MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

[Daonlyjmo7]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

But he would be #35 in my franchise.

In today's market, $23MM for a guy like Hamels is a very attractive rate. It seems like a lot, but it's become a deal. Also, remember the Rangers dumped the contract of Matt Harrison's corpse on Philly to partially offset Hamels in the deal. That's $28MM Harrison was owed, so about 1+ years of Hamels' 3-4 years left for free.

So the Rangers got 3-4 years of Hamels with some salary paid along with not having to give from Gallo/Mazara/Brinson/Tate. Nick Williams was still a pretty big piece though not at Gallo's level. I would also argue that Ross doesn't have more than 75% of Hamels' trade value due to performance, team control, and injury risk. Hamels going from a HR-heavy environment (Citizen's Bank Park) to Texas is also a bit more certainty than whatever Ross would become without Petco to lean on.

In short, if I were to trade Ross for Gallo, I would feel cheap about it.

I actually did trade Ross in my Padres franchise (lol, everybody's using the Padres for some reason now) and I dealt him along with Derek Norris to Houston for Jon Singleton, Francis Martes, and Preston Tucker. People thought A.J. Reed was too rich of a return as Gallo would be.

What about Ross for Devers and a few more prospects (open to suggestions)? Also thinking if I don't trade for Gallo I could go get Profar. I would like to hear your guys thought on that too.

I know it is my franchise, but I like getting extra approval on realism as I am one that feel very guilty later on to the point where I start over a lot. I want to stay fully realistic. Thank you guys for the feedback.

[AC]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Not if he's a 4-5 WAR guy as he's been since 2008. There's plenty of surplus value there. He'd need to dip to about 3 WAR annually to be a neutral asset according to all the math you guys like to do, lol.

Yeah but you'd discount for age and injury. And his current year performance included sends his FIP projection down to 3.93 (still ignoring ZiPS). His fastball velo is down half a mile and his zone and swing rates are way down. He's been great but he's the kind of guy you have to discount kind of heavily. 33 next year + showing signs of breaking + mandatory pitcher injury discount -> 4 WAR pitcher probably doesn't go that far above what could be as much as like $65m/3.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

FanGraphs is doing their annual Top 50 trade value series...here are links to what's come out so far....

Players that just missed the cut

Players 41-50

Players 31-40

Gallo was in the honorable mentions and Tyson Ross isn't on the list anywhere. Just some info to chew on.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Yeah but you'd discount for age and injury. And his current year performance included sends his FIP projection down to 3.93 (still ignoring ZiPS). His fastball velo is down half a mile and his zone and swing rates are way down. He's been great but he's the kind of guy you have to discount kind of heavily.

But he's not that old (32) and his injury history is pretty spotless (hasn't pitched less than 180 innings since 2006). He has some weird stuff going on with an unsustainably high HR rate, but he's also running a near career best groundball rate at the same time. Guys also tend to throw harder as the season goes on so I wouldn't be surprised for him to end the season near 92 MPH average FB velocity. His career average is also lower than what he's got going on this season (91.6 MPH vs 91.2 MPH). The FB velocity shouldn't really worry anyone as it's at his 2013 level.

The only thing that's different than any year before is he's getting behind in counts (decrease in 1st pitch strikes) and throwing more balls overall. Everything else is pretty much the same.

I think part of the reason Texas got Hamels is because he's not a guy you discount in the near future and he can be a decent #1 or a great #2 throughout their entire contention window that started last season.

[AC]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Comment about fangraphs trade values: It's literally just a completely arbitrary listing of guys while taking a cursory glance at ZiPS values (not useful). If anyone tries to use this as a reference I will personally be fighting it pretty hard.

[AC]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

But he's not that old (32) and his injury history is pretty spotless (hasn't pitched less than 180 innings since 2006). He has some weird stuff going on with an unsustainably high HR rate, but he's also running a near career best groundball rate at the same time. Guys also tend to throw harder as the season goes on so I wouldn't be surprised for him to end the season near 92 MPH average FB velocity. His career average is also lower than what he's got going on this season (91.6 MPH vs 91.2 MPH). The FB velocity shouldn't really worry anyone as it's at his 2013 level.

The only thing that's different than any year before is he's getting behind in counts (decrease in 1st pitch strikes) and throwing more balls overall. Everything else is pretty much the same.

I think part of the reason Texas got Hamels is because he's not a guy you discount in the near future and he can be a decent #1 or a great #2 throughout their entire contention window that started last season.

I'm unsure on looking at IP totals at this point. I mean, better healthy than injured, but wear and tear is definitely a thing. And 32 is getting up there, I've never heard "32 isn't that old" for a pitcher. It's not just the HR/FB rate because that's accounted for in his projections. His walks are way up and the K's are in decline. You can't really say that he's 'just' throwing more balls, especially on the first pitch, because that's really important.

I think Texas targeted Hamels because he was more controllable than Price, cheaper because Toronto was stupid, and of similar-ish calibre. I don't know why you or Texas wouldn't discount Hamels by a good rate.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Comment about fangraphs trade values: It's literally just a completely arbitrary listing of guys while taking a cursory glance at ZiPS values (not useful). If anyone tries to use this as a reference I will personally be fighting it pretty hard.

Well it's better than what people use otherwise, which is nothing to base their trades on at all. I, personally, am open to people referencing this list (not using as gospel) rather than proposing random fleecings of the cpu.

Also, ZiPS is not completely useless. I feel like you've gone a little overboard on the anti-ZiPS thing. It's a perfectly legitimate projection model even if you like other models better.

[Daonlyjmo7]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Sorry, but how do you guys feel about Devers in a Ross deal. Also what do you think of Profar in a Norris deal. Open to ideas about expanding both trades.

[AC]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Well like, why use ZiPS when Steamer's right there. On the aggregate, it's slightly worse and you have a better system about 5 pixels south. But individually it can also be terrible. It doesn't properly regress players at all which is a critical error.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

I'm unsure on looking at IP totals at this point. I mean, better healthy than injured, but wear and tear is definitely a thing. And 32 is getting up there, I've never heard "32 isn't that old" for a pitcher. It's not just the HR/FB rate because that's accounted for in his projections. His walks are way up and the K's are in decline. You can't really say that he's 'just' throwing more balls, especially on the first pitch, because that's really important.

I think Texas targeted Hamels because he was more controllable than Price, cheaper because Toronto was stupid, and of similar-ish calibre. I don't know why you or Texas wouldn't discount Hamels by a good rate.

Well the British spelling of "caliber" invalidates your whole post, sorry.

The whole point is that Hamels is going through a spell of spottier control than usual, but is not showing any signs of "breaking" as you put it. He velo is fine. He's not on the DL. He's still striking out almost a batter per inning in the AL (22.7% K% this year, 23.4% career mostly in NL). He hasn't really been that hittable (.240 BAA, .235 BAA career mostly in NL).

If he finds that 5% more first pitch strikes, he's back to being a 4+ WAR pitcher.

I think Texas wanted him for all of the reasons we've both specified.

[KBLover]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

This is a beautiful post. I would just be careful using Marcel-esque projections cause they don't necessarily use enough information, but for a video game is is awesome.

Yeah, plus...I can actually do it (or at least -esque as you noted) lol

I don't know how/if I could calculate ZiPS or Streamer or CHONE, etc. If I saw the formula/algorithm, I might could "fake it to make it".

What's scary is it was fun to do it!

[KBLover]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

But he would be #35 in my franchise.

He would be whatever he is relative to the rest of the kids in your franchise.

Are there 34 better prospects in your franchise?

[CBoller1331]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Yeah, plus...I can actually do it (or at least -esque as you noted) lol

I don't know how/if I could calculate ZiPS or Streamer or CHONE, etc. If I saw the formula/algorithm, I might could "fake it to make it".

What's scary is it was fun to do it!

As someone who is nerdy enough to 1. Be interested in how to calculate projections 2. Incorporate these projections into my virtual reality....could you share how you calculated these to a uninformed fan?

[Daonlyjmo7]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Who else could the Red Sox add in a deal for Ross alongside Devers?

[AC]

Re: MLB 16 Trade Discussion Thread

Well the British spelling of "caliber" invalidates your whole post, sorry.

The whole point is that Hamels is going through a spell of spottier control than usual, but is not showing any signs of "breaking" as you put it. He velo is fine. He's not on the DL. He's still striking out almost a batter per inning in the AL (22.7% K% this year, 23.4% career mostly in NL). He hasn't really been that hittable (.240 BAA, .235 BAA career mostly in NL).

If he finds that 5% more first pitch strikes, he's back to being a 4+ WAR pitcher.

I think Texas wanted him for all of the reasons we've both specified.

"Signs of breaking" = half a mile of velo with declined PD for me. Just red flags. All I'm saying is a guy who's gonna be 33 when you're acquiring him (assuming it's an offseason/TD at least deal) you have to account for not insignificant red flags like that.

Also it's Canadian. Please brexit the premises thank you.

Yeah, plus...I can actually do it (or at least -esque as you noted) lol

I don't know how/if I could calculate ZiPS or Streamer or CHONE, etc. If I saw the formula/algorithm, I might could "fake it to make it".

What's scary is it was fun to do it!

I'd suggest regressing to the mean a little bit but it's work, lol. Check out this on the stabilization points. https://www.fangraphs.com/library/pr...s/sample-size/

So you'd just substitute the difference in PA between the player/the point with league avg (or better, comparable players' avg) production.

Interested in seeing the process if you decide to post.