The Trade Deadline Matters Less Than Ever
Among MLB’s calendar of so-called Important Events, one finds a fast-approaching date — namely, the July 31st non-waiver trade deadline.
Historically, it is a deadline that facilitates action, that forces teams to declare whether they’re contenders or rebuilders, that compels sellers and buyers to stop negotiating and come to terms on a deal. Deadlines often force actors to make “yes” or “no” calls. This date is one of the last periods for teams with postseason aspirations to improve, for rebuilding clubs to retool. The date creates interest in the sport. This very Web site experiences increased traffic during the days leading up to to the deadline.
But the trade deadline wasn’t so packed with action a year ago, and it might be even slower this season.
The trade deadline just might not matter that much anymore.
Teams knew early last year whether they were buyers or sellers. They’ve known earlier still this season. They also know the deadline doesn’t typically provide much impact.
Over the last five summers, only seven players acquired in the middle of the summer produced two or more wins for their new teams in the second half. That’s not to say no moves have made recent major impacts: two of those aforementioned players, J.D. Martinez and Justin Verlander, were important acquisitions last summer (even if Verlander was acquired through a waiver deal).
This season, however, there is little uncertainty about which clubs are buyers and which are sellers. As a consequence, there is less reason to wait and hope a club’s outlook improves. And, in some cases, the incentive to buy has been diminished.
In the American League, both the Astros and Red Sox have a 100% chance of making the postseason, according to this Web site. The Yankees are at 99.9% odds, the Indians at 98.7% entering play Wednesday. The only division race that figures to contain September drama is the AL East race between the Yankees and Red Sox, but both teams will almost certainly qualify for the postseason.
The Mariners are in the second Wild Card spot at the moment and have an 80.3% probability. Only a recent hot streak by the A’s, who possess a 14.7% postseason figure, coupled with a hypothetical second-half collapse by Seattle, offers the potential for a true race for a postseason berth.
So five AL clubs have an 80% or better chance of reaching the postseason; four of those are essentially certainties. Nine clubs have odds of 3% or less, including seven with a figure that sits at less than 1%. In the AL, the contenders and sellers know who they are much earlier in the summer this year. Perhaps more importantly, there are few teams in the middle, fewer clubs trying to figure out if they ought to buy and sell. Really, the A’s are the only team that fits that criteria, and teams haven’t really invested much in chasing the second Wild Card. This isn’t helping the prospect of an action-packed trade deadline.
Moreover, teams like the Astros and Indians can run away with their divisions without adding anything (although the Indians’ bullpen appears to need significant help to navigate through October). It’s going to be difficult for a trade to really impact the postseason field in the AL, with the East division perhaps representing the lone exception.
In the NL, the situation is more fluid.
In the NL, all three division races remain muddled and up for grabs. That’s true. Even in that case, however, the contenders and non-contenders are pretty clear. No club among the Marlins, Mets, Padres, Pirates, and Reds has a postseason chance of 2% or greater. The Rockies are hanging in there, barely, with 6.2% odds. The Braves, Brewers, Cardinals, Cubs, Diamondbacks, Dodgers, Nationals, and Phillies, on the other hand, are all contenders with some level of interest in buying.
Consider that, overall, major-league teams placing last or second-to-last in divisions in 2017 finished, on average, 27.1 games back of their respective division leaders. Five years prior to that, it was 24.4 games. Five years before that? Just 18.3 games.
This season, last place and second-to-last place teams are a combined 205 games behind the division leaders entering play Tuesday — or, on average, 20.5 games back. So that average is on pace to exceed 30 games this season.
What this means is the game doesn’t need July 31st to spur action and decisions between buying and selling status. More and more, the contenders and sellers know their status earlier in the season and sometimes even before the season. Moreover, in a game loaded with rebuilding clubs, non-contenders are perhaps more incentivized to beat the market. There is incentive for activity to begin — if it is to begin — earlier. That makes for a less dramatic deadline.
The Mariners have already made a trade. (Of course they have.) The Orioles might be nearing readiness to deal the summer’s top trade rental, Manny Machado. Maybe the Orioles can coax more out of contenders as the deadline approaches. At the same time, though, every day the Orioles wait — and they’ve already waited too long — Machado loses a day of benefit to a contender.
Another reason the deadline is likely to be less meaningful in the near future is that teams tend to operate less emotionally than they have in the past. They know the impact of deadline acquisitions is often limited and almost always requires the surrender of future, cost-controlled wins. Rather than overpay for Machado, contenders like the Dodgers might simply move down their preference list to a cheaper alternative like Scooter Gennett.
Sources: Dodgers have stepped up pursuit of a position player and are looking beyond Manny Machado. Have had conversations with Reds about Scooter Gennett, Twins about Brian Dozier and Mets about Asdrubal Cabrera. Dodgers’ versatility allows them to pursue a number of positions.
— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) July 10, 2018
This author suspects that the influence of reason and emotion-less operators was a factor in the ice-cold offseason. It’s more difficult to get teams, buyers, to overbid as the clock nears expiration. Teams have become more rational. They execute plans, value young talent, and typically avoid pricey, aging veterans. There’s less reason to wait and believe an amazing deal will emerge. There’s also less willingness to part with controllable talent. For instance, with the value of relievers at an all-time high last summer, no contender met the Padres’ high asking price for Brad Hand.
There are other factors, too, specific to this deadline period.
Starting pitchers are typically the most sought-after assets at the deadline, and there appears to be a dearth available this summer. There is no Yu Darvish. J.A. Happ is very good and should be moved, but there are not a lot of difference-makers available. They are the type of assets that can most likely create a bidding war up to the last minute.
The outfield market is weak. Shin-Soo Choo is enjoying an outstanding bounce-back season, but he’s owed $40 million. Teams aren’t placing much value in bat-only corner players. Moreover, the CBA has incentivized teams to remain under the tax floor, complicating the ability to add salary for some contenders.
What does it all mean? The trade deadline, and the days leading up to it, probably matters less than ever before.
A Cleveland native, FanGraphs writer Travis Sawchik is the author of the New York Times bestselling book, Big Data Baseball. He also contributes to The Athletic Cleveland, and has written for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @Travis_Sawchik.
Sure, the Dodgers are more rational, and it MIGHT have been more efficient not to trade for Dozier last year….but how different is last year, and all of this year, if they did trade for him, instead of a guy that isn’t good but was cheaper to acquire? Is it really better to get a deal, than to get a great player (like Machado this year)?
That would depend entirely on prospectcost no?
Do the Indians go all in this year?
On the one hand, they’re clearly not as strong as the Astros, Red Sox, or Yankees. So going all in this year might not be a smart move.
On the other hand, as bad as the bullpen has been this year, it will only get worse after Allen and Miller walk in the offseason.
What does “all in” look like for Cleveland? They’re basically guaranteed a postseason berth already, and you’d figure they can add a rental bat or two quite cheaply given the way the trade market has looked the last couple of years. Possibly — just possibly — barring a top-tier starter it doesn’t seem like there’s much present-value upgrade to their odds in the playoffs out there that would be worth, and require, trading significant future value. I’d figure they’re exactly the kind of team that will mostly be looking for smaller, cheaper marginal upgrades at the deadline.
Well the bullpen is the area that needs the biggest upgrade. Plus the outfield. Two years ago they gave up two of their top prospects to get Andrew Miller. (and they were willing to give up even more top prospects to get Lucroy).
Are they willing to go that far again? Should they?
This may just be semantics, then. Trading a couple of top prospects for a non-rental ace reliever and then remaining in playoff contention for years afterward doesn’t sound like “going all in” to me. That’s exactly the kind of move I’d expect Cleveland to continue to make and it sounds like that’s the consensus here.
And to me that is going all in. They have several holes to fill in the bullpen and the outfield, this year and next. And they don’t have many major league league assets in the minors. So if they trade a few of those assets to fill just one of those holes, how do they fill the rest of them? Yeah, they’ll have some money coming off the books that they can use to sign free agents but they won’t be going after the top-tier.
And chances are the prospects they trade won’t be “top tier” either.
I think one of the best bets out there for deadline deals is the Indians going for a reliever. I think that the big question is not if they will, but rather whether the Indians just go for a stop gap kind of thing like Fernando Rodney, or whether they take the opportunity to ALSO address what they will do with the next couple years when Miller and Allen are probably gone and go for Hand or Iglesias.
They desperately need a reliever or three.
Teams aren’t playing for postseason berths. That’s the misconception.
Well the Marlins aren’t anyway.
That is bang on! Thank you. The key is that teams want to AVOID the wild card game. The Yankees & Red Sox have resources and are seeking the same things, plus they want to deny the asset from their rival. NL teams of course have even more teams in this situation.
We’ll know soon enough if the deadline is boring this year or not. I am betting on NOT.
They won’t be as good as NYY, Sox, or Astros next year either…..may as well, imo, try to get better this year while they are in the playoffs for sure. I’m not sure why they’d not add a RP or two at this point. Because next year people will have the same questions, most likely.
Exactly. The Yankees, Astros, and Red Sox aren’t going anywhere. None of those 3 teams project to be any weaker next year
While the bullpen might be getting worse, no one else in the AL Central looks to be all that competitive for the next few years. If I’m the Indians i’m not going to give up a bunch if it means shortening my window even a little
HamelinROY, are you already assuming Cleveland can’t get to the WS this year? If that’s true, I agree with you. If not, I’m with Sixel. For the record, I’m with Sixel.
Heh, you probably haven’t typed that many times!
These are the Orioles. Angelos may simply decide to keep Machado. It would be in line with his perennial failure to build a winning ballclub.
You listed every single NL team except the Giants, who sit at 12.8% postseason odds. WHY DO YOU HATE THE GIANTS?!?!?
I think using WAR here for trade impacts is kind of not right. Because in a lot of cases, the moves made at the deadline are made for the express purpose of the playoffs. Yu Darvish a prime example. If he doesn’t win game 3 of the LCS vs Cubs- very real chance the Dodgers don’t make the World Series. Dodgers didn’t need him in the regular season.
I think the 1 reason why the trade deadline has mattered less is that more teams have signed their young guys for long term deals. I mean last year if the Angels hadn’t signed Trout long term, don’t you think he would have been dealt?
If you take away their names and just rename them Player A and Player B, Scooter Gennett is very comparable to Manny Macahado offensively
Sure, they’ve been pretty close for 350-400 PA this year. the previous three years combined, Machado has a pretty huge edge. You basically have to ignore the past in your RoS projection.
Granted, point for Gennett in that you’ll get a full extra year out of him. And he’ll almost certainly cost much less in talent.
I’d buy it if you were trying to sell me on Gennett being the better value play at the deadline, but not that they are basically indistinguishable as players.
Machado also has pretty significant home/road splits, while Gennett has none. My point isn’t that Gennett is the better player, but given that he’s likely to cost significantly less I think he’s the better acquisition
You say that teams “know the impact of deadline acquisitions is often limited”, which I think is completely invalid. 4/6 pennant winners, and 2/3 WS winners, have been radically influenced by deadline deals (Verlander in 2017, as alluded to, but also Cespedes in 2015, Chapman in 2016 and Miller in 2016).
I think you also underestimate the incentive to buy and overestimate the negative impact on the sellers market. This site has much ballyhooed the playoff odds of teams in the AL specifically, which of course creates less buyers, but it also creates even greater incentive for those teams at the top to buy, and buy big, as they look to gain an edge over their peers. It’s not just about getting in (especially for AL East teams, who don’t want to play in a win-or-go-home WC game following 95+ win seasons). It’s about winning the World Series, which is why everyone is in on Manny Machado. Not only are you searching for that edge for yourself, but you’re also trying to keep your competition from gaining it at the same time.
Would the Cubs trade their trophy in if they could have Gleyber Torres back?
I think there have been some intriguing impacts to the trade deadline as teams generally de-value rentals, increase perceived value of their own young talent and as the buyers in the market reduce, but I don’t think you’ve touched on all of them here. The real interesting thing this year is that we might actually see a more heightened, localized market develop as their appears to be only one significant difference maker available. The price the O’s fetch for Machado, and his eventual destination, could likely be the difference in who wins (or at least gets to) the WS. Recent history backs that up.
That’s just selective memory. Yu Darvish in 2017 and Mark Melancon in 2016 are just two examples of high profile trades that failed to materially affect their team’s postseason fortunes or failed to do so in a positive manner. If Andrew Miller did not give up 2 runs in game 7, the Cubs most certainly would want to have Gleyber Torres back, especially since it was Chapman who blew the save in the first place.
Some trades are going to work and some trades aren’t; you can’t just look at the ones that do and assume they’ll work out. The Jeff Samardzija trade is still infamous.
You’re right that there’s no guarantee of success when you make a move, and that’s not my point (although I do maintain that what the public saw as the BIGGEST moves at the time they were made have often paid off hugely for the buying teams, and I don’t put Darvish or Melancon in that category). David Price is a good recent example of a “high profile” trade that didn’t get his team to the finish.
You’re completely right about Miller and Chapman, but then if it had gone the opposite way, we’d be saying the same thing about the Indians and Justus Sheffield and Clint Frazier (thank God I’m a Yankees fan).
I think what all of this adds up to – the lack of buyers, the lack of elite talent available, the lack of SPs – is to a very intriguing deadline that will center around Manny Machado, and that’s my point. Moreover, I think that the article’s assumption that his value is diminishing as the deadline approaches is way off base. I think it’ll go to the wire, and the haul will be relatively significant. Can’t wait to see where he goes and where he takes them. It’ll radically change the future of that team one way or another.
At the time of his trade, Darvish was the best pitcher in the market.
Verlander managed to increase his stock by performing well after Darvish’s trade happened.
Darvish was most certainly the biggest move of the 2017 deadline, Verlander not withstanding.
And all Darvish fetched for the Rangers was the #60 prospect in the league heading into last year (according to MLB.com) and a few throw-ins. He also helped to pitch the Dodgers to the WS, and if Game 7 had gone differently, we might be talking about him more like we’re talking about Verlander now.
I think anyone who was paying attention saw that Verlander was the best pitcher on the market despite his slow start last year. I certainly was hoping the Yankees would trade for him > Sonny Gray because he represented the most viable #2 behind Luis Severino (it just so happend he was the most valuable player in the league after he was dealt).
Regardless, my point is that the trade deadline still matters. The market may be changing, which is what’s most interesting. The short-term impact is quite clear in nearly every recent example. Just look at the pennant winners the last few years. They’ve all added big names at varying costs.
Chapman also gave them 1.2 WAR across 28 games in the regular season and was key factor in the Cubs getting to the WS in the previous two rounds. Both Miller and Chapman were overused after their trades, hurting their effectiveness.
7 guys traded at the non-waiver deadline went on to turn in a 2 WAR over the last 2-3 months of the season in the last 5 years? That is amazing. 4 WAR is All-Star level play. So of the MLB players traded mid-season in the last 5 years, 7 put up All-Star level numbers for their new teams.
I think it’s important to identify the “who” of those seven players. As I mentioned in my comment Yoenis Cespedes, Aroldis Chapman, Andrew Miller and Justin Verlander were major contributors to their teams WS berths (and Ws in the case of Chapman and Verlander). Only two of them (Cespedes and Verlander) likely produced a 2+ WAR in the second half.
and to even expand on that- for guys dealt on July 31, really only 1/3 of a season left. So a 2 WAR guy would equate to a 6 WAR full season player- or MVP level.
That is less than the number of actual All-Stars traded mid-season in the last 5 years.
I think that there are usually a few teams adding for the playoffs, and a few more teams trying to make the playoffs. I don’t think this year is any different than other years. It’s just that the balance is slightly off this year, and all of the “guaranteed” teams are in the AL instead of split evenly between leagues. I don’t really think that is going to make that much of a difference. Plus, the Red Sox and Yankees are in a great little race in the AL East, so no resting on laurels there. And in the NL you’ve got the Cubs, Dodgers, D-Backs, Brewers, Nationals, Phillies, and Braves all in a big scrum (and the Cards not too far behind). The only team that isn’t buying is the Astros because there’s literally nowhere to improve.
And yet, I think that we’re not going to see much movement this year also, but because the sellers don’t have anything compelling to sell. Almost everyone is looking for a rotation upgrade, but who is selling a starting pitcher that’s any good? Who is selling any good position players, except for Machado and Wilson Ramos? And maybe Scooter Gennet( (jeez, that is weird to write).
On the other hand, we’ll probably see lots of bullpen movement again…
With as smart as teams are, it would be really funny if nobody ponied up for what Baltimore wants and instead settled for say Moustakas or Beltre (unwilling to give up a huge haul for a 2 month rental) and Baltimore ended up not trading him. Or only getting like, 3 45FV players.
Should have traded him last year. Everyone knows it.
Last year? With Machado coming off a career worst wrc+ 102, war 2.5 season?
Pretty sure Orioles are going to get more from half year of Machado with his wrc+ 155 so far than they could have gotten last year.
Moustakas and Beltre aren’t difference makers. They’re window-dressing. I don’t think that the return for Machado will necessarily be to the level that we’d gotten accustomed to for these rentals, but if there’s any truth to the report than the Yankees have a “strong offer” out for him, that could mean something like Sheffield + Andujar, which is significant.
Moose/Beltre will be what? 1 win worse? Playoffs are a crapshoot. Almost anyone can hit well for 3 weeks or slump. It’s pretty negligible. Especially considering the long term damage of what 2 months of Machado will cost.
Your assumption is a best-case for them and worst-case for Machado. According to WAR, he’s been two wins better than Moustakas and three better than Beltre this season (understanding that Beltre was hurt).
Regardless, we treat WAR like it’s perfect and it applies directly to team results, and it doesn’t. The impact of Machado is significantly greater than Moustakas or Beltre. I think most would agree.
Are we at a point where the union must demand a minimum salary with real penalties? Teams are correctly not spending if they aren’t real contenders.
It’s just crushing the market for good but not great players.
I wonder if returns for rentals will be really low this trade season with so few contenders, and so many sellers. Outside of offering impact controlled starters the market has a ton of options for almost everything else. I kinda think returns will be real light this year for anything you dont get 1.5+ seasons of control over.
I just wonder if we may see a surprise guy or 2 traded given how dearth the market is for true impact players. This year is one of the weakest markets for guys available in recent memory. So if you have a guy like a de Grom- he may fetch way more than he normally would just given how scarce the options are.
actually, the Giants might need until the end of the month ro be certain that they can’t snag a wild-card berth.
if convinced that they can’t they might decide to trade a starter in return for prospects and also to get them under the tax threshold.
problem is the only starter that is really tradable is Madbum. They aren’t going to be able to get anyone to take the Shark or Cueto. The other starters don’t make anything so no help there.
Is Ben Zobrist for Sean Manaea and Aaron Brooks not a comp? Did you not think Zobrist was a 5 Win player?
Just ask Dallas Keuchel how little the trade deadline matters…