The Oswalt-Strasburg Thing
Earlier this week, Steve Phillips went on Mike Francesca’s radio show and said that the Washington Nationals should consider trading Stephen Strasburg for Roy Oswalt. Predictably, every person who heard him say this did an instant face palm, and Phillips was roundly mocked for his comments.
I passed on writing about the comments for one main reason – I’ve done a decent amount of radio interviews over the last few years, and I know that sometimes, when asked a question on the air, you say stuff that you regret later. You don’t have time for measured responses or any kind of research, so if you haven’t put a lot of thought into a subject, you can say something that you soon discover is kind of foolish. It’s part of the medium, and so I’m generally willing to give people a pass for things they say in live broadcasts.
Given a few days to reflect on the comments and think the situation over, Phillips did what any reasonable human being would do and realized that his statement was utterly, entirely insane. Wait, what? He didn’t? Instead, he recorded a video where he actually stood his ground and reasserted the same point?
Seriously. You can watch it here.
The crux of the argument – prospects are risky, proven aces are rare, and when you have a chance to win, you have to go for it. On their own, all three points have some merit. Strasburg comes with a lot of risk. Oswalt is one of the better pitchers in baseball. There is a big financial payoff for doing well in October. (For the purposes of this post, we’ll ignore the massive difference in costs that both players would incur, as Phillips does, and simply evaluate this from a talent perspective – once you include contracts, the entire thing becomes laughable, and no one needs it laid out how the differences in salary and team control make this one of the dumbest ideas ever.)
However, this line of thought shows the flaw of analysis by cliche, rather than by measuring the value of individual assets. If you follow Phillips path to its logical extent, you could justify trading nearly any prospect for almost any major league player, as long as your team was in contention. Any marginal upgrade for a winning team could justify a complete pillaging of a team’s farm system, because, after all, “prospects get a GM fired.”
In reality, Phillips is simply displaying an extreme reliance on one of the great myths of baseball – the reliability of the proven veteran. His assertion that you know what you’re going to get from Oswalt, while Strasburg is just a big riddle wrapped inside a mystery, is the kind of thinking that has been chased out of baseball over the last 10 years.
It’s not that prospects aren’t risky. They are. However, major league players, especially pitchers, are almost equally risky. Just take a look at how last year’s aces are performing so far this year. Zack Greinke, Felix Hernandez, Dan Haren, and Javier Vazquez were among the best pitchers in the game in 2009, and have all struggled (to different degrees) so far this year. Jake Peavy, proven veteran ace, has been a disaster for the White Sox. Ask the Red Sox how their investments in Josh Beckett and John Lackey have gone this year, or query the Braves about Derek Lowe. And we’re not even talking about the guys who have gone down to injuries and aren’t even pitching right now.
Yes, it’s just two months, and we should expect each of those pitchers to perform better going forward than they have so far in 2010. However, we cannot ignore the significant variance in pitcher performance, especially in just a few month’s worth of starts, no matter how long and impressive the resume of a pitcher may be. Roy Oswalt may pitch well for his new team, but it’s nothing close to a sure thing, and he’s not even that much more of a sure thing than the kid who has never pitched in the majors.
This is the mistake that bad general managers have been making for years – significantly overestimating the reliability of veteran players. It’s the kind of misunderstanding of projected player performance that Phillips mastered as a GM. Steve thinks prospects gets GMs fired, but in reality, its misinformed opinions about how to build a baseball team, much like the one he’s espousing right now.
0
Steve Phillips should be banned from having an opinion on baseball.
I don’t care how risky prospects are. Strasburg is a rare talent. Oswalt is 32 years old and is clearly on the downside of his career, posting the highest ERA of his career and the second highest FIP of his career last year (the year before was his second-highest).
Strasburg for Oswalt is laughably dumb. That said, 32 is not particularly old for a pitcher of Oswalt’s caliber, and you are underrating his abilities… especially when you use statistics like earned run average to support your point.
But s/he didn’t just use ERA; s/he used FIP, as well.
Man, Fangraphs is sure a magnet for snobs.
Orem is right as it comes to Oswalt. He’s got a 3.57 career xFIP and hasn’t deviated from that much lately. It would nevertheless be a dumb trade, but the problem is the cost of Oswalt, not the ability.
Where is FJM when we need it…
This morning on the Seattle sports radio station, Phillips said he thinks Oswalt has more value on the trade market than Cliff Lee because of his secured contract situation. For most teams, I would think the length and size of the contract for Oswalt would make Lee the better option, especially when considering that there is a 100% chance of Lee being a type A free agent after this season but the same can’t be said for Oswalt when his contract ends.
Yes. Steve Phillips has demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of the value of money.
Ugly link to the audio:
http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18227/1h/cchannel.download.akamai.com/18227/podcast/SEATTLE-WA/KJR-AM/5-27%20phillips.mp3
I am loathe to defend Phillips, who I think is pretty much a moron, but there are arguments that Oswalt’s contract could be more attractive for SOME teams vs. Lee’s.
There are many teams, that if they traded for Lee, would have no chance retain him for next year. It is possible that the Yankees might have a rotation spot or two open next year, and if they want Lee, well, you know how that goes….
So, for some teams, the only way to secure a #1 type starter for the 2011 season is to trade for one who is already under contract. And since Oswalt is ALSO likely to garner 2 draft picks after 2011, the comparison becomes a little closer:
The excess value of Lee over his salary for 1/2 season plus the value of 2 draft picks vs. the excess value of Oswalt over his salary for 1 1/2 seasons plus the value of 2 draft picks discounted back a year
It’s not the craziest think Phillips has ever said. Probably not even top 20.
Why did no one ask him how that risky prospect Scott Kazmir turned out or what Victor Zambrano’s ERA is this year? .
To be fair, that trade was actually Duquette
Not actually Steve Phillips deal. Common misconception, but it was actually a deal completed by GM Jim Duquette.
I hate Phillips as much as the next guy, but Duquette made that trade, not Phillips.
I have heard that he tried to trade Wright and Reyes before they made it to the majors, though.
Take out “Scott Kazmir” and “Victor Zambrano’s ERA” and put in “David Wright” and “Jose Cruz Jr.’s OPS”
Although that trade didn’t happen, Steve Phillips wished it happened.
The nicest criticism I can give Steve Phillips is that the game has passed him by. And as such, guys like him have no shot at getting a GM job in the future.
Jake Peavy, proven veteran ace, has a 4.28 xFIP this year which is not what I would call “disaster”. Especially given how poorly he started off. Which reminds me…
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/time-to-worry-about-peavy/
Since that article was written, Peavy has put up a 3.21 xFIP.
That works if we don’t talk about his contract or the players they gave up to get him.
Amen.
Obviously, Steve is ok with taking on risk when it comes to making a big score.
http://www.nypost.com/rw/nypost/2009/10/26/news/photos_stories/cropped/steve_phillips–300×300.jpg
Just ONE example where trading in a proven vet for a risky prospect has gone wrong.
This wasn’t tongue in cheek?? There are a handful of pitchers you would consider trading Strasburg for, and even then there could be an argument against.
Brook Hundley thought it was an excellent idea.
Would the Nationals literally spontaneously combust if this trade ever occured?
Yes, they would literally burst into flames. Every last one of them.
Maybe next year they can trade Harper for Jorge Posada.
I can’t pass up a chance to make fun of Joe Morgan, and I can barely pass up an opportunity to bash Steve Phillips.
The idea is based on the belief that the Nationals are in contention. That’s a bit optimistic for a team one game over .500 in a pretty tough division. Yes, their starting pitching is awful and yes, Oswalt would presumably take the place of a sub-replacement level starter like John Lannan…but how much is that worth? Maybe 5 WAR over the remainder of the season, at best. And the Nationals are still floating on the tremendous luck bubble that is Livan Hernandez, waiting for it to pop beneath them.
It’s not just Livan Hernandez-Scott Olsen is blowing away his projections. Ryan Zimmerman is outperforming his projections. Josh Willingham is outperforming projections. Adam Dunn is…playing reasonable defense; his UZR/150 is well under -30!. Pudge is hitting like it’s 2003. Christian Guzman is playing better than expected. The only significant contributors underperforming their projections are Willie Harris and John Lannan.
The entire picture seems to paint a team that’s propped up by good fortune and deceptive results. I understand that projections are not infallible, but to have such a large portion of a single team all overachieving against expectations and the preponderance of supporting numbers speaks to a team ready for a collapse. And all of this has conspired to place the Nationals a single game over .500. It’s hard to imagine that they could be any more lucky from this point on.
In reality, he’d replace Strasburg, who should be starting in the next week or so. I’d say 2 win upgrade is a very optimistic projection.
There is no way that Oswalt is a 5 win upgrade over the course of the remainder of the season. It’s at most a 3 win upgrade over someone like Lannan and considering that Strasburg will probably provide 1.5 to 2 wins, his actual worth to the Nats would be very small.
Also worth considering is that the Nationals have, to this point, allowed more runs than they’ve scored; a strong record with a negative run differential isn’t likely to be sustainable. So I agree; the Nationals appear to be in contention much more than they actually are.
zimmerman is outperforming projections? just goes to show the projections were flawed, if he actually *is* outperforming them. his numbers are almost exactly the same as last season.
09/10
OPS 889/911
OBP 364/370
SLG 525/541
AVG 292/295
I think its pretty obvious why Phillips jumped on the chance to re-assert this (stupid) idea: it’s the first time in a long time that people are talking about Phillips in a context other than his sex scandal. In this case, stupidity is actually a form of image rehabilitation.
Lol. Excellent point.
Phillips traded a chance of sex with a good looking woman for a sure thing with a pig.
I’m not sure what would be more surprising:
The Nationals trading Strasburg for Oswalt
or
Oswalt waiving his no-trade clause to go to the Nationals.
Oswalt waiving his no trade clause to go to a Nationals team without Stephen Strasburg.
Steve Phillips is looking for attention.
bingo- he’s now a sociopath
From sources other than Brooke Hundley.
I could MAYBE understand if this was a team that was a serious contender and Oswalt could put them over the top like say a Minnesota. It maybe worth the gamble to win a championship this year but lets face it realistically Washington isn’t going anywhere this year with or without Oswalt. So why hamper yourself with a bad contract the next couple years and trade away the best pitching prospect to come along in years? One of the worst trade ideas I’ve ever heard from an “expert”.
Phillip’s comment it self is simply inexcusable, but the idea behind his comment is sound. Take another team in contention with an electric arm in their system, the Reds with Chapman. And I’ll do you one better, if the Astros eat Oswalt’s contract it would be the same as what the Reds spent to sign Chapman. This also takes out a fair amount of the veteran not performing up to his standards seeing as he would stay within the division. While Strausburg is ludicrous, would that be?
I’d say yes. I don’t know how many years of control the Reds have with Chapman, but I’m guessing more than the 2 years with Oswalt. Also, who’s to say Oswalt pitches any better than Chapman THIS YEAR? Same with Strasburg. We’re not even talking about the next few years. I don’t see how playing within the same division guarantees he doesn’t regress; injury, getting worn down, losing his release point? If I were a Reds or Nationals fan and my team traded Strasburg/Chapman for Oswalt and Berkman, I’d be very disappointed. I’m a Giants fan. I hope we don’t trade Bumgarner for Oswalt.
Bum shouldn’t even be mentioned in the same sentence as those guys.
You must have misread me. I simply stated that by pitching within the same division it acts as a buffer for regression, not a guarantee. The team control idea would be the purpose of the trade for the Astros. It is highly unlikely Chapman is capable of performing at the level of Oswalt based simply off of history. The issue seems to be a perceived value that is yet to exist for prospects. What if the Rangers were to trade Smoak, or the Sox to trade Beckham? These players clearly have potential, but are yet to achieve that. If a team could trade a good prospect for a player more likely to contribute now when they are in a position to do well it would be ill advised not to do so.
Absolutely indefensible. Just take into consideration that Strasburg is as good as Oswalt is right now, but with 0.000 service time. And if Strasburg isn’t as good as Oswalt, which is entirely plausible considering experience, etc., he can’t be far behind, right?
Josh, That is the whole key to Phillips argument. We dont know how good or bad Stasburg will be. There are alot of AAAA players (including pitchers) out there. THere have been “cant fails” that failed. Oswalt is a sure thing. Sure, that sure thing is on the downside and a tad pricey, but, you know you have a decent chance of a win with him on the mound (with decent support that is, not the astro’s support). Its the whole gameshow idea of “would you trade a “decent known quantity” for a “well hyped maybe (that isnt proven to be good or bad yet)” ?
Nobody is a sure thing in baseball. Who’s to say he doesn’t get hurt the next week after being traded to the Nationals? Being a Giants fan, we’ve seen firsthand the reliability of veterans to perform up to ‘expectations’.
does anyone in the world have worse judgment than steve phillips? from the ugly fat chick to knowing nothing about baseball… this guy redefines what it is to be a retard.
Steve Phillips makes some of the most baffling arguments. Last year, while he was still working for ESPN, he tried to make the argument that Denard Span is better suited hitting 7th in the lineup, and that the Twins lack a prototypical productive leadoff hitter. That’s the farthest thing from the truth I’ve heard since A-Rod went on Katie Couric.
I can’t wait till Omar Minaya is unemployed and making dumb statements like this. It takes talent to run a NY baseball team at around 500 ball for 20 years.
being a Mets fan I’ll forever be grateful to Steve Phillips for bringing us:
-Mo Vaughn
-Bobby Bonilla
-Jeremy Burnitz
-Robbie Alomar
Oh! and I can’t forget to mention trading away Jason Bay and trying to trade Reyes to Cleveland. Hes also got great taste in women.
Beckett is on the 15 day DL. It would have been pretty easy to look that up before writing the article.
It’s not prospects who get GMs fired, it’s having sex with crazed interns.
Did he forget the Nats had to pay the biggest bonus in draft history to draft him? And if they trade him that money is just flushed down the toilet, then they pay 15M more for Oswalt.
The idea is dumb enough as is, but he’s talking as if we’re playing a video game where teams don’t have budgets and you can just do whatever you want with no consequences.
It might have sounded insane or even retarded, but Strasburg could be the next Ben McDonald or Brien Taylor.
Oswalt is a guy who is showing no signs of breaking down, and having one of his best seasons. Houston gives him no run support…
Only Peavy and Hernandez are acually number one starters when at their best… all the other starters mentioned have ERAs near 4, and pretty crappy winning percentages. Lackey? Lowe? Vazquez(career .500 record with an ERA well over 4)?
Oswalt is owed and paid less than Lackey, Lowe, and most the other guys mentioned.
He’s also second among starters in career ERA behind only Johan Santana.
All that being said, it’s just another retarded statement from Steve Phillips who just wants some attention. He’s not the brightest guy, but Oswalt is still in his prime and having one of his best seasons.
It might have sounded insane or even retarded, but Strasburg could be the next Ben McDonald or Brien Taylor.
Ben McDonald was not a bad pitcher.
And why do pro-vet players insist on citing Taylor as an example of what can happen? Taylor was injured in an off-field incident and it derailed his career. What happened to Taylor as no bearing or comparison to anyone, and could just as likely happen to Oswalt as Strasburg.