Abomination Old-Timey Member Posted December 6, 2013 Posted December 6, 2013 I get this argument, but what isn't mentioned here is that there's still a lot more uncertainty as to whether a Polanco-type prospect will actually live up to the projections, whereas there far less uncertainty about Price living up to his. That's why teams will usually get far more return than these types of valuations. Not to mention that it's not all about surplus value, nor are things like increased revenue from attendance and tv factored in (difference between making the playoffs and missing for example). I'm not saying surplus value isn't important, but actual performance during a window of contention is as well.
John_Havok Old-Timey Member Posted December 6, 2013 Posted December 6, 2013 Not to mention that it's not all about surplus value, nor are things like increased revenue from attendance and tv factored in (difference between making the playoffs and missing for example). I'm not saying surplus value isn't important, but actual performance during a window of contention is as well. I don't disagree with the valuations, and the fact that this type of thinking is actually starting to slowly slip into the MLB psyche is great. I just know there's now ay in hell that Tampa would trade Price for Polanco and be satisfied with the return because his projected surplus value is higher. They'll probably get an even better return than they did for Shields, even though that was an overpay
Abomination Old-Timey Member Posted December 6, 2013 Posted December 6, 2013 I don't disagree with the valuations, and the fact that this type of thinking is actually starting to slowly slip into the MLB psyche is great. I just know there's now ay in hell that Tampa would trade Price for Polanco and be satisfied with the return because his projected surplus value is higher. They'll probably get an even better return than they did for Shields, even though that was an overpay I'm fine with running the valuations (and they should be run), I just don't believe it's proper to evaluate a trade solely based on surplus value.
John_Havok Old-Timey Member Posted December 6, 2013 Posted December 6, 2013 I don't either, but a lot more teams should be using them as tools. It might help them not get bent over by Friedman on a regular basis
Angrioter Old-Timey Member Posted December 6, 2013 Posted December 6, 2013 I've been trying to pry Polanco away from z3r0s for months in DDL. If I were Pirates I definitely wouldn't include him in a Price trade. Polanco DWL .320/.424/.500 RC = 25 RC27 = 7.67
KingKat Old-Timey Member Posted December 6, 2013 Posted December 6, 2013 Cameron, true to his reputation, is being simple-minded here. It's not all about projections, probability should factor too. I doubt teams would ever base their valuation on a single figure. They would (or at least should) be looking at ceiling and at floor and at how wide the gap between the two is. One of the problems with using projections in fantasy for instance is that two players can be projected to provide the same value but the probability is completely different and ultimately that should factor hugely in how you value the two players. The other thing is that the whole $/war thing doesn't really work when every team has vastly different budgets. The Rays operate under a huge $/WAR imperative. They will cash in Price because that's there m.o. but most contending teams don't operate that way. They will sacrifice surplus value so that they can project more comfortably into the playoffs. If they have deep pockets, that's just not a big deal. The Rays on the other hand will take the chance that they may be cashing in the marginal wins that will keep them out of the playoffs (they sure do cut it close most years).
GD Old-Timey Member Posted December 6, 2013 Posted December 6, 2013 y = mx + b Get off my lawn. You nerds are taking this too far! Do you even watch baseball?
GD Old-Timey Member Posted December 6, 2013 Posted December 6, 2013 What is the weighted average cost of a win for the jays? What weights? One win cost $1,581,555.41 for the Jays last year.
G-Snarls Community Moderator Posted December 6, 2013 Posted December 6, 2013 What weights? One win cost $1,581,555.41 for the Jays last year. With a LOT of money sitting on the DL
Lawrie22 Verified Member Posted December 7, 2013 Posted December 7, 2013 Tweet from incarcerated bob: @incarceratedbob: **BREAKING MLB NEWS**Source: Rays talking trade with Blue Jays / Mets / Dodgers about @DAVIDprice14 ' Serious OFFER from Mets tonight #IBN I know this guy doesn't have the best credibility but to his credit he does get a fare share right
havok24 Old-Timey Member Posted December 7, 2013 Posted December 7, 2013 lol can you imagine Syndergaard getting traded to the Rays? (Won't happen obviously lol).
P2F Old-Timey Member Posted December 7, 2013 Posted December 7, 2013 lol can you imagine Syndergaard getting traded to the Rays? (Won't happen obviously lol). f***! Please, no.
Lawrie22 Verified Member Posted December 7, 2013 Posted December 7, 2013 If there was to be a price trade to the mets than one of wheeler or syndergard would have to be involved so I wouldn't rule it out completely. It would be a nightmare for syndergard to go to the rays and pitch lights out, it would make the dickey trade look even worse
JoJo Parker Dunedin Blue Jays - A SS On Tuesday, Parker was just 1-for-5, but the one hit was his first professional home run. Explore JoJo Parker News >
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now