lower down, as I have an easier time talking myself down than up when it comes to him. But this is nitpicking, because he’s a likely plus bat with elite defense, and he’s going to be sticking around a long time; despite his 1.6 WAR in 2020, he only played in 24 games, and didn’t even accrue enough service time to qualify for Super 2, which means he won’t be eligible for arbitration until 2024.

There’s risk here, obviously. Hayes has hit a ton of grounders this year, and is running a low line drive rate; the two of those have combined to make for a low xwOBA, not that that’s a particularly predictive statistic. He’s still hitting the ball plenty hard, and already has a good feel for the strike zone; I’m not surprised to see his walk rate creep above 10% this year, and the combination of his plate discipline and contact quality make it hard for me to believe he won’t put up at least a few 130-150 wRC+ seasons at some point down the line. Combine that with elite defensive chops, and you have a franchise cornerstone whose biggest question mark is whether he’ll hit enough to be a superstar rather than merely a great player. – BC

Hayes is an exciting young hitter. Wrist injuries take time to recover from, and even after a return to play, it can take months for the power to come back. That seemed to be the case for the 24-year-old during the first half of 2021. He has a good approach, with plenty of plate coverage and a knack for finding the barrel; the mid-point of the external evaluations on him suggests a future of seasons marked by 40 doubles and 20 home runs.

And then there is the defense. Third base is a unique position on the infield. It’s not a place where range is required as much as an ability to read and react, and few in the game do those two things as well as Hayes. All this, and still five more seasons until he reaches free agency. – KG

Five-Year WAR +23.9
Guaranteed Dollars $252.0 M
Team Control Through 2028
Previous Rank
Year Age Projected WAR Contract Status
2022 31 +5.7 $36.0 M
2023 32 +5.2 $36.0 M
2024 33 +4.8 $36.0 M
2025 34 +4.3 $36.0 M
2026 35 +3.9 $36.0 M

Hoo boy, is this one going to inspire some takes. I know, I know, you surplus value types will be upset. The Yankees owe him so much money! We got exactly that feedback from several people we sent the list to. But the game is baseball, not surplus value maximization, and while that general mode of thinking is alive and well in front offices (and played its role in this list), the desire for a globe-destroying ace who makes you a favorite in every game he pitches exists as well.

Cole might win a Cy Young this year, but whether he does or not, it’s clear that he’s still at the top of his game. Even down 150-plus rpm in the aftermath of goop-gate, he’s blowing opposing hitters away, and while pitcher health is never guaranteed, it feels like he hasn’t missed a start since the Nixon administration. Cole won’t become available while he’s still this great because teams don’t trade players like this when they’re at their peak and in the juicy part of long-term deals, but if he did, the bidding would likely be fierce. Maybe money would get thrown around to make the numbers work, but the sheer talent that a team would have to surrender to get the Yankees to even pick up the phone merits this spot, and I was tempted to put him even higher. – BC

Cole was one of the players at the center of the sticky stuff controversy after he followed a poorly-worded answer to a question on the subject during a Zoom presser with some lackluster outings. But then he threw a shutout against the best offense in baseball on the road and struck out 11 Red Sox in his next outing, and people seem to have stopped talking about it. Did Cole use foreign substances? Almost assuredly. But here’s the thing: if you take an advantage away from everyone, the talent afterward is going to line up mostly the same way as it did before. And as starting pitchers go, Gerrit Cole is one of the best, with his combination of quality and quantity arguably unmatched in the game. He’s not only an elite pitcher on an inning-by-inning basis, he’s also the pitcher most likely to deliver 32-33 starts and well over 200 inning per season.

Few can touch Cole in terms of power stuff, as he sits in the upper-90s with a fastball that becomes all the more dangerous due to it’s vertical shape. Then there are two dominating power breakers and a changeup that has gone from solid to downright excellent over the past few years. Beyond all of that is Cole’s command and control, which exceed that of many low-velo pitchers who are labeled as pitchability types. Yes, it’s a long and very lucrative contract, but he’s absolutely well worth it. – KG

Five-Year WAR +15.8
Guaranteed Dollars
Team Control Through 2024
Previous Rank
Year Age Projected WAR Contract Status
2022 27 +3.7 Arb1
2023 28 +3.5 Arb2
2024 29 +3.1 Arb3
Arb

Burnes is a handy reminder that while we base this list off of plenty of industry feedback, our own evaluations matter a lot in the process, particularly when it comes to breaking ties. Could you put Woodruff or Hayes, just to name two, over Burnes? Sure! But he’s piling up a strong track record that says he might be in that Cole/deGrom tier, and while I like Woodruff plenty, I simply don’t feel the same way about him. We had several sources say Burnes should be in the top 10, and several say he should be below Woodruff (sometimes the same person, even), so this feels like an appropriate landing place.

There’s no question that Burnes lost some movement when the league cracked down on foreign substances, but in his four starts since June 21, he’s struck out 32 while walking only four. He’s put up a 1.75 FIP and 2.51 xFIP over that time period, and a 0.99 ERA. Apparently great pitchers are still great! It’s a tiny sample, of course, but he still looks the part. The big change Burnes made after 2019 — no four-seamers, all cutters — is starting to feel like one of the great pitching adjustments of our time. The suddenly plus command is just gravy, and if I had my druthers, he might have ended up in the top 10. – BC

Corbin Burnes has one of the best cutters in baseball. It’s more of a “natural” cutter, in that it’s just how his 95 mph-plus fastball moves. His low-80s curve and upper-80s slider might be even better than that. Oh, and the changeup is nasty too. And have I mentioned that he pretty much never walks anybody, or gives up home runs? He’s also just entering arbitration next year, leaving his age-27-29 seasons among the most valuable in baseball.

Our assignment as part of these player blurbs is to talk about the player and why they rank where they do. To do so you need to discuss what a player is good at and what he isn’t. For Burns, that is a struggle, other than the fact that he’s still unproven in terms of workload. I guess I’ll just leave this here then: He doesn’t do a great job of paying attention to runners at first and it takes him a while to deliver the ball, so overall, he’s quite easy to run on. There, I found something. – KG

Five-Year WAR +24.2
Guaranteed Dollars $334.05 M
Team Control Through 2030
Previous Rank #4
Year Age Projected WAR Contract Status
2022 30 +6.3 $37.1 M
2023 31 +5.7 $37.1 M
2024 32 +5.0 $37.1 M
2025 33 +4.0 $37.1 M
2026 34 +3.2 $37.1 M

Look, I don’t know. Even more than Cole, this one took some theorizing. Most teams in baseball wouldn’t be willing to take on Trout’s contract, regardless of return; that’s simply not how they operate. But concentrating so much value in a single position — penciling a perennial MVP candidate into your lineup every day until he declines — is such an attractive proposition that the bidding among teams that can afford him would be intense — even if, like in Cole’s case, any deal would be complicated.

That said, this might be Trout’s last year with such a lofty place on the list. His injury troubles have become more chronic than one-off, and the game has always been to squeeze out as many years of peak performance as possible before the back end of the deal kicks you in the teeth. That can be worth it if you’re not cash-constrained and are in the juicy part of the win curve, but it doesn’t take that many lost years to flip Trout from intriguing to albatross. If he misses one of the next three years (cumulatively) with injury, the deal flips from favorable to neutral. It’s even possible we’ve already missed the inflection point — that 2026 ZiPS is scary, though I’ll easily take the over on it. But while we did get feedback that Trout was too high, it was always a commentary on big contracts in general, not Trout in particular. For now, at least, there’s still the belief that he’s the best hitter in the game when he can play. – BC

The baseball world is a better place when Mike Trout is on an active roster, and the good news is that that seems like it will be happening again soon. I knew he was having a good season before his injury, but I didn’t realize until starting this series that his 2021 actually represented a career-best in terms of OPS, albeit in just 36 games. This year’s malady is a calf strain, but it should be noted that Trout is starting to get a reputation for being an outstanding player who tends to find himself on the Injured List once or twice a year, as thumb, wrist and foot issues limited him to an average of just 129 games over the last three full seasons.

Like most players, Trout has lost a step as he approaches 30, but he’s worked hard on his defense and is still mostly solid in center field. He’s also turned into a strong pull hitter and has seen his contact rates both in and out of the zone take a dip in recent times. It’s going to happen, folks. Mike Trout is (we are pretty certain) human, and like all of us, he is aging. He’s beginning to exit his prime, but since that prime was among the best in the history of baseball, a standard decline as he gets older should still leave him a star for the remainder of his deal. – KG

Five-Year WAR +20.6
Guaranteed Dollars
Team Control Through 2024
Previous Rank #10
Year Age Projected WAR Contract Status
2022 27 +4.7 Arb1
2023 28 +4.4 Arb2
2024 29 +4.1 Arb3
Arb

I wouldn’t judge you if you wanted to put Bieber behind Burnes. I wouldn’t judge you if you wanted him to be four or five spots higher on the list. The injury risk here is real, as is the talent; he’s been on the IL since June 13, though he resumed throwing this week. This rating assumes he’ll be back at some point this year, which appears to be the case, but shoulder injuries are scary, and there’s no guarantee that he’ll be back to his old self immediately when he does return. Sure, he still has three more years of arbitration after 2021, but if you trade for Bieber, you’re trading for him for the four years of playoff starts as much as the regular season.

But yeah, if he’s back, you can’t argue with the results. Over the last two seasons, he’s turned from a down-ballot Cy Young candidate to one of the few best pitchers in the game. This season hasn’t been as good as 2020, but how could it be? He was simply ludicrous last year, with ace closer levels of production for seven innings a start. If you’re nitpicking, you could look at the fact that he allows hard contact when he does get hit, or that he relies a lot on breaking pitches for his whiffs, with the occasional walk issues that implies. That and the injury scare have him down slightly, or he might otherwise be the number one pitcher in the game when it comes to trade value. – BC

Shane Bieber only throws his fastball a third of time. It’s a far lower proportion than most, but it’s with good reason, as he’s also in possession of some of the nastiest breaking stuff in the game. His curveball and slider (and some in between) have big velo, massive movement, and somehow Bieber has shown a profound ability to locate them despite just how much they break.

He can miss bats as well as anyone and doesn’t enter arbitration until 2022. A month ago, Beiber would have ranked in the single digits, but that same month ago, he was placed on the IL with a shoulder strain. Obviously, there are no good injuries, but elbows feel like a bump in the road more often than not. Shoulders? They scare the hell out of teams. Bieber is reportedly throwing again, but there’s no set timetable for his return, and until he’s out of the injury nexus, we had to hedge a bit on this list. – KG

Five-Year WAR +17.8
Guaranteed Dollars
Team Control Through 2025
Previous Rank #34
Year Age Projected WAR Contract Status
2022 25 +3.7 Pre-Arb
2023 26 +3.8 Arb1
2024 27 +3.6 Arb2
2025 28 +3.5 Arb3
Pre-Arb
Arb

Kevin and I spent a lot of time on this one. You need to be pretty sure that a DH-only type will hit to put him this high, even with four years of discounted team control remaining after this year. Well, we’re pretty sure that Alvarez will hit. We both have him as an easy .900 OPS, 150 wRC+ type, perennially one of the best hitters in the majors. It’s easy to call this year a disappointment, but even then, he’s running a .352 OBP, hitting for power, and hanging around the top of the league when it comes to barrel rate while simultaneously swinging and missing far less often than average.

Want to engage in some pedantry with your trade value list? I’m a seller of the DH positional adjustment. Someone has to sit in the DH role. Teams aren’t short for people who can stand in outfield corners, but they are short for hitters who can win MVP trophies. Teams don’t actually care whether Alvarez plays an inoffensive outfield or doesn’t play in the field at all, but WAR docks him roughly a win for it. Even with that hit to his value, the projections look good, and make no mistake: they’re underselling how much teams value elite hitters. Four years of this amount of thump would command a hefty price, whether or not the NL adopts the DH. – BC

It’s hard to put a bat-only player this high, but when it’s a 24-year-old bat of this quality who doesn’t hit his first year of arbitration until 2023, it becomes a bit easier. Yordan’s exit velocities match up with nearly any player in the game and he does it without selling out for power, as he’s more likely to rifle a ball up the middle than he is to pull something. His approach has gotten a bit weird this year, as he’s swinging in the zone less and out of the zone more, but a return to form with his power and in-zone contact rates would potentially create 1.000-plus OPS seasons.

The Astros hope that Alvarez’s knee issues are a thing of the past after surgery in August of 2020, and he’s been surprisingly acceptable during his limited run in left field this season, although he’s no longer the 50-55 runner he was as a rookie. But talking about anything beyond the bat is playing in the margins, as Alvarez is one of the most dangerous hitters in baseball and likely still years away from his prime. – KG

2021 Trade Value, 11-50
Rk Pv Player Age 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
11 34 Yordan Alvarez 24 +3.7
Pre-Arb
+3.8
Arb1
+3.6
Arb2
+3.5
Arb3
12 10 Shane Bieber 26 +4.7
Arb1
+4.4
Arb2
+4.1
Arb3
13 4 Mike Trout 29 +6.3
$37.1 M
+5.7
$37.1 M
+5.0
$37.1 M
+4.0
$37.1 M
+3.2
$37.1 M
14 Corbin Burnes 26 +3.7
Arb1
+3.5
Arb2
+3.1
Arb3
15 Gerrit Cole 30 +5.7
$36.0 M
+5.2
$36.0 M
+4.8
$36.0 M
+4.3
$36.0 M
+3.9
$36.0 M
16 Ke’Bryan Hayes 24 +3.1
Pre-Arb
+3.2
Pre-Arb
+2.9
Arb1
+2.9
Arb2
+2.7
Arb3
17 43 Shohei Ohtani 26 +3.6
$5.5 M
+3.5
Arb3
18 HM Zac Gallen 25 +3.0
Pre-Arb
+2.9
Arb1
+2.7
Arb2
+2.5
Arb3
19 28 Brandon Woodruff 28 +3.4
Arb2
+3.0
Arb3
+2.7
Arb4
20 23 Bo Bichette 23 +4.8
Pre-Arb
+4.9
Arb1
+4.8
Arb2
+4.6
Arb3
21 Jake Cronenworth 27 +3.5
Pre-Arb
+3.4
Arb1
+3.1
Arb2
+2.7
Arb3
22 12 Ketel Marte 27 +4.2
$8.4 M
+4.0
$11.0 M
+3.8
$13.0 M
23 Kyle Tucker 24 +4.4
Pre-Arb
+4.2
Arb1
+4.2
Arb2
+4.0
Arb3
24 41 Adley Rutschman 23 +2.9
Pre-Arb
+3.3
Pre-Arb
+3.4
Pre-Arb
+3.4
Arb1
+3.3
Arb2
25 Framber Valdez 27 +1.8
Arb1
+1.7
Arb2
+1.6
Arb3
+1.5
Arb4
26 17 José Ramírez 28 +5.6
$11.0 M
+5.3
$13.0 M
27 19 Jack Flaherty 25 +4.0
Arb2
+3.9
Arb3
28 33 Lucas Giolito 26 +4.4
Arb2
+4.3
Arb3
29 Julio Urías 24 +3.3
Arb3
+3.3
Arb4
30 14 Luis Robert 23 +2.8
$6.0 M
+2.6
$9.5 M
+2.7
$12.5 M
+2.6
$15.0 M
+2.4
$20.0 M
31 31 Matt Olson 27 +5.3
Arb2
+5.1
Arb3
32 Randy Arozarena 26 +2.3
Pre-Arb
+2.2
Arb1
+2.3
Arb2
+1.9
Arb3
+1.5
Arb4
33 HM Will Smith 26 +3.4
Pre-Arb
+3.3
Arb1
+3.3
Arb2
+3.1
Arb3
34 HM Trent Grisham 24 +4.0
Pre-Arb
+4.1
Arb1
+4.0
Arb3
+3.7
Arb3
35 HM Alex Verdugo 25 +2.8
Arb1
+2.7
Arb2
+2.6
Arb3
36 25 Aaron Nola 28 +4.1
$15.5 M
+3.7
$16.0 M
37 16 Rafael Devers 24 +4.1
Arb2
+4.1
Arb3
38 Sean Murphy 26 +2.5
Pre-Arb
+2.4
Arb1
+2.3
Arb2
+2.0
Arb3
39 Ian Anderson 23 +3.2
Pre-Arb
+3.3
Pre-Arb
+3.0
Arb1
+3.0
Arb2
+2.9
Arb3
40 36 Ramón Laureano 26 +3.2
Arb1
+2.9
Arb2
+2.9
Arb3
41 Trevor Rogers 23 +4.1
Pre-Arb
+4.2
Pre-Arb
+3.8
Arb1
+3.7
Arb2
+3.7
Arb3
42 HM Dylan Carlson 22 +2.6
Pre-Arb
+2.7
Pre-Arb
+2.8
Arb1
+2.6
Arb2
+2.6
Arb3
43 Freddy Peralta 25 +3.6
$2.5 M
+3.4
$3.7 M
+3.1
$5.7 M
+2.9
$8.0 M
+2.8
$8.0 M
44 Nick Madrigal 24 +2.4
Pre-Arb
+2.5
Pre-Arb
+2.3
Arb1
+2.1
Arb2
+2.0
Arb3
45 39 Max Kepler 28 +3.3
$6.8 M
+2.9
$8.5 M
+2.6
$10.0 M
46 49 Xander Bogaerts 28 +4.5
$20.0 M
+4.2
$20.0 M
+3.7
$20.0 M
+3.1
$20.0 M
+2.5
$20.0 M
47 Tim Anderson 28 +2.8
$9.5 M
+2.7
$12.5 M
+2.4
$14.0 M
48 Luis Garcia 24 +2.9
Pre-Arb
+2.9
Pre-Arb
+2.6
Arb1
+2.5
Arb2
+2.3
Arb3
49 Pablo López 25 +2.6
Arb1
+2.6
Arb2
+2.4
Arb3
50 40 Jeff McNeil 29 +3.1
Arb1
+2.8
Arb2
+2.3
Arb3
Pre-Arb
Arb
Team Option
Vesting Option





203 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
markmark
5 years ago

I was surprised to see Hayes this high and not in the 30+ range because he seems to have settled down this year into simply a plus player and not a superstar, but the fact that he’s still smoking the ball coming off a wrist injury means he probably deserves to be here.

He could be an offseason mechanical change that helps him elevate away from being that superstar. That is, assuming the wrist fully heals.

D-WizMember since 2019
5 years ago
Reply to  markmark

Yeah, I think you nailed it. He’s also only 24, so there’s a very good chance he has a lot of improvements left to make. Plus he’s getting the minimum with tons of cheap team control remaining, which always holds a ton of sway on a list like this. He’s already one of my favorite players to watch, and I think a mid-teens ranking feels right for him.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  markmark

Hayes is good but I think he’s probably close to a finished product. But that finished product is still a likely a guy who puts up at least 3.5 wins a year with the upside for more if he gets hot.

We’re not used to seeing guys put up a ton of production at third without blasting homers all the time and so I think there’s a bias against them. He reminds me a lot of some of the good-field, good-contact second basemen who had enough power that they could sometimes blast a bunch of home runs if they were in the zone but mostly didn’t. Guys like Brandon Phillips or Jason Kipnis.

I would have put Cronenworth a little lower but him being about 5 spots above Cronenworth seems about right since Hayes has another year of team control.

markmark
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I’m gonna push back on the finished project part, just because he flashed superstardom in last year’s stint and the recoveries for wrist injuries tend to be inconsistent.

His approach has looked better this year and he’s gotten better at adjusting to breaking balls and taking them to opposite field for doubles from what I’ve seen this season. If he manages to get a bit more loft on his swing, it wouldn’t shock me if there’s a 25-30 HR player in there.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  markmark

Well, he also outperfomed his xwOBA by 100 points last year. The problem is mostly that he hits a lot of balls on the ground. This has always been the knock on him. I don’t think I really care about that anymore because he’s going to put up 110-120 wRC+’s while playing elite defense at an important position. He hits the ball hard enough that when it is in the air he’ll still get homers. But I also don’t think he’s likely to change at this point.

markmark
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

He certainly overperformed his expected production last season, but so does anyone with a 1.124 OPS in a small sample size. The flashes I’m referencing were his line-drive rate and elite exit velocities from last season.

I’m not saying he will be a superstar in the form of a 150 wRC+ hitter, but you’re telling me there isn’t a path to him being more than just a good regular? Swing changes happen and with someone who plays the defense Hayes does, it wouldn’t take top-tier offensive production to be a legitimate star.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  markmark

A guy consistently puts up 3.5 wins who gets hot every now and then and does better? That’s better than a good regular. He’s probably going to make a couple of all-star teams. That would be a core player on a championship contender. You can be really good without being peak Josh Donaldson or Evan Longoria.

markmark
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Yeah, good regular was the wrong term. I just meant that handicapping him at his age with the lack of plate appearances to a 3.5 win player feels impatient.

His most likely outcome is certainly as you’ve described, but I have a hard time believing there isn’t an outside shot he has some peak Matt Chapman-esque years where he’s a top-10 position player.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  markmark

Just want to say, thank you for the thoughtful discussion on this. This is why this is the one good place on the internet.

wokegraphs
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

It was polite. That’s all that matters.

rhdx
5 years ago

Just based on the WAR projections, Bichette is WAY too low compared to the other players in this section. He has 4 years of control and higher WAR projections than anyone except Cole or Trout. I am not saying I believe the projections, but if you believe in your forecasts, then he should be much higher. Also can’t see how anyone would trade that much for Gallen. Not a great track record (not much of a record at all), middling forecasts…that one just seems off.

markmark
5 years ago
Reply to  rhdx

If it was only based on WAR projections, you would be correct. But it’s not and Bichette has legitimate concerns about approach and defense, two flaws that no one else in this range has exhibited.

Josh
5 years ago
Reply to  markmark

Right, if this was just a WAR-projection ranking then you could do that yourself by sorting stats.

WerthlessMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  rhdx

I swap Alvarez and Bichette and feel much better about the order of this group of 10.

OtterMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  Werthless

Toronto is not trading Bichette for Alvarez. I’m shocked Alvarez is that high. Can we all skip ahead and put him on the HM list for 2022?

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  rhdx

Yeah, I don’t believe those projections. I think sometimes we think that guys will improve simply because they’re 21 or 22 when they are this good but he’s going to have to change all kinds of stuff about him to improve from here. Good player but it’s not by any means a given he’s going to start walking more and striking out less (which is what those projections think he will do)

rhdx
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Given that their projection system rarely projects really high WAR values I also agree that Bichette’s projection is high. But then, why do we have it here? And if the people making the list significantly disagree with a specific projection it would be interesting to hear why. If we are talking about surplus value, than future projections is what we need to base that on.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  rhdx

I have become very skeptical of projections for players who burst into the majors in their early 20s and put up a good batting line. I don’t know whether it’s because young guys are making it to the majors more where previously the only guys who got called up this young wound up being hall of fame candidates but I think that in a lot of cases there’s a lot less room for improvement than we would have thought. Some guys when they come up are just more polished and have room to improve.

In Bichette’s case, I think you can be doubly skeptical because he will need to dramatically change his swing, his approach, or both–and it’s not clear he sticks at shortstop. And while the BABIP isn’t totally unsustainable or anything it is also a little on the higher side. He might have some 5-win years but I think the downside risk of him missing time for injury is a bit more than banking on improvement.

All that said he’s basically a 4-win player now, so it’s not like he belongs lower on this list either. I think they got it right.

juk75
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

He’s not basically a 4 win player. He is a 4 win player with more upside on that number so far than downside. It’s ridiculous to say a guy who has been successful over parts of 3 seasons needs to ‘dramatically’ change his swing – why the hell should he? People know his swing and approach and have done for a while and he’s still hitting, so why would he dramatically change anything?

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  juk75

Agree, also every era of baseball also has repeated, several superstar players who rarely walk… yet we always have to hear about it when they don’t, as if it is some negative. Its comical really.
Bo walks as much as Robinson Cano did, He walks as much as Vlad Sr. did early and late in his career. He walks as much as Ichiro, or Pudge Rodriguez, etc etc etc.

juk75
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The flaw in your analysis is you don’t need to believe Bichette will improve much to reach these projections. He’s been at least a 4WAR/150 guy every year in his career already. There’s no way a guy with his track record, age and control should be at 20. Even if you assume he remains a 4 win guy he still has the 4th highest 5 year WAR of anyone in this tier (less than a win behind Bieber)

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  juk75

Every year in his 700 career PAs? I’m clearly not going to convince you, but there’s a lot more downside risk from injury than you’re assuming here and while it’s possible to regularly run BABIPs that high it does create some more downside risk. ZiPs thinks he’s going to stop blasting balls into the ground and put them over the fence instead, at a roughly 40% higher rate than what he’s doing currently, and that he’s going to stay at shortstop. While the second one seems likely the first one is less so, and the chances of both are not good. He might have some years better than 4 wins, but he’ll probably have years where he’s less too.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

He’s likely to improve at SS, and likely to improve as a hitter, and as likely as anyone else is to stay healthy. Why would Toronto want to move him off of SS? He’s one of the strengths of the team.

juk75
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Yes over 700 PAs across 3 seasons. Like I said if he doesn’t improve he’s a cost controlled 4 win player. ZIPs assumes 130 games a year so some injury risk is also built in already. You haven’t explained why someone with his track record needs to ‘dramatically change his swing’. I’m going to assume this is because you can’t

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  juk75

To be that kind of 5-win player? Yes, he will probably have to change his swing, his approach, or both. He hits balls into the ground a lot and he swings at everything. Personally, I wouldn’t mess with the swing, but the approach definitely needs work. It’s hard to be a 5-win player when you swing that much and you’re driving balls into the ground.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I have enjoyed his 16 groundball-home runs this year, and his 79 xb-hits over his first 167 games in the big leagues. Just think if he ever learns to lift the ball.

juk75
5 years ago
Reply to  casey j

If only he was a plus runner who could turn some of those grounders into doubles as well. Maybe he wouldn’t have to dramatically change his approach if that were the case

juk75
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Let me try one more time. He is already a 4 win player. To go from 4 to 5 doesn’t require you to dramatically (your word) change anything. He could just improve his D a little bit (as noted his issue is with errors not range, which is easier to improve), or walk a bit more, or more likely improve a little in a number of areas, which doesn’t seem outrageous for a 24 year old. But regardless the original discussion was whether he is too low at 20, and the point is if he didn’t improve one iota he’s a 4 win guy with 4 years of control so the answer the clearly yes.

Dan B
5 years ago
Reply to  juk75

His 4 wins isn’t a floor. There is both upside and downside.
I agree with you that the industry might be overrating the downside risk, but it’s also disingenuous to pretend that it doesn’t exist.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  Dan B

Yes, but every player has risk. The question would be “does he have more risk than other players”, and If consider him less risky than average. not much history of injury, very consistent history of hitting, and his prime years right around the corner.

juk75
5 years ago
Reply to  Dan B

I’m not pretending he doesn’t have downside risk, although I disagree that he has more than all the other players on this list (pitchers break!). 5 wins isn’t a ceiling either, although as a jays fan I’d be delighted if he hits his projection.

I was disagreeing with the notion that he needs dramatic improvements to justify being higher on this list or that he needs to change who he is to have a shot at being a 5 win player.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  rhdx

Zac Gallen has the talent to win a CY in the future. Sure he is hurt more than most, but the talent is there. He just has to have a pain free season with 32 starts and your attitude will change. Unfortunately he has had to many health issues to expect a Scherzer like ending to his career or even Andy Pettite, but I am sure any team would would take a Kevin Brown career at this point considering the cost. He is kind of a modern day Kevin Brown and that is not to shabby.

FrancoeursteinMember since 2025
5 years ago
Reply to  NATS Fan

Peak Kevin Brown was some of the finest pitching of all time. That’s a bold take.

Jamessssssss
5 years ago
Reply to  rhdx

Came here to say exactly this. Lets put the 4.5 WAR 23 year old short stop that can run below 3.5 DH.

Like Linkin Park said though, in the end it doesn’t really matter.

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago

DOUBLE DOSE of commentary! Love it

DLHughey
5 years ago

Glad to see some pushback on the concept of the DH penalty. Never agreed with the extent of it myself.

Bartolo Cologne
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

My take is that there should be a benefit for playing positive defense and a detraction for negative defense. The fact that the DH position exists actually allows baseball a defensively net neutral position to start from, which is helpful and should be utilized instead of treated like an aberration.

I know many people think that playing defense should be rewarded, and I agree but with a caveat. GOOD defense should be rewarded, but I don’t think Eugenio Suarez should get a WAR bump over Yordan Alvarez because his manager makes him stand at the SS position and hope nobody hits it to him.

DLHughey
5 years ago

Bingo, this is exactly where I stand. It’s a position, it exists, and no value is gained or lost defensively by a player being in the mandatory position.

I also feel like the penalty is logically inconsistent with pitcher oWAR. Pitcher hitting gets compared to other pitchers. So Zack Greinke putting up a 70 wRC+ (great for pitchers, terrible for anyone else) gets rewarded for objectively bad hitting. Alcides Escobar, playing the most demanding defensive position on the diamond, gets punished by oWAR for putting up the same 70 wRC+ because he’s a SS. They both produced bad offensive numbers, yet one is rewarded via oWAR because of the subset he’s compared to.

DHs on the other hand, get dinged defensively because their defense is compared to all defenders (not a subset), while pitcher offense is only compared to pitchers. Why not compare DH defense to the subset of all DHs, which would of course result in a net neutral? At the very least, pitcher oWAR is conceptually flawed as it is because it rewards actively bad performance, but I definitely think that the DH defensive adjustment needs a strong revision because it essentially penalizes a neutral outcome.

texag
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

I don’t understand this argument against a defensive penalty for DH. I think everyone and their dog agrees that good defense nets players positive runs and bad defense nets players negative runs in the overall formula. Players at DH don’t contribute anything to the defense. They are considered so bad at defense that they aren’t even allowed to be in the field. Is that 100% the case these days? No. Maybe the DH penalty is harsh but saying a guy who isn’t even allowed to contribute on defense should get zero runs while a guy who is slightly below average at SS should get negative runs is insane.

DLHughey
5 years ago
Reply to  texag

1) Contributing nothing (neutral outcome) is better than contributing bad defense.

2) Still avoiding the point about pitcher oWAR. Why do we reward their actively bad outcomes, yet DHs get penalized for neutrally existing? If we want to compare people to their position, then it should be done universally. If we want to compare people to everyone, it should be done universally. This is not currently done.

OtterMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

In all likelihood the DH is worse defensively than the bad defensive player he is ‘forcing’ to play bad defense. Also a DH only player limits lineup flexibility as its harder to keep the bat of good hitting fielding players in the lineup when they don’t play the field (and also injuries to position players). On top of that, a lot of DHs have a more limited trade market since only half the league has the DH (at least right now), or if they are traded to the NL, the NL team would (in theory) trade less value because of the DHs defensive limitations.

If Alvarez was posting Vlad Jr like offense, then sure. But he’s not.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  Otter

I dont think all of this should be included in WAR. Good fielding position players are put into the DH spot all the time. Its called the DH, but the manager can use it how he wants. Also, in the NL there is no DH. So is the Pitcher stealing at bats as well? lol. If you have an extra spot to ad a bat by rule, it makes sense to put a guy that can hit in that spot. Sorry Yordan Alvarez doesn’t swing the bat well enough for your tastes.

synco
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

Somebody still has to play the position the DH is so bad at that he can’t fill. That’s why the DH gets a penalty – he’s worse than the worst defensive player on the field. If he had to play in the field (like he would in the NL because there’s no DH) he would put up those terrible numbers and get knocked for them directly. If he’s lucky enough to play in the AL, we estimate what that penalty would be and apply it to him.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  synco

By this definition, I get a negative credit for my defense. He could be Ozzie Smith, but he gets credit for hypothetical bad defense if he is put at DH for a week. haha. It doesnt matter if a DH weighs 700 pounds. His defensive ability has no relevance on his value, right? I cant see how it does. The only way it does is IF a plus hitting DH only player is much much easier to find than an average fielding, average hitting third-baseman. That would seem to be how the “replacement level” would be established.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

Id agree, but in that case I think it makes the most sense to universally compare players among their position. Because that balances the REAL scarcity and value of hitting at that position. If Greinke’s 70 is average for a pitcher, then he is above replacement level with the bat. If Escobar’s 70 is average for a SS, then same for him. Of course, the average SS hiys more than the average pitcher, so there is that.

Lanidrac
5 years ago
Reply to  texag

Besides, it goes against the concept of WAR in the first place, as a replacement player at DH would be subject to the same negative penalty, so the DH isn’t proving any less defensive value than a replacement player would.

SertoriusMember since 2023
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

There’s no such thing as “oWAR,” there’s just WAR. People are getting confused by accounting. No one is compared to just their position or even average hitters of pitchers. It’s wins above REPLACEMENT. A replacement level shortstop and pitcher look very different, but are equal in value. DHs don’t lose value by playing defense, they just don’t gain any. A first basemen having a terrible day defensively still did more to help his team than the DH, no matter what.

Think of it this way, we don’t say Grienke gets penalized for playing in the AL because he doesn’t get to hit like DeGrom. We just understand that, in a different situation, he might be more valuable. It’s the same with DHs.

Lanidrac
5 years ago
Reply to  Sertorius

No, we have to compare by position exactly because of the difference in defensive values between them. A replacement DH costs your team no more defensive value than the first DH did.

In the case of moving a 1B to DH, you’re actually replacing both the DH and 1B. The change of defense at DH is neutral irregardless of where the new guy previously played, while the difference in defensive value at 1B is then determined between the first guy’s (who’s now at DH) 1B defense and the new first baseman’s 1B defense.

Also, no, a 1B having a terrible day both offensively and defensively does do less to help his team win than a DH having a terrible day, as the DH didn’t cost the team any runs on defense like the 1B did.

We understand that in a different situation that the DH might be less valuable, but that’s not the actual case.

TerenceMember since 2016
5 years ago

The DH penalty is a detraction for negative defense. It’s the just the opportunity cost for someone else’s negative defense.

If Yordan Alvarez wasn’t DH, the Astros could put Michael Brantley or Yuli Gurriel in the DH slot. Instead those guys stay on the field and provide negative value to the team. The team defense would be even worse if Brantley or Gurriel was DH’ing and Alvarez was in the field. The Astros are making the best choice, but it still makes their defense worse, and the negative defensive production accumulates because Alvarez is a negative value defender.

The best example of this is how Manny Ramirez racked up -107 (!!) DEF runs over 4 years from 2004-2007 for the Red Sox. Normally, Manny would have DH’d, and not created negative value in left field. But the Red Sox could not take Manny off the field. They had David Ortiz in the dugout. DH’s create negative defensive value because they are your worst defender. If you weren’t penciling that guy into DH you could take your worst defensive liability off the field.

DLHughey
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

This reads like some Fangraphs 2009 comment.

The idea of the DH being some out of shape, unathletic, defensive disaster is mostly a relic of an older time. Unless you’re an absolutely elite hitter (Yordan, Ortiz) or an older but still elite hitter (JDM, Cruz), teams simply aren’t tolerating a player being developed or rostered without a position. Every player is now developed with some defensive value in mind, and if they have none and aren’t elite bats, they’re basically weeded out in prospect-dom. But the DH position remains, and outside of Ohtani pitching nights, is de facto mandatory for AL teams to field. Now it serves mainly as a rest day for competent defenders, because developing some modicum of defensive skill is low hanging fruit at this point, and has been for the better part of the past decade.

dukewinslowMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

I’m willing to believe this but show your work that DH’s are increasingly getting innings in the field over time.

DLHughey
5 years ago
Reply to  dukewinslow

Look at box scores from the past week. Modern DHs more often look like Mancini, Bradley, Moncada, Meadows, Lowrie, Stanton, Tesocar, Lourdes, Sal Perez, etc. — a hodgepodge of guys who rotate through the spot, have a range of defensive value, might be injury prone, and benefit from the rest. And those are names I took from box scores in the past few days. The old guard of elite hitters with absolutely zero defensive value is dwindling. No more E5, Ortiz, Dunn, etc. Cruz is the only real long time pure DH left of that guard, although JDM is quickly joining him in that small tier of “still elite older hitter”. And Yordan is the only young hitter where DH is a tolerated primary position.

synco
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

Then those guys just get the DH penalty for the games they play at DH. In the same way that a part time infielder gets an SS benefit for the days the play SS, or 3B for the days they play 3B. Someone still has to fill the defensive position the DH is resting from, even if it’s just for a day.

Bartolo Cologne
5 years ago
Reply to  synco

The DH isn’t “resting” from any position. It is its own position. The only person resting is the pitcher, who now permanently rests from batting because a new and distinct position was created.

synco
5 years ago

It doesn’t matter if DH is a position or not. The point is who contributes more toward victory. Who is more valuable, the guy who hits .300/.400/.500 and can play a passable left field, or the guy who hits .300/.400/.500 and is so bad out there that the manager doesn’t want to play him on the field at all? If the second guy was good enough to play the field he would, so now you don’t have to play the guy out there who can field the position but isn’t as much of a hitter, and the DH slot is open for the next-best guy who can hit but can’t really field. That’s why the DH gets a penalty. It’s about opportunity cost and the ripple effect on the lineup. You want the most defensive and offensive value possible in the lineup. Guys who can play D are by definition more valuable than those who can’t.

Or, for the rotating/resting argument, who is more valuable, the guy who hits .300/.400/.500 and is durable enough to play 150 games, or the guy who hits .300/.400/.500 and can only handle 100 games on the field before he starts to break down? Again, that’s why the DH gets a penalty.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  synco

Ohtani would be playing the field everyday if they were not worried about injury! Are you aware that Manny Ramirez had it written into his contract they he would not DH. Adam Dunn did as well. Those are two of the worse fielders the game has ever seen. Why should they get more WAR than the players they made DH so they could play?

Lanidrac
5 years ago
Reply to  synco

Your argument actually backfires on you in practice.

If the left fielder is bad enough to put up negative Defensive WAR, then he’s doing less to help the team win and is in actuality less valuable than the equal hitter playing DH who’s not costing the team any runs on defense. It doesn’t matter that the DH would be less valuable if he played the field when he’s not actually doing so.

Likewise, if the left fielder is putting up positive defensive numbers, then the actual value difference between them is only that positive amount of defensive value the LF puts up.

The defensive opportunity cost of replacing just the DH in the lineup is exactly zero, while defensively replacing him with someone at a different position is solely defined by the defensive opportunity cost of replacing the second guy at his position.

Left of Centerfield
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

“And Yordan is the only young hitter where DH is a tolerated primary position.”

Franmil Reyes would like to have a little chat with you…

dukewinslowMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

sure, but that could just be selection/recency bias. It could be that this was true 10-20 years ago as well for most teams, we just remember the exceptions because of their, erm, gravitational pull.

I’d take the share of AB’s for players at DH versus their other positions over time and see if that changed. Obviously, you’d have some cutoffs and it’d be interesting to see how one defined “full time” DH’s. My intuition is that this shift is real, I just dunno.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

Maybe this proves his point. Maybe thats why it evolved?

TerenceMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

It’s almost like some Fangraphs readers have been here 12 years and haven’t learned.

DH Penalty is the opportunity cost to take your next worst defender off the field.

You imagine some imaginary new world that doesn’t exist. After Ohtani, the leading DH are JD Martinez, Yordan, Ty France, Nelson Cruz, Austin Meadows, Jed Lowrie, Trey Mancini, Franmil Reyes, and Giancarlo Stanton. These guys are not unathletic. They are defensive disasters. They are bad at defense. They are not competent defenders (as compared to other MLB players). If you could develop them into competent defenders, you could make alot of money for yourself. There is a reason they stay in the dugout when everyone else picks up a glove. If they did put on a glove it would make their team worse. JD Martinez is a worse defender than Verdugo & Dalbec, and is the reason, the Red Sox have to field their negative defensive value. If the Mariners weren’t playing Ty France at DH, they could take Mitch Haniger off the field. There is a good reason that they don’t.

The only player where it seems weird to penalize them is Ohtani. He seems like he might be an above average defender and it is not fair that he is resting/protecting he legs to pitch. But guess what, when he plays DH, the Angels have to field Upton or Walsh (or both!). Those guys are bad at defense. It makes the Angels worse. And part of the reason they are worse is because they can’t move Upton or Walsh into the DH.

Lanidrac
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

No, it’s not! It’s the opportunity cost of putting in a replacement at DH (always 0) plus the opportunity cost of putting in another defender at the position that was moved to DH, but THAT cost is already factored into the defensive bonus/penalty at that other position.

It doesn’t actually matter how bad the DH is at defense if they don’t actually play it, and you have to play a DH if you don’t want the pitcher to bat (who will be playing defense either way)! It’s not like you can just replace the DH by putting an extra fielder out there.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

Are you suggesting that these DH’s WAR should change, depending on who the worst of the other 8 players on the field are? Or is it just something to keep in mind, making the positional adjustment kind of like an average of all the teams?

Bartolo Cologne
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

I understand this logic, I just disagree with it because it treats the DH position as a special, anomalous circumstance. You said that the Astros are making the right choice but it makes their defense worse. I’d say that the Astros are making the right choice but it doesn’t make their defense worse, it just makes their defense what it is, because they have a DH, all AL teams have known they would have it since 1973, and they chose to construct their team this way anyway. If they thought Brantley’s defense was too big a liability, they could do a bunch of things (bench him, trade him, teach him a new position) only one of which is to get rid of Alvarez and move Brantley to DH.

My position is that, ultimately, DH is its own distinct position (it gets voted on for the ASG and receives its own Silver Slugger award) and should be evaluated as such instead of as an opportunity cost tradeoff for the worst defender on the field. If you’re such a good hitter that you’re chosen to be the designated hitter amongst a plethora of good hitting/bad fielding options, you shouldn’t be penalized because other players are bad at fielding.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago

Good points. Id also ad that Brantley is solid in LF, Gurriel was moved to first where is solid there, and Alvarez is above the average for a bat at DH. So, the Astros are an example of a team that maximized production from all three spots. But overall, agree. Developing good fielding position players, and hit only DH’s are not exclusive to each other any more than developing good hitting and pitching are.

TerenceMember since 2016
5 years ago

I did not say that at all. The Astros are making the right choice and it makes their defense better than it would be if Yordan was on the field. If they could take Brantley off the field and put an above average defender on the field in his place, that would make their defense even better. Playing Brantley in the field makes them worse than the average defender would.

In MLB, the front offices have to decide who to pay and who not to pay. They evaluate DH vs right hand relievers vs SS vs Left hand starters. If you pay Yordan Alvarez, you only have 25 other active player spots. There is an opportunity cost to pay and play him. If you are a good hitter/bad fielder you can still play but you are not as valuable as a good hitter/ good fielder.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

Kind of, unless you Have 11-12 good defender-good hitters on your roster. If one DH’s, he doesn’t have more value. . . unless it can be extracted on the field, or by paying less for him. and being able to used to afford help elsewhere. I think we might be finding a limitation for WAR… it depends on the team and the roster and the GM.

Lanidrac
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

Yes, but the opportunity cost of replacing Brantley defensively is already reflected by the difference in LF defensive value, so it makes no sense to double dip with the DH defensive value.

dl80Member since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

This. I actually would like to see negative defense capped right at the DH penalty. It wasn’t Manny’s fault that Ortiz couldn’t learn first base.

Just like it wasn’t Sheffield’s fault that the Yankees kept throwing him into the outfield.

Bartolo Cologne
5 years ago
Reply to  dl80

By the same token, it isn’t Ortiz’s fault that the Red Sox chose to sign and play Manny Ramirez. And if they had traded Ortiz, it isn’t a given they would have made Manny their DH. They might have just signed someone else and kept running Manny out to left.

Hypothetical: if Jacob DeGrom’s DH ended up having a horrible offensive season, should DeGrom have the DH’s negative offensive WAR detracted from his WAR total?

TerenceMember since 2016
5 years ago

It is 100% Ortiz’s fault that he couldn’t play better than -30 DEF in LF in Boston with the Green Monster behind him.

They would have absolutely put Manny at DH when they traded Ortiz. You’re arguing that Ortiz should have been penalized even more than the standard/league average DH penalty.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

Edgar Martinez became the DH because he became injury prone and Seattle did not want to risk his bat playing him at 3rd. Statistically, he was an average defender for his career when he did defend. Had Seattle not chosen to DH him he would have likely had a much shorter career, but gotten for WAR during the years he did play. frankly Seattle made the right choice for the team!

PC1970Member since 2024
5 years ago
Reply to  NATS Fan

Paul Molitor was very similar. Played the 1st half of his career in the field & was hurt all the time. Had over 140 games played 4x in 13 years Milwaukee finally wised up & just put him at DH around 1990, where he then played 150+ games 5x in 6 years. (including the strike year where he led the league in games played.)

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

Not all DHs are defensive liabilities. Most are not! If a team has two above average defending corner OFs who lack the range for center, and average defensive corner OF, and all three are better bats than most of the rest of the team the average defender guy will DH most of the time. Why should he be penalized?

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  NATS Fan

hmm interesting. I see your point. This player might not even be a DH on a different team. As an average though, he has to have at least SOMEWHAT lower value than an average LF… I think

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

All of us that regularly read this site know that being a DH makes hitting harder to do. Isn’t that penalty enough?

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

I liked this, because it is well thought out… BUT, Brantley is solid in Left, Gurriel is solid at 1B, and Alvarez is above the average DH with the bat. This would actually seem like an OPTIMAL use of the DH. Also. the Red Sox had to play Manny in LF, but they also got to have Manny and Ortiz in their lineup… and the team was good. So, while I see your point, its situational. I can see why it would be hard to quantify the value of a DH with one statistical estimation of such.

TerenceMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  casey j

The entire point of Fangraphs is to quantify the value of players with statistical estimation that is not situational.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

This can be done in a discussion like this, but it might not be possible in a formula. It is possible as a n estimation, but very hard to be exact. Also, most of what I look at here is prospect talks… which is about projection into the future, and stats can only help so much in that regard. So its part of the point, but not the entire point.

Lanidrac
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

No, it’s the opportunity cost for a replacement *at DH*, which is always zero defensively!

When moving someone else to DH, you may be making the team worse defensively but only because you put in a worse defender at the other position you replaced. If the Red Sox gave Ortiz the day off and moved Ramirez to DH while putting in a better fielder in LF, then they actually improved their team defense that day, just at the heavy cost of team offense. If they simply switched Ortiz’s and Ramirez’s positions, then it would make their defense worse but only because their LF defense would lose value due to Ortiz being a worse left fielder than Ramirez.

carterMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

I would say that Alvarez is absolutely a better fielder than Brantley who has been one of the leagues worst for years now.

SertoriusMember since 2023
5 years ago

The fact that Eugenio Suarez is a terrible shortstop defensively but an average 3B defensively should tell you about why DHs should not be considered average defenders. Eugenio Suarez gets a WAR bump over Yordan Alvarez because he’s much more valuable defensively. Playing even bad defense has value, it’s the whole reason that it’s WAR and not WAA.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago

I think the weirdest part of the DH penalty is that when good defensive players are put there for a rest their own defensive part of WAR is lowered for that game because they DH’d.

Dan B
5 years ago

It should be case by case. It should reflect opportunity cost.
If a good fielder gets a day off to DH, why should they get the same penalty as a lifelong DH who has terrible fielding stats on the rare times that they play 1B?

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  Dan B

Their penalty could be more! Because you are removing their defense for a day. One day isn’t a huge deal, but if Matt Chapman has to DH for a month, that subtracts value. It doesn’t matter if hes “great at defense”, he isn’t adding value if he isn’t out there. Also, WAR has to assume that the guy replacing him is average… for a backup 3b

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  Dan B

Oof, that would be a disaster to try and calculate. Figuring out the opportunity cost of who is playing DH, where they would play *every game* if they were in the field, who that would displace, how good of a fielder are they relative to the person they would purportedly replace, etc? Definitely have to have baked-in assumptions to simplify WAR calculation so that it doesn’t take an army of folks to calculate with 100 variables with a bunch of judgment calls associated with each variable. WAR is a valuation shorthand relying on certain baked-in assumptions, it’s never intended to be accurate to the 4th decimal place.

joe_schlabotnik
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

I also think the positional adjustments are in general just too weighted. I don’t think a CF who just can’t hit it is as valuable as an average LF who wRC+’s 120.

joe_schlabotnik
5 years ago

also, if a player is an “average” shortstop, they are still an amazing shortstop. They’re being compared to a league full of shortstops who are also amazing. id take an elite hitting SS with below average defense over lindor any day of the weekend. sorry haters, defense is overvalued in WAR

Cave Dameron
5 years ago

I don’t understand your analogy, because in that case an average LF with a 120 wRC+ would be much more valuable than a CF who can’t hit, even if that CF was a gold glover (I don’t know if you were assuming an average CF, or a very good defensive one).

Take 2019 for example. You have a CF in Lorenzo Cain who had a 83 wRC+, 19 runs saved in CF, and was worth 1.5 WAR over 148 games.

Meanwhile you had a LF in Tommy Pham who had a 122 wRC+, 2 runs saved in LF, and was worth 3.3 WAR over 145 games. Both were average baserunners as well.

An average LF who hits around 120 wRC+ will always have more value than a good CF who can’t hit. Even gold glove defense at CF can’t make up the difference if your LF is a good hitter and average fielder. Look up all the other examples from 2019 and the CF’s who can’t hit (Bader, Hamilton, Cain, Kiermaier, Robles, Dyson, Margot, Marisnick, DeShields) are almost all on a 2 WAR/season or below pace. The average LF who can hit are around 3.0-3.5 WAR pace.

Yes positional adjustments exist, but they’re only 10 runs between LF and CF. If both are average fielders at their position then yes of course a guy with a 120wRC+ is going to be better than someone who can’t hit. A 10 run positional adjustment won’t make up for the 30 runs of offensive difference, and WAR reflects that.

kylesch87
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

Two things in regards to the DH positional adjustment:
1) DH must have the worst positional adjustment of all positions; every player in baseball is capable of playing average defense at DH. That is what the positional adjustment is measuring: what average defense looks like at each position.
2) The DH penalty is too steep anyway though because the DH hitting penalty is not included. I don’t remember off the top of my head the extent of the penalty, but an average hitter either pinch hitting or playing DH will see their woba suffer. This penalty needs to be accounted for somewhere in WAR but it is left out entirely. The DH positional adjustment seems the most obvious place to restore the balance.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  kylesch87

This!!

Left of Centerfield
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

As far as I know, the position adjustments that Fangraphs uses were calculated by Tom Tango a while ago. He basically looked at how teams trade off offense vs defense at each position. But you obviously can’t do that for DH since there is no defense. If I remember correctly – and I’m pretty sure I do – Tom admitted that he just made up a number for DH.

So you could certainly be right that it’s too high. That being said. it’s not clear what it “should” be or even how to calculate it. Tom knows more about this sort of stuff than basically anyone else in the world. And even he had no idea how to do it.

tung_twista
5 years ago
Reply to  DLHughey

Not just the DH penalty, but the whole ‘positional adjustment’ is a skeleton in the closet that should have been properly addressed a long time ago.
It is an integral part of how we use WAR to compare players fielding different positions, but we are using numbers where the positional difference is always in multiples of 5 runs.
Surely, nobody actually buys that and we can do better than that now?

Also, there is an argument to be made that positional adjustment should also be adjusted for era (e.g. as balls in play decrease, the difference in defensive value across positions also decreases).

Left of Centerfield
5 years ago
Reply to  tung_twista

“we are using numbers where the positional difference is always in multiples of 5 runs.”

Yeah, that’s a Tom Tango thing. For reasons that I can’t begin to explain, he was more concerned about having numbers that people could easily remember than having them be 100% accurate.

“Also, there is an argument to be made that positional adjustment should also be adjusted for era”

Both Baseball Reference and Fangraphs do indeed adjust for era. For example, Willie Mays has a career position adjustment of -14 runs on Fangraphs and -19 runs on Baseball Reference. And in neither system does he have a single season where he has a positive position adjustment. That being said, I do believe that they’re in need of being updated. As far as I know, both BR (which uses a different set of numbers – not Tango’s) and Fangraphs have been using the same adjustments since about 2000.

dukewinslowMember since 2020
5 years ago

I never really figured out who the “Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim in California” rebrand was FOR, exactly. National media? No one cares. Locals? It just pissed off my angels loving family in Orange County. Like most things angels, they probably made a seat of the pants branding decision that they have too much sunk cost to move on from now. And, as a slightly superstitious sort, I can’t help but feel a little hoodoo that such obvious pandering to a group of people who could care less (Angelenos) at the expense of their own core fans has bit them in the butt.

Anyway, valuing Ohtani is hard and FA contract is going to be a REALLY interesting exercise.

Also, how much of Trout’s injuries are the angels keeping him off the field to prolong his peak? This is a thing in football and basketball, where the toll the game takes can significantly shorten players’ careers (if you think the Panthers shut McCaffrey down because of a real injury, I have a bridge to sell you). I dunno how much of a thing that is in baseball and how much you have to think about it if you’re going to trade for a guy.

mikecws91
5 years ago
Reply to  dukewinslow

They wanted to have it both ways: try to appeal to the entire LA media market while also not offending Anaheim by ditching that name. And when you try to have it both ways, you usually end up with neither.

dl80Member since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  mikecws91

Not so much not offending Anaheim as not being sued

WerthlessMember since 2020
5 years ago

If the Yankees made Cole available, I doubt that they could fetch more in a trade than the guys around him. I think he belongs in the late twenties.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago

Alright I’ll take the bait. Cole doesn’t belong on this list. Your team sources who pushed back on you here are right. If the Yankees insisted on a team paying the full salary they’d get someone like Jorge Guzman in return. Not Jorge Guzman as he was in the centerpiece of the Giancarlo Stanton trade, but Jorge Guzman as he is now, the guy on his last option and with 30 command in AAA.

I’d put Trout and Betts (who I suspect is on next week’s list) a lot lower on this list too for the same reason. Trout, Cole, and Betts have the most remaining money on their contracts of any three players in the league. In 2027, Gerrit Cole will be 36 and making $36M a year. Trout will be 35 and making $35M a year and have $142M left on his deal. There are so few teams that would be willing to take that contract on at all without eating money that it kills any leverage you’d have to get a good set of players in return.

You eat $100M on these deals, suddenly you’ll start having teams offering top-notch players in return, enough that Betts and Trout at least still probably belong on this list somewhere. But you also just paid $100M. I don’t think you can write that off.

TM
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I agree. When Cole signed his contract, his trade value became negative: if someone else wanted to pay him that much they’d have bid him up and he’d end up with more money. And now he’s down 1.5 prime years off the front of the contract, so the value will be lower.

TerenceMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  TM

Players are not cars. Their trade value does not diminish the day the contract is signed by default and definition. If they stay healthy (exceeding projected playing time) and perform at a high level (exceeding median performance projections) then their projected value goes up. If teams in the 2019/2020 offseason could have known what Cole’s next thirty starts would look like for certain, his contract would have been much more expensive. The projected value of his contract has gone up since signing and teams are not assuming as many of the worst possible scenarios as well.

From the article when Cole signed with the Yankees, Zips projected 18.6 WAR for Cole in ’22-’26. Now ZIPS is projecting Cole for 23.9 WAR in ’22-’26, and certainly some added value in ’27-’29 as well. That’s a big difference!

dukewinslowMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

Players have option value to teams, that option value changes when they sign a contract. Sure players aren’t cars, but a new contract can add (eg Albies) or subtract from their value (and in this case we’re talking about surplus value- the contract determines how much production is surplus, unless contracts cause a change in performance in some way)

O'KieboomerMember since 2021
5 years ago
Reply to  Terence

But acquiring teams won’t get those 30 starts…

PC1970Member since 2024
5 years ago
Reply to  O'Kieboomer

No, but, the performance baseline has changed? Since, Cole has another 30 starts of proven, injury free, great performance, isn’t fair to state the expected performance going forward is higher than it was before he signed?

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Agree. Too, I think the “spin rate” / ball doctoring impact on Cole’s value (or any pitcher’s value, for that matter) is still to fresh to totally digest, but his value to other teams can’t possibly be as high as it was prior to the crackdown. It may be 0.95x or 0.97x, but it can’t be 1.01x or 1.05x. (x being his pre-crackdown value)

Just as a poor start or two after the crackdown provided points of evidence but not any definitive proof that his production and performance were permanently diminished, so too the great starts since then are just points of evidence but not definitive proof that his value is unaffected by the crackdown. Still too fresh to know the long-term impact, and that uncertainty can only weigh on his value in one direction.

synco
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

That brings up a question that I’m unsure on an answer for – do the teams these players are on count in the rankings? I.e. in our hypothetical trade scenarios is Cole just a guy with a contact who can be traded to any team, or is the scenario specifically if the Yankees, the team he is on, decided to trade him? Obv a Cole market that includes the Yankees as a suitor creates a higher potential return than one in which they’re out.

quincy0191Member since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  synco

In the intro they said it was the maximum return, not the average. So for Cole, the fact that the Dodgers (and maybe Giants, given their extreme payroll flexibility) exist means it doesn’t matter that the Pirates and Royals aren’t going to trade for Cole under any circumstances – it’s just about the fact that the Dodgers likely would.

That being said, I agree he shouldn’t be on this list. I’d actually argue that basically any free agent (or equivalent – the fact that Trout and Betts technically weren’t FAs doesn’t mean they didn’t get FA-style deals) shouldn’t be on a trade value list unless they’ve suddenly become a much better player (a DJ Lemahieu, for example). The whole thing about FA contracts is that you’re a) paying market value, so evidently nobody else thought he was worth that amount of money in dollars, which are a perfect substitute so we don’t even have quibbles about how a particular team sees a particular player, and b) the value is frontloaded , so the Yankees have already consumed the best dollar-per-win years of that deal and it’s getting uglier by the day. If we’re talking like it’s this offseason, you’re asking another franchise to give a 31-year-old Cole seven years and $252 million with an opt-out after 2024, which is three years into the contract instead of five. I mean, he might get that – but let’s recognize it’s $42 million more than Scherzer got at two years younger (seven years ago, of course) and Scherzer has tons of deferrals and no opt-out. That’s about the best-case scenario for any pitcher contract ever; anyone going double-or-nothing on it?

Anon21Member since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  quincy0191

“The whole thing about FA contracts is that you’re a) paying market value, so evidently nobody else thought he was worth that amount of money in dollars”

I think this is somewhat oversimplified. It describes most but not all free agent contract values, because some players have non-monetary factors that cause them to pick an offer that’s not the absolute maximum dollar value.

NATS FanMember since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  Anon21

At the time no team was willing to pay more, but things have changed. Perhaps a large market team was in a rebuild at the time, but now they are more competitive and feel Trout is underpaid now ( he is) and would be willing to pay that money plus some real prospects.

newsenseMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  quincy0191

I think that’s the core point. If Cole or Trout had an opt-out that made them free agents would they get a contract that paid significantly more than what they are currently getting? If not, why would you give up player/players in trade in order to pay the same amount?

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  newsense

Because of the money gained by winning A World Series? Maybe, to keep ones job as a GM?

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  synco

I believe it is hypothetical, so in theory, the Yankees could trade for Cole and this contract. But since they are literally the only team in baseball who would take this salary without offsets (and did take it without offsets!) I think the point still stands. I mean, other teams could probably fit him in. There’s no shortage of money. But I don’t think they would.

Max Power
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

There’s a reason why even rich teams like the Dodgers, Angels, and Astros balked at beating the Yankees offer for Cole. If you told those teams, yeah, if you want Cole at that price, you also have to give away a pre-arb star player for nothing, it would’ve been even a harder no. Plus, he’s already burned the 1.5 years where he was the best bargain on that contract.

I appreciate the amount of work that goes into a series like this, but if you have team personnel telling you you’re wrong and still make an obvious mistake, I’m not sure what you’re really accomplishing here.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

It’s interested you get so much support on this comment, but if someone says the Lindor contract was bonkers around here, they get downvoted into oblivion.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  airforce21one

IDK, I did not think it was a good deal for the Mets at the time. “Bonkers” is a bit much, though. He’ll be good for a while, and I bet it ages better than Giancarlo Stanton’s contract did. I just didn’t think he was a Top 10 position player anymore.

joe_schlabotnik
5 years ago
Reply to  airforce21one

the lindor contract is bonkers, im with you brother

HappyFunBallMember since 2019
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Trade value is both blood AND treasure. The fact that a trade for a megacontract won’t return much talent the other way doesn’t make it a worthless trade. Indeed, simply clearing $150M off your books is pretty darn valuable!

The point about how few teams would be in the discussion stands.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

I don’t really understand this comment. But if what you’re saying is a player has trade value because you can get rid of 60% of the contract and buy prospects equivalent to the other 40% then I don’t agree. If you get prospects equivalent to more than the other 40% then that excess is the trade value.

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  HappyFunBall

That is one way to look at it, but it is not how the authors or Fangraphs have ever stylized these lists.

These lists are basically “how many and how good of top prospects would you get for a player.” It’s from the trading partner’s perspective and from that perspective the amount owed being more is a bad thing.

wokegraphs
5 years ago

1) Cole doesn’t belong here and prior authors wouldn’t have had him here.

2) I hope the slugging Hayes showed last year and this year in AAA prior to the thumb comes back asap.

MikeD
5 years ago

The inclusion of Trout and Cole makes perfect sense. They’re controllable with their contracts, and they’re providing high value. This is about competitive sports and entertainment, and ultimately that requires winning. I want Trout and Cole on my team because they’re going to provide great value through increased winning.

wokegraphs
5 years ago
Reply to  MikeD

Trade value is about surplus value, MikeD. Cole and Trout are fairly compensated for their contributions so they don’t have it unlike pre-Arb and Arb players. They don’t belong on this list because they wouldn’t fetch the talent in trades that the players around them on the list would do to their contract cost. Make sense?

Travis LMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  wokegraphs

I don’t think trade value is entirely about surplus value, and from what I’ve read here, the authors and team reps don’t think so either.

wokegraphs
5 years ago
Reply to  Travis L

Well, sure its present value v future value but in a vacuum of surplus value if that makes sense?

texag
5 years ago
Reply to  MikeD

What you are talking about is basically just ranking players by expected WAR for a given season or any length of time you’d prefer. Like the other commenter said, Trout/Betts/Cole don’t have surplus value. You aren’t going to get commensurate player value in return because of the hefty price tag that goes along with them. If the point of this series was “who’d make the best possible team?” then sure, all three of those guys would be front line picks.

casey jMember since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  texag

The thing is, the getting the them. money saved is value to the team dealing them, and the huge player is big value to the team.

Angels trade Trout to Seattle for say, Jake Fraley and $50 million cash. The Angels could feel like they got huge value, and so could the Mariners, right? The Angels could get even more of course, because of the massive impact on a franchise by adding Trout.

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  MikeD

“They’re controllable with their contracts”

In that sense, “controllable” basically meaning a known, fixed cost. That cuts both ways though – providing some surplus value on the front-end of their contracts, but providing negative value in the back end of the contracts. Pujols and Miggy Cabrera are also ‘controllable’ in the same sense, but not necessarily valuable.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
5 years ago

Bichette has the highest projected five year WAR, at a premium position, is 23, is still pre-arb and is the worst-rated on this list?

synco
5 years ago
Reply to  airforce21one

I think translated what they’re saying is that they think the projections are high on Bichette and that the actual return will be less. That’s pretty much what is has to be because if not yeah, he needs to jump over a lot of guys ahead of him.

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago

I know this is slightly off topic as it relates to yesterday’s list, but I gotta ask: in what way is Framber Valdez more valuable than Ian Anderson? Anderson is much younger, has a better prospect pedigree, has pitched better in the majors in pretty much every conceivable way, performed well in the postseason (for whatever that is worth) and has an extra year of team control, and cheaper to boot as he’s not Super 2. If the Braves traded Anderson for Valdez every single Braves fan and probably every single player on the team would be livid.

Really does seem like there might be some presumably unconscious bias for Astros players on this list overall, but Valdez as the 25th most valuable trade chip may take the cake. Maybe the only worse placement other than Max Kepler.

dukewinslowMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Injury risk. That’s one thing. And the Valdez projection is wrong- you need to double the projected innings, and I wouldn’t double the WAR but I could be talked into it (I don’t think the innings—> inputs on pitcher WAR—> WAR transformation is linear)

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  dukewinslow

Who has the injury risk?

As for innings, I see Valdez as having thrown 140 innings in 2018, 115 in 2019, 70 in the weird 2020, and just short of 70 so far this year. His Zips projections for 2022 and 2023 are just over 110 innings. Ok, could he pitch more? Sure. Expecting DOUBLE? That is nonsense, unless I’m missing something. Even pumping his innings up an actual reasonable amount does not lead to a better expected value than the younger, cheaper, more team control-years Anderson, who pitched 120 innings in 2018, 135 in 2019, and has 96 this year so far (he only had 36 regular season innings in the weird 2020, 55 if you include postseason).

I’ll go with the guy with the better K/9, BB/9, ERA, FIP, and xFIP that is younger and controlled longer and will be cheaper.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

There is a whole lot of annoyance towards Framber Valdez in these comments and I probably would have put him a bit lower than he was. But it’s important to remember that he is exactly the kind of pitcher who breaks fWAR. When you’re getting ground balls 2/3rds of the time you’re inducing weak contact at a rate way more than the formula for fWAR would predict.

This is in addition to dukewinslow’s important comment about the innings. I think you’re looking at more than one 4-win season even before we start talking about whether fWAR can measure this guy’s skillset appropriately.

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Well, his brWAR isn’t any better. I’d also wonder if, along with everything else, the possible prohibition on shifting* would hurt his value. Feels like pulling rosy predictions out of thin air could put dozens of pitchers in the same position.

*which is stupid.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

That would definitely hurt his value.

His xERA is about 3.50, so if you believe that that is real, we’re talking about Joe Musgrove-level performance, but more sustainable and under control for much longer. That’s pretty good!

TheGarrettCooperFanClub
5 years ago

I do get the thinking about Cole and Trout being on this list–you’re pretty much getting top talent guaranteed for X number of years, and even then they regress, they should still be good players for a few years before probably turning into albatrosses. I just did not expect them to show up on the list, or at least this high up on the list.

That means there’s likely to be some pretty big snubs on this list, eh? You can count on: Tatis, Acuna, Soto, Albies, Guerrero, Buehler, and deGrom to be in the top-10, who’s missing? Bregman has been an interesting name this week in the comments. It feels like if he were going to be on the list, he would have shown up already, no? Is he really a top-10 trade asset?

dukewinslowMember since 2020
5 years ago

Albies might not be on there.

TheGarrettCooperFanClub
5 years ago
Reply to  dukewinslow

That would be the biggest shock of them all in what has already been a pretty surprising list.

synco
5 years ago
Reply to  dukewinslow

Not in the top 10? He’s definitely in the top 10. The question is whether he’s top 1-3 or “only” 4-5.

Anon21Member since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  dukewinslow

Ozzie Albies, a 3-4 WAR up-the-middle player who is signed through 2027 for less guaranteed money than a single season of Gerrit Cole, and who ranked 6th on last year’s list, might have missed not just the top 10, but the entire list and a list of about 50 other honorable mentions. That’s your contention?

dukewinslowMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  Anon21

I’m not saying he shouldn’t be! He’s either 1 or 2 behind Acuna for my money. But that was a name not on the list in the parent comment. THAT would be a huge surprise. Or it was and I didn’t see it, ha.

Anon21Member since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  dukewinslow

Ah, ok. It is in the parent comment, at least as of now.

AnonMember since 2025
5 years ago
Reply to  dukewinslow

Piling on here but you didn’t really think that one through did you?

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago

Mookie Betts and Wander Franco will also be top-10

TheGarrettCooperFanClub
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Right, Franco. I knew I was missing somebody.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago

Top 10 is way, way too high for Bregman. I’d take Moncada over him easily. To be fair I would put Moncada somewhere around 35 on this list but I’d give Bregman an honorable mention. Moncada is controlled for the same amount of time for $20M less, plus a nice team option, and on top of that he not only is outperforming Bregman this year (by a lot!) he outperformed Bregman last year while he was recovering from COVID. Whether it’s the new ball or the lack of trash can banging Bregman looks a whole lot more like the guy he was in 2016-2017 than who he was from 2018-2019.

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I’m going:
1. Tatis Jr.
2. Acuña Jr.
3. Guerrero Jr.
4. Betts
5. deGrom
6. Albies
7. Bregman
8. Franco
9. Soto
10. Bueller

Acuña would easily be #1 if healthy. I still think it’s a coin flip.

JupiterBrandoMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Healthy or not, Acuna’s contract is a joke. He should be number one for the next five years.

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  JupiterBrando

As a Braves fan and Acuña fan, it’s tough for me to say; I wouldn’t trade him for anyone straight up, but him providing zero this year has to hurt his trade value compared to someone who is playing.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

If I were making this list I’d put Tatis Jr. at #3 and move Acuna and Vlad Jr. up. But I also wouldn’t put Betts in the Top 20 or 30 and would put Bregman on the honorable mention border so who knows what they’re going to do.

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

They aren’t going to do that

synco
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Acuna will (very most likely) be fine. ACL tears are not the death sentence they were 20+ years ago – there are still adverse outcomes of course but as a whole he should be expected to recover, and probably won’t miss much of 2022 (if any, he’s got ~10 months to recover). Given that I don’t think one can put an oft-injured Tatis Jr. above him, given the distance from the Earth to the Moon sized difference in their contracts. That doesn’t mean the list makers won’t get caught up in the hype and do so, but it wouldn’t be correct IMO.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  synco

On top of that, Acuna was so absurdly underpaid even before that he’s still a strong contender for #1 even with time off from a serious injury.

Joe Joe
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Bregman is 8th among position players in the last three calendar years and was on pace for ~4.5 WAR this season prior to the hamstring getting worse and then going to the IL. I doubt the new ball and the trash can banging are responsible for him being absolutely horrible the two weeks prior to his IL stint while being ~Top 25 hitter prior to that for the season. I think most teams would expect Bregman to perform close to his projections which are likely a lot higher than most of the players on this list.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago

Franco will be on it, so that’s 8.

Top 10 would seem like it would be way too high for Betts and Eloy Jimenez but they weren’t on an honorable mention list so it seems like they’ll be on it. But between them one of Jimenez, Betts, and Bregman will be left off.

synco
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I don’t think any of those guys belong in the top 10, but clearly two of them must be. We shall see!

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Betts should not be lumped with Trout, but since 2015, he clears every non-Trout player in WAR by 10. He’s closer to Trout than he is to #3. He’s 28, could have been MVP last year, and is having another excellent season. He’s a top-10 trade asset. He’s younger and better than Cole while only being owed a little more; and he is younger and owed less than Trout, while perhaps being better if injury concern is included. Trading for a 28-year-old who in a normal generation would be arguably the best player of his generation and getting him for the rest of his career is something that teams would line up, best prospects in hands, to do. There is no question he will be in this top-10 or honestly this list is stupid and we’ve all wasted our time this week reading it.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Would they do it and pay another $300M or whatever it is on top of that? I don’t doubt that Betts should be on this list somewhere, but you’re not paying for the WAR that has already happened. You’re paying for the right to pay Betts $300M. That’s got to cut into the return enough to knock him out of the top 10, maybe even top 20.

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

If you have Cole and Trout where they are, it makes sense. It actually doesn’t make any sense at all for Betts not to be ahead of both Trout and Cole.

You disagree with where Trout and Cole are, I’m sure. And honestly, I also have a hard time wrapping my head around this argument. But living in a reality where Trout and Cole are just outside of the top-10 means it is silly nonsense to not have Betts inside the top-10.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

I agree that if you are benchmarking them against Trout, who seems to be hurt a lot and is far more expensive, and Cole, whose inclusion on this list at all is debatable, then Betts in the Top 10 makes sense.

But the argument is this–if the Dodgers made him available for trade today, what do you think you would get in a trade? Just in terms of fair value back. Would teams trade Wander Franco for him and take on the $300M contract? What about Adley Rutschman and Grayson Rodriguez? What about Kelenic, Julio Rodriguez, and Noelvi Marte?

Those packages will get you where Franco winds up on the list, probably #7 or #8. I don’t think a single team would do those deals for Betts. Then the question is, how much money would you have to pay down to get a prospect package like that? $50M? $100M? $150M? Keep in mind, that prospect package is only like $180M in surplus value. I get that it’s not all surplus value and super-elite players like Tatis and Betts are at a premium but it’s really hard to see how we get him in the Top 10 without using Trout and Cole as reference points.

Groundout
5 years ago

I’m guessing Wander, Eloy, and Bregman for the other three … which means that Betts’ contract is underwater (which feels a little crazy).

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  Groundout

Somebody was accidentally left off the list. I’m guessing it was Eloy, though to me he’s not close to top-10.

MikeSMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

I’m a huge Eloy fan but between the injuries and the fact that he shouldn’t play OF even if he didn’t keep getting hurt out there, I have a hard time calling him one of the top 10 trade chips in all baseball.

But he might be there because maybe the only thing less defensible than putting him in the top 10 is saying he’s not in the top 50 and not even good enough to deserve an honorable mention.

All things considered, I’d probably rather have Luis Robert at 6/$50 through 2025 than Eloy at 6/$43 through 2024, especially with both having 2 years of options after that.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  MikeS

Eloy is probably the 4th most valuable contract on that team behind Giolito, Moncada, and Robert. So I bet it’s Eloy who isn’t on the Top 10 and it’s because they just forget about him entirely.

Groundout
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

On the one hand, Eloy’s an injured corner outfielder.

On the other hand, he has 45 homers and 3.4 WAR in his first 177 games, and costs just $36M over the next five seasons (his 25-29 seasons).

Yeah, that sounds top-10.

mikecws91
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Whoever started this list just sorted by 2021 stats and forgot the guy who got hurt in Spring Training.

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

I’ll add that conceivably it could be deGrom with only one more year of team control, but he wasn’t on Good players approaching free agency HM list, so he has to be here, but I didn’t realize he has the opt out after next season, so a bit surprised he’s top-10. But this list leans more towards talent mattering than value mattering, so it makes sense in context.

OtterMember since 2016
5 years ago

IMO this list has always undervalued elite performers for the sake of good players on entry level/great contracts. It’s much harder to find an 8 or 9 win player than a 3 win player, but this list, typically, views surplus as linear and I don’t agree.

PC1970Member since 2024
5 years ago

Wander Franco will definitely be in the top 10

mikecws91
5 years ago

It’s true that teams consider more than surplus value when making trades. For example, a team making a playoff push is not going to trade a star player on the verge of free agency to dump his salary or get a great prospect return. The player’s performance is what matters most to that team, as opposed to how much surplus value his contract has.

That said, I’m a firm believer that surplus value is the ONLY factor when trying to balance a trade. Players with the same surplus value may fill different needs for a team in terms of position or competitive window, but an elite player on a massive contract does not have high trade value simply because he’s elite.

In a perfect system, every free agent’s trade value would be zero the moment he signs a contract, because the amount of money he gets would tell you how much he’s worth to MLB teams, and how much they’re willing to give up to acquire him. Sometimes teams get good deals in free agency, but generally speaking these players are getting paid as much as they are because no other team wanted to pay that much.

OtterMember since 2016
5 years ago

Holy what is going on with the list this year? A DH with four years of control at 11? A #3 starter with a high LOB% and low HR%, both of which might not be sustainable, at $18? A 4/5 win SS with four years of control behind both of them? Moncada as an HM? Verdugo over Devers? A previously always hurt and somewhat underwhelming Urias with two years of control left but finally having a nice season at #29?

DoctorPayne
5 years ago
Reply to  Otter

I do think that some of the choices in this year’s edition are a bit reflective of the site’s brain drain over the past few years. Not trying to be shitty, I know the list is largely for funsies, but in prior years you really were getting something akin to an elite front office’s take on player valuation, and I dunno if that’s the case this time out.

Left of Centerfield
5 years ago
Reply to  DoctorPayne

Regardless of the reason, I think we can all agree that there’s a lot on this year’s list that makes no sense. Cole wasn’t in the top 50 last year but this year he’s #15. Betts was #47 last year and now it looks like he’ll be top 10. Jimenez wasn’t in the top 50 last year, hasn’t played at all this year, and it looks like he’s jumping into the top 10.

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago

Jimenez, perhaps on advice of doctors, will be doing no such jumping.

joe_schlabotnik
5 years ago

i completely agree about the DH positional adjustment being too extreme, and generally think fangraphs overvalues defense and positional adjustments in the WAR calculation.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago

Man you must really hate bWAR then.

John WickMember since 2018
5 years ago

I’m surprised Gallen is this high given his recent UCL tear.

Every pitcher is an injury risk and all that, but it seems like a known risk like that would depress his value. The teens are where I would expect him if he were currently healthy.

JupiterBrandoMember since 2020
5 years ago

How many years until Acuna and Albies aren’t 1/2 on these?

Anon21Member since 2018
5 years ago
Reply to  JupiterBrando

Albies was #6 last year, so this year would be the first. But I don’t think it will be–safe to assume others slot in above him, even given the contract and his keeping up his established level of performance since the last iteration of the list.

Brad WesleyMember since 2025
5 years ago

Whatever happened to the anagrams poster???

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  Brad Wesley

Disillusioned when NotGraphs folded, likely. Too despondent to continue.

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  Brad Wesley

But as a quick pinch hit:

20. Bite the Cob
19. Fun Barf Down Odor
18. EZ Nag Call / Can Gall EZ
17. Oh Shit in a Hoe
16. Bakery, yes? Nah
15. C? Legit Error
14. Burns Rib Cone
13. Rout ‘Em, Kit
12. I Been Basher
11. Al Razed n Ovary

mikecws91
5 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

#18 is actually Glaze Clan, a notorious doughnut gang.

si.or.noMember since 2017
5 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

#17 is amazing.

Baseball Anagrams
5 years ago
Reply to  si.or.no

Still working on it for one final master list (moving to a new place irl, so haven’t been able to post at all til just now).

Jason B – any objections to borrowing “Oh Shit In A Hoe”? at no. 17 (with a shoutout of course?)

Jason BMember since 2017
5 years ago

Not at all. I’ll let the master do his work!

Antonio BananasMember since 2026
5 years ago

If we were to place a value number on each of these, what would it be? It’d be interesting to rank the teams.

kylesch87
5 years ago

Brandon Woodruff’s SIERA the last four years are 3.26, 3.60, 3.30, 3.24. ZiPS projected ERA and FIP for him ROS are 3.44/3.25. Basically what he’s been doing for the past four seasons. He’s ranked more like his ERA and FIP the past three seasons are all that are being used to come up with his value.

It’s obviously not impossible that he beats his projections for the next few years, but it would either take him improving or being super rare in some way to be able to outperform his underlying stats.

miltonfriedman
5 years ago

No Tigers? LOL!
22 year old OF 270/350/470 with 15 steals making peanuts
24 year old rookie southpaw being a stud after his first 3 starts this year
24 year old righty starter making peanuts with a great era
Top 5 defensive catcher in MLB with an 800 OPS. Rookie and making nothing

dl80Member since 2026
5 years ago
Reply to  miltonfriedman

I feel like this is a troll account but I can’t remember.

Baddoo has 260 PA above A ball and wasn’t a highly regarded prospect. Maybe if he does this for another year.

Jake Rogers has 127 very good PA this year after 128 awful ones last year. His career wRC+ is 70.

Mize is a groundball guy who doesn’t strike anyone out. That’s fine, but no one is paying a ransom for that skill set.

Skubal looks very good, but he needs to fix the home runs or he’s the next Vince Velazquez/Robbie Ray.

PC1970Member since 2024
5 years ago
Reply to  dl80

Is the fact Baddoo only has 260 AB above A Ball a negative or a positive? I can see it both ways. The fact he’s doing what he’s doing with his total lack of experience, while playing about 80% of the time, is astonishing. No one would blame him if he hit .190 with the lack of experience. Yes, he has a moderately high BABIP, but, the BB/K #’s are solid & he sure looks like a potential 20+ HR/30 SB guy. He’s also fun as hell to watch though that doesn’t count in this exercise.

It is interesting. They ARE playing .585 ball the last 65 games..mostly with young guys. You would think someone would be in the rankings somewhere. However, when you look at the specific players you’re thoughts sure look correct.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
5 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

There is no evidence that Akil Baddoo can hit left-handed pitching and he’s outperforming his xwOBA by 40 points. I suppose anything is possible but I don’t see anything that would suggest he’s going to be an everyday guy along the lines of a Mike Yastrzemski type of performer. I think there’s a world where he becomes Joc Pederson, a guy who can put up 3 wins in a season if you never let him face left-handers, but there’s a world where he doesn’t and the skepticism is warranted.

PC1970Member since 2024
5 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

While I understand what you’re getting at. Here’s the flip side:

He’s on pace for 3.6fWAR/600AB as a 22 year old that had 118 AB’s in A+ ball, NONE in AA/AAA, and missed 2020. With that in mind, even a .313xwOBA is very good. If any player has room for significant growth, it’s him. Add in above average D in a corner OF spot, which he’s already providing when he plays LF/RF & potential to maybe play CF (or fake it for a few weeks if needed)

Look at guys like Kelenic, Franco, etc. MLB is freaking hard. By all rights, Baddoo should be totally overmatched & hitting .190. The fact he’s succeeding is pretty amazing.

shaq_diesel
5 years ago

Yordan Alvarez’ 27% K rate doesn’t bother you, but Brandon Lowe’s 30% terrifies you enough to leave him off the list altogether? If Lowe’s BABIP was normalized, he’d be in MVP conversation. Meanwhile, Yordan’s BABIP can only go down, as it’s already sky high. Not to mention Lowe walks at almost double the rate Yordan does.

I don’t agree guys. Similar hitters, but 1 plays middle infield and is locked into a long term cheap contract. The other is soon to reach arbitration and can only DH.

mattMember since 2023
5 years ago

Given he’s a pitcher with a elbow related IL stint earlier this year Gallen is about 20 spots too high imo.

kid
5 years ago

The fact that you can’t read any Hayes blurb w/o hearing about his wrist makes me believe that we are overusing the “wrist injury” as a crutch argument as it pertains to his performance. “Everyone knows wrist injuries linger and take a long time to recover from” – OK, what does that mean? How long are we talking, here? Years? Are players ever the same after suffering one?

Alex Kiriloff suffered a wrist injury a few months ago, and the Twins were discussing surgery as an option. Ultimately, they chose to be conservative, and Kiriloff came back after a few weeks. But now, Kiriloff is undergoing wrist surgery. And if I had to bet, I’d bet that the chances of Kiriloff having related wrist issues in the future to be much higher than the average hitter.

MSpitz
5 years ago

This entire list has been questionable, but Bichette’s spot in this section is the most surprising to me I think. In a 1 for 1 trade, I don’t think any of these players can get you Bichette – they’re all older, worse, have less control, or all of the above. Like, if you think his projection is way too aggressive, take 1 win per year off! Now he’s projected the same as Alvarez, but a year younger, and with defensive value to fall back on.

shh31Member since 2021
5 years ago

I’m very intrigued by this mystery tenth player. The other nine must be in some order of:

Acuña Jr
Albies
Bregman (?)
Buehler
DeGrom
Guerrero Jr
Franco
Jimenez
Tatis Jr

shh31Member since 2021
5 years ago
Reply to  shh31

Update: Nevermind forgot Mookie.

AnonMember since 2025
5 years ago
Reply to  shh31

You left out Soto so there are 11 guys for 10 spots meaning someone was left off the list entirely, even the HM list.

I’m starting to wonder if sadtrombone is right and they just flat forgot about Eloy since he hasn’t played at all this year. . . .

DDD
5 years ago
Reply to  Anon

There will be 11 players in 10 spots with Acuna and Albies tied at #1. 😉

TKDCMember since 2016
5 years ago
Reply to  Anon

Tim Anderson wasn’t even an HM last season, so maybe this is just a new annual tradition to piss off Sox fans.

Joe Joe
5 years ago

Looking at projections for guys ranked that are still under service time control, Rogers, Peralta, Garcia, Anderson, Carlson, and Grisham are the most under valued on this list, and the 9 most over-valued are all pitchers with Alvarez being the most overvalued non-pitcher.