Roy Oswalt's Trade Value And The Rangers: Part II
Hope is a wonderful thing. Hope is what enables us to remain emotionally invested and not sink into despondence and/or apathy. Hope is what makes games like last night's -- one which I've affectionately dubbed "The Matt Treanor Game," a game rendered special by the sheer improbability of its finish -- mean something. And the mere presence of hope is what breeds summer trade-market discussion -- what to acquire, when to acquire it and, perhaps most importantly, how to acquire it.
What we seem to know for certain at this point is that the Rangers and Astros have at least touched base with each other regarding the possibility of a Roy Oswalt-to-Texas exchange; depending on whom you choose to believe (such as NBCSports.com's Craig Calcaterra, who insists that his source on yesterday's scalding-hot rumor was credible), discussions between the two clubs have progressed to such an extent that the framework of a deal has already been agreed upon and the only remaining obstacle is obtaining clearance from Major League Baseball. What that fails to tell us, however, is what a reasonable deal for Oswalt would necessarily entail on the Rangers' end in terms of value relinquished.
Using the basic Dave Cameron-inspired player valuation model, we can determine that Oswalt, over his last 75 starts (spanning three seasons, including this one), has been worth approximately 8½ wins above replacement level, or around 0.11 wins per start; just for the record, this is slightly less than half of what Mariners left-hander Cliff Lee has produced on a per-start basis over the last three seasons. Assuming that the Rangers managed to acquire Oswalt right on July 1st, he would be in line to make around 16-17 post-July 1st starts (notwithstanding injury), followed by 30-32 starts in 2011, his final year of club control; let's peg that number at 48 starts.
Here's where things begin to get a little fuzzy. It's a good idea to regress this 0.11 WAR/start figure towards league average, particularly since a move to the American League would entail (a) pitching against more talented hitters with the inclusion of the designated hitter, as well as (b) pitching in a somewhat more homer-friendly ballpark, but Oswalt is also pitching at a higher level than he did in 2008-09, with a heftier strikeout rate and consistently good peripherals otherwise. All the same, however, let's call it 0.10 WAR/start, which would put Oswalt's total projected value over the final 1½ seasons of his deal at 4.8 wins above replacement.
As Cameron noted in his Lee-centric piece, the marginal value of a win varies depending upon a team's post-season contendership and the time of year, but even if you operate off his assumption that one win is worth approximately $5 million to a contender right now (as opposed to $4 million this past off-season), you can probably employ the popular $4.5 million/win figure and feel pretty comfortable about doing so, particularly since the value of a marginal win will again dip going into the 2010-11 off-season. Multiplying that figure times the expected 4.8 wins above replacement, plus the value of the two compensation picks that Oswalt would presumably garner as a Type A free agent following the 2011 season (approximately $6 million, per Victor Wang's calculations), brings Oswalt's total expected value through 2011 to the sum of $27.5 million.
But this is where a truly significant divergence between Oswalt and Lee on the trade value scale becomes apparent. Whereas Lee is under contract through only the remainder of this season (and is owed only about $5 million over that period, to boot), Oswalt would be owed approximately $7.5 million over that same period, plus $16 million in 2011, with a $16 million club option for 2012 with a $2 million buyout. Provided that Oswalt didn't invoke his right to demand that the club option be picked up in a trade, that works out to $25.5 million, placing his surplus value at a paltry $2 million. If that doesn't sound like very much to you, that's because it's not.
Referring again to Victor Wang's calculations (this time, to his quantification of prospect trade values), that's the equivalent of one age-22-or-younger 'Grade C' pitcher, or a pair of age-23-or older 'Grade C' prospects; think along the lines of trouble-prone Danny Gutierrez, or Guillermo Moscoso plus Max Ramirez. That's the sort of toll that Oswalt's burdensome salary takes on his trade value. In a largely context-neutral setting, Oswalt's trade value is virtually nil when compared to what could be acquired in the off-season markets.
Of course, there are other considerations, beginning with the fact that marginal wins are especially valuable to the Rangers in their current state, as each additional win greatly enhances their probability of reaching the post-season. Drayton McLane assuredly wouldn't accept a perceived low-ball offer, since it is incumbent upon him -- and the Astros front office, although that unit doesn't seem to hold as much power under McLane as front offices in other cities might -- to recoup some nice value for Oswalt if he's going to go through the trouble of relinquishing his team's ace. And, besides all of that, there's likely some sort of mark-up associated with intrastate trading, given the on-going battle for fan interest and valuable season-ticket buyers.
But unless the Astros are prepared to kick in at least $10-12 million, there's no reason to believe that a prospect package comprising Martin Perez, Mitch Moreland and Matt Harrison -- never mind the debated inclusion of a power-relief prospect -- would make sense on the Rangers' end. Subsidizing $8 million might make a straight-up Oswalt-for-Scheppers exchange moderately reasonable on paper, but only just. This isn't really a matter of Houston being able to up the prospect ante by means of including more cash in the deal; rather, it's more of an absolute necessity that the Astros include significant money in order to obtain the sort of prospects that they desire.
31 Comments | in Analysis, Game Recaps, Rumors, The Season
Reader Comments (31)
Sincerely asking: is a trade for Cliff Lee even feasible? Obviously the M's could find no shortage of trade partners, and it seems like they'd prefer to keep Lee, and the compensatory picks that follow his departure, out of the division, but is that necessarily how the business of baseball works, or is that more of a fan mentality?
WOW... now THAT was a great write up!
Back a few months ago BBTiA asked for suggestions and it seemed the overwhelming majority of BBTiA loyalists would enjoy more trade rumor articles, just like this one. This really puts things in perspective.
I pray that JD visits BBTiA today and sees this... and as a result, offers only something that's reasonable and fair for both clubs... and if it's not there, say thank you very much and move onto more pressing issues with the club; like finding a platoon partner for Smoak at 1B.
Somebody posted yesterday that we look no further than Jake Peavy and the success he's had in the AL. He's VERY similar to Oswalt and I would be willing to bet a hefty sum that Oswalt will be an abject failure in the AL, especially pitching in Arlington.
The guy has had a nice career... and I'm sure he'd give us some nice performances... but he's simply not worth the price we'd have to pay... no way!
JD - DON'T DO ANYTHING THAT YOU WILL LATER REGRET....PUHLEEEEZE!!!
@ lr
It seems to be mainly fans that are concerned about trading within your division. A GM should be looking for the best deal possible.
Consider a possible scenario: The M's could trade Lee to Texas for package like Justin Smoak, Martin Perez, Alexi Oganda.
Do they then care if Texas gets picks because Lee signs elsewhere? I think not. Do the Rangers care that they have to play against those guys now? Maybe, but probably not if Lee pitches them to a World Series.
That is why GM is a tough job and knee jerk reactions are not usually a good thing.
Could we just send this list to the Astros and say, "Pick 5." LOL
Beltre, Engel OF nd
Boscan, Wilfredo P nd
Brigham, Jacob P 2006
Delossantos, Leonel C nd
Delossantos, Miguel P nd
Falcon, Ryan P 2007
Font, Wilmer P nd
Fry, Eric OF 2007
Gomez, Kennil P nd
Gradoville, Chris C 2007
Greene, Jonathan 3B 2007
Grullon, Geuris P nd
Gutierrez, Daniel P 2005d
Hamburger, Mark P nd
Hyatt, Jared P 2007
James, Andres SS nd
Kaase, Jacob SS 2007
Kiker, Kasey P 2006
Laughter, Andrew P 2007
Lawson, Matt 2B 2007
Lemon, Marcus SS 2006
Mendoza, Anyenil P nd
Moreland, Mitch OF 2007
Nam, Yoon-Hee P nd
Nelo, Hector P 2007
Ortiz, Joseph P nd
Pimentel, Carlos P nd
Podraza, Cody OF 2006
Reed, Evan P 2007
Rodriguez, Tim OF 2005d
Selen, Alejandro 2B nd
Solis, Emmanuel 3B nd
Stoneburner, Davis IF 2007
Tatusko, Ryan P 2007
Name Pos Draft
Ballard, Michael P 2006
Bryan, Melvin P nd
Castillo, Fabio P nd
Garr, Brennan P 2006
Jones, Beau P 2005
Murphy, Steve OF 2005
Osuna, Renny IF 2005
Paisano, David OF nd
Puello, Albert C nd
Quintero, Jorge P nd
Santana, Cristian OF nd
Sarmiento, Elio C nd
Swanson, Glenn P 2005d
Tracy, Chad 1B 2006
Whittleman, John 3B 2005
Yan, Johan 3B nd
Name Pos Draft
Frostad, Emerson C 2003
Hamilton, Clayton P 2004
Schlact, Michael P 2004
Roy Oswalt has no place in Texas.
I know you have to give up something good to get something good, but I don't think giving up Perez AND/OR Smoak is worth it.
Any deal that sees either of them leave I won't like.
@BP - when you put it that way, trading a few guys looks a bit more attractive.
@Ron - I know you just threw it out there as an example, but that's the type of package I feel the Rangers should stay away from... Smoak and Perez... and Ogando are all KEY pieces for years to come. You cannot trade away guys like this... it has to be 2nd tier guys or no deal at all.
This should also place the return for Kevin Millwood in perspective. The Rangers did pretty well in that deal, really. The Teixiera trade looked great at the time, and is only getting better.
All in all, I would be MUCH happier with trading for Lee, even given the far greater cost, than for Oswalt. Lee is a lefty, already in the AL and pitching like a first ballot HOFer right now. The thought of Lee starting against division foes this summer and fall, and then starting games 1 and 4 in the playoffs makes me drool. Wait until late July when the cost comes down a bit, but then go ahead and pay the price.
This si a bad deal. First, a pitcher switching leagues (especially NL to AL) is always worrisome to me. Second, Roy Oswalt would only be under guaranteed Rnger control for 1 1/3 seasons. Giving up any of the players in the farm system for a lease-a-player is too much to ask. Oswalt isn't worth that. How do we know he'd be successful? see Rich Harden. See Chan Ho Park. The Rangers ought to dance with what brung them.
Here is my take I would like to see Roy oswalt here but not for what it is going to take to get him unless he reupped for at least 4 more years with the rangers but we all know that he is going to go back & retire an astro. So I just hope they go after someone else maybe more teams will fall out of the race & more people become avaiable let's hope anyway & let's hope that the ownership deal turned a corner yesterday.
Isn't it funny now that Perez is being discussed as a possible trade chip (again, I'm not pickin on you Ron... I'm using that deal as an example only) when if we rewind 6 months back, he was completely untouchable.
I'm not really going to indulge myself in trade proposals for any major players until I really know what's going to happen with the ownership situation. I would however entertain the possibility of going after Mike Lowell.
Maybe the Redsox would take Michael Schlact for Lowell.
Let's debunk this nonsense about how Oswalt won't be able to pitch in the AL right now. He has a career 3.51 ERA in interleague games, and a 3.45 K/BB ratio. That's right where you would expect both of his numbers to be going by his xFIP and his career K/BB.
Also, Roy Oswalt is not Rich Harden. The fewest innings Oswalt has pitched in a season since 2003? 181. He could have pitched more, but the Astros were out of contention, so they decided to shut him down early. He has never turned in a bad year--his lowest FIP in a season is 3.80.
Roy Oswalt is a legitimate ace, and you have to overpay for legitimate aces. That's just the way things work in baseball.
I really want to hold out hope that Harden will get it together while he is "hurt," but I realize this probably will not happen. I think Oswalt may bring some non-stat based success to the team. He knows how to pitch in late August, he's played in the playoffs, and pitched in a World Series. I think this could give our young pitchers some confidence as the year goes on. Also, the fact that he will be around for at least 1 1/3 seasons makes me favor him over Lee.
I agree with mike walters and christian. I dont see any regression by Oswalt due to switching leagues. Any regression due to AL and our ballpark I believe will be offset by a spark of energy and focus he will get pitching for another team for the first time in his career and by being in a playoff hunt. I have always loved Roy as a ballplayer and think he would be a great fit here in many ways.
However, I agree that I DONT want to give up the prospects it would take to have him be here for only a year and a half. Not worth it. Also, theres a ton of money on his contract that has to be paid. With our situation, it cant be done. Only way is if Houston picks up part of the tab and that means more/better prospects to deal. I want Roy bad, just not bad enough to give up what it will probably take. If JD works magic here Ill spit shine his shoes.
Astros scouting director Bobby Heck marches to the beat of his own drummer and it seems to work, so I don't know that the Rangers would necessarily need Martin Perez or a similar talent to get a deal done. There are so many high upside pitchers in the Rangers system that I suspect Heck could find a package he really liked and sell it to the Astros front office.
Something like Michael Main, Robert Erlin, Wilmer Font, Engel Beltre might get the deal done. A high-quantity package of upside (especially pitching) might actually help the Astros more than a blue chipper close to the majors anyway. The 'stros have a few solid pitching prospects but need depth.
I think Oswalt could make the difference in getting swept out of the first round and possibly winning a couple of series. But its obvious we can't come close to affording his contract. MLB probably even made it impossible to even think of taking on the $2M or so owed to Conor Jackson -- who the A's absolutely stole from the D-Backs. This trade is simply not going to happen until the ownership situation is resolved. The Rangers are hamstrung so badly right now.
@BP - IMO I think that a package of E Beltre, Kiker, Moreland, Pimentel, and a guy not on the list Beavan could get the deal done as long as the Astros pick up enough of the contract to allow MLB to green light it.
The Astros could sell that to their fans. And we keep scheppers and perez.
Awesome article! Can you do this with Lee, Haren, Cain, Lily ect...?
Actually, can you do this for every player that has made a start this year?
Lee: Won't be dealt within the division.
Haren: Won't be dealt, period. (Under team-friendly contract for years.)
Cain: Won't be dealt, period. (Under team-friendly contract for years.)
Lilly: Won't be dealt, period. (No Trade Clause, Cubs don't like to sell.)
Heard that the Diamondbacks are ready to blow it up... if true, JD needs to go hard after Haren. HE, would be a great fit. The steep price could get dicey though... but we have to be conmfident in JD
Sincerely asking: is a trade for Cliff Lee even feasible? Obviously the M's could find no shortage of trade partners, and it seems like they'd prefer to keep Lee, and the compensatory picks that follow his departure, out of the division, but is that necessarily how the business of baseball works, or is that more of a fan mentality?
It's feasible, but sort of like how there's some mark-up involved with making a deal for Oswalt by virtue of Houston being reluctant to considerably strengthen Texas, the Rangers are probably also reluctant to go all in for Lee, because they don't want to considerably strengthen the Mariners' farm system. Rob Neyer had an interesting post on this subject recently.
I think this reluctance for teams to make intradivision deals more often is bred by two-way apprehension -- neither GM wants to take the chance that an intradivision deal makes the other team better, so as a result nothing ends up happening. I don't think it's rational on paper to restrict your trade options in that way, but no GM wants to be known as the guy who dealt the next big star to his division rival. That's the sort of thing that can hasten your dismissal.
I agree with mike walters and christian. I dont see any regression by Oswalt due to switching leagues. Any regression due to AL and our ballpark I believe will be offset by a spark of energy and focus he will get pitching for another team for the first time in his career and by being in a playoff hunt. I have always loved Roy as a ballplayer and think he would be a great fit here in many ways.
I always wonder about the logic underlying this mindset. It strikes me as more likely that stable or improved numbers would actually be more the product of the league not being familiar with him his first time through than a "spark of energy and focus." And going into 2011, some regression is likely inevitable, and at the very least would have to be accounted for in his projections.
I know this is probably a dumb question, but is Vlad's hit streak still alive after having a plate appearance last night since he was walked and didn't technically have an AB?
@Luke - it's not a stupid question; I thought the same thing. My GUESS (I'm sure someone on here will correct me if I'm wrong) is that the streak is in tact b/c a pinch hit AB does not qualify as a "game" (as it would relate here). I seem to remember this coming up a few years back with someone else.... I just don't recall the details.
Don't take this to the bank though... I could defintely be wrong.
I feel like there's something missing in this analysis.
The assumption here is that Oswalt only is worth 2 million in a trade because that's what his value is ABOVE his current contract. But that doesn't make much sense....that would imply that a play is NEVER worth trading for if his value is worth EXACTLY his contract. But of course that isn't true. For instance, if Albert Pujols was available, and his contract was worth only 2 million below his VORP, it would be incredibly unreasonable to assume that all we should have to surrender is a couple Grade C prospect to trade for him. The fact is, the simple right of owning a player like Oswalt costs something, and something significant. Most likely in this case, a Martin Perez.
What if our first baseman had a .285 avg with 12 HRs and 30 RBIs?
What if our centerfielder had a .300 avg with 10 HRs and 27 RBIs?
What if our catcher had a .265 avg with 8 HR and 26 RBI?
It's scary to think where the Ranger's might be if the "what ifs" were true. This team is winning with 3 positions hitting way below average... which is akin to suffering 3 devastating injuries whereas backup players had to play.
I'm sick of hearing people say "what if" the Angels had Morales... or for that matter, any team suffering through significant injuries.
This Ranger team is getting better and better with each passing game/series. They will be downright scary when Borbon, Smoak, and Treanor/MaxRam begin to really figure things out. It's already happening with Borbon and to a lesser degree, Treanor (he's probably playing at his highest level right now). Smoak and MaxRam continue to struggle... and I hope they figure it out and find some consistency.
Maybe your right Joey, I could be assuming that more out of emotion than logic, its just a feeling that with the ability and competitive nature of Oswalt, he would be fired up at the challenge of pitching in Arlington and it would bring out the best in him. Im even more confident in his ability to still be a shutdown ace given the fact that after a "down year" last year for him, he has come back this season and with the exception of a two game stretch has pitched at a Cy Young caliber quality. Im sure it cant be backed up by stats enough to prove it the rule rather than the exception, but there are players that have been really rejuvenated after leaving a team where hes been for years to play for another, especially a competitive one, and maintains or improves their numbers. I guess my gut just tells me Roy would be that guy for us.
I personally am not 100% sold on the view that a pitchers number will decline more times than not as opposing batters get more familiar with him IF he is a stud type pitcher. The really good pitchers in the league are consistantly really good no matter who they play or how many times they play them right? I mean Roys been pitching against the same guys in the NL for years and never experienced any significant declines. Great pitching is better than great hitting right no matter where you are right?
I could be wrong here, but wouldnt logic say that if opposition gets more familiar/successful with a pitcher the more they faced him, that the pitchers numbers would steadily decline every season? Can a great pitcher be "figured out" like that?
I just feel like the more I look at Roys career numbers the more confident I become that would be a solid Ace here.
(Of course with all that said Im still not comforable with what it may take to get him)
Oswalt will give up more runs in the AL and playing in Texas. The runs are less valuable in the AL and in Texas. It's mostly a wash.
The assumption here is that Oswalt only is worth 2 million in a trade because that's what his value is ABOVE his current contract. But that doesn't make much sense....that would imply that a play is NEVER worth trading for if his value is worth EXACTLY his contract. But of course that isn't true. For instance, if Albert Pujols was available, and his contract was worth only 2 million below his VORP, it would be incredibly unreasonable to assume that all we should have to surrender is a couple Grade C prospect to trade for him. The fact is, the simple right of owning a player like Oswalt costs something, and something significant. Most likely in this case, a Martin Perez.
If Pujols was worth only $2 million above and beyond his contract, he would be a 4-4.5 WAR player and banking $16M. I think you're overstating the ability of teams to incur that sort of payroll spike, particularly for a very good but not elite player in this scenario.
The key in the trade value calculator is that it's context-neutral, with "zero trade value" meaning -- in theory, at least -- that you could supply the same amount of production by signing a free agent at the going free agent rate without giving up anything else. Obviously, this is not always the case (positional scarcity, etc.), and mid-season is a somewhat different kettle of fish, which is why we adjust the dollars/win total to reflect the reality that you can't really go out and procure talent in such a manner in July, as well as the fact that wins are more valuable at that stage to contending teams.
Even if you got a tad more aggressive and used $5M/win over the remainder of this season and next season, however, you still only come out with $30M of value against a $25.5M commitment. Again, unless Houston is prepared to kick in eight-digit salary relief, I cannot see the wisdom behind relinquishing Perez alone, much less Perez + other pieces. Scheppers is more realistic, but Houston would still have to be willing to eat a lot of money.