What is Moncada's Value?

[Flash]

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.  

[Flash]

34 minutes ago, Dominikk85 said:

Isnt 30 mil a bit light on madrigal? Longenhagen has him a 55 which is worth about 40-45m.

The 30m would put him at more like a 50.

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

[Chicago White Sox]

40 minutes ago, Flash said:

Not sure what you are referring to. Do you mean the methodology BTV uses to arrive at surplus value?

Yes, some their surplus value projections are simply bad.  For example, they have Moncada at negative surplus value which candidly is straight up embarrassing.  Again, the tool is cool and very user friendly, but it’s only as good as the inputs and clearly there are some cracks in that department.

[Flash]

4 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Yes, some their surplus value projections are simply bad.  For example, they have Moncada at negative surplus value which candidly is straight up embarrassing.  Again, the tool is cool and very user friendly, but it’s only as good as the inputs and clearly there are some cracks in that department.

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.

[Chicago White Sox]

55 minutes ago, Flash said:

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.

Are actually trying to argue that Yoan isn’t worth a 4/$60M contract?  Because that’s is one of the most ridiculous takes I have ever seen on this site.

Edited December 24, 2020 by Chicago White Sox

[Flash]

35 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Are actually trying to argue that Yoan isn’t worth a 4/$60M contract?  Because that’s is one of the most ridiculous takes I have ever seen on this site.

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'. 

[fathom]

19 minutes ago, RagahRagah said:

It's pretty common for people here to immediately assume everything (bad) about a player after 1 rookie (or even 60 games).

He’s never hit for power at any level.

[Chicago White Sox]

1 hour ago, Flash said:

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'. 

I’m not sure what I’m missing here, but a player’s surplus value when it comes to trades is based on expected future performance and not on historical performance.  There isn’t a magical formula to calculate future performance, which means projections are inherently subjective even if the models used are data driven.  The flawed input in this case is the forecast model that thinks a 25 year old, former 70 grade prospect in Yoan Moncada is not going to provide $60M in value over the next four years after coming off what would have been a 4 fWAR season despite being negatively impacted by COVID-19.  If their model is ignoring player context, then the tool is basically worthless.

[Flash]

27 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

The flawed input in this case is the forecast model that thinks a 25 year old, former 70 grade prospect in Yoan Moncada is not going to provide $60M in value over the next four years after coming off what would have been a 4 fWAR season despite being negatively impacted by COVID-19.  If their model is ignoring player context, then the tool is basically worthless.

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'.  

[Chicago White Sox]

14 minutes ago, Flash said:

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'.  

My point is any tool that views Yoan Moncada as a negative surplus value player can’t be relied on even as a point of reference.

[Flash]

6 hours ago, Chicago White Sox said:

My point is any tool that views Yoan Moncada as a negative surplus value player can’t be relied on even as a point of reference.

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.

[Chicago White Sox]

37 minutes ago, Flash said:

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.

Dude, you are taking this way too personally, which is very strange since unless you created the site none of these comments are directed at you.  You keep saying they provide a very “comprehensive” description of how they come up with their projections, but here is their blurb on this piece of it for major leaguers:

Quote

In our modeling, we’ve found that there isn’t one true projection system available that accurately matches what the teams are using. So we played around with our own combinations of statistics, using our own formulas and algorithms, until we found consistent correlations to real-life transactions. We consider this part of our story proprietary, so we’ll leave it at that.

Well gosh damn, it’s now clear as mud how they came up with that negative valuation for Yoan Moncada...lol.  Again, you keep acting like coming up with a projected surplus value is simple math exercise and the reality is it’s not because future performance is uncertain.  The prior season does NOT automatically predict the future season.  I have no idea what BTV is doing to come up with a negative valuation (since they don’t explain their methodology!), but my guess is they are simply anchoring off the prior year.  Meanwhile, well known projections systems like Zips & Steamer both project 3.3 win seasons for Yoan next year since they are looking at a broader set of data points and not just 2020 results.  With no further growth in performance or with any inflation in the cost per win in free agency (so $9M per win in all years), his surplus value would be ~$60M.  I personally would estimate his future production to be higher than what those models project (in this case more like a 4 win player), which would place his surplus value closer to $90M.

Regardless, the point here is that some of BTV’s surplus value projections (more than just Yoan) are simply bad, which undermines the tool.  By all means keep using it as a reference point, but if you posted any outputs that involved Moncada for example you would be laughed at.  This has nothing to do with White Sox fans overvaluing Yoan, but everything to do with BTV’s poor forecast model undervaluing him due to a bad 2020 season.

[Flash]

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

[Chicago White Sox]

2 minutes ago, Flash said:

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

3.3 wins per season x 4 years of control = 13.2 projected wins over the life of control.  13.2 x $9.0M cost per win assumption = $118.8M in expected future value.  $118.8M - $60.0M in guaranteed contract commitments = $58.8M in surplus value.

[Chicago White Sox]

And that’s ignoring his 5th year team option that would further add value.

[Flash]

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. 

[Chicago White Sox]

16 minutes ago, Flash said:

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. 

Flash - Yoan Moncada was ranked as the 7th most valuable asset in baseball by Fangraphs in August.  While not the end all be all, the reality is Yoan was one of the most valuable assets in baseball prior to 2020 and did not suddenly become a negative value player after a semi-disappointing, COVID impacted season.  I tried using him as an example of a flawed projection methodology by BTV and this was your response:

Quote

Moncada's SV was negative due to his lack of productivity (the 'raw material') since signing his extension. It’s only embarrassing in the context of our collective attachment to Yoan and our expectation of higher performance.

I then asked you if you were actually defending a negative surplus value projection for Yoan since you seemed to imply that I was somehow being emotional and/or non objective in calling out BVT.  And yes, saying that Moncada has negative surplus value is a laughably bad take and I fully stand by that.  Not sure you were even arguing that point or not, but it felt important to call out given your responses to what I deem to be very fair criticism.

[Flash]

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.

[Chicago White Sox]

21 minutes ago, Flash said:

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. 

And regarding a Madrigal & Cease for Castillo & Moustakas deal, it all depends on how teams view Madrigal & Cease who are no longer prospects but are now major leaguers.  Zips has both guys at ~2 wins next year and both have two pre-arb years left.  Those four years of control would theoretically be worth $72M at $9M per win vs. a total of cost of $2.5M.  Right there is $69.5M in surplus value.  And perhaps the marginal value for players in the 1 to 2 win range isn’t that much.  Let’s say those wins are valued at a cost of $6M per, that would bring the surplus value down to $45.5M.  Either way, that ignores the possibility of future improvement, the value of their arbitration years, and any inflation in free agency.  Point is a case can be made that if these guys are viewed as 3 win players long term then they are probably a fair return for Castillo + Moose.  BTV is not valuing them as major leaguers though, but rather as prospects.  Again, this is where the subjectivity of projections comes into play.  Everyone has their own view on go-forward expectations and using Zips as our baseline instead of BTV would tell a much different story.

[Chicago White Sox]

4 minutes ago, Flash said:

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.

Nope, I can’t get behind that at all.  The 2019 season is equally important to his go-forward expectations as his 2020 season is.  And using career stats ignores the natural aging curve and the fact he switched positions where he has been fantastic defensively.  I’m starting to think you have an equity stake in the website.

[thxfrthmmrs]

9 hours ago, Flash said:

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'.  

Let's take Jack Flaherty vs. Yoan Moncada as an example, since both players had an incredible 2019 but a down year in 2020.

Flaherty 2019 4.7 fWAR 5.7 bWAR 2020 0.6 fWAR -0.3 bWAR 2021 Steamer 2.9 fWAR

Moncada 2019 5.7 fWAR 4.8 bWAR 2020 1.6 fWAR 0.7 bWAR 2021 Steamer 3.3 fWAR

Now I am not sure which WAR model BTV uses, you referenced the lower of Moncada's 2020 WAR, but BTV links to the players profile on Fangraphs. One would then assume their model is more aligned to FG, which Moncada is considerably more valuable in 2019 and 2020.

Using the logic that they are recency biased, it would be make sense if Flaherty projects to be a less valuable going forward than Moncada, especially since Flaherty has only 3 years of control left, and Moncada has 4 not counting the 2025 team option (and BTV incorrectly listed only 3 years of control left, yet they seem to have counted his salaries for the next 4 years, leading to a negative SV). Now they are projecting Flaherty to produce 103.2 AFV over the next 3 years while only 83.8 for Yoan (the difference here is SV fo a Dylan Cease), so this isn't just a dumb tool is fed with numbers from recent performance and spits out a projected value going forward. The problem here lies they have their own projection model, and it is different than the industry projection models, they also have some data issue where they only projected 3 years of control left for Moncada and counted his salaries for next 4. I would say the tool is a good baseline to check the ballpark estimate of SV for a player or trade, but it does leave room of subjectivity, Moncada is perfect example of an outlier.

And for shits and giggles, if we do not apply subjectivity to the BTV values, we end up with shit like these:

 

[Flash]

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

[thxfrthmmrs]

13 minutes ago, Flash said:

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.

Terrible take. You don't average WAR for a player who spent majority of some of those years in the minors. If that's how BTV projects Moncada's value for the next 5 years, then they need to go back to the drawing board.

[Flash]

4 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Nope, I can’t get behind that at all.  The 2019 season is equally important to his go-forward expectations as his 2020 season is.  And using career stats ignores the natural aging curve and the fact he switched positions where he has been fantastic defensively.  I’m starting to think you have an equity stake in the website.

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.

[Flash]

6 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

Terrible take. You don't average WAR for a player who spent majority of some of those years in the minors. If that's how BTV projects Moncada's value for the next 5 years, then they need to go back to the drawing board.

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