The #Royals are seeking "near ready'' starting pitching in exchange for OFs Melky Cabrera and Jeff Francoeur.
The Dayton Moore tradition of ridiculously overvaluing your talent now has a new twist of blocking Lorenzo Cain. Genius!
11 months ago
BHWick
129 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Ugh
Why does it always have to be “near-ready” MLB pitching? That’s just code for “crummy AAAA pitcher Team X doesn’t want anymore.”
Get an A ball lottery ticket. At least they have the chance to get a lot better.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
or even a near ready reliever...
we dont need anymore 5-7 starters
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions
We need starting pitching for 2013/4
I thought everyone agreed on that.
And Moore is getting criticized for seeking pitchers that would address that need? Is it just a reflex to criticize what he says?
Sometimes Moore gets guys like Will Smith and Justin Marks (A-ballers who could improve) and he gets criticized. Sometimes Moore gets guys like SOS and Mazzaro (near-ready MLB pitchers) and he gets criticized.
It’s one thing if you think he’s not getting fair value back in trade, but to be upset that he’s targeting MLB-ready pitching seems nuts to me.
by KSinDC on Jul 15, 2011 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I think Retro is rightly assuming that near-ready MLB pitcher in exchange for Melky or Frenchy isn’t going to be a really good prospect. Because really good pitching prospects that are near MLB-ready are extremely valuable, and certainly more valuable than Melky or Frenchy. Typically if you get “near ready” pitchers in a deadline trade, they are marginal guys like SOS and Mazz.
If the Royals could get a decent pitching prospect for either player, it isn’t going to be of the near-MLB variety. It’s going to be a talented, projectable guy probably in A-ball.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2011 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I know that it intuitively makes sense that near-ready pitchers are more valuable
But is it true? I think that Victor Wang’s research found that age/level/readiness only makes a difference at the low end of the talent spectrum (C prospects). A 20 year old grade B pitcher at A+ is valued the same as a 23-year old B pitcher at AAA.
Did you find something different?
true
but those grades change as a prospect develops.
a C+ type could be someone in AAA, who is a marginal prospect, or it could be a Dominican pitcher in the complex league that has the potential to be a B+/A- prospect in 3 years.
The AAA person is more likely to make some contribution on an ML team, but the other has the better potential to be an impact player.
We may be saying the same thing
sorry if I stated the obvious
Wang found that older and younger players with the same grade produced the same value
So if Moore had said he wants an MLB-ready Sickels B-rated pitcher as opposed to a B-rated pitcher in A-ball, would everybody have thought that’s a reasonable thing to say?
Yes
I just don’t think people expect to get a B prospect for Melky. Look at deadline trades from the last five years. Teams aren’t throwing around B prospects for Melky-like players.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2011 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Just to clarify
What are we using to define Melky-like players? The comps Connor was using in his piece a couple weeks ago?
Hard to simply define. I can’t remember what comps Connor used; don’t know if I even read them. It’s hard to say how teams value Melky. He’s had a very good first half. But that first half is very different from the rest of his multi-year career. I think teams are going to be very skeptical that his second half (and potentially his 2012) season will be much like his first half. I don’t think he’s viewed as a genuinely good player. Perhaps they will think that his second half will be that of an average MLB player (which I think is actually a little higher than his true talent level), which I think is fair.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2011 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I think it would be a helpful exercise to look at some comps
Because running through the numbers, as I did below at 4:25pm makes it very easy to get to a grade-B pitcher using Wang’s valuation numbers.
I’m not saying that’s gospel, but it’s one framework.
Here’s one of the comps he cited:
6/1/2009:
ATL gets:
Nate McClouth (CF): MLB player (09 fWAR: 3.4), 2.5 years of team control remaining
PIT gets:
Gorkys Hernandez (OF): Minors, Sickels B- (#8 in ATL farm system)
Charlie Morton (RHP): former MLB player in AAA at trade time (09 fWAR w Pirates: 1.2), 5.5 years of team control remaining
Jeff Locke (LHP): Minors, Sickels B- (#10 in ATL farm system)
At the time of the trade, McClouth was hitting better (123 RC+ versus 118 RC+ for Melky so far) and McClouth had an extra year of team control, but it’s hard for me to see that those differences are so great that Melky wouldn’t be worth a single grade-B pitcher if you use this trade as a comp. McClouth was also, if anything, a worse fielder than Melky.
McLouth is a poor comp
At the time of the trade (i.e., meaning McLouth’s struggles since joining Atlana are irrelevant), McLouth had posted a 3.9 WAR season in the previous year in which he was an All-Star, won a Gold Glove, and received MVP votes (teams pay attention to those things). He was under club control for three additional years (including a team option) at reasonable rates for 3.0 WAR player.
Melky, in comparison, was coming off a season in which he posted -1.0 WAR before being released outright and no bothered to pick him up for the rest of the season for free (probably due in part to the complaints that Melk liked the nightlife too much and was not committed to the game). Melky had not amassed 3.9 WAR in his career before this season. Melky also would only be under control for one more year, not three (including the team option).
by Gopherballs on Jul 15, 2011 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
You make very good points
As you did in the original thread.
I know you think the 08 Nady trade is also a poor comp because he was crushing the ball (141 wRC+ at trade time) and the 09 Nyjer Morgan trade isn’t a great comp because Morgan was an all-glove no-bat CF when he was traded.
Do you think there are any reasonable comps out there for Melky?
No perfect ones, but maybe the first A's-Padres Scott Hairston trade
Hairston was having a monster first half (299/358/533, .390 wOBA, 147 wRC+), could play CF although he was probably below average there, was making a little over $1 million, and coming off a 2.2 WAR season (in semi-regular playing time). He had two additional years of club control versus one for Melky, but he was also a couple years older.
As for the return, the Padres got three interesting arms but none that would be considered above a C+ prospect at the time: Sean Gallagher, a couple years removed from being a decent prospect but whose control problems were killing his major league career; Craig Italiano, another former decent prospect whose career had been derailed by injuries and was probably looking at a future in the bullpen; and Ryan Webb, an OK relief prospect.
That was a pretty good haul for the Padres looking at it from the time of the trade, even though none were top prospects at the time.
I just don't want them to put themselves in a box
This organization ALWAYS does this. “We need a 3B and a catcher for Beltran!” “We need a right-handed hitting OF that is near MLB ready for Dotel!” “We need a MLB ready pitcher for Melky or Franceour!”
Hey, the team that actually competes for something is so far away that we don’t KNOW what our needs will be then. How bout just adding the best players available, and worrying about your distant competitive team’s lineup later?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jul 15, 2011 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Really?
I mean, I think that’s a good strategy because you’re talking about many years in the future, but for making plans for next year and the year after, I think it probably makes more sense to target the positions we’re weak. What would we do with another 1B or 3B now? Hell, I’m frustrated that Cain is blocked by Melky, but as long as Moore clears that block at the trade deadline, I’ll get over it. If he bring back players in a trade that are blocked long-term, I’m going to be pretty pissed. What would the point be?
Are we really competing next year?
Because I don’t see it until Hos and Moose have a year under their belt. I can’t think of many competitive teams that were pretty much carried by two players in their first full time season. I guess Butler and/or Gordon could reach a higher level of performance, but I wouldn’t count on it.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
No we're not
But we need to start getting young pitchers up here and see what they’ve got if we want to compete in 2013/4 (which I really think is our window)
They pretty much will
have a year under their belt by then. Slightly less, but how much difference will that really make?
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
Just that you usually don't see teams with hitters that young as their best players
Competing for divisions titles.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
Don't worry
even though we’re totally stacked at 2B with Getz, Giavotella, and Colon, I’m sure Dayton would take Cano for Frenchy in a heartbeat.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jul 15, 2011 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions
My thoughts exactly
Chaim Mattis Keller New York City's # 1 Royals fan!
wait....
so DM both overvalues AND undervalues his talent? Thats the impression I got from here after the DDJ trade…DDJ was so awesome that he merited much better players than Vinny and Marks even though all of the evidence pointed to that being false.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 2:31 PM EDT reply actions
DDJ is a Baird guy
so he was only sticking around because every guy DM got to try and take DDJ’s job failed
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bhindepmo
Chairman, The Melky Cabrera Seasoning Sauce. It's great on your outfield!
gordon?
francoeur?….last i checked they’re both sprinting laps around DDJ this year
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions
DDJ is having a down year this year due to a fluky low batting average. Unless you really think a near 100 point drop in batting average at age 31 is normal.
He was one of the top Royals position player, if not the best one, for pretty much his entire Royals career and had quite a few good years. He most definitely could’ve gotten a better return than a #5 starter AT BEST and a non-prospect. Don’t be silly. Looking at his numbers this season is completely irrelevant.
Killing time until time kills me
DDJ
his iso is down…his k’s are up significantly…his defense is down…his shittiness isnt all or mostly a product of luck
why did willingham bring even less of a return than DDJ? They were almost identical in value. Not similar players, but similarly valued players with similar contracts…
ok…looking as his numbers this season is irrelevant why? He had a major injury which absolutely had an effect on his value and seems to be having an effect on his performance.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions
No mention of his .248 BABIP?
His defense in RF is nearly identical to his defense in RF over the same # of innings in RF last year for KC. If he had a normal BABIP, his offensive numbers would be fine and his overall value would be in the same range as always. Would he have the exact same numbers as last year, no, but they’d be close. His ISO is down 11 points and his UZR is down 0.7. His problems are nearly all luck related.
Killing time until time kills me
so, im to assume that his 355 BABIP last year wasnt luck? Im to assume thats DDJ's norm?
what about the extra k’s? are those luck too?
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions
10th worst BABIP among all qualified hitters in the game, with a LD% around league average
Clearly unlucky.
DDJ has had BABIP’s in the .330s three times in his career. So yes, he was slightly lucky offensively last year. This years BABIP is around 70 points lower than his career average.
It is extremely obvious this year is a fluke. He is 31 years old. If he were 37, you could say he’s declining. His BABIP and BA are so far below every single other year of his career. Obvious fluke.
Killing time until time kills me
Also, his K% is only 2.3% higher than his career average.
I mean, if that’s the crux of your argument, then I don’t think you have much to lean on.
His walk rate is up, his K% is only a bit higher, his UZR is close to his norm, and his ISO is only 11 points lower than last year. The only numbers that are drastically different are BABIP, which drags down his triple slash.
It’s quite obvious. If DDJ does this again next year, then we can argue about it not being a fluke.
Killing time until time kills me
and completely disregarding the very serious injury
which clearly hurt his value?
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Players get hurt all the time. His defense is nearly identical to last year, his power is down only barely, and his walk rate is up. He is striking out a whole 2% more than last year. A 2% fluctuation in strikeout percentage is the norm for his entire career.
The only drastic change in his numbers is BABIP and batting average. Are you really arguing that since he’s now injured, he just hits the ball really softly all the time? Otherwise, there is no evidence that an injury is the reason.
Killing time until time kills me
you've been saying that he shouldve been valued as if he'd hit like last year....
ignoring the injury, ignoring the age, ignoring the luck from last year….of course, he’s not as bad as his numbers indicate this year, but he’s not performing as well as he did last year, nor should he have been expected to.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
I didn't say that one single time.
Please show me where I said “he should be valued as if he’d hit like last year.”
I said he could’ve garnered more than a guy with #5 upside and a total non-prospect/organizational filler guy.
He was SLIGHTLY lucky in 2010. He has been MASSIVELY unlucky in 2011. It is right there in the numbers. For his career, he has been a solid 2.5-3 WAR player consistently, with potential to be a 4 WAR player occasionally. His being barely above replacement level this year is the obvious fluke.
Killing time until time kills me
why should he have garnered more than that?
Willingham returned less with a clean bill of health and a similar track record and a similar contract. is it b/c davey is better looking? has a better smile?
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions
I don't know where you've got this idea that the Josh Willingham deal is the benchmark for all trades involving outfielders.
Killing time until time kills me
he was the only similar guy traded last year....
and he was very similar…feel free to come up with some better examples
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions
This is too similar to your argument that Gia will never be good b/c of one season Chris Getz had in AAA.
Your views are far, far too narrow. You can’t just act like one trade made sets the rules for every other trade in baseball. It quite clearly doesn’t work that way. Especially if you are claiming those were the only two players traded under these similar circumstances. A sample size of two times is completely irrelevant.
Killing time until time kills me
its far more relevant than the nothing you've brought to the table...
yeah…davey shouldve been worth more b/c i said so….
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Lol, yes, the "because I said so" was my reasoning.
Not the plethora of stats showing he’s was a very solid player for his entire KC career and has been a poor player this year due mainly (not 100%, please read before you put words in my mouth for the fourth time) to luck.
Killing time until time kills me
close was your exact wording
and the stats that showed that DDJ was about the same player as willingham? with the same contract? it wasnt about saying DDJ wasnt a good player…it was that he just wasnt all that valuable on the trade market which is how it turned out
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, I did say close. I think with normal luck he'd be a solid player this year, just like every single other year of his career.
Never said he wasn’t unlucky in 2010 or that he should’ve been valued for exactly how good he was in 2010. Both of those are things you claimed I said, despite me never saying. You are the one making things up and then pretending I said them.
Your Willingham argument is irrelevant b/c that is one player in one trade AND the DDJ trade took place a full month before the Willingham trade. So by your logic, the DDJ trade occured before Willingham had set the market or whatever you are trying to claim.
Killing time until time kills me
He suffered a major injury last year
Ignoring that and attributing all of his decline to luck is not being realistic.
What facet of his game has been affected by injury?
Defense in RF pretty much the same as last year. ISO is down only 11 points from last year. He has a higher walk rate. He is striking out a grand 2% more than his career strikeout percentage.
Killing time until time kills me
He's striking out 17% more than his career average
Going from 1% to 2% is a doubling, not a 1% increase.
God talk about twisting an argument.
For his career, he has struck out once every 7.7 PAs. This year, it’s been once every 6.5 PAs. Over the course of a full season (700 PAs we’ll say), that comes to 90 Ks a season for his career average, and 107 Ks for his rate in 2010.
That’s 17 strikeouts a season. If you think his value is hurt that much by an extra 17Ks over an entire season, I think that’s a pretty weak argument. His K rate hasn’t “doubled” as you are trying to say. It has gone up slightly.
Killing time until time kills me
his GB% is down
his LD% is down…his IFFB% has doubled…his fb% is up…these all would contribute to a drop in BABIP…but yeah, chalk it all up to luck
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions
His LD% is down 2%. That is nothing. He is popping the ball up too much, that's true.
Yes, his offense should be down from last year. I don’t claim he was as good offensively as 2010. I claim he’s a hell of a lot better than he has been in 2011.
Killing time until time kills me
you said they'd be close...
and thats just not true…every aspect of his offense has gotten worse this year…some significantly, some less so….the only way his numbers would be close to what they were last year is if he were getting even luckier on balls in play
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions
luckier than he did last year
something’s changed davey, whether its the injury or age…he’s not the same hitter and it wasnt at all unexpected
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:35 PM EDT up reply actions
I ran his numbers through this xBABIP calculator
http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/fantasy/article/simple-xbabip-calculator/
His xBABIP this year is 43 points lower than his career xBABIP with the Royals. It’s not just bad luck.
And I didn't say that his K rate has doubled. I said it's up 17%, not 2%
If his K rate was only up 2%, I’d agree that’s nothing worth paying attention to. If it’s up 17%, I think that’s a significant difference. So it’s important to get the math right.
His K% for his career was 13%. Now it is 15.3%.
You can say it any way you want, in the end it amounts to a difference of merely 17Ks over a 700 plate appearance span. That’s not significant.
Killing time until time kills me
if that was the only thing that changed...
then yeah, were talking about a 5-6 hit difference for the season…but then you take into account the rest that goes into it…the drop in LD/GB which result in quite a few hits…then add the significant rise in fly balls (fall for hits 1/2 as much as GB) and doubling of IFFB which never fall for hits and you’ve got a significant dropoff…luck or no luck
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah a 43 point drop in xBABIP
(Assuming I did the calculations right)
When I ran DDJ's numbers through a xBABIP calculator
I got that his xBABIP was .315. Not the same calculator you used though, so I have no idea which one is better. Just what I got.
Regardless, even with a BABIP in the .280-.290 range, I think that would make a difference.
Even if you just gave DDJ ten more singles instead of outs this season, his line would be .258/.342/.371 with above average defense.
I’d imagine that much of a difference in BABIP would result in more than just 10 measly singles. Probably be some extra base hits in there. Point is, the difference in BABIP this season is the major factor in why his offensive line is down. No, not literally the only one, but the biggest one by far.
Killing time until time kills me
Yeah, i'm not sure about the calculator
It gave me .302 for this year and .345 for his career with the Royals. It takes park factors and infield flies into account, but as a result, it’s so complicated, I can’t really compare its formulas to other calculators at a glance.
That’s why I was giving the result in terms of the difference rather than the absolute numbers. If the calculator is worth anything, it would suggest that 40 points of his 75 point decline in BABIP are not luck. The other 35 are luck, and part of the 40 is changing parks, but he’s still performing well below his career norms, even accounting for that.
l am sure that park factors do play a role, but luck still seems to be by far the biggest factor for me.
His ISO is only down 11 points from last year. His walk rate is up. His K rate is not significantly higher than his career rate. His LD% is only a little bit lower.
I thin DDJ would have a .270/.350/.400 line. No, not as good as last season where he did have better luck than normal, but still a pretty solid player in this run environment.
Killing time until time kills me
Luck is definitely a factor
But he was a career .289 hitter with the Royals. Just the combination of his K rate increasing by just over 2 percentage points and his LD rate dropping by just over 2 percentage points should knock 20 points off his batting average by itself. That’s .270
If you add in the increase in FB% from 32% to 39%, and the increase in the share of those that are infield popups from 9% to 12%, you’re well below .270, even if his luck doesn’t change.
The
did we trade DDJ for Francoeur?
or did we trade DDJ for a pitcher who the manager immediately buried?
Ron Mahay
Mark Grudzielanek
the DM trade record has a way of standing pat and making sure that players who were as good as they’d be stick around to show us how bad they would be… or that we’d get nothing for a Grudzielanek.
Granted, DM did turn Podsednik, Ankiel and Farnsworth into Lucas May (traded), Gregor Blanco (traded), Jesse Chavez (sucks), and Tim Collins (no control)..
so if DM gets zero good players for Podsednik and Ankiel, who are better than Melky and Francoeur, he’s not getting starting pitching prospects for Melky and Francoeur
He’ll be better off leaking “He wants out” rumors about one of them to cover for a lowered price, like he did with Greinke
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bhindepmo
Chairman, The Melky Cabrera Seasoning Sauce. It's great on your outfield!
Grudzielanek never had more than the remainder of the season left at the trade deadline
If the point is that DM hasn’t traded off players with more than a partial season remaining, I think Mahay is the only example to support that.
even though all of the evidence pointed to that being false.
All the evidence, huh? Please. It would be really difficult for you to overstate your position any more. “All the evidence supports my position! All of it! ALL OF IT!!!” Try that next time.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2011 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions
find me some evidence that shows that he shouldve garnered more in a trade?
he was hurt…he’s getting old….a similar player in Willingham returned even less in a trade….
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Jesus
This is just like all the howling over the debt ceiling negotiations. It’s just all freaking posturing.
by BlueEyes_Austin on Jul 15, 2011 2:43 PM EDT reply actions
Wait
If Dayton doesn’t trade Jeff Francoeur, will my grandmother still get her social security check?
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
by RoyalsRetro on Jul 15, 2011 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Royals do not have a debt ceiling problem
They overly control their spending. They might need a spending floor.
by Rebel Royal on Jul 15, 2011 11:20 PM EDT up reply actions
I guess I don't understand how this quote reflects poorly on DM.
Like it or not, Cabrera has been a 3 fWAR player this year in his age 26 season. While that was unexpected due to his 2010 season, he had a couple decent years for the Yankees too..so there’s some talent there. I don’t think DM needs to be trading Cabrera just for the sake of getting rid of him. DM should seek to improve our rotation in the near future via these trades. I think an A-ball lottery ticket would be far too little return for a 26 year old CF having a pretty damn good season.
I don’t think “near ready” means just any random AAA arm regardless of how good he is. I think it means DM wants a pretty decent prospect that can fit in our rotation in 2012. I don’t see what is wrong with that, given our current rotation.
Killing time until time kills me
if its a near ready starter with a #2-3 ceiling with a decent probability of reaching it...
fine…not another mazarro SOS
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, that's the deal
If Moore is dead set on a near-MLB-ready pitcher, we’re screwed. Because he’s not going to get a genuinely good pitching prospect who is near MLB-ready for either of those guys. He could certainly get a near MLB-ready pitcher who is a SOS/Vinnie #5 SP for them though. He should focus on getting the best prospect(s) he can get, not “near ready”.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2011 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Scott, is there any evidence to indicate that "near-ready" prospects are valued differently?
Victor Wang’s research seemed to suggest that, until you get down until the bottom of the barrel (C prospects), the age or level of development didn’t make any difference. A 20-year old B pitcher in A+ is worth the same as a 24-year old B pitcher in AAA.
Did you find something different in your research?
My research didn't look into that issue
And I’m only familiar with Wang’s research that was similar to mine, where he compared how prospects were ranked with how they eventually ended up performing. I’m not familiar with Wang’s research into A, B, C prospects. Was he using Sickels’s grades?
I’m just saying that when a pitching prospect who is 20 years old in A-ball is given that kind of “grade” it is based on a lot of projection. His pitches and control aren’t all there now, but they project certain improvements. When you’re a B prospect in AAA who has performed well enough to be “near-ready” for the majors, then you’ve made the improvement. His pitches/control/etc. are MLB-quality; they don’t merely project to eventually become that. So I see more value in high quality advanced pitching prospects than high quality pitching prospects in the low minors. Among other things, the near-ready prospect has avoided many opportunities to fail. The guy in A-ball still has several walls he could hit.
C prospect = bottom of the barrel? I’m not familiar with that use of the nomenclature. When people like Sickels are talking about A, B and C prospects, those are all good or at least pretty good prospects. A is the elite level. B is just below that, and C prospects are still legitimate prospects. What do you mean by bottom of the barrel? Organizational filler? Are are you talking about someone like Tim Collins, Salvador, Perez, or Clint Robinson (all C prospects per Sickels)?
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2011 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions
He's using Sickels grades
And by bottom of the barrel, I meant in terms of surplus value. A grade C pitcher 22 or younger is worth $2M, older is worth $1.5M. A grade C hitter 22 or younger is worth $0.7M. Older is worth $0,5M
For BA top 100 prospects and sickels grade A and B prospects, he didn’t find a difference by age.
That’s the only study I know that’s looked at it, and it didn’t find any difference. I agree it makes sense for MLB-ready prospects to be worth more (and maybe BA or Sickels tends to increase rankings/grades as prospects increase levels, which would be capturing all of that MLB-readiness), but I’m just asking if you have any evidence. Maybe people overvalue high ceilings and that elevates the younger prospects in a way that I wasn’t anticipating.
(and maybe BA or Sickels tends to increase rankings/grades as prospects increase levels, which would be capturing all of that MLB-readiness),
It is my understanding that prospect rankings/grades come primarily from two things: 1) ceiling, and 2) the likelihood that the player will reach that ceiling. From looking at what prospect evaluators say and do (in terms of rankings and grades), I think they value 1 more than 2. Prospect evaluators LOVE potential and high ceilings. But certainly as a prospect continues to look good as he moves up in levels, the opinion of the prospect improves. Conversely when they stumble as they move to higher levels, the opinion (and rank and grade) of the prospect worsens.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2011 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions
Actually as I think about it, it doesn't matter
What Wang found in the study was that there wasn’t a significant difference between younger and older prospects at the various rankings/grades, except C. So they’re striking the right balance between ceiling and likelihood as players age so that a 23-year old grade B prospect is worth, on average, the same as a 20-year old grade B prospect
Ok, I think we're talking around each other here
I don’t think the Royals are going to get a B prospect for either Melky or Francoeur. That is, unless we’re talking about a prospect that Sickels gave a B grade to in the offseason and then his stock has dropped this season due to either injury or poor performance. Now, if they package them together, they might get a B prospect (probably a Collins-like reliever). But I think such a package deal is unlikely. I think the Royals are more likely to get a C prospect or two or a C prospect and a bench MLB player. I think that’s the kind of “near-ready” pitcher they’d get. And if all I could get is a C or C+ prospect, I’d rather it be a talented-but-with-question marks young prospect.
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2011 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions
What do you think Melky's surplus value is?
A grade B pitcher is worth (or was, when Wang did the study) $7M.
If you assume Melky brings back a comp pick (big assumption considering comp picks could get tossed in the CBA), that’s worth $2.5M (for type B) to $8M (for type A) by itself, and, unless he falls off a cliff, Melky’s likely to produce another WAR this year, which would be worth $5M, of which $4.5M or so is surplus.
Also, Collins was graded C (or maybe C+) by Sickels. Dwyer was B. Coleman was B-. The Big 3 plus the two Brewers pitchers were B+. I think Crow was C+.
Melky's actual value can only be guessed at.
A lot of his value depends on the new CBA and the compsensation picks. If they go away, half his value goes with them.
Go Royals!
Actually if you think Melky is a three WAR
player for the next year and a half, the has as much surplus value as Zack Grienke has, at over 20 million in value. The Royals really should get back a very good prospect for him, or should just keep him.
Go Royals!
If Melky is a 3 WAR/season player over the next year and a half
We have to trade him. He’d have a significant amount of surplus value, but all of it would take place outside of our window for contending. We’d need to convert it into value that could help us in 2013/4
I'm with EspeciallyK here. The fact that Mazarro and SOS didn't work out doesn't prove the strategy bad
There’s no such thing as a pitching prospect. Mazarro was graded as B by Sickels, and he had good minor league numbers. (I know less about SOS). I have no problem with repeating that strategy over and over. Sometimes it will pay off and sometimes it won’t.
OT:
When is Kelvin Herrera expected to be up?
He’s at AA now, and is tearing it up. Am I the only one who thinks he’s a bit overlooked?
I'm a 14 year old freshman in high school with a love for all things Royals and Packers.
he was just in the futures game...
i dont think he’s being overlooked by anyone. he is however, a relief prospect with an awful injury history. he’s got high upside for a reliever, but also a huge chance of never contributing.
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 2:55 PM EDT up reply actions
People are going to overreact to this like they always do
…but Chuck LaMar did a heckuva job.
Making watching baseball as fun as doing your taxes.
My Twitter feed.
by Matt Klaassen on Jul 15, 2011 3:02 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
who's better, Podsednik/Ankiel or Francoeur/Melky
consider the return for Podsednik/Ankiel/Farnsworth…
and if Fransworth wasn’t in the deal with the Braves, we don’t get the only major league player that we got for Podsednik/Ankiel/Farnsworth
unless Melky and Francoeur are decisively better than Podsednik and Ankiel, who is dumb enough to give us a starting pitching prospect for either of those guys
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bhindepmo
Chairman, The Melky Cabrera Seasoning Sauce. It's great on your outfield!
The two best seasons by any players in those five are by Francoeur and Melky
I guess you could make the argument that, on the basis of a slightly better avg WAR / year, Podsednik was better than Melky, but Melky is on the upside of the aging curve.
Francoeur and Melky aren’t great players, but I think they’re better than any of the 3 we traded last year. Of course, value and surplus value are two different things. I haven’t compared the contracts.
if im remembering correctly...
ankiels deal was similar to frenchy and podsedniks was similar, maybe a little bit higher than melkys…so they’re not all that different either
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I looked up Pods yesterday. It was a lot less than Melky's
I thin Pods got $1.6M for the season. I don’t know the rest of them
melky's was only $1.25
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions
ankiel $3.25 last year
frenchy $2.5 this year
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions
For some reason I thought Melky was making $3 this year
Well, it looks like surplus value for Melky and Francoeur is probably higher than Ankiel, Pods, or Farnsworth
Pods was more than Melky
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2011 4:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Contracts (all guaranteed money)
Melky $1.25M
Podsednik $1.75M
Francoeur $2.5M
Ankiel $3.25M
You may know me as NYRoyal.
by Scott McKinney on Jul 15, 2011 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions
frenchy's already made almost $15 million in his career...thats depressing
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Not counting the millions in frequent flyer miles from Delta
From his endorsements.
Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com
I don't really like being the Francoeur apologist
But he’s produced $38M in value.
i know...its just that he's still so young...
and hasnt been that awesome…but he keeps getting multimillion deals based on shit that happened 5 years ago
Fire Everyone
by billybeingbilly on Jul 15, 2011 4:13 PM EDT up reply actions
That's not correct
The $ per WAR calculation is not uniform.
A 1 WAR player is not worth 4-5 Million dollars. They’re worth 1-2 Million.
Your quarrel is with fangraphs, not me. I'm just the messenger
Over about 6 full seasons, Francoeur has produced 10.0 fWAR, which fangraphs values at $38.7M. That means they’re valuing a 1.6 WAR player at just under 4M/WAR.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=4792&position=OF#value
No
Their calculation varies by year based off of total dollars spent.
But yes, Fangraphs is incorrect to say that a 5 WAR player is worth 5 times as much as a 1 WAR player. You are equally incorrect to restate it.
Do you have a constructive point?
The total number of dollars still have to be allocated to the total number of wins. If you take dollars away from his 1 WAR and below seasons (all three of them), you’re going to have to add dollars to his 3 WAR and above seasons (both of them).
I went looking for the basis of your 1 WAR = $1-$2M to find out what Francoeur’s 3.8 season was worth, but I just find a lot of theory. Fangraphs asserts that teams value free agents linearly (i.e. 3 WAR gets paid 3x as much as 1 WAR). I agree it doesn’t make sense, but markets don’t always make sense. Since we’re trying to estimate the market, following its results as closely as possible is the goal.
Do you have an estimate of the value Francoeur has produced over the years?
Teams don't follow it linearly
I don’t know what Francouer’s production was valued at, given comps for players. I do know he provided essentially no value over 2008-2010.
The only point, and it is constructive, is to understand that WAR*x does not equal value. A .2 WAR player is not worth a 1 Million dollar contract.
from Fangraphs:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/win-values-explained-part-six/
“Now, I know there’s some sentiment that teams don’t pay for wins linearly, because a six win player is worth more than three two win players. While I agree with this in theory, major league teams just don’t operate this way. If you just look at the dollar per win costs for the multi-year contracts handed out to hitters last year, the cost per win was $4.3 million for guys with an average win value of 4.4 wins per player. Alex Rodriguez signed for about $3.8 million per win last year. Teams just don’t pay exponentially more for higher win value players than they do for average and below players. You could argue that they should (and I would probably agree), but they don’t. The dollar per win scale is linear. "
produced $38M in value?
does he cook meth on the side?
Follow me on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/bhindepmo
Chairman, The Melky Cabrera Seasoning Sauce. It's great on your outfield!
Contract value is a piece of that puzzle
Performance is a bigger piece. Francoeur’s value isn’t as an everyday player. His value would be as a platoon guy in RF. against LH pitching
A triple slash of .310/.348/.607 this year with 7 HR’s in 92 PA’s against LHP’s
Career: .299/.344/.491 against LHP.
Add in improved defense in RF and you have a guy who’s interesting to a playoff contender, much more so than Ankiel or Podsednik.
I hope Moore is open to maximizing the value for these guys. Pitching is always nice to have and it’s hard for me to imagine us acquiring a position player who could ever be league average with either Francouer or Melky. And there’s nothing wrong with saying you want a good return, either. I don’t anticipate such comments actually have much effect one way or the other, except to minimize the offers of AAAA outfielders and utility guys.
maybe Crow's "illness" was a cover to get more sudafed for Freedomy
"Things could always be worse." - Buddy Bell
It would have to be a real good package deal of some sort from the Royals...
The Giants will have Brandon Belt at first so Butler and his multi-year contract might not be a good idea. Also Bumgarner is under team control and was a high propect that would take alot to pry away. Sanchez and Cain would be ideal with their current contracts (lack of time remaining <1.5 years) and their value as pitchers would fill what the Royals are sorely lacking. The Giants have a surplus of starting pitching and can afford to deal either one of them. The biggest question would be will the Royals be contending in a year and a half to make it a worthwhile trade?
The idea I like, and I could be wrong, is sending them a package of either/2 or 3/all of Pena, Melky, Betemit, Frenchy, and a few lower prospects. What the Giants need is offense in the outfield, at shortstop, at catcher, and possibly a bat on the bench. The Royals want a starting pitcher like Paris Hilton needs Valtrex. Make this happen.
Yes I will grant that the Giants value defense to back up their great pitching and that most of the above would be downgrades there. Also the pitchers above are going to be valued by other contenders willing to part with higher prospects and higher value players to obtain them. The Royals just have to out deal them with multiple players/prospects (Godspeed GMDM). Both Cain and Sanchez states have their faults, but they have stats also can be used to argue as valuable #1, #2, or #3 pitchers.
by A Study in Blue on Jul 16, 2011 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions
If DM trades for a pitcher who's not under contract in 2013/4, he should be fired
Then shot
Then driven over by a truck.
that is all
Not very optimistic...
That terminator DM is out there. It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.
— Kyle Reese
I am down on them competing in 2012 or 2013, until the end of April of those years when I am positive this is the year. Hope is a major fault of mine.
Still, with the upcoming 2011 FA pitchers market, trading a couple of spare parts for an ace or a pseudo-ace that can give the Royals 1.5 years with the possibility to sign with the Royals before or after he becomes a free agent I believe would be worth it. If he pitches well in KC it may be time to raise the lowest payroll in the majors and sign the bastard for the future. Anyone that doesn’t have a self destruct button that gets pressed in the fifth/sixth/seventh inning would make that time they are in KC worth it and an upgrade on what the rotation is now.
by A Study in Blue on Jul 16, 2011 7:01 PM EDT up reply actions
BP arm plus Melky or French?
I haven’t heard anything about throwing in one of the BP guys to bring back some more value. Would we not get enough value in return to compensate for the years of control we would be giving up? Would throwing in Collins for example help get a better “near ready” arm, or (what I would prefer) a AA pitcher with high upside?
Rany discussed it in his last post...
concluded it would be the right move but very unlikely to actually happen.
I actually just went to his site after posting this question
But too late to read a whole Rany post without the eyes getting heavy. I will finish it in the morning.
Collins doesn't have substantial value though
He’s replacement level. Holland, Wood, Crow, and Soria are the valuable guys.
Collins would be more valuable
if he didn’t walk so many guys. A trip to Omaha might help. Then again, if I had wings, I’d fly to the moon.
"First we got the bomb and that was good, 'cause we love peace and motherhood
Then Russia got the bomb but that's okay, 'cause the balance of power's maintained that way
Then France got the bomb, but don't you grieve, 'cause they're on our side (I believe)
Then China got the bomb, but have no fears, they can't wipe us out for at least five years" --Tom Lehrer
I just threw out Collins' name
How about thowing in Holland? Would he be able to up the return enough that we are getting another AAAA SP (SOS)? Do teams value years of contol for Bp arms, due to the high turnover/fail rate? Would the increased return be worth what we are giving up?
by spamiam79 on Jul 16, 2011 8:52 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Here's the thing
If a team wants Melky/Francouer and a relief pitcher, it makes no sense to pay extra just to get them both in the same trade. Trade a fringe prospect for the OF and another fringe prospect for the RP. There is no benefit to making fewer trades, so it makes no sense to trade a superior prospect just for the convenience of getting both needs in a single trade.
My desire is to reverse the normal equation
DM normally trades away a dime for two shinny pennies. I was hoping that if DM trades away two dimes he might get a quarter in return.
I'd keep Melky
He’s having a good enough year that we ought to see if he can do it again. In RF, not center. I wouldn’t just throw Frenchy away, either. If we get a good offer (someone who has a decent chance of becoming a 2 WAR MLB player), take it, but if not, keep them and platoon them (broken record).
Speaking of platooning, we could get Kelly Shoppach to replace Treanor for next to nothing. He kills lefties, though he can’t hit right-handers at all. His defense is pretty decent and he’s still under 30. He’s coming up in free agency and we could probably get him for a minor-league contract. Brayan is coming through with a surprisingly solid season, after a slow start, and he’s going to win the starting job, but a lefty-masher like Shoppach would be a decent backup.
"First we got the bomb and that was good, 'cause we love peace and motherhood
Then Russia got the bomb but that's okay, 'cause the balance of power's maintained that way
Then France got the bomb, but don't you grieve, 'cause they're on our side (I believe)
Then China got the bomb, but have no fears, they can't wipe us out for at least five years" --Tom Lehrer
This
Melky is cost controlled, at a position of relative need (he could play any OF position), and his recent performance has been great. He bombs, and we kick ourselves for not acquiring a C+ and a C prospect. He flourishes, and we get the benefit of his performance plus a better return next year or a Type A free agent.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
