Hader trade ideas

[mlloyd10]

Ruiz is an offensive limited player and his D is average.

 

Rios is a career utility player

 

Mario Feliciano hit 273/324/477 as a 20 year old in A+, striking out 28.8% of the time. Would you say he is an offensive limited player?

 

Keibert Ruiz hit 315/344/497 as an 18 year old in A+, striking out 14.4% of the time.

 

Yes, Keibert's offense has fallen off some since he moved up to AA (about a 95 wRC+ in 725 PAs), but he was a 19/20 year old switch hitting catcher in AA posting identical 7.4% K & BB rates.

 

That has nothing to do with what i said. I'm not comparing to what we have. I stated that i wouldn't trade Hader for a package centered around Ruiz.

[PeaveyFury]

You do have to wonder where the 'law of diminishing returns' sits on a Hader deal right now. Normally, you'd assume that the longer you hold him, the less value you'd receive (especially as he gets more expensive each year). But with the current market environment for baseball and payrolls, you really have to wonder if they wouldn't be better off holding for now vs. taking a more limited return than they'd otherwise receive.

[sveumrules]

Ruiz is an offensive limited player and his D is average.

 

Rios is a career utility player

 

Mario Feliciano hit 273/324/477 as a 20 year old in A+, striking out 28.8% of the time. Would you say he is an offensive limited player?

 

Keibert Ruiz hit 315/344/497 as an 18 year old in A+, striking out 14.4% of the time.

 

Yes, Keibert's offense has fallen off some since he moved up to AA (about a 95 wRC+ in 725 PAs), but he was a 19/20 year old switch hitting catcher in AA posting identical 7.4% K & BB rates.

 

That has nothing to do with what i said. I'm not comparing to what we have. I stated that i wouldn't trade Hader for a package centered around Ruiz.

 

You maybe implied that, but you didn't state it.

 

My response had everything to do with to your statement "Ruiz is an offensive limited player".

 

It's probably moot regardless though as many here would consider Ruiz/Rios an underpay while the Dodgers likely view it as an overpay.

[adambr2]

You do have to wonder where the 'law of diminishing returns' sits on a Hader deal right now. Normally, you'd assume that the longer you hold him, the less value you'd receive (especially as he gets more expensive each year). But with the current market environment for baseball and payrolls, you really have to wonder if they wouldn't be better off holding for now vs. taking a more limited return than they'd otherwise receive.

 

We've already passed it. Hader had immense value a year or two ago when his control was higher and his average cost per year remaining was lower. He's worth something, but it isn't nearly what it was and isn't nearly what an average fan is going to like. I think they're going to hold onto him for that very reason.

 

Yelich is the same deal in a different way. A year ago was the optimal window if you were going to trade him, he was one of the most valuable trade chips in baseball. His rough year to a lesser extent, and his extension to a greater extent, have significantly and negatively impacted his surplus value since that time. They're all-in on keeping Yelich for the long haul now and he'll not be dealt, IMO.

[narwhalattack]

You do have to wonder where the 'law of diminishing returns' sits on a Hader deal right now. Normally, you'd assume that the longer you hold him, the less value you'd receive (especially as he gets more expensive each year). But with the current market environment for baseball and payrolls, you really have to wonder if they wouldn't be better off holding for now vs. taking a more limited return than they'd otherwise receive.

 

We've already passed it. Hader had immense value a year or two ago when his control was higher and his average cost per year remaining was lower. He's worth something, but it isn't nearly what it was and isn't nearly what an average fan is going to like. I think they're going to hold onto him for that very reason.

 

Yelich is the same deal in a different way. A year ago was the optimal window if you were going to trade him, he was one of the most valuable trade chips in baseball. His rough year to a lesser extent, and his extension to a greater extent, have significantly and negatively impacted his surplus value since that time. They're all-in on keeping Yelich for the long haul now and he'll not be dealt, IMO.

 

In some way, I think this was more of a "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. If someone was offering an amazing package a year ago, Stearns would've pulled the trigger already. The fact that Hader is still with us likely means that the market was just never there, and had Stearns pulled the trigger earlier, we still may have been underwhelmed by what we got. Yet at the same time, the longer we continue to hold on to him, the less return we may get.

[adambr2]

You do have to wonder where the 'law of diminishing returns' sits on a Hader deal right now. Normally, you'd assume that the longer you hold him, the less value you'd receive (especially as he gets more expensive each year). But with the current market environment for baseball and payrolls, you really have to wonder if they wouldn't be better off holding for now vs. taking a more limited return than they'd otherwise receive.

 

We've already passed it. Hader had immense value a year or two ago when his control was higher and his average cost per year remaining was lower. He's worth something, but it isn't nearly what it was and isn't nearly what an average fan is going to like. I think they're going to hold onto him for that very reason.

 

Yelich is the same deal in a different way. A year ago was the optimal window if you were going to trade him, he was one of the most valuable trade chips in baseball. His rough year to a lesser extent, and his extension to a greater extent, have significantly and negatively impacted his surplus value since that time. They're all-in on keeping Yelich for the long haul now and he'll not be dealt, IMO.

 

In some way, I think this was more of a "Damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario. If someone was offering an amazing package a year ago, Stearns would've pulled the trigger already. The fact that Hader is still with us likely means that the market was just never there, and had Stearns pulled the trigger earlier, we still may have been underwhelmed by what we got. Yet at the same time, the longer we continue to hold on to him, the less return we may get.

 

Right. I agree with this too. Just because Hader was worth more a year or two ago, doesn't mean that teams were offering enough for us to take it.

[PeaveyFury]

Though I can't disagree with your point at all adam, I think mine is more to the effect of wondering when the real sweet spot is now going forward. I think there's a weird inverted bell curve-like situation unfolding where he's probably worth more in trade if we wait a bit again. I'm just not sure when that next hypothetical max value comes up....

[narwhalattack]

I feel like there's a greater risk to holding on to relievers. I've seen too many relievers have solid seasons and then all of a sudden implode the very next year.

[wibadgers23]

I feel like there's a greater risk to holding on to relievers. I've seen too many relievers have solid seasons and then all of a sudden implode the very next year.

 

Unfortunately I think GMs around the league hold the same opinion and that might be why Hader is still a Brewer and might be for some time.

[brewcrewdue80]

This year should have been the sweet spot to Trade Hader but Milw was screwed by the 1 day service time that made him a Super 2 and giving Hader Arbitration last year rather than this being his 1st of 3 only. It was like immediately turning a top 10 prospect like Lux as a headliner to maybe Dustin May prior to last season. (Think May outshines Hader value now) Brewers on a typical Super 2 cutoff should have been at least 1week safe. God Awful Luck.

 

Peavy is probably right that holding on to him is to best gain value on timing to make a trade. Let's say LA loses Jansen early next season to TJ. They offer a higher return at July Deadline than the offer they give now.

 

I do also wonder if the covid season of 2020 gives Hader more value because he remains a cheaper closer than...well that's just it, what closers are on the FA market asking for large summed contracts? Hader would present a cheaper option. Now I don't know of any, so that negates Hader being a cheaper option. Hader's value will be higher if multiple teams require a closer with no fantastic options out there.

To me the competition is 3 teams. Dodgers, Yankees, and White Sox. White Sox making the trade for Lynn, do they continue and trade for a close? Dodgers simply because Jansen is a FA I believe after next season. Yankees because they had Rivera, Chapman, may as well get Hader. We're the little guys and a bag of balls should be enough.

[narwhalattack]

This year should have been the sweet spot to Trade Hader but Milw was screwed by the 1 day service time that made him a Super 2 and giving Hader Arbitration last year rather than this being his 1st of 3 only. It was like immediately turning a top 10 prospect like Lux as a headliner to maybe Dustin May prior to last season. (Think May outshines Hader value now) Brewers on a typical Super 2 cutoff should have been at least 1week safe. God Awful Luck.

 

Peavy is probably right that holding on to him is to best gain value on timing to make a trade. Let's say LA loses Jansen early next season to TJ. They offer a higher return at July Deadline than the offer they give now.

 

I do also wonder if the covid season of 2020 gives Hader more value because he remains a cheaper closer than...well that's just it, what closers are on the FA market asking for large summed contracts? Hader would present a cheaper option. Now I don't know of any, so that negates Hader being a cheaper option. Hader's value will be higher if multiple teams require a closer with no fantastic options out there.

To me the competition is 3 teams. Dodgers, Yankees, and White Sox. White Sox making the trade for Lynn, do they continue and trade for a close? Dodgers simply because Jansen is a FA I believe after next season. Yankees because they had Rivera, Chapman, may as well get Hader. We're the little guys and a bag of balls should be enough.

 

I'd add the Mets to that list as well. With a new owner, they seem to be aiming to make as many splash deals as possible.

[LincolnDD]

Scuttlebutt has the Mets more likely to spend on free agents rather than trade prospects from a mediocre farm system.

 

Their GM last week on MLB radio: "There are only two currencies in baseball -- players and money. And right now (in) the upper levels of our system, we don't have the players. We have some money, at this point. And so, we're going to sort of balance those two things. But our focus is going to be -- that's why we expect to be somewhat active in the free agent market, as opposed to the trade market. We don't want to give up our young guys."

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Scuttlebutt has the Mets more likely to spend on free agents rather than trade prospects from a mediocre farm system.

 

Their GM last week on MLB radio: "There are only two currencies in baseball -- players and money. And right now (in) the upper levels of our system, we don't have the players. We have some money, at this point. And so, we're going to sort of balance those two things. But our focus is going to be -- that's why we expect to be somewhat active in the free agent market, as opposed to the trade market. We don't want to give up our young guys."

 

No team wants to give up their young guys. But there are no Josh Haders on the free agent market, either.

[baumer16]

I’m all for keeping Hader at this point. Teams are getting smarter and smarter and getting hauls for relievers seems like a thing of the past and definitely not something I see a smart organization like the Dodgers doing. All these deals on this post lately seem pretty underwhelming.

 

Keeping Hader and having a dominant bullpen isn’t a bad thing. Along with a great 1-2 Starting pitcher punch. Just attempt to fix the corner positions and hope for a turn around on a whole bunch of players who played unusually bad and we’re a pretty damn good team.

 

Watch Hader get traded today now. Lol

[adambr2]

Scuttlebutt has the Mets more likely to spend on free agents rather than trade prospects from a mediocre farm system.

 

Their GM last week on MLB radio: "There are only two currencies in baseball -- players and money. And right now (in) the upper levels of our system, we don't have the players. We have some money, at this point. And so, we're going to sort of balance those two things. But our focus is going to be -- that's why we expect to be somewhat active in the free agent market, as opposed to the trade market. We don't want to give up our young guys."

 

No team wants to give up their young guys. But there are no Josh Haders on the free agent market, either.

 

There's a Brad Hand.

[adambr2]

Though I can't disagree with your point at all adam, I think mine is more to the effect of wondering when the real sweet spot is now going forward. I think there's a weird inverted bell curve-like situation unfolding where he's probably worth more in trade if we wait a bit again. I'm just not sure when that next hypothetical max value comes up....

 

It's probably near the trade deadline of a "normal" season when teams aren't afraid to spend again and some contender with a rich farm system needs some serious pen help. Maybe July of 2022. But it's impossible to predict for sure.

[Eye Black]

Question for the group... If the Yankees called today and offered a 1-for-1, Hader for Clint Frazier deal would you take it? I know the answer for most would’ve been an easy no in the past, but it seems their value might not be that far apart as it currently stands.

 

Edit: Sort of amazing that Hader is only 152 days older than Frazier. At 26, both should in theory still have a lot of baseball still in front of them. Frazier has one more year of control than Hader. I would probably make the trade if there aren't other comparable/better offers on the table.

[patrickgpe]

Question for the group... If the Yankees called today and offered a 1-for-1, Hader for Clint Frazier deal would you take it? I know the answer for most would’ve been an easy no in the past, but it seems their value might not be that far apart as it currently stands.

No, but maybe straight up for Dom Smith if the other New York team called.

[sveumrules]

Scuttlebutt has the Mets more likely to spend on free agents rather than trade prospects from a mediocre farm system.

 

Their GM last week on MLB radio: "There are only two currencies in baseball -- players and money. And right now (in) the upper levels of our system, we don't have the players. We have some money, at this point. And so, we're going to sort of balance those two things. But our focus is going to be -- that's why we expect to be somewhat active in the free agent market, as opposed to the trade market. We don't want to give up our young guys."

 

No team wants to give up their young guys. But there are no Josh Haders on the free agent market, either.

 

There's a Brad Hand.

 

Yup. Liam Hendriks too. 2019-20 stats for all three...

 

Hader | 94 IP | 64 ERA- (33rd) | 73 FIP- (27th) | 3.2 runs WAR (4th) | 2.6 FIP WAR (5th)

Hand | 79 IP | 62 ERA- (28th) | 53 FIP- (6th) | 2.1 runs WAR (27th) | 2.6 FIP WAR (5th)

Hendriks | 108 IP | 38 ERA- (1st) | 38 FIP- (2nd) | 5.4 runs WAR (1st) | 5.2 FIP WAR (1st)

[adambr2]

That's precisely the reason I think there's logical reason to assume the trade market for Hader is going to be lukewarm. Even a team acquiring Hader is going to have to pay -- 6M? Maybe? For 2022. And that's just the first year. It's only going up from there.

 

So on top of that, they can't just have Hader for nothing, they have to give up prospects, too. So the guys that are available for free (trade-wise), what's their market? It almost by default has to be less than 1/10 for Brad Hand, right? I don't know what the market for Hendricks is, but it's probably pretty similar given his age and other comparables.

 

Now if you want to argue that Hader is better than both, that's fine, but if he is, it's not by a lot. It's not like we're comparing Hader to Alex Claudio and David Phelps. They are all high end relievers.

 

So a team that didn't want to give Brad Hand 1 year and $10M while giving up nothing to get him is going to jump at the chance to give us their more valuable prospects AND pay Hader 6M for this year? How is that logical at all?

[brewcrewdue80]

 

No team wants to give up their young guys. But there are no Josh Haders on the free agent market, either.

 

There's a Brad Hand.

 

Yup. Liam Hendriks too. 2019-20 stats for all three...

 

Hader | 94 IP | 64 ERA- (33rd) | 73 FIP- (27th) | 3.2 runs WAR (4th) | 2.6 FIP WAR (5th)

Hand | 79 IP | 62 ERA- (28th) | 53 FIP- (6th) | 2.1 runs WAR (27th) | 2.6 FIP WAR (5th)

Hendriks | 108 IP | 38 ERA- (1st) | 38 FIP- (2nd) | 5.4 runs WAR (1st) | 5.2 FIP WAR (1st)

 

What if you took this to a 3 year stat? Hader would win I imagine handedly. Hendriks didnt have a good 2018.

 

I did overlook him on RPs and Hand being non-tendered. So there are options for 2 good late inning RPs. And I see a report the White Sox are in on Hendriks. That will be a reality in other words and removes the White Sox from a Hader need.

[sveumrules]

What if you took this to a 3 year stat? Hader would win I imagine handedly. Hendriks didnt have a good 2018.

 

I did overlook him on RPs and Hand being non-tendered. So there are options for 2 good late inning RPs. And I see a report the White Sox are in on Hendriks. That will be a reality in other words and removes the White Sox from a Hader need.

 

Hendriks only threw 25 IP in 2018, so it doesn't really effect the rate stats all that much, though Hader closes the gap on the counting stats. Triple H relievers 2018-20...

 

Hader | 176 IP | 62 ERA- | 64 FIP- | 5.8 runs WAR | 5.2 FIP WAR

Hand | 151 IP | 65 ERA- | 65 FIP- | 3.2 runs WAR | 3.8 FIP WAR

Hendriks | 134 IP | 51 ERA- | 50 FIP- | 5.6 runs WAR | 5.3 FIP WAR

 

The projections take all that (& much more) into account & ZiPS has Hendriks at a 163 ERA+ in 2021 with Hand at 138. The Brewers haven't been released yet, but Hader was projected at a 176 ERA+ for 2020 & posted an actual 122 mark. I'd guess his projection slides some for 2021 & ends up a couple two tree points higher than Hendriks.

[sveumrules]

That's precisely the reason I think there's logical reason to assume the trade market for Hader is going to be lukewarm. Even a team acquiring Hader is going to have to pay -- 6M? Maybe? For 2022. And that's just the first year. It's only going up from there.

 

So on top of that, they can't just have Hader for nothing, they have to give up prospects, too. So the guys that are available for free (trade-wise), what's their market? It almost by default has to be less than 1/10 for Brad Hand, right? I don't know what the market for Hendricks is, but it's probably pretty similar given his age and other comparables.

 

Now if you want to argue that Hader is better than both, that's fine, but if he is, it's not by a lot. It's not like we're comparing Hader to Alex Claudio and David Phelps. They are all high end relievers.

 

So a team that didn't want to give Brad Hand 1 year and $10M while giving up nothing to get him is going to jump at the chance to give us their more valuable prospects AND pay Hader 6M for this year? How is that logical at all?

 

Yeah, that is a pretty good summation of why I think the odds of Hader getting moved this offseason remain pretty low.

 

If I was a fan of a rich team in the market for relief help I'd prefer Hendriks at 3/30 (MLBTR & FG estimate), then Hand at say 1/7 or 2/12 or whatever, over Hader at like 3/26 (Arbys estimate) plus a prospect haul.

[adambr2]

That's precisely the reason I think there's logical reason to assume the trade market for Hader is going to be lukewarm. Even a team acquiring Hader is going to have to pay -- 6M? Maybe? For 2022. And that's just the first year. It's only going up from there.

 

So on top of that, they can't just have Hader for nothing, they have to give up prospects, too. So the guys that are available for free (trade-wise), what's their market? It almost by default has to be less than 1/10 for Brad Hand, right? I don't know what the market for Hendricks is, but it's probably pretty similar given his age and other comparables.

 

Now if you want to argue that Hader is better than both, that's fine, but if he is, it's not by a lot. It's not like we're comparing Hader to Alex Claudio and David Phelps. They are all high end relievers.

 

So a team that didn't want to give Brad Hand 1 year and $10M while giving up nothing to get him is going to jump at the chance to give us their more valuable prospects AND pay Hader 6M for this year? How is that logical at all?

 

Yeah, that is a pretty good summation of why I think the odds of Hader getting moved this offseason remain pretty low.

 

If I was a fan of a rich team in the market for relief help I'd prefer Hendriks at 3/30 (MLBTR & FG estimate), then Hand at say 1/7 or 2/12 or whatever, over Hader at like 3/26 (Arbys estimate) plus a prospect haul.

 

 

Yeah, if we keep Hader which I agree we will that is fine with me. I don't think the likely return justifies the loss.

 

Frankly, I'd double down on the pen, sign Hand or Hendricks, and try to win in 2021 with one of the best back end bullpens in baseball and hope for positive regression from Yelich, Hiura, and Garcia.

[brewcrewdue80]

What if you took this to a 3 year stat? Hader would win I imagine handedly. Hendriks didnt have a good 2018.

 

I did overlook him on RPs and Hand being non-tendered. So there are options for 2 good late inning RPs. And I see a report the White Sox are in on Hendriks. That will be a reality in other words and removes the White Sox from a Hader need.

 

Hendriks only threw 25 IP in 2018, so it doesn't really effect the rate stats all that much, though Hader closes the gap on the counting stats. Triple H relievers 2018-20...

 

Hader | 176 IP | 62 ERA- | 64 FIP- | 5.8 runs WAR | 5.2 FIP WAR

Hand | 151 IP | 65 ERA- | 65 FIP- | 3.2 runs WAR | 3.8 FIP WAR

Hendriks | 123 IP | 49 ERA- | 48 FIP- | 5.3 runs WAR | 5.1 FIP WAR

 

The projections take all that (& much more) into account & ZiPS has Hendriks at a 163 ERA+ in 2021 with Hand at 138. The Brewers haven't been released yet, but Hader was projected at a 176 ERA+ for 2020 & posted an actual 122 mark. I'd guess his projection slides some for 2021 & ends up a couple two tree points higher than Hendriks.

 

Which is a lil bit garbage. Hader had 19IP in 2020. Would say 2 poor outings total. Hendriks had 25.1 IP in 2020 and gave up only 1HR. Hendriks had 24IP in 2018 giving up 3HRs and finished above 4ERA.

 

Point here being Hader gave up 2HRs and 4runs in one outing raising his ERA upper 4s and finished this small sample size lowering his ERA after that to 3.79. Knowing his history he likely would have lowered that ERA further by the time he reached 24-25IP. All it takes is 1 normal Hader week and one game Hendriks allows a HR that same week and they look nearly identical. I dont know why I'm arguing cause I realize you still believe Hader will be rated higher than Hendriks. I guess it just gets upsetting to me people think Hader is losing it and expect him to become Turnblow and this he sounds almost like he has 0 trade value.