The Athletics Trade a Shortstop for a Reliever
On the face of it, trading a shortstop for a reliever seems like a bad idea. Especially when the shortstop is under team control for a year longer. But teams aren’t vacuums, and you can’t cram all of your players into one depth chart without scraping some elbows. In other words, Yunel Escobar can’t pitch, and Tyler Clippard can. And so maybe this trade between the Athletics and Nationals works for both teams.
It seems from both projections, as well as general approximations of value, that Yunel Escobar can potentially give more value to a team than Tyler Clippard could. Escobar is projected to be just worse than the average major league baseball player by Steamer (1.8 WAR), while Clippard is more likely to be replacement than average (0.3 WAR). One pitches every other day for an inning, the other plays most innings at a premium defensive position.
But that sort of analysis ignores a ton of factors, not the least of which is Clippard’s excellence. Slice your pie anyway you like, and Clippard has been a top-20 reliever since he broke out in 2010. Here are his accolades among his reliever peers.
* Top 15 by WAR since 2010
* Top 10 in RA/9 WAR since 2010
* Top 15 by swinging strike rate since 2009
* Top 25 by strikeout rate since 2010
* Top 30 by strikeout minus walk rate since 2010
* Top 25 by ERA since 2010
* Top 3 by changeup swinging strike rate (21.4%, minimum 300 thrown) in 2014
* Top 3 in changeup pitch type values since 2011
* Number 1 in innings pitched since 2011
* Number 1 in pop-up rate (10.1%, league average is 3.5%) since 2011
That last one is important to your concept of his value. Pop ups are included in WAR, but not included in FIP and not projected by Steamer into his future WAR. But there’s evidence that pop-ups are sticky, year-to-year, and therefore a skill. The year-to-year correlation on pop-ups (.63) is better than the number on home runs allowed (.41). Clippard has consistently put up elite pop-up rates and so that has to be factored into his excellence. (Oakland’s park is also conducive to pop-ups, so he’ll fit in.)
In sum, you have a durable arm that has consistently put up plus strikeout rates and elite pop-up rates on the back of an elite changeup. He’s been worth more than a win a season over the last five seasons (closer to two wins per season if you use RA/9), he was available, and he was cheaper than the other most available pitcher that may have satisfied some of these conditions. Jonathan Papelbon is due at least $13 million compared to Clippard’s $9.3m, and it’s unclear that the rebuilding Phillies would want Yunel Escobar anyway.
Yunel Escobar was due to be paid $5m this year, $7m next year, with a $1m buyout on a $7m option in 2017. If you buy his Steamer projection, you’re buying a bounce back in defense, and if you’re buying a bounce back in defense, Escobar is a good player on a great contract.
Defense is notoriously hard to talk about through the eyes of metrics. But there are a few ways to talk about the skills that go into defense. Speed is important, and Escobar’s speed has been in decline. By speed score, he’s never been above average, but last year’s 1.1 (5.0 is average) was very bad. It was the fourth-worst speed score in baseball last year, and easily the worst by a middle infielder (though J.J. Hardy was close). Since 2011, his speed score is only going down, and at 32, it’s hard to for project him for improvement in that category.
A potentially positive quirk in Escobar’s defensive profile is that he’s very sure-handed. Even including his bad year, Escobar has been top-five in making the Routine plays since 2011 as determined by Inside Edge. He’s been the best shortstop since 2011 at making the Likely plays, too. A shortstop that makes 96.6% of the routine and likely plays is valuable no matter his range.
It’s beyond that where his decreasing range becomes problematic. He’s been 13th in Even plays (plays made 40-60% of the time), and 14th in Unlikely plays. And in last year’s UZR, it was the range portion of his effort that was the most problematic.
To the Athletics, that might have been important, but to the Nationals, his declining defense was less important. Escobar will be asked to play second base for the Nationals. At second, his projected offense (due to be about 4% worse than league average by Steamer) only ranks 23rd by projections, but his defense is likely to be better at the easier position than the other available players on that list — Tommy La Stella, Rickie Weeks, and Yamaico Navarro have much more risk (and poorer defense) associated with them. Escobar is a safe, cost-neutral, major league second baseman.
And the Athletics had a backup plan for Escobar. At the winter meetings, Billy Beane admitted that Marcus Semien (then projected to be an average major league player) was slotted at shortstop. As much as it might have been nice to use Semien as a utility man, how much of an upgrade would he have provided in that role over the likes of Eric Sogard? Judging by our depth charts, Tyler Clippard will push Ryan Cook down out of the setup role and offer as much as a one-win improvement in that spot if you use Clippard’s RA/9 WAR as a guide.
And that’s really the crux of it. Yunel Escobar has averaged about two wins a season for the last five seasons, but fits the Nationals better at a position of need. If you go by Tyler Clippard’s runs allowed — a good idea because he has a rare skill in creating pop-ups — the reliever has averaged 1.8 wins a season for the last five seasons. And he fits the A’s better.
The Athletics traded a shortstop for a reliever and yet it probably made sense for both teams.
With a phone full of pictures of pitchers' fingers, strange beers, and his two toddler sons, Eno Sarris can be found at the ballpark or a brewery most days. Read him here, writing about the A's or Giants at The Athletic, or about beer at October. Follow him on Twitter @enosarris if you can handle the sandwiches and inanity.
might Desmond move to 2B?
No way, Desmond is a 4 win SS. Escobar to 2B and then SS next year if we can’t resign Desi
Why because he’s a poor defensive SS? Not likely, Espinosa is a significantly better defensive SS than either Desmond or Escobar and Espinosa plays 2B when he and Desmond are in the game together and stayed at 2B when the two were both slotted in as a starters.
Now just waiting for the Nats to trade Escobar to the Padres for a 2014 draftee to be named later…
Gettys?
If you have a hole, and you have two of the same thing elsewhere, trade one of those for that hole.
Signed Butler who replaces Moss. But now you have 2 similar players. Trade Moss, have less holes, lose nothing.
Pick up Escobar and you have Semien (who’s similar, younger, and cheaper). So you have 2 similar players. Trade one of them, lose nothing.
escobar is not nothing, he is wonderful depth at middle-infield. players get hurt all the time. Speaking as an A’s fan, I don’t like the deal. I felt very comforted to have Escobar, Semien, and Zobrist for 2 infield spots. Plus Zobrist is likely gone next year!
Seems like they view Sogard and Wendle as their MI depth…approximately a half a win downgrade relative to Escobar over the course of 600 PA’s, but in reality significantly less than that since its a reserve role
neither wendle nor sogard is really an MLB SS defensively. THey are primarily 2B, but your point is taken.
this is a terrible trade for the Nationals!! they could have put Danny Espinosa there!!
As a Nationals fan: ha, ha!
small typo Eno
Since 20011, his speed score is only going down, and at 32, it’s hard to for project him for improvement in that category.
approximately 18000 years in the future, I dunno if his speed score can go any lower, being (probably) dead and all. But thanks, ironically incorrect spell-checker/possible time traveler.
A “decreasing lack of range” would also be a positive, right? Rather than being “problematic”.
Interesting how Escobar was supposed to go to Nationals in that supposed 3-team blockbuster
No way this trade makes sense unless the Nationals kick in some cash or prospects. Escobar has the better contract and plays everyday.
there is the idea that only Joe Maddon was able to get the most out of Escobar
Counterpoint: Clippard is an excellent and remarkably consistent reliever, and that’s pretty valuable on a one-year commitment.
Clippard plays almost every day!
I think this makes the Zobrist trade look even better. some were speculating Yunel was nothing but a salary dump. given the quick turnaround, have to think he had this in the works. oh Billy!
But Clippard is an Arb4 guy, probably going to get eight to ten million for 2015 and then hits free agency.
Do non-closers get 8-10MM per in arbitration? Seems really high. They don’t even fetch that on the open market.
Clippard’s 2014 salary was 5.875 million, and MLBTR projects him for about 9.3 million for 2015.
Yeah, that does seem way too high. Why would Clippard get the same annual salary that Andrew Miller signed for, when Clippard isn’t even a free agent yet?
Miller did accept less money to sign in NY, but your overall point still holds. It does seem high. Compare that to Robertson’s trip through arbitration. I’m guessing Clippard had to be a super 2?
The A’s have some cash to spend. Even if Clippard costs $10 million this trade is probably worthwhile for them.
Remember, as a minority owner, ~5%, Beane gets the cash left in the corners after Wolff/Fisher recapitalize by cashing the dole check.
I’m probably interpreting this incorrectly, but wouldn’t fWAR properly account for Clippard’s high pop-up rate since pop-ups are included in the calculation? From the article, it seems like Eno is saying you would want to use RA9 WAR instead if you wanted to factor in his pop-ups.
“That last one is important to your concept of his value. It’s not calculated in our fielding-independent value numbers because those numbers are agnostic of balls in play.”
“If you go by Tyler Clippard‘s runs allowed — a good idea because he has a rare skill in creating pop-ups — the reliever has averaged 1.8 wins a season for the last five seasons.”
fWAR only takes into account FIP, which is based on Ks, BBs, and HRs. So, no, it doesn’t account for pop ups. Did I make a mistake?
Apparently fWAR does now take into account pop-ups:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/infield-flies-fip-and-war/
But there really hasn’t been a definitive answer from the FanGraphs writers.
I am referencing the following glossary item:
“Pitchers – While position player WAR is based on Batting Runs and Fielding Runs, pitching WAR uses FIP (with infield fly balls), adjusted for park, and scaled to how many innings the pitcher threw.”
http://www.fangraphs.com/library/misc/war/
I learned something today. I thought we were just talking about putting it in. Apparently pop-ups are included in fWAR as strikeouts because they are outs 99% of the time.
But they are not projected by Steamer and so aren’t in his projected WAR.
Aaaaand we have found ANOTHER problem with Steamer.
Please, can FG writers be more nuanced in their offseason articles? Don’t get me wrong, I love a lot of what I read here, but reading articles that treat Steamer projections as gospel makes it seems like we’re missing the point of saber-metrics in the first place.
… you thought this article took projections for gospel?
it may not be treated as gospel per se, but just about every offseason article i’ve read lately uses Steamer as a big chunk of evidence to support whatever the writer is talking about. i don’t have a dog in this fight. i think steamer is fine, but Noah is right that the Steamer projections are held in pretty high regard around here, deservedly so or not.
Pop-ups track very well with fly ball rate (note Clippard has extreme fly ball tendencies). Therefore they are already baked into xFIP and presumably Steamer if they use ground ball rates. Similarly, pop-ups track decently with home runs and should be baked into FIP as well.
Noah/rottenchops – The writers here use Steamer because it is free, available and accurate enough to draw conclusions from. Fangraph readers should understand that these theories are based on a projection, not reality. It’s not gospel, it’s what they have to work with. Steamer is flawed, just like PECOTA, ZIPS, Oliver and whatever is used on websites that I don’t read. We can all draw our own conclusons and analysis from these articles, Eno and Fangraphs are here to simplify and help us.
“Billy Bean did it. It must be good!”
– Every fangraphs writer since the offseason began. Is Bean bankrolling this site?
Nah. If that were the case they’d be running puff pieces about Michael Sam or Jason Collins every other day.
“puff” pieces. I get it.
I don’t think you do…
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=billy+bean
Wrong Billy Beane.
That’s the point. He wrote Bean; not Beane.
Pretty funny…
Actually the reason Billy Bean dealt yunel is that thang he told us about with his mascara
He did say we have a bug in his office. Just tried to run through why both teams did it. Obviously, traditional analysis would favor getting the every day player.
What kind of piece would that make?
Maybe a fair piece, basically debating the nuts and bolts trading each way, ending with the 3-ish-WAR SS making it a good deal better than the 2-ish-WAR RP.
a 3ish WAR SS was not involved in this deal, so no, not a fair piece.
He’s 2.8WAR/600 for his career. He was down in 2014, for whatever reason, but you don’t have to squint too hard to see 3WAR.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/instagraphs/why-the-billy-butler-deal-probably-is-crazy/
Yeah I wrote that one. In both cases, I tried to see what they were doing.
I also wrote this one, that tried to figure out what Ruben Amaro liked in Ben Lively.
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/fg-on-fox-marlon-byrd-ben-lively-and-deception/
I find the other side of consensus more interesting.
Are you familiar with the term “psychological projecting”?
Yes, that’s why he doesn’t have any money to spend on players.
Tell you what. Next time the totality of Beane’s moves fail to pay off, you can say something. Until then, don’t.
Define payoff? Anyway, this isn’t about the totality of his moves, that’s a pretty poor way to view individual decisions which is what FG has been inundating us with all winter.
I suppose your only definition of “pay off” is to win a title or bust, eh?
This is the lowest from of baseball “analysis.” It makes me almost vomit how many of my fellow humans diss what Beane has done against such steep odds simply because he hasn’t won it all.
He’s brought several (8) different teams to the playoffs in the AL just this century. With wayyyyy less money than most GMs. He’s formed differently styled teams, trying some with more speed and “playing the game the right way.”
The point is for ANY GM let alone a low payroll one like Beane, what he has done is amazing because all a GM can do is the MUCH HARDER PART, get his team TO the playoffs.
The playoffs are very much a crapshoot. Very few teams with best record in the regular season win it all anymore due to so many playoff slots. The nature of the sport is it needs large sample sizes to avoid SPs being off here and there, bloopers, bleeders going towards one team, teams getting hot for a short stretch, etc etc etc.
But no, with all of this baseball truth being obvious to the eye test and deep stats, there’s always this oh so large contingent of “thinkers” who insist Beane is overrated/a fraud/Mr Ego who wrote moneyball and thinks he’s as big as Brad pitt now…all because his teams (his built in huge underdog teams) haven’t won it all.
Congrats on being one more of this kind of deep thinker!
This is the most ridiculously defensive post I’ve ever read. You want to vomit because someone disses Beane? c’mon, bro.
No way. Bad trades are bad trades.
You have a team that has decent pitching but is weak up the middle and you trade a guy who can play shortstop or second for an expensive reliever who you are only going to be able to keep for one year?
Once again, Billy fails to impress.
Yes, much better to just scratch the surface of the trade and think in incredibly simple terms, rather than dig deeper into the complex world of MLB roster construction.
Beane, like all the smart GMs, has made a living thinking outside the box. Conventional doctrine should not be used by any GM in the manner you’re describing.
Under this reasoning, Beane can do nothing wrong…
You made that up because you are biased.
Yep. If Dayton Moore trades a starting SS with a cheap 3 year deal for 1 year of a RP he would be getting killed here. The immediate jump to defend anything Beane does is beyond tiresome. We’ve seen articles devoted to Beane gaining team control to convince us of his great plan and now we get articles that moves to win now are part of his great plan.
Hell, Dayton Moore still largley gets killed for making a the Myers trade even though the Royals made it to the world series and a second team has also felt it was smart to move Myers as well. Basicaly all we got was a begrudging “well, maybe we missed something but it was probably just luck” post lol.
I love this site but there does seem to be persistant narritives around certain guys.
It all comes down to “Value Attribution.” And the “Halo Effect.” And “Confirmation Bias.” And shit.
Hmm, which GM gets the benefit of the doubt? Moore who brought one team to the playoffs (barely) and sees that team make it to the WS, or Beane, who’s brought 8 teams in 15 years to the playoffs?
How much evidence do you need of the crapshoot nature of the playoffs? What more can a lowpayroll GM do than get his team in position?
Beane’s formed many different styles of team out of those 8 playoff years. It wasn’t the style of play Beane formed that lost, but weird individual plays by Jer Giambi, Tejada, Byrnes and a dropped ball by Crisp, each 1st round series going the full 5 (in that small sample size.) But what, should Beane have seen that coming and not signed those guys who were part of the reason they made the playoffs, and part of the limited pool of overachievers he HAD to choose from?
Your “reasoning” doesn’t add up. People have tried to prove there’s some secret playoff success sauce and come up begrudgingly admitting there is not. Some team has to win it all, some teams get hot/lucky/their good side at a good time. But it’s not very controllable, it just plays out and WE the fans, YOU, put the narrative on it. “Winners, gamers, grit, play the game the right way.” Nope, so much more random in that small sample size than that. Look at how rare it is the best reg season team wins it all, look how often lower even wild card teams win it, look at the barely over .500 Cardinals who won it all, etc etc etc
This “narrative” here at FG you think has Beane’s jock is actually going on so much more reason and proof than all those of you who simply look at what did happen and put too much control on it on a GM (i.e. how you somehow think Moore did something particularly wiser than Beane does to “get to the WS.” And how so many use the fact Beane hasn’t won it all as some proof he’s a fraud of some sort.)
It’s sad and scary how many people cannot get their heads around the fact GMs can only do so much, but particularly ones with less money to spend. And that the playoffs are indeed a crapshoot.
Think about it. The very nature of baseball NEEDS a large sample size. The fact that very differently talented starting pitchers form a rotation of 5 guys can lead to volatility, the bleeders and bloopers that don’t even out in small samples sizes, more.
There’s a reason MLB plays twice as many regular season games as the next league, and a reason for most of MLBs history there weren’t so many playoff games (or any.) When the regular season winners of the AL and NL met in the world series, other than having no WS at all, that best proved who the best teams were.
You can’t measure success or failure of a front office on the outcome of the playoffs, it’s not anywhere close to a large enough sample. It’s not like Dayton Moore would be a better GM if Salvador Perez had lined a broken bat single off of Madison Bumgarner and the Royals ended up winning in extra innings. He’s the same GM he was either way (good or bad) and they’re the same players.
Well, looking at how after it all the A’s are better, cheaper, and younger, it seems like they may have been on to something.
The A’s now have tons and tons of pitching. The Rockies need pitching, pitching, and more pitching. Think about it: Scott Kazmir, Jarrod Parker, Jesse Chavez, Tyler Clippard, and Marcus Semien for Troy Tulowitzki.
lol
Did the Cubs waive LaStella??
Just saying he was available this offseason.
Should have selected a different article title:
“It’s possible to argue that Beane didn’t get ripped off”
But not bloody likely.
I read Eric O’Flaherty (their other Lefty) isn’t healthy and that Clippard might close. That would leave Cook and Doolittle to set up.
I’m getting tired of all of the comments about how fangraphs favors the A’s. I’m starting to assume that the writers all find it funny at this point, but as a fellow commenter, I am actually a bit perturbed.
It would probably be really boring to only read articles that just assess the trades and signings based on the traditional information we have: projections, $/WAR, surplus value, etc. I feel like anyone with a computer could do a quick analysis of a trade and determine a winner and loser based on what the projections say and what the market is dictating. There seems to be an algorithm that each post seems to follow just to give a straight up, unbiased opinion of a deal.
So the real fun occurs when a team makes a trade or a signing that appears to not add up with the information we have or the conventional wisdom of evaluating trades and signings, as has been the case quite often this offseason with this particular organization. These deals give us the invaluable insight into the thought processes of the front offices making these moves who–and this is an important aspect–are spending more time and more advanced resources on figuring all this stuff out.
And *that* is why I come to fangraphs to read about these deals! I want to know what the front office was thinking when they forgo conventional wisdom as there is likely something to be learned. You see the same analysis happen with non-Beane front offices. I’m thinking of when the Padres went on their recent spree of eschewing defense. The articles all approached the deals through the lens of skepticism given the numbers, but mostly had the tone that since this is a major league front office, we should give careful consideration to what they’re doing.
Sorry for the rant, I’m probably just a little frustrated with all this recent violence, football, and not baseball on the TV these past few weeks.
what he said
If you want to know who got the better side of the deal on paper, look up the stats.
That’s like your opinion, man. This rant might hold up if FG defended every move from every GM, but that is just not the case. FG is exceptionally critical of other GMs all the time. There isn’t a thread of balance present when talking about Beane and its not like the guy has a pile of championships to justify his decision making. Maybe FG should be drooling all over Brian Sabean, but instead he gets routinely crushed here.
We don’t drool over Sabean for the same reason we don’t ask lottery winners for investment advice. Winning games over many seasons is statistically significant, and winning games at low cost is a statistically significant and consistent talent shown by Oakland.
Actually, since no mutual fund has consistently outperformed the S&P 500 when averaged over more than a few years, I guess we do ask random number generators for investment advice and pay them for the privilege.
Also, Beane has made about 10x as many moves as Sabean has this offseason. More to comment on.
FG is exceptionally critical of other GMs all the time
You made this up.
FG should be drooling all over Brian Sabean, but instead he gets routinely crushed here.
Why do you lie so much?
Ah yes, the “needs a title to prove he’s a legit GM” crowd. The “hasn’t won anything” line of “thinking.”
SMH
Let me guess, you would have considered Dayton Moore a better, “more proven” GM than Beane if the Royals had “won it all” last season, amirite?
The A’s lead the AL in wins over the past 3 seasons with one of the lowest payrolls. I guess any Average Joe off the street can accomplish that, though.
The playoffs are still a crapshoot. Prior to 2014, Lester was the AL version of Bumgarner in the postseason (one of the all-time great October pitchers). Beane gets Lester, and what happens next? Lester gives up 6 ER in the WC game and Bumgarner is absolutely unhittable. You can’t predict stuff like that.
So your point her is the A’s have been consistently good, therefore we should give deference to every move Beane makes. Got it.
Jonnytwotimes, out!
*here
Johnnytwotimes, Out!
It’s amazing how stupid some of the fangraphs commenters are. Why are you even here if you hate statistics and analytic thinking so much?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_probability
What? I love analytic thinking. What are you talking about? All I said was we should evaluate Beane’s moves on an individual basis just like we do every other GM. Can you even read, broseph?
Will be interesting to see how Yunel does playing for Matt Williams… seems like there could be a personality clash there.
And that is what all the Beane-haters suddenly forgot. When he traded for Escobar he was a toxic clubhouse presence. Now that he’s been traded away suddenly he was integral to a 2015 run.
Do the As put Clippard in as closer to push down Sean Doolittle’s arbitration price?
Doolittle signed an extension.
Good piece as always Eno. Billy Beane is simply the most interesting GM since, AJ Preller. (I kid)
But, it will be very interesting to see how the flurry of moves works out over the next 1-3 years for the A’s.
The article seems to be arguing that even though Escobar has more value in a vacuum given his position and contract, the A’s may not have been fleeced because he was redundant to their roster and Clippard isn’t. Conceding that, even though it’s not clear that it’s true, should they not have received another piece to even up the “value in a vacuum” in order for the trade to be even? Would the author argue the Giants were actually astute for acquiring Ray Sadecki because Orlando Cepeda was redundant to their roster? If the Red Sox were to trade Mookie Betts for Clippard would it make sense for them because they can replace him with Rusney Castillo?
Betts would be redundant if they had healthy Tully in their lineup. Oakland has close to equal replacement, and they can afford to fill a position of need without weakening SS position. Considering questions about Escobar’s future value, WAS obviously wasn’t ready to pay more.
OAK may have gotten more value from other teams in prospects and other players, but it is questionable if they would’ve been able to turn it into top 10-15 reliever.
I get what you’re saying, but trades also don’t occur in a vacuum. There are only 30 teams, and only a handful with a given need at any given time, so the trade market isn’t completely efficient. Perhaps the A’s needed to offer a little surplus value to give this trade impetus. This can still be a net positive for them if it allows them to redeploy their talent in a more efficient way, even if it means they lose a little on overall talent.
Ivan, its been beat to death, but maybe I can put it simply.
If we use ZiPS, which probably does a better job encapsulating Clippard’s value, and bWAR rather than fWAR, we’re probably looking at 1.5 or so WAR for Clippard. ZiPS more or less expects Clippard to turn in something similar to his 2014 and 2013 seasons in which he was worth 1.5 and 1.9 bWAR respectively. If that’s right, its pretty equal to anything Escobar could be expected to do. And given the replacements aren’t much of a down grade on Escobar (Semien, Sogard and probably Parrino), I’ll take this deal.
And the more I read about the differences in bWAR and fWAR, I really think bWAR is a lot better for relievers. For starters, its more arguable and for position players I don’t really give a rip either way, but bWAR has done a better job with relievers.
In fact, Semien is an upgrade over Escobar. The only downgrade is the utility role, where Soggard will be replacing Semien.
So you’re saying that Clippard and Escobar are of basically equivalent value? Fine but that’s not what the article says.
More or less it does actually:
“Yunel Escobar has averaged about two wins a season for the last five seasons, but fits the Nationals better at a position of need. If you go by Tyler Clippard‘s runs allowed — a good idea because he has a rare skill in creating pop-ups — the reliever has averaged 1.8 wins a season for the last five seasons.”
Still don’t understand why we let Cabrera walk for a 1-yr deal in FL. Riz over-played his hand, right? Surely this was not the master plan (lose Clip & Cabrera for Yunes).. I know we got some prospects but our WS window is closing… let’s not be another version of the Caps!
Nats fans must be freaking out this offseason with all the expiring contracts at the end of next year. Rizzo seems like a smart GM, but he should have addressed the fact that Zimmerman/Fister/Desmond/Span all are FA eligible after this by now. Extend some, trade the others, and so on. At least Clippard has been exchanged now. Unless his plan is to get as many comp picks in next year’s draft and consequently have a lot of holes in what is otherwise a win-now roster, this is an example of bad long-term planning.
Just because they’re all becoming FA’s at once, doesn’t mean they will LOSE them all. They’re not a small-market team like Oakland or Tampa Bay, so they can re-sign a few, get a few comp picks back, and still be ok.
Nats fan here, not freaking out. Actually I’m pretty impressed by Rizzo’s maneuvering.
The Nationals are built to win this year and in coming seasons, some teams a bit better than others, but all within striking range. He has done a great job of building a minor league system despite the draft picks that go with winning the most games in MLB the past three seasons. If you look at the trades he makes in hindsight, they pretty much all look good. Even if the payroll is at the ceiling (until the MASN deal is worked out) it’s a $150M ceiling, #7 in MLB. We’re not talking about Oakland or Tampa here.
Of the players approaching free agency, Rizzo has now traded the two that are definitely NOT getting qualifying offers (Detwiler, Clippard). Desmond, JZim and Fister are pretty much gimmes for a QO. I would expect that one of three will sign an extension (there’s a lot of money coming off the books); which one I’m not sure (too many variables). But Rizzo has now set up an insurance policy so that there isn’t a pending FA whose loss would be catastrophic.
Don’t take this as a putdown of WAR, since that is usually my starting point for analysis, but this article basically underscores everything I have been saying about WAR for RPs.
1-One one hand, Clippard is referred to as “more likely to be replacement than average (0.3 WAR)”.
2-OTOH, Clippard is also referred to as “Clippard has been a top-20 reliever since he broke out in 2010”.
If one of the best RPs in BB is little more than a replacement player, then almost by definition, there will be no RPs in baseball past the first 3-4 control years. If the elite RPs are replacement players, then the non-elite RPs are below replacement value, so just fill the BP with replacement-level players making minimum wage.
This.
Are we going to stick with one of the tenants of fWAR that RP are largely replaceable assets or are we going to change on principle to fit the narrative?
“Relievers are largely replaceable assets” and “elite relievers can have a lot of value” are entirely compatible statements. You are being willfully dense.
Tenet, not tenant, unless fWAR is a landlord. I agree with your view on this though.
If the elite RPs are replacement players
Doesn’t follow from anything said in the article. It is as if you are deliberately failing to understand the difference between past performance and future projection.
The top 20 relievers last year were all above 1.4 WAR. The top two surpassed 3 WAR.
Same story the year before.
Same story the year before that.
It’s more of an indictment of Steamer’s shittiness.
I predict this will work out better than last years Jim Johnson trade. It will also be marginally cheaper salary wise to boot.
J.Johnson was worth 3.5 WAR over the 3 years prior to the trade, Clippard has been worth 3.1 WAR over the last 3 years.
BTW, both moves were dumb by the standards set forth by FG, yet we also got a defense of the Johnson move last year too.
WAR for relievers doesn’t really get me jazzed. I thought the Johnson trade was out of left field and pushing the desperation button. I think Clipboard will be a much better bet.
“Pushing the desperation button?”
The A’s got Johnson because at the time they had extra cash to spend and didn’t appear to have any needs to address other than RP. (Sure enough, they were a juggernaut in the first half of ’14 despite Johnson’s implosion.)
Maybe they should have set aside that 10 million they gave Johnson and used it to keep Donaldson instead?
T Furgeson – Beane’s never been that good at building a bullpen. Rage away at that one.
Beane and the A’s owners have repeatedly stated that money saved from one year doesn’t roll over to the next. The ownership group wants to keep things pretty even year-to-year, which makes a lot of sense.
@ Woop it up!,
The Donaldson move wasn’t about shedding salary, it was about selling high on a guy getting close to starting his decline phase. It was worth it for Beane to get the guys he got for a 1.5-2 WAR decline at third this year.
@Shankbone: “Beane’s never been that good at building a bullpen.”
Since 2000 A’s have the 2nd best reliever ERA in MLB, and the 4th best FIP. Amazing what a little research reveals, rather than just making up ignorant blather.
Odd to comment on a data site, yet can’t be bothered to, y’know, look up the data.
I don’t see any issue with Fangraphs treatment of Beane’s moves generally, but that Jim Johnson one should have been questioned from the jump. I see it more as an example of a strong desire around here to be counter-intuitive and take the non-consensus side. But that Johnson trade made little sense no matter what angle it was approached at. But that was the immediate consensus everywhere, so Fangraphs wanted to try to make a case for the other side. It was an overreach and was inconsistent with their previous approach to analyzing moves more objectively.
But I don’t think you should take that one example and generalize from it to all Billy Beane moves or all moves from front office favoring analytics. Overall there is good consistency and objectivity by the writers on this site.
The Steamer projection for Clippard seems pretty pessimistic. It is based on severe regression of his career BABIP (almost 500 innings) despite that BABIP being understandable from the pop-up rate. It also presumes a very significant decline in K rate. The ZIPS projection (an ERA+ of 140 with a K rate over 10) seems more reasonable to me. You definitely want to use him in a high leverage role.
The ZIPS projections for Escobar and Espinosa are interesting. Escobar is at .254/.316/.348 with a -6 defence; Espinosa is at .218/.285/.350 with a +2 defence. Espinosa is a switch-hitter with severe splits over his career and in 2014- he kills LHP and can’t hit RHP well. Escobar is a RHH with very small splits. You could work a strange platoon with them, with Espinosa facing lefties and coming in for defence late in the game. It never hurts to have another serviceable shortstop on the roster in case of injury.
It seems like a fair trade to me, given the contracts. I personally prefer the Nationals’ end. I’d be reluctant to go into a season with shortstop options of Semien and Zobrist.
I’ve already posted my skepticism of Semien’s minor league numbers translating the major leagues in other places, but a crucial aspect of this trade would be to assess how well he can handle shortstop at the major league level. Trading redundancy only applies if Semien turns out to be a competent major league shortstop. If he doesn’t, and there are questions both offensively and defensively, then the A’s created a bigger weakness than the one they addressed with Clippard.
No, not “only”. Escobar is far from a sure thing. At his age and after last year it is just as likely that Escobar falls off hard as it is Semien. Except Semien is projected for a half a win more than Escobar over 600 PA, will cost $4.5 less this year and $6.5 less next year (and the year after that if the option is exercised).
Both could underwhelm this year, in which case the A’s still got Clippard.
Saying “it is just as likely” is clearly wrong. Escobar has an established level of major league performance. While he could fall off completely and/or Semien could be a better shortstop, there is far more confidence in Escobar being competent at the position than Semien because of established major league performance. As I’ve discussed elsewhere, the Steamer projection for Marcus at the plate is extremely optimistic.
Stop analyzing! Just blindly accept what Steamer tells you!
JD, you’d stated your opinion but you haven’t really gone on to show any evidence that what you’re saying means squat compared to Steamer, or ZiPS for that matter, which basically agrees with Steamer on Semien.
But yeah, we get it. You just KNOW that ~1/2 season worth of K rate and popups and what ever else is more meaningful than the models based on thousands of player seasons….. er OK.
Cool Lester,
We don’t blindly accept anything. In this very article the author brings up aspects of pitching that Steamer/fWAR specifically leaves out that probably are a real projectable and valuable skills.
JD can’t produce anything like that for Semien. He just brings up things that Steamer already accounts for in its model. I guess his point is that it doesn’t account for it ENOUGH. Well, prove it JD. Otherwise all you got is hot air.
In real baseball, there is a growing consensus that having a lights out 7-8-9 RP is key to a winning club. Oakland now has a pretty darn good RP, and if their SPs come back, a pretty darn good overall pitching staff, and some flexibility with pitchers like Chavez. Little of that would be reflected in fWAR. Their offense has question marks, but to me their pitching looks very solid, and Clippard is a key piece to that, on paper. Of course, more trades may be in the offing.
Cook is probably expendable now. I wouldn’t be surprised if he isn’t with the club by the time pitchers and catchers report.
Also the team does have a lot of young rotation arms that are not used to the grind of pitching an entire season in the majors. Having as many strong bullpen options as possible means that you can yank your pitchers after 6 and not worry to much about those last 9 outs.
This is a good deal for Beane, solid 8th innings reliever with high K rate for a guy who shouldn’t play over Semien anyway. They need a full look at him
All this shortstop talk got me thinking about the depth of SS in fantasy. Would it make any sense at all to draft Tulo, giving you a clear advantage at that position (as long as he’s healthy)… then also drafting Hanley. Hanley seems to be the clear-cut number 2 in most projections, and if you didn’t have to break the bank to get him, he could serve as your insurance if Tulo got hurt and play OF in the mean time. Obviously it all comes down to what round/price you could get them… but curious of what your thoughts are, as not many draft two top tier players at the same position. I wonder if it could work.
As a Nats fan, this trade was a hard one to digest. Eno hits this on the head. Thank you for a job well done. Letting Desi go would be smart too… he strikes out way too much (184 times in 154 GP last year).
Here’s another article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/nationals-journal/wp/2015/01/15/the-ripple-effects-of-the-tyler-clippard-yunel-escobar-trade/?tid=trending_strip_4
Of course in today’s chat eno finishes his thoughts:
Comment From hscer
Do the Nationals plan to see how few games they can win the East with this year?
12:09
Eno Sarris: I think the consensus is that they made their team better with Yunel, I was mostly trying to play devil’s advocate in a way. Also, Yunel cost less than Clippard, which is sort of amazing, and may have been important. That I don’t know.
So the consensus is that they made their team better with Yunel (not surprisingly, given Danny Espinosa and Dan Uggla as alternatives). AND they have Escobar for two, possible three seasons as an insurance policy in case Desmond walks.
Eno I think you need to slowdown a bit. You have a good perspective but want to take a breath. Also you sight that he averaged 1.8 wins for the last 5 years. Not according to fWAR. Its like 1.5 .4 1.2 1.6 1.4 so its not 1.8 average. I think you may be insinuating he’s worth the value of escobar but even that is murky. You are a good writer but you need to slowdown. Beane is grabbing based on need and his desire. Escobar was close to a salary dump although a valuable salary dump when traded from the Rays. It also continues Beane’s not shying away from expensive relievers such as Jim Johnson. Although given benefit of the doubt the deal was questionable due to price and ended up being unexpectedly worse than anticipated. Clippard is a good reliever and steamer tends to have very low opinions of non-elite swing and miss closers due to being mainly focused on FIP only. Its been a criticism of steamer I’ve always held. But it is refreshing that you aren’t being a slave to projections and you pointing out steamer does not properly value Clippard’s skill set. Clippard is probably going to be a 1.2 to 1.5 WAR player. Still it is an overpay but not one that doesn’t make sense. The money concerns me but given that he was willing to pony of for Headley like a lot of smaller clubs they have to accept that what they don’t grow themselves they have to pay a premium to get better. FAs and such are relunctant to go there unless having some connection. You see that with the Astros and other small to mid market teams. I think he could have found a more even split but that was not his desire and Clippard was the safest reliever on the market. He loses this no question in terms of raw value but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense for the As. Having Zobrist and Clippard makes sense for the As even given what they gave up. It makes a lot of sense for the Nationals and ultimately they clear some salary and get an insurance policy should Desmond leave. its easier to look for a ss/2b than just a ss.
The 1.8 number comes from RA/9 WAR, which is derived from straight runs allowed instead of Ks, BBs, and HRs.
What was that about taking a breath?
Looks like i need to slowdown as well. its cite not sight.
Beane: Zobrist said what after the trade?
Susan Slusser: he said “it will be a good comfort level in Spring Training knowing Yunel is there.”
Beane: That’s great, tell Ben I will now trade his little BFF to DC for an over-priced-anti-Moneyball-don’t-fing-need-him set up guy. Comfort level that Ben!!!
I agree with this . . . are we really sold on Semien handling SS every day?
Looks like we’ll see! Seems like he could do a respectable Jed Lowrie impression out there if he can cut his strikeout rate, which his minor league track record and Steamer imply is quite likely
As an A’s fan, I can honestly say if they had Clippard and they traded him for Yunelly Escobar, I’d have been enraged. Conversely, I’m quite content.
I know, right? It’s funny too, because i’ll bet most of these people reaching to rip Beane also aren’t huge fans of Yunel Escobar, also have doubts about how good he’ll be at 32 showing consistent digression of talent.
I mean sure, YE could turn it around, and that would allow you to much more easily accept the huge douche bag he is, but at 32 with his chunky size showing consistent loss of skills…..
Meanwhile Semien is on the other end of the career spectrum and has some upside, is a heady, good dude who seems like he could find his ceiling or close at least. And Clippard not only has been lights out for years now, his pop up tendency likely hides some of his value from deep stats.
If YE was a very good SS, sure, i can see how you’d want that more than even a lights out reliever like Clippard. But YE is not a very good SS and could end up being a bad one, quite easily.
Meanwhile, if the A’s aren’t close enough come trade deadline, you know many teams would kill for a Tyler Clippard.
Looking at it from the Nats’ perspective, I think I would have felt better off keeping Clippard and taking the chance on getting some value out of someone like Rickie Weeks at 2nd base. It feels like a very good 8th inning reliever is a bit much to give up for a slight upgrade at 2nd in Escobar. Is Escobar’s defense that much better than Weeks’?
The contract situations involved do weigh in Escobar’s benefit, but still..
One off-the-field “peripheral” that wasn’t mentioned is Yunel’s raging homophobia. That doesn’t fit too well in the Bay Area. I have no idea what Clippard’s stance is in the subject, but that’s a good thing. If he has a problem with it, at least he can keep it to himself and avoid outraging his fan base.
This would be a good point, if Oakland had a fanbase.
Yep, they only had roughly the same attendance as the Royals. Tsk.