Brewers Trade Value Top Ten

[Eye Black]

Just to clarify on the idea of why some prospects are included on this exercise is two-fold...

 

First, using the 40 man roster as the ranking "pool" was an easy cut-off for who to include and not include. This certainly includes a few prospects, most obviously Arcia.

 

Second, I think including Arcia offers some important perspective. If it helps picture some other top-15 prospect that you believe has similar value to Arcia. Remember, this isn't the future value of these players to the Brewers, it is strictly "how much are they currently worth on the open market"? The way I tried to look at it was not from the Brewers point of view, but from other teams standpoints of which players would be most desirable to acquire.

 

The Lucroy vs. Arcia "trade value" argument serves a couple of purposes. For starters it offers some idea of what we should expect to receive in return for Lucroy. If you believe that Lucroy still has a higher trade value than Arcia, then maybe we should expect a top 15 prospect for Lucroy. If you think Arcia has surpassed Lucroy's value than we probably shouldn't expect that trading Lucroy could acquire a comparable prospect to Arica. Lastly, I think the Lucroy vs. Arcia trade value argument gives some idea of what value baseball teams are placing on current wins vs. future wins. For a team like the Brewers clearly they are playing for future wins, but are the teams trying to assemble competitive rosters now willing to give up the expected future win value of a player like Arcia in order to secure the current wins that Jonathan Lucroy can potentially add?

[MKE81]

It has been reported on a few occasions the Brewers would LOVE to get rid of Braun.

 

When???

Haudricourt said this recently:

 

Truth be told, the Brewers would not hesitate to move Braun and his five-year, $105 million contract extension that kicks in next year if a sensible offer surfaced. The baggage accumulated in recent years with his PED scandal and health issues, as well as significant no-trade protection in his contract, make a trade unlikely at this point, however.

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/brewers/what-the-brewers-starting-lineup-would-look-like-if-opening-day-were-tomorrow-b99647430z1-364593341.html

 

There have been some other things - mostly tweets from various sportswriters about the fact that there's not a lot of interest in Braun at this time.

 

It should be noted that Haudricourt's article caused other sources to basically report the same thing - that the team would move him if they could.

 

It will always boggle my mind that teams arent interested in players because of PEDs - I'd understand a multiple time offender where they're out of baseball the next one but someone as talented as Braun whose contract will be a steal in a year or so if he's getting 500+ ABs, who will definitely not risk take anything the rest of his career. MLB = Entertainment industry. If a player like this can help you win then you go get him. But not in MLB because they have "morals" and "ethics"....even though they actually don't. You can put the 9 biggest [expletive deleted by moderator] on the field and if they're winning and bring a championship the stadium will be packed every game

[Roderick]

Braun .... , who will definitely not risk take anything the rest of his career.

 

That is a stretch. You are imputing your logic on another person. Logically, he shouldn't take peds, but logically people shouldn't take drugs, smoke, etc, etc. I don't think a team can assume he will stay clean the rest of his contract, so that will decrease (not eliminate) his value.

[MKE81]

Braun .... , who will definitely not risk take anything the rest of his career.

 

That is a stretch. You are imputing your logic on another person. Logically, he shouldn't take peds, but logically people shouldn't take drugs, smoke, etc, etc. I don't think a team can assume he will stay clean the rest of his contract, so that will decrease (not eliminate) his value.

 

Understood. But I think teams can absolutely assume he'll stay clean. STL assumes Peralta will stay clean. Same with Seattle and Cruz, etc etc. It's been 2yrs+ and they're all still productive therefore one can assume they'll continue that route moving forward. I understand the injury/age concern toward Braun and acquiring his contract but not so much on the PED front. These guys made a poor decision and have paid the price. But that's just me...

[Mr Southpaw]

Segura was listed on less that half of the top ten lists and brought back a very good prospect without giving anything of great value. . The palyers on the top ten list should bring back more.

[MrTPlush]

Segura was listed on less that half of the top ten lists and brought back a very good prospect without giving anything of great value. . The palyers on the top ten list should bring back more.

 

We gave up Wagner and ate 6.5mil...which is a large chunk of change. In all honestly I feel like we traded Segura for half of Anderson. The other half of Anderson and Diaz were traded for by paying the cash and giving Wagner.

[MrTPlush]

Not that I really want to get into the PED argument, but Biogenesis included a long list of of guys who never tested positive for anything. So yes there are good reasons to go back on PEDs as there is clearly ways to beat the system. Actually there are probably many guys who get caught and decide to go back on PEDs.

 

Not saying Braun will or has, but it isn't as simple as saying getting caught once just means you will never use PEDs again.

[KCBrewerfan34]

Segura was listed on less that half of the top ten lists and brought back a very good prospect without giving anything of great value. . The palyers on the top ten list should bring back more.

 

We gave up Wagner and ate 6.5mil...which is a large chunk of change. In all honestly I feel like we traded Segura for half of Anderson. The other half of Anderson and Diaz were traded for by paying the cash and giving Wagner.

 

As stated multiple times previously, subtract Segura's $2.6 million and we ate under "$4 million". For that we got a rotation arm and a prospect with a pretty good upside. What's not to like?

 

Wagner had good minor league stats but his 91 mph doesn't project to the pros IMO. Greg Maddux he ain't. Stearns has a solid "B" from me so far, he probably could have done better in the Lind trade but he is quickly transforming the Brew. combine that with a Top 5 pick coming up I'm excited for the future 2-4 years down the road.

[And That]

I'm trying to avoid studying, so here we go:

 

1. Arcia

2. Lucroy

3. Lopez

4. Davis

5. Smith

6. Braun

7. Nelson

8. Santana

9. Peralta

10. Anderson

[MrTPlush]

Segura was listed on less that half of the top ten lists and brought back a very good prospect without giving anything of great value. . The palyers on the top ten list should bring back more.

 

We gave up Wagner and ate 6.5mil...which is a large chunk of change. In all honestly I feel like we traded Segura for half of Anderson. The other half of Anderson and Diaz were traded for by paying the cash and giving Wagner.

 

As stated multiple times previously, subtract Segura's $2.6 million and we ate under "$4 million". For that we got a rotation arm and a prospect with a pretty good upside. What's not to like?

 

Wagner had good minor league stats but his 91 mph doesn't project to the pros IMO. Greg Maddux he ain't. Stearns has a solid "B" from me so far, he probably could have done better in the Lind trade but he is quickly transforming the Brew. combine that with a Top 5 pick coming up I'm excited for the future 2-4 years down the road.

 

I have nothing against the trade. I like it a lot, but Segura's value was bad and this trade showed it. We didn't get the return we got because of Segura. It was because we are millions of dollars and gave up a prospect.

[A Swing and A Drive]

Braun has a long contract at market value with a lot of risk and baggage. He currently has little to no trade value. If he continues to produce as his contract shortens, the Brewers SHOULD be able to get something of value in return for him.

[logan82]

Braun has a pretty reasonable contract that pays no more than $15m er year.

[Eye Black]

Thanks for everyone that voted in the Brewers Trade Value Top Ten thread. Below are the top ten results tallied from the 15 posters that voted:

 

Brewers Trade Value Top Ten

1) Jonathan Lucroy (140 pts.)

2) Orlando Arcia (120 pts.)

3) Jimmy Nelson (117 pts.)

4) Khris Davis (92 pts.)

5) Will Smith (88 pts.)

6) Ryan Braun (71 pts.)

7) Wily Peralta (46 pts.)

8) Jorge Lopez (39 pts.)

9) Taylor Jungmann (32 pts.)

10) Jeremy Jeffress (30 pts.)

 

Honorable Mentions (tied for 11th):

Zach Davies (13 pts.)

Domingo Santana (13 pts.)

 

Interestingly the now traded Jean Segura finished 15th with 4 points (four 10th place votes).

[adambr2]

Late to the party, but I have to question how Brett Phillips, who is a top 50 prospect, doesn't even crack the top 10. Surely not everyone listed in the top 10 would return a top 50 prospect.

 

I would have to think that the centerpiece of a trade that cost us Carlos Gomez and Mike Fiers at least belongs in the top 5. If Stearns was offered a top 50 straight up right now for either of Davis or Smith I'm sure most would agree he should jump at it.

[Eye Black]

Late to the party, but I have to question how Brett Phillips, who is a top 50 prospect, doesn't even crack the top 10. Surely not everyone listed in the top 10 would return a top 50 prospect.

Yes, Brett Phillips and possibly some other prospects would have made the top ten, but the voting was limited to players on the Brewers current 40-man roster which is why Phillips wasn't eligible for the list. The list was limited to the 40-man roster for simplicity and to avoid submissions filled with only prospects. It is a valid question though where the cut-off would be on the list for a player that could bring back a prospect to an equivalent talent level of Phillips.

[brewerfan82]

Interesting and fun topic/exercise! Love the list it churned out.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if Lucroy, Davis, Smith and Peralta are all gone by the trade deadline (or even opening day). Possibly in two big deals Lucroy/Peralta in one and Davis/Smith in another. Those are two really nice packages that could really boost another team and convince them to give up some significant talent.

 

That said, there's been a lot of discussion on this board about a lot of the tradeable assets and which ones could raise their stock by keeping them to the deadline, rather than trading them by opening day. It'd be interesting to see a ranking of 1.) whose stock could rise the most by holding onto them til the deadline, and 2.) whose stock could decline the most by waiting til the deadline. Here's my take on the guys I think are most likely to get traded:

 

Players whose stocks could raise the most holding onto them until the deadline:

 

1.) Peralta - He always just seems like he's on the edge of busting out. If he has a strong first half, his value to another team in need of a starter could sky rocket.

2.) Lucroy - The first half could give him a chance to reassure other teams that he's healthy and productive.

3.) Smith - While I'd like to think it doesn't matter, his stock could change drastically depending on his role. If he gets the bulk of the closer opportunities and is lights out, he might actually be the highest riser in the group. That said, I have a feeling Jeffress is more likely to get a crack at that role if it's not a closer-by-committee situation.

4.) Davis - He could continue his homerun rampage and solidify his power threat status, but I'm in the crowd that believes he's kind of proven what he is already and a barrage of homeruns in the first half likely won't affect his trade value much.

 

Players whose stock could decline the most holding onto them until the deadline:

 

1.) Lucroy - If he's not productive or has another concussion or can't catch for some reason, he could lose almost all his remaining value. Plus like others have pointed out, it's not ideal for teams to pickup a new catcher in the middle of the season. I think the risk, far outweighs the reward in Lucroy's case and he really needs to be traded sooner than later.

2-4.) Tie between Peralta, Smith and Davis - I think the rest of the guys have a similar risk factor, it's all about staying healthy and being productive. If they're not, we probably won't have many suitors for any of them at the deadline, but I also don't think their overall value drops as significantly as Lucroy's could.

 

In short, I think it's too much of a gamble to hold onto Lucroy, however, with lingering concerns from other teams, I think we'll have to tack on one of the pitchers in a deal in order to get the return we'd want for him. The remainder of the players I think we might as well trade sooner than later to make room on the roster for players we want to evaluate for the future, but it wouldn't be the end of the world if we held onto them into the season.

[MadScientist]

In short, I think it's too much of a gamble to hold onto Lucroy, however, with lingering concerns from other teams, I think we'll have to tack on one of the pitchers in a deal in order to get the return we'd want for him. The remainder of the players I think we might as well trade sooner than later to make room on the roster for players we want to evaluate for the future, but it wouldn't be the end of the world if we held onto them into the season.

 

It's not too much of a gamble if the Brewers don't like the return they are being offered for Lucroy. The goal isn't to trade Lucroy, the goal is to get impact talent for him.

[adambr2]

Late to the party, but I have to question how Brett Phillips, who is a top 50 prospect, doesn't even crack the top 10. Surely not everyone listed in the top 10 would return a top 50 prospect.

Yes, Brett Phillips and possibly some other prospects would have made the top ten, but the voting was limited to players on the Brewers current 40-man roster which is why Phillips wasn't eligible for the list. The list was limited to the 40-man roster for simplicity and to avoid submissions filled with only prospects. It is a valid question though where the cut-off would be on the list for a player that could bring back a prospect to an equivalent talent level of Phillips.

 

Ah, missed that, thank you. That'll teach me not to skim through the original post.

[brewerfan82]

In short, I think it's too much of a gamble to hold onto Lucroy, however, with lingering concerns from other teams, I think we'll have to tack on one of the pitchers in a deal in order to get the return we'd want for him. The remainder of the players I think we might as well trade sooner than later to make room on the roster for players we want to evaluate for the future, but it wouldn't be the end of the world if we held onto them into the season.

 

It's not too much of a gamble if the Brewers don't like the return they are being offered for Lucroy. The goal isn't to trade Lucroy, the goal is to get impact talent for him.

 

True, but I don't think anyone advocating that his trade value is higher now than it may be at the deadline is advocating trading at all costs. None of us know what the offers are out there, we're just saying there's a good chance that the highest offer that Stearns is getting now is quite possibly higher than what his highest offer may be later (when there are fewer suitors, there's a hesitation to breakup a pitching rotation's vibe with their catcher, and Luc's had more time to completely kill of his value), so don't shoot yourself in the foot by reaching for the moon. But yes, if there aren't any offers for any impact players, you might as well hold onto him for now.

[Roderick]

Braun .... , who will definitely not risk take anything the rest of his career.

 

That is a stretch. You are imputing your logic on another person. Logically, he shouldn't take peds, but logically people shouldn't take drugs, smoke, etc, etc. I don't think a team can assume he will stay clean the rest of his contract, so that will decrease (not eliminate) his value.

 

STL assumes Peralta will stay clean......

 

How do you know what St. Louis was thinking when signed Peralta? What if Peralta would have received another $7M if they knew he was going to be clean, but since they didn't know, they discounted the amount they were willing to pay.

[adambr2]

I doubt Braun ever uses again. There's zero financial incentive now as his paycheck is now already set til he's 37/38, at which point his career will likely be over anyway. He could hit 75 HRs this year and he still wouldn't gain a penny.

 

Conversely, he could end up banned and forfeit the rest of his contract if he's busted again. The risk/reward is just too great. He has no reason not to just sit back, be quiet, and try to do the best he can as Father Time eats away at his numbers.

[Crash2303]

interesting re-reading this thread. with trade talks heating up a little bit and since several players were traded this offseason, while others have been added I was interested in what people's new, current top 10 would be, especially as we're "nearing" the trade deadline. Please review the guidelines that Eye Black at Night set forth in the opening post. I don't think we necessarily need to tally them up- just curious what people think. Here's mine fwiw:

 

1. Arcia

2. Nelson

3. Villar

4. LuCroy

5. Santana

6. Carter*

7. Davies

8. Knebel

9. Smith

10. Lopez

11. Jeffress*

 

* if Carter is under contract through 2018- I've seen posted that he is a FA after 2018, but have also seen (sportrac) that he becomes a FA after 2017. if the latter is true, he would fall outside the top 10 and Jeffress would take his place at #10)

[1992casey]

Cot's, Baseball Reference, and spotrac all agree on Carter's total service coming into the season. He had 3 years, 159 days. That comes up to being 13 days short of four years of service, making him controllable through the 2018 season and eligible to sign with anyone for 2019.

 

Column three on Chris Carter's soptrac page is right while column six isn't. That makes spotrac's page half right and half wrong, with the actual service time being in agreement across all three sites.

[adambr2]

interesting re-reading this thread. with trade talks heating up a little bit and since several players were traded this offseason, while others have been added I was interested in what people's new, current top 10 would be, especially as we're "nearing" the trade deadline. Please review the guidelines that Eye Black at Night set forth in the opening post. I don't think we necessarily need to tally them up- just curious what people think. Here's mine fwiw:

 

1. Arcia

2. Nelson

3. Villar

4. LuCroy

5. Santana

6. Carter*

7. Davies

8. Knebel

9. Smith

10. Lopez

11. Jeffress*

 

* if Carter is under contract through 2018- I've seen posted that he is a FA after 2018, but have also seen (sportrac) that he becomes a FA after 2017. if the latter is true, he would fall outside the top 10 and Jeffress would take his place at #10)

 

Braun not even in the top 11? Villar over Lucroy?

[Crash2303]

as discussed in the thread, it is not about who is better, but who has greater trade value to a team- meaning, who could bring back the greatest return in a trade- which takes into consideration length and size of contract, age, as well as performance. a lot can would actually depend on a team's need, and a team's contention or nor, but this exercise, I believe tries to assume it is neutral.

 

Braun is due around 20 mil a year for the next four years. a fair contract if he continues to stay healthy, but that is a big IF. regardless, teams would not be willing to trade much for braun, unless we ate some of his contract- so not a huge amount of trade value to the brewers.

 

although LuCroy is having a monster year on a team friendly contract, he is only under contract for one more year. I think Villar vs Lucroy is very close and could go either way, but I don't think its that absurd that a team may prefer a 25 year old, soon to be All-Star SS, who is only making $500K and under team control for an additional four years.