Exploring Justin Upton’s Trade Value

If you’re still looking for offense on the free agent market, you’re basically out of luck, other than the still-available Chase Headley. Looking at our Free Agent Tracker, the only hitter left who projects to reach a realistic 2 WAR — i.e., league average — is Jed Lowrie, who is undeniably talented but rarely healthy and probably not a shortstop. (Ignore the overly optimistic outlook on Daric Barton, since this is using Steamer/600, and he’s had 600 plate appearances total over the last four seasons.)

That means that if you’re still in a situation where you need a bat and you don’t have the finances or the flexibility to add Headley, you’re either totally out of luck or you’re looking to the trade market. That’s where the Padres turned in landing Matt Kemp, for better or worse. It’s where the Cardinals went when they landed Jason Heyward, and how the Tigers picked up Yoenis Cespedes, and how Josh Donaldson landed in Toronto, and how Miguel Montero became a Cub.

While we can’t ever truly know for certain who is “available” on the trade market, we can say with reasonable confidence that Justin Upton is. As the Braves signaled their intention to shift from win-now to something resembling a mild rebuild with the firing of GM Frank Wren and the trade of Heyward, moving Upton — who can be a free agent following 2015 — seems like the logical next step. Unsurprisingly, his player tag at MLBTR has been full of activity over the last few weeks.

Upton, for the moment, is still a Brave, and we don’t know whether that’s because Atlanta wants too much or other teams aren’t stepping up — the answer, almost certainly, is both. But with the added information we have thanks to recent moves, can we get closer to finding his true trade value?

Now that we’ve seen what Boston got from Detroit for Cespedes, we can look at Upton with a bit of a more informed approach, because the two outfielders are surprisingly similar. That’s the case whether you look at them only in 2014:

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.
2014 PA AVG OBP SLG wOBA wRC+ HR BsR SB Off Def WAR
Upton 641 .270 .342 .491 .363 133 29 0.6 8 24.4 -7.7 3.9
 Cespedes 645 .260 .301 .450 .326 109 22 3.2 7 9.8 0.4 3.4

…or over the last three years, which comprise Cespedes’ entire big league career…

2012-14 PA AVG OBP SLG wOBA wRC+ HR BsR SB Off Def WAR
 Upton 1,912 .271 .350 .462 .354 124 73 9.2 34 60.4 -33.7 9.1
Cespedes 1,759 .263 .316 .464 .336 115 71 5.2 30 35.9 -14.2 8.5

…or by what Steamer/600 sees from them both in 2015:

2015  PA AVG OBP SLG wOBA wRC+ HR BsR SB Off Def WAR
Upton 600 .262 .344 .460 .353 126 25 1.3 8 18.7 -9.1 3.0
Cespedes 600 .268 .319 .467 .342 118 24 0.5 7 12.3 -3.1 3.1

Upton has had the better bat, especially in 2014, though Steamer sees a milder edge next year. Cespedes has been the more valuable fielder, and that’s less of a dig at Upton (who has been adequate) than it is recognition of just how deadly Cespedes’ arm has been. Overall, the on-field value has been nearly identical.

Off the field, both have their advantages. Upton is two years younger, about to enter his age-28 season, and that matters, though perhaps less than you’d expect it would if you’re looking at him as merely a one-year rental as opposed to the long-term investment he’ll plan to be following the season. Cespedes is cheaper, set to make $10.5 million in 2015 as opposed to Upton’s $14.5 million, but the terms of his contract state that he can’t be given a qualifying offer. However you want to value that, it’s something that Upton brings and Cespedes doesn’t.

If one is more valuable in trade than the other, it’s probably Upton, though not by a great deal. I say that in deference to the qualifying offer, that offense generally gets paid better than defense, and for whatever value a team might place upon having an exclusive negotiating window to attempt to set up an extension. It’s counterbalanced some by Cespedes’ cheaper salary and superior defense in a sport that increasingly values it, but probably not enough to make the two 100% even in trade discussions. So what’s that worth?

Here’s what it was worth for Cespedes. The Tigers gave away Rick Porcello’s age-26 season (at an estimated $12 million in arbitration) and one likely qualifying offer draft pick in return for Cespedes, middle reliever Alex Wilson and low-level pitching prospect Gabe Speier. Porcello has been a steady three-win pitcher for most of his career, and is projected to be just that again in 2015. Detroit changed the way in which they’ll get those three wins, filling a hole that would have been difficult to fill on the market, but didn’t overall didn’t greatly change their team projections for the season.

Of course, the Braves aren’t going to be looking for a one-year major league starter — sorry, Reds fans, you can keep your Mike Leake — and published reports indicate that they may be overvaluing what they think Upton is worth. In November, Joel Sherman wrote in the New York Post that the Braves “think Upton has greater value in the trade market” than Heyward, in part because “right-handed power” is the trendy over-used buzzword of the season. Dave Cameron replied to that right here with a very good explanation of why Upton really shouldn’t be worth more than Heyward, and it’s part of the reason I didn’t include Heyward in these charts, despite being another outfielder with one year left on his contract — he’s younger and he’s better.

The thing is, we’ve been through this before with Upton.  23 months ago, the Mariners reportedly agreed to send Walker, Nick Franklin, Charlie Furbush, and Stephen Pryor to Arizona for three seasons of Upton, though the deal never happened because Upton invoked his no-trade clause (which now includes only the Cubs, Brewers, Blue Jays, and Indians.)

Here’s how that was viewed at the time:

In the aftermath of the news, sentiment seemed to coalesce around the idea that the Mariners were significantly overpaying for Upton. A front office friend of mine shared a similar sentiment, suggesting that giving up Walker and Franklin was too much for Upton.

It’s fair to note that Upton was coming off something of a down 2012, but even so, his value was higher then than it was today. Heading into only his age-26 season, there was more hope for breakout potential than there is now, and of course, teams will be looking to buy one season of Upton rather than three. At the time, Dave crunched the numbers and determined that Upton was worth around $40 million in surplus value. Now, depending on your inputs — I’m going to go with “3.5 WAR in 2015” and “$7 million per WAR” — he’s worth around a quarter of that in surplus value. (Give or take, as always.)

It’s difficult to assign a dollar value to prospects, though many have tried. The most-often quoted study suggests that $10 million is worth something like the 50th best pitching or hitting prospect in the game, which we can spitball as “back of the Top 100 overall.” Looking at MLB.com’s current Top 100, you’ll see names like Jake Lamb, Rafael Montero, Brandon Finnegan and Marco Gonzales — good prospects all, but not the elite return that some fans appear to be expecting. Where two years ago Upton was worth Walker and three others, today the Braves probably couldn’t get Walker alone for him.

There’s still teams that need a corner outfield bat, and that the Braves hold one of the best available options — though Marlon Byrd, Dexter Fowler, and Shane Victorino are still possibilities — should help their case. We know the Mariners need an outfield bat, and so do the Giants, Orioles, Reds, Rangers, etc. Even the Padres are reportedly interested, despite having Kemp.

The Braves can move Upton, and they’ll get back players who will do more to help the next good Atlanta team than Upton would. But they’re not likely to get back something extraordinary, either. One year of a good player who isn’t a star just doesn’t tend to get what people expect it should. Four years of Donaldson, who is a star, didn’t bring back what many people thought it would. Most star trades don’t bring back what people think they will. Cespedes, a very similar player, brought back a single year of Porcello, a good but far from great pitcher. Upton himself, after that failed Seattle deal, was traded for a disappointing return of Martin Prado and a few mid-level prospects, the best of whom (Randall Delgado) couldn’t hang on to a starting job.

There’s still plenty of reason to find a trade for Upton, given the path the Braves have set for themselves. It’d just be a good idea to set appropriate expectations first.





Mike Petriello used to write here, and now he does not. Find him at @mike_petriello or MLB.com.

35 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Sandy Kazmir
11 years ago

The Kendrick and Samardzija trades shed considerable insight on what a return for a 3ish WAR player should be. You can have a mid-100 prospect (Heaney) straight up or you can diversify a bit and get six years of a guy that looks to be around league average, but probably a little short of that to start and a pu pu platter of other guys that don’t really portend a high ceiling nor floor.

I used these two as a basis for a potential Ben Zobrist trade because Ben profiles as a better player than any of these guys, including Upton, in the same exact control situation, but making half of what Upton will make this year and a few dollars less than the other cats. I think Ben has more value than any of these guys, but as long as there are plenty of substitutes on the market that probably doesn’t mean a whole lot. The Rays have a substantial track record of moving guys in this situation if they get something approximating what they’re looking for, but they may hold off until some other guys move around. The number of suiters may dwindle, but that should lead to a higher likelihood of one of the remaining teams meeting their demands.

Before signing Melky I thought that the White Sox made a ton of sense because the Rays can also throw in Matt Joyce and letting him platoon with Dayan Viciedo. That’s probably not happening now, but a team that has been doing what it takes still has a colossal hole at 2B and the resources to lock up a very good player on a reasonable deal following this year. Check it out if you have interest and a bit of time:

https://dockoftherays.wordpress.com/2014/12/11/conditions-getting-ripe-for-zobrist-trade/
https://dockoftherays.wordpress.com/2014/12/12/irresponsibly-speculating-on-the-return-from-a-hypothetical-ben-zobrist-trade/

Feel free to delete if you think this is spam I just thought it was tangential to the topic which I enjoyed reading.

Nick C
11 years ago
Reply to  Sandy Kazmir

Kendrick is a good starting point for the discussion, because he’s likely to reject a qualifying offer next year, giving the Dodgers a compensatory pick. He’s also roughly the same WAR as Upton, though he certainly offers less power.

What was the Angels’ return on Kendrick? Andrew Heaney, who entered 2014 as the 30th best prospect in baseball and is likely hovering the 20th position entering 2015. I’d say it’s reasonable for the Braves to expect a prospect in the 20-30 range for Upton.

CrazyPants
11 years ago
Reply to  Nick C

he’s unlikely to get a QO.

BipMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  CrazyPants

Especially because the Dodgers would not be hurt much if he accepts, lowering the drawback for them to make the offer.

Roger
11 years ago

Are you including the draft pick compensation in your surplus value calculation? I get $10M without it, and the draft pick is typically valued around $5M.

AMB
11 years ago
Reply to  Roger

The pick the Braves will get is worth less than the pick teams have to give up (since teams no longer get the forfeited pick, they only get a sandwich pick between the 1st and 2nd round) so $5 million for a mid 1st round pick is probably fair but the sandwich pick is worth less.

Plus this article uses a high valuation of his value (since Streamer predicts 3.1) and the high end calculation for WAR at $7/million per win. Using 3.1 WAR and $6 million/WAR you get a surplus value of about $4 million dollars (plus the draft pick value). Using 3.5 WAR and $7 million you get $10 million of surplus value (plus the draft pick value).

So $10 million “Give or Take” is almost exactly on the money.

MARK LIU
11 years ago
Reply to  AMB

Sandwich picks are worth about $10-15 MM. A win is worth about $7-7.5MM nowadays.

KJ
11 years ago
Reply to  Roger

I’ve read that the current value of a 1st round pick is 15M – 20M – this includes the sandwich round.

AMB
11 years ago
Reply to  KJ

That’s insanity and can’t possibly be correct.

KJ
11 years ago
Reply to  AMB

AMB, Early this year Dan Szymborski wrote on ESPN about the Braves siging of Ervin Santana and thus giving up the #26 pick in the draft. He valued this #26 pick at 19.6M.

http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/10594065/ervin-santana-signing-panic-move-atlanta-braves-mlb

Roger
11 years ago
Reply to  KJ

There’s a vast difference between the top of the 1st round and the bottom of the 1st. I’ll buy 20M at the top, but the bottom is about a WAR in average value.

joser
11 years ago
Reply to  Roger

Indeed, the first round isn’t even a round. It’s more of a cliff.

Chase Headley
11 years ago

Sources saying I’ve received a new 6 yr/$87 million offer w/ 2 club options

Chase Headley
11 years ago

Steamer has me as a 3.9-win player. C’mon. Value City, population: me, Chase. $87 million will look cheap in 5 years. I think I’m worth it, even after taking inevitable defensive regression into the equation.

Jason B
11 years ago
Reply to  Chase Headley

These are telling insights indeed regarding Justin Upton.

KJ
11 years ago

If the Braves can’t get what they want for Justin then they will just keep him and take the 1st round supplemental draft pick next year. It’s going to take at least one top 100 prospect plus filler to get him.

What is the value of a player who pushes a team further to a World Series title? If the Mariners trade Walker for Upton and make it to the WS next year will it have been worth it? Prospects, no matter how good, are not an absolute.

Moustakas' Gum
11 years ago
Reply to  KJ

Baseball potpourri for $200, Alex.

This is explained in the article.

What is the value of a player who pushes a team further to a World Series title?

Stay tuned Final Jeopardy after these commercial messages.

BipMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  KJ

What is the value of a player who pushes a team further to a World Series title? If the Mariners trade Walker for Upton and make it to the WS next year will it have been worth it? Prospects, no matter how good, are not an absolute.

Would approach every trade like this by asking “what if we make it to the world series this year?” If you do, you’re not going to have a farm for much longer, and you probably won’t even get that much better for giving it up.

geo
11 years ago

The omission of Heyward from the discussion is a mistake, in my opinion. As long as the Braves think they should get more in exchange for Upton than they did for Heyward, his inclusion in the analysis would be instructive. It doesn’t matter that Fangraphs prefers him if John Hart doesn’t.

Balthazar
11 years ago
Reply to  geo

The point of the article was to indicate what the _market_ likely sees as Upton’s value. It’s instructive to note as well that industry consensus generally sees St. Lou’s give for one year of Heyward as an overpay, and Upton as a less attractive option.

Hart seems to be asking for more back for one year of J-Up than Atlanta traded out for three years, which is ridiculous. Since then, Upton has positively firmed up his offensive numbers though not taken a spike in production, while negatively firming up his base running and defense. Upton’s value now can’t remotely resemble what he might have gotten then. Walker ALONE is an overpay (and not happening), since at that time Walker was a Top 50 prospect with a half season in AA, while now he has major league experience and has generally performed quite well there, with enough total innings he isn’t even a prospect anymore, and five years of control starting at the league minimum. A Back 50 prospect/unspectacular MLB regular and another second tier prospect is about what the give for one-year of Upton and a QO should be, a little less if he goes to a park that doesn’t favor his main strength which is right-handed power.

If John Hart is misvaluing one year and a QO of J-Upton, which he is, then he doesn’t a deal done. And that’s his problem. An empty 2015 season of Upton and a sandwich pick a year from now is less than he could get making a fair deal tis offseason. Sometime after the New Year, I think Hart geeks rather than the market.

Slavin33
11 years ago

The previous article about Cole Hamels’ trade value, this one, and the Pirates Prospects study mentioned above have all intrigued me. After pondering them, I have come up with a question that hopefully can be answered by Mike or readers more informed than I. This will be a hypothetical situation based upon a real one. To avoid the obvious narratives, assume that the teams involved have middling-or-better payrolls, but not endless pockets.

I’m going to assume that Cole Hamels has 4 years left at $20 million a pop (for simplicity sake). Let’s say the projections for the next 4 years predict $80 million worth of production. Therefore, Hamels has no “surplus value,” but his production is still worth something to contenders, even though he’s not a “bargain.” What could we expect as a return, in terms of prospects (or the surplus value in the study mentioned)? I would assume a team can get a decent package, but Jeff (in his article) seemed to conclude that Philly would have to pay about ~$10 million of Hamels’ salary for each top-100 prospect.

The reasoning there certainly has logic, but it seems to defy real-life practices. Jeff’s theory above would seem to indicate that Philly would have to give Hamels for free in order to buy prospect(s) for their predicted surplus value. My point here is to determine what “surplus value” can a player be traded for, even if his contract is at market rate.

If we keep the salary the same but change the predicted future production, things get a little more interesting. Predicting $100 million of future production over the 4-year $80 million deal, adds $20 million in surplus value. Therefore, the expected return that we come with for the previous example would be boosted by $20 million. But what if the future production is valued below the actual salary? Without muddying this up by include kicking in money to sweeten the pot, at what point could my Cole Hamels be traded for a bag of baseballs (with both teams being satisfied)? The break-even point here will be lower than the actual break-even point of production vs. cost. Otherwise, why would anyone sign a free agent to even slightly above market value.

As I’ve already stated, my biggest point here is that production at a market-value salary is still valuable, despite there being no perceived surplus value. Hopefully someone can answer some of my questions to enlighten me onto how that is valued in the trade market. Thanks in advanced to anyone who attempts to answer this.

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago
Reply to  Slavin33

He’s been identical to Lester over the past 4 years, and is guaranteed fewer years and a lot less money.

He’s a bargain.

Slavin33
11 years ago

That’s not the point of my post if you read it fully. I didn’t ask what Hamels’ real life value is. I used his situation to build a more hypothetical one, in order to see what the trade value is for someone who provides future production at/below/above his actual salary.

arc
11 years ago

That is a non sequitur.

Mr Punch
11 years ago
Reply to  arc

Slavin’s is a reasonable question I think – How much of actual trade value is about capturing surplus (dollar) value, and how much is about getting a player who can help your team in specific ways? Easy example: Suppose you were a team with a very good, very expensive starting lineup, but the best guy in your rotation was the worst starter in baseball last year – would your emphasis be on getting a bargain ($/WAR), or building a good pitching staff?

arc
11 years ago
Reply to  arc

It’s about surplus value. What you’re calling attention to is the simple fact that value itself is ultimately subjective while WAR and the surplus value calculations we base it on are largely objective. They remove crucial aspects of valuation that are specific to a particular park, team (e.g. 2014 Phillies), and franchise.

This is why individual clubs have their own more sophisticated models for WAR that account both for context-independent data and for their own peculiar variables. It’s not just the factors you suggested (e.g. “do we need pitching”), but where on the win curve a team already is, how much financial flexibility they currently have, farm system projections, and many other considerations.

And all of this only answers the question of what Player X is worth to that team at that time. There are many more factors when you enter a trade scenario where market demand and negotiation factors come into play.

You’re forced to trade precision for accuracy when answering these questions and that’s what most of the modeling here does well. That’s a good thing, but it does open the door to a lot of the criticism and accusations of bias that are common to these comment sections.

Cool Lester Smooth
11 years ago
Reply to  arc

Not really.

We know the market value of a pitcher who has performed identically to Hamels and is the exact same age is 6/$155m.

We also know that Hamels is under contract for either 4/$96m, 5/$110m or 5/$114m, depending on how his options play out.

So we know that Hamels’ contract is, at least, being paid $40m under his market value.

BipMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  arc

It’s a non sequitur because the post is not about Hamels. It’s a thought experiment.

Sandy Kazmir
11 years ago
Reply to  arc

Hamels is guaranteed $24M a year for the next four years, which includes the buyout. In the event that the option is picked up you’re looking at $22.5 for four years and then a fifth at $20 or $24M. Lester is going to make just shy of $26M a year for six years on a deal that the market just dictated and most thinking folks has said is pretty close to making sense.

The one or possibly two shorter seasons has value, but let’s not act like the $2 to $4M that is being saved on an annual basis is worth some tremendous prospect. It’s been said many times, but you refuse to listen. Hamels has been a good pitcher. He is being paid like a good pitcher. That does not leave much room for surplus.

His current team would be receiving the benefit of being able to spend another $22.5 to $24M for the next four to five years. That benefit is in lieu of receiving a better prospect return. They can (and arguably should) eat into those cash savings in order to receive a better prospect package, which is factored into the surplus value calculus.

The team does not get to get out from under that contract while recouping a significant return via trade. That would be having your cake and eating it too. It does not work that way. Ignoring what perfectly smart people have been ever so eloquently communicating does not change reality, though it’s always interesting to see you continue to do so.

BipMember since 2016
11 years ago
Reply to  Slavin33

It depends on the what’s available on the market, I would think. If you have a very good pitcher signed exactly to market rate, he’s not going to have much value if there are a bunch of equal free agent pitchers. Why would a team give you prospects to have your guy when they could sign his clone for the same price without giving up prospects? However, if it’s a very thin market for pitching, a team that wants an above-average starter would have nothing available to them except to trade for someone. In this instance, your pitcher necessarily has value, by the fact that they don’t have the option to get that same player for “free”.

CrazyPants
11 years ago

Giants feel like goos fit. Blackburn + Flores? Is that enough? Okert?

Chris from Bothell
11 years ago

How much do you weight years of control on a prospect when thinking about a one-year rental? Is it thoroughly crazypants to give say, 5-6 years of Brad Miller or Taijuan Walker to get one year of Upton, if your team is like the Mariners and a) needing an outfield upgrade plus b) on a place on the win curve to try to go for it this year?

Anon21
11 years ago

Something brought up in the last Upton thread, as a minor point (not hugely swinging the valuation either way, but a thing to consider): Upton, as one of the longest true-distance homerers in the majors, probably has some additional value to a club like Seattle, San Francisco, or San Diego, where you really have to hit a ball hard to get it out of the park.

shoewizard
11 years ago

Upton is entering age 27 season, not age 28 season.

His Birthday is August 25th, so season just concluded was his age 26 season, even though he turned 27 during the year.