If we were sellers - Breaking down the roster by trade value

[adambr2]

I know we have had similar threads in the past, but I figure it was time for an updated one. Please note this is just for fun, I am not advocating being sellers at the moment and realize we are in 1st at the moment. Just analyzing hypothetically, if we sold, what kind of returns we could expect for our MLB players. I categorized them by tier, feel free to agree or disagree, these are obviously subjective. I did not include anyone on the roster who is still for MLB purposes considered a 'prospect'. I did include players imminently returning from the DL.

 

Tier 1 - Thames, Arcia, Knebel, Anderson

These guys are the cream of the crop for trade value. They may have that value from cheap controllable contracts (Thames), just from the market for relievers (Knebel), or youth and prospect status (Arcia), among other factors. I would estimate the minimum asking price on these players to be either a top 25 prospect, or a top 50+top 100, among other piece(s). Comp trade would be Lucroy.

 

Tier 2 - Santana, Broxton, Nelson, Shaw, Guerra, Perez

These players are just a notch below the Tier 1 and also highly controllable. They may simply be a bit too unproven yet to be tier 1, or be having somewhat of a high outlier season that keeps the asking price lower. Asking price should include a top 100 plus other piece(s), or similar value. Comp trade could be Will Smith or Tyler Thornburg.

 

Tier 3 - Davies, Villar, Pina, Barnes, Sogard

These players aren't going to bring back substantial returns, but they could net an interesting prospect or two. A low top 100 is unlikely but not out of the question. I would peg a comp return somewhere between Khris Davis, Adam Lind, and Jason Rogers, however one might rank those.

 

Tier 4 - Hughes, Aguilar

These players could probably net a lottery ticket or two or low to mid level prospect, comparable to perhaps an Aaron Hill return.

 

Tier 5 - Drake, Torres, Franklin, Bandy

These players are worth essentially nothing. It doesn't mean they aren't tradeable, but it would be a cash/PTBNL type deal.

 

Other - Braun, Garza

These two have contracts that a team would be unlikely to take in full, so the return could depend on how much salary we're willing to eat. In Braun's case I would guess if he got healthy and got going we could see a Tier 2 return if we were willing to eat a substantial amount and Tier 3 if not.

 

*** If I didn't have to pick a Tier I would have put Barnes at about 2.5, as Tier 3 seems too low given the reliever market and his ability, he just doesn't seem to be established enough to bring a strong return. Likewise I would have had Sogard at 3.5, 3 seems awfully high for a journeyman guy who had zero value 6 weeks ago, but he's just been so good I don't think they would be willing to undersell him with how important he's been.

[NievesNoNO]

Nice list. I'd personally move Guerra down a tier and Shaw up one. Shaw is in the middle of an offensive breakout, in his prime, plays good D and controllable.

[adambr2]

Nice list. I'd personally move Guerra down a tier and Shaw up one. Shaw is in the middle of an offensive breakout, in his prime, plays good D and controllable.

 

Very fair. I considered Shaw for top tier as well, personally I love Shaw. It's just a little hard for me to believe that his value is markedly higher than a few months ago based on his season so far when he also had a hot first half last year.

 

Guerra is also a tough one. Starting pitching is always coveted, and despite his age he's highly controllable. Personally I don't think he's looked as sharp this season as last, but the numbers are still there to a degree. So who knows.

[BrewCrewBlueDevil]

Thames is not tier one and Broxton is not tier two. Thames contract will be the worst on the 40 man by September 1st.

[adambr2]

Thames is not tier one and Broxton is not tier two. Thames contract will be the worst on the 40 man by September 1st.

 

Broxton is very cheap and controllable, fairly young, and carries an .813 OPS with power and speed at a premium position. He's very easily tier 2 IMO.

 

I'm less confident about Thames as Tier 1, but I think it's crazy to suggest he'll have the worst contract on the team by September 1st.

[3and2Fastball]

Thames is beginning to look like a slightly better version of Chris Carter. Not Tier One. After his hot start teams have adjusted to him and he's hit .221 in May and .188 in June

[adambr2]

Thames is beginning to look like a slightly better version of Chris Carter. Not Tier One. After his hot start teams have adjusted to him and he's hit .221 in May and .188 in June

 

I could see Thames as a Tier 2 guy, but I think it's unfair to compare him to Carter. Thames still gets on base very well, Carter didn't .

[MrTPlush]

Going by your system description we have no Tier 1 guys. None of those guys are anywhere close to getting a Lucroy deal by themselves. How is Knebel getting a Lucroy package when Jeremy Jeffress needed arguably the best catcher in baseball in his deal to get such a return? Arcia is mostly still unproven so I don't see how he is bringing back a haul. Thames has been pretty bad since April and has little track record. Anderson also has no track record. I just don't get how any of those guys are close to Lucroy's value. I understand they have a lot of control, but they don't hold a candlestick to Lucroy's production or track record.

 

Barnes and Perez also both seem to be vastly overrated in your tier system. Barnes has no track record and no real good production to show even in a small sample size. I love Hernan Perez, but lets be real here...he has a sub .300 OBP. I can't see any team giving up top prospects for a guy like that even if he is incredibly versatile.

 

Other than that it isn't too bad. We could argue all day about how Guerra is better than Nelson etc., but we will end up with 25 tiers. For clumping them into just a few tiers I would agree for the most part.

[JosephC]

I agree that there isn't a current tier 1 player on this roster. There are some strong candidates for the future like Arcia and Shaw, but those players don't have the track record yet that would yield a tier 1 type return.

 

It would be interesting to see what other GMs actually think about some of these players.

 

Has Thames even been above replacement level in May/June? Fangraphs has him as a +0.2 in May and a -0.1 in June so just slightly on the positive. His BABIP in April was .360, but has been a crazy low .205 in June. He clearly isn't the superstar he looked like in April but is definitely better than replacement level.

 

Is Knebel the next super-star reliever or just a flash in the pan? At only 25 years old he may have hit his stride and could be the next dominant reliever. On the flip side, coming into this season he was a 4.03 ERA, 3.64 FIP pitcher. A nearly 2 MPH bump in fastball velocity (from 95.2 to 96.9...some of that can be attributed to the change in how velocity is measured) likely has pushed the K rate way up and has been the difference but will that be sustainable? Personally I'm seeing him as a real deal, but would MLB GMs feel the same way, especially with how volatile relievers are and there is no solid track record with Knebel? I'm still very skeptical that relievers will go for near what they went for last year because there aren't the Chapman/Miller's to blow up the market. We won't find out with Knebel anyway because I don't see Stearns parting with him considering how bad the rest of the bullpen is.

 

I'd guess most GMs would put Anderson and Nelson in the same group. Anderson has been a better performer this year, but both are controlled for the same amount of time but Anderson was a super-two and Nelson was not. If they continue to be similar performers, Nelson likely carries a more attractive price-tag and could actually have a slightly better surplus value over the next few seasons.

 

P.S. - It was sure nice to make an "other" designation. I would have just called it "negative tier" because that's exactly what it is. Maybe Garza's cheap option might lift him out of that, but it's pretty questionable since he's looking worse and worse the further we get into this season (although he did OK in the last start).

[adambr2]

I think you guys have me pretty well convinced Thames isn't tier 1, but I'm not convinced we don't have a player who couldn't bring a Lucroy type return.

 

As good as Lucroy was he was a year and a half rental at a position that isn't really in demand at the deadline. Maybe I'm overestimating Knebel's market, but his effectiveness isn't overlooked around the league. The strikeout record might not have much meaning, but it says something about what kind of shutdown guy he is now, and he's very controllable.

 

Anderson ...I don't know. Starting pitching is worth a ton, and to me he seems like more of a real believable breakout guy as a #2 starter right now compared to Nelson. But maybe that's just my own interpretation.

 

Arcia carries a .700+ OPS and an elite glove at a premium defensive position, is 22 with a ton of upside, was a top 10 prospect and has 5.5 years of control remaining. If they were to offer him up in trade they had sure better ask for at least as much as they got for 1 year + 2 months of Lucroy if not more.

[MrTPlush]

If you want a Lucroy return it would probably take Arcia+Knebel or Shaw+Knebel. I'm not sure their control eclipses their lack of production/track record though.

 

Depends how other teams view Orlando Arcia. I'm guessing his value greatly varies depending on the team you were to ask. I wouldn't trade either of these duos for that kind of package and it may seem unfair, be t that's what happens when you talk about trading guys with little track record. The other team is also taking a risk too.

[Roderick]

Thames is beginning to look like a slightly better version of Chris Carter. Not Tier One. After his hot start teams have adjusted to him and he's hit .221 in May and .188 in June

 

I could see Thames as a Tier 2 guy, but I think it's unfair to compare him to Carter. Thames still gets on base very well, Carter didn't .

 

Actually, Carter obp was .100 higher than his batting average (he hit .222), which is a lot better than most of this team.

 

The Thames of May/June (pitchers figured where to pitch?), is starting to look very much like 2016 Carter, except without the slugging.

 

Maybe the Reds haven't updated their book on Thames yet.

[JosephC]

Arcia has shown his fair of splash plays and I would agree that his glove is already well above average based on the eye test, but some of the defensive stats put him more in the "good but not great" region. DRS is a +3 which puts him in a 5 way tie for 5th among qualifiers (25 total qualifiers), but the leaders in the category are between +11 and +9 so Arcia is well behind the leaders. His UZR/150 is +5.1 which ranks 8th among qualifiers. Good glove, but not elite. And while he has been very encouraging with the bat (absolutely love the way the OBP has gone up every month), he's still just a .268/.311/.392/.703 player which puts him in the 7th or 8th slot in the majority of major league batting orders.

 

Couldn't be more pleased about the way he's been playing but I don't see a team giving up a top 25 prospect for him.

[Outlander]

Thames is not tier one and Broxton is not tier two. Thames contract will be the worst on the 40 man by September 1st.

So are you saying Broxton is tier one or tier three because Broxton would most likely bring back just as much as a Will Smith type trade. Don't know how Broxton could be traded at this point without getting a top 100 prospect back in return. I guess I could see Broxton getting traded for major league talent in return.