MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

[The Left Shark]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Except Houston were willing to give up what you say no one was willing to give up. Martes is a top 20 prospect, they offered him plus a couple of guys of a similar if not higher level than Mateo. That's the point, Mateo is an add on, not the main piece of a Quintana trade

Actually, from what I read, the Astros did not want to give up Martes. I believe he was in the Chris Archer deal though.

[Bard]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I'll add on for the Lorenzo Cain part!

He is in a walk year, but with a projected ~3 WAR and what, ~8 million for this year? He is quite valuable even as a potential free agent.

He brings in a value of ~15.25 which could net you a top 76-100 pitching prospect or a "just missed" top 100 hitting prospect. So a B potential, just nobody that is super highly touted.

Christian Arroyo is the 69th ranked prospect in MLB, and he might be a bit too rich for Cain...But they are 8 games back and need to be in the playoffs. I think Tyler Beede is the more realistic option. The 88th best spec in the league.

Giants receive:
Lorenzo Cain

Royals Receive:
Tyler Beede
Dan Slania

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[The Left Shark]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Happ is the number 63 prospect in baseball. The number two prospect on the Cubs...So yes he would be available if the Cubs are in need.

Happ ++

Honestly, I would like some feedback here. Because Chicago to Chicago, my bias would be Jimenez + Happ + top 20 in system (lotto ticket).

That would be the 14th, 64th, and a lotto prospect for Quintana.

Goodness just feel like editing, if I were the White Sox I would ask for Cease as well or Almora.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Jimenez, Happ, and Candelario is one deal I've seen on twitter kicked around by both Sox and Cubs fans where fans of both teams agreed they would do it for sure. Cubs are loaded with enough young, controllable talent to the point where trading those 3 doesn't matter.

[Bard]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Jimenez, Happ, and Candelario is one deal I've seen on twitter kicked around by both Sox and Cubs fans where fans of both teams agreed they would do it for sure. Cubs are loaded with enough young, controllable talent to the point where trading those 3 doesn't matter.

See, this is how I feel.

White Sox start with Jimenez, Happ, Candelario.

Cubs reject with, Almora, Happ, Albertos.

White Sox say they want Jimenez and Happ, what can they do.

Cubs say fine, but we will only send Albertos to finish it up.

White Sox are fine as they get the Cubs 1 + 4 prospects, 14 + 64 in MLB as well as a very promising arm that throws fast and hard, oh hey Kopech.

In my franchise the Phillies traded Micky Moniak to the Cubs for Addison Russell. Should I reverse it or let it play out?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Operation Sports mobile app

Zero reason for this deal honestly, I would reverse it

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[hampshirestags]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

In my franchise the Phillies traded Micky Moniak to the Cubs for Addison Russell. Should I reverse it or let it play out?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Operation Sports mobile app

Flip it. The CPU was drunk.

[pickle2002]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Nick Markakis is roughly -18 million in value..So he wouldn't cost much of anything at all.

Corey Dickerson will cost an in-division fee. Though, his surplus isn't all that high either. It would take probably two C's that are young.

Duvall would likely cost a B, he is a bit harder to gauge, but the Reds would likely just keep him if they couldn't get that...If not more...He isn't worth it.

Juan Lagares is really only defense, and would cost as much as Markakis, about nothing.



Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Ok what about schwarber and pederson? What would it take for me to get one of them? Another guy I forgot to add was Alex Gordon... He's probably the most expensive option but he looks really good too. What is his value?

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Ok what about schwarber and pederson? What would it take for me to get one of them? Another guy I forgot to add was Alex Gordon... He's probably the most expensive option but he looks really good too. What is his value?

You can't. Unless you want to move Stroman or Sanchez plus

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

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Actually, from what I read, the Astros did not want to give up Martes. I believe he was in the Chris Archer deal though.

That would be correct.

[babybombers]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

What would the cost be for stroman to the braves?

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

That would be correct.

Depending on who you read. Other reporters stated Martes was firmly in the offer

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

[AC]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

So the complicated answer is yes and no. You do discount him but not to the full extent of being a 1.1 WAR player. Just like we don't value McCutcheon as a .7 WAR player. You'd consider the season an outlier, and lower his overall value based on the added risk a bad season adds

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

Alright gotcha. So if a players WAR last year say was a 7 WAR and in my season they happen to have a bad year like Cutch and it dropped to 1 WAR I could safely take that into account and pretty much avg it out to a 4 WAR value in the formula if I understand right....

I realize these posts are 10 days old but:

Previous year: 60%
Two years: 30%
Three years: 10%

Andrew McCutchen: 2.84, Steamer 2.8
Yasiel Puig: 1.59, Steamer 2.6
Dallas Keuchel: 3.75, Steamer 3.6

The thing to do then is to curve this to age. This is just a video game so we can do this mentally, using the prior that peak is around 26. You also want to regress, obviously, but it's less of an issue here.

This is just for pre-season, though. When considering current year performance, it's trickier. You could do something like:

(player_PA / 650)*WAR + [(650-player_PA)/650]*projection

Where "projection" is the 60/30/10 weighting.

Having WAR in the game is a huge bonus. Imo, this thread should mostly be focused realism checks at this point, or more abstract things like how to value 3 for 1s or the like. I think we have a good concept of player value at this point.

sum(WAR_over_contract) * (10+0.05*years_on_contract) - sum(salary_over_contract) = surplus value

The hardest part is obviously the the WAR over contract, but we have prospect valuations that are very good estimates, reasonable ways to project true talent, and even good ways to value draft pick compensation. For major leaguers, it's simple enough to just take his true talent WAR (as shown above) and curve it to age for each year of his contract, using something like this. Ignore the equation, obviously, and don't use the raw numbers as it's for wOBA, not WAR (but it's still pretty representative, just maybe take a bit more off pitchers):




So if we do this quickly for Cutch IRL (and it's still early so we'll just do the basic one):

sum(WAR_over_contract) * (10+0.05*years_on_contract) - sum(salary_over_contract) = surplus value

Cutch is projected at 2.84, and you can just simplify and multiply by 1.95 if you believe he'll lose 5% performance next year (so about 5.5 wins over the next two years). The cost of a win goes up about 5% a year and is at 10 right now. He's due 28.5m.

(2.84*1.95) * (10+0.05*2) - 28.5 ~= $56m surplus value

Or a couple of good prospects.

[GamecocksLaw17]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I realize these posts are 10 days old but:

Previous year: 60%
Two years: 30%
Three years: 10%

Andrew McCutchen: 2.84, Steamer 2.8
Yasiel Puig: 1.59, Steamer 2.6
Dallas Keuchel: 3.75, Steamer 3.6

The thing to do then is to curve this to age. This is just a video game so we can do this mentally, using the prior that peak is around 26. You also want to regress, obviously, but it's less of an issue here.

This is just for pre-season, though. When considering current year performance, it's trickier. You could do something like:

(player_PA / 650)*WAR + [(650-player_PA)/650]*projection

Where "projection" is the 60/30/10 weighting.

Having WAR in the game is a huge bonus. Imo, this thread should mostly be focused realism checks at this point, or more abstract things like how to value 3 for 1s or the like. I think we have a good concept of player value at this point.

sum(WAR_over_contract) * (10+0.05*years_on_contract) - sum(salary_over_contract) = surplus value

The hardest part is obviously the the WAR over contract, but we have prospect valuations that are very good estimates, reasonable ways to project true talent, and even good ways to value draft pick compensation. For major leaguers, it's simple enough to just take his true talent WAR (as shown above) and curve it to age for each year of his contract, using something like this. Ignore the equation, obviously, and don't use the raw numbers as it's for wOBA, not WAR (but it's still pretty representative, just maybe take a bit more off pitchers):




So if we do this quickly for Cutch IRL (and it's still early so we'll just do the basic one):

sum(WAR_over_contract) * (10+0.05*years_on_contract) - sum(salary_over_contract) = surplus value

(2.84*1.95) * (10+0.05*2) - 28.5 ~= $56m surplus value

Or a couple of good prospects.

Welcome back AC

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

[bryanm1982]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

I was toying around with trades last night just offering to see if it would work on my Cubs franchise. I noticed even if the thing says "This is interesting deal and its a good deal" or what ever it says when its balanced. When you click X to submit they will still say they declined. I didn't see that in the 16. I like it cause it wasn't a realistic trade anyway. So even if its saying its a good deal they still might say no when you decide to pull the trigger. Anybody notice this too?

[pickle2002]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

You can't. Unless you want to move Stroman or Sanchez plus

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

Yeah i figured it would cost something like that... I narrowed it down to two players. Adam Duvall and Nick Markakis.

My lineup with Duvall would be-
Travis 2B
Donaldson 3B
Bautista RF
Morales DH
Duvall LF
Tulo SS
Pearce 1B
Martin C
Pillar CF

With Markakis-

Travis 2B
Markakis LF
Donaldson 3B
Bautista RF
Morales DH
Tulo SS
Martin C
Pearce 1B
Pillar CF

Markakis would be a good fit because he is a lefty but Duvall would also be a good fit because he is the better hitter with great power...

How do these deals look?

Richard Urena (B POT) for Adam Duvall

Shane Opitz (C POT) for Nick Markakis

[rjackson]

Re: MLB 17 Trade Discussion Thread

Thanks in advance for your feedback. With Jake Bauer I think it is being an 'A' prospect at 1B for TB, what would get them interested in giving the Rockies Gillaspie who I think is a 'B' prospect at 1B for TB? I could see a rare prospect for prospect trade here. I was wondering if anyone else would think so as well? I'm looking to move Desmond into more of a Zobrist role in 2018.