FG on Fox: Suggesting a Blockbuster
The Red Sox had too many hitters before they signed both Pablo Sandoval and Hanley Ramirez to lucrative contracts, and now, they have perhaps the deepest line-up in all of baseball. But they still don’t have any pitching, and they simply don’t have enough spots in the line-up to spread around between their talented hitters. Rarely has a team’s need to make a trade (or two) been so obvious.
However, finding a natural trade partner for Boston’s needs is a little tricky. Their most obvious trade chip, Yoenis Cespedes, has the right-handed power that a number of teams seek, but because he’s only under contract for one more season, the teams that will be most interested in acquiring his services are teams that are trying to win in 2015. And teams that are trying to win next year are unlikely to part with the kind of pitching that the Red Sox covet; after all, if you’re trying to win next year, you probably want to hang on to your frontline pitching, since you’ll need it yourself.
There is one contender who has signaled a willingness to move a frontline starting pitcher: the Washington Nationals. With both Jordan Zimmermann and Doug Fister set for free agency after next season — as well as shortstop Ian Desmond, center fielder Denard Span, and relief ace Tyler Clippard — the Nationals are in a position where it might make sense for them to degrade their 2015 team slightly in order to make sure they don’t experience too steep off of a drop-off after next season. Zimmermann, in particular, would likely return a significant trade package, given his recent excellence and reasonable price tag.
But the Nationals simply don’t have any need for Yoenis Cespedes, or really many of the other pieces Boston might use to try and land an ace. Their outfield is stacked as it is, and their only real glaring hole is in the middle infield, where they need a second baseman for 2015 and likely a shortstop for 2016, after Desmond hits free agency. The Red Sox aren’t trading Xander Bogaerts or Mookie Betts for a rent-a-pitcher, however, and so the Nationals don’t really seem to match up with the Red Sox that well.
Perhaps there’s a way to make a deal work between the two teams, however, if we can identify a third team that covets the right-handed power the Red Sox have for sale, and has an extra talented middle infielder to send to the nation’s capital. Enter the Seattle Mariners.
Read the rest on Just a Bit Outside.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
I would argue that the marginal value that Napoli provides over a Craig/Nava platoon is extremely important to a team like the Red Sox. While the Mariners need RH power and the Red Sox have a surplus, they don’t have much interest in depleting that surplus. I believe if they could get a top-half-of-the-rotation pitcher without giving up Cespedes or Napoli they probably would, but are slightly more unwilling to part with Betts or really significant prospect packages. I think they believe they can part with Cespedes, in part because of impending FA, in part because of defensive woes in RF, but doubt they’re as willing to trade Napoli as portrayed — and I sincerely doubt they’d be willing to move both. Particularly for one year of Zimmermann and one year of Clippard.
I also wonder how interested the Nats are in moving two of their best players for Miller (as underrated as he might be) and Hultzen. The Cespedes+ leading to a three way deal for Zimmermann (or another similar pitcher) isn’t far-fetched, but I doubt the + is Napoli.
The Sox should be looking to upgrade 1B with their offensive suplus anyway. Napoli isn’t that good. If they know why Craig sucked last year and are confident he gets better, even less of an issue.
as a sox fan, this is a no brainer. you are better this year, not giving up any future value and you save a bunch of money
Gotta disagree with you and SKob. I know on paper a Craig/Nava platoon replaces Napoli pretty well, but I feel like it might not be as effective as expected for a few reasons.
Napoli is a far superior defender than both, though some of that is hard to quantify (picking bad throws, stopping screaming liners, etc) whereas Craig and especially Nava have been poor there.
Napoli also signed what was perceived as a team friendly extension so trading him might have some untold effects there. He’s also likely to hit for more power next year as he recovers from the hand injury.
He’s a middle of the order RH bat and was an effective cleanup hitter on a World Series winner. He is good. Trading Napoli AND Cespedes changes Boston’s offseason from drastically improving a poor offense to a much more marginal improvement offensively in exchange for a #2 pitcher and a bullpen arm when they could almost certainly get a pitcher of similar quality for JUST Cespedes.
As a Sox fan I hate this trade. Having actually watched Allen Craig play last year I wouldn’t project him for 15wrc+ let alone over 100. He is so completely done I want nothing to do with him as more than a bench bat. People might say injury but both the team and player insisted there was none and his bat speed looked slower than a tortoise.
Yeah I think the Nats would like someone better than Miller in return for both Zimm and Clippard, even with the wildcard Hultzen added to the mix. It’s not that far fetched, but I don’t think they pull the trigger for a 2b who may not be perceived to be *that* much of an upgrade over Espinosa.
In a vacuum, I agree the marginal value is important. But plugging Zimmerman into the rotation, while clearing the roster logjam, represents a huge value.
I think Seattle says no first. Boston jumps at it, Washington might find it worthwhile, but does Seattle really go for that?
I was struggling with that part too. Can’t see why Seattle would want any part of that trade.
I don’t like it for Seattle, and it seems absurd for Washington. Nobody knows what Hultzen can and can’t do, he hasn’t faced batters in a live game after major surgery. Nobody is going to trade a major asset against a rumor of possibility. I personally think and hope Danny H. will come back and be effective, but the idea of balancing a trade with him on the basis of nothing more than his draft position pre-injury is pure pie in the sky of the kind the author used to deride routinely.
I don’t see trading a young, cost-controlled player with years of service time and a ton of upside—Brad Miller—for a one year rental and a good but aging player to DH. “Win it all?” Who knows if that will be the outcome. Safeco is a tough place to hit for right hand batters. Cespedes is not a good defensive outfielder, and if he’s acquired in such a scheme one of the present starting outfielders in Seattle is displaced. What’s the plan for whoever that is? Just does’t seem like a good use of resources.
It would make far more sense to move Dustin Ackley to Atlanta with an actually healthy starting pitcher of middling ability for Justin Upton, while Atlanta moves Ackley back to 2B to maximize his value if the point is to acquire a one-year guy to make a run at post-season.
Really a weird trade that seems cooked up for no better purpose than stir a little controversy and snag site hits. I’d have far more interest in seeing an actually serious proposal.
It’s a huge upgrade to their lineup — 40 or 50 runs, perhaps (?) — with no long-term financial commitment, and only giving up a relatively redundant player and a TJ risk.
I can’t see the Nats saying yes, though. I think they’d need to be knocked out to trade Zimmerman, and Taylor isn’t quite there.
Souza is quite there, however.
The only way the M’s don’t say yes to this is if they can’t stop laughing before the other two teams hang up on them.
This is yet another classic in the genre of ludicrous Dave Cameron pipe dream trades.
I have a feeling that the same thing could have been written about the Rangers, except that the Nationals would receive better middle infield talent back in return.
Good call, but isn’t Dave a Seattle fan?
Dave is the co-founder of USS Mariner, so he is or was a Seattle fan, but he tries to be impartial.
He has no ability to be impartial about the M’s. Fangraphs is littered with his silly ideas about what the Mariners could and should do.
I say this as a fellow M’s fan. He wears Seattle-colored glasses at all times.
Cameron may have founded USSMariner, but I haven’t seen him post anything there in years; I don’t think he really has anything to do with it beyond hosting it. He’s been living on the other side of the country for most of a decade. And he’s made clear more than once he’s kind of sick of the team. He was the last guy aboard the Kyle Seager train, and I’d be surprised if he’s seen more M’s games than those of any other middling AL team. He’s a national writer at this point; he may have originally emerged from Mariners fandom but he’s no more a Mariners fan today than Rob Neyer is a Royals fan.
Wouldn’t a trade of Steven Souza Jr. for Miller straight up be a better answer. Both teams fill a need with 5+ yrs of service?
Yeah. Some combination of Souza/M. Taylor for Miller/C. Taylor seems like a much more likely thing to actually happen.
If they wanted to get fancy and swap one year of Zim for multi-year control of a younger SEA pitcher I could see that also.
Souza probably doesn’t help the M’s near enough this year. They’re going for it now and would want much more present production than future production.
Trades are interesting, much less so when baseball fans attempt to come up with trade ideas. This is more informed than most I have read, but I fail to see why the Red Sox wouldn’t just give San Diego a call. They match up much better without having to try and pull in a third team to accomplish a deal that is advantageous for both sides.
Killjoy!
Why would San Diego want a one-year rental of Cespedes and Napoli? The value of those two is appealing only to a clear contender who wants to win in 2015, and there’s nothing to suggest that SD is there. In fact, with the departure of Headley, they’re probably going to be worse, coming off of a year when they won 77 games.
Because Zimmermann is twice as good as any of the SD pitchers, starting with Kennedy, and while we stat heads think the differences aren’t significant, actual teams disagree.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone accurately predict a trade, player for player, but the player values listed above make sense. Except if I were the Nationals (or any team where $$ is not a huge issue), I wouldn’t want to downgrade my pitching staff as described, unless it was for irresistable prospects, and Brad Miller and Danny Hultzen just wouldn’t quite do it for me. Just my opinion though.
You had me interested until the bit about throwing in Tyler Clippard as a sweetener. He’s been one of the Nat’s most consistent bullpen arms for years and I can’t justify giving up him and J Zimm for some potential middle infield talent. I’d rather stand pat now and try to resign Desmond when the time comes than give up 2 big pieces of our pitching staff.
Agreed. Miller just doesn’t have the kind of upside that warrants giving up both of those pieces, even with Hultzen added to the mix. I could see a move like that if they weren’t a contender in ’15, but that’s obviously not the case with the Nats.
I think there isn’t enough to make Washington do this. They need something bigger
WAS: Miller, Taijuan Walker
SEA: Napoli, Cespedes
BOS: Zimmermann, Clippard
Why would the M’s give up six years of the best young pitcher in baseball for two rent-a-players? Maybe this works if BOS is able to throw in Souza/Taylor?
Taijuan Walker is the best young pitcher in baseball?
Thank you so much for this article. I’ve been thinking to myself, “Gee, Fangraphs REALLY needs to have more Red Sox content.” Excluding the Chat from yesterday, if you look at the box on the homepage labeled “fangraphs”, 6 0f the 12 articles are Red Sox content. That number should be 11 of 12, I’m sick of all this small market BS on here! Get your act together!
The Sox have tremendously active in the past week. They’re just reacting to these developments. Later this winter it’ll be the Cubs, and at some point we’ll all be talking about the Yankees or whomever else makes a big splash.
I get it, but it’s over-the-top. I didn’t see any articles after the Martin signing about how the turf in Toronto has an impact on fielding and hitting there, but I did see one about pitching in front of the Green Monster yesterday. There was also one about “Hanley, Panda, and the monster”, which is relevant right now, but my quota for articles about one team’s left field fence is one per week, unfortunately.
Its pretty simple really. No one cares about the Jays. Or at least far more people care about the Red Sox.
Whine about it if you must but fangraphs is not here out of the goodness of its heart. its a business. Writing about things more people will read is better for business.
meh
I wish you’d have contacted the Daves sooner so that they would have known that your Boston content quota had been filled. Of course, they should have consulted you first and should be reprimanded accordingly for failing to do so. Next time, hopefully you won’t have to contact them ahead of time since they’ll be more proactive.
Its clear that Red Sox articles drive traffic, so obviously sawxgraphs will cater to that audience.
Not too long ago it was Cardinal Graphs.
And to be fair, during the playoffs, it was RoyalsGraphs.
🙂
Someone’s got delusions of grandeur.
Your opinion certainly doesn’t reflect mine, given how condescending you are, and I’m certain it doesn’t reflect many others’ as well.
If you don’t want to read articles about the Red Sox, there’s a pretty simple solution — don’t read them.
If the Nats trade Jordan Zimmermann and Tyler Clippard for Brad Miller and an injured pitching prospect, I’ll punch myself in the nuts.
I agree. Dave Cameron is telling Washington they should employ the Wayne Huizenga school of baseball management, but WITHOUT winning a World Series first. I am sure that DC’s long-standing history of loyal baseball fans would forgive the front office’s decision to dismantle a team that led the league in wins two of the last three years, all because Boston and Seattle need to win now for the good of the game.
Yeah, FG is largely underrating the opportunity cost of acquiring top flight pitching. There just aren’t that many front end SP available (4 right now, Zimm, Lester, Hamels, Max) at any given time and despite the limited 1 year of control, Zimmermann (or Hamels) is worth more than that, particularly to a contender. Brad Miller isn’t going to convince the Nats to give up Zimm and weaken its chances at a WS in 2015. We kept hearing how little a SP like Samardzija would net until he pulled in a top 10 prospect in MLB. Yet no one here has corrected their valuation.
In support of your view: James Shields. Where would Kansas City have been in 2014 if they’d been ‘smart’ and traded Shields rather than have him walk after the season? Just who is it who’s going for it in 2015, a Mariners team that couldn’t win (yet) down the stretch and has multiple holes, or the Washington Nationals who led their division in wins and played in post-season?
I do think Brad Miller is both a fine player and presently undervalued, but I certainly don’t see that the Nats should cut down talent and their own very realistic playoff chances in 2015 rather than ‘see Zimmerman walk.’ If the Nats move Zimmerman, they need to get back a pretty sure thing in terms of performance right now, which a package of Miller and Hultzen most certainly is not.
Dave C. has a long history of speculating trades that move the guys on the Mariners on his personal disposable list rather than actually looking to build trade concepts that balance for both sides. This is just one more. All that really shows in this wet noodle scheme is that he’s down on Miller and Hultzen at present.
Yeah and I think Dave is too hung up on “Only one year left, so not that valuable” narrative and has taken it too far. I just think there is a disconnect from how executives should value cost control and how they actually do value cost control. So in other words, Dave is probably right that getting Miller for Zimmermann is a fair value for Washington, based on cost and projected value. But Washington turns that down without a second thought because the actual market has a very different set of values.
Miller’s performance in 2014 almost ensures this deal would never happen. Mike Rizzo would have a challenge explaining the deal to the fanbase and local media – why Brad Miller projects to be a much better player than he showed in 2014 based on his minor league numbers, his performance after being called up in 2013, the value he provides defensively, how if Miller had played a full season similar to his 2013 numbers, they’d never be able to acquire him in exchange for a pitcher about to hit free agency, etc. The average fan would look at Miller’s crappy numbers in 2014 and think Mike Rizzo got swindled, and conclude that the Nats front office made this deal solely to save money.
@brook
All those things ARE true though. A GM doesn’t HAVE to justify his moves to the media. He needs to do the best job of adding wins both in the present and future, in a way that best creates playoff and championship seasons. In fact, many times a GM has to makes a decision that confounds the simpletons who write and read the local paper, because creative decision making often trumps the conventional baseball “wisdom” of the masses. Miller’s 2014 slash line holds little relevance going forward compared to just the information on the site, let alone any MLB team’s internal metrics and valuation.
The media can say whatever it wants, and be wrong often. They still get paid, no matter how much nonsense they spew. If the GM is consistently putting a winning team on the field it doesn’t matter.
The Reds seem like they would also be a potential fit for a 3-way deal as well.
Potentially a very good fit. The problem is that the Reds seem to think they have a good shot at the playoffs next year. They’ll only do a trade like this if they get more realistic.
Dave, can you explain the math between contracts and years of control? How does this pan out?
In the same way that I react to fans posting their fantasy team roster decisions with a resounding “WHO CARES!?”, fan created trade offers are a waste of time.
This article probably should have been posted on USS Mariner.
One the other hand: “Who forced you to read this free article?! Don’t complain.”
Hahahahaha.
You’re suggesting we give up 2-3 wins during a year we hope to win the World Series to get the FAT HALF OF A PLATOON with Danny Espinosa at 2B?
Oh wait, you’re willing to throw in a 25-year old pitcher with shoulder problems who’s thrown 160 career innings in the minors, and none since 2013?
Oh thanks Dave, for being so generous!
I’d grade the idea for each team as follows:
SEA – awesome; A+. They give up pieces they no longer count on for two guys that could really help in a ‘go-for-it’ year. Its a one year shot, but would continue to build momentum from last year’s Cano signing and almost-playoffs.
BOS – pretty good; B+/A-. They give up good hitters, but with questions, at a position of strength, and get two top flight pitchers in their prime (at areas of need). Plus, the 1 year window to offer JZimm a 6/$130m deal is worth a lot, I think.
WAS – poor; D-. It isn’t the concept, it is the execution. They are giving up their best SP and best RP in a win now year; they need better prospects. If Zimmermann can’t bring back a Bogaerts or Profar (and I understand all the reasons why that may be the case), it isn’t worth the trade to the Nats. I know Dave is high on Miller but that is far from a consensus amongst the prospect writers, and he isn’t a lock for being a core piece for the next 5 years. And they already have a ‘Hultzen coming off shoulder surgery’, whose name is Matt Purke.
I like the idea, but it just isn’t enough. Better to trade Strasburg and get some real pieces back, and then extend Zimmermann.
Aren’t you overestimated the trade value of both Cespedes and Napoli? Over the past two seasons Cespedes has ranked 30th out of the 44 qualifying OF’ers in wRC+ the past two years. Napoli has been a good 1B the past two years (9th of 22 qualifiers) but he’s always injured (never played more than 140 games in a season) and declined significantly as a power hitter last year. Those two one year rentals is going to get you one of the best starters in baseball (although also a one year rental)?
Pursuing hitters that offer little value when they aren’t hitting home runs is a bad philosophy for Seattle. They need to embrace their ballpark and construct a roster based on a contemporary version of Whitey Ball.
I think you answered your own question man, its a one year rental. Boston got a year and a half of Cespedes for half a year of Lester. To get a comparable pitcher for a full year, it makes sense that they would include what they netted from Lester plus some other asset of roughly equal value (like 1 year of Napoli)?
No way Nats sell Zimmerman and clippard for a MI prospect and a lottery ticket. Zim on his own, but definitely not both.
I’m still not convinced the Mariners would do this trade. If they sell Iwakuma, who plugs into the rotation without inducing vomit?
Here is a fun trade idea:
TOR trades E5 to WAS in exchange for J. Zimm and Jayson Werth.
That may be fun (I guess you’re a Jays’ fan) but it’s nowhere near realistic.
Also: Mookie Betts for Julio Teheran. Who says no?
The Red Sox. And they don’t ever answer your calls again.
Why is that rediculous? Teheran is 23 formerly elite prospect and is under very cheap team control until 2020.
I mean I might not do it. But it certainly isn’t outrageous. Teheran is a 4-WAR by RA9-WAr pitcher that you get until age 29
the braves are basically tied with the Cardinals for the second best defense in baseball – given than and the small sample size we’re dealing with, it doesn’t make any sense to assume that Teheran should be judged by RA9-WAR.
Betts, in his age 21 season, was on pace to put up 6 WAR! There’s no real reason to assume Teheran is anything better than a 3-4 WAR starter, and Steamer is in fact intensely pessimistic for some reason (1.3 WAR).
Someone’s already gotten into the Thanksgiving wine.
So explain to me how forcing themselves into a must-trade position was a good idea again?
Dave, Espinosa is a switch-hitter.
Technically, yes. Practically, no. There’s talk he may choose to learn how to hit exclusively right-handed.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statsplits.aspx?playerid=9219&position=2B&season=2014
As a Red Sox fan, I do this without a second thought.
And, if the Nats don’t want to do it, I’d make the trade directly with Seattle, assuming the Hultzen shoulder checks out okay.
Napoli is priced about market appropriate at $16M, and it doubtful he would be offered a QO. So his excess value is pretty marginal.
Cespedes offers excess value, but at a position where he can be replaced internally.
So we get two very good young players/prospects? With $26.5M, a remaining outfield of Hanley, Castillo, and Betts, and Craig/Nava, to replace a Napoli that only averaged 129 games over the past two years.
There is no way that an OF of Hanley/Castillo/Cespedes is much, if any, better than Hanley/Castillo/Betts. So we basically lose the marginal value of Napoli over Craig/Nava, and use the $25M to sign Lester.
Absolute no-brainer for the RS.
See…I argued the marginal value of Hanley was non-existent over an outfield of Betts,Castillo,Victorino. You would have Hanley or Sandoval at 3rd and an additional $100M and you still could trade Cespedes. You could upgrade the rotation where the marginal value of replacing a replacment level player is greater.
The Red Sox forgot there are diminishing returns in up grading the offense when it is already very good.
They didn’t forget that, they’re strategy was to acquire these bats so that they could move other bats for pitching. Not a bad strategy at all considering the low run environment we are in right now. Everyone needs bats.
I say no deal with Brad Miller included, but yes with Chris Taylor. I do that if I am Seattle since then fill need for OF and DH/1B. Still need another OF though. I still want Kemp.
Maybe should have major trade with Dodgers instead, getting both Kemp and Van Slyke. That would satisfy needs for OF and Dh. Could give up Taylor? And higher prospects.Think Dodgers need RP which Seattle has in spades
I love this for the Sox, like it for the Nats and hate it for the Mariners. I don’t understand how 5 years of Miller is worth one year of 2.5-3 wins each out of Cespedes and Napoli. Forget about adding 6 years of Hultzen. It’s not as if the Mariners have a one year window to compete. It doesn’t make sense to trade a good 25 year old SS who has 5 more years of control for a few extra wins out of players who will both be gone in a year. I’m also very skeptical that the M’s can’t get a 2 win OF/1B on the free agent market, there are still a lot left. And even if you can’t, does making your team marginally better for 2015 while making it significantly worse for 2016 onward make sense for a team like the Mariners? I mean, they just signed Seager to a 7 year deal, I don’t think they’re thinking 2015 or bust.