JP3700

A comparison of Jacoby Ellsbury and Stephen Drew in 2013. At the plate and their defense. Ellsbury - .781 OPS Drew - .776 OPS Ellsbury - Fielding adjusted to position +12.0 Drew - Fielding adjusted to position +10.9 Comparison of the same over their career. Ellsbury - .789 OPS Drew - .764 OPS Ellsbury - +47.8 Drew - +22.0 A few other things to consider. Ellsbury put up a .928 OPS in 2011. His highest OPS in any other full season is the .781 in 2013. Drew was worth -17.1 fielding in his first three years. His last five years +39.1. They are both 30 years old. Ellsbury contract - 7 years,$153 million Drew contract - ? I know Ellsbury adds value with his base running, but Drew at $100M less starts to look like a steal.

I think Drew is being way undervalued here. Shortstops who hit league average with good defense don't grow on trees. As I mentioned before, Tulo and Peralta are the only players who've met that standard in the last three years. Drew just missed due to his bad start coming back from injury in 2012. The comparison to Florimon was just not accurate. Drew was 40% better than Florimon at the plate in 2013. Drew - wRC+ 109. Florimon - wRC+ 68. I would not overpay, but I wouldn't rule it out. I'd wait it out and see if the market thinned. Value is value.

Josh Willingham is coming off the worst full season of his career. It's very easy to say that this was due to a 34 year old player reaching his inevitable decline. But is it really that simple? I wanted to take a deeper look at the numbers to see if this was the case. Willingham actually started his 2013 campaign off well. He continued where he had left off in 2012. Josh posted a .250/.400/.544 slash line in April. Unfortunately, that would be the only month where he was above league average at the plate. What happened? On April 27 the Twins were playing a home game against the Texas Rangers. In that game, Willingham thought he'd show off his wheels and steal second base. It was a success! The Hammer had stolen his first base of the season. Unfortunately, in that moment of glory, Josh awkwardly slid into second base and injured his knee. At the time, it didn't seem to be too serious. However, it became increasingly clear that something wasn't right. Willingham continued to play the next two months. Between April 27 and June 30 he posted a slash line of .214/.342/.353. The decision was finally made for Josh to have surgery. On August 9 Willingham rushed back to his team and made his return to the lineup. Like the good teammate that he is, he came back ahead of schedule. Unfortunately, he was not rewarded for it. After his return Pedro Flo.. I mean Willingham finished the season hitting .182/.318/.315. Did Willingham really decline that much? Did he go from being a power hitting outfielder to a light hitting middle infielder? Let's take a look at some secondary numbers, to really evaluate whether his regression was due to decline or more injury related. 2013 Career LD%: 18.3 19.0 GB%: 36.5 36.9 FB%: 45.2 44.1 IFFB%: 17.6 12.8 HR/FB: 11.8 15.1 As you can see. Other than hitting more infield pop ups and his HR to FB ratio dropping, everything else is in line with his career numbers. Now, let's take a look at his plate discipline. This will compare his approach in 2013 to his career year in 2012. 2012 2013 BB%: 12.4 14.0 K%: 22.9 27.2 O-Sw%: 21.7 21.5 Z-SW%: 62.7 59.8 SW%: 40.4 38.6 SwStr%: 9.5 10.3 Just in case you aren't aware. O-Sw% is the percentage of pitches the batter swings at outside the strike zone. Z-Sw% is the percentage of pitches the batter swings at inside the strike zone. Sw% is the total percentage of pitches a batter swings at. SwStr% is the batter's swinging strike percentage. It looks like Josh took a more patient approach. Swinging at less pitches. Which helps explain his increase in walk and strike out rates. The increase in SwStr% is a little worrisome, but it isn't a big enough jump to worry too much about. The big thing to me is that his O-Sw% was the same. Meaning he wasn't chasing bad pitches. For a comparison, Oswaldo Arcia had a 37.3 O-Sw% in 2013. All in all, I see very little that tells me Willingham was a much different hitter in 2013. He got on base, he struck out and he hit fly balls. The thing that went missing was his power. However, his power outage seemed to correlate with his knee injury. Is it fair to think that Willingham's early season .944 OPS would have come down to earth? Of course. I think it's also fair to think that the injury, along with rushing back from it, were the main reasons for his horrible 2013. If the Hammer shows up healthy in 2014, I think his career .830 OPS is a reasonable projection. Let's just hope he doesn't go Darin Mastroianni on us again.

Just because your team doesn't perform to it's projection doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do. At the time, Detroit was looking to push themselves over the top. The Red Sox were a 90 win team in 2011 and won 69 games in 2012. Just because they won 69 games doesn't mean they weren't putting a 90 win team on the field on opening day. This happens quite often. It happened to the Nationals this year. Just not to that extreme. The difference is how often do 69 win teams win 90?

Just about every post I've had, referred to timing. I'm pretty sure I've said multiple times that I would advocate a trade if we were higher on the win curve. I also stated that you can make an argument for Pittsburgh to make that trade when I posted the link to Cameron's article. I think it's a closer decision due to their lack of finances. It would be like the Rays trading to the NL Rays. The whole premise of timing is based on surplus value. Since the Twins will be spending somewhere in the $90-110M range, they will naturally have to get a surplus value from players making below what they're worth to be an above .500 team. You're not going to achieve that by playing replacement level players and you aren't going to achieve that by buying players through free agency. Your best bet is to let your major league ready prospects play and hope a core of them become league average+ players. Then you make the big splash. If you agree that the timing is not right, I'm not even sure what else there is to discuss.

The fact that the costs aren't variable is the important factor. It now just comes down to performance. Whether they bust or pan out makes no difference. It's about the risk, reward. The risk is the league minimum salary. The reward is league average or above performance. When your other options are replacement level players, that has more value to you. Let's say it takes Meyer, Gibson, Arcia and filler to acquire Price. You now have Worley, Diamond and Presley in those spots while increasing payroll to $92M. Now what do you do? You just traded for Price and filled out your roster with replacement level players. You're comparing an 88 win team trading for a 24 year old position player to a 66 win team trading for a 28 year old pitcher.

Of course it's projecting. Everything involves projecting. We are projecting David Price will continue to be an ace. The Rangers are projecting Profar to improve over a -0.4 WAR season. When you sign a free agent, you project what they will be worth over the time frame that you plan to sign him. So to say projecting player development is irrelevant, is just irresponsible. Established players bust or get hurt, just like prospects do. The point is that the Twins need that surplus value that young, cost controlled players may provide. Let's use that Pirates example. Let's just say they traded Cole, Marte and filler for Price last year. Those two players combined for 6.9 WAR. Price was worth 4.4 WAR. They just made themselves 2-3 games worse. Add into account that Price made more than Liriano and Martin combined. So his salary would prevent them from signing those two players. That's another 7.2 WAR. They just made themselves 10 games worse. That's why it's not smart for small and mid market teams to make moves like this when they are still so low on the win curve. They are better off betting that their young, cost controlled players perform while signing high upside free agents. Then when you are higher on the win curve, you make this type of trade. The main thing is that you don't sell off those young players with years of control that helped you get higher on the win curve. Within the next two years, if the Twins project to be an 85 win team, that has cost controlled pieces in place who are providing that surplus value. Then you make this type of move with a Kohl Stewart+ type trade. A free agent signing is still preferred, but those players aren't always available. Here is a good read by Dave Cameron about surplus value and David Price. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-price-for-david-price/. It's a little different because he's actually using a 90+ win team. So I can actually see an argument for the trade. But, it still shows why it doesn't make sense to trade major league ready young players with 6+ years of control.

dWAR for catchers is still one of the hardest thing to quantify. Pitch framing hasn't been added to their value, although that should be coming soon. Then you have to think about the catcher's ability to call a game and manage a pitching staff. Unfortunately, even though we know there is value, it is impossible to quantify. But you can just imagine how much more value Yadier Molina would provide over a Josmil Pinto, in this aspect of the game.

I've read hundreds of posts on how bad Doumit is behind the plate. How bad he is at pitch framing. Yet, I see all this support for John Buck. Here's an article on pitch framing.. http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-baseball/24280722/leaderboarding-the-best-catchers-at-framing-pitches-in-2013 As you can see, Buck tops the list of worst pitch framers in baseball. Buck has been worth -58 DRS (Defensive Runs Saved) in about 8600 innings behind the plate. Doumit has been worth -16 DRS in about 4300 innings. Just some food for thought.

Surplus value completely matters. It's part of team building. Especially to small and mid market teams. Teams like that need to project surplus value to compete. The goal is to try to add as many wins to your roster as possible, within your budget. The Pirates made the playoffs this year because they received a huge amount of surplus value from their players. Free agents like Liriano and Martin were worth $25M+ over what they were making. $25M+ that a team like the Pirates can't afford to spend. If they had performed to the value of their salaries, the Pirates miss the playoffs. That doesn't even include the value they received from guys making the league minimum. Like Marte, Cole and Locke. You can look across the league at any successful small to mid market team, and see the same thing. This is what you aim for. This is why the Twins have completely fallen off. They are getting little to zero value out of their young, cost controlled players. This is why the Cardinals are holding on to their young, cost controlled players. They are needed to compete. As I mentioned, you need to be a 40 WAR team, just to be in contention. That's $200M+ worth of value, depending on how much you value a win. That's why the large market teams, are at such a competitive advantage. They have more room for error, as they don't need as much surplus value out of their players.

That "good year with injuries", Morse was valued as a replacement level player(0.0 WAR). The same as Willingham this past year. If you've kept up with the reports on the Mariners, their two targets are Nelson Cruz and Corey Hart. So maybe they haven't learned their lesson. I used Morse as a comparison to establish their need of a certain type of player and their willingness to overpay. If you read the article I stated.. Hammer is coming off a down, injury-riddled season. Although I hate the thought of selling low Perkins is obviously the biggest piece in this trade So in no way have I overplayed his value. There are just other factors involved here, including Perkins being involved in the deal.

I just wanted to add that if I was around for that post, I would have fully supported your idea. Just like if the Twins were coming off an 87 win season in 2013, I'd support trading for Price.

Wow, a whole army? We have an army of 3+ win players coming up from the minors? Wow, let me get my world series tickets now. See you at the parade! Then you go on to mention that some prospects bust and how people are violently optimistic on our prospects. Which one is it? Do you assume our propects will be 3+ win players or are you realistic about our prospects? Just to give you an idea. Jurickson Profar. The consensus #1 prospect going into 2013, just put up a -0.4 WAR season. I'm all for being aggressive. In my blueprint, I had the Twins signing Max Scherzer to a 7 year deal next offseason. I understand that there is money, and we have a healthy amount of impact prospects. There should be a good 6-8 year window of success coming up. Trading several of those prospects that you will likely need during that window, is counter productive.

Of course it comes back to how you project them as a major league player. If the Mariners considered any of these guys as untouchable than the point is moot. That's why I stated in the article that the prospects being involved are interchangeable. Although I have a great fondness for Taylor. Every team has financial restraints, especially a team like the Mariners. I've touched on every single thing you mentioned. They have $40-50 million to spend, and have at least 5 or 6 positions to upgrade. Their objective is obviously to win now. I didn't supply scouting reports, other than a brief one on Taylor. I didn't want to make it too long, and I felt if someone was that interested, they could look up the other players discussed. They've all made top 10 Mariners prospect lists in various years, with Maurer and Taylor ranking as high as #5 on a couple. Tell that to Michael Morse. Going into last year, he had only one productive season in the majors. Willingham had 7 straight until last year. Morse is actually an even worse defender than Willingham and even more injury prone. He was also coming off a down year. One year of Morse netted the Nats a package of prospects as good, if not superior to the one being suggested. Just by himself. It's about lineup construction. Take a look at the Mariners roster. They have a left handed bat at second, short, third, center and right field. Their first baseman Smoak is a switch hitter who can't hit lefties (.548 OPS batting right handed in 2013) . There's a reason why I mentioned right handed. Corey Hart is the only player that fits, and he is coming off two major knee surgeries.

Where did I state Meyer = Price? I said Meyer has a good chance to provide more surplus value than Price over the six years that were being discussed. Where is Taylor = Mauer scoffed? I don't see it. My surplus value argument has stayed quite consistent.. "The point is, this is what trades involving prospects are all about. The team getting the major league players, are acquiring them to win now. The team acquiring the prospects are banking on those players having more value in the long run. Even if that trio is only worth 3.3 WAR in 2014, that's 3.3 more than they would get out of the trio of prospects. If they're currently a .500 team, that gets them to about 85. That's what you do when you're contending. You add as many wins as possible." The difference is that the Mariners forced their hand by signing Cano. As I mentioned in the article. It is a curious move for a 71 win team. This would be like the Twins trading for Price tomorrow. As bad as the move would be, you'd be compounding the mistake by not make any additional moves. I would then be willing to trade prospects to add as many wins as possible. This is when you trade that projected surplus value, for current value. Another thing that you're missing is that you're comparing Meyer to the prospects being mentioned. Meyer is close to big league ready, a top 50 prospect and a good bet to help in the short term. If a player like Meyer would have been involved in this trade suggestion, then it would make no sense. The players being suggested have little to no chance of making an impact on the 2014 Mariners. So the 3-4 wins you've added, is your actual net gain. Which is what I stated in the other thread.. "The fact that you'd also be trading players that would be providing some of that needed surplus value, also makes no sense. I'm okay with jumping the gun. By assuming Buxton, Sano and Meyer will help the team and making a bold move. But losing their value, to gain Price's defeats the purpose. That's why the Royals trade for Shields was incredibly stupid. Not just because it was an overpay. They traded Myers, a major league ready contributor. They took away 2.5 wins making the league minimum for 4.5 wins making $12M." As for the Willingham discussion. Sure, there are available trade targets. However, other than teams like the Marlins, Astros and Cubs, every other team is gearing up to contend. They're unlikely to be willing to trade something that is such a rare commodity. Teams like the Giants, Dbacks and Orioles have all been reportedly seeking a right handed, power hitting, corner outfielder. The market is rather thin. Of course the M's are allowed to do business with any team they see fit. This is, after all, a trade proposal. However, there are plenty of factors to why these two teams would fit as trade partners.

Other then the Oliver projections, all I've seen is your own perceived value of the players. Jay just added a couple of other good examples, of trades that directly relate to the value of the players suggested. There are many factors to trades other than the value of the players involved. Other than the ones I've stated, Seattle is a place where hitters do not want to go. They have never been able to get a big free agent to sign there. That's why they had to outbid the Yankees by $65 million for Cano. You're also giving this front office a lot of credit. This is the same team, that just last year, traded for Michael Morse. They traded 29 year John Jaso for 31 year old Michael Morse. Jaso had three years of control, Morse had one. Jaso was coming off a 2.6 WAR season, Morse was coming off a 0.0 WAR season. Jaso is a catcher, Morse is a DH acting like an outfielder. The Nats actually received A.J. Cole (top 100 pitching prospect), Ian Krol (later flipped as part of the Doug Fister trade) and Blake Treinen, if you want to look at it that way. All for one year of Morse. These are just factors you have yet to acknowledge.

Correct. Oliver projections of prospects have no merit in this conversation. First of all, there is no major league data to project with. Secondly, the WAR projections are based on an equal 600 AB per season. There are no guarantees that any prospect will ever reach 600 AB in their career, let alone one season. I agree that this is very unlikely to happen. I don't think I've ever seen a fan suggested trade come to fruition. The premise is not the trade itself. It's that these are the kind of moves that TR should be looking at. Take advantage of a desperate team in need. Give them a call, and see what they're willing to offer. Don't be afraid to add value, even if it doesn't make sense for the short term. I come to Twins Daily, not only for the great news, interviews and updates. I also like to read those fan suggested trades. I like to read others' thoughts and opinions. No matter how much I disagree with them. They're fun to read. Often times it gets me thinking or I might learn something new.

The O's had also claimed Michael Morse, so they had another option. Albeit, an inferior one. If not for that, who knows what would have happened. Especially considering they still gave up one of their top 10 prospects for Morse. As in the case of Perkins, we just don't know what's been offered for Willingham. I do know that none of the players suggested are top 100 prospects like Rodriguez is. I also know the market is thin for corner power. Either way, I think we're going in circles here. Multiple people have already posted that the Twins are getting the short end of the suggested deal. You are stating the opposite. We all have opinions, which makes for good debate. I personally think it's a fair deal.

Deadline deals are different because trades are generally the only avenue to upgrade your team during the season. It goes back to supply and demand. The Mariners aren't the Yankees or Dodgers. They can't just sign free agents for inflated salaries, on long term deals. The M's current outfield is Abraham Almonte, Dustin Ackley and Michael Saunders. The demand is clearly there. The only comparable player to Willingham on the free agent market is Nelson Cruz. He is just as bad defensively and on the bases. Steamer has them projected to be the same player next year and Josh will cost $50+ million less. Where in free agency, or in the trade market can they add a reliever like Perkins, who makes as little as he does? The M's had the second worst bullpen in baseball last year, only because the Astros are still considered a team. Their bullpen ERA was a full run higher than the league average. They need to add multiple relievers, on a limited budget. Also, keep in mind that not one of the players mentioned have been considered a top 100 prospect. It's not like the suggestion was Walker, Miller and Franklin. By the way, Willingham did have interest last year at the deadline. Even coming off of an injury. Orioles balked when TR asked for top 100 prospect, Eduardo Rodriguez. It was also reported that TR received plenty of calls for Perkins, but he wasn't interested in moving him.

Ah, I disagree with you there. The Twins aren't the Dodgers or the Yankees. Surplus value is more important to a team like the Twins. You need to be a 40 WAR team to just be in contention for the playoffs. If there isn't any surplus value, your team will be under 20 WAR with a $100M budget. The Twins need to find multiple Brian Doziers. Not necessarily his ability, but league average to above average players making little money. At that point, David Price and his contract makes sense to have. The fact that you'd also be trading players that would be providing some of that needed surplus value, also makes no sense. I'm okay with jumping the gun. By assuming Buxton, Sano and Meyer will help the team and making a bold move. But losing their value, to gain Price's defeats the purpose. That's why the Royals trade for Shields was incredibly stupid. Not just because it was an overpay. They traded Myers, a major league ready contributor. They took away 2.5 wins making the league minimum for 4.5 wins making $12M.

I had no idea Oliver projections were set in stone. Why would the Mariners ever trade away Taylor? He's going to be worth $40+ million in surplus value over that time frame. Why would anyone ever trade any prospects? Why did the Rangers trade 6 years of Edwards(top 100 prospect), Olt(former top 100 prospect), Grimm and Ramirez for 13 starts of Garza? He had put up 1.5 WAR in the first half of the season with the cubs. So let's just say he projected to be worth another 1.5 WAR with the Rangers. They traded how many wins for 1.5 wins? He ended up being worth -.1 by the way. Jon Daniels must be a GM that's "near stupid enough". The point is, this is what trades involving prospects are all about. The team getting the major league players, are acquiring them to win now. The team acquiring the prospects are banking on those players having more value in the long run. Even if that trio is only worth 3.3 WAR in 2014, that's 3.3 more than they would get out of the trio of prospects. If they're currently a .500 team, that gets them to about 85. That's what you do when you're contending. You add as many wins as possible. As for there being 29 teams. It comes down to how many teams are willing to move a right handed corner outfielder with a career 123 wRC+? How many teams are moving a top ten reliever making $12M over the next 3 years?

Leviathan, I think we're on the same page overall. We just have different arguments. Price is by far a more valuable commodity, due to being a proven front line starter. 4+ win pitchers don't grow on trees. I've agreed with you and Kab of that being true. He's a much better bet to perform at a higher level than Meyer over the next six years. What I was stating is their values of cost vs. performance over the next six years, and the value in terms of dollars. Meyer is a better bet to provide more surplus value than Price during that six year window. As for the "good bet" thing. I've played poker for a living for years, so perhaps my thoughts on good bets is a little skewed. You give me odds, I'm taking it

Is it? Wish you'd give some points to support that. Mine were mentioned in the article, but let me just break it down a little. Nelson Cruz is the remaining outfielder in free agency, that fits what they're looking for. Bats right handed, and supplies power. He's most likely going to command 4yrs, $60+ million. He turns 34 in July and his career wRC+ is 114. Josh Willingham is owed 1yr, $7M. He's going to be 35 on opening day and his career wRC+ is 123. Which player makes sense to the M's? The remaning "proven closers" on the market are Grant Balfour(36), Joaquin Benoit(36) and Fernando Rodney(37). All are are seeking multi-year contracts worth at least double Perkins's AAV. Maurer has upside but he is most likely going to start in AAA coming off his bad year. They can't afford to throw a young pitcher out there to get shelled. That's why someone reliable like Correia makes sense. The fact that he is signed for only one year is a bonus. Taylor and Romero are both blocked at their positions so they are trading a surplus. As I mentioned in the article, the names are interchangeable. They have plenty of young talent. The premise of the article is in the last paragraph. It's a combination of things, that make a trade make sense. Not just what's being exchanged. The Shields trade was laughable. The mid-season Garza trade was laughable. The Robinson Cano signing itself, is extremely laughable. It's surprising what teams will do when they are trying to contend, and are limited in options.

I like Perkins as much as anyone. He's a joy to watch pitch, especially compared to the starting pitching we've been throwing out there. But, as I mentioned, he's a reliever. Relievers and their results are highly volatile. To think that he's still going to be the same pitcher, for the next five years, is just not realistic. Plenty of relievers are proven, until they're not. Dave Cameron wrote a great article on relievers in July this year. Here is an excerpt.. "Let’s just look at where the top 10 under-30 relievers from the 2010 season are now, just for fun? Remember, this is good young relievers, most of whom were under club control for many years. Carlos Marmol, +2.8 WAR: DFA’d, traded in salary dump, in minors Brian Wilson, +2.5 WAR: Surgery, hasn’t pitched since start of last year Hong-Chih Kuo, +2.3 WAR: Surgery, inability to throw strikes, out of baseball Neftali Feliz, +2.0 WAR: Surgery, hasn’t pitched in 2013 Sean Marshall, +1.9 WAR: Has pitched 7 innings this year due to sore shoulder Joakim Soria, +1.9 WAR: Surgery, hasn’t pitched since 2011 John Axford, +1.8 WAR: Lost closer job, pitching middle relief, likely non-tender Daniel Bard, +1.6 WAR: Lost strike zone, sent to AA, now on DL Jonny Venters, +1.6 WAR: Surgery, out for the season Juan Oviedo, +1.4 WAR: Surgery, out for the season This isn’t a cherry picked list of guys who were good and then washed out. This is the top 10 under-30 relievers by WAR just a couple of years ago. There isn’t a single pitcher on that list that has any real value in 2013. The Brewers are likely to trade Axford for a pittance, as some team takes a shot on him finishing strong as a setup guy, but everyone else is either rehabbing or trying to get back to the big leagues in some form. John Axford is the success story of the group." Just think about it, how many relievers are good, from year to year?.. It's hard to think of many..

Nothing wrong with negative. I hate giving up Perkins as well, but he's a relief pitcher. Maurer IS one of their top pitching prospects. If he still had his prospect status that is. He sits at 92-95 and tops out at 99. Also has a wipe out slider, with a curve and a change. His problem is command. He's only 23 though, so there's still plenty of upside there. I'm also very high on Taylor. As I mentioned, he profiles as an everyday SS to me. Romero is a little old, but he can hit. His floor should be utility player with some pop. Ceiling is an everyday player with some versatility. Martin Prado like. If you can just get one above average player, whether it be a pitcher or a position player, it would be more than worth it.