SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 13, 2017 19:23:26 GMT -5
I think that it's fair to say that there's a glut of power hitting in the market and a dearth of top-echelon pitching. So while their "real" value is likely very similar in combined terms of production, cost, and risk, the actual trade return is likely to be reasonably different due to market forces.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 13, 2017 20:00:43 GMT -5
None of those power hitters are anywhere near as good, though. Bautista and Trumbo are something like two wins worse than Goldschmidt. It's like saying Sale should have come cheap because Rich Hill and Drew Smyly were available ("lookit that glut of lefties!").
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 13, 2017 20:26:00 GMT -5
If this is such a crazy thread, then can someone explain to me why no one in the market has offered more than a Jose De Leon for a Brian Dozier?
Dozier plays a more important position than Goldshmidt who has one year less of control.
In theory both players should cost a Sale type package but in reality, teams aren't willing to pay as much for these players versus a guy like Sale.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 13, 2017 21:02:30 GMT -5
Brian Dozier had an OBP 70 points lower than Goldschmidt! Also, Goldschmidt is younger than Dozier. I can't believe you just compared Paul Goldschmidt to Brian Dozier. You're borderline-obsessed with players as "types" rather than as players. Dozier plays a more important position, sure. But he's not worth more than Goldschmidt because he's a much, much worse hitter.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 13, 2017 21:24:06 GMT -5
I'm not even comparing the players in terms of performance. I'm comparing their markets. I thought Dozier was younger but they are a few months apart in age.
Dozier might not be Goldshmidt historically too but he's coming off a season in which Dozier was indeed better than Goldshmidt in a way less hitters friendly park. Their markets should be comparable unless Goldshmidt goes off in the first half of next year.
Yes I'm obsessed with the Sox getting better in a year where they're cleary going for it.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 14, 2017 1:03:45 GMT -5
None of those power hitters are anywhere near as good, though. Bautista and Trumbo are something like two wins worse than Goldschmidt. It's like saying Sale should have come cheap because Rich Hill and Drew Smyly were available ("lookit that glut of lefties!"). No, it's not. There is a glut of power on the market because it's undervalued right now. Maybe I wasn't clear in my statement and it came across in an unintended way. Teams aren't trying to sign those players, which creates an excess supply and further depresses the market. But the root issue is not that the glut has depressed value, but that depressed interest has created the glut. Encarnación is a perfect example. Compare his 3/$60M deal to pre-offseason estimates generally in the 5/100-110 range. While Goldschmidt is excellent defensively, offensively he and Encarnación aren't all that different in terms of production. Hitting, and hitting for power, is Goldschmidt's top calling card. Teams don't empty their farms for defensively-minded first basemen, unless they can hit incredibly well (see Adrian Gonzalez to Boston). BUT, with the depressed market hitting-wise, most teams probably figure that they can get 60-75% of that offensive production elsewhere. I think you're using a reduction to absurdity to gloss over what is a complex dynamic. So I disagree with you that teams will line up to give up slightly less than Moncada-Kopech-Basabe-Diaz for Goldschmidt. I absolutely AGREE that the Diamondbacks should ASK close to that, but I don't think they'll get it because of the disfavor that power has fallen into. Yes, Goldschmidt has a number of other skills, but probably his (historically) most valuable one is underrated right now. It takes a certain confluence of prospect wealth AND PERCEIVED NEED for a team to make a deal like the Sale trade. When a team can keep their prospects and sign a short-term stopgap for peanuts, and spend that $30+M elsewhere to make up that 3 WAR, there's less incentive to make a trade. Even your example says something: both Hill and Smyly have new teams. There's demand for pitching. Hill is 37 and got a great contract. I'm not saying that teams don't want or wouldn't trade for Goldschmidt, I'm simply saying that the current market environment has shifted far enough (if only slightly) as to make a good match, where the D'backs get sufficient return value to be willing to trade him, unlikely. And the smaller the group of interested teams, the less intense the bidding. The Sox overpaid for Sale, and I just don't see AZ getting that sort of willingness to pony up in this market. I don't think it's a huge difference, but enough to make a "fair" match unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 14, 2017 1:33:16 GMT -5
None of those power hitters are anywhere near as good, though. Bautista and Trumbo are something like two wins worse than Goldschmidt. It's like saying Sale should have come cheap because Rich Hill and Drew Smyly were available ("lookit that glut of lefties!"). I'm still surprised that for someone who routinely calls out others for their straw men, you'd jump into your own. C'mon, dude. You're a mod, you don't think that was a little bit much inference and fabrication? I think pedrofan's point (which I agree with) is that the gap between a return for Sale/Goldschmidt is simply bigger than you're alluding to because of transient market forces. It's not such an unreasonable idea. There's LOTS more to trades than simply "excess value" calculation. You don't need to jump into a nitpicking defense that goes WAY off track of that simple idea. Just say "I don't think the market forces will apply as significantly to that rare a player," or whatever you think.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 14, 2017 1:40:57 GMT -5
I'm not even comparing the players in terms of performance. I'm comparing their markets. I thought Dozier was younger but they are a few months apart in age. Dozier might not be Goldshmidt historically too but he's coming off a season in which Dozier was indeed better than Goldshmidt in a way less hitters friendly park. Their markets should be comparable unless Goldshmidt goes off in the first half of next year. Yes I'm obsessed with the Sox getting better in a year where they're cleary going for it. I get what you're saying, I think. Personally, I think the market was just right (high demand, multiple teams, high valuation) for a Sale overpay (an offer the White Sox wouldn't refuse, given his value as a franchise cornerstone). I think that power has fallen into enough disfavor that the already small cohort of teams with the prospect capital to trade for Goldschmidt is further shrunken, and so nobody's going to offer what he's "worth." So while i agree with jmei's assessment of their (equivalent) excess value, I think there's probably a substantial market "offer" difference. We could be proven wrong, but I don't think so.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jan 14, 2017 1:44:22 GMT -5
I also don't want to see the Sox trade for Goldschmidt, because I think jmei's right that it would take a package approaching Sale's *to get it done.* AZ can hold onto him, I don't see them rushing to move him. So while I don't see them getting back that return, it's because I don't see anyone meeting their demands.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 14, 2017 8:24:11 GMT -5
I'm not even comparing the players in terms of performance. I'm comparing their markets. I thought Dozier was younger but they are a few months apart in age. Dozier might not be Goldshmidt historically too but he's coming off a season in which Dozier was indeed better than Goldshmidt in a way less hitters friendly park. Their markets should be comparable unless Goldshmidt goes off in the first half of next year. Yes I'm obsessed with the Sox getting better in a year where they're cleary going for it. I get what you're saying, I think. Personally, I think the market was just right (high demand, multiple teams, high valuation) for a Sale overpay (an offer the White Sox wouldn't refuse, given his value as a franchise cornerstone). I think that power has fallen into enough disfavor that the already small cohort of teams with the prospect capital to trade for Goldschmidt is further shrunken, and so nobody's going to offer what he's "worth." So while i agree with jmei's assessment of their (equivalent) excess value, I think there's probably a substantial market "offer" difference. We could be proven wrong, but I don't think so. Yeah I just hope Arizona stinks enough like I think they will to get the Sox in the conversation at least for a Goldshmidt. I mean that power from first base seems like it could be the missing piece if Ortiz doesn't come back. Goldshmidt just seems ideal to what the Sox could be looking for. Plus these types of trades are always fun to dream on. I'm kind of glad I got the pushback on a deal like this because it just reaffirmed how good Goldshmidt is and how a lot of people value him. I hope we are both right and maybe the market is down enough to the point where Goldshmidt isn't worth a insane package and is worth the upgrade. I know Dombrowski won't hesitate with the way he's pulling off trades since he took over really.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 14, 2017 12:01:17 GMT -5
I'm not even comparing the players in terms of performance. I'm comparing their markets. I thought Dozier was younger but they are a few months apart in age. Dozier might not be Goldshmidt historically too but he's coming off a season in which Dozier was indeed better than Goldshmidt in a way less hitters friendly park. Their markets should be comparable unless Goldshmidt goes off in the first half of next year. Yes I'm obsessed with the Sox getting better in a year where they're cleary going for it. The problem with Dozier is will a team trade for him with his worth at 6 wins or at his career average of around 3? HR aren't nearly as valuable when the OBP sucks in comparison. Ditto for Trumbo. Not anywhere close to Goldschmidt, who is a complete hitter and one of the top 5 in the league. He has hit like Papi over the last 4 years. It's like you want the Red Sox to trade for Goldschmidt without giving anything up and arguing about why he's not worth much but in the back of your mind, you know how good he'd be for us. Why do you want him if he's not that valuable as you've argued? He's actually listed as the top 1B for 2017 in this fantasy article. www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/top-15-first-basemen-for-2017-first-run/
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 14, 2017 18:02:00 GMT -5
I'm not even comparing the players in terms of performance. I'm comparing their markets. I thought Dozier was younger but they are a few months apart in age. Dozier might not be Goldshmidt historically too but he's coming off a season in which Dozier was indeed better than Goldshmidt in a way less hitters friendly park. Their markets should be comparable unless Goldshmidt goes off in the first half of next year. Yes I'm obsessed with the Sox getting better in a year where they're cleary going for it. The problem with Dozier is will a team trade for him with his worth at 6 wins or at his career average of around 3? HR aren't nearly as valuable when the OBP sucks in comparison. Ditto for Trumbo. Not anywhere close to Goldschmidt, who is a complete hitter and one of the top 5 in the league. He has hit like Papi over the last 4 years. It's like you want the Red Sox to trade for Goldschmidt without giving anything up and arguing about why he's not worth much but in the back of your mind, you know how good he'd be for us. Why do you want him if he's not that valuable as you've argued? He's actually listed as the top 1B for 2017 in this fantasy article. www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/top-15-first-basemen-for-2017-first-run/Because the market doesn't value him and there's a excess amount of right handed power on the market. It's been discussed maybe 10 times now. Dozier is coming off a near 6 win year in a non hitters friendly park. He's a really good player. The market isn't trading much because there's a lot of players like him on the market. Also giving up Swihart is nothing to sniff at when Arizona is clearly coveting him. My package was just as good as the Jose de Leon package if not better because Sam Travis would be included and I think Swihart still holds as much value as de Leon, if not more. I want him because he's a clear upgrade over Moreland.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 15, 2017 12:33:48 GMT -5
The problem with Dozier is will a team trade for him with his worth at 6 wins or at his career average of around 3? HR aren't nearly as valuable when the OBP sucks in comparison. Ditto for Trumbo. Not anywhere close to Goldschmidt, who is a complete hitter and one of the top 5 in the league. He has hit like Papi over the last 4 years. It's like you want the Red Sox to trade for Goldschmidt without giving anything up and arguing about why he's not worth much but in the back of your mind, you know how good he'd be for us. Why do you want him if he's not that valuable as you've argued? He's actually listed as the top 1B for 2017 in this fantasy article. www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/top-15-first-basemen-for-2017-first-run/Because the market doesn't value him and there's a excess amount of right handed power on the market. It's been discussed maybe 10 times now. Dozier is coming off a near 6 win year in a non hitters friendly park. He's a really good player. The market isn't trading much because there's a lot of players like him on the market. Also giving up Swihart is nothing to sniff at when Arizona is clearly coveting him. My package was just as good as the Jose de Leon package if not better because Sam Travis would be included and I think Swihart still holds as much value as de Leon, if not more. I want him because he's a clear upgrade over Moreland. Goldschmidt isn't just right handed power. He's one of the best hitters in baseball. There is never a glut of the best hitters in baseball no matter how many times you say it. His best comp is Miguel Cabrera.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jan 16, 2017 13:52:35 GMT -5
My main point was to look at the Dozier market and use it as a example to why Goldshmidt doesn't hold as much value as everyone else thinks here. I think you're underestimating how good Goldschmidt is. He stole 32 bases last year as a 1B, and the year before he put up a 7.3 fWAR season. He's one of the 3-5 best 1B's in baseball pretty much any way you look at it, and probably a top-20 player in the majors. Maybe next year when he has a year less of team control and we might be able to put together a more convincing offer (maybe if Dalbec takes another step forward, or Groome dominates, or some such thing) but for now I can't see it, although we might make them think more if we included Pomeranz or Rodriguez
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 16, 2017 16:07:24 GMT -5
My main point was to look at the Dozier market and use it as a example to why Goldshmidt doesn't hold as much value as everyone else thinks here. I think you're underestimating how good Goldschmidt is. He stole 32 bases last year as a 1B, and the year before he put up a 7.3 fWAR season. He's one of the 3-5 best 1B's in baseball pretty much any way you look at it, and probably a top-20 player in the majors. Maybe next year when he has a year less of team control and we might be able to put together a more convincing offer (maybe if Dalbec takes another step forward, or Groome dominates, or some such thing) but for now I can't see it, although we might make them think more if we included Pomeranz or Rodriguez Yeah maybe you have the right idea about a deal if it was going to get done. Eduardo Rodriguez, Swihart, and Sam Travis would probably be closer to what it would take now thinking about it. I'm not sure if I do that kind of deal to be honest. That's a tough one to think about.
|
|
|
Post by ctfisher on Jan 17, 2017 14:38:24 GMT -5
I think you're underestimating how good Goldschmidt is. He stole 32 bases last year as a 1B, and the year before he put up a 7.3 fWAR season. He's one of the 3-5 best 1B's in baseball pretty much any way you look at it, and probably a top-20 player in the majors. Maybe next year when he has a year less of team control and we might be able to put together a more convincing offer (maybe if Dalbec takes another step forward, or Groome dominates, or some such thing) but for now I can't see it, although we might make them think more if we included Pomeranz or Rodriguez Yeah maybe you have the right idea about a deal if it was going to get done. Eduardo Rodriguez, Swihart, and Sam Travis would probably be closer to what it would take now thinking about it. I'm not sure if I do that kind of deal to be honest. That's a tough one to think about. I think if Swihart and Travis play exceptionally well in the first half, then that might get the deal done, partly because I can't really come up with a team that has the prospects and the kind of window that would make sense to deal for him. Unless one or both of the guys really pushes their value up substantially though I can't see the Dbacks not insisting on Devers unless there's no market out there at all
|
|
ematz1423
Veteran
Posts: 5,153
Member is Online
|
Post by ematz1423 on Jan 17, 2017 19:56:30 GMT -5
Goldschmidt is a heck of a player and signed to a pretty team friendly deal. I don't see Swihart Travis and erod being close to enough for a guy like him.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 18, 2017 5:47:49 GMT -5
Goldschmidt is a heck of a player and signed to a pretty team friendly deal. I don't see Swihart Travis and erod being close to enough for a guy like him. I think people would of said the same thing about what Sale got back in a trade. This trade proposal actually makes me hesitate more. The floor of Eduardo Rodriguez is a lot higher than both Moncada or Kopech. Moncada could be a average player (with bust potential) or better and Kopech could be a reliever at worse. Eduardo Rodriguez is a back end starter at worse and a mid rotation starter or maybe even a top of the rotation starter at best. Sam Travis is a everyday first baseman at worse. Swihart is a starting catcher at worse. The floor of this proposed trade is higher than the Sale trade imo. The ceiling of the Sale trade is a lot higher however. I'll always take the higher floor over the highest potential, unless you got a high contact prospect like Xander, Benintendi, or Betts. I still don't know if I do this deal. Young good cost controlled starting pitching is hard to give away.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 18, 2017 6:01:49 GMT -5
Yeah maybe you have the right idea about a deal if it was going to get done. Eduardo Rodriguez, Swihart, and Sam Travis would probably be closer to what it would take now thinking about it. I'm not sure if I do that kind of deal to be honest. That's a tough one to think about. I think if Swihart and Travis play exceptionally well in the first half, then that might get the deal done, partly because I can't really come up with a team that has the prospects and the kind of window that would make sense to deal for him. Unless one or both of the guys really pushes their value up substantially though I can't see the Dbacks not insisting on Devers unless there's no market out there at all If the D-Backs were set on Devers then I'd just walk away from the table and that's a easy call for me. Not worth the upgrade. Devers is going to be a player, and the Sox really need him in the future.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 18, 2017 11:02:11 GMT -5
Eduardo Rodriguez is a back end starter at worse and a mid rotation starter or maybe even a top of the rotation starter at best. Sam Travis is a everyday first baseman at worse. Swihart is a starting catcher at worse. This is an incredibly optimistic take on Travis and Swihart, and a mildly optimistic take on Rodriguez.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 19, 2017 5:48:37 GMT -5
Eduardo Rodriguez is a back end starter at worse and a mid rotation starter or maybe even a top of the rotation starter at best. Sam Travis is a everyday first baseman at worse. Swihart is a starting catcher at worse. This is an incredibly optimistic take on Travis and Swihart, and a mildly optimistic take on Rodriguez. Well the only real optimistic take I could possibly see is that Sam Travis doesn't play enough defense to even be a first baseman, in that case he'd be a DH only. Other than that, if Travis can play first base properly he can easily be a starter. I also see Swihart as a starter because it doesn't take much to be better than even the average starting catcher in MLB. Swihart can easily be that. Salty was a starting catcher for a couple of years and he was horrible. I still can't get the thought of that out of my head. They both might not be above average starters, they might even be below average as a floor type of players but I still see them starting games in the future. Especially for a possible second division team like a Arizona. Eduardo Rodriguez might never be a top of the rotation type but there's always a possibility I suppose, he's still really young. I guess it depends on what you consider a starting player in this league.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 19, 2017 8:45:36 GMT -5
There's a huge difference between saying a prospect could be an average starter and saying that they are at worst average starters.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jan 19, 2017 14:28:28 GMT -5
Saying a guy can be a starter, means he can start for one or more of the teams in Baseball, not just Red Sox.
I want to add that sources stated one of the reasons Red Sox went with a one year deal with a 1B was because they didn't want to block Travis. Teams don't worry about blocking players unless they think they could start.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 20, 2017 7:12:53 GMT -5
When I think starter, I think a 1.5 win or better player. It's a shorthand measure for player quality, not whether a guy could be a replacement-level player who starts for a bad team that doesn't care about winning games. That's maybe Travis' median projection (and even that is optimistic, in my opinion), not his floor.
I have not seen that article (and could not quickly find it on Google), but the front office and ownership have every incentive to pump up their own prospects and justify a move (the signing of Moreland) that was mildly unpopular and one that was mainly driven by financial (luxury tax) considerations.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jan 20, 2017 7:45:46 GMT -5
When I think starter, I think a 1.5 win or better player. It's a shorthand measure for player quality, not whether a guy could be a replacement-level player who starts for a bad team that doesn't care about winning games. That's maybe Travis' median projection (and even that is optimistic, in my opinion), not his floor. I have not seen that article (and could not quickly find it on Google), but the front office and ownership have every incentive to pump up their own prospects and justify a move (the signing of Moreland) that was mildly unpopular and one that was mainly driven by financial (luxury tax) considerations. Ahh okay. I probably need to raise my standard into your line of thinking and think more highly of what actually is a starting player. Don't you agree that a below average starting player (A player with less than the 1.5 WAR) could hold more value if he's cost effective and under team control like Travis and Swihart? That's what I take into consideration of value when thinking about them as starters in this league, especially for a mid market team like a Arizona.
|
|
|