MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

[TattooedEvil]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

What do you think I'd have to give up as the Rays to get James Shields back and have the White Sox retain, say $6-7m of his $10m a year for the next two years? (Padres already paying $11m of his hilarious $21m a year) I know that they don't really want him, but if I'm not taking on much of the salary would that mean they'd want more in return? Or would they still just be happy to get rid?

Same question about Matt Garza, who I imagine the Brewers would be pretty delighted to get rid of, but I'd want them to eat a fairly large chunk of the $12m he's due this year.

Would they accept any old rubbish, or would I have to give up something to get them to eat most of the salaries?

unfortunately u cant eat contracts for some odd reason

[brandonholmes]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I could be off here, so you might need another opinion, but what about Blackmon to the Blue Jays for Sean Reid-Foley straight up?

Idk how highly the Jays value Reid-Foley, and Blackmon would have to slide to LF but I think his bat still plays in the corner.

I'm a big Reid-Foley fan, but I don't think that's enough for Blackmon. If the Rockies want ML ready pitching, Reid-Foley isn't it. His stuff plays up in the bullpen, so I think he might be ready for a September call up in that regard, but he likely still needs minor league seasoning for this year.

On the other hand, Stroman is a total non-starter.

[BigOscar]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

unfortunately u cant eat contracts for some odd reason

You can sort of work around it if you plan it before starting the franchise. Just lower the player you wants salary to the amount the new team would pay, then add the remaining amount to some terrible D prospect for the original team. It's not ideal, but it gets the right result

[Powertoyourhead]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I respect the attempt. You just have to accept the fact that Tanaka nor Gardner still have to he same value. Two teams I think you could look at for Tanaka are the Rangers and Astros. If they appear to be a pitcher away from a serious World Series run, see if you can pull off a Mid-Season run. I'm not sure who you get from the Stros but you could potentially build a deal around Mendez from the Rangers. Still, you'd have to be willing to part with major Yankee prospects to get Yelich. You won't get enough back in a deal with any other team to build a package for Yelich that doesn't include any top tier Yankee prospects.

So after going home last night after work I got onto The Show and was looking at ratings and potentials and was curious why would I need to give up an A prospect and two Bs for a player as Yelich that has a potential of B. Like I said im just curious as to why that makes any sense? I know someone said to look at the Adam Eaton trade but in the end when that trade was made everyone on MLB Network agreed the Nats got screwed. I just want a fair trade. Im not concerned about what teams have done in the past that have gotten screwed on deals.

[brandonholmes]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

So after going home last night after work I got onto The Show and was looking at ratings and potentials and was curious why would I need to give up an A prospect and two Bs for a player as Yelich that has a potential of B. Like I said im just curious as to why that makes any sense? I know someone said to look at the Adam Eaton trade but in the end when that trade was made everyone on MLB Network agreed the Nats got screwed. I just want a fair trade. Im not concerned about what teams have done in the past that have gotten screwed on deals.

Well you're always going to pay a bit more in prospect capital for a sure thing. Once players hit their primes in the majors, potential < overall. For prospects, potential > overall. Also, B is a range. I'm not near my console atm, but a "B" potential can be anywhere from 80-89 in Show terms. So if Yelich has an 89 POT, your "B" prospect might have an 80, for example. You have to incentivize Miami to do the deal.

You are going to have to headline any Yelich deal with a top prospect (Torres, Frazier, Mateo) and work from there. I would think a pitcher would need to be involved. Outside of trading them ML ready, high-potential pitching (Severino) I don't see any other reason why Miami would trade Yelich.

[Powertoyourhead]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Well you're always going to pay a bit more in prospect capital for a sure thing. Once players hit their primes in the majors, potential < overall. For prospects, potential > overall. Also, B is a range. I'm not near my console atm, but a "B" potential can be anywhere from 80-89 in Show terms. So if Yelich has an 89 POT, your "B" prospect might have an 80, for example. You have to incentivize Miami to do the deal.

You are going to have to headline any Yelich deal with a top prospect (Torres, Frazier, Mateo) and work from there. I would think a pitcher would need to be involved. Outside of trading them ML ready, high-potential pitching (Severino) I don't see any other reason why Miami would trade Yelich.

Okay that makes more sense. I do get the range of Potential but someone else made it seem like Yelich was going to be a Mid level A POT. It was someone else that was saying I needed to give up two of those three you just listed plus a B potential pitcher. So I could do a three way trade with the Marlins myself and a third team that has a good pitching prospect that is in win now mode and I could trade Mateo to Marlins and Tanaka to Team C and then Team C would send their pitching prospect to Marlins? Make sense?

[kenp86]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Whats the value on Jed Lowrie, Matt Joyce, Trevor Plouffe, Yonder Alonso, Stephan Vogt and Khris Davis?

Rebuilding the As around Gray, Hamilton (trades once osfm drops) anf their prospects

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Okay that makes more sense. I do get the range of Potential but someone else made it seem like Yelich was going to be a Mid level A POT. It was someone else that was saying I needed to give up two of those three you just listed plus a B potential pitcher. So I could do a three way trade with the Marlins myself and a third team that has a good pitching prospect that is in win now mode and I could trade Mateo to Marlins and Tanaka to Team C and then Team C would send their pitching prospect to Marlins? Make sense?

No. You can't pick the worst of your 3 prospects listed and get Yelich. He had 6 years and $62 million left on his deal. He's projected by STEAMER go be a 4 WAR player this year. So doing the math based on Fangraphs aging curves ( http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/gaugi...tin-verlander/ ) it looks something like:

Age 25: 4 WAR
Age 26: 4.25 WAR
Age 27: 4.5 WAR
Age 28: 4.5 WAR
Age 29: 4.5 WAR
Age 30: 4.5 WAR
Total value over the deal: 26.25 WAR
Now, 1 WAR is worth roughly 9 million in value, but inflation happens too at roughly 5% of value. However for this I'll stop inflating after 3 seasons.

The math then goes (4 x 9) + (4.25 x 9.5) + (4.5 x 9.9) + (4.5 x 9.9) + (4.5 x 9.9) + (4.5 x 9.9)= 36 + 40.375 + 44.55 + 44.55 + 44.55 + 44.55 for a total value of $254.575.

So then you do the value of his WAR minus the value of his contract. Which is $254.575 - $62 = $192.575

That number is what you have to hit in prospect capital. https://www.google.com/amp/www.fangr...prospects/amp/ this site gives you values of prospects.

After doing this I realized Yelich is even more valuable than we thought and he certainly wouldn't be traded without one of Torres or Sanchez headlining.

Even if we decide we don't like the math Fangraphs used and we want to go back to WAR being valued at $8 per WAR which ignores inflation and ignores the huge FA class coming up with Harper and Machado, you get

$210 (WAR value - $62 (Contract Cost) for a Surplus Value of $148 million. That would still need to include a huge headliner like Torres

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Operation Sports mobile app

[BigOscar]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I really don't think the Marlins would trade Yellich, under any circumstances. There is no reason for them to do it. He's a fantastic, marketable, improving player, on a very team friendly, long term deal. I don't see any reason they would even consider trading him for prospects. The Marlins aren't rebuilding and even if they were, his deal is long enough and reasonable enough that you'd keep him anyway

[brandonholmes]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I really don't think the Marlins would trade Yellich, under any circumstances. There is no reason for them to do it. He's a fantastic, marketable, improving player, on a very team friendly, long term deal. I don't see any reason they would even consider trading him for prospects. The Marlins aren't rebuilding and even if they were, his deal is long enough and reasonable enough that you'd keep him anyway

I think they might move him for a young, TOR starter, but that's about it. Unfortunately, that rotation took a serious hit losing Fernandez overnight. I think losing a top-5/top-10 starter in baseball does change Miami's outlook enough that Yelich is movable, but only with a pretty massive return. The Yankees are technically capable of giving it, but this particular poster doesn't want any of it.

[Wavebird99]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Any ideas about a Cargo trade? I have a Rockies franchise going and I think I'd like to trade him for pitching help.

I did find a mildly interesting trade on the trade finder - send him to Seattle (who have Nelson Cruz but otherwise need outfield hitting help) for James Paxton + a mid tier prospect.

What do you guys think? Any other ideas that you've had maybe?

[brandonholmes]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Any ideas about a Cargo trade? I have a Rockies franchise going and I think I'd like to trade him for pitching help.

I did find a mildly interesting trade on the trade finder - send him to Seattle (who have Nelson Cruz but otherwise need outfield hitting help) for James Paxton + a mid tier prospect.

What do you guys think? Any other ideas that you've had maybe?

I kinda like it actually.

Effective hitter from Coors, for a guy with good stuff that's never been able to put it together all the way. Boom/bust for both teams. Cargo likely has a higher ceiling, so the prospect is a decent balance. I dunno though, I tend to be extremely skeptical of Rockies hitters.

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I kinda like it actually.

Effective hitter from Coors, for a guy with good stuff that's never been able to put it together all the way. Boom/bust for both teams. Cargo likely has a higher ceiling, so the prospect is a decent balance. I dunno though, I tend to be extremely skeptical of Rockies hitters.

Paxton is too much for one season of CarGo. I like the young pitcher for CarGo idea but Paxton has more value. If you're stuck on Paxton add a prospect from the Rockies in addition to CarGo

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Operation Sports mobile app

[brandonholmes]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Paxton is too much for one season of CarGo. I like the young pitcher for CarGo idea but Paxton has more value. If you're stuck on Paxton add a prospect from the Rockies in addition to CarGo

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Operation Sports mobile app

Forgot about contract. Yeah that's probably too much given the fact it's only a year. Still a decent base though.

[lil frier]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

No. You can't pick the worst of your 3 prospects listed and get Yelich. He had 6 years and $62 million left on his deal. He's projected by STEAMER go be a 4 WAR player this year. So doing the math based on Fangraphs aging curves ( http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/gaugi...tin-verlander/ ) it looks something like:

Age 25: 4 WAR
Age 26: 4.25 WAR
Age 27: 4.5 WAR
Age 28: 4.5 WAR
Age 29: 4.5 WAR
Age 30: 4.5 WAR
Total value over the deal: 26.25 WAR
Now, 1 WAR is worth roughly 9 million in value, but inflation happens too at roughly 5% of value. However for this I'll stop inflating after 3 seasons.

The math then goes (4 x 9) + (4.25 x 9.5) + (4.5 x 9.9) + (4.5 x 9.9) + (4.5 x 9.9) + (4.5 x 9.9)= 36 + 40.375 + 44.55 + 44.55 + 44.55 + 44.55 for a total value of $254.575.

So then you do the value of his WAR minus the value of his contract. Which is $254.575 - $62 = $192.575

That number is what you have to hit in prospect capital. https://www.google.com/amp/www.fangr...prospects/amp/ this site gives you values of prospects.

After doing this I realized Yelich is even more valuable than we thought and he certainly wouldn't be traded without one of Torres or Sanchez headlining.

Even if we decide we don't like the math Fangraphs used and we want to go back to WAR being valued at $8 per WAR which ignores inflation and ignores the huge FA class coming up with Harper and Machado, you get

$210 (WAR value - $62 (Contract Cost) for a Surplus Value of $148 million. That would still need to include a huge headliner like Torres

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Operation Sports mobile app

Note, this requires you to accept the FG value of a win, and the 100% accuracy of WAR, without question. I subscribe to WAR on a high level, but not enough to say "this is it, no one else needs to assess anything further." What's more, I greatly disagree with that dollar amount FG pushes every year. It ALWAYS seems inflated. Alfonso Soriano's contract with the Cubs isn't bad with their dollar values, even though he was factually a letdown. On top of the projection there, it doesn't offer any consideration to injury or the emerging idea that players peak sooner than previously thought (I believe the last article I read on this partially attributed it to primes ending at younger ages as the Steroid Era came to an end). So, it could be that this is peak Yelich and he's actually seeing his WAR trend downward by the end of his contract (not to say he's bad at that point, just not still at his peak).