FanGraphs Baseball


RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Think i would take Profar over Moose tacos and bet most guys would too. I’m not even sure who is better right now and Profar is cheaper for longer. just my 2 cents

    Comment by st — July 19, 2012 @ 11:42 am

  2. Dave, I am not going to call you an idiot. In fact, while we disagree on quite a few things, I’m going to say that you are absolutely one of the best analysts in all of sports, and if someone with the consistently fantastic level of analysis that you have doesn’t deserve a few mulligans now and then, no one does. Keep up the good work.

    Comment by Oren — July 19, 2012 @ 11:42 am

  3. What the hell?? Why are there now 2 sets of 26-30 and a list of 21-25 with a repeat of one of the 26-30 lists??!?! Get it together, Cameron.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 11:43 am

  4. I have to agree with your concerns about Bundy. How many A ball pitchers have put up gaudy numbers? Furthermore, his numbers in A+ haven’t been all that spectacular. Yes, they’ve been excellent, but if you’re going to rank a 19 year old in A+ the 29th most trade valuable player in baseball, he better look like the second coming of Jesus Christ (like Bundy’s low A stats were).

    Comment by Will — July 19, 2012 @ 11:45 am

  5. Reading comprehension is not a talent of yours, I see.

    Comment by Will — July 19, 2012 @ 11:46 am

  6. Could Texas be any more stacked?

    Comment by ALEastbound — July 19, 2012 @ 11:47 am

  7. If nothing else, it makes more sense to find (what I assume will be the only) two prospects in the lower 20s than the upper 20s.

    Comment by Anon21 — July 19, 2012 @ 11:48 am

  8. Sarcasm is not a language you comprehend, I see

    Comment by Joe — July 19, 2012 @ 11:50 am

  9. ……………………………..

    it’s addressed in the first sentence…….

    Comment by Sleight of Hand Pro — July 19, 2012 @ 11:50 am

  10. You mean Alexis Texas?

    Comment by kid — July 19, 2012 @ 11:51 am

  11. I’m extremely shocked by Votto being on there and the justification is extraordinarily confusing with regards to the fact Adrian Gonzalez was left off the list entirely last year.

    Votto is a phenomenal talent, but the back end of that deal has extreme albatross potential.

    Comparing the two, I just see a massive disconnect on how Votto could make this year’s list while Gonzalez missed last year’s. Votto’s numbers are better this year than Gonzalez’s were last year, but not enough so that I could see any reasonable justification for ranking Votto in the top 25 while leaving Gonzalez off entirely last year.

    Considering I recall Gonzalez’s long term deal being the primary justification for leaving him off, how can one justify putting Votto on here when Votto is contracted for (At minimum) over $100MM more than Gonzalez was at the time of last year’s rankings (Gonzalez will be 36 in the last year of his deal, sticking his team with maybe two years of decline phase, Votto’s team will be on the hook for five years of decline phase at $25MM per, that’s ridiculous).

    Votto’s an elite player and probably the best 1B in the game right now, but I don’t see how that contract is remotely tradeable.

    Comment by Jonathan — July 19, 2012 @ 11:56 am

  12. Pretty sure that’s not sarcasm, Joe.

    Comment by MDL — July 19, 2012 @ 11:56 am

  13. troll everdiso alert

    that ain’t me.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 11:57 am

  14. *Top 30, missed that blurb about the ordering screw up.

    Comment by Jonathan — July 19, 2012 @ 11:57 am

  15. For the record, I am convinced this post is a joke.

    Comment by Well-Beered Englishman — July 19, 2012 @ 11:58 am

  16. re: Votto, it’s mentioned that the back end of his deal is likely to bring negative returns.

    I’ve seen analysts say this (or something close to it) about many players who sign huge long term deals (Votto, Prince, Pujols, etc.). I’m curious how much, if at all, this type of analysis accounts for the likely inflation of the cost per marginal win between now and 2020?

    Generally, the accepted figure I’ve seen today is $5M per marginal win. If that number is 6, 6.5, or even higher in 2020, doesn’t that make the back end of this type of deal much more reasonable?

    Comment by Sean — July 19, 2012 @ 11:58 am

  17. Consider a name change, mate.

    Comment by Well-Beered Englishman — July 19, 2012 @ 11:58 am

  18. We’ll find out in the next few weeks #uptonandhamelsplease

    Comment by Ross — July 19, 2012 @ 11:59 am

  19. i dont know whats real anymore

    Comment by juan pierres mustache — July 19, 2012 @ 11:59 am

  20. no joke. I’ve yet to post a response to any of this excellent top-50 trade value series until the last 15 minutes.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 12:03 pm

  21. How dare you say Kinsler is having the worst offensive year of his career! That completely glosses over how terrible he’s been in the field, too.

    Comment by Fatbot — July 19, 2012 @ 12:06 pm

  22. Don’t try and deflect blame fake-everdiso. I don’t know why your trying to put words in my mouth, but I meant what I said.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 12:07 pm

  23. you’re a dummy and a weirdo.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 12:12 pm

  24. So, I think this is a good opportunity to clear up some confusion that I and maybe some others have about the list.

    Is this a descriptive list or a prescriptive list?

    In other words, is Dave saying that if the Orioles made Dylan Bundy available right now, they would get a bigger return than if Texas did the same with Ian Kinsler?

    Or, is Dave saying that, if all GMs in baseball were perfectly rational, than Bundy would get a bigger return, because he has more surplus value?

    I’m guessing it’s the latter, because I just don’t see any way how Bundy would actually bring back more than Kinsler if they were both available right now. But then why call it a “trade value” list?

    Comment by Jamie — July 19, 2012 @ 12:12 pm

  25. lol, hanging html tag. Makes me look super legit.

    Comment by Jamie — July 19, 2012 @ 12:13 pm

  26. Ditto. Mous wasn’t as highly touted as a prospect and is only a year removed from the minors, I think Profar’s position and success at such a young age pushes him above Moustakas in my book. Not sure what happens in the middle to bridge the gap cause I like the other guys more than Profar, so I guess I’d probably have to say Mous is a bit higher than I’d list him.

    Comment by Ray — July 19, 2012 @ 12:15 pm

  27. One thing I’ve read about Bundy is that he’s shelved his cutter/slider in the interest of focusing on his other offspeed offerings. It’s supposedly his best pitch. Linkage, and I’ve read it elsewhere as well:

    Comment by Ray — July 19, 2012 @ 12:17 pm

  28. Don’t believe this impostor. I actually believe it is real.

    Comment by Fake Well-Beered Englishman — July 19, 2012 @ 12:19 pm

  29. I think that we’re no longer following the plan to give more credit to MLB production with these. We’ve got 2 guys without and AAA experience in the top-30, and we’ve got Matt Moore’s horrible 2012 up there as well. I would NOT straight-up trade Castro for Profar.

    Comment by Keith — July 19, 2012 @ 12:20 pm

  30. Re: Votto vs. Adrian Gonzalez from last year – they mentioned at the start of the series that their ranking methodology has been adjusted to better represent real-world MLB valuation. From the 2011 series recap: “The other changes with this year’s list are probably going to be more along the lines of a shift towards valuing production somewhat more strongly and slightly reducing the emphasis of low cost salaries.”

    Comment by Ray — July 19, 2012 @ 12:21 pm

  31. Well, Dave explained thoroughly that his opinion on contracts holding value down have changed. There’s basically a whole post on it, so I think the inconsistencies you have observed were to be expected.

    Comment by Eminor3rd — July 19, 2012 @ 12:22 pm

  32. Potentially, however, we have to account for the fact that inflation doesn’t always occur in salaries.

    Back in 2007, we were on track for massive salary inflation. Then the economy tanked and that salary inflation got curbed, by and large, with a few exceptions which have all generally been regarded as massive overpays.

    Add in the wrinkle of the new CBA, which will likely act to even further prevent inflation considering even big market teams like the Yankees are trying to get below the luxury tax by 2014. Realistically, with the new CBA in place, I can’t imagine anyone giving even Votto much more than the $25MM annually he’s getting, particularly for his post peak years.

    Yes, one could easily argue that there’s massive savings on the front end of the deal, but you’re only really getting those savings for four years at the expense of six years of, at best, market value (And at worst, outright albatross considering how specifically the massive raise coincides with his probable decline phase).

    The extraordinarily minimal amount of MLB (Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, Phillies, Detroit) teams that could conceivably afford Votto’s back end years already have an expensive 1B locked up through the cheap years of Votto’s deal. The only team I could consider being able to afford him that doesn’t already have a 1B capable of producing maybe 75% of Votto’s production is the Dodgers.

    Again, great player, but he has probably the third most immovable contract of a productive player in the MLB (Behind only Pujols and A-Rod, not counting guys like Crawford or Wells since they’re immovable due to poor production rather than just their contracts).

    Comment by Jonathan — July 19, 2012 @ 12:22 pm

  33. Fangraphs most likely (although I’m not sure on this) could get the IP address from the everdiso posts and tell us if they came from the same spot … that is if anyone actually cared.

    Comment by glassSheets — July 19, 2012 @ 12:22 pm

  34. yes, it would be fairly easy to do. if they cared.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 12:23 pm

  35. Fair enough, missed that part.

    That aside, I still probably wouldn’t have included Votto, at the least not this high. I really can’t imagine a real world situation where any other team would trade for him and his current contract. The only exception being MAYBE the Dodgers, but they might be hesitant considering they need to extend Kershaw and they just extended Kemp and Ethier.

    Comment by Jonathan — July 19, 2012 @ 12:23 pm

  36. Including Votto in the top-30 with that contract certainly doesn’t jive with what you’re saying. Personally I’d take Profar over Castro and I think there are a lot of teams who would do the same.

    Comment by Ray — July 19, 2012 @ 12:24 pm

  37. Likewise. As a fan of neither team involved, I’d give up more for Profar than I would for Castro.

    Comment by Jonathan — July 19, 2012 @ 12:26 pm

  38. It’s a combination of a few factors.

    1. Votto is a lot better than Adrian Gonzalez. It’s not a small difference. Votto’s career wRC+ is 155 – Gonzalez has only matched that in a single season once, back in 2010, when he put up a 156. Votto is currently performing at a level that Gonzalez has never gotten close to, and his track record is much stronger. Gonzalez is a good hitter, but he’s never been the best hitter in baseball.

    2. On an AAV basis, their contracts are basically equal, with both making $22 million per year on average. Whether a team can afford a player is more often based on whether his salary fits into the team’s budget than on length of the deal. Any team that could afford Gonzalez could also afford Votto. The deal is longer, yes, but given that Votto is a better player (more surplus value up front) and a year younger, the contracts aren’t all that different.

    3. I talked about this in the “What I Learned” post, but based on feedback from some folks in the game, I’ve adjusted the penalty applied to good players with big contracts. With the explosion of new revenue from TV deals, a lot of these contracts look better in a few years than they do when they get signed, which is why you see expensive other expensive guys like Carlos Gonzalez climbing the list and Kinsler not dropping even after he gets his $75 million deal.

    Given the changes to the way the list is made and the fact that Votto is both younger and a lot better than Gonzalez, I’m okay with the difference.

    Comment by Dave Cameron — July 19, 2012 @ 12:27 pm

  39. In the prelude to the series, Dave’s already addressed the methodological changes he’s made to this year’s series based on the mistakes he felt he made in last year’s series. Here’s the link for your perusal:

    The point is that, in hindsight, perhaps Dave feels that Gonzalez should have made last year’s list. Read that post and perhaps that will remove all of your “shock” and “confusion” about Votto being on this year’s list and Gonzalez being absent from last year’s list.

    Comment by chuckb — July 19, 2012 @ 12:28 pm

  40. Andrelton Simmons, blah… blah… blah!!!!!

    Comment by ppabich — July 19, 2012 @ 12:31 pm

  41. More of the former. There’s no assumption of rationality, which is actually why Bundy is ranked as highly as he is. I’d probably put him a bit lower, but MLB teams really covet “aces”, and Bundy is perceived as a future ace.

    Comment by Dave Cameron — July 19, 2012 @ 12:33 pm

  42. Why? The trade off, is the projectability of a more patient hitter, better defense and longer control for established Major League success. We KNOW that Castro can hit .300 in MLB that’s more important than patience in AA. Profar gets us more excited, but I think it’s incredibly irrational to say that Profar would get a larger return.

    Comment by ppabich — July 19, 2012 @ 12:36 pm

  43. I think you’re pretty significantly underestimating the market value of this kind of player. Prince Fielder can’t carry Joey Votto’s jock, and he got 9/214 last winter. You’re treating Votto’s contract like it’s some kind of albatross. In reality, had he been a free agent, he’d have probably gotten another $75 to $100 million.

    Comment by Dave Cameron — July 19, 2012 @ 12:37 pm

  44. c-c-c-c-c-c-combo breaker

    Comment by Julian — July 19, 2012 @ 12:44 pm

  45. Agreed, and while I think your stubborness sometimes gets in the way of the truth your knowledge is beyond impressive; it’s frightening. And even though I think your ego gets in the way of the truth and scientific process sometimes now and then (we are all human) ego is important to being great. You are the greatest sabermetric mind of our generation. Your work on roster constuction is groundbreaking, and your understanding of player values is unparralelled. I would say that the next step in player evaluation is to add body types and existing injury history in along with age, skillset and production.

    Comment by whatever — July 19, 2012 @ 12:44 pm

  46. Pretty sure it is, MDL.

    Comment by Ryan — July 19, 2012 @ 12:47 pm

  47. Alexis Texas; do you mean stacked or stuffed, or both.

    Comment by whatever — July 19, 2012 @ 12:48 pm

  48. In fairness, there’s really only one Braves fan screaming about Simba. Last year, the entire nation of Canada was screaming about Escobar.

    Comment by TKDC — July 19, 2012 @ 12:54 pm

  49. Yes, I was honestly perplexed by the thought that Profar could be at the same level this year as Harper was last year, especially given the methodological adjustment. I still think the prospects listed here are all aggressively ranked.

    Comment by TKDC — July 19, 2012 @ 12:57 pm

  50. I’m not buying the argument on Votto. Sure, he may have more trade value than A-Gone or Fielder. But that isn’t saying much, as both of those players’ contracts are immovable (ie, negative surplus value). I can’t see anyone providing significant value to the Reds *and* taking on Votto’s entire contract. Is there any precedent for a team taking on nearly that many years or nearly that many dollars and also giving value in exchange?

    Comment by AF — July 19, 2012 @ 1:00 pm

  51. he’s only a year removed from the minors…and kicking ass. Important detail.

    I’d have Profar well above Bundy, however.

    Comment by geefee — July 19, 2012 @ 1:01 pm

  52. When you add in defense the gap closes. Their WAR values are really close 09-11. Votto by a bit. 18.9-18.

    Comment by whatever — July 19, 2012 @ 1:01 pm

  53. How much if any is Votto’s value here depressed by his current injury?

    Comment by TKDC — July 19, 2012 @ 1:03 pm

  54. But how would we know which IP address is which? And what if there are dozens of everdiso’s?

    Comment by guest — July 19, 2012 @ 1:05 pm

  55. Holy Cow I’d give up a TON for Votto, he’s arguably the best player in baseball! Who cares how much he gets paid, if you can afford it you would give the farm for the guy. How much would the Nats give up? Not Harper or Stras, but everyone else is fair game. How much would the Marlins give up? Not Stanton, but everyone else is fair game. If you’re the Giants, outside of Bumgarnder who wouldn’t you give up? Votto is a guy to you give up your minor league system for. Like Dave said earlier, people think about his contract in relation to the Reds, but for teams like the Yankees or Dodgers it’s UNDER value.

    Comment by ppabich — July 19, 2012 @ 1:06 pm

  56. Arod?

    Comment by TKDC — July 19, 2012 @ 1:07 pm

  57. But I guess the Rangers even paid some of that.

    Comment by TKDC — July 19, 2012 @ 1:08 pm

  58. And the main reason why there isn’t a precedent for trades like this is because teams don’t ever trade a guy when he’s the best player in baseball. There is no way the Reds could Justify to their fans that they traded him for Profar and Mike Olt, even though they probably got the better end of that deal.

    Comment by ppabich — July 19, 2012 @ 1:12 pm

  59. The 32 million posts set a record for Fangraphs!

    Comment by Adrock — July 19, 2012 @ 1:32 pm

  60. That cost them Soriano, who wasn’t a massive return and had a rather chunky contract of his own, no?

    Comment by Keith — July 19, 2012 @ 1:39 pm

  61. Teams that would answer the phone on Votto before the first ring finished: Texas, Miami, St. Louis, Chicago Cubs, Chicago White Sox, Washington, Baltimore, Toronto, LA Dodgers, Seattle, NY Mets. There would be a market.

    Comment by indyralph — July 19, 2012 @ 1:39 pm

  62. I’m also a little surprised that he’s included. If he was put on waivers and a team could pick up his contract without giving up any players, how many teams would even put in a claim? I could be vastly underestimating him, but I would think most teams would pass because that contract looks like it can wreak havoc in a few years.

    Comment by vivalajeter — July 19, 2012 @ 1:40 pm

  63. Just speaking hypothetically. If I had a sudden impulse to start using the name “troll everdiso”, would that make me a bad person?

    Comment by hoser — July 19, 2012 @ 1:40 pm

  64. Fair enough, thanks for the response.

    Comment by Jamie — July 19, 2012 @ 1:45 pm

  65. Pretty empty .300 from Castro though, right? I mean, his OBP this season is .312, his first two seasons he was in the .340’s. His power’s minimal, and while I can’t speak to his fielding it sounds like it’s gone from ‘bad’ to ‘not bad’. This isn’t to say Castro isn’t as valuable, but I’m still taking the chance on the 5-tool beast who’s dominating AA at 19 years old.

    Comment by Ray — July 19, 2012 @ 1:46 pm

  66. I agree. Especially Bundy. You know what they say about pitching prospects…

    Comment by Anon21 — July 19, 2012 @ 1:49 pm

  67. I am everdiso

    Comment by Random Roman Prisoner — July 19, 2012 @ 1:54 pm

  68. My complaint is that it seems fans fall into the trap of overrating prospects that they have never seen play before, and undervalue players who have played in MLB for a couple years. The fact we know who Castro is, his shine has warn off. But he’s a 22 year old SS capable of putting up a .773 OPS. That’s insane. He would be a college senior this year, think if he was able to get drafted? There is no question he would go #1 overall. Most all players his age aren’t close to MLB yet, and he was a rookie at 20.

    One thing I think people forget about Castro is that he is still projectable. He is still 5 years away from his peak age. People look at a guy who has had to develop in the Major Leagues and see his holes and forget about how impressive he actually is.

    Profar is pure excitement. He hasn’t failed yet, but there is a good chance he does at some point. How will he adjust after that? We don’t know but it will have a profound impact on his perception.

    How many people here have actually seen Profar play an extended amount? It just seems unreasonable for fans to be confidant that Profar is somehow better, or significantly more valuable.

    Comment by ppabich — July 19, 2012 @ 2:08 pm

  69. GMs aren’t going to add in the defense. Or at least they’ll weight it a lot less.

    Comment by Anon21 — July 19, 2012 @ 2:10 pm

  70. I think you’re right, ppabich. Everyone thinks this super-hyped prospect is going to hit his ceiling. Some do (see Trout, Mike), but it’s pretty rare.

    However, I think Dave’s point would be that GMs are just as susceptible to this fallacy, so sometimes prospects really are overvalued.

    Comment by Anon21 — July 19, 2012 @ 2:21 pm

  71. You may laugh, FWB-E, but I have seen a fake WB-E post before. My sympathy for real-everdiso is heightened as a result.

    Comment by Well-Beered Englishman — July 19, 2012 @ 2:22 pm

  72. Castro hit 7 HR’s in more than 200 mL games and showed limited patience at the plate, with walk rates hovering between 5 and 8%. He was always young for his level, of course, and the contact and speed was obvious, but he didn’t show much else. That’s what we’re seeing in the majors: great contact, good speed, limited power and batting eye.

    Profar has been similarly challenged–even moreso when you consider Castro started his age 19 season in A ball while Profar’s been in AA the whole time. Despite that he’s shown considerably more power potential (23 HR’s in 202 games the past 2 seasons), an above-average BB rate (12.6% last year, 11.1% this season), and similarly good speed. He apparently also has an above average glove, something Starlin didn’t (maybe doesn’t?) have.

    So while I agree Starlin’s ceiling isn’t yet 100% defined I think he’s following the path scouts expected of him and he’ll be limited to a degree because of the lack of power and patience. With Profar you need to have a bit more patience but all the tools are there for him to be a 5-cat superstar, and as I said before I’m personally taking that risk. Castro might be a top-2 or 3 SS in baseball, whereas Profar may develop into the best player in baseball. And that’s where I see the difference.

    Comment by Ray — July 19, 2012 @ 2:22 pm

  73. I’m everdiso and so’s my wife!

    Comment by Well-Beered Englishman — July 19, 2012 @ 2:22 pm

  74. Its really just pathetic that some people have to come online and sully the reputation of one a website’s most revered and respected members just to gain some sort of minimal personal satisfaction.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 2:28 pm

  75. heh. you are pretty good at this trolling, I’ll give you that. And the effort and talent you put to use is still very flattering.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 2:30 pm

  76. “most revered and respected”

    heh. that IS pretty funny.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 2:31 pm

  77. But it’s true. My comments may get thumbs downed sometimes but it doesn’t mean I am not respected overall. I bring a lot to this site. You, however, just troll other names for a cheap laugh. Pathetic really.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 2:41 pm

  78. “You are the greatest sabermetric mind of our generation.” I just shot milk out of my nose, and I haven’t been drinking any milk.

    Comment by Bobby Ayala — July 19, 2012 @ 2:45 pm

  79. I was blind, but now I can see!

    Comment by drewcorb — July 19, 2012 @ 2:46 pm

  80. you were on a good troll streak there but that last post messed it up. you can do better than that.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 2:49 pm

  81. Now you’re trying too hard.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 3:06 pm

  82. Man, if I’m the Orioles, I’m on the phone right now shopping Bundy.

    Honestly I’m not even sure I’d take Bundy over Weiters.

    Comment by Joncarlos — July 19, 2012 @ 3:46 pm

  83. Hey Dave, where’s my boy Yuni Betancourt at?!

    Comment by CLogdorp — July 19, 2012 @ 4:08 pm

  84. Agree with ppabich – prospects are forever overrated, especially in today’s culture where every casual baseball fan is an armchair scout. Prospects – even the cream of the crop – are still significant risks.

    Comment by kid — July 19, 2012 @ 4:10 pm

  85. I think it’s just a tad unrealistic to suggest that had Votto been a FA he’d get between $321 million and 346. That would be bigger than the A-rod contracts and Votto isn’t worth that, even if he is one of the best in baseball.

    I get you’re suggesting he’d make more as a FA, which is fine, but there simply isn’t a chance anybody would spend $300M on Votto.

    Comment by Mark — July 19, 2012 @ 4:13 pm

  86. will both of you troll jerks shut up already? clearly the real everdiso is I.

    Comment by everdiso — July 19, 2012 @ 4:18 pm

  87. i hope i speak for everyone when i say… god that joke is old.

    Comment by Sleight of Hand Pro — July 19, 2012 @ 4:27 pm

  88. Feel like people are getting way too worked up about Votto’s contract and forgetting the fact that he’s the best hitter in all of baseball. Some commenters live in a fairy tale world where every top prospect flourishes to his max potential, you manage to sign every budding star to a cheap contract before he hits FA, and every FA you sign delivers surplus value. That’s not reality, or even close to reality. In some cases you’ve simply gotta open up your wallet when you realize talent, a few million here or there be damned.

    Comment by kid — July 19, 2012 @ 4:48 pm

  89. well said.

    Comment by Sleight of Hand Pro — July 19, 2012 @ 5:27 pm

  90. “But he’s a 22 year old SS capable of putting up a .773 OPS. That’s insane. He would be a college senior this year, think if he was able to get drafted? There is no question he would go #1 overall.”

    You know who’s another 22 year old SS capable of putting up that kind of OPS, with much better on base skills and better defense, yet doesn’t get any credit? Ruben Tejada. His OBP has been around .360 the last two years, and he’s displayed much more doubles power this year than he has in the past. Somehow I doubt he’d go #1 overall though. When it comes down to it, Castro has much more power potential than Tejada and is more exciting as a player, but he also has the type of attributes that lead to a player never fulfilling their potential. 5 years down the road, I wouldn’t be surprised if Tejada’s had a better career than Castro.

    Comment by vivalajeter — July 19, 2012 @ 6:40 pm

  91. I bet the fake everdiso is probably that same loser who posted all of those FireJoeMorgan-esque comments last year under different minor Seinfeld character names. Does anybody remember that guy? It was funny for about an hour or two, but then it was just pathetic.

    Comment by doppelganger — July 19, 2012 @ 7:13 pm

  92. doppelganger, obviously there are multiple fake everdisos just as there were multiple Seinfeld guys.

    Comment by guest — July 19, 2012 @ 8:07 pm

  93. If there is really an everdiso troll, not a multiple personality or some kind of joke, why doesn’t the real everdiso just use a different pseudonym.
    I find it hard to believe that a real person would have such an attachment to an obscure moniker.

    Comment by Baltar — July 19, 2012 @ 9:18 pm

  94. LOL, Spartacus.

    Comment by Baltar — July 19, 2012 @ 9:21 pm

  95. Yes.

    Comment by Baltar — July 19, 2012 @ 9:22 pm

  96. I fully agree. Dave has indicated that he is talking about trade value to somebody, not necessarily everybody. There are very rich teams who wouldn’t blink an eye at paying way too much for Votto’s later years in order to have him at a reasonable price today.

    Comment by Baltar — July 19, 2012 @ 9:28 pm

  97. Yeah, in this post there are clearly multiple fake everdisos, but I’m pretty sure it’s been primarily the same person doing most of them every day for the last few weeks just like it was primarily the same person who did all the Seinfeld things last year. It had to be the same person most of the time because he kept on doing it for weeks after everyone was well past the point of being annoyed with it. Whatever, it ‘s actually very stupid for me to post this. I should just ignore it.

    Comment by doppelganger — July 19, 2012 @ 9:29 pm

  98. Although he didn’t say so explicitly, I see Dave’s change mainly as finally resolving the ambiguity he has had in past incarnations of this list between the players’ real-word trade value and their should-be trade value. Last year’s list in particular was rife with waffling between the two.
    Going either way would have been OK, but it is good that he chose one.
    I also congratulate him on admitting mistakes. A very high percentage of writers will argue to the death before admitting that they were ever wrong.
    As far as copying the wrong 5 goes, that is the kind of mistake all of us make sometimes (at least I certainly do). I’m glad he owned up to it.

    Comment by Baltar — July 19, 2012 @ 9:39 pm

  99. But Dave’s criteria is what some teams would do, not most teams.

    Comment by Baltar — July 19, 2012 @ 9:40 pm

  100. No, Dave explicitly says it was the former in his introductory post.

    Comment by Baltar — July 19, 2012 @ 9:45 pm

  101. Awww, thanks man, I truly do it for the fans!

    Comment by CLogdorp — July 19, 2012 @ 10:48 pm

  102. And in fairness to me I said I would stop bringing him up a few lists ago and I haven’t started any of the discussions on him since. I think he clearly deserved to make the backend of the list (seriously, what does Alcides Escobar have on him except a few years sucking in the majors?), but he’s nowhere close to a top 25 guy so it would be kind of dumb to keep bringing him up over and over again.

    Comment by Nitram Odarp — July 19, 2012 @ 11:01 pm

  103. Hm, that’s interesting. I hadn’t heard that. That could explain the merely great numbers in high A. Thanks

    Comment by Will — July 20, 2012 @ 3:33 am

  104. Ugh, this really bothers me: “Even after you adjust for his home park, he’s a 26-year-old running a 157 wRC+, showing that his 2010 season wasn’t a complete fluke”.

    It strikes me that to think we understand how to “adjust for his home ballpark” is very arrogant. Baseball in Colorado is a mess, and it does NOT affect all players equally.

    CarGo’s main weakness is plate discipline…his is TERRIBLE in that regard. And Colorado’s biggest hitting advantage smooths over that exact problem, by neutering breaking balls.

    After many years of paying attention to this issue, I’ve concluded that that only reasonable way to judge a Rockies hitter is to look at his road production. That’s absolutely NOT totally fair to the hitter, as many hitters would do better at home regardless of ballpark, but to apply some kind of overall ballpark adjustment to Gonzalez as if it helps him only as much as anyone else strikes me as a fallacy that does not fit qualitative or quantitative analysis.

    Gonzalez will never approach anything close to “one of the best offensive players in baseball” until he fixes his, again, terrible approach at the plate. To view otherwise is to totally overrate him.

    Comment by redsoxu571 — July 20, 2012 @ 11:46 am

  105. There is a line between respect and ass-kissing.

    Comment by R M — July 20, 2012 @ 11:51 am

  106. Agreed. Adjusting for parks is a start but it’s very quick and dirty.

    We aren’t even adjusting for handedness yet because of sample size issues I think. Parks fluctuate from year to year due to weather and randomness. The final adjustments are a good representation of how the park would affect the average hitter, but no two hitters are the same.

    When looking at a guy like CarGo it is important to consider that the biggest offensive outliers could also be the biggest outliers in terms of how that specific park affects players.

    Comment by Erik — July 21, 2012 @ 2:42 am

  107. We are generally measuring value in terms of ‘$ cost per WAR produced’ – a good way of doing so really but there are two things to consider when coming up with trade value.

    Average $ cost per WAR the price teams are willing to pay ON AVERAGE. Some teams may be spending $4m per WAR, others 5, 6, 7, or 8.

    WAR measures players performance in relation to a theoretical replacement level player. Teams look to acquire players based on the ACTUAL player that will be replaced.

    Joey Votto might produce the exact amount of WAR over the life of the contract that he is paid to do, which would result in 0 surplus value. Even still he might have surplus value because he produces more WAAP (Wins Above Actual Player) than WAR for a team that is willing to spend a greater $ amount per WAR than average.

    Comment by Erik — July 21, 2012 @ 2:49 am

  108. 29. Even the lowest revenue club would pick him up on waivers in a heartbeat.

    Comment by Jason — July 23, 2012 @ 12:05 pm

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


Close this window.

0.168 Powered by WordPress