PDA

View Full Version : Which trade asset is more valuable?



*BaseClogger*
07-30-2009, 06:44 PM
Which asset trade asset is more valuable, taking into account player's talent, contract, age, and injury risk? Edwin Encarnacion or Scott Rolen?

Their contracts:

Edwin Encanacion

09: $2M
10: $4.75M
11: arbitration eligible

He can be offered arbitration again in 2012 and if he declines the Reds would receive compensation.

Scott Rolen

09: $11M
10: $11M

Falls City Beer
07-30-2009, 06:45 PM
Which asset trade asset is more valuable, taking into account player's talent, contract, age, and injury risk? Edwin Encarnacion or Scott Rolen?

Their contracts:

Edwin Encanacion

09: $2M
10: $4.75M
11: arbitration eligible

He can be offered arbitration again in 2012 and if he declines the Reds would receive compensation.

Scott Rolen

09: $11M
10: $11M

Moot.

Homer Bailey
07-30-2009, 06:46 PM
It depends on the franchise. For those with higher payrolls and are less hamstrung, Rolen is the obvious choice.

*BaseClogger*
07-30-2009, 06:47 PM
It depends on the franchise. For those with higher payrolls and are less hamstrung, Rolen is the obvious choice.

That's why I phrased it "which trade asset is more valueable?" One player has to have more value...

Homer Bailey
07-30-2009, 06:49 PM
That's why I phrased it "which trade asset is more valueable?" One player has to have more value...

What is valuable to one franchise may not be as valuable to another.

*BaseClogger*
07-30-2009, 06:50 PM
What is valuable to one franchise may not be as valuable to another.

Then, I'm thinking two teams completely out of contention, like the Reds and the Blue Jays, but who might think they can compete in the future (both players are locked up beyond 2009)...

PuffyPig
07-30-2009, 06:51 PM
That's why I phrased it "which trade asset is more valueable?" One player has to have more value...

Actually, the value of the asset could be quite different to different teams.

To a contending club with unlimited payroll, Rolen has more value.

To a non-contending team with a limited payroll, EE probably has more value.

I assumed you were looking at value to the Reds. So I picked EE.

Homer Bailey
07-30-2009, 06:54 PM
Actually, the value of the asset could be quite different to different teams.

To a contending club with unlimited payroll, Rolen has more value.

To a non-contending team with a limited payroll, EE probably has more value.

I assumed you were looking at value to the Reds. So I picked EE.

This is what I'm thinking.

I went with Rolen because I was thinking with an unlimited payroll. Rolen is a better player, and his contract isn't a back breaker (no pun intended).

EE's defense is completely unacceptable and his bat simply does not make up for it. And I personally don't think it ever will.

TheNext44
07-30-2009, 07:16 PM
EE is bench player because of his defense. He can't field well enough to play third, can't hit well enough to play left.

Rolen at least gives you solid D and should provide a decent bat.

Basically, I'd rather pay around $14M for a real MLB starter for a year and a half, than $5m for a bench player.

And if Rolen leaves after 2010, the Reds should get at least one draft pick.

Highlifeman21
07-30-2009, 11:21 PM
Personally, I'd rather have Rolen than EE right now, regardless of age or money.

kaldaniels
07-30-2009, 11:28 PM
Won't Rolen net us a pick if he declines arb?

AtomicDumpling
07-31-2009, 01:41 AM
I have suggested in the past that the Reds should try Encarnacion at second base before giving up on him. He is a decent fielder but he can't make the long throw from 3B accurately enough. The throw from 2B is much shorter and easier and he would have more time to make it. Move Phillips to short and give EE a shot at second base. I still think he can be a plus bat for the long haul as a 2B, but not as a left fielder.

WVRedsFan
07-31-2009, 02:05 AM
It depends on the franchise. For those with higher payrolls and are less hamstrung, Rolen is the obvious choice.

I find it funny that those who value defense and driving in runs important pick Edwin. He is defecient in both. Oh yeah, I forgot. He has a good OBP. Never mind.

tripleaaaron
07-31-2009, 02:11 AM
That's why I phrased it "which trade asset is more valueable?" One player has to have more value...

Still varies no matter how the question is posed. Right now EE is more valuable to me. 3 weeks ago I probably would have voted Rolen. Even the same franchise can value a player differently in different situations.

Mario-Rijo
07-31-2009, 02:12 AM
I find it funny that those who value defense and driving in runs important pick Edwin. He is defecient in both. Oh yeah, I forgot. He has a good OBP. Never mind.

I don't think you can attribute it all to that, if at all. I picked Edwin and I would swap him with Rolen in a heartbeat cash and all. Part of EE's value is that he still does have the potential to be good no matter how far fetched it may be. Likewise part of Rolen's lack of value is his age/injury history and contract. If I were any other team in baseball not making a deal midseason to make a push to the playoffs I'd rather have EE, if I were making a deal for a guy to play 3rd in a playoff push I'd look for a 3rd alternative 1st and then perhaps eventually settle on Rolen.

All that said I have tired of waiting on EE to fulfill his potential I just don't believe he has the drive/discipline to improve at this point so let someone else try to turn him around. Sometimes it takes a guy getting a strong dose of reality that he better get his act together before he decides to do something about it.

mth123
07-31-2009, 04:45 AM
Flawed player who has a history of league average offense and rotten defense vs. guy likley to sit on the DL who costs twice as much money.

I'll take EdE over paying $11 Million to a guy on the DL.

corkedbat
07-31-2009, 05:02 AM
I'd deal EdE for someone else and sign Chone Figgins :D

redsfandan
07-31-2009, 09:35 AM
Won't Rolen net us a pick if he declines arb?Rolen is currently projected as a type A free agent which means he'd net us 2 picks. But that can change between now and the end of the 2010 season. Here are how players are ranked (includes pretty much everyone and is subject to change):
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17870577/Rankings-073009

I have suggested in the past that the Reds should try Encarnacion at second base before giving up on him. He is a decent fielder but he can't make the long throw from 3B accurately enough. The throw from 2B is much shorter and easier and he would have more time to make it. Move Phillips to short and give EE a shot at second base. I still think he can be a plus bat for the long haul as a 2B, but not as a left fielder.
Now that's a radical thought that I haven't heard before.

bucksfan2
07-31-2009, 10:00 AM
I have suggested in the past that the Reds should try Encarnacion at second base before giving up on him. He is a decent fielder but he can't make the long throw from 3B accurately enough. The throw from 2B is much shorter and easier and he would have more time to make it. Move Phillips to short and give EE a shot at second base. I still think he can be a plus bat for the long haul as a 2B, but not as a left fielder.

Edwin already has bad enough footwork at 3b, move him to second base where he has more room to cover and more time to react and it likely would be a comedy of errors. I also don't think Edwin has the necessary foot speed to play 2b.