MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

[Daonlyjmo7]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Well the only similarities between Duffy and Quintana are they are 28 year old lefties. Duffy is a 2-3 WAR pitcher signed for ~$15M a season and Quintana is a 4-5 WAR pitcher signed for ~$10M.

What about a Duffy+Cain?

[disk]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

What about a Duffy+Cain?

If your dealing with the Cubs... Almora/Candilario + Cease for Cain and Duffy. If you really want Jimenez I could see an argument for Jimenez straight up for Duffy and Cain.

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

What about a Duffy+Cain?

KC just signed Duffy long term. Its a REALLY bad look to deal a guy shortly after signing him to a long term deal that was likely a bit of a hometown discount

[bobbyb9827]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Was wondering where I could send Ellsbury's contract. About to start 2018 season, and he's coming off a .276 BA and about .340 obp season in 2017. Want to just get rid of him as I have a logjam in the outfield. Would be willing to give up a prospect or two just to rid that contract.

Any team that would be willing to take him on?

[rjackson]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Quintana packages that have been reported

Yankees - Clint Fraizer/Chance Adams

Astros - Kyle Tucker/David Paulino

Braves - Acuna/Allard

Where was this ATL one reported? I don't see it anywhere. I never saw that Frazier was offered, either. Maybe asked about?

[Mattchu12]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

New rumor says Hamels could be moved if Rangers sputter out of the gate post-break, where would he fall in the pecking order of potentially available starters at the deadline?

[kenp86]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Was wondering where I could send Ellsbury's contract. About to start 2018 season, and he's coming off a .276 BA and about .340 obp season in 2017. Want to just get rid of him as I have a logjam in the outfield. Would be willing to give up a prospect or two just to rid that contract.

Any team that would be willing to take him on?

Way early on in this thread, i had a deal that was agreed upon by most depending on how the players and clubs are doing.

Arizona gets: Ellsbury, Tate, Mateo
Yankees get: Greinke

[BennyXavier]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I have a Yankees/Frazier question. Before you go "ugh, not this crap again" -- Todd Frazier, not Clint. The White Sox are Very Bad™ and will likely be selling everything but the stadium. Since Frazier to Yanks has been rumored in real life, I've been toying with the idea of bringing the Toddfather back home to play for his boyhood ballclub.

Chase "Give Me" Headley is not cutting the mustard. Nearly at the end of April and he's on the interstate (.180 or thereabouts) with two dingers. I don't want to bring Gleyber Torres up until September, because even though he's hitting well in AAA, I don't think he's gonna be quite ready for prime time this year.

So Headley is bad, the Yankees want Torres to stay in Scranton, and the White Sox are garbage. For as much guff as we give them, you have to commend SCEA for their incredible commitment to realism.

Okay, let's play the "what-if" game. Let's say Frazier is hitting .250 with, I don't know, 15 dongs by the end of June. There's no guarantee he'll be there, as he's only hitting .210-ish IRL, but that would be the point where I would seriously consider bringing him to the Bronx. The computer is suggesting an interesting trade for him:

CHICAGO GETS
SP Chance Adams (B potential)
OF Blake Rutherford (A potential)
3B Chase Headley

NEW YORK GETS:

3B Todd Frazier

Rutherford is a very valuable piece, but he's three or four years away from the Majors, and he's been struggling in AA so far this season. Chance Adams is doing okay in AAA, and could be a temporary long-relief option by the All-Star break. The two of them would go to Chicago, and there would be a straight swap of third basemen.

So, if I'm in buyer's mode at the deadline, and if Frazier is hitting significantly better than Headley, I could pull the trigger on this. My concern is that Rutherford is too valuable to give up for a rental, but he's still quite a ways away from the big time. What's your take on this deal, OS? Should I go for a better third baseman, change my offer for Frazier, or keep the deal as it is?

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Where was this ATL one reported? I don't see it anywhere. I never saw that Frazier was offered, either. Maybe asked about?

An ATL equivalent would be Acuna + Gohara

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

Way early on in this thread, i had a deal that was agreed upon by most depending on how the players and clubs are doing.

Arizona gets: Ellsbury, Tate, Mateo
Yankees get: Greinke

To be fair that was based on Greinke being not good last year

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

I have a Yankees/Frazier question. Before you go "ugh, not this crap again" -- Todd Frazier, not Clint. The White Sox are Very Bad™ and will likely be selling everything but the stadium. Since Frazier to Yanks has been rumored in real life, I've been toying with the idea of bringing the Toddfather back home to play for his boyhood ballclub.

Chase "Give Me" Headley is not cutting the mustard. Nearly at the end of April and he's on the interstate (.180 or thereabouts) with two dingers. I don't want to bring Gleyber Torres up until September, because even though he's hitting well in AAA, I don't think he's gonna be quite ready for prime time this year.

So Headley is bad, the Yankees want Torres to stay in Scranton, and the White Sox are garbage. For as much guff as we give them, you have to commend SCEA for their incredible commitment to realism.

Okay, let's play the "what-if" game. Let's say Frazier is hitting .250 with, I don't know, 15 dongs by the end of June. There's no guarantee he'll be there, as he's only hitting .210-ish IRL, but that would be the point where I would seriously consider bringing him to the Bronx. The computer is suggesting an interesting trade for him:

CHICAGO GETS
SP Chance Adams (B potential)
OF Blake Rutherford (A potential)
3B Chase Headley

NEW YORK GETS:

3B Todd Frazier

Rutherford is a very valuable piece, but he's three or four years away from the Majors, and he's been struggling in AA so far this season. Chance Adams is doing okay in AAA, and could be a temporary long-relief option by the All-Star break. The two of them would go to Chicago, and there would be a straight swap of third basemen.

So, if I'm in buyer's mode at the deadline, and if Frazier is hitting significantly better than Headley, I could pull the trigger on this. My concern is that Rutherford is too valuable to give up for a rental, but he's still quite a ways away from the big time. What's your take on this deal, OS? Should I go for a better third baseman, change my offer for Frazier, or keep the deal as it is?

You're giving up way too much for a rental. Frazier if he is raking could get you like a Chance Adams or Mateo, but no way he gets multiple top 100 pieces as a rental. He can get one back end guy at best

[rjackson]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

An ATL equivalent would be Acuna + Gohara

My point is that ATL never offered Acuna so if you are focused on realism and not just fairness, the reports I saw were that they had the opportunity to get Q but they refused to trade Acuna so they lost out. Do we only focus on fair value in this thread nowadays?

You're giving up way too much for a rental. Frazier if he is raking could get you like a Chance Adams or Mateo, but no way he gets multiple top 100 pieces as a rental. He can get one back end guy at best

Are you forgetting that there is ~$26MM bad money going to Chicago? Plus, Frazier has value in this scenario. Not much, say something like 3-5MM (6MM contract left this year, around 1.2-1.5WAR accumulated). I don't think the computer is too far off here.


As a guy working on a White Sox rebuild right now, I can tell you I'd prefer Mateo over Rutherford and toss in Tate as a dice roll and I'd take it. If you gave them to whoever it was, I'd go with the computer here. I'd probably have to give you another minor piece, some sort of C prospect but I'd upgrade to Sheffield over Adams.


IRL there is no market for Frazier or his performance so I'm going off of what you said.

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

My point is that ATL never offered Acuna so if you are focused on realism and not just fairness, the reports I saw were that they had the opportunity to get Q but they refused to trade Acuna so they lost out. Do we only focus on fair value in this thread nowadays?


Are you forgetting that there is ~$26MM bad money going to Chicago? Plus, Frazier has value in this scenario. Not much, say something like 3-5MM (6MM contract left this year, around 1.2-1.5WAR accumulated). I don't think the computer is too far off here.


As a guy working on a White Sox rebuild right now, I can tell you I'd prefer Mateo over Rutherford and toss in Tate as a dice roll and I'd take it. If you gave them to whoever it was, I'd go with the computer here. I'd probably have to give you another minor piece, some sort of C prospect but I'd upgrade to Sheffield over Adams.


IRL there is no market for Frazier or his performance so I'm going off of what you said.

We don't only focus on fair value. But for realism sake if we just got a trade that accurately states his value its reasonable to give comps for other teams. There were also clearly reports where CWS asked for Acuña. I can link those if you want. If we want to go by "realism" then it isn't "realistic" for any team not the Cubs to trade for Quintana. It also wouldn't be "realistic" for the White Sox to take back anything of less value than Jimenez and Cease.

No there isn't. There's roughly $20 million going to Chicago not $26. You only pay roughly half of 2017 then his 2018 season $. This is ignoring the fact that Frazier is making basically the same salary $12 million this year. So at most the White Sox are taking back $14 million. Or roughly the value of a back end top-100 pitcher. So for that we can say the value of the deal is $14 million plus whatever Frazier is worth. I don't really see where that gets you an A prospect and a B prospect but you do you. Adams was ranked #56 in the midseason update and Rutherford was ranked #36. That's a whole bunch of value to dump $14 million dollars as the freaking Yankees and get 3 months of Frazier

[rjackson]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

So you are saying that if you are playing as ATL and you wanted Q, you'd have to give up Acuna+Gohara? Wouldn't you think that we would have to beat the offer of Jimenez+Cease? What about me playing as CHI? You are saying that I can choose to get Acuna+Gohara instead?

On the other point, you are right, I thought there was more time on Headley and miscalculated. So, knock back the $26 to ~$19MM. You still need $22-25MM in value. We don't know the market, either. Maybe BOS wants him, too. Maybe the computer is asking for more based on what they can get from someone else? The computer is asking for an overpay but I'd actually trust the computer in this case of either do as offered or don't. My advice would be getting to Aug 1 in the franchise and seeing if Frazier goes or not. Then, you could reload July 31st and do something at that time to beat the offer they took.

And please stop placing so much importance on a singular prospect list that is midseason and has no bearing on our virtual worlds. Acuna is doing great IRL. That doesn't mean he hasn't been tanking and is down to a C in my 'chise and now I can get Q for him. Another point, Hanson was rated really high midseason based on a breakout performance but was always a 45FV player. Now, he is a bench player picked up by ChiSox for nothing.

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

So you are saying that if you are playing as ATL and you wanted Q, you'd have to give up Acuna+Gohara? Wouldn't you think that we would have to beat the offer of Jimenez+Cease? What about me playing as CHI? You are saying that I can choose to get Acuna+Gohara instead?

On the other point, you are right, I thought there was more time on Headley and miscalculated. So, knock back the $26 to ~$19MM. You still need $22-25MM in value. We don't know the market, either. Maybe BOS wants him, too. Maybe the computer is asking for more based on what they can get from someone else? The computer is asking for an overpay but I'd actually trust the computer in this case of either do as offered or don't. My advice would be getting to Aug 1 in the franchise and seeing if Frazier goes or not. Then, you could reload July 31st and do something at that time to beat the offer they took.

And please stop placing so much importance on a singular prospect list that is midseason and has no bearing on our virtual worlds. Acuna is doing great IRL. That doesn't mean he hasn't been tanking and is down to a C in my 'chise and now I can get Q for him. Another point, Hanson was rated really high midseason based on a breakout performance but was always a 45FV player. Now, he is a bench player picked up by ChiSox for nothing.

I used both their potential in the game (A and B prospect) and their prospect ranking. How the hell else am I supposed to value them? Seriously, what can I do to appease you. I do one and you get mad. I include both and you get mad. I can just stop posting if thats what I need to do. If you have a problem with how I'm doing things or posting feel free to give me a PM. But there has to be a way to value prospects.

For someone who uses surplus value as a way to approximate the value of a player and what they should be traded for, prospect lists are paramount to establishing how valuable a trade asset is. In addition, many people play with many different rosters. How am I to know if Rutherford is an A in one, a B in another or a B+? A large portion of the time we are given little information so we substitute what is real to fill in the gaps.

A prior example of what I've said on Quintana "And Quintana is worth like $80-100 in surplus value. It would be more like Frazier + Kaprellian (Assuming he is healthy in your game) + Mateo + Sheffield/Adams"

Jimenez is worth $73.5 million and Cease is worth $15.6 via http://www.thepointofpittsburgh.com/...dated-edition/

Which basically means my use of prospects lists got the actual trade correct.

[rjackson]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Don't stop posting. I am merely challenging you to get more of an explanation. It helps me learn but also others may learn as well. Admittedly, I don't keep up on as much trade rumors or prospects as i used to but I can keep up with the math side of it. Plus, being out for a year makes my questions on fairness versus realism applicable (at least to me) and the most pertinent part of this thread to me. That is why I am so focused on Acuna. See the first questions on my prior post as those are genuine and not challenging you. Getting a trade done that is both fair to the CPU, at least, and a realistic one without copying real life is more of an art than a science. Acuna is just a great example to focus on because he seemed like an option to me and those differences of IRL and my franchise fascinates me for some reason, I think that art I was going with.

If I said that I wanted to go with Acuna in my franchise instead of Jimenez because CF is more appealing than LF, would you say speculatively that ATL would have went for it?

[disk]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I used both their potential in the game (A and B prospect) and their prospect ranking. How the hell else am I supposed to value them? Seriously, what can I do to appease you. I do one and you get mad. I include both and you get mad. I can just stop posting if thats what I need to do. If you have a problem with how I'm doing things or posting feel free to give me a PM. But there has to be a way to value prospects.

For someone who uses surplus value as a way to approximate the value of a player and what they should be traded for, prospect lists are paramount to establishing how valuable a trade asset is. In addition, many people play with many different rosters. How am I to know if Rutherford is an A in one, a B in another or a B+? A large portion of the time we are given little information so we substitute what is real to fill in the gaps.

A prior example of what I've said on Quintana "And Quintana is worth like $80-100 in surplus value. It would be more like Frazier + Kaprellian (Assuming he is healthy in your game) + Mateo + Sheffield/Adams"

Jimenez is worth $73.5 million and Cease is worth $15.6 via http://www.thepointofpittsburgh.com/...dated-edition/

Which basically means my use of prospects lists got the actual trade correct.

I agree with you on everything with the exception of your views on prospect lists. I've probably said this before but you have to look at FV and FV only. Moncada is a 70 FV prospect and #1 on most lists, would he become less valuable if there were 1 or more 70 FV prospects or even 1 or more 75 FV guys, thus bumping him down a prospect list? No because he is still 70 FV and worth ~$107M. You have to put one 50 FV guy above another 50 FV guy for example, simply because of the nature of lists, however they are both "worth" the same in a trade.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your process and your using lists to find FV which is all good but if you value two prospects with the same FV differently simply because they are ranked differently on a prospect list I see some fault in that.