Quintana to the Cubs

[Vanimal46]

 

Contrary to many opinions we're hearing on this thread, I for one think they could readily put a package together to entice a trade for a pitcher of roughly Quintana's caliber without coming even close to decimating their talent pipeline. Frankly, my wish list includes an off-season FA signing AND a trade of surplus prospects for two rotation mainstays, one being a 2/3 guy. (I think of Quintana as a 1/2).

 

I'm right there with you, Bird. The White Sox took on more risk than the package the Twins could have offered. Jimenez and Cease may have high prospect rankings, but there's a loooong ways to go before they're MLB ready. Lots of things can happen from A ball to MLB. 

[gunnarthor]

 

Personally, my tinfoil theory is that some FO's are really good at putting lipstick on their prospects with the national writers. The newest market inefficiency. A particular specialty of Epstein's, I think.

Actually, Callis sorta confirmed that years ago when he was still at BA. He said Red Sox and Yankee prospects tend to get overhyped - he specifically mentioned Phil Hughes - because they were the big teams. He also said that teams with farms near the I-95 (Trenton, Lehigh Valley, Wilmington) get more coverage because the writers live in those areas so they might not see some teams until they go through those areas.

[kab21]

 

Just curious as to what people are thinking Santana's market might be given the Quintana trade and the likelihood that Archer really isn't on the market...

 

Using the Yankees as an example (just because someone brought them up), could any of these be about right Santana trade? (That is, a Santana trade that Falvey and Levine would actually accept with the Twins being borderline "in it"). 

 

Option 1:

LHP Justus Sheffield (#66 mlb, #73 BA - currently in AA)

RHP Chance Adams (#93 mlb, not ranked in BA top 100 - currently in AAA)

 

 

Option 2:

LHP Justus Sheffield (#66 mlb, #73 BA - currently in AA)

RHP Albert Abreu (no top 100s, #10 Yankees prospect, potential frontline starter but likely reliever - currently in A+)

OF Estevan Florial (no top 100s, #15 Yankees prospect - currently in A)

Excellent post. 

I think these are fair values for Ervin considering all of the arguments that people make that he has to be traded now. There is a top 50-ish pitching prospect and 1-2 top 200-ish prospects. I like the 2nd deal more since it would give the Twins 4 MLB ready pitchers at some point in 2018.

But it isn't enough for me to throw the white flag on the season. That is a completely demoralizing thing to do and trading 1 of 2 halfway decent starters is completely throwing in the towel. This isn't like the Yankees return last year when they did this. They got back legitimately great prospects. Getting a mid rotation prospect just doesn't do enough.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Actually, Callis sorta confirmed that years ago when he was still at BA. He said Red Sox and Yankee prospects tend to get overhyped - he specifically mentioned Phil Hughes - because they were the big teams. He also said that teams with farms near the I-95 (Trenton, Lehigh Valley, Wilmington) get more coverage because the writers live in those areas so they might not see some teams until they go through those areas.

 

I'm guessing that has changed a bit by now?  There are more scouting groups and they seem more decentralized.  And of course there is MILB.TV, so you don't have to take someone else's word for it if you don't want to.

 

 

I mean, the idea that Theo Epstein has a specialty for putting lipstick on his prospects, in general, seems a bit much.  The Red Sox and the Cubs have produced tons of talent.

 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Just curious as to what people are thinking Santana's market might be given the Quintana trade and the likelihood that Archer really isn't on the market...

 

Using the Yankees as an example (just because someone brought them up), could any of these be about right Santana trade? (That is, a Santana trade that Falvey and Levine would actually accept with the Twins being borderline "in it"). 

 

Option 1:

LHP Justus Sheffield (#66 mlb, #73 BA - currently in AA)

RHP Chance Adams (#93 mlb, not ranked in BA top 100 - currently in AAA)

 

 

Option 2:

LHP Justus Sheffield (#66 mlb, #73 BA - currently in AA)

RHP Albert Abreu (no top 100s, #10 Yankees prospect, potential frontline starter but likely reliever - currently in A+)

OF Estevan Florial (no top 100s, #15 Yankees prospect - currently in A)

I feel like option #1 would not be forthcoming from these Yankees.  Adams might be likely to get called up instead.

 

#2 might be closer. I don't know much about the other guys but I feel like Sheffield plus one interesting guy might be the limit.

 

Keep in mind that Ervin himself is posting his worst FIP in 5 years, and he's only a ~3.90 ERA guy since April.  The Yankees seem to have that already in Sabathia, Severino, and Montgomery, and Tanaka and Pineda certainly have that potential and would seem likely to get the opportunity.  Cost-benefit wise, they may prefer to either aim higher than Santana if possible, or roll the dice on internal options and bargain pickups instead?

EDIT: Pineda might be out for TJ surgery.  That would certainly up the Yankees desire for a veteran starter.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I feel like option #1 would not be forthcoming from these Yankees.  Adams might be likely to get called up instead.

 

#2 might be closer. I don't know much about the other guys but I feel like Sheffield plus one interesting guy might be the limit.

 

Keep in mind that Ervin himself is posting his worst FIP in 5 years, and he's only a ~3.90 ERA guy since April.  The Yankees seem to have that already in Sabathia, Severino, and Montgomery, and Tanaka and Pineda certainly have that potential and would seem likely to get the opportunity.  Cost-benefit wise, they may prefer to either aim higher than Santana if possible, or roll the dice on internal options and bargain pickups instead?

 

Well, I think you are mixing 2 things.

 

1. Is that level of prospect return about right, regardless of the team (as the OP says it's an example)?

 

2. Will the Yankees, in context of their options and where they feel they are in the reload, do either trade?

 

1. I think that's about right, but 2 is probably closer to about right than 1.

2. No, they won't do this, as they are committed to a process of aiming for next year/the year after. And, they have internal options that might be around as good as ESan.

[Vanimal46]

FanGraphs posted "Projecting the Prospects in the Jose Quintana Trade"

 

Jimenez projects well. The others, not so much. 

[kab21]

 

Keep in mind that Ervin himself is posting his worst FIP in 5 years, and he's only a ~3.90 ERA guy since April.  The Yankees seem to have that already in Sabathia, Severino, and Montgomery, and Tanaka and Pineda certainly have that potential and would seem likely to get the opportunity.  Cost-benefit wise, they may prefer to either aim higher than Santana if possible, or roll the dice on internal options and bargain pickups instead?

Doesn't everyone (including opposing GMs) expect Ervin to be an upper 3 ERA pitcher since that is what he has been for his entire career? I just don't see the return being high enough (for example the theoretical Justus Sheffield) to make trading worth it for a team that has so little pitching.

[Mike Sixel]

With Pineda needing TJ.....it might be that the Yankees want ESan now.....doubt it, but possible.

[bird]

 

Not really. Check out their Fangraphs pages -- Jimenez has scouting grades of 50/70 for game power and 70/80 for raw power, as compared to Javier's 20/45 and 30/50. Javier is not bad, of course, but his prospect upside is more like Nick Gordon.

And it takes a pretty huge discount when he is 2-3 years away from that, and still hasn't left rookie league ball. A lot of uncertainty yet whether he will even reach that point, much less how he will someday transition to the majors.

Which is all to say, you'd need more than just "another piece" to make up the gap between them.

 

 

Agreed. My question is about what it would take to acquire a 1/2 type starter given today's ever--fluid market, and my skepticism is directed to opinions that the Twins simply couldn't put together an attractive package, and if they did whether that would decimate the tallent pipeline to nearly the extent many are suggesting.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

With Pineda needing TJ.....it might be that the Yankees want ESan now.....doubt it, but possible.

The Pineda news certainly makes their need clearer.

 

But it could push them to go bigger after Gray or Cole.

 

There are a few guys still on the market that teams absolutely have to deal.  Feldman and Cahill are doing well, and there's a few more like that who are at least eating innings.  Expiring contracts, on teams going nowhere.  If I was a GM, I'd probably either aim big or just wait out the must-trade guys, rather than haggle with the Twins who have their own clear utility for retaining Santana for 2017-2019.

[Mike Sixel]

 

The Pineda news certainly makes their need clearer.

 

But it could push them to go bigger after Gray or Cole.

 

There are a few guys still on the market that teams absolutely have to deal.  Feldman and Cahill are doing well, and there's a few more like that who are at least eating innings.  Expiring contracts, on teams going nowhere.  If I was a GM, I'd probably either aim big or just wait out the must-trade guys, rather than haggle with the Twins who have their own clear utility for retaining Santana for 2017-2019.

 

Oh, I'm with you all the way on that...

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Agreed. My question is about what it would take to acquire a 1/2 type starter given today's ever--fluid market, and my skepticism is directed to opinions that the Twins simply couldn't put together an attractive package, and if they did whether that would decimate the tallent pipeline to nearly the extent many are suggesting.

Well, I'm not sure many/any deals have come together in quantity over quality in recent history, at least not for a guy like Quintana.  Even the Hamels deal was basically 3 top ~100 guys, plus Eickhoff who almost immediately slotted effectively into the Philly rotation.

 

The Twins don't have an elite guy, and they don't even seem to have multiple pieces in the next tier.  History isn't much of a guide here to say what the Twins could comparably offer, so I'm going to assume that either A. we couldn't make a comparable offer, and/or B. making a comparable offer with what we had would in fact have emptied our system to an uncomfortable degree.

[Han Joelo]

 

I'm guessing that has changed a bit by now?  There are more scouting groups and they seem more decentralized.  And of course there is MILB.TV, so you don't have to take someone else's word for it if you don't want to.

 

 

I mean, the idea that Theo Epstein has a specialty for putting lipstick on his prospects, in general, seems a bit much.  The Red Sox and the Cubs have produced tons of talent.

I'll counter your rational, reality based statement with some more wild, unjustified speculation:

 

In order for this subterfuge to work, a team HAS to be successful at producing lots of talent.  That way it is more believable when a subpar prospect is talked up.  If I were an enterprising young investigative reporter on the Ringer or something, I'd pursue this.

 

At any rate, Rick Hahn, instead of being denigrated for trading away an in-their-prime core (after failing to surround that core with the right complementary pieces and manager), is lauded for nabbing a bunch of prospects that are highly rated by someone.  

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

At any rate, Rick Hahn, instead of being denigrated for trading away an in-their-prime core (after failing to surround that core with the right complementary pieces and manager), is lauded for nabbing a bunch of prospects that are highly rated by someone.  

I think there has been plenty of denigrating of Hahn and White Sox.  To the extent they are lauded now, it might be simply recognizing that he is changing his previously failed strategy.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I think there has been plenty of denigrating of Hahn and White Sox.  To the extent they are lauded now, it might be simply recognizing that he is changing his previously failed strategy.

 

people do change and learn and grow. Like, all the time. It's a good quality, contrary to what some might say.

[old nurse]

 

I'm guessing that has changed a bit by now?  There are more scouting groups and they seem more decentralized.  And of course there is MILB.TV, so you don't have to take someone else's word for it if you don't want to.

 

 

I mean, the idea that Theo Epstein has a specialty for putting lipstick on his prospects, in general, seems a bit much.  The Red Sox and the Cubs have produced tons of talent.

All the access and the geniuses had Judge rated 93, 45 63,  B/B-,  prospect this spring.

[Mike Sixel]

 

All the access and the geniuses had Judge rated 93, 45 63,  B/B-,  prospect this spring.

 

Point being that being wrong on one or four prospects proves all projection systems are bad?

 

The data is actually pretty clear, when you look at ratings and career WAR, there is a fairly strong correlation, despite the obvious misses.

[jimmer]

 

Point being that being wrong on one or four prospects proves all projection systems are bad?

 

The data is actually pretty clear, when you look at ratings and career WAR, there is a fairly strong correlation, despite the obvious misses.

Think about where the geniuses kept ranking Buxton ;-)

[Mike Sixel]

 

Think about where the geniuses kept ranking Buxton ;-)

 

I don't think people really think about how projection systems work, in baseball, in the stock market, in airline safety, in any part of life. Some people just don't really want to believe that projection systems are about most likely outcomes, not all possible outcomes (though those are usually in the data too, just not talked about because you'd have to write 100000000000 words to cover all possibilities).

[jimmer]

 

I don't think people really think about how projection systems work, in baseball, in the stock market, in airline safety, in any part of life. Some people just don't really want to believe that projection systems are about most likely outcomes, not all possible outcomes (though those are usually in the data too, just not talked about because you'd have to write 100000000000 words to cover all possibilities).

Dude, I was just messin' :-)

[Mike Sixel]

 

Dude, I was just messin' :-)

 

I knew that, wasn't aimed at you....

 

and dang, I wish the non-Cameron crowd had been more right about Buxton than Dave has been so far...

[old nurse]

 

Point being that being wrong on one or four prospects proves all projection systems are bad?

 

The data is actually pretty clear, when you look at ratings and career WAR, there is a fairly strong correlation, despitthe obvious misses.

Yup. top 10 ranking means as a position player you have about a 36% chance of being a stud player, 24% for pitchers.  Somewhere close to 50% bust rates.  It is not being wrong on one or 4 prospects, it is half of them.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Yup. top 10 ranking means as a position player you have about a 36% chance of being a stud player, 24% for pitchers.  Somewhere close to 50% bust rates.  It is not being wrong on one or 4 prospects, it is half of them.

 

You realize you just said that there is a very strong correlation to success in the rankings. You need to look at the population to understand the process, not each item in the population. 

[markos]

 

Yup. top 10 ranking means as a position player you have about a 36% chance of being a stud player, 24% for pitchers.  Somewhere close to 50% bust rates.  It is not being wrong on one or 4 prospects, it is half of them.

I'm really curious where you got your numbers from - particularly what your definitions of "stud" and "bust" are. I'm working on a project that is looking at this very topic. I don't have my data in front of me, but IIRC my numbers (using bWAR and BA top-100 lists since 1990) indicate that top-10 hitters are pretty good bets.
~60% end up above-average (>2 WAR/season)
~25% end up as a below average contributor (<2, >0.5 WAR/season)
~15% end up as a "bust" (<0.5 WAR/season)
Now that doesn't necessarily contradict your comment (different definitions of stud and bust and whatnot). I'm mostly curious of other data sources that may or may not corroborate my analysis.

[old nurse]

 

I'm really curious where you got your numbers from - particularly what your definitions of "stud" and "bust" are. I'm working on a project that is looking at this very topic. I don't have my data in front of me, but IIRC my numbers (using bWAR and BA top-100 lists since 1990) indicate that top-10 hitters are pretty good bets.
~60% end up above-average (>2 WAR/season)
~25% end up as a below average contributor (<2, >0.5 WAR/season)
~15% end up as a "bust" (<0.5 WAR/season)
Now that doesn't necessarily contradict your comment (different definitions of stud and bust and whatnot). I'm mostly curious of other data sources that may or may not corroborate my analysis.

A study cited in an espn article.   Really, do people not know how to find things on the internet?

[drjim]

Good trade for both teams. Good value for Sox, smart pickup for Cubs.

 

Twins couldn't touch this package.

 

Does provide for another chance to reflect on how the Sox had Sale and Quintana and Eaton on a good contract and couldn't exceed mediocrity.

 

Sox have a really good system, will be interesting to see how the arms shake out. And I'm personally somewhat skeptical of Moncada becoming monster.

[Willihammer]

Katoh+ projections for the specs involved in the trade:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/projecting-the-prospects-in-the-jose-quintana-trade/

 

For comparison Quintana is projected to be worth about 13 WAR including the 2nd half of 2017:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/2017-trade-value-41-to-50/

[Willihammer]

If my back of the napkin math is right, Quintana is projected to provide around $118m in surplus value.

Using FA values from here:

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-recent-history-of-free-agent-pricing/

[Willihammer]

Thought this was interesting. According to Bob Nightingale, the Cubs first target was Michael Fulmer.
 

 

They recently tried to pry All-Star Michael Fulmer away from the Detroit Tigers, but the Tigers had no interest, unless they Cubs were willing to trade infielders Javy Baez and Ian Happ.

Once that trade was dead on arrival, the Cubs and White Sox became engaged in talks on Sunday, with a deal done within 48 hours.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2017/07/13/white-sox-cubs-cold-war-jose-quintana-trade/476409001/#