Higher Trade Value? Fielder or McGehee

[sveumrules]

First, let's make some assumptions. I feel like 5 WAR is a pretty safe bet for the Prince. That's worth about 20 million right there and lets say he comes in at 15 million in arby, so you've got about 5 million in surplus value.

 

Casey is a little trickier. I think his true talent level is about 3 WAR. So over 4 years you get 12 WAR which is worth about 48 million. How much is Casey going to make over this time, though? Using the 40/60/80 arby model I get a total of about 32 million (.5/4.5/7/10) which puts his surplus at 16 million.

 

It would seem like Casey has more surplus value, but that's not the whole picture. Prince's floor is probably higher than Casey's ceiling at this point. Prince has a longer track record of greater success while being two years younger. He is a HUGE (literally) LH slugger. He is only a one year commitment. Casey is cheap the next couple years. He plays a more premium defensive position. But he also has more uncertainty about his production moving forward, it's easier to be confident about a 1 year vs a 4 year projection.

 

It obviously depends on what the trading team's needs are but I still think Fielder will net better offers than McGehee this offseason. Hows about you?

[thebruce44]

sveumrules[/b]]It would seem like Casey has more surplus value, but that's not the whole picture. Prince's floor is probably higher than Casey's ceiling at this point. Prince has a longer track record of greater success while being two years younger. He is a HUGE (literally) LH slugger. He is only a one year commitment. Casey is cheap the next couple years. He plays a more premium defensive position. But he also has more uncertainty about his production moving forward, it's easier to be confident about a 1 year vs a 4 year projection.

 

It obviously depends on what the trading team's needs are but I still think Fielder will net better offers than McGehee this offseason. Hows about you?

Like Prince, Casey is really also a 1 year commitment worse case scenario with 4 more years of team control if wanted.

 

 

[CheezWizHed]

Sure, if you are looking at "value", they might be comparable, but value is a secondary consideration on what people trade for.

 

Supply and demand. The higher WAR, the fewer and fewer players are available to make that pace. Price is going to reduce the number of buyers, but there are still enough out there to want Prince to not make a difference in cost.

 

Over the last two years, Prince had an average WAR of 5.5 and was 5th overall among 1B. McGehee had an average WAR of 2.7 and was 19th.

 

You don't pay much for something that is common place, but will pay more for something that is rare.

 

Your value considerations bring the two a little closer, but not much.

 

Prince.

[TooLiveBrew]

McGehee's avg. WAR is dragged down due to lack of a full season in '09. I think Casey made a pretty good case for being about a 3-4 WAR talent this season. I think Melvin would be trading with that assertion. His 3.5 WAR value for '10 is probably a very accurate for what his avg. WAR should be considered imo.

 

I think Casey will have more trade value, simply because Fielder is a rental (albeit a very good one). But like Cheez said, supply & demand is always the key. Never know when a couple teams might get into a bidding war on a guy like Prince.

[Ennder]

It still wouldn't shock me to see McGehee put up only 1 WAR next year. I just don't trust him and I'm sure a lot of GMs wouldn't either.

[Invader3K]

It still wouldn't shock me to see McGehee put up only 1 WAR next year. I just don't trust him and I'm sure a lot of GMs wouldn't either.

Well, there's that as well. I do think McGehee can continue to play well, but he's always going to have to prove himself because he was never a touted prospect. People are always going to go, "Yeah, he keeps hitting, but who is this guy again and how much longer can he keep it up?" It's kind of a shame since he's done everything someone could reasonably ask of him in the past two seasons.

[logan82]

So did Bill Hall.

[Ennder]

It still wouldn't shock me to see McGehee put up only 1 WAR next year. I just don't trust him and I'm sure a lot of GMs wouldn't either.

Well, there's that as well. I do think McGehee can continue to play well, but he's always going to have to prove himself because he was never a touted prospect. People are always going to go, "Yeah, he keeps hitting, but who is this guy again and how much longer can he keep it up?" It's kind of a shame since he's done everything someone could reasonably ask of him in the past two seasons.

Nothing personal against him. There are players like this that just fade away all of the time so he really does need to prove himself at least one more year. Look at say Cantu, 2.7 WAR in 2008, 1.3 WAR in 2009 and 0 WAR in 2010. When you combine good but not great hitting with bad fielding you are going to get really mixed results.

 

[CheezWizHed]

Yes, even though Casey is under contract for longer, he has a much higher chance of tailing off. He just turned 28 (Oct). Prince will turn 27 next spring (May). So age also comes into play with the arguments of "can he do it again?" and "how long can he continue at this level?".

 

If there are 18 3B that are as good or better than Casey, that makes a pretty small market for for buyers. But if Prince is in the top 5 1B, that makes a much bigger number of buyers that could upgrade their current 1B by obtaining Prince.

 

If we traded both players this off-season and got a similar return, it would be a traveshamockery! (sorry, just wanted to use that word...) But seriously, if you were going to trade X (Gamel, Odorizzi, $10, whatever), would you prefer to get Casey for 3 years or Prince for 1 year (plus draft picks) in return?

 

edit - clarified a few statements.

[CheezWizHed]

Sorry to double post, but a clearer way to look at it popped in my head. Separating this year and future years:

 

1) Would you rather have Prince or Casey plus $15M (Guessing on the difference in salary here) on your team for 2011?

2) Would you trade Casey 2012-2014 (Casey's arby years - correct me if I'm wrong) for a 1st/Supplemental or Supplemental/2nd Round draft picks?

 

I would say that Casey has the lower value one both sides (though the first option was closer than I originally thought by adding in the $15M).

[logan82]

I don't see us as contenders next year so I would rather trade McGehee and let Fielder walk the next year. Replace McGehee with Gamel in 2011 and Fielder with Lawrie the next year.

[Invader3K]

I don't see us as contenders next year so I would rather trade McGehee and let Fielder walk the next year. Replace McGehee with Gamel in 2011 and Fielder with Lawrie the next year.

If you don't see us contending next season, why not just trade Fielder now?

[logan82]

I don't see us as contenders next year so I would rather trade McGehee and let Fielder walk the next year. Replace McGehee with Gamel in 2011 and Fielder with Lawrie the next year.

If you don't see us contending next season, why not just trade Fielder now?

I am not sure the return would be high enough. If we trade both we have to sign a stopgap for a year. If the return is good enough, trade both.

 

[Invader3K]

I am not sure the return would be high enough. If we trade both we have to sign a stopgap for a year. If the return is good enough, trade both.

 

Couldn't you just call up Joe Koshansky (or someone else), or sign a guy like Overbay on the cheap? I certainly wouldn't use the need for a stopgap as an excuse not to make the best move for the club in the long term.

 

You may be right that the return may not be there for Fielder, though. If he does remain a Brewer for 2011, I think the team has to "go for it" again though. No point in paying Fielder $15 million or so if the team isn't going to contend.

[logan82]

Invader3K wrote:

Couldn't you just call up Joe Koshansky (or someone else), or sign a guy like Overbay on the cheap? I certainly wouldn't use the need for a stopgap as an excuse not to make the best move for the club in the long term.

I know we all hate talking about getting picks for a player after the CC debacle and the collective bargaining agreement may change in the next year but as things currently stand, the picks may be better than the return on a trade. I would prefer whatever is best for the club long term. The question is are the picks better than the player(s) we would get by trading him?

You may be right that the return may not be there for Fielder, though. If he does remain a Brewer for 2011, I think the team has to "go for it" again though. No point in paying Fielder $15 million or so if the team isn't going to contend

I don't think they have to go for it if Fielder stays. If they do trade Fielder, I think they would have to pick up at least part of his contract to get a decent return so the salary saving might be minimal.

[Invader3K]

This was an interesting blurb on MLB Trade Rumors:

 

Rosenthal writes that the A's "are believed to have made a strong push" for Iwakuma. He speculates that if the Brewers are willing to part with Casey McGehee, they could potentially match up for a trade with Oakland given their need for pitching.

[paul253]

What does Oakland have to offer for pitching? McGehee would be about the easiest player on the team to replace as far as position goes. Not sure Gamel can immediately meet his production, but I'd be willing to risk it.

[sveumrules]

In the article Rosenthal mentions Vin Mazzaro. Bleh. Oakland is lauded for their young pitching but I'm not all that impressed. Anderson is great but has a Sheets like injury history. Gonzalez has a curveball and that's about it. Cahill is the ultimate example of the follies of ERA. Braden threw el perfecto but is a middle of the rotation guy at best.

[Invader3K]

My guess is that at best we could get a #3 type starting pitcher for McGehee. That wouldn't be the worst thing, but doesn't really do much to help the top of the rotation like we so desperately need.

[nate82]

Oakland is lauded for their young pitching but I'm not all that impressed. Anderson is great but has a Sheets like injury history.

I would take another Sheets like player any day of the week. I would trade McGehee for a Sheets like player injury concerns or not. Would you trade McGehee for Rogers? Anderson is going to be an Ace like pitcher.

 

I think the Brewers could get more for McGehee than a #3 but I wouldn't be mad at getting a #3 like pitcher for McGehee. After Beltre is off the market there is absolutely no other good FA player for a team to pick up. The trade market for a 3B is rather empty also and if the Brewers make McGehee available and depending on the teams bidding for his services McGehee could actually have more value in the trade market than Fielder.

 

With the Red Sox going with Ortiz at DH I don't see a fit anywhere for Fielder other than the usual suspects. I don't see the Angels being a serious bidder for Prince nor do I see the Rays, Orioles, Yankees, White Sox, Cubs, or the A's as being serious bidders for Prince. I believe the market for a 1B/DH is going to be rather low. It will probably be so low that the Brewers will probably be better off keeping Fielder and taking the draft picks.