Bleacher Bums Forum

On a Bryant trade, say for instance you want Jo Adell from the Angels.  Bryant is owed say $43 million for his 2 years of control.  If 1 WAR =$9 million, the Angels would have to value Bryant as a 6 WAR player.  If they do then the value of a 1:1 trade could line up.  The more likely scenario is Bryant is valued at 4-5 WAR player and his surplus value is $29-47 million.  So you could get a back-end top 100 guy and a 2-3 WAR player with control.  The Red Sox are going to be in the same bind trying to unload Betts.

Bryant hasn't accumulated 6 WAR the last two seasons combined.

So, teams now make trades based on WAR? I did not realize that.

So, teams now make trades based on WAR? I did not realize that.

I could make a smart ass reply, but I’m turning over a new leaf. Do teams make trades off of public WAR values no. They make trades off of their own version of WAR and their own projection systems. They assign a dollar value and come up with a surplus value. Prospects get put through a similar projections and they get assigned a value. If the values are close to matching then a trade gets made. At the deadline a premium might/might not get paid.

The public WAR and prospect values will get you in a roughly the right area.

I think GM's say to another GM, I need a centerfielder and a good pitcher, I can give you a good hitting catcher and a good bat at third.   What can we do?  Then after they cough up some names, they run the contracts, the WAR's, the intangibles and agree to a deal or pass on the deal.

Sharma:

“Former Phillies pitching coach Chris Young will be the Cubs next bullpen coach. Before getting an in-uniform job with Philly, Young was a pro scout with the Astros and Padres.”

How do we know that the Cubs development system is horrible?  Are there many examples where players that the Cubs failed to develop were subsequently developed successfully in other organizations  If so, how does that compare with similar examples in other organizations?  Could the big problem be in identification of future high quality ML players (pitchers in particular)?

How do we know that the Cubs development system is horrible?  Are there many examples where players that the Cubs failed to develop were subsequently developed successfully in other organizations  If so, how does that compare with similar examples in other organizations?  Could the big problem be in identification of future high quality ML players (pitchers in particular)?

I think this is where D+D is better evaluated as a combination.  Otherwise, we don't know where failure lies.  Did the draft/IFA deliver zero talent, so that the development guys have no chance no matter how good they are?  Or is draft/IFA identifying and delivering reasonable talent, but development is wasting it?  Or both? 

Your question suggests perhaps the problem has been on the draft/IFA side, because there aren't many examples of guys who developed once they left the system?  Some of the left-the-system guys would be Soler, Gleyber, Eloy, Godfrey, Cease, Paredes, Candelario, Vizcaino.  Obviously several of them have developed greatly since leaving the Cubs, but don't see that reflecting on Cubs development system.  Theo really coveted Steve Wilson and Quintana and Davis, so he traded whatever minor-league talent he had to get them. 

Maybe they're bringing in Creed Bratton?