MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

[breaking_ankles99]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Is this a fair basis for a deal:
To Pirates:
Quintana

To White Sox:
Meadows
Keller

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Fair point maybe I look elsewhere

trade for meadows, newman and glasnow.

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I guess what i did in the trade was made all the surplus value equal. here is the list of players with their surplus that I made it even. With the Indians making out the most. I know that our values do not add up 100% because I use Baseball Reference for WAR but.....

YankeesCarrasco 84
AstrosTanaka 28Fowler (20)Pineda 11Green (14)
Kaminsky 10
IndiansMcCullers 88Holder 13Abreu 13

McCullers is worth more than the Astros get. Carrasco is worth more than the Yankees give up. It just doesn't work. Having numbers add doesn't always work. You're going with a bunch of quantity instead of quality.

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

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Is this a fair basis for a deal:
To Pirates:
Quintana

To White Sox:
Meadows
Keller

I think you could get Newman in as well

[breaking_ankles99]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I think you could get Newman in as well

Do you think they value glasonow or keller higher

[breaking_ankles99]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

What teams would be interested in David Robertson, solid closer/good set up man

[brandonholmes]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

McCullers is worth more than the Astros get. Carrasco is worth more than the Yankees give up. It just doesn't work. Having numbers add doesn't always work. You're going with a bunch of quantity instead of quality.

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

This. Understanding the surplus value calculation is important in terms of making trades that line up value wise, but context is relevant as well. Take the Trout trades that were discussed earlier in the thread. Trout projects as a 10 WAR player for the next 4 years of his contract. I as the Blue Jays can easily give up 2 players that project for 5 WAR a piece and say mathematically I've made a fair trade, but that's just not the way trades work. There's tons of other contextual situations; when teams want production is the most pervasive. The Cubs want production right now, the Twins might want it 3 or 4 years down the road. It's projectability.

In almost all circumstances though, a team is going to look at a trade with projections and context in equal measure. Even if you added pieces, the Astros aren't going to want to deal McCullers, nor the Indians Carrasco. Neither team is going to be incentivized by Tanaka, who as we've discussed has limited trade value. I'm not saying he sucks at baseball, but he has an opt-out and a wonky elbow. Those two things severely impede your ability to move him, especially for young, controllable pieces that may actually outproduce him this year.

The most common type of trade in baseball is the established player for prospect swap. If you were looking to move Tanaka, look for a team with prospects and a chance of competing this year. They will give you prospects for Tanaka. There is almost no circumstance where dealing him is going to get you back a comparable player right now. There isn't really much backing the idea that a team would trade you an ace with more team control for an ace with elbow problems and a contract they can sever next season.

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Do you think they value glasonow or keller higher

I think glasnow

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

This. Understanding the surplus value calculation is important in terms of making trades that line up value wise, but context is relevant as well. Take the Trout trades that were discussed earlier in the thread. Trout projects as a 10 WAR player for the next 4 years of his contract. I as the Blue Jays can easily give up 2 players that project for 5 WAR a piece and say mathematically I've made a fair trade, but that's just not the way trades work. There's tons of other contextual situations; when teams want production is the most pervasive. The Cubs want production right now, the Twins might want it 3 or 4 years down the road. It's projectability.

In almost all circumstances though, a team is going to look at a trade with projections and context in equal measure. Even if you added pieces, the Astros aren't going to want to deal McCullers, nor the Indians Carrasco. Neither team is going to be incentivized by Tanaka, who as we've discussed has limited trade value. I'm not saying he sucks at baseball, but he has an opt-out and a wonky elbow. Those two things severely impede your ability to move him, especially for young, controllable pieces that may actually outproduce him this year.

The most common type of trade in baseball is the established player for prospect swap. If you were looking to move Tanaka, look for a team with prospects and a chance of competing this year. They will give you prospects for Tanaka. There is almost no circumstance where dealing him is going to get you back a comparable player right now. There isn't really much backing the idea that a team would trade you an ace with more team control for an ace with elbow problems and a contract they can sever next season.

So in your opinion what would be the best return I can get for Tanaka and Pineda for prospects?

[breaking_ankles99]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Can someone look into what the value is I can get in return for:
Jose Abreu
David Robertson
Todd Frazier

Thanks!

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

So in your opinion what would be the best return I can get for Tanaka and Pineda for prospects?

Tanaka:
LAD: Mitchell White and DJ Peters
CHC: Candelario and Trevor Clifton
COL: Tapia and Senzatela
HOU: Daz Cameron and Brady Rodgers
STL: Sierra and Fernandez
TEX: Guzman and Sadzeck

Didn't include Pineda because you wouldn't like the answer. He just hasn't been good

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

[breaking_ankles99]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I'm not sure on the value of Abreu but consistent .290 25hr/100rbi guy and Blue Jays are a much better team if they could acquire a 1B and put pearce in left field with carrera/smoak/barney/salty on the bench so how does this sound
To Jays:
Abreu

To Sox:
Reid-Foley
Alford
Bichette

[BigOscar]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Any ideas for a good destination for Jake Odorizzi. 3 years left, reliable middle of the rotation guy, I can think of a fair few takers, but what do you reckon is the most plausible? I was thinking Rockies as they need pitching badly with the window closing on Cargo, Lemahieu and Arenado

[kenp86]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Whats the return on lemahieu? Going to have Rodgers take over second

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Tanaka:
LAD: Mitchell White and DJ Peters
CHC: Candelario and Trevor Clifton
COL: Tapia and Senzatela
HOU: Daz Cameron and Brady Rodgers
STL: Sierra and Fernandez
TEX: Guzman and Sadzeck

Didn't include Pineda because you wouldn't like the answer. He just hasn't been good

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

No and I understand that. The unfortunate thing is that he has ACE POT pitches but for whatever reason can only pitch well enough to be a 3 or 4 in a rotation. Your answers for Tanaka were helpful thanks