Regarding The Prince Fielder Rumor
Prince Fielder strikes a pose after hitting a home run somewhere at some point in time.It's funny what a glaring offensive weakness and a few seemingly idle trade inquires can do to set the rumor mill churning into overdrive. Despite previous indications that the Rangers were financially handicapped in terms of any further trade-market splurging, the whispers have persisted, with SI.com's Jon Heyman reporting that the "very active" Rangers had joined the Angels and White Sox in pursuing the Brewers' Prince fielder, and ESPNChicago.com's Bruce Levine stating that the Rangers are among six teams bidding for the Nationals' Adam Dunn.
Less than 24 hours ago, I was heavily inclined to write all of this off as pure, unadulterated garbage, but I get it now. And maybe it never should have surprised any of us in the first place. If it looks, acts and hits like a replacement-level player over a long enough duration, it probably is one. That isn't to say that Davis is destined to remain saddled with such an ignominious label as "replacement level" for the remainder of his pro career, but regardless of whether he's being plagued by inconsistent hitting mechanics, an inability to develop good pitch-recognition skills or something tools-based (e.g. degradation of his power stroke*), it seems clear that the Rangers are looking for a more reliable/productive intermediate- to long-term solution to their first base dilemma.
[For what it's worth, resident scouting guru Jason Parks recently issued these statements on Twitter: "The future [first baseman] of the Texas Rangers is not currently in their system or on the 25-man [roster]. Chris Davis of '10 is not the same Davis as '08. ... His pitch recognition skills aren't very good (they were never great), but he doesn't appear to have the same strength/bat speed. ... At one point, I would have felt comfortable giving Davis a legit 80 grade for the present power. I can't say that now."]
Anything of significance I have to say about Dunn in the context of this trade market can be covered in a more interesting fashion by examining this Fielder-to-Texas notion; it almost certainly won't happen, but that never stopped anyone from talking about a trade rumor before, particularly those of the potential blockbuster variety. And before I can articulate my problem with this trade rumor, and why this isn't really akin to the Cliff Lee trade in terms of potential impact, we need to set about actually quantifying Fielder's trade value, using the same model we used to determine Roy Oswalt's worth.
Operating off the reasonable assumption that Fielder, if acquired by Texas, would amass two wins (above replacement) over the remainder of the 2010 regular season and approximately 5.5 wins in 2011, and factoring in other variables such as the market value of a single win ($4.5 million/win, in this exercise), salary ($3.5 million over the final two months of this season, plus $13-14 million via arbitration in 2011) and the value of post-2011 compensatory draft picks ($6 million, per Victor Wang's calculations, we find that Fielder's surplus value is around the $22-23 million mark; since the Rangers would likely require a cash subsidy to cover what remains of his 2010 salary, you can likely bump that upward into the $26-27 million range.
Is that enough value to justify relinquishing Martin Perez and/or Tanner Scheppers? Absolutely. And to be clear, I can't imagine any possible way in which such a deal would get done without including at least one of those two elite arms, or perhaps Derek Holland -- whose upside may still be bright, but whose trade value has also taken a hit as a consequence of his injury problems this year -- and a more talent-laden prospect package; it's just not feasible without employing at least one or two elite trade chips. Notice, however, that there's a distinction between the deal being justifiable value-wise, and me -- or you, or anyone else -- actually wanting to pull the trigger. Why?
Well, in case you didn't notice, there's a flaw in that $26-27 million valuation. The impact (and value) of the two marginal wins that Fielder would supply during August/September is diminished, as the Rangers' chances of reaching the post-season are already very high; in other words, they almost certainly won't need those two wins to wrap up the division, which means that Fielder's primary value is in (a) any post-season contributions in 2010 and (b) his regular-season contributions in 2011.
And guess what? Somebody will probably lead you to believe that Fielder makes the Rangers significantly stronger in terms of contending for a world championship in 2010, but they'll be off the mark. In terms of wins above replacement in, say, a seven-game series, Lee's total expected value (0.23 WAR/game started) would be nearly double that of Fielder (0.04 WAR/game), and nearly triple that if things reached the point where Lee made three separate starts in a playoff series. That's an intuitive way of seeing how the presence of an elite starting pitcher is more important than that of an elite hitter in the post-season, but there's another consideration I'd like to highlight.
Sooner or later, people will get tired of me bringing up Nate Silver's "secret sauce," but it's relevant here in terms of how Silver assessed the importance of hitting in the playoffs: "More remarkably, all three of these characteristics [a power pitching staff, a good closer, and a good defense] relate to run prevention, rather than run scoring. That does not mean that offense is of no importance in the playoffs. But there is a lot of noise in the postseason record, and offense did not produce enough signal to emerge through it. The reasons are too complicated to get into here, but have to do with what happens when good offenses face good pitching. Pitching does have some tendency to dominate these match-ups, whether they occur in the regular season or in the playoffs. Because "plus pitching" versus "plus hitting" duels occur more frequently in the post-season, we tend to notice the effects more then."
It's one thing to implore the Rangers' front office to acquire Fielder while knowing full well that it would be a 2011-focused deal; it's quite another to regard Fielder -- or Dunn -- as the missing piece in the Rangers' inevitable march to the World Series and rely upon that perspective when lobbying for a major trade. I won't deny that either Fielder or Dunn would constitute a major short-term upgrade over Davis, and even give the Rangers a post-season boost; what I have a problem with is the belief that such a boost would be significant, which is really overstating the case. I can see Texas revisiting this over the 2010-11 off-season if Fielder's still on the market, but in the here and now, I can't see the logic behind paying a king's ransom to acquire Fielder. I just can't.
21 Comments | in Analysis, Rumors, The Season
Reader Comments (21)
Thank you, Joey ... while I am enjoying this great run by the team, I also am of the belief that the Rangers would be better served to exhaust any and all internal options first ... I am not as down on Davis as some, and I believe that his defense, as illustrated in Mr. Silver's "Secret Sauce" analysis, is every bit as valuable, if not maybe a little more so, than his offensive contributions in the playoffs. Wining in the playoffs is as much about "preventing runs" as it is scoring them ... and Davis gives our defense the ability to prevent runs. Would I like to see more production out of CD ... absolutely!!
And what we would have to give up, in terms of prospects, if Milwaukee would even consider trading Fielder, is a price that, at the moment, I am loath to do ... I just am.
So roll with what we have in place now ... we have the pitching (starting and bullpen), and we have the defense ... I'm happy to take my chances with this group and see what we can do in October ...
This potential trade has a Carlos Lee like vibe. And like Lee, he's a crappy defensive player. CD is lucky he's a good infielder.
Joey, I was wondering if CD is a gold glove caliber 1st baseman? For some reason I have my doubts
The game wouldn't be any fun if you could just punch numbers into a computer and determine the winner. I guess it just depends how valuable a championship is to you. Would you rather have 2 pennants, or 1 championship? I'm not saying this move would make the difference...nobody knows. You can always choose to decline a move because "it only helps a little", and doesn't seem to make economic sense. But, it might only take "a little" to push a team over the top.
I think this is spot on. I just can't see Fielder or Dunn putting us "over the top" in a run to the 2010 WS.
I think the Lee trade did that for the postseason for exactly the reasons Joey stated here. And IMHO, we aren't talking about "elite" hitters here, just good ones. CD still has an upside and the potential to put together a good month or two. Don't sell the farm JD. We've got what it takes right now.
Yep, well said. I'd rather give up Castillo and/or Reed for Cantu or Helms than a huge package for Fielder. Getting a platoon partner for Davis is an adequate move for now. The Rangers postseason offense depends on Hamilton, Guerrero, Kinsler, etc., not any 1B acquisition.
Longview's loss of bat speed is something I've noticed as of late, and that's probably the thing that scares me the most.
However, I'm wondering how much of that can be attributed to tenative pitch selection / lack of confidence in recognition, especially when talking about a guy who doesn't exactly have a short swing.
Still, the zero homeruns is the stat that still makes me the most apprehensive. He should still be a guy that just absolutely latches ahold of one on occasion, even if just by pure luck.
Did he quit chewing? I noticed him blowing bubbles instead of spitting through the collosal chaw Wednesday night - didn't catch a close up last night. That would have him seeing pitches through a fog, not that his issues at the plate don't predate the gum.
I had hoped that a deal for Dunn would somehow get...um done. Then I heard the rumor yesterday. I told my wife that if Texas got Dunn then the world series was a forgone conclusion. I felt that way because having Dunn in the lineup meant that now you take a .200 hitter with no HRs out of the lineup and replace him with a guy who is a legitimate top-flight slugger.
I won't pretend to know half as much about sabremetrics as you, Joey. And I appreciate articles like this, even when I disagree with them. Aand I disagree with you here.
I think that Dunn is the final piece of the playoff puzzle. He would guarantee a playoff spot. Having him in the lineup would make the Texas lineup 7 deep with really good hitters (when Elvis snaps out of it).
I do agree with you though, that giving up Scheppers or Perez would be potentially disastrous to the franchise long-term.
As a Rangers fan since the mid 70s, I am very happy that the franchise is in great shape talent-wise. I am not sure whether the team should trade another top prospect for the icing on the cake or whether it should stand pat and go into the playoffs with a glaring weakness.
I had been hoping that Chris Davis would snap out of this ubelievable funk and be the guy he was at the end of 2008. If he was THAT CD, we wouldn't need anyone to try to upgrade the position.
Thanks for the article. But I hope somehow the Rangers can get a Holland-centered deal for Dunn done.
While I agree that defense is paramount to post-season success, I think a lot of CD fans are over-inflating the importance of 1B defense. There's a reason 1B has the highest league wide OPS of any (non-DH) position, year after year. It's because that's where you can hide a defensive liability who mashes, and get away with it.
I still have not given up hope that we might see Mitch Moreland by September 1, and then have sort of a month-long open competition for the starting job come playoff time. It's really too bad they are both lefties, or they might be able to platoon.
As for trading prospects, I think the Rangers' long-term inability to acquire top-flight SPs given their Free Agency limitations and the RBiA factor means you don't trade top kiddie pitching. Smoak, yes. Going forward, if someone wants CD, Moreland, Beltre (CF), or one of the kids (Profar, Alfaro, etc) in a deal for the right puzzle piece, then yes. But not Scheppers, not Perez, not Holland, not Font, not Ross, not Beltre (SP) and not Erlin. Not unless it's for a Big League, top-flight SP with multiple years left (a la J. Johnson from Florida).
@Spanky
You are crazy to think giving up future plusplus arms for nothing more than a "good" bat for a stretch run is the thing to do here. A deal for Dunn doesn't even come close to sealing anything for this year, especially not a "foregone conclusion".
JD is foolish to give up any of our farm arms for Fielder or Dunn. As t ball said, a minor move for a platoon RH bat is a good consideration.
We are a championship team AS IS.
There's no such thing as a 'World Series guarantee'. Over the shorter series, the odds even out some and it's very rare to see a team have even a 60% chance of winning. Even if there was a team that was that much better than every other team in baseball, their chances of winning the world series would be 21.6% and it would only be 36% to even make the World Series.
Really, you should look at the MLB playoffs a lot more like March Madness than the NBA playoffs.
Whoever they get, he may be platooning with Mitch Moreland if Davis doesn't get going pretty quickly.
As a Brewers' fan first and a baseball fan overall.......I believe that Texas does not have their 1st basemen of the future on the roster or in the orginization.
Throwing out all the rocket science, who wouldnt want a .290 .300 ba with 40-50 homeruns?Doesn't Dunn represent the same thing you already have in CD? A .235 ba with 20-25 homeruns?
Fielder represents OUR 1st basemen of the future....however, being handcuffed as a small market team.....along with having an ass clown for an agent apparently has us looking elsewhere.
Texas could do a lot worse......I believe a trade for Prince would seaal the deal for you. Maybe not guarantee anything but, you wont get pushed artound either.
By the way, I really like Davis, but it's a grown-up world, and at some point your career is no longer judged by your potential to produce, but by your actual production. I'm sure that Davis is just about out of chances with this organization.
Well, looks like we get a chance to see Mitch Moreland sooner rather than later, and I couldn't be happier about it. Getting him on the 40-man now means that if he earns the starting job later on this season, he can be added to the playoff roster. Despite Kinsler going on the 15-day DL, this is good news in my book. I think it MAY also push the 1B question into August, as the Rangers' brass may decide to see if they have an answer here already in Moreland before they unload prospects for a platoon 1B.
If we do go for a platoon 1B option, I'm starting to get the itch to deal with Boston for Lowell. He's tearing it up in his rehab stint in AAA, he's got playoff experience, and (if he regains all of his form) I think there's a lot more upside to him than there is to a Cantu or Wiggington. I also suspect Boston would not ask for the same super-premium as some other teams if we need them to kick in salary, as they can just pour money down the drain at will.
@ Jason
Sorry, Fielder is not worth what MKE will ask in return. Plain and simple. No way I give up Holland, Scheppers, Beltre, Perez, in any combination for Fielder. No way. He simply doesn't add that much to the rest of the year.
Don't forget if the Rangers acquire Fielder and he walks after 2011, Fielder is a Class A free agent and would net two first rounders in return.
So the latest news suggests that Florida is, after all, willing to take on Cantu's money, and that they have their eye on Reed + one other good pitching prospect. Here's where it would have been nice to have Beavan to offer - now they're going to have to give up someone else usable. My hope is it's Strop or McCarthy or Moscoso - but I imagine that's probably too good to be true.
Cantu isn't Prince Fielder, but all we need is for SOME production from that spot - and it would also help to have another guy who can hit against lefties. I just hope that we can keep Scheppers & Perez & Holland.
TO ME TRADING FOR CRUZ MAKES MORE SENSE THAN GOING AFTER A PLAYER THAT WILL COST US OUR OUTSTANDING YOUNG PLAYERS THAT WILL BE THE FUTURE RANGERS VERY SOON AND KEEP THE TEAM IN CONTENTION AND PLAYOFFS FOR YEARS TO COME. I KNOW THAT JON DANIELS AND HIS CREW HAVE WORKED AWFULLY HARD AND DONE A GREAT JOB OF PUTTING TOGETHER THESE YOUNG PLAYERS. LET'S NOT TRADE THEM FOR "TODAY."
Is it really appropriate to use Win shares to predict post season performance? Like @GhettoBear04 and others have pointed out, post season series are so close matchup-wise that the smallest of margins can make the difference. Having a guy who can maybe hit 1 or 2 crucial homeruns/doubles more than Davis, which could translate into 1 or 2 big wins, which may decide 1 or 2 series... is HUGE, especially when Chris Davis has shown no indication that he will be getting those hits.
Rosenthal is reporting that the Marlins' return for Cantu will be Double A RHP Evan Reed & Double A RHP Omar Poveda, who is on DL recovering from TJ surgery.