Let’s Talk About Manny Machado’s Trade Value

Manny Machado is on the trade block. And rightfully so, as the Orioles are not very close to the other contenders in the AL East, and are looking at losing Machado, Zach Britton, and Adam Jones to free agency next winter. There is simply too large a divide to justify holding those guys and hoping the team lucks into a Wild Card spot, so moving their best pieces while they have the most value is the rational decision.

That said, as I’ve ready some of the suggested offers various teams could make to bring Machado to their city, it seems there remains a disconnect between the understanding of Machado’s abilities and Machado’s trade value. It’s unquestioned that Machado is one of the best players in the world. He’s a star, and will be paid accordingly in free agency next year. But for anyone acquiring him, he’s a one-year rental, with some fringe benefit of being able to try to get him to give you a discount in free agency next winter. That’s worth something, but it isn’t worth the kinds of packages that people seem to expect.

For instance, let’s just take this Nick Cafardo suggestion.

The Sox would have to give up a significant everyday player (Xander Bogaerts?) and a significant pitcher (Drew Pomeranz or Eduardo Rodriguez). Not even sure that would get a deal done. They’d likely have to throw in a prospect such as Michael Chavis or Sam Travis.

No question, Machado is a better player than Bogaerts. But let’s look at this offer realistically.

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.

Bogaerts is a second-year arbitration guy, so the Red Sox currently control his rights for both 2018 and 2019. Steamer projects him for +3.6 WAR this year, and as a guy who hasn’t racked up big power numbers, his arbitration estimate is only $7.6 million, so he’s looking at something like $20 million in salary over the next two years. Bogaerts’ open market value on a two year deal is probably north of $50 million, and might push $60 million given the lack of need to give a long-term commitment. In other words, Bogaerts is something like a $30 to $40 million value by himself.

Conflating Pomeranz and Rodriguez is a little bit tricky, since they aren’t the same thing in terms of trade chips. Pomeranz is in his walk year and makes $9 million in arbitration, so while he’s a bit of a value relative to market price — I could see him getting around $20-$25 million if he was a free agent who only wanted a one year deal — he probably wouldn’t have that much appeal to Baltimore, who would likely have to turn around and flip him too. Pomeranz has some real trade value, but isn’t a great fit for the Orioles.

Rodriguez, though, has four more years of control before he hits free agency, and while his health for 2018 is a question mark coming off knee surgery, he’s got plenty of long-term value. Even a conservative projection to account for his health issues likely puts him at $60 or $70 million over the next four years, and that might be low; teams are paying $10 million to the likes of Drew Smyly and Michael Pineda with the expectation of getting almost nothing from them in 2018, and then only getting one healthy year as a reward for their patience.

Given his low number of innings thrown, Rodriguez won’t get ridiculous payments through arbitration, even as a Super Two, with MLBTR estimating him for $2.7M this year, and probably not a huge raise next year if he misses a good chunk of the season. If he goes $2.7M/$3.7M/$7M/$11M in his arbitration years, you’re looking at about $25 million in costs, and of course, each of those years would effectively come with a team option, since the Red Sox could always non-tender him if he got too expensive relative to his production.

So Rodriguez may actually be a more valuable asset than Bogaerts, and might be pushing $40 to $50 million in value by himself. If you combine Rodriguez and Bogaerts, you’re looking at north of $70 million in value between them, and maybe as much as $90 million if you’re particularly bullish on the pair. As great as Manny Machado is, there’s just no way any rational calculation should suggest that a team should give up both Bogaerts and Rodriguez for rent-a-Machado. And the idea of that offer not being enough, and requiring a prospect on top of the package? That’s just crazy pants.

And yes, I know, it’s easy to justify offers like this by talking about how wins now matter more than wins in the future, and that there’s more to deciding trades than calculating surplus value. Of course that’s true. There are team-specific circumstances that can and should move the needle enough to rationally make inefficient deals at times. But those on-the-margin factors are basically never large enough to justify this kind of unbalanced transfer of value.

Even if the Red Sox decided that buying 2018 wins was of utmost importance, and that Bogaerts and Rodriguez should be sold off to reach that end, the team could almost certainly do better in upgrading in the short-term than trading those guys in a package for one year of Machado. The impact of star players are easily and often overvalued, and when you look at the actual difference between Bogaerts and Machado, and then account for the loss of value of what Rodriguez could give them this year, the Red Sox might only be buying a win, maybe two. To give up 2019 Bogaerts and 2019-2021 Rodriguez for a one-win present upgrade is kind of nuts.

And this isn’t just the one crazy Boston suggestion. There are also writers in Chicago suggesting Addison Russell and other stuff as a Machado offer from the Cubs. This idea of building an offer around a good-not-great young player with multiple years of control is a popular idea. But it’s not a very good one, in most cases.

Last week, I pondered whether Machado or Marcell Ozuna — a lesser player under control for one additional year — had more trade value. You guys leaned very slightly in Machado’s direction, with the poll coming out 55/45 in favor of giving up more for one year of Machado than two years of Ozuna. But then, a few days later, we actually saw Ozuna’s trade value brought to life, and it was a back-end top 100 prospect, a lottery ticket speedster who can’t hit, a lower-level arm of some note, and a throw-in.

Sure, the Marlins front office isn’t impressing anyone these days, and I’m with those who think that was a bad trade for Miami, mostly because I don’t love the guys they got back. But even if you think Sandy Alcantara and Magneuris Sierra are legitimately 50 FV prospects, we’re still not talking about the kinds of value that good young big leaguers with multiple years of control are worth. And we’re definitely not talking about a team needing to offer several of those guys.

In reality, I think even just one year of Manny Machado is probably worth something like $40 to $50 million to a contender. He’s really good, of course, but he can also provide concentrated value in one roster spot, which is important to already-good teams like the Cardinals who can’t as easily upgrade by spreading the wealth around their roster any more. For the Red Sox, I think you could actually argue that a Bogaerts/Machado deal is kind of interesting, taking some 2019 value and putting it onto their 2018 roster. Or even a Rodriguez/Machado deal could work, if the Red Sox were willing to shift Rafael Devers to first base and avoid giving a mega-contract to J.D. Martinez or Eric Hosmer.

But both of those guys, plus a prospect? No. Or Addisson Russell, who is similar to Bogaerts in production but comes with four years of control instead of two? Again, no. Machado is great. He’s not worth that kind of crazy overpay though.

And while we can talk about the philosophy and utility of star players in their walk years, almost every recent example of a deal suggests that the market is actually valuing guys in this way. Ozuna went for much less than many expected. J.D. Martinez went for almost nothing last summer. Machado will bring back more than either of those guys, but the package will probably look closer to what Miami got than one might expect. As good a talent as he is, it’s still just one year, and teams aren’t going to give up a remarkable amount of future value without also getting a huge present-value upgrade.

And once you start packaging guys like Bogaerts and Rodriguez, you’re not getting a huge upgrade anymore. You’re getting a small upgrade at a huge long-term cost, and those are the kinds of deals MLB teams have figured out just aren’t worth it.





Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.

91 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
sphenreckson
8 years ago

A much needed article. The whole world seems to be overestimating the value of one season of Manny Machado.

Les Vegetables
8 years ago
Reply to  sphenreckson

These are the same people that were shocked at what the return was for Stanton. They don’t really understand how to properly value baseball players.

Damaso
8 years ago
Reply to  Les Vegetables

What does Stanton and his gargantuan contrct have to do with a trade involving 1 affordable year of Manny Machado, 2 affordable years of Xander Bogaerts, and 4 years of a mediocre pitcher who just had his knee reconstructed?

redsoxu571
8 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

They have to do with people not properly understanding MLB player trade value. Why would presenting more examples of that issue be inappropriate here?

Paul22
8 years ago
Reply to  Les Vegetables

Neither does Jeter

JoseF16
8 years ago
Reply to  sphenreckson

Whole world except for the fangraphs groupthink contingent who is so much smarter than everyone else.

paperlions
8 years ago
Reply to  JoseF16

Well, no…but you have to first recognize that in baseball you trade contracts, not players. People keep throwing around names without context, and then those people are shocked at the final deals.

These are the same people that thought Stanton should return 2 top 25 prospects plus, you can’t just ignore contracts.

WARonEverything
8 years ago
Reply to  paperlions

You also have to recognize that the internet and talk radio are made for clicks and ears, so it’s better to talk things up make things sound bigger than they may be and/or get dissension (more clicks) so discussion goes on and on. There is a reason why the titles of these articles display the number of comments. makes you come back even after you read the article. So don’t be surprised when you hear something outrageous in any direction because most of it isn’t for education but for ears/clicks.

Damaso
8 years ago
Reply to  paperlions

But shouldn’t we be questioning Dave assigning a $70m valution to a mediocre pitcher who has had chronic knee problems and just had major reconstructive surgery on that knee?

toonsummoner
8 years ago
Reply to  Damaso

…that pitcher who also happens to be a very serviceable #4 who has shown success? and has 4 years of control?

MikeSMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  JoseF16

Well, the Fangraphs Groupthink Contingent and apparently about 30 MLB General Managers.

sabrtooth
8 years ago
Reply to  MikeS

Appeal to authority but I’ll still give you the thumbs up because you used it to fight a troll.

Matt1685
8 years ago
Reply to  sabrtooth

“Whole world except for the fangraphs groupthink contingent who is so much smarter than everyone else.”

“Well, the Fangraphs Groupthink Contingent and
apparently about 30 MLB General Managers.”

“Appeal to authority…”

“Well, the Fangraphs Groupthink Contingent and Harry who sweeps up in the grocery store on the weekends.”

Better?

Eminor3rdMember since 2019
8 years ago

This is why, IMO, we have a situation where the White Sox appear to have the leading offer. It isn’t because the White Sox are pushing their chips in and abandoning their rebuild, it’s that no one is actually offering much, and so anyone’s random pile of parts could come out ahead of anyone else’s.

And while the White Sox may have the leading offer, my guess is that it isn’t the type of offer that will actually get Baltimore to trade. If no one bests Chicago’s offer, Machado will likely be in Baltimore until the deadline.

Rex Manning DayMember since 2022
8 years ago
Reply to  Eminor3rd

Yeah, I think there are actually two questions here: What is Machado worth in a trade, and what is Baltimore willing to trade Machado for?

I agree wholeheartedly with Dave about what Machado is actually worth, but I suspect that Baltimore isn’t interested in trading him for what he’s actually worth.

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
8 years ago

We should remember that this version of “what Machado is actually worth” represents on-field value only (and not even that, perfectly — the mix of components, offense vs. defense, having all the WAR in one roster spot vs. several, etc., as people are talking about in other comments). The Baltimore front office also has to consider the PR implications, the possible impact on ticket sales, and so on. That’s not what he’s “actually worth” in the on-field sense but it has to factor into the decision whether or not (or when) to trade him.

johansantana17Member since 2026
8 years ago
Reply to  Eminor3rd

Baltimore might be smart to hold until then. Machado can play both SS and 3B very well, so there almost certainly will be some existing demand for a left-side infielder. Injuries to starting SS/3B or surprise contention could increase demand for Machado too. Imagine if Justin Turner had season-ending knee surgery in June, or if the Braves are leading the NL East on July 25th.

jiveballer
8 years ago
Reply to  johansantana17

Hah you had me gong until the Atlanta part at the end.

pezzicle
8 years ago

This article is <3. I had a very long and drawn out argument with people online on Thursday and Friday about a trade to Cleveland and many people were saying they "wouldn't want to give up both Mejia AND McKenzie for 1 year of Machado" which I was constantly suggesting was a huge overpay anyway and nowhere near what he would get.

There was some belief that Machado would get "Triple" what Ozuna fetched.

I'm wondering about a Salazar + deal….

johansantana17Member since 2026
8 years ago
Reply to  pezzicle

Two years of Salazar plus one of Cleveland’s #5-10 prospects seems reasonable

vivalajeter
8 years ago
Reply to  johansantana17

Even if it was reasonable from a value standpoint, that wouldn’t make sense for the Orioles. If they’re trading away Machado, then they won’t put much value on a player that’ll be a Free Agent in two years.

Paul22
8 years ago
Reply to  vivalajeter

They could flip him for a package for a controllable pitcher

johansantana17Member since 2026
8 years ago
Reply to  vivalajeter

If they’re trading away Machado then they will take whatever is the best non-joke of an offer available.

channelclemente
8 years ago

Great article. Timely.

Mike NMN
8 years ago

Good piece. This may just be the trade that can’t be made right now, because of the wide divergence between Machado would be worth and what the O’s could get (and would find acceptable). In a way, this is Stanton-like. You know you are getting a terrific player..but the price makes it tough.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago

Here’s a question I’ve been thinking about…

The Orioles are not planning on granting an exclusive negotiating window with any team planning to acquire Machado. Is that hurting or helping his value on the trade market?

On the one hand, if I was a team (almost any team, really) that could afford it I would gladly pay a prospect premium to land Machado on a market-rate deal (which would be super expensive). Even though it is not a “good deal” on paper, players that good don’t come along very often, and he’ll be a core player for my team for years.

On the other hand, Machado may not be interested in an extension at all, and keeping that information from the acquiring team may heighten his value. Machado could also try to make it so only a team he wants to go to can acquire him.

For example, if I’m the Cards I would be willing to give up a some nice prospects (including Flaherty as one of them) and DeJong for him if I can sign up to a blockbuster extension. Without the extension, probably not. But right now I would have no idea what to give up. I would guess that the offers vary pretty wildly from team to team, since each team has different ideas of whether they could keep him long term.

Brad JohnsonMember
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

In all likelihood, the Orioles aren’t granting a negotiating window because Machado (or his agent) told them it would be a waste of time. No point negotiating a deal contingent on a signed extension if that’s not really a possibility.

soaktherichMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The O’s are in a tough spot, @sad. Trading him at all is admitting to their fans that they’re giving up on the next several years — years that they’ll be overpaying for Chris Davis and Mark Trumbo (two guys handpicked by Angelos), while also wasting what may well be Dylan Bundy’s breakout. They’re also admitting to their fans that they have no intention of paying market rate for Machado after this season (trade then sign as FA almost never happens).

So now they’re in a situation where Machado is over-valued as a trade piece by fans and even media, compared to his value among GMs (as this article points out); so any fair return is going to seem like a giveaway to Birds fans. Plus, there’s a real risk that a team that acquires Machado will flip him straight to the Bronx, which is Angelos’s worst nightmare.

All that given, I’ll be pretty shocked if he’s traded this winter. He may go in July, assuming BAL is out of contention. At that point, assuming he’s on a 5-6 win pace, he’ll be worth 2 wins plus whatever the O’s would receive in compensation for losing him as a FA, which would add up to about two prospects in the 75-125 range. Ultimately, that’s almost what he’d bring back now. Also, moving him in July assures that he’ll go to a real contender who will not flip him to NYY or BOS.

Finally, keeping him for the first half provides at least the glimmer of hope that, if a million things fall right, BAL could contend themselves. Trade him now and there’s no hope of that and ticket sales suffer accordingly. He’s not getting traded this winter.

signedepsteinsmother
8 years ago
Reply to  soaktherich

I think you underestimate the fanbasa.

output gap
8 years ago

Addison Russell for Zach Britton and Manny Machado becomes a more interesting offer for the Cubs, as it would add something like 4 wins next year, but that would probably not maximize Baltimore’s trade return.

theoriolewayMember since 2026
8 years ago

Why would the Orioles want to trade for players they wouldn’t control long-term, like Bogaerts?

I feel like the Orioles should dare Machado to turn down $400 million over 12 years, trade everything that isn’t nailed down (which is basically Jonathan Schoop) and eat all the money of what they sell. Gausman, one free year of Adam Jones and Zach Britton. There’s value there. Everything they get back should have an ETA of 2019 or 2020. That seems like a much more effective rebuild than the ones I’ve seen floated.

McPontiffMember since 2026
8 years ago
Reply to  theorioleway

Now you’re talking my language! Keep the Hand Jive Bros together!

Brad JohnsonMember
8 years ago

I’m not so sure Russell is a farfetched match. As someone pointed out on Twitter today, he’s basically a rich man’s Freddy Galvis. Russell is the slightly better hitter and fielder, but the gap only adds up to about a win or so.

While the upside on Russell is still enticing, this seems like a case where the Cubs could escape some bad optics, make an upgrade, and not come out too far behind in 2019 when Baez/Happ/Zobrist can revert to the SS/2B tandem.

wilkie
8 years ago
Reply to  Brad Johnson

He’s 23 with four years of control. Steamer sees the difference as about 2.5 wins.

Brad JohnsonMember
8 years ago
Reply to  wilkie

Look, I’m not saying get er done or anything, but there is a certain sense to the swap. Long term, I’m not convinced Baez/Happ isn’t a more productive infield combo than Addi/Baez, and I sure am convinced the Cubs are a lot scarier in 2018 with Machado. If you need a throw-in to feel better about selling the cost controlled SS, fine.

Trades aren’t just about penny pinching the asset, they’re about improving a team’s W/L.

Thom with an HMember since 2017
8 years ago
Reply to  Brad Johnson

I agree, actually. It’s not a crazy idea. Among the 32 shortstops with 350+ PA’s last year, Russell ranked 23rd in wRC+ (84). He’s never been an offensive weapon, and it’s risky to assume he’ll become one.
That’s a helluva glove, though.

signedepsteinsmother
8 years ago
Reply to  Brad Johnson

Funny, I was thinking, after looking at the values, that Montgomery and a low level prospect would be realistic…..

some guy
8 years ago

The 2 critical questions that have the most impact on his trade value are 1. Can the acquiring team negotiate an extension with MM prior to agreeing to trade terms, and 2. Will Baltimore acquiesce on their rumored ridiculous attempt at preventing MM from ending up in the Bronx?

If a long term MM deal can be had, then game-on with crazy offers. If not, then he should likely net a few mid-range prospects or one pretty good one.

The Yankees restriction is pretty dumb. If he’s intent on being a free agent, he can sign with NYY next offseason, meaning the Orioles are only preventing him in NY for one season, ostensibly because they believe they are going to make the playoffs in ‘18. Insisting on this restriction only serves to restrict their own return. It’s certainly not what some have suggested as a “fair” return, especially when you consider there are other 3b’s potentially available.

Les Vegetables
8 years ago

It’s almost as if Nick Cafardo is a hack who doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

Joey Butts
8 years ago
Reply to  Les Vegetables

I gotta say, though: he had one of the best AL MVP ballots.

james123Member since 2024
8 years ago

The Yankees seem like the perfect fit, and it’s going to be really interesting to see if Angelos is willing to trade there. From what I read, he’s reluctant to trade Machado to the White Sox because he’s worried they’ll turn around and flip him to the Yankees. I don’t know if this is true, but someone reported that Angelos would need an agreement in writing that the team trading for Machado wouldn’t then trade him to the Yankees.

pumpsie greenMember since 2022
8 years ago

I see why Donaldson trade talk is getting nowhere with the Blue Jays. What’s the point, if all they’re going to get is what Ozuna got? And once a potential suitor fills a hole with Machado, the return on Donaldson will be even less impressive. May as well just keep him and roll the dice.

channelclemente
8 years ago
Reply to  pumpsie green

Unless it’s a butts in seats issue, and/or the team in question might bid on him anyway as a FA.

abailey
8 years ago
Reply to  pumpsie green

Right.

If you’re a team like the Jays — and the Orioles aren’t all that different — are you better off waiting until midseason? Maybe you end up competitive, in which case, yay. And if you don’t and have to settle for less than you could’ve gotten in December, well, if you weren’t going to get that much anyway, does it really matter?

John Autin
8 years ago

Very good general analysis, I think. Small quibbles:

1) One player-year of 6 fWAR usually has more “contender” value than the same fWAR spread among multiple players or seasons.

2) Russell’s value shape — much more defensive than offensive — is generally more available than Machado’s, I believe.

JoseF16
8 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Agreed. It’s ridiculous to compare many seasons of slightly above average players to one year of a superstar and pretend it’s the same math.

tb.25
8 years ago

These same outlandish suggested offers showed up in the Stanton sweepstakes, though he wasn’t a rental. Fans and writers often don’t understand valuations of contracts and players.

Matt
8 years ago
Reply to  tb.25

Most people just see “OMG Machado could be traded”, and don’t think of “OMG, Machado might be traded. He has 1 year at ~17M before the team loses him as a free agent.”

Jetsy Extrano
8 years ago
Reply to  tb.25

People still talk Reserve Clause baseball.

timmer
8 years ago

I like Russell for Machado & Gausman

ShauncoreMember since 2019
8 years ago

I would find it somewhat funny if one of the key pieces for the Orioles trade was Rodriguez, who the Orioles traded a few years ago for a rental (a good one at that though in Andrew Miller).

bananas
8 years ago

Things Bogaerts and Russell have in common:
1) “Franchise Player” prospect pedigree, “solid role player” reality
2) “Power + contact” scouting report that hasn’t materialized
3) Long slumps with tons of Ks.
4) Disappearing in memorable prime-time moments.
5) “Golden age of SS’s” = unrealistic comparisons to contemporaries

To the average home fan these guys are “coulda beens” which is the classic path to being an undervalued average player.

timmer
8 years ago
Reply to  bananas

I’d dispute 3 & 4. Bogaerts isn’t a high-K guy at all, and Russell has had a boatload of memorable playoff hits/HRs.

LHPSU
8 years ago
Reply to  bananas

I would love to root for a team that could call a 4 WAR shortstop a “role player”.

JoseF16
8 years ago

2017 Astros: Traded for Verlander
2016 Cubs: Traded Gleyber and more for Aroldis
2015 Royals: Traded for Cueto
2014 Giants: Gave up 2 of top 3 prospects for Peavy
2013 Red Sox: Added Peavy and Thornton

Most of these trades were for rentals, and most gave up too much by your standards. But no team that wins a World Series kicks itself for what it gave up. I understand teams trade for rentals and it doesn’t work out, but this article is too far leaning to that side. Sometimes, you have to go for it.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
8 years ago
Reply to  JoseF16

I agree with you that sometimes our understanding of value in trades is iffy. But I think those were all in-season trades when the playoff odds were much more tangible, the teams were that much more desperate, and had fewer routes to improve.

Also, weirdly (or perhaps not weirdly) those are all pitchers.

JoseF16
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Good point, and I don’t disagree. I think this attacks the assumption that one year of a player is more valuable than half a year. The certainty at the deadline that you will have the need for that player to get you over the top for the playoffs more than offsets the value of the extra half year (especially if you’re a team that should make the playoffs anyway). The risk for the selling team, however, is that more players become available (e.g. Donaldson) or that the contending teams don’t have the need.

JoseF16
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I forgot some non-pitchers, such as Zobrist to KC for Manaea, etc.

Brad JohnsonMember
8 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The point that gets lost in all of this is that the framework Dave used above is just that – a framework. It’s one of many ways of conceptualizing trade value. It happens to be a helpful way and (snarky full disclosure), it’s tied to our site’s flagship stat.

Dave would gladly point out this caveat – there is more than one way to measure value. He HAS done so in the past. But it’s kind of obnoxious to do it every single time we talk about player value.

Eminor3rdMember since 2019
8 years ago
Reply to  JoseF16

All of those trades were made at the deadline, when contending teams were already well-positioned to make the post-season, and thus assumed drastically less risk of wasting their investments.

JoseF16
8 years ago
Reply to  Eminor3rd

Yup. So take Manny, for example. Do you think he could fetch a larger return now or at the deadline? I realize the prediction can’t be known for sure, but I’m asking your prediction.

soddingjunkmailMember since 2016
8 years ago

The more I think about this, the more a Cleveland acquisition makes sense to me. They can easily slide Jose Ramirez over and their time to contend is now – another couple years and we’re going to see the inevitable decline of Kluber and Carrasco. Add this to the ascendancy of the Yanks/Astros and the perpetual financial disadvantage Cleveland is in, and I think that if there were ever a team that would benefit from a major rental, this is it.

pezzicle
8 years ago

i agree unfortunately they aren’t really the type of team who goes after rentals

fjtorres
8 years ago
Reply to  pezzicle

Also:
– while Cleveland can use Machado’s bat, they don’t necessarily need it at 3b. Their best fit for a righty power bat is in the heavily lefty Outfield or 1b.

– where Baltimore and Cleveland best line up is with Britton (they tried trading for him at the deadline) and with Adam Jones (as a corner, not at center).

Britton is the most likely trade option because the fit doesn’t depend on what happens with Kipnis (healthy and back at 2B, playing OF, or trade), Diaz (can he add some loft to his contact skills and put his monster physique to work?), or even Urshela. Britton they need regardless of whatever else happens with the FA market. It is doubtful they’ll luck out on an Encarnacion type deal for the needed bat but they might cobble up another platoon bat to plug the hole left by Santana without having to sacrifice depth or a prospect in a trade for a bat.

So no, Cleveland isn’t a likely trade partner for Machado just yet. Midseason would be more likely if the in-house options fail to pan out.

soddingjunkmailMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  fjtorres

“Needing” Britton sounds like an overstatement to me. Of course Britton makes them better, but they already have Miller for the highest leverage spots.

Getting a guy like Britton who’s capable of the very highest leverage situations and pushing either him or miller out of them feels like a luxury, not a necessity. (Especially considering what he’s likely to cost)

fjtorres
8 years ago

They lost the biggest innings eater in the pen. And Miller has been showing signs of fraying. Plus the likely back end starters look like five-and-run guys. They need another reliable high leverage reliever and a trade of excess resources is preferable to spending cash to this particular team.
As I said, they already tried to get him at the deadline and the need is greater now.

abgb123
8 years ago

I never know what to expect from the Os, one second I think theyre brilliant and the next they give Davis 160 mil and Trumbo 35ish mil in back to back off seasons while exclusively negotiating against themselves. So that being said I could see them squeezing a team for a package as listed above or a hand full of magic beans, oddly the only thing that doesn’t seem likely is landing somewhere in between.

Rex Manning DayMember since 2022
8 years ago
Reply to  abgb123

Not to be rude, but what on earth gave you even the brief impression that the Baltimore Orioles are brilliant?

abgb123
8 years ago

lol I’m not an O’s fan so this isn’t rude to me 🙂 but they have pulled off some really brilliant trades.

vmx
8 years ago

It would be one season of Machado plus whatever they get as the compensation pick. Still an overpay for the scenarios discussed in this article, but that comp pick isn’t nothing.

twoseam2007
8 years ago

I really don’t think Addison Russell for Machado is nuts by any stretch. They gave up Gleyber Torres (and Billy McKinney) a couple seasons ago for 40 innings from Aroldis Chapman. Russell did not play that well this year and his bat is a legitimate question mark, plus they have Baez under control for a few years. (I’m a Yankee fan btw). If I were Theo, I’d make that trade.

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
8 years ago

I think this is well placed and reasonable enough as a corrective to perceived market value, but the question then is, why would anyone trade a star player whose contract was up in a year? If the rental market yields returns this light, is it really even worth it? How long till the market corrects for this valuation, even if it’s reasonable — by simply not being much of a market at all?

v2miccaMember since 2016
8 years ago

I think in the case of Machado, where the possibility of negotiating an extension remains less that 5%, as long as the return on the trade is perceived to be greater than the return that a qualifying offer would net, there will remain a market. Machado’s one year of value to Baltimore is limited at best.

Joey Butts
8 years ago

I think it would behoove the Orioles to get Machado under contract for next season ASAP. Then they can agree to pay some of that money in exchange for a better return.

v2miccaMember since 2016
8 years ago
Reply to  Joey Butts

Takes two to Tango. If Machado’s camp refuses to entertain a contract, there isn’t anything the Orioles can do about it.

Joey Butts
8 years ago
Reply to  v2micca

I’m just talking about 2018. They’re going to arbitration eventually, so there’s no particular reason not to tango.

ryanredsox
8 years ago

If someone happens to have a connection to Dave D, I beg you to get this article to him.

nojybles
8 years ago

Yet another reminder why Nick Cafarto is painfully out of touch. Anything coming from him is typically nonsensical bullshit.

timprov
8 years ago

I’m suspicious of the math here. I think Machado might bring back considerably more than the surplus value calculations would suggest, by virtue of much more positional rarity than Stanton and Ozuna, and much more accessibility than Stanton.

I’m going to take the Twins as an example, because I’m most familiar with them. Suppose Baltimore calls them up and offers Machado straight up for incumbent SS Jorge Polanco. Can they say no? With the potential to resign Machado, plus Nick Gordon and Royce Lewis in the wings, the Twins are in a good position to make a strong upgrade for 2018 while sacrificing theoretical value later.

Steamer projects the 23-yo Polanco for 2.3 WAR in 2018, and he has five years of team control left. While he’s not as good as Bogaerts he should be quite a bit more valuable by your math, especially because his value is less bat-centric and he’ll make less relatively in arbitration.

So there’s something of a floor, and it’s one a team aiming not to compete in 2018 should prefer substantially over Bogaerts and Pomeranz. If the Red Sox or anyone else want to get in on this they’re going to have to offer more. And it seems like with 27 teams out there probably several of them will be interested.

Ivan_GrushenkoMember since 2016
8 years ago

Going by past trade comps is akin to valuing a house based on past sales comps. It works for most fungible players in most instances. But non-fungible players can have wildly different values to different teams. If you’re the Indians looking at a closing window of maybe another year or two as an elite team with more prospects than payroll space, maximizing your chances in the coming year by getting Machado and Brach for Mejia and McKenzie and other stuff may make sense. Really all that matters is how much better off you are in 2018 and maybe 2019 before and after the prospective trade. OTOH if you’re the Cardinals looking at a longer window, more payroll space and less elite current status it probably does make more sense to go for a longer term expensive asset like Stanton. The numbers derived from fungible player values aren’t as useful.

Lee Stone
8 years ago

Rationally speaking, suggesting that even one year of Ozuna at $11M is worth less than a year of Machado at $17 defies logic. Ozuna was the best player at his position. Machado was 12th in OPS at third base. Recent form is vastly more important than years past.

LHPSU
8 years ago
Reply to  Lee Stone

The road is filled with Ryan Ludwicks and Rene Riveras.

scooter262
8 years ago

I only hope that Dombrowski agrees with you, Dave. Any rich team like the Yankees, Red Sox, or Dodgers can just wait one year and bid on Machado: they have little or no reason to give up a lot for an extra year, especially since Machado/Boras is not giving any sort of discount to a team that he’s already on.

Damaso
8 years ago

It seems Dave is still polishing those red sox “kids”.

Machado projects to be better than both X and ERod combined next year.

One extra year of Bogaerts, who is getting expensive just as he seems to be turning into a light hitting 3B, and the privilege of hoping a mediocre pitcher like ERod can bounce back from reconstructive knee surgery, is not much of a return, to be honest.

Paul22
8 years ago

Dave does not understand trading. This isnt a money exhange where rates are clear set and stable.

The value of a a player to the average population in the market is not the same to a team with a glaring hole at 3B and SS who wants to compete in 2018.
Manny is a massive upgrade over XB regardless of what the position biased WAR says. Keeping him from joining Stanton in the Yankee lineup is a bonus. Their LH rotation faces them 18-19 times a year

Furthermore, the Orioles do not need to trade Manny unless its worth their while. They want controllable pitching or players who can get that for them. Red sox probably have to throw in Groome in
addition to XB and Erod

You want Manny? Gonna need a better package than Jeter got for Stanton or Ozuna which was simply a salary dump/gift

JohnnyRingoFWC
8 years ago

Would love to see Manny in Chicago.

I like the Britton/Machado for Russell suggestion.

Maybe throw in Montgomery and a SP arm IF you sign a Yu Darvish or a top level arm in free agency.

Fun trade in my mind:

Cubs:

– Addison Russell
– Kyle Schwarber (sorry Theo, I love him too)
– Mike Montgomery
– Jen Ho Tseng

for

Orioles:

– Manny Machado
– Zach Britton
– Mark Trumbo

steveospeak
8 years ago

I agree that some are over-valuing Machado’s return, but I feel even more are undervaluing it as well.

Sure it is “only one year”, but it is only one year of one of the top 15 position players in the game, who is well rounded and helps both offensively and defensively. He’s a player who has a high likelihood of being in the 6-7 WAR range. While his Arb. figure will be high it will still be a definite discount. Finally, if Machado does walk a team will get a good draft pick as compensation.

Moustakas has a total of 12.1 WAR for his career, and he’s likely to get a 5-6 yr deal for $18-20M a year. Plus he will cost some picks and bonus money depending on who signs him. Sure you get him for an extra 4-5 years, but is that really a big positive?

I know there can be some differences in pitchers vs position players, but when you look at the deadline returns for very good or elite rentals the last couple of years for guys like Darvish and Chapman, you will see some very good prospects headlining the deals with a couple of other solid pieces as well.

Those deals not only were for less time as they only were with their new teams for 2 months plus the playoffs (it worked out for the Cubs), but they also didn’t come with the pick value when they eventually left (assuming Darvish leaves).

Dominikk85Member since 2020
8 years ago

Would a similar offer like the andrew miller or chapman deal make sense? I know they are relievers who were targeted for the playoffs but I think overall it could be right.

That would be one top50 prospect (but not a top10 so no moncada,vlad jr) and one good 45.

Dave from DCMember since 2018
8 years ago

The O’s missed a golden opportunity these past few years to start an Astros-style rebuild. Now comes news that Zach Britton ruptured his Achilles–ugh. If only they had traded Machado, Brach, Britton, O’Day, Jones, heck they even got calls on Bundy and Gausman despite their struggles. Basically, move everyone other than Schoop and never sign that Chris Davis deal. As an O’s fan losing Machado is really gonna hurt, but the real kick in the pants is thinking about where they could be right now versus where they are.

Ted@soundarguments
8 years ago

So what exactly does Machado’s trade value look like in the terms that the Orioles stated they want–controllable starting pitching?

The White Sox, with the putative “best offer” are on record, I believe, saying they won’t deal Kopech or Giolito. Would some combination of Lopez/Fulmer/Cease be realistic?

stansfield123
8 years ago

There’s no straight up mathematical correspondence between WAR (or any other way to measure on field value) and trade value.

Even in a small market (small in terms of the number of participants: 30), economic/social/psychological principles come into play: prices are driven by supply and demand, scarcity, branding, the economics of luxury goods, etc., etc.

Just because a little known corner outfielder like Ozuna is projected to provide the same on field value as a superstar, slick fielding 3B/SS, doesn’t mean they have the same market value. Every economic factor is heavily tilted towards Manny:
1. “slick fielding 3B/SS with great hitting” is a lot harder to find than “mediocre corner outfielder with a good bat”. Little supply = high price. Even if it’s not justified by what we think the value the buyer gets out of it, a scarce luxury item (a vintage, one of a kind sports car, for instance) is going to command an astronomical price.

Obviously, this is a smaller, more controlled market, so prices can’t get out of control as much, but supply and demand still has an effect.

2. GMs are people. Owners are people. One of them is going to get excited by the prospect of acquiring a superstar, and ignore the numbers.

3. Marketability: Ozuna’s is non-existent. Manny is gonna move merch and tickets, especially in a big market.