Otto von Ballpark

Perhaps, but all too often, ALL of the proposed pieces of a trade are players like this. I think 90% of recent trade ideas on this site are comprised solely of the following players: Meyer Arcia D. Santana Vargas Walker Tonkin Suzuki Dean Turner Not even Hicks! It's almost as if you have any recent success and/or placement in a top-10/15 prospect list, you're ineligible to be traded on Twins Daily. Now, if you want to package one of these guys with Berrios, that's a different story.

Why wouldn't Milone be back? He's got 3 more years of team control, and I doubt his arbitration raise will be too steep this winter. Heck, we were willing to guarantee him $2.8 mil for 2015 and still sent him to AAA for a month -- although I guess we won't be able to stash him in AAA next year. Still, between Pelfrey leaving and Nolasco's health, and the wait on Berrios, there is almost certainly a spot for him on our MLB staff.

A player with great raw HR power can still be a near-replacement level player. A team trading for Arcia now, or in a year if he's still treading water near replacement level, will indeed only offer "next to nothing", as you say. That's the very definition of Arcia's trade value approaching zero.

I agree with this new "Meyer rule." It also currently applies to Arcia (and to a lesser extent, Santana, Vargas, etc., although those guys weren't as well-regarded as prospects to begin with). I think Hicks is finding his way back from under the rule, although I don't think he's ready to headline a trade yet, but he could be seen as contributing value.

The A's from 2007-2011 were in a permanent swoon, so you're basically nullifying all of those years and players from your sample. Since they started winning again in 2012, they hadn't had another star to trade until Donaldson. I think the A's of the past 10 years have been trying to operate differently than the A's of the early Beane period -- no more letting stars walk, and no more attempts at long-term contracts like Eric Chavez. Deal early and often. It would have been much more surprising to see Beane deviate from this more recent pattern because of his team's record.

It's not that silly, given the A's pattern. They don't care whether a guy has 3 or 4 years of control left, hence why they are always so willing to deal guys early. The key point for them is not waiting too long to deal star-level talents who can return multiple pieces. Graveman was the 3rd or potentially 4th ranked piece in the deal, that's not assigning him a disproportionate amount of value. By the time the Duensing rule was created, Duensing was a failed starter / middling reliever pushing 30 years old and arbitration. That's basically a valueless player, as far as trades are concerned. Graveman is no star, but given his recent draft status and rapid ascent through the minors, he was much closer to a Baker circa 2006 or Slowey circa 2008 type prospect. Not a star, not a trade headliner, but again, not valueless.

How not? Donaldson was traded as soon as he was eligible for arbitration, the same as Gio Gonzalez, Trevor Cahill, Nick Swisher, etc. (I think a few others like Dan Haren went a year later, but still pretty early.) He was traded for a mix of cheaper present and future pieces, including a not-nearly-as-good-but-competent replacement, a couple pitchers, and a SS prospect on the rise. It seems to fit the pattern pretty well, as do the subsequent moves. Samardzija was flipped for multiple pieces, Norris (from a position of strength) for a couple pieces. Soon-to-be FA Jaso, who wasn't going to get a QO and comp pick, was traded for a player who could (Zobrist). Even Butler was signed first thing in the offseason, which fits the aggressiveness theme. That looks like a regrettable move, but his contract really isn't out of line with past FA attempts by Beane, especially given Butler's relative youth and health. It was a flurry of activity, to be sure, and magnified by their recent midseason deals and contender status, but they seem to fit the theme.

I don't know if it's that baffling. It doesn't always fit any simple "go big", "go cheap", or "rebuild" narrative, but I think there is a pattern. I am not endorsing the pattern or the moves, but it's there. They like to make deals early, and they don't really care about having elite players/prospects and prefer a more even talent spread in their roster and organization. I think they'd rather have a stable 80-85 win projection every year, and give up some likelihood of 90+ win seasons in the process, but also reduce the risk of bottoming out with sub-70 win seasons. Similarly they like to keep payroll steady, although they are not overly concerned with either buying or selling for payroll reasons. So, when they look like a WS contender in early July 2014, they use their elite prospect (Russell) to add 2 SP well ahead of the trade deadline, the better of whom could be flipped again in the offseason or will eventually return a comp pick. Then at the deadline, they exchanged 1.5 years of Cespedes (whose contract forbids a qualifying offer and thus no comp pick) for 0.5 years of Lester and Gomes. Then, early in the offseason, Donaldson and Samardzija are both cashed in for multiple players at different stages of readiness/contribution, including a ready SS and catcher. Then extra catchers and another SS prospect are sent out for comp-pick-eligible Zobrist and a few ready pitchers, with Clippard and Butler helping fill out the roster. Current payroll remains the same, projected payroll is probably mostly unaffected too, I'd guess. Again, not an endorsement of any of these moves, but that's the pattern I see. Not that much different from moves they've been making the past 10 years or so, except Russell and Donaldson are generally viewed as better than Carlos Gonzalez, Gio Gonzalez, Dan Haren, etc. I am sure it is frustrating for their fans at times, but it's certainly interesting for a neutral observer to watch!

So we're really talking about different things then. You're projecting Arcia to improve, which is fine, but it doesn't change the fact that he has more or less stagnated as a nearly average hitter (and nearly replacement level player) from age 21-24. Thus, his trade value has been steadily dropping. And unless he shows some improvement in the next 1.5 years, his value is going to be darn near zero entering his arbitration seasons. Might still be worth keeping around depending on our roster construction (i.e. we don't have better DH options). Either way, not much we can do now but wait and hope he starts showing some more of that talent.

He hits, but roughly around league average so far. If he sticks in this league as a starter, it will be because of significant improvement in some facet of his game (hitting or defense) that he has yet to show.

That's not a good move for the Giants at all. It means zero starts for Matt Duffy (126 OPS+), starts for Hector Sanchez (51 OPS+ the past two years), and more starts for mediocre outfielders (who can currently be benched for 129 OPS+ Brandon Belt, with Posey starting often at 1B). Not to mention increased wear and injury risk for Posey, and zero insurance in case of Posey injury, until they can draft and develop or acquire another decent catching option. All to get Plouffe (110 OPS+) into their lineup for the next 2.5 years for ~$16 mil? Plouffe's a fine player, but that move is unnecessary at best. Frankly, they are doing what the Twins should have done with Ramos in 2010...

I am not definitively calling him a bust, but he's clearly headed further down that path in 2015. This was supposed to be his breakout year and he's basically fighting to get back to the big leagues. He's still young, but few players in the league have sustained much success with a 31% K rate and a 7% BB rate, even with a .200 ISO.

Did you miss the "after 2016" part? Obviously we don't cut Arcia now, but if he's still a ~100 OPS+ bad defense corner OF a year and a half from now, we might not have a lot of options. And given that he is languishing in AAA right now, he might have some work to do just to get back to being a ~100 OPS+ MLB player again. And if Plouffe was a corner outfielder who played bad defense, he would have been a non-tender candidate after 2013 too (when his service time was roughly equivalent to Arcia's projected service time after 2016).

No doubt that losing Plouffe would hurt this year. But fortunately, offering him would be unlikely to address our weaknesses in trade this month anyway, so I doubt our front office would be tempted. The few teams actually looking to deal a MLB ready catcher (or shortstop) are not looking for a veteran 3B in return. I guess Plouffe could bring relief help, but trading a starting position player for a reliever is almost always a bad trade. Maybe if you could get an AJ style return for him, where you get a good controlled reliever plus prospects? Don't know if anyone would be looking to do that kind of trade midseason though.

Paulino's best-case career scenario is becoming Eric Fryer.

Like I said, a glove-first SS is about as "safe" as you can get for a HS pick. Gordon certainly wasn't viewed as a boom-or-bust pick at the time. Low ceiling, high floor. Interestingly, Stewart, who was often viewed as boom-or-bust at the time given his age and experience, has performed more like a "safe" pick too.

Had we signed Jackson, his contract would at least be off the books a year ahead of Nolasco's. And Jackson would have fit in perfectly on the 2015 Twins, given our love for relievers that no one trusts.

Seasons aren't won or lost at any one position

I don't think so. Cespedes had a 116 wRC+ before the trade. In the month of August, Oakland LFers had a 77 wRC+, and then a 61 for September. August/September 2014 Moss 25 starts in LF, 76 wRC+ Fuld 14 starts in LF, 68 wRC+ Gomes 14 starts in LF, 62 wRC+

Like Nolasco, Jackson greatly under-performed his FIP in Chicago. By FIP, he was basically a league-average starter there! Jackson also hardly missed a start, so I would guess Nolasco will have a longer leash for that reason.

Jackson's bullpen numbers haven't been bad this year, but he's been used almost exclusively in a mop-up role, so it's hard to judge if he's really improved. His game-entering leverage index of 0.6 is equal to Stauffer's and May's so far in 2015, or Deduno's from 2014.

Just looked it up -- Barreto was up to #22 on BA's midseason prospect list (which doesn't yet include 2015 draftees or international signings, but still that's pretty good -- just 3 spots behind Berrios). Graveman is the latest effective no-name SP for Oakland this year, with 1.4 WAR already per B-Ref. Lawrie has been healthy and compiling a Plouffe-esque line, to the tune of 1.7 WAR this year. Nolin seems to still be stalled out in AAA. I'd still prefer Donaldson, who is cementing his status as a true superstar on both sides of the ball, but the Oakland return hasn't been embarrassing so far. They are far less likely to win 95 games this year or the next few seasons without Donaldson, but this collection of players might help them project as ~85 win team for longer? Will be interesting to follow.

I don't know if that was the common opinion either. More common was the reason that small-market Oakland has to reload when they can, and trading one guy at peak value for multiple pieces is what they have to do. A lot of commenters seemed to say that, even while acknowledging Toronto likely won the deal. But I think Donaldson was too good, too far away from FA, and Oakland too close to contending to really make this look good for the A's.

I obviously didn't mean they are similar TODAY. But Arcia is much closer to Viciedo circa 2013 than he is to a valuable trade chip right now. Batting from the left side is probably why Arcia has a career 103 OPS+ vs Viciedo's 97. But even the Twins have shown this year how little that performance is worth when it's accompanied by negative corner OF defense and no forward progress at the plate. Arcia was looking like a potential non-tender candidate after 2016 even before his AAA banishment.

Huh? Burdi indeed had a few good appearances lately, but back in high-A. I think the aggressive timeline for him is off the table now...