Trade Value article

[klw]

There are a few rankings like this during the off-season. Grantland is putting out one this week. Here is part one.
Latos and Frazier are in a just missed the top 50 and Bruce is in at 35.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...aseball-part-1

If you've read Grantland's baseball coverage long enough, you probably know that I'm completely in the tank for Todd Frazier. A relatively unheralded prospect compared to the Trouts and Harpers of the world, Frazier still put up shiny numbers in his rookie season, hitting .273/.331/.498 with 19 homers in 128 games. I'll show my non-stathead side and say the guy played with some serious verve too, like the time he hit a home run zero-handed. Still, this being an objective exercise, we have to look at the facts: Frazier turns 27 in February, struck out just under three times as often as he walked in 2012, plays so-so defense, and put up decent but unspectacular numbers in the minors. As Grantland colleague Rany Jazayerli (one of my three consiglieres/sounding boards for this project, along with Baseball Prospectus's R.J. Anderson and FanGraphs' Dave Cameron, who writes an excellent trade value series of his own) put it, Frazier "could easily go full Marty Cordova next season" — meaning he could turn out to be another late bloomer who fares well in his rookie year, then never plays that well again.

[RedsManRick]

I imagine Cueto will be up there in the remaining top 30 or so. I doubt Chapman would be, but I guess I wouldn't be surprised if he was.

[PuffyPig]

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

I imagine Cueto will be up there in the remaining top 30 or so. I doubt Chapman would be, but I guess I wouldn't be surprised if he was.

I expect Chapman, with a decent contract, and under team control for 4 more years, would have decent value, certainly in the top 50.

[mdccclxix]

Without looking at the article, I'm guessing Votto's got no shot? There has to be some psychology in play with such a list.

[klw]

Originally Posted by mdccclxix

Without looking at the article, I'm guessing Votto's got no shot? There has to be some psychology in play with such a list.

I expect Votto will be on there. See this snippet from the intro:

So, given the likelihood that at least one team would pay through the nose to land a well-paid star player, you'll see a few nine-figure contracts spliced in with various underpaid, 20-something stars (see the sidebar for a full list of Trade Value rules).

[klw]

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

I expect Chapman, with a decent contract, and under team control for 4 more years, would have decent value, certainly in the top 50.

I assume that he does not make the list as Kimbrel is outside the top 50 based upon the lack of wisdom in breaking the bank for a reliever. Now if they consider Aroldis to be a starter, he could show up.

[mdccclxix]

Aha, thanks.

[MikeThierry]

The guy I'm surprised is on the list is Salvador Perez. He's the catcher that nobody really knows about but this guy is going to be a stud. He's already close to Molina on defense and just budding as a good to great hitter. At age 22, if someone can get him, they're going to have an MVP quality player for years to come. I'm only surprised that he's on this list because not many throw his name around as far as best catchers in the game and not very well known.

EDIT: In fact, I'm willing to bet someone on here that Perez turns out to be a better catcher in his career than Buster Posey because of the value Perez adds on defense.

[klw]

Part 2 is up. I was 0 for 2 in the predictions in post 5, 6.
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...aseball-part-2
No Votto but Cueto at 28, Chapman at 17

R.A. Dickey won the Cy Young, but Cueto was right there with the best in the league, posting a .278 ERA, 3.27 FIP, and 3½-to-1 strikeout-to-walk rate. A fully formed no. 1 starter at age 26, the Reds smartly got pen to paper early, which means Cueto is Cincinnati property for the next three years, at just $27 million (including a $10 million club option in 2015).

Aroldis Chapman is, as of this writing, a relief pitcher. There is no scenario, in the history of the universe, in which a relief pitcher should be the 17th-most valuable trade chip in baseball. Not Aroldis, not Eckersley or Gagne in their primes, not vintage Mo, not anyone.

By Opening Day, the Cuban Missile may finally be launched. The latest reports have the Reds close to signing Jonathan Broxton to a three-year contract. Though the Broxton deal isn't official yet and we don't know for sure if a Broxton signing would spur a Chapman move to the rotation, Reds GM Walt Jocketty has hinted that the team might elect to do exactly that.

[osuceltic]

I know contracts matter, but it's absurd that Votto isn't on that list.

[MrRedLegger]

Consider Votto's monster contract in terms of output per dollar. Although I agree wholeheartedly that it was worth it to sign him for this much, I see how it might seem not worth it to trade for that sort of contract. Signing him costs money, but trading for him costs would most likely cost money and prospects - creating a smaller return than say trading for a not as good 1st baseman for a much much less expensive price.

[Benihana]

Disagree with Chapman (and Cueto) being that much higher than Latos. I'd put all three of them in the same ballpark. I guess with the first two you have some degree of cost certainty.

I guess this means that a Chapman + prospect deal for Stanton (#7) could actually be enough value?

[osuceltic]

Originally Posted by MrRedLegger

Consider Votto's monster contract in terms of output per dollar. Although I agree wholeheartedly that it was worth it to sign him for this much, I see how it might seem not worth it to trade for that sort of contract. Signing him costs money, but trading for him costs would most likely cost money and prospects - creating a smaller return than say trading for a not as good 1st baseman for a much much less expensive price.

I understand the thinking, but I disagree with the conclusion. Look at that list. Put Votto on the market and some of those other guys on the market, and who fetches the greater return? You can't convince me that everyone on that list has higher trade value than Votto. No way. And that's exactly what they're saying. It's just a typical list that drastically overvalues potential, undervalues production and underestimates the willingness of teams to pay for legitimate, top-shelf talent.