What could Braun bring from the Dodgers?

[HighHeat19]

If the Brewers want Bellinger and DeLeon, the Brewers will have to sweeten the pot. And that would mean adding Villar to the offer. I would also want alot more back from the Dodgers as well for Braun and Villar.

 

However, these prospects are getting overblown value wise the last few years. This copycat league has inflated prospects by the way of what the Cubs, Astros have done recently. So all teams jump the bandwagon of the rebuilds and this causes inflation of the perceived process of young talent.

 

Reminds me when the 3-4 d in football became popular again about 15 years ago. What made it great in the beginning was the lack of teams running it, hence the number of players that fit the scheme and were available to run it, and the relatively low cost/draft round that you could get them at.

 

Part of me says the Nats and Red Sox came out ahead in these "highly" touted prospects for stars. Quite frankly, if you trade a star away, you should receive 2 future "no doubt about it" stars in return. One star for the star traded, and the other one for interest, or if one star does not pan out. Brewers don't get what they like, then piss on the Dodgers. Maybe the Crew comes in at .500 this year and turns around next year and becomes big time buyers in the trade market. Sell a Philips, or Corey Ray, or even an Arcia for proven cost effective commodity such as the trades for Sale and Eaton.

[MNBrew]

Funny how Cafardo quoted only one exec, yet many take it that it's a representative viewpoint of many rather than one individual's opinion. Either could be correct, but Cafardo wasn't exactly clear.

 

I find holes with that exec's viewpoint, too, but Heaven forbid Cafardo add any critical thought to what his "source" said.

[FVBrewerFan]

Funny how Cafardo quoted only one exec, yet many take it that it's a representative viewpoint of many rather than one individual's opinion. Either could be correct, but Cafardo wasn't exactly clear.

 

I find holes with that exec's viewpoint, too, but Heaven forbid Cafardo add any critical thought to what his "source" said.

 

Is this "exec" even from a team on Braun's approved list? Pretty easy to make a statement like that when your team has no chance to trade for him anyhow. This "exec" doesn't sound like a GM either, or he would have been referred to as one.

 

So now a throw- away comment by some mysterious "exec" has been picked up by espn, Fox sports, and all the other national sports media. So the story is now the story. Gotta love journalism these days.

[sveumrules]

Fangraphs takes a crack at figuring out Ryan Braun's trade value...

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-disappearing-trade-value-of-ryan-braun/

 

Braun’s 2016 exceeded his projections; if he were to do the same thing this year, he’d be well on his way to producing nearly as much value as he’ll be paid for the rest of his deal. To break even, Braun would need to record about 7.5 WAR over the next four years, starting at about 2.5 WAR in 2017, losing half a win each year thereafter.

 

I looked at some comps for Braun based on the seven wins and 125 wRC+ he recorded from his age-30 through age-32 seasons. The result is mostly boom or bust for similar players in their age-33 campaigns. There were guys who performed well like Brian Downing, David Justice, and Josh Willingham. There are also replacement-level types like Jermaine Dye, Cliff Floyd, and Luke Scott. Removing Braun’s ugly age-30 season and focusing on comps for ages 31 and 32 produces a collection of 16 players. They averaged 2.0 WAR at age 33, with half of the group exceeding 2.4 WAR. From age 33 through 36, that group averaged 6.6 WAR — not too far from the break-even point of the contract — with seven of the 16 players at or exceeding 8.0 WAR.

[adambr2]

Fangraphs takes a crack at figuring out Ryan Braun's trade value...

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-disappearing-trade-value-of-ryan-braun/

 

Braun’s 2016 exceeded his projections; if he were to do the same thing this year, he’d be well on his way to producing nearly as much value as he’ll be paid for the rest of his deal. To break even, Braun would need to record about 7.5 WAR over the next four years, starting at about 2.5 WAR in 2017, losing half a win each year thereafter.

 

I looked at some comps for Braun based on the seven wins and 125 wRC+ he recorded from his age-30 through age-32 seasons. The result is mostly boom or bust for similar players in their age-33 campaigns. There were guys who performed well like Brian Downing, David Justice, and Josh Willingham. There are also replacement-level types like Jermaine Dye, Cliff Floyd, and Luke Scott. Removing Braun’s ugly age-30 season and focusing on comps for ages 31 and 32 produces a collection of 16 players. They averaged 2.0 WAR at age 33, with half of the group exceeding 2.4 WAR. From age 33 through 36, that group averaged 6.6 WAR — not too far from the break-even point of the contract — with seven of the 16 players at or exceeding 8.0 WAR.

 

Pretty much exactly my thoughts, good read. This is why I feel Braun's value relative to his contract is basically zero, which sounds horrible, but I'm not saying negative, just zero. It just means I think Braun's remaining contract is about exactly what his current open market value is. So to get anything of real value back will likely require us to eat a substantial portion of the remaining contract.

 

I think the Dodgers are probably getting cold feet on the August deal and I think those 20 minutes we missed a deal by will be regrettable.

[Point Beer Is Best]

I know that Stearns hates to add "sweeteners" to the deal since his belief is you can get more quality if you trade away just a single player at a time, and has really only done it once with MLB players (adding Jeffress to the Lucroy deal), but if adding Villar to the deal gets us back an elite prospect or two that Braun could not on his own, then I'm OK with it. You still have Gennett for the short-term and could platoon with Perez to cover 2B. From the Dodgers perspective it's a one-stop-shop for them, and could help them avoid the luxury tax threshold, but they'd have to pony up for that to happen.

[Jose Cardenal1]

Well the basis for a deal similar to August's are still relevant. As JosephC illustrated Braun has surplus value of about $9 million. Taking back Puig and McCarthy balances out the salary for the Dodgers and also McCarthy's negative surplus value wipes out Puig's positive surplus value. The rumored deal involved 2 prospects that could not be agreed to.

 

Given the above it was likely 2 prospects in the 12-30 range (which seems to be Stearns MO anyway i.e. the inefficiency of the market in his eyes is the non-top 10 prospects who are ascending).

 

So either:

1) The Dodgers feel better about Puig after his return to the bigs and now don't feel as compelled to make the move

or

2) The Dodgers really don't want to give up the 2 prospects Stearns wants

or

3) The Dodgers feel adding Dozier helps them as much or more than Braun (but at a steeper prospect cost)

or

4) The Dodgers are slow playing Stearns in hopes that he blinks (maybe they were the source for Cafardo's article)

[MadThinker88]

Fangraphs takes a crack at figuring out Ryan Braun's trade value...

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-disappearing-trade-value-of-ryan-braun/

 

Braun’s 2016 exceeded his projections; if he were to do the same thing this year, he’d be well on his way to producing nearly as much value as he’ll be paid for the rest of his deal. To break even, Braun would need to record about 7.5 WAR over the next four years, starting at about 2.5 WAR in 2017, losing half a win each year thereafter.

 

I looked at some comps for Braun based on the seven wins and 125 wRC+ he recorded from his age-30 through age-32 seasons. The result is mostly boom or bust for similar players in their age-33 campaigns. There were guys who performed well like Brian Downing, David Justice, and Josh Willingham. There are also replacement-level types like Jermaine Dye, Cliff Floyd, and Luke Scott. Removing Braun’s ugly age-30 season and focusing on comps for ages 31 and 32 produces a collection of 16 players. They averaged 2.0 WAR at age 33, with half of the group exceeding 2.4 WAR. From age 33 through 36, that group averaged 6.6 WAR — not too far from the break-even point of the contract — with seven of the 16 players at or exceeding 8.0 WAR.

 

Pretty much exactly my thoughts, good read. This is why I feel Braun's value relative to his contract is basically zero, which sounds horrible, but I'm not saying negative, just zero. It just means I think Braun's remaining contract is about exactly what his current open market value is. So to get anything of real value back will likely require us to eat a substantial portion of the remaining contract.

 

I think the Dodgers are probably getting cold feet on the August deal and I think those 20 minutes we missed a deal by will be regrettable.

 

Fangraphs had a separate article related to Tyler Naquin of Cleveland. In the analysis, some info related to Braun was pointed out.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/tyler-naquin-pulled-a-bryce-harper/

 

"... This is about Naquin! Naquin just ranked 49th in average air-ball exit velocity. That’s a strong ranking, especially for a rookie — it put him around Buster Posey and Matt Carpenter. But Naquin also ranked first, very first, extremely first, in air-ball slugging percentage. We know it’s not all just about average batted-ball speed. There are most certainly other factors. But the average is hugely important, and, compared to what you would’ve expected of Naquin, his air-ball slugging over-achieved by 312 points.

 

It’s much easier to see graphically. Here are all the players with at least 100 tracked air balls from 2016, and Naquin is highlighted in red.

 

(Chart here)

 

I didn’t have to pick on Naquin, and you know why? That point right next to him is Ryan Braun. Braun’s air-ball slugging over-achieved by 333 points. Bigger than Naquin’s number! Could’ve been a Braun piece. But Naquin is newer and therefore more interesting, and there’s another Braun piece being written right now for the website, anyway. Be wary of Braun, but also, be wary of Naquin. Something doesn’t feel right."

[JosephC]

My big problem with the fangraphs assessment is this. They say normal dropoff for a player in the 31-37 age range is 0.5 per year and use that for the 2018, 2019 and 2020 seasons. But they start the entire evaluation by saying a depth chart projection of Braun for 2017 is 1.9 WAR, which would be 1.3 WAR less than the 3.2 he was credited for in 2016! Why such a big disparity? In the end fangraphs projects the WARs as 1.9, 1.4, 0.9, 0.4 and then calculates out his value as 41 million dollars. But if there is a 0.5 WAR dropoff each year, including from 2016 (3.2) to 2017, the WARs are 2.7, 2.2, 1.7, 1.2 and in that case his value calculates out to 70.27 million dollars...nearly a 30 million dollar difference because of the 1.3 drop in WAR they use right from the start.

[JosephC]

Well the basis for a deal similar to August's are still relevant. As JosephC illustrated Braun has surplus value of about $9 million. Taking back Puig and McCarthy balances out the salary for the Dodgers and also McCarthy's negative surplus value wipes out Puig's positive surplus value. The rumored deal involved 2 prospects that could not be agreed to.

 

Given the above it was likely 2 prospects in the 12-30 range (which seems to be Stearns MO anyway i.e. the inefficiency of the market in his eyes is the non-top 10 prospects who are ascending).

 

So either:

1) The Dodgers feel better about Puig after his return to the bigs and now don't feel as compelled to make the move

or

2) The Dodgers really don't want to give up the 2 prospects Stearns wants

or

3) The Dodgers feel adding Dozier helps them as much or more than Braun (but at a steeper prospect cost)

or

4) The Dodgers are slow playing Stearns in hopes that he blinks (maybe they were the source for Cafardo's article)

 

I don't think there is any posturing involved, it's just that now we are in the off-season and the Dodgers have so many additional avenues to improve their roster for 2017. They need one more big right-handed bat to stick in the middle of the lineup. Once they do that I think they will be happy with their roster. I don't think it matters to them if that bat is an outfielder or second baseman, once they add one more big bat to Grandal, Gonzalez, Turner, Seager, Pederson I think they will feel pretty good about the lineup. Dozier seems to be choice #1 right now, personally I think that's the right move for them and if it happens then Braun to the Dodgers very likely will not happen. But if they can't get a deal for Dozier done then I think either Braun or J.D. Martinez will be the next two players they look at. I think they will actually see Martinez's one year of control as a positive as it gives them more flexibility in trying to get under the luxury cap in future years. But there would be two big advantages with Braun. First, even though Braun would probably be most fairly evaluated as a "below average" defender, that's still worlds better than J.D. Martinez who was an absolute butcher in right field last year (-22 DRS, -21.5 UZR/150, career negative in both DRS and UZR/150 in both LF and RF). There were also reports that the Tigers were looking to keep payroll down, so the other big Braun advantage is that it would probably be much easier for the Dodgers to dump McCarthy on the Brewers.

[LouisEly]

I looked at some comps for Braun based on the seven wins and 125 wRC+ he recorded from his age-30 through age-32 seasons. The result is mostly boom or bust for similar players in their age-33 campaigns. There were guys who performed well like Brian Downing, David Justice, and Josh Willingham. There are also replacement-level types like Jermaine Dye, Cliff Floyd, and Luke Scott. Removing Braun’s ugly age-30 season and focusing on comps for ages 31 and 32 produces a collection of 16 players. They averaged 2.0 WAR at age 33, with half of the group exceeding 2.4 WAR. From age 33 through 36, that group averaged 6.6 WAR — not too far from the break-even point of the contract — with seven of the 16 players at or exceeding 8.0 WAR.

The key is what I have highlighted in bold. It is popular around these parts to use the Fangraphs model that assumes a decline of 0.5 fWAR/year. However, if what is in bold is true, it sounds like that is mostly not the case; they either mostly sustain their WAR, or they drop off a cliff. If that is the case, then using that model will mostly yield incorrect results.

 

We don't need to look further than last season to see why that model can be very wrong; over his age 36-40 seasons David Ortiz put up almost 19 bWAR. Yes, he was a DH, and Braun can't take advantage of that (yet), but Braun has kept himself in excellent shape and by all accounts has been extremely dedicated to his rehab. It is very possible that Braun does not follow that model and can sustain his WAR.

 

David Ortiz also, like Braun, once tested positive for PEDs (allegedly).

[JosephC]

http://www.fanragsports.com/mlb/heyman-dodgers-twins-standstill-dozier-trade-talks/

 

Sounds like the Dodgers/Twins trade talks may be breaking down. RHP-De Leon is available, but the Dodgers are not willing to deal OF/1B-Bellinger and it doesn't sound like they are willing to include RHP-Alvarez or RHP-Buehler in a deal that already includes De Leon. No word on if OF-Verdugo is under consideration (I see him as the last "top shelf" piece the Dodgers have that could be included in a deal). Dozier has averaged 4.7 WAR over the last three years and comes at a bargain price of 15 million over the last two years, for the Twins to demand De Leon + Alvarez OR De Leon + Buehler + 2 more prospects is not at all unreasonable.

[JohnBriggs12]

A good comparison going forward for Braun might be Paul Konerko. His WAR doubled between his 33 and 34 seasons from 1.8 to 3.5. At age 35 it dropped to 2.7 and at 36 to 2.0 before falling off the proverbial cliff at 37. Braun is just now heading into his age 33 season, and throwing out the "bad thumb" season, he's still roughly a 3.0 to 3.5 WAR player, fangraphs projections notwithstanding. It's reasonable to expect some dropoff starting in his age 35 season (2019) but he figures in my estimation to likely still be in the 2.5 range in 2019 and 2.0 range for his age 36 year which is the final guaranteed year of his deal. Considering his salary goes down those two seasons, he's still not a bad contract.

[pacopete4]

http://www.fanragsports.com/mlb/heyman-dodgers-twins-standstill-dozier-trade-talks/

 

but the Dodgers are not willing to deal OF/1B-Bellinger

 

 

Makes me mad that if this guy was in a deal last August and we didn't pull the trigger. Just feels like he's going to be a complete stud.

[Oldcity]

Feel like there's no way Bellinger was in the deal if they "couldn't agree on two prospects." The Brewers probably wanted him in it, and LA wouldn't do it.

[reillymcshane]

My big problem with the fangraphs assessment is this. They say normal dropoff for a player in the 31-37 age range is 0.5 per year and use that for the 2018, 2019 and 2020 seasons. But they start the entire evaluation by saying a depth chart projection of Braun for 2017 is 1.9 WAR, which would be 1.3 WAR less than the 3.2 he was credited for in 2016! Why such a big disparity? In the end fangraphs projects the WARs as 1.9, 1.4, 0.9, 0.4 and then calculates out his value as 41 million dollars. But if there is a 0.5 WAR dropoff each year, including from 2016 (3.2) to 2017, the WARs are 2.7, 2.2, 1.7, 1.2 and in that case his value calculates out to 70.27 million dollars...nearly a 30 million dollar difference because of the 1.3 drop in WAR they use right from the start.

It's important to know that Fangraphs does not do projections. The projections on their site are from outside sources - such as Steamer and Zips. The 'Depth Charts' section of Fangraphs is a combination of those numbers - plus projected playing time from the Fangraphs stats (and the ZIPS numbers are not in there - so the Depth Charts is really mostly based on one projection system). So the numbers derived are not really projections from Fangraphs - just a way to aggregate various systems into one number.

 

In the end, Zips, Steamer and Depth Charts are just tools. Just as the 0.5 WAR drop for a player of Braun's age is a tool. If a player has a WAR of 1.0 at age 32, then a 4.0 WAR at 33, do you project him to drop to a 3.5 WAR at age 34? Again, it's just a general rule - but not every player needs to be assessed beyond the analytics to find their ultimate value.

 

I don't know why Steamer has Braun dropping off pretty dramatically - but projections are always a dicey business. I enjoy seeing them, but I don't get too worked up about them.

[reillymcshane]

I looked at some comps for Braun based on the seven wins and 125 wRC+ he recorded from his age-30 through age-32 seasons. The result is mostly boom or bust for similar players in their age-33 campaigns. There were guys who performed well like Brian Downing, David Justice, and Josh Willingham. There are also replacement-level types like Jermaine Dye, Cliff Floyd, and Luke Scott. Removing Braun’s ugly age-30 season and focusing on comps for ages 31 and 32 produces a collection of 16 players. They averaged 2.0 WAR at age 33, with half of the group exceeding 2.4 WAR. From age 33 through 36, that group averaged 6.6 WAR — not too far from the break-even point of the contract — with seven of the 16 players at or exceeding 8.0 WAR.

 

Perhaps the comps for Braun being boom or bust players at age 33 is not unique to him - maybe that's just a point where most players start to go in the tank.

 

I looked at Fangraphs and saw that 8 position players had a WAR of 2.0 or better last year who were age 33 or older (this was out of 96 players). That's not a lot. I don't know if this is the answer - but maybe, on average, guys just start to really fade at this age. Sure you have exceptions to the rule - Beltre and Beltran and Molina, etc. - but on the whole, buys just tend to fade around 33.

[splitterpfj]

In 1989, Robin Yount won the AL MVP, at age 34 - that offseason, the Brewers outbid the California Angels, to keep him here. (By the way, I believe Robin's new contract made him the highest paid player in baseball for a brief time).

 

Robin never produced at the same level again, he still had power in 1990, but his batting average fell off by 71 points. The next season, he had a kidney stone, and hit the DL for one of just two times in his career - his power fell off, and in '92, despite playing in 150 games, he hit 8 home runs - his final season had similar results.

 

In short, Yount's last big year came at age 34 - it's very subjective, Dale Murphy's last big year came at age 31, Jim Rice was at age 33, Mike Schmidt was age 37, George Brett still had power at 35, and won a batting title at 37.

 

It's definitely a guessing game.

[LouisEly]

http://www.fanragsports.com/mlb/heyman-dodgers-twins-standstill-dozier-trade-talks/

 

Sounds like the Dodgers/Twins trade talks may be breaking down. RHP-De Leon is available, but the Dodgers are not willing to deal OF/1B-Bellinger and it doesn't sound like they are willing to include RHP-Alvarez or RHP-Buehler in a deal that already includes De Leon. No word on if OF-Verdugo is under consideration (I see him as the last "top shelf" piece the Dodgers have that could be included in a deal). Dozier has averaged 4.7 WAR over the last three years and comes at a bargain price of 15 million over the last two years, for the Twins to demand De Leon + Alvarez OR De Leon + Buehler + 2 more prospects is not at all unreasonable.

Interesting. The X-factor here in comparison to any Braun deal is whether/not Minnesota is willing to take back any salary in the form of McCarthy/etc.. If Minnesota doesn't take any salary back, then the actual cost of adding Dozier is ~$22.5M/2 (50% luxury tax). If the Brewers were willing to take McCarthy/Puig, then the net addition to the Dodgers would have been just Braun's salary with no additional luxury tax penalty.

 

While the risk is lower with Dozier's contract, so is the reward - he could be gone after two years, in which case they gave up top prospects for only two years of his services (versus four years for Braun). If they want to keep him they will likely have to offer a salary that is more than what Braun is being paid for much longer than Braun is under contract. Assuming that a qualifying offer is at least $18M, keeping him for more than two years might mean a 5/$100M deal or more, in which case Braun may be the lower risk and better value long-term.

[brewcrewdue80]

I looked at some comps for Braun based on the seven wins and 125 wRC+ he recorded from his age-30 through age-32 seasons. The result is mostly boom or bust for similar players in their age-33 campaigns. There were guys who performed well like Brian Downing, David Justice, and Josh Willingham. There are also replacement-level types like Jermaine Dye, Cliff Floyd, and Luke Scott. Removing Braun’s ugly age-30 season and focusing on comps for ages 31 and 32 produces a collection of 16 players. They averaged 2.0 WAR at age 33, with half of the group exceeding 2.4 WAR. From age 33 through 36, that group averaged 6.6 WAR — not too far from the break-even point of the contract — with seven of the 16 players at or exceeding 8.0 WAR.

 

Perhaps the comps for Braun being boom or bust players at age 33 is not unique to him - maybe that's just a point where most players start to go in the tank.

 

I looked at Fangraphs and saw that 8 position players had a WAR of 2.0 or better last year who were age 33 or older (this was out of 96 players). That's not a lot. I don't know if this is the answer - but maybe, on average, guys just start to really fade at this age. Sure you have exceptions to the rule - Beltre and Beltran and Molina, etc. - but on the whole, buys just tend to fade around 33.

 

So guys that pretty much have produced their whole careers, with maybe a season that didn't, like Braun has.

[reillymcshane]

I looked at some comps for Braun based on the seven wins and 125 wRC+ he recorded from his age-30 through age-32 seasons. The result is mostly boom or bust for similar players in their age-33 campaigns. There were guys who performed well like Brian Downing, David Justice, and Josh Willingham. There are also replacement-level types like Jermaine Dye, Cliff Floyd, and Luke Scott. Removing Braun’s ugly age-30 season and focusing on comps for ages 31 and 32 produces a collection of 16 players. They averaged 2.0 WAR at age 33, with half of the group exceeding 2.4 WAR. From age 33 through 36, that group averaged 6.6 WAR — not too far from the break-even point of the contract — with seven of the 16 players at or exceeding 8.0 WAR.

 

Perhaps the comps for Braun being boom or bust players at age 33 is not unique to him - maybe that's just a point where most players start to go in the tank.

 

I looked at Fangraphs and saw that 8 position players had a WAR of 2.0 or better last year who were age 33 or older (this was out of 96 players). That's not a lot. I don't know if this is the answer - but maybe, on average, guys just start to really fade at this age. Sure you have exceptions to the rule - Beltre and Beltran and Molina, etc. - but on the whole, buys just tend to fade around 33.

 

So guys that pretty much have produced their whole careers, with maybe a season that didn't, like Braun has.

 

No.

 

I don't think - or know - if there's a way to identify what kind of player is going to age well. Is the fact that a player is good from age 25-33 mean he's going more likely to be good at age 34 or 35 or whatever? Perhaps that's the case. But (and this is just my guess) who ages poorly and who doesn't seems to be a guessing game.

 

What makes Andruw Jones fall off a cliff at age 30 - after averaging 5-6 WAR a year for a decade?

 

To me, every person is unique. Some fall apart at 30. Some fall apart at 33. Some fall apart at 37.

 

Perhaps there's a better answer - but I don't think it's a simple as better guys last longer.

[adambr2]

I think you hit it on the head, there is no better answer. There is no way to accurately predict how Braun's production will be affected by his age.

 

Which is exactly why the 4 remaining years for him are such a problem for other GMs rather than being a benefit. If he had 2 years left, it wouldn't be such a risk for them.

[TURBO]

Then why don't we just pay the last 2 years of his contract, get some primo prospects in return and call it a day?

 

I myself would prefer Braun retire a Brewer, and the fact this conversation has lasted 45 pages is amazing to me. What else can possibly be discussed that hasn't already been hit on numerous times?

[logan82]

Then why don't we just pay the last 2 years of his contract, get some primo prospects in return and call it a day?

 

I myself would prefer Braun retire a Brewer, and the fact this conversation has lasted 45 pages is amazing to me. What else can possibly be discussed that hasn't already been hit on numerous times?

I agree. Pay off the final two years in full to get prospects back. I think the likleyhood of Braun performing through his contract is low.

 

I would prefer to win games. Not next year but add a couple games to our team when they are good.

[Mr Southpaw]

I sense a little "fake news" over at Fangraph. Am I wrong or are they a little tilted.