The first of June is tomorrow and while no significant trades are likely to be made in the first few weeks of June, the Cubs do find themselves to be far from contenders at this point. The Cubs will likely trade a few players near the deadline for prospects so it seems a good time to start talking about the trade value the players have. It’s actually fairly simple to calculate. A win (WAR) is worth $4.5 million. I’m going to assume all trades are made on July 31st so the player would have two months remaining. I’m also going to use the current ZiPS projection and will update these later on to reflect talent changes.
Along with knowing the value of the win, we have a reasonable projection for each player and know how much he’s likely to contribute over the final two months of the season. If we multiply those numbers we find how much the player is worth above a replacement level player making league minimum. Then we just factor in the contract. Two-thirds of the season is gone by that point so only a third of the contract remains to be paid.
We also have a good idea of how much draft picks are worth for players who may be eligible for arbitration. One additional draft pick is worth $2.5 million. A type B free agent would bring one draft pick if the club offers arbitration. A type A free agent brings two draft picks so his value in draft picks is $5 million. Furthermore, we know the value of rated prospects based on how similarly rated prospects have performed at the big league level. Combining all of this we get a reasonable idea of how much we should expect in return for the players.
There’s a lot of error obviously. A player may be playing on a bad leg and his projection moving forward isn’t actually as good as ZiPS thinks it is. Maybe the team trading for the player only wants to use the guy in limited action making his value a bit lower to the team trading for him. There are all kinds of other examples so don’t take these numbers for anything more than what they are: a reasonable expectation for return if the player is traded.
Over the next couple months we’ll cover all the players on the roster unless the team suddenly finds itself in contention. At that point we’ll change gears and look at what the Cubs can acquire to improve the team and how much they’d have to give up in terms of prospects. That seems unlikely at this point, but it’s still possible.
Carlos Pena‘s updated ZiPS is a .371 wOBA. Over two months we’d expect him to get 200 or so plate appearances. I’m ignoring defense because of how unreliable it is even over the course of one season, but over the course of a couple months it’s useless. A .371 wOBA over 200 plate appearances is .8 WAR. That’s a value of $3.8 million. Pena’s contract is a little bit odd.
He’s being paid $5 million this season and $5 million next year even though it’s only a one-year contract. It’s unlikely any team is going to pick up the payment for next season so the Cubs are on the hook for that. Over the final two months this season he’d be paid $1.7 million. It’s probably OK to think he’ll be a type B free agent, which is another $2.5 million in value. His surplus trade value is $4.7 million (after rounding). A top 10 hitting prospect is worth just over $36 million so obviously the Cubs won’t get anything close to that in return. Grade B hitters are worth $5.5 million and two Grade C pitchers, 22 and younger would be worth a combined $4.2 million. You can look at the grades for the Cubs prospects to get an idea of what the Cubs could get in return for Pena.
The additional $5 million the Cubs will have to spent next season also needs to be factored in somehow, but I’m not really sure how to include it. It’s possible the Cubs could just write that off as an expense and not include it in his value. It’s even possible the Cubs convince the other team to pay it, which would net them nothing in return except freeing up some payroll, which may be more valuable than you think.
UPDATE: After Carlos Pena hit a home run agains the Yankees, his trade value is basically the same as the above.
Comments
From previous…
Brett Jackson saw 14 pitches altogether in his 4 PAs. The groundout was on the first pitch in his final AB.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Jackson will be fine. I expect it will take him a few games to get going though.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]Jackson will be fine. I expect it will take him a few games to get going though.[/quote]
Yeah, I figure being out of the loop for so long he needs an adjustment period. He was playing center and as far as I could tell didn’t make any glaring errors based on the play-by-play.
Unrelated, but I think they should have moved DJ LeMahieu to Iowa and called up some other infielder instead. Making your better prospects ride the bench is stupid, but he’s only been here a couple days so let’s see what happens.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Did anyone else notice in the game yesterday when Bob heaped scorn on Castro for making the throw to third after Barney’s error (in the 8th?).
Obviously the throw was ill-advised and he should’ve just held onto it, but it seemed like Bob went on and on for like 5 minutes about what a bad decision it was. He never once mentioned Barney’s complete inability to field the ball that caused the whole situatuon.
ZappBranniganQuote Reply
[quote name=ZappBrannigan]Did anyone else notice in the game yesterday when Bob heaped scorn on Castro for making the throw to third after Barney’s error (in the 8th?).
Obviously the throw was ill-advised and he should’ve just held onto it, but it seemed like Bob went on and on for like 5 minutes about what a bad decision it was. He never once mentioned Barney’s complete inability to field the ball that caused the whole situatuon.[/quote]
Imagine the additional scorn had the run subsequently scored.
At least Brenly defended Soto’s throwing “error” where Barney did the ole’ bullshit and completely missed it.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
For you breaking bad fagets
http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/whats-alan-watching/posts/amc-sets-breaking-bad-july-premiere-date-for-season-4
BerseliusQuote Reply
Yeah I heard that Brenly bitching, but to be fair, it was sort of the final straw in a day of much shittiness after giving the game away.
I learned about two new things courtesy of the Internet today. One was planking (thanks to Cubey on the last thread), and the other is Vajazzle. There must be so much other dumb shit out there in the world that I’m clueless about.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
[quote name=Suburban kid]Yeah I heard that Brenly bitching, but to be fair, it was sort of the final straw in a day of much shittiness after giving the game away.
I learned about two new things courtesy of the Internet today. One was planking (thanks to Cubey on the last thread), and the other is Vajazzle. There must be so much other dumb shit out there in the world that I’m clueless about.[/quote]You know about ACBey so that’s about it.
mb21Quote Reply
Levine chat:
Yeah, but Castro didn’t sit on the bench.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Why does Levine do those chats? I realize he’s good with the scoops, but he never seems to say anything smart or informative when I see these chats quoted here.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
[quote name=Suburban kid]Why does Levine do those chats? I realize he’s good with the scoops, but he never seems to say anything smart or informative when I see these chats quoted here.[/quote]
And, of course, he didn’t actually answer the question as to why he was on the bench. Very likely he didn’t have a good answer, but don’t these people just make up answers anyways?
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=Mish]And, of course, he didn’t actually answer the question as to why he was on the bench. Very likely he didn’t have a good answer, but don’t these people just make up answers anyways?[/quote]Yeah, I guess that’s my point. Any credibility he gains from having scoops from the front office from time to time is erased by making shit up or failing to make shit up when called upon. (dying laughing)
Suburban kidQuote Reply
doesn’t it seem Like Pena is doing apprciably better offensively over the last month or so? if that continues, I’d think his trade value, or at least his attractiveness as a trade candidate might be a tiny bit higher by July 31st. We basically have two months of numbers, but it took him a whole month to hit his first home run, and home run hitting accoutns for much of his value offensively, right? Similarly, his defense might be impossible to account for in the formula because fo the unreliablitiy of the numbers, but it seems like its something that would be taken into account by anyone looking at him for trade.
UrkQuote Reply
[quote name=Urk]doesn’t it seem Like Pena is doing apprciably better offensively over the last month or so? if that continues, I’d think his trade value, or at least his attractiveness as a trade candidate might be a tiny bit higher by July 31st. We basically have two months of numbers, but it took him a whole month to hit his first home run, and home run hitting accoutns for much of his value offensively, right? Similarly, his defense might be impossible to account for in the formula because fo the unreliablitiy of the numbers, but it seems like its something that would be taken into account by anyone looking at him for trade.[/quote]
The .371 wOBA that MB is using from ZiPS is more or less in line with viewing his recent performance as indicative of his TTL
BerseliusQuote Reply
Pena is also a historically slow starter (I don’t know how much predictive value that has, but it certainly seems to be true for some players).
ACTQuote Reply
Jesus the Daytona Cubs are 39-12. I think we need to speed up moving day a little bit.
jtsunamiQuote Reply
Doesn’t some of Pena’s percieved value come from his reputatation as a positive clubhouse guy and veteran team leader? He’s just the type of player a lot of teams are looking to add right around the trade deadline with those types of ‘intangibles.’
Obviously, there’s no real way to represent that statistically, but I think it does improve his value some, even if it’s not signficantly, there’s a lot of GMs and managers who would throw their support behind someone like Pena with those types of charachteristics in mind.
ZappBranniganQuote Reply
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
Aisle424Quote Reply
[quote name=ZappBrannigan]Doesn’t some of Pena’s percieved value come from his reputatation as a positive clubhouse guy and veteran team leader? He’s just the type of player a lot of teams are looking to add right around the trade deadline with those types of ‘intangibles.’
Obviously, there’s no real way to represent that statistically, but I think it does improve his value some, even if it’s not signficantly, there’s a lot of GMs and managers who would throw their support behind someone like Pena with those types of charachteristics in mind.[/quote]
I think the “intangibles” make a guy easier to trade, and might open up a few more suitors than a pain-in-the-ass would, so the value could increase through competition, but probably not enough to make MB’s calculations that far off the mark.
Aisle424Quote Reply
KG
Matt Szczur, OF, Cubs (Low-A Peoria): 2-for-4, 2B, HR (2), R, 2 RBI, BB. Home runs in back-to-back games and 18-for-43 (.419) in his last ten; .343/.409/.460 on the season and could be headed to High-A soon.
MishQuote Reply
$4.5 million for 1 win? That’s crazy. If I’m understanding correctly, when a player has a 9 WAR season, he’s worth $40.5 million for that year?
MuckerQuote Reply
[quote name=Muck Muckintuck]$4.5 million for 1 win? That’s crazy. If I’m understanding correctly, when a player has a 9 WAR season, he’s worth $40.5 million for that year?[/quote]
Based on what teams pay on the FA market, yes. No one is paying a guy with an expectation that they will be worth 9 WAR though. But it’s a big reason why the $30m/yr number is being thrown around for Pujols.
BerseliusQuote Reply
I think there has also been debate on whether its linear or not, but given the range that most players operate within, it should still be reasonably accurate.
Maybe a better way to look at it is that an “average” player (~2 WAR) is worth roughly $9-10M on the open market, which is about right.
I think relievers somewhat buck the trend on this number though.
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]Based on what teams pay on the FA market, yes. No one is paying a guy with an expectation that they will be worth 9 WAR though. But it’s a big reason why the $30m/yr number is being thrown around for Pujols.[/quote]I see. So when you look at A-Rod’s original 10 year contract and his WAR for those 10 years, he actually out produced his contract. The value for wins has probably increased since 2000 but still, that’s incredible to think he was actually worth that contract and even then some.
MuckerQuote Reply
new post http://obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/articles/which-types-of-players-have-been-injured.html
BerseliusQuote Reply