Jump to content
NBC Sports EDGE Forums

2017 MLB Trade Rumors and Deadline Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Fangraphs annual "Top 50 Trade Value" piece is being unveiled is week. Interesting stuff, because it tries to quantify and rank things -- ie,  a player's value as an asset -- that are very opaque.

 

I'm pretty sure Schwarber's not sniffing the top 50. Nor is he even in the "honorable mentions" I believe.

 

Edit: Schwarber is an honorable mention.

Edited by My Dinner With Andre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2017 at 5:26 PM, SpecialFNK said:

 

the Cardinals were not even starting him. that had to effect his value.

 

I don't know if I'm in the minority on this type of thing, but I think players values are continually changing even after every single game. if a player goes hot for a week it ups their value. if a player goes cold for a week it drops their value. continually going up and down based on how they are currently playing.

 

 

You are in the minority. Mike Trout's value doesn't take a ding after an 0-4 game with 3 K. Clayton Kershaw's value doesn't take a hit after a 3 IP, 5 ER start. 

 

Actual owners and GM's are not near as fickle as fantasy baesball players. I've had deals get proposed to me and canceled because their guy hit a home run. Makes no sense to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/8/2017 at 5:33 PM, SpecialFNK said:

 

no one has said he has become a stud. he has showed with Atlanta that he can be a power threat, like he had in previous years with St.Louis. he has still struggled against LHP just like he has I think in every season, but he has still been doing more with Atlanta than he was while not even playing much with St.Louis. that's on St.Louis for allowing his value to drop by not even playing him.

when Atlanta and St.Louis were first starting to talk trade and S.Louis had asked for a "player of value", Atlanta could have been like come on you're not even playing him he doesn't have "that value". now with Atlanta he has been playing and producing, so his value should be higher than what he was while sitting on the bench for St.Louis.

 

No, I think you're wrong. Atlanta acquired him because they had a glaring need. He's gotten hot while given full playing time, why would they bench him? 

Everyone else is saying he won't keep this up. His career #'s show this little hot streak is an anamoly. If not for Freeman getting hurt, Atlanta never starts that convo about acquiring Adams. 

His role in St. Louis was about right for him. He's not an ever day MLB player, or not a very good one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

I love that this 3 months of Schwarber's struggles have people so convinced that none of his time in the minors, none of his rookie year, none of his 2015 playoff performance, none of his 2016 WS performance mean anything. Nope just the last 3 months, he's now worthless.

 

3 months of struggles? The guy hit .221 and .208 the last two months of his rookie season. His rookie season, when he hit 16 HR in 69 games, he still only slugged .487 with a .842 OPS. Those are Chris Davis numbers. The K rate is still awful, he still can't hit lefties (he struggles enough against righties), and is terrible in the field with no true position. Is he worthless? No, he'd make a decent DH for a team strapped for power. 


And his 2015 playoff performance? Sure, it was good, but you think that 8-10 game sample really blows up his value? If it was last year, possibly, but being that was 2 years ago? It's an afterthought at this point. 

 

8 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

 

Not angry at all, I just actually understand how player valuation works.

 

I'm not sure that's accurate. Schwarber being offered straight up for Fulmer pretty well speaks at the Cubs over-valuation of him, and you seem to be on the same train of thought. Schwarber is invaluable to Cubs fans, but to people outside of the organization? Not so much. The time to sell has passed, and now people can see his overall ineptitude at the dish + his horrendous fielding. Whatever + value he may provide with the bat has to be negated in the field. 


He played 69 games in 2015, and 68 games this year. (2 games last year). His career line is 136 games, 29 homers, .210 BA, .326 OBP, .436 SLG, 183 K, 87 BB. 

What in any of that screams elite, or even average, bat? And of his 2015 and 2017, in which he's played equal games, what are people going to focus on more? What he's doing currently, or what he did two years ago? Pretty easy answer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing he is not calculating is that the offense output of the jucied ball era has devalued power hitters with no defensive profile. Run prevention value has increased.  The environmental shift in baseball is why the Tigers giving up Fulmer for Schwaber is a pipe dream now.

 

Schwarber may have only lost 25% of his value in 3 months..but his value wasn't nearly as high as people thought when the season started. That is more where the issue is coming in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sngehl01 said:

 

You are in the minority. Mike Trout's value doesn't take a ding after an 0-4 game with 3 K. Clayton Kershaw's value doesn't take a hit after a 3 IP, 5 ER start. 

 

Actual owners and GM's are not near as fickle as fantasy baesball players. I've had deals get proposed to me and canceled because their guy hit a home run. Makes no sense to me. 

The one I dislike is proposing a trade and the player I want hits a hr that night. Have never had trade accepted at that point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Low and Away said:

The one I dislike is proposing a trade and the player I want hits a hr that night. Have never had trade accepted at that point. 

 

I like offering trades for pitchers the day after they get blown up.  Sometimes you get that reactionary "this guy sucks" acceptance, even though it logically makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sngehl01 said:

I'm not sure that's accurate. Schwarber being offered straight up for Fulmer pretty well speaks at the Cubs over-valuation of him, and you seem to be on the same train of thought. Schwarber is invaluable to Cubs fans, but to people outside of the organization? Not so much. The time to sell has passed, and now people can see his overall ineptitude at the dish + his horrendous fielding. Whatever + value he may provide with the bat has to be negated in the field. 


He played 69 games in 2015, and 68 games this year. (2 games last year). His career line is 136 games, 29 homers, .210 BA, .326 OBP, .436 SLG, 183 K, 87 BB. 

What in any of that screams elite, or even average, bat? And of his 2015 and 2017, in which he's played equal games, what are people going to focus on more? What he's doing currently, or what he did two years ago? Pretty easy answer. 

 

We're also talking about a small sample size of a 24 year old player, it's not like we can conclude this is "who he is" or what his ceiling is.  He had always hit for a good AVG in the minors, so I think it's a little short-sighted to say a 24 year old batting .210 over 136 games is therefore going to be a "less than average" bat.  Plenty of prospects come up and take some time to adjust to MLB pitching.  I have no attachment to Schwarber or the Cubs, but I also think we're all being a lot more fickle / recency biased than most real life GMs at this point.  

 

I'm also not even sure Schwarber was offered straight up for Fulmer.  The report I read was that there were talks between the Cubs and Tigers about Schwarber involved in a deal with Fulmer or Daniel Norris.  Fulmer is clearly a much more valuable asset than Norris, so the source / report can't be accurate in talking about Schwarber straight up for one of them.  It's a lot more likely the talks started with "would you consider a deal where Schwarber is the main piece?" and then went from there.  This seems a little bit like a game of broken telephone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, handyandy86 said:

 

We're also talking about a small sample size of a 24 year old player, it's not like we can conclude this is "who he is" or what his ceiling is.  He had always hit for a good AVG in the minors, so I think it's a little short-sighted to say a 24 year old batting .210 over 136 games is therefore going to be a "less than average" bat.  Plenty of prospects come up and take some time to adjust to MLB pitching.  I have no attachment to Schwarber or the Cubs, but I also think we're all being a lot more fickle / recency biased than most real life GMs at this point.  

 

I'm also not even sure Schwarber was offered straight up for Fulmer.  The report I read was that there were talks between the Cubs and Tigers about Schwarber involved in a deal with Fulmer or Daniel Norris.  Fulmer is clearly a much more valuable asset than Norris, so the source / report can't be accurate in talking about Schwarber straight up for one of them.  It's a lot more likely the talks started with "would you consider a deal where Schwarber is the main piece?" and then went from there.  This seems a little bit like a game of broken telephone.

 

For sure. He's only 24. Yes, it's short sighted to point at what he's done in the majors thus far. The problem (for me) is he gets valued so much higher because of 1) timely/big hits and 2) being on a championship winning team. The guy raked in the minors and walks a lot too. I'm not even saying he's a less than average bat, but I don't think he's a ++ bat. 

I'd say your probably right on how the story developed. Recency bias plays a part, but it's obvious he has some holes he needs to fill to be a plus bat. Heck, Mike Moustakas absolutely raked in the minors too, and we're just now finally seeing him come around against MLB pitching. Jesus Montero was similar. I mean, the list is long of guys who could hit AA and AAA pitching hard. It seems like he's been exploited and can't adjust back. 

I don't fault the Cubs for offering (if they did) the deal, but for Fulmer, it makes no sense. For Norris, I can see why it would have made sense that they think it may be taken. Fulmer is as young, good now, and a good pitcher. 

He's a power hitter who's not hitting (for power or average) at a time when everyone else is. Couple that with the fact that he simply can't play the field, well, I just don't know that I imagine he's actual value lines up with what many think his value is. You obviously can't write him off as a lost prospect; he missed last year to get a new knee. However, his value has to have taken a significant step back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, My Dinner With Andre said:

It's comforting that even the great Theo Epstein makes the same bad decisions us fantasy managers make.

 

Shoulda sold high off that rookie year....

 

 

Then they may not win the WS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

I love that this 3 months of Schwarber's struggles have people so convinced that none of his time in the minors, none of his rookie year, none of his 2015 playoff performance, none of his 2016 WS performance mean anything. Nope just the last 3 months, he's now worthless.

 

 

Don't you get it by now.   For fantasy owners, it's what have you done for me lately

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest issue for Schwarber's value is he's so inept defensively that he'll need to be a near elite bat to carry a lot of real life value.  And obviously, even if you think this year is an aberration, he's still far from being an elite bat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, My Dinner With Andre said:

Fangraphs annual "Top 50 Trade Value" piece is being unveiled is week. Interesting stuff, because it tries to quantify and rank things -- ie,  a player's value as an asset -- that are very opaque.

 

I'm pretty sure Schwarber's not sniffing the top 50. Nor is he even in the "honorable mentions" I believe.

 

Edit: Schwarber is an honorable mention.

And Fulmer comes in at #22.  Team control through 2022.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Tryptamine said:

I love that this 3 months of Schwarber's struggles have people so convinced that none of his time in the minors, none of his rookie year, none of his 2015 playoff performance, none of his 2016 WS performance mean anything. Nope just the last 3 months, he's now worthless.

not saying he's worthless, I'm saying schwarber for Fulmer is insulting. Fulmer is one of the best young pitchers in the game with many years of control left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Friday, July 07, 2017 at 10:12 AM, 2ndCitySox said:

So I'm going to go through all of the contenders and write up what I think their most glaring need is, and what might be their second most important need. 

 

I'll starting with surprising Brewers. 

Glaring need: a good veteran SP.  I loves me some Jimmy Nelson and Chase Anderson, but after than you have Garza (who's been ok), and Davies (who's been not ok). The rotation is fine on paper, but it's hard to know how Jimmy and Chase would fair in a division race or in the playoffs. A solid veteran SP could bring some confidence to the bunch and give them a formidable playoff rotation. 

 

Likely need: RP- it's really Kneble and that's it. This might be as important as getting an SP. None of the relievers other than kneble inspire a lot of confidence. 

 

Ok, I'll move on to other contenders later! 

 

Hmmm.

 

I wonder if they'd bite on Verlander.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I don't watch enough of Fulmer to really appreciate him, but am I the only one who thinks he's a little overrated right now? I'm not saying I don't think he's good, but he doesn't have a great K/9, low HR/FB rate, he's out-pitching his FIP / xFIP, Brooks reports his FB and sinker have relatively little movement, etc. 

 

I guess what I'm saying is Fulmer is a 24 year old with lots of talent that's maybe getting a little lucky, and Schwarber is a talented 24 yo with a .200 BABIP that's maybe getting a little unlucky. I know results mean a lot, but in the near future the tables could turn if some of these luck-related factors start changing for both. 

 

That's a little OT, but I don't think a trade with Fulmer and Schwarber as center pieces is that ridiculously far off base. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...