Flash

Anderson

Padres being Padres and they're still in on Sugano. Even w/o Clevinger, adding Snell to the mix with Lamet, Paddock and Gore is scary. The linchpin is obviously Patino. He has been very highly ranked for several years but I'm not convinced he's a dude. Obviously Rays like him alot. For me, this just suggests the 'mind trades' we (and the food guys) have been offering for guys like Darvish and Castillo ust aren't going to cut it and we should focus on getting Hendriks locked up ASAP.

Thanks. Seems like a reasonable approach.

Can they float say a $2.5M offer now (to convince him to wait) or would that be a violation?

Meant to send this sooner. Chicago White Sox is entirely correct. While trying to detect the flaw in BTVs model, I overlooked the obvious disconnect...they list Moncada's contract as having 3 yrs and $85M left. Hense CWS comment "it’s only as good as the inputs and clearly there are some cracks in that department." was prescient and accurate. When agjusted for the correct inputs Yoans SV likely exceeds $50M. Apologies to CWS.

Can we make it worth it to Colas to wait until next signing period by offering him (through apprpriate channels) more than $2M or is $2M some kind of league imposed limit?

I have not offered an opinion on the value of Moncada's contract. I did not bring up Moncada or his contract. Moncada was brought up by someone else as an example of inconsistencies in how Baseball Trade Values calculates surplus value. That led to a discussion on the efficacy of various ways to calculate SV.

Guys...I have no vested interest in anyones website or model. I crawl around FG as much as the next guy. I really couldn't care less about how Moncada's SV was determined. I didn't bring it up. It was brought up as an anomaly to BTVs SV forecast ostensibly to support why it is unreliable as a proxy for valuing WS players as trade pieces for Castillo and/or others. Thats fine. i'm always up for an intellectual arguement on the efficacy of certain data and how it can/should be interpretted but can do without the commentary on the value of my perspective. I often take controversial and contrarian positions across a variety of interests but Moncada's SV calculation approach is not worth the calories we've already burned. Agree to disagree.

So by that explanation, what should Moncada's WAR be?

According to Baseball Reference, Moncada's 2020 line was BA .225; OPS 705; OPS+ 94; WAR 0.7. His last 3 seasons were heavily influenced by a strong 2019 of 4+.

Please enlighten me on how you would arrive at an appropriate WAR for Moncada for purposes of calculating SV.

For the last time...its a model. It doesn't care about the persona, only the data. You want to make this about your perceived criteria on how Moncada should be valued. Fine but thats not how their model works. If you want to assign and pay for the value Yoan receives for his FG ranking go ahead. Its just not how they view things and it doesn't matter what either you or I think. I sent you to the site and youv'e crapped all over it 4 times because you disagree with how they calculate Moncada's SV. Just don't go to the site or use their data...I really don't care.

I'm starting to think you are in a relationship with Moncada

In the 5 years Yoan has been in MLB he is avergaged 1.6 WAR/yr. This was inflated due to his strong 2019 of 4 plus. Given recency bias of 0.7 WAR in 2020 as most models will have, and the fact that its an algorithm that doesn't conflate how publications rank him or whether or not he had Covid in the context of a $60M contract, one can understand how he has negative SV according to BTV. Again, let's not confuse SV with market value.

Well done. The delta relates to your assumption of 3.3 wins per season vs. BTV's unpublished forecast based upon his actual performance last season (i.e. @700 OPS, 94 OPS+). There are other adjustments that they make which are not proprietary and described on the site. The model is impersonal and not specific to Moncada or any individual player. I do not take this stuff personally but rather as a distraction from the things that are personal. That said, your authoritative remarks such as 'this is the dumbest thing I've ever seen on this site' suggest you take yourself rather seriously. In any event, you can use Moncada as a proxy for how flawed BTV's model is and maybe you're right. In my observation, they usually get it right but thats not the point. Regardless of how you calculate Moncada's SV, its not going to be supportive of a Madrigal/Cease package for Castillo and Moustakas which was the basis of my original post.

Okay. Please provide Moncadas Surplus Value based upon how you would calculate it. I'll wait.

You commented in this thread 'Surplus value is without question an important part of trade discussions' and asked me where the SV numbers came from. I told you BTV and directed you to their site. The site gives a very comprehensive explanation for how SV is determined. You have either not read it or you don't understand it but in either case, you still don't get it. Simply avoid the site and refrain from comments such as 'SV as important part of trade discussion' unless you have another/better way of determining it.

Last time....the BTV model doesn't know a guy named Yoan Moncada. It doesn't care what his prospect grade was or that he was coming off Covid. Its a dumb tool. What it does care about is some player coming off of a year with an OPS+ of 94 and WAR of 0.7 and, based upon assumptions relating to future performance and an implied WAR value of $9M, how much, if any, suplus value exists over the life of his contract. The model doesn't make trades...its a tool to help us fake GMs assess trade fairness. Its up to the users of the tool to add 'player context'. Its not the end all be all but I reference it here from time to time when random trade proposals are offered without regard for relative value. If you are someone who needs an algorithm to quantify and forecast the subjective qualities of a player, of course you will consider the tool 'basically worthless'.

Reds wouldn't

oldsox...I think you are confusing my old age with 'smarts' . Moustakas, when healthy, is a 2.5-3 WAR player. He hits left handed and with power. At $14M for '21 is he overpaid? Not really. Do I think Moose is a better player today and would bring us closer to the promised land?...yes. Would I seek a straight up trade with Cincy, Madrigal for Moose?...no, but its not out of the realm of sanity. The issue, as you correctly point out is contract value and control and, on both counts, you have to favor Madrigal. That said, the hypothetical trade I posited was Cease, Madrigal, Lopez and Rutherford for Castillo and Moose. I also stipulated that it would likely be viewed as too light by Cincy but, in my view, adding Castillo to this rotation would almost be unfair and, in the short term, Moose would be considerably more valuable than Madrigal.

I didn't bring up Yoan...you did. I'm not arguing anything. You commented that "it’s only as good as the inputs and clearly there are some cracks in that department" and I was trying to help you understand that the inputs you are referring to represent actual performance data. Their 'tool' doesn't care who the player is, only actual performance in the context of contract value. I clearly stated "Thats not to say his SV is the equivalent of his market value because we all know how talented he is..." I don't know how I can make this any clearer to you without sounding argumentative or making snarky remarks such as 'that's one of the most ridiculous takes I have ever seen on this sight'.

Nope. Their formula is stochastic, very straight forward and data driven. No subjectivity. Moncada's SV was negative due to his lack of productivity (the 'raw material') since signing his extension. Its only embarrassing in the context of our collective attachment to Yoan and our expectation of higher performance. Thats not to say his SV is the equivalent of his market value because we all know how talented he is but his SV is what it is.

Arguably yes but one could also argue the industry would be unlikely to assign Rutherford SV of 6.

Go to www.baseballtradevalues.com and scroll to About/Valuing Major League Players. Its a fun site to crawl around and in my observation, their methodolgy doesn't leave much room for subjectivity. Its also a good source for 'native' perspective on potential trade scenarios. is there room for disagreement? Sure. But, if you go back and review actual trades that have occurred, you'll find BTVs relatve values were very much in the bandwidth if not spot on.

Yep.