Beyond the Box Score: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Steve McNair Found Shot to Death


Eight Deadline Thoughts

It's a common thing right after the deadline: everybody's talking about "winners" and "losers" in the trade market. Trading's not really a zero-sum game, I don't think; the nature of a trade is that BOTH sides expect to gain value based on their needs.

But it doesn't always work that way, and that's where you get the "winners" and "losers." You'd think that teams use very sophisticated economic models to make transactions at this level, and you would think that most teams can judge for themselves and justify all of their deals quantitatively, but I feel like it would be a good idea to join the foray.

Now, realizing that I was most critical over Wayne Krivsky's acquisition of Bronson Arroyo (fringe Cy Young candidate) and Jim Bowden's acquisition of Alfonso Soriano (fringe MVP candidate, I suspect), I'm going to try to take a quick look at some of these deals, in the spirit of Jason Whitlock's "NFL Truths" column on ESPN (but I'm only doing 8).

Star-divide

1. The New York Yankees improved themselves a lot and didn't give up much to do so.

A great deal for one team might not necessarily be a great deal for another. What the Yankees did to acquire Bobby Abreu could not be considered a good deal if you're talking about a team like Toronto or Cleveland in New York's shoes--they just don't have the cash reserves that the Yankees do. But cash is the biggest asset for the Bombers at this point, and they understood that in this trading process.

The Yankees were quieter than normal, it seemed, with the Abreu rumors becoming serious very late in the process (and I was skeptical right down until the last minute), but the Yanks made the biggest splash of the deadline, and they did very well in the process.

So, what did they get?

Bobby Abreu
Cory Lidle
Craig Wilson
A lot of salary

And, what did they give up:

C.J. Henry
Shawn Chacon
Scrubs

Essentially, the Yankees parlayed their financial advantage into a major coup at the deadline, and, considering that Abreu's 2007 salary will most likely just replace Sheffield's on the roster, it's not even a big salary addition in the long term.

The Abreu deal was topped only by the heist for Craig Wilson, as Dave Littlefield severely undervalued his low-cost slugger (just $3.5 million for the season and he's hitting .267/.339/.478). Shawn Chacon, whose utility had formally worn off with the acquisition of Lidle, was sent to Pittsburgh for Wilson, who will fit in as a great bat off the bench and a DH/1B/OF option.

The Yankees are huge winners in this and are the clear favorites in the AL East, considering the inaction from Boston. You've gotta give Cashman credit; I really have no idea how he pulled all of this off.

2. The Texas Rangers were similar to the Yanks this weekend.

There are some eerie similarities between the Yankees' moves and the Rangers' moves, as far as the personnel additions. The Carlos Lee deal has been quite covered by many outlets, but my feeling was that the Rangers did very, very well in it (especially considering that they got Nelson Cruz, too). They also netted Matt Stairs for reliever Joselo Diaz, who is intriguing with high K-rates and good stuff but some control problems. There are a bunch of guys like that around, and Matt Stairs is an adequate bat off the bench (a lot like Craig Wilson, no?).

The most interesting acquisition, though, was the deal for Kip Wells right before the deadline. Wells' name has been kicked around in trade rumors for a few years now, and Wells has battled injuries this year (most notably a severe blood clot). The statline is unimpressive, to say the least, but Wells has been a good middle of the rotation starter in the past, and there's a chance that he emerges as a valuable piece in the middle of the shaky Texas rotation. They traded minor league pitcher Jesse Chavez, a 22-year old with interesting peripherals but not a guy that appears on prospect lists. Essentially, he's not worth much.

Texas didn't do quite as well as the Yankees did, but they certainly acquitted themselves well here. Quite possibly, the Rangers are the division-favorites out West.

3. Tampa Bay will be scary in 2 years.

If you'd like to extend this back a little further than the deadline, look at the young talent the Devil Rays added:

Dioner Navarro
Justin Ruggiano
Mitch Talbot
Ben Zobrist
Joel Guzman
Sergio Pedroza

What did they give up?

Mark Hendrickson
Toby Hall
Julio Lugo
Aubrey Huff

See, this is what happens when you make smart trades in July: you get a bunch of talented young players. There's no collection of young talent better than that in Tampa; there are three superstar-caliber talents in the fold, now, with Upton, Young, and Guzman. Add in Evan Longoria, Jonny Gomes, and Carl Crawford, and you have the best collection of young bats in the league. The cost was a fringe pitcher, a catcher who never panned out, a middle infielder in the midst of what appears to be a career year, and a bat who simply had no position with the D'Rays in 2007.

Tampa's past inactivity at the deadline froze the market at times and also caused stagnation in Tampa. The new administration clearly has the right idea, though. The bottom line is, at this point, Tampa is looking primed for a run in 2008. Well played in Tampa.

4. The 2006 Dodgers are too close to the 2004 Mets for comfort.

Among Met fans, there is a belief that July 30, 2004 was "Black Friday," a day in which the Mets traded some of their best prospects (Justin Huber, Scott Kazmir) for average or below average major league pitching.

I feel that there are valid comparisons between the 2004 Mets and the 2006 Dodgers.

Here's a table to explore that, comparing how far out of a playoff spot the two teams were at various dates in late July.

                Mets    Dodgers

17-Jul          3.0     3.0
18-Jul          2.0     2.0
19-Jul          3.0     3.0
20-Jul          3.0     3.0
21-Jul          3.0     3.5
22-Jul          3.0     4.0
23-Jul          3.0     4.5
24-Jul          4.0     5.5
25-Jul          5.0     6.5
26-Jul          6.0     6.5
27-Jul          5.0     7.0
28-Jul          6.0     6.0
29-Jul          6.0     6.0
30-Jul          7.0     5.0
31-Jul          8.0     5.0

You'll notice that, in the grand scheme of things, the Dodgers have only lost 2 games in the standings in the past two weeks. The point, though, is that the trend is not a good one, and 5 games out with a boatload of teams to hurdle is not a good time to add talent and deal prospects.

Now. I've privately advocated the Dodgers going for it all this season... but that was with respect to where the Dodgers were two weeks ago. After a horrendous stretch, the Dodgers find themselves a fringe contender for the playoffs moreso than a legitimate one. At this point, it's simply not worth selling off the pieces for the 2007-10 playoff teams (while it may have been worth it to do so two weeks ago).

The weak NL aside, the Dodgers have an uphill battle to reach the postseason, even with the additions of Maddux and Lugo.

Here's another table.

        wOBA    EqA
2003    .336    .263
2004    .332    .258
2005    .347    .277
2006    .384    .292

(Note: wOBA is "weighted-OBP," published in The Book. For more on wOBA, read this article.)

Julio Lugo's 2006 is far out of line with the years that preceded it. The question is: why should we believe that that is sustainable? Furthermore, the Dodgers have stockpiled a valuable collection of SS-2B types, the guys with value on the defensive spectrum. But Lugo, the prized acquisition at the deadline, might be out of a job with Betemit, Furcal, Kent, and Nomar manning the infield (assuming that they're all healthy come September, which is not a sure thing).

Lugo's a good player, but this was the wrong acquisition here. They're too far from the playoffs and they dealt one of their most prized prospects in the process.

Even the Maddux acquisition, which was a savvy one considering that they only dealt Izturis, is the wrong strategy because Maddux is a rent-a-player. If the Dodgers somehow make the playoffs and I'm wrong about all of this (which is possible), I will apologize, but, until then, I can't help but think that these moves are desperate and shortsighted.

One thing's for sure: Depodesta wouldn't have made them. We don't know if that's a good thing or a bad thing, but it does show the culture change in the LA front office.

5. Assuming I read this right, it's a fair assumption to make that the Red Sox are a smart, well-run organization.

The subject of rumors and everything else, the Red Sox effectively sat on their hands at the deadline, choosing not to take a seat behind the chessboard and make the move to counter the Yankees.

Why is this smart? Well, it's a rare occassion for moves at the deadline to really tip the scales in a pennant race, but the Abreu-Lidle-Wilson trifecta really does. The Red Sox, who were struggling to crush a wounded Yankees team, really don't seem to have the horses to keep up with the Yanks this year, at this point. Their prized prospect Jon Lester was most likely the sticking point in just about every deal... and they chose not to deal him. Now, whether or not it's sensible to put so much stock into one pitching prospects remains up for debate, but the point is that the Sox did not mortgage what appears to be a very bright future in exchange for a questionable present. Essentially, they didn't do anything that Los Angeles did.

6. Doug Melvin and the Milwaukee Brewers were one move away from a very effective deadline period, but, as it is, you've gotta wonder what they were thinking.

The market this year really, really undervalued good hitting corner outfielders, considering the packages that the Brewers got for Lee (centered around a 30ish reliever, albeit a pretty good one when he's in top form) and the one that the Phils got for Abreu (no prospects over A-ball save a 27-year old reliever), and the one that the Pirates got for Wilson (nothing?).

Perhaps that's what kept Melvin from dealing Mench: he didn't want to get nothing.

Still, though, if that's the case, the Brewers miscalculated. I told myself that I'd wait until the Brewers dealt Mench in order to really look at the Lee deal, but the Brewers opted to hold Mench. The Brewers should have probably swung Lee for a few prospects, instead, although you can certainly see them building for '07 still. It's a minor setback, I guess, but it's not a killer one.

I think that what we're seeing is a high valuing of premium prospects these days because of the salary disparity between a young guy who can give you league average production and a free agent or trade acquisition who could. I'm not an expert on finances, but my general impression is that the average salary has risen much faster than the major league minimum has, and the marginal cost of one of those older free agent-types versus a prospect has certainly gone up. And, it's for this reason that the Gnats couldn't get what they wanted for Soriano--Bowden continually asked for the top prospects when teams just have no desire to give up the potential for cheap, league average or better production. We never heard Brandon Wood's name in trade discussions.

And yet, sometimes, this logic is defeated. We've seen Andy Marte traded twice in the past season. So who knows?
[editor's note, by Marc Normandin]Jeff Sackmann's take is pretty parallel.

7. It's tough to defend the Abreu deal.

I strongly advocated the Phils trading Abreu here about a week ago, but I didn't actually expect it to happen. This was really a "where there's smoke, there's fire" type situation. We heard Abreu's name thrown around in the offseason far too often this year to believe that the Phils weren't exploring trading him for whatever reason.

As it is, I agree with the logic for trading Abreu: the Phils needed some wholesale changes, they had too much money invested in a guy whose power had dropped precipitously, and there's a good chance that Abreu's trade value was dropping by the day. It was a great time to sell ahead of the curve and extract value for one of your franchise's best players.

But I don't think that they played this correctly. The Phils are not a small-market team, and this was a small-market move. Granted, Abreu's no-trade decimated the market for him, but you have to figure that the Phils could have added in a top prospect if they had been willing to pick up a little bit of the salary.

It's a little disheartening as a Phils fan, I'm sure, to see the team head towards a "five-year plan" (Shapiro, not Stalin) style rebuilding program, complete with stronger investment in the farm system, when you've squandered some of the best offensive seasons in the franchise's history over the past few years.

The fairest evaluation of this trade would be to reassess where the Phillies are in the offseason, seeing what they're doing with the money they've saved. I can't imagine that this one has a happy ending for Phillies fans, though.

8. Quick hit playoff picks?

These change by the minute, but at this point I'd go with the Yanks, Tigers, White Sox, and A's in the AL, and the Mets, Cards, Padres, and D'Backs in the NL.

0 recs | Comment 7 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

minimum salary
On a percentage basis, the minimum salary has actually risen much faster than the average salary.  In 2002, the minimum was $200,000; now it's $327,000 -- a 64% increase over four years.  From 2002 through 2005 (don't have the average 2006 salary yet), the average overall salary only rose 8%, or about $180,000 in absolute terms.  Somehwat more than the minimum has risen, but not a lot.

Just thought you'd like to know.

by studes on Aug 1, 2006 1:46 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

has it?
Well, that's certainly interesting data, so thanks for that! I'm surprised but I guess I shouldn't be; there was that period where the free agent salaries were pretty level, and it doesn't take much of an actual increase to make a big percentage increase on the minimum salary.

A quick guess without doing much research is that separating this into pitching and hitting might yield some interesting results (as in, a pretty big rise for the pitchers and not much for the hitters at all).

The other thing that I'm curious about is what of a more... targeted look at it? Most of the major deadline moves are for players that will be starting. Take a guy like Aubrey Huff. His value might have been pushed down by the idea that a lot of teams think that they can get highly similar production from a minor leaguer, when Huff's making close to $7 million already. So teams may be more hesitant b/c the difference in price between Huff and a minor leaguer is over $6 million, and the production difference doesn't seem like a worthy investment.

by Dan Scotto on Aug 1, 2006 2:26 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Right, but
The cost of a marginal win (per your work) on the free agent market has risen much, much more. I think that's what's important here.

by David Gassko on Aug 1, 2006 2:06 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Agreed
He said he didn't have the info, so I thought he'd like it.

by studes on Aug 1, 2006 2:23 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Yep
And thanks again! :)

by Dan Scotto on Aug 1, 2006 2:26 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Rangers
I just don't get the positive feelings about the Ranger's doings at the deadline.  They are an organization heavy in hitting and light in pitching. It just seems logical to me that the no brainer strategy is to trade your currency (hitting) into pitching.  Since you are a long way from fielding a pitching staff formidible enough for the AL and thus have no realistic chance of competing for the AL crown, you should focus on acquiring as many pitching prospects as possible, rather than acquiring major league pitchers, and certainly, you don't need to covet more bats.

So what strategy do the Rangers employ?  They trade away some pitching, and also convert some of their hitting currency into more hitting.  Rental hitting mostly.  For this seemingly incomprehensible move, people generally seem to congratulate them.  

IMO, the bottom line for any trade is "Does this trade increase our chances, now or in the future, of winning it all?" I don't see how this trade made the Rangers any closer to being a real contender.  They might however score seven runs instead of five in their future losses.

by jbm on Aug 1, 2006 4:16 PM EDT reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Point well taken...
But I have a few comments:
  1. The Rangers' pitching statistics are distorted by the fact that they play at Ameriquest Field. (with that said, they're also a bit distorted in the other direction due to the weak competition in the AL West).
  2. There just wasn't very much pitching to be had during this trading season.
  3. The Rangers' offense has actually been slowed by several underachieving performances, including Wilkerson and Teixiera. Adding a live bat will help them outscore their opponents.
  4. No one in the AL West, including the A's that I have stuck by all season, has proven to me that they're any better than the Rangers at this point.
Granted, one of these years, they're going to have to focus on pitching... but I think that for all of the bad things that they could have done at the deadline, they did pretty well for themselves.

Still, though, no one's afraid of the Rangers come October, and that would bother me a lot, if I were a Rangers' fan.

by Dan Scotto on Aug 1, 2006 10:14 PM EDT to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

We use numbers and stuff.
Community Guidelines
Start posting on Beyond the Box Score »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

P1_iannetta_small
Matt Herges: The reason we look at peripherals
Small
SLG and Speed
Small
Interleague Attendance Nonsense
Limes_125_small
A Note About Becoming a BtB Author: Contributing to the Community Helps
Small
Is Adrian Beltre underrated...?
Limes_125_small
How Do You Like the New Daily Link Roundup Posts?
Stlouiscardinals_small
Depth Charts Help
Zorilla_small
How Do You Measure a Pitching Coach?
Limes_125_small
Looking For SQL & Tech Geek Help For Collaborative Projects
Small
When do MLBers get paid...?

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recent FanShots

There's your human element.  Why, when the technology is readily available, are humans still calling balls and strikes?
Fire Jim Leyland: Fu-Te Ni Follow Up; Concern Over Big Three?
Rany Gets Banned By the Royals
Contract Retrospective: Vernon Wells' 7-year, $126 Million Contract
The Rockets are innovative
Flip Flop Fly Ball
Yanks Considered Trading Rivera For Wells In '95: MLB Rumors - MLBTradeRumors.com
Bullpen Usuage Charts for Last 5 days
MiLB Game of the Week
Drive Mechanics Looks at Chris Perez's Mechanics and Pitch F/X numbers

Post_icon New FanShot All FanShots Carrot-mini

Most Commented

Subscribe to BtB via Email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

BtB Goes Social

BtB on Facebook

BtB_Sky on Twitter


Managers

Mos-def-the-ecstatic_small R.J. Anderson

Limes_125_small Sky Kalkman

Editors

Rawlings_baseball_bigger_small Dan Turkenkopf

Face_small Harry Pavlidis

770insig_small Jeff Zimmerman (TucsonRoyal)

Rickstache_small erik

Authors

Jinaz-reds-avatar_small JinAZ

Hms_surprise_small Graham

Wisc19cropped2_small jhmoore

Raysring1_small Tommy Rancel

E52205a2_small tbsmkdn

Official Partner of Yahoo! Sports