Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
Inbox
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

The value of Troy Tulowitzki

Posted: 02/13/2013 6:13 PM

The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


A few things seem pretty certain to me.    The Rockies are going to be a really bad team in 2013.  They have absolutely no pitching.  Pitching represents a strong part of the game of baseball and it's difficult to really do anything without it.  A few other things that stick out to me are that the Pirates have a good core but still really need another player to properly set the balance.  It would make the entire pecking order much better if you had Andrew McCutchen as the top player.  A good secondary player and followed by Alvarez, Marte and Walker as your third, fourth and fifth best players.  Perhaps Walker becomes the sixth guy and someone like Travis Snider becomes guy number five.  That doesn't really matter much it's finding the second guy that is the problem.

This brings us to where you can improve the team realistically.  Currently the obvious long term holes are at shortstop, first base, catcher and right field.  First base and right field are generally easy positions to fill with a decent offensive player.  Shortstop and catcher are very tough.  Basing on the current Pirates team the most pressing need is at shortstop.  The current shortstops contract expires after 2013 so someone new will need to take that spot.  The free agent market offers very little in terms of help next offseason.  The only guys that will be free agents that are of any interest will be Stephen Drew and Jhonny Peralta.

The best shortstop in baseball is Troy Tulowitzki.  If Colorado were to move him it would be because they finally decided to rebuild.  The Pirates are in a very enviable position because if they choose to have interest in Tulowitzki they have something no other team has and that is prospect depth as well as a logical fit and payroll flexibility to make a deal happen.

In terms of farm system rankings here are the top 10.  I'm going to use Keith Law's list just because it ranks the Pirates in the middle of their high and low projections from other sites.

1. St. Louis Cardinals
2. Minnesota Twins
3. Tampa Bay Rays
4. Houston Astros
5. Chicago Cubs
6. San Diego Padres
7. Pittsburgh Pirates
8. Seattle Mariners
9. Texas Rangers
10. New York Yankees

Now lets assume that if Colorado wants to move Tulowitzki they will want a lot.  It would be a realistic expectation that they would trade him to one of these teams as they can offer the likely best package in trade.  However not all these teams can acquire Tulowitzki for obvious reasons.  Lets eliminate those now.

The Twins are rebuilding and trading away a bunch of prospects to acquire Tulowitzki won't make a difference as they will still be a bad team.  Same goes for the Astros so wipe them out also.  Then we have need.  The Cubs have an all-star shortstop they extended to a big contract so they probably won't be interested.  The Rangers also have a two really good shortstops already.  They aren't likely to give up a lot to upgrade a position that doesn't really need an upgrade so scratch those two off as well.  The Yankees are a bit of a wild card.  Derek Jeter has a player option for the 2014 season.  He's also coming off of major surgery.  Chances are he will accept the option no matter what.  I'll lean them as a no right now.  They have shown a commitment to getting payroll in check so adding another high contract probably isn't in the plan.  The Rays are out simply because they can't afford the contract.  While they certainly have the players to pull it off you also need to be able to pay the price.

That leaves the Cardinals, Pirates, Mariners and Padres as possible fits.  None of these teams have fixtures at shortstops and all of them have really good prospects.  You could make a case for any of these teams except for the one that makes the most sense.  The Cardinals.  I always thought that they would go hard after Tulowitzki if he was available.  It makes perfect sense after all they have the best farm system in baseball.  Then I looked closer and realized that even though the Cardinals have a good farm system, they really need all of those guys.  They have 5 high ceiling guys who will all make the majors in 2013.  Shelby Miller, Kolten Wong, Carlos Martinez, Oscar Taveras and Trevor Rosenthal.  No doubt they could make up a package with these players but it would simply trade one hole for another.  Payroll is important here.  The Cardinals have about 115 million committed for the 2013 team.  In 2014 you're looking at them having about 70 million already under contract.   Now this is with all free agents leaving and I don't think that will happen.  Most likely they will need to resign Adam Wainwright and that will cost about 20 million.  That puts them at 90 million with all kinds of holes to fill.  Carlos Beltran will have his contract expire.  That won't be a huge issue because Taveras will take his place.  That of course means you can't trade Taveras however.  In the starting rotation you have a similar problem.  Assuming you resign Wainwright that leaves you with Wainwright, Garcia and Lynn in the rotation.  You need Miller/Martinez/Roesenthal to fill those holes.  It's very difficult for the Cardinals to acquire Tulowitzki because most of their top prospects will be needed in the immediate future.

The Pirates, Mariners and Padres all could propose impressive packages so we won't rule any of them out.  Instead we'll focus on the cost to acquire Tulowitzki

After the 2013 season Tulowitzki will have either 8 years and 145 million or 7 years and 134 million depending on if you pick up his 2021 option.  I'm going to go with the 7 year option because trying to project that far into the future is tough.  So we have a 7 year, 134 dollar contract.

In terms of projected value of Tulowitzki I'm going to go with 4.5 WAR a season.    Over 7 years that is projecting 31.5 WAR.  

We will use the cost of 6 million per WAR so that gives him 189 million of value.  Subtract the 134 million in terms of his actual contract and that gives you 55 million in surplus value.  So that gives you a number to target.

Here is a general breakdown of the value of prospects

Hitters #1-10 - 36.5 million
Hitters #11-25 - 25.1 million
Hitters #26-50 - 23.4 million
Hitters #51-75 - 14.2 million
Hitters #76-100 - 12.5 million

Pitchers #1-10 - 18.2 million
Pitchers #11-50 - 15.9 million
Pitchers #51-75 - 12.1 million
Pitchers #76-100 - 9.8 million

Grade B pitchers - 7.3 million
Grade B hitters - 5.5 million

Alright so in prospect terms you need to get to 55 million.

Now the Pirates probably don't want to deal Cole and Taillon in this type of deal.  They would want those guys to be part of the future.  Since this is a little down the line and a lot of prospects will move off the list based on other guys coming off of it we can try and play around with a possible package.

Gregory Polanco
He currently sits in the 51-75 range for hitters.  A year from now lets say he sits in the 26-50 range and assign him a value of 23.4 million

Luis Heredia
He is currently unranked but is on the verge of making the list.  A year from now lets move him to the 76-100 spot and he earns a value of 9.8 million

A package of Heredia and Polanco is a good start but it's still about 20 million short in terms of fair value.  We'll have to add some B level prospects to even things out.

So in terms of prospects we're looking at two B level pitchers and one B level hitter.  For the hitter that means you're giving up either Barrett Barnes or Josh Bell in this deal.  For the pitchers you need to send two of Nick Kingham, Clay Holmes or Tyler Glasnow.

Now this is a year from now we're talking.  Prospects could move down the list because of poor performance but they can also move up.  In a perfect world Polanco and Heredia maintain their prospect status and move up slightly because they don't take steps back.  Then one of Barnes, Bell, Kingham, Holmes or Glasnow breakthrough and increase their value so you can get away with trading less.  For example lets say that Barrett Barnes makes his way onto the top 100 prospect list in the 51-75 range.  Now suddenly he is worth about 12.1 million instead of 5.5 million.  That kind of increase would save you a pitching prospect.  So now a fair package looks like Heredia, Polanco, Barnes and say Kingham.

Both teams would probably be happy with that kind of trade.  The Pirates top end prospects are protected in Cole, Taillon and Hanson.  They lose their 4, 5 and 6 top prospects.  The number doesn't really matter it's their position around the league because a year from now those same players will likely be the teams 3, 4 and 5 prospects since Cole will have graduated.  Three top 5 prospects as well as a B level pitching prospect is a big price to pay especially in a system as good as the Pirates but they could probably make that deal and be happy.

If the Rockies were smart they would try and trade Tulowitzki right now because his value goes down the more money and less prime years you're getting.  If they moved Tulowitzki right now and using the same criteria we used before he would have 8 years and 144 million on his contract (his salary is 10 million for 2013)  At 4.5 WAR for 8 years that would give him a total WAR of 36.  At 6 million per WAR that gives him 216 million of value minus the 144 million of contract cost and that gives you 72 million of surplus value.  That is 17 million more than it will be a year from now.  By hanging onto him now they basically cost themselves an additional 11-50 pitching prospect.  Meaning if they traded him today it would be fair for them to ask for Jameson Taillon as well in the deal.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/13/2013 7:03 PM

Re: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


Tulo will be a Bucco as soon as Cuban owns the team.  If Nutting aquired Tulo we would lose the front line prospects you mentioned, then we would start hearing about the albotross contract like Jason Kendall, and we would dump Tulo for much less than what it took to acquire him.

You are right that the Pirates have the prospects to acquire Tulo.  What they are missing is the financial commitment from the owner (who is the 10th richest owner in baseball).
Reply | Quote

Posted: 02/13/2013 8:17 PM

RE: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


I don't think money will really be a problem. Allocation of money could support Tulo on the roster. We don't really have any big contracts. Even McCutchen's contract is really low all things considered.

Tulowitzki will make marginally more than Barmes and Burnett who are off the books. If you acquired Tulo it would pretty much mean that Garrett Jones wouldn't be back in 2014. I think there was a good chance that would happen anyway considering you would be paying your outfield platoon about a combined 12 million dollars between Sanchez and Jones. Platoons are meant to combine two players and get extra production at a low price. 12 million is the price that Adam LaRoche got in the open market. You can have Tulo on the roster and still have a 65 million dollar payroll. You have all those young guys making nothing for a long time in Cole and Taillon. Cole won't make over a million till 2017 and Taillon will have to wait till 2018.

The Pirates have tremendous financial flexibility as they only have two players signed beyond 2014 in Tabata and McCutchen. Those two will combine to make less than 15 and 18 million respectively in 2015 and 2016 so you can pretty much go any direction you want. Huntington has done an excellent job of not handicapping either his future or the future of the next GM.

The Tulo contract is much different than the Kendall contract. Kendall really wasn't the same player after the injury. He was not a middle of the order bat like Tulo is. Finance are much different now then they were at that time as well. Jason Kendall never made as a Pirate more than Russell Martin will make next year.

I'm of the belief that if the Pirates really got creative they could afford not only Troy Tulowitzki but also Robinson Cano as well if you could land him on say a 8 year, 200 million dollar contract. You would have to go with a lot of minimum salaried players around the roster but they could afford if the contract was structured properly and back loaded. It would require a moderate payroll boost but nothing major. You would need Cano to sign for 8/200 structured this way.

2014 - 15 million
2015 - 20 million
2016 - 25 million
2017 - 25 million
2018 - 25 million
2019 - 30 million
2020 - 30 million
2021 - 30 million

Trading for Tulowitzki and signing Cano would allow you form the following 25 man roster in 2014

C - Tony Sanchez - 500K
C - Michael McKenry - 500K
1B - Pedro Alvarez - 3 million
2B - Robinson Cano - 15 million
SS - Troy Tulowitzki - 16 million
3B - Neil Walker - 4.5 million
OF - Starling Marte - 500K
OF - Andrew McCutchen - 7.5 million
OF - Jose Tabata - 3 million

BN - Jerry Sands - 500K
BN - Alex Presley - 500K
BN - Jordy Mercer - 500K
BN - Travis Snider - 1.5 million

SP - Wandy Rodriguez - 7.5 million
SP - Garrett Cole - 500K
SP - Jameson Taillon - 500K
SP - James McDonald - 4.5 million
SP - Jeff Locke - 500K

CL - Jason Grilli - 4.5 million
RP - Bryan Morris - 500K
RP - Mark Melancon - 1.0 million
RP - Justin Wilson - 500K
RP - Tony Watson - 500K
RP - Jared Hughes - 500K
RP - Kyle McPherson - 500K

That team can be constructed for about 75 million dollars. You would have to move Garrett Jones, Francisco Liriano, Charlie Morton, Gaby Sanchez and Russell Martin to make it work in trades.

The rising cost of Cano's contract can be covered by when the team gets a new television contract in 2018. 2015 salaries will be covered by bigger salary guys like Grilli and Rodriguez leaving and a minor raise in payroll. You could also move a Pedro Alvarez or Neil Walker in 2016 and replace one of them with Alan Hanson for a minimum salary player.

Last edited 02/13/2013 8:19 PM by katoy2j

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/14/2013 4:56 AM

Re: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


Agree. I'll believe it when I see it.

And imo it would take more than Polanco, Heredia, and (other) prospects to make it happen. Polanco and Heredia are years away, if ever, from the majors. Look at what the DBacks were demanding for Upton - Taillon, Marte, and another prospect. Getting Tulo would require that sort of bigger name, close to the majors prospects.

---------------------------------------------
--- Sangue wrote:

Tulo will be a Bucco as soon as Cuban owns the team.  If Nutting aquired Tulo we would lose the front line prospects you mentioned, then we would start hearing about the albotross contract like Jason Kendall, and we would dump Tulo for much less than what it took to acquire him.

You are right that the Pirates have the prospects to acquire Tulo.  What they are missing is the financial commitment from the owner (who is the 10th richest owner in baseball).

---------------------------------------------

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote

Posted: 02/14/2013 7:49 AM

RE: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


Remember this was using the time frame of a year from now. Meaning the 2013 offseason. Polanco and Heredia would both be a year closer to the majors.

As for Upton we have a comparable offer to pit it against. The voided Justin Upton deal to the Mariners.

Arizona traded Justin Upton to the Mariners for Taijuan Walker, Nick Franklin, Charlie Furbush and Stephen Pryor

In terms of trade value, Walker was worth 18.2 million, Franklin 23.2 million. Furbush and Pryor are relief pitchers so they have limited value. Probably 3 million in trade value each.

That is basically the equivalent of the Pirates trading Cole, Marte, Victor Black and Tony Watson

For Tulo however we have a player who is owed a lot more money than Upton is and is a lot older so you have to take that into effect.

Polanco would basically be the equivalent of Franklin or Marte in either deal. A 25-50 hitting prospect.

Heredia would not have the same value as Walker of Cole but pitchers are valued differently in trades because of the huge fail rate. The difference between a top 10 pitcher and a 75-100 pitcher is much smaller than the difference between a top 10 hitter and a 75-100 hitter.

Heredia gets credit as a 75-100 pitching prospect. At the moment it's still behind the Walker/Franklin core offer but here is where things change. It's the secondary pieces in the deal.

If you were to trade Josh Bell or Barrett Barnes with them cracking the back quarter of the prospect list it would have tremendous value. Three top 100 prospects is a lot to give up in any trade even if none of the guys are in the top 25 of the lists. Then when you throw in a B level pitcher such as Kingham or Holmes or whoever it is a lot of value.

A comparable trade for reference would be the 2007 trade of Dan Haren by the Oakland A's for a package of prospects. Carlos Gonzalez, Brett Anderson, Aaron Cunningham, Dana Eveland, Chris Carter and Greg Smith.

Carlos Gonzalez was ranked as the 22nd best prospect but non of the other players cracked the top 100 list.

At the time of the trade Haren had a 4.3 WAR season for the A's in 2007 as a 26 year old. He had 4 guaranteed years left on his contract at the following salaries

2008 - 4 million
2009 - 7.5 million
2010 - 8.25 million
2011 - 12.75 million
2012 - 12.75 million + 3.5 million dollar buyout.

So lets say that Haren was worth 4.5 WAR over 5 seasons. That gives him a total WAR of 22.5

His total salary was 45.25 million. Since this trade was made in 2007 the cost of a WAR was lower than it currently is because of inflation. We will use 5 million per WAR. That gives Haren 112.5 million in value minus the 45.25 million in contract value which gives the surplus value of 67.25 million.

Dan Haren was the highest player in terms of value that I can ever remember getting traded. This was because he was traded so early in an extension and had such a team friendly contract. Haren had significantly more value than Tulowitzki will have a year from now.

Here are the values of the players they received for Haren

Carlos Gonzalez - 25.1 million (11-25 hitter)
Brett Anderson - 7.3 million (B level prospect)
Dana Eveland - 7.3 million (B level prospect)
Chris Carter - 5.5 million (B level prospect)
Aaron Cunningham - 5.5 million (B level prospect)
Greg Smith - 7.3 million (B level prospect)

That gives you a total of 58 million which is pretty close to the 67.25 million in value needed to acquire Haren. It's possible that the A's valued a player like Carter or Anderson a little more than a B level prospect.

Value wise Polanco, Heredia, Barnes/Bell and Glasnow/Holmes is fair value for Tulowitzki. Values can certainly go up or down over time. If Tulowitzki has an MVP type of season and posts a 7.0 WAR in 2013 then he would require a lot more in trade. If he gets hurt again and posts a 1.5 WAR then you would need to adjust his WAR down and you could get him for less. If either of the prospects fail then they can't really be included in the deal. There is risk on all sides by waiting.

For the record the most valuable player in baseball that has signed an extension (excludes guys like Trout, Harper and Stanton who don't have predetermined future salaries) is Andrew McCutchen. He has 63.5 million owed to him on his contract and if you qualify him as a 6.0 WAR player for the 6 years left on his contract (He was a 5.3 in 2011 and a 7.0 in 2012 so meeting below the mid point) He is projected to earn 36 WAR. At a 6 million per WAR cost that gives you a whopping 216 million in value. Subtract the 63.5 million he is owed in salary and that gives you a surplus value of 152.5 million which is astronomical. It is impossible to trade Andrew McCutchen today for fair value. Even if you got an entire teams farm system. Remember Haren was the highest valued player ever traded and he only had 67.25 million which is less than half of what McCutchen is worth now.

Now if the team ever decides to move McCutchen it will likely be prior to the start of the 2018 season. If McCutchen is worth 6.0 WAR a season and at that time let us assume inflation has raised the cost of a WAR to 6.5 million. He would be worth 39 million. You would also need to add about 5 million dollars in value for the draft pick that you would surely get if he left as a free agent. So 44 million minus his 14.75 million dollar salary it would give you 29.25 million in surplus value for his last season.

Fair value in a trade would be a 11-25 hitter and a B level hitter or a 1-10 pitcher and a 76-100 hitter.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/14/2013 8:27 AM

Re: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


You miss my point -- it isn't enough to give the Rockies some notion of "fair value" when that value is based upon purely speculative looks into the future.  Polanco and Heredia are far from the MLB, and have never even proved themselves against quality competition. 

Basically you're talking about two kids who have a good year in A ball. 

Colorado isn't going to trade away its prize chip in exchange for kids who are at least two years away, and possibly more (Heredia is what, 17?).  They are going to want major league ready prospects -- like Cole, Taillon, Marte.  Those guys have proven themselves capable of competing against good AA and AAA competition, and can be used now. 

I'd also question your Upton - Tulo comparison.  Tulo would require MORE in return than would Upton.  Tulo is a fan favorite in Colorado, and if traded the Rockies had better get something great in return or the fans will go nuts.  You are also constantly telling us that SS is a high value position than is OF, and that SS who can hit are rare (and thus extremely valuable).  That raises Tulo's value even more.

IF the Rockies trade us Tulo for Polanco and Heredia, I will immediately admit that you were right all along AND send you all of my Canadian coins (which banks in Pittsburgh won't take).  That's putting my money where my mouth is.  biggrin

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote

Posted: 02/14/2013 9:04 AM

RE: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


Tulo is worth more than Upton I never said he wasn't. Upton was traded for a two top 100 prospects and two relief pitchers.

The package for Tulo was built around three top 100 prospects and a B level pitching prospect.

Remember that salary and age play a lot into this. Justin Upton makes a lot less money than Troy Tulowitzki will after next year. Tulo will make 16 million in 2014 and then has salaries rise to 20 million going forward. He would also be 29 years old at the time of the trade. Upton on the other hand makes 9.75 million, 14.25 million and 14.5 million. Over a three year time frame he makes 17.5 million less then Tulowitzki will. That effects the value. Also Justin Upton is only 25. That affects the value.

At the end of the day the value is broken down by the production of the player prorated out for future years against the salary owed on the deal. If you value Justin Upton as a 5.0 WAR player he is projected to be worth 15 WAR over the life of the contract. At 6 million per WAR he has 90 million in value. Subtract the salary he is owed and that gives you 51 million in surplus value. Which is pretty close to what Tulowitzki is worth. Upton has more year-to-year value because he has a better contract and is far more likely to produce in that time frame because of his age. His contract covers his 25-28 age seasons. Pretty much his prime years. Tulowitzki is far riskier. His contract is a lot larger and it runs 7 years after 2013. Meaning he has to produce throughout his age 29-35 seasons. There is a good chance that you have already seen the prime of Troy Tulowitzki and you're going to get a gradual decline in production. Some of that is factored in as you assume well he will be great the first couple of years and then get slightly worse. Now if you get an long term injury at all it's going to kill your value because chances are you can never make that up. Tulo missed most of 2012 because of groin surgery. All he was able to produce was a 0.3 WAR for the year.

In terms of value both players are pretty much equal. This is where the other factors come in. If you need a particular position you choose one guy over the other. If you need both positions however then Upton is the safer pick. He's much cheaper.

It comes down to what you replace a player with as well. Where does the upgrade help you out the most? For the Pirates, Upton doesn't help as much because you already have a pretty strong outfield. McCutchen in a 7.0 WAR so Upton represents a downgrade. Marte has the skill set to produce 3.5+ WAR a season. Upton could be better but it's only a 1.5 WAR difference. You don't want to trade so many good prospects for a 1-2 win upgrade. For RF you have to do some projecting. What do you see Snider of Tabata becoming? If you think they are 3.0 WAR players at full production then it's the same thing with Marte. You don't make the move.

Tulowitzki on the other hand represents a big upgrade over Barmes. If you project Barmes to be a 2.0 WAR player then the possible 6.0 WAR gives you over the first 3 years of the contract gives the Pirates more value to upgrade that position.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/14/2013 9:37 AM

Re: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 



It isn't as simple as finding some combination of projected WAR or other measure of value for a combination of prospects in the Pirates system in exchange for Tulo.

It has to be the RIGHT combination of prospects.  I don't care how much value you assign to Polanco and Heredia.  They can't be the foundation for a trade for Tulo.

It would be like the Pirates trading Cutch for three top 50 A ballers -- you might be able to make the "value" add up, but the Pirates couldn't possibly make a trade like that because the fan base would go absolutely nuts.

The Rockies fans wouldn't be satisfied with two players who might be very good in a few years.  They are going to want good players NOW if they are going to give away Tulo.  And management has to respect that point of view if it wants to sell tickets. 

I don't disagree that it would probably take 3 top 100 prospects to get Tulo.  But I would say that at least one of them (if not two) would have to be top 20 types guys who are major league ready.  That would mean Cole or Taillon at the very least, plus probably Marte and either Hanson/Polanco.

I'm not saying we should, or shouldn't, entertain such a trade.  I just think that is the type of deal it would take to get Tulo.

___________

 

  

Last edited 02/14/2013 10:10 AM by gr1111

Reply | Quote

Posted: 02/14/2013 10:28 AM

RE: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


Value is assigned by production and cost as I already broke down.

Tulowitzki has a value of 55 million in surplus value. Andrew McCutchen has a surplus value of 152.5 million

It's impossible to get fair value for Andrew McCutchen because his value is astronomical. You would pretty much need to trade 3 Troy Tulowitzki level players at their salary to make it equal to McCutchen.

As I stated it's impossible for a team to trade for McCutchen offering minor leaguers right now because no system has that much value. Even if you traded the entire organization.

You might not agree with the names but these are how trades are broken down and the value they have. They are generally very accurate when used to figure out the value of players. Meaning that 3 top 100 prospects and a B prospect is pretty much the best Colorado can get for Tulowitzki.

If their focus was to get major league players to replace Tulowitzki then they would be better off to keep Tulowitzki in the first place. The reason why the Rockies would deal a player like Tulowitzki in the first place is because they can't win with him and need a massive influx of talent in order to win in the future. No team is going to give up 4 major league players with high upside for 1. It would simply cripple the team.

Remember this is also a year into the future as was stated. Gregory Polanco will be a AA player and 1-2 years away from the majors. Heredia in high A. These are just basic parameters in terms of what is fair value based on reasonable performance.

It's entirely possible that you can substitute major league players and give up less in prospects. For example assume that Travis Snider breaks out next year and hits 25 homers with a .275/.340/.475 line. He plays average defense and becomes a 3.0 WAR player. With 3 years left on his contract he would have 54 million in value and with projected salaries of about 4/7/10 million in arbitration he would end up with a total of 33 million.

You can pretty much go back and research all trades involving prospects except for trades involving the Royals because they're idiots and find that the value is in the general neighborhood. You can figure out the value of the player in production, subtract his salary and it will give you a number. To make a trade work you have to get to that number. Tulowitzki at 55 million is a high number to reach. In order for the Pirates to get there it costs the Pirates three top 100 prospects and another good prospect. That is a big price to pay. Polanco and Heredia are not just any old prospects. On some organizations Polanco would be the number 1 ranked prospect. The fact he ranks lower on the Pirates is simply because they have so many very good players ahead of him. An offer of Polanco, Barnes, Heredia and Kingham is an absolute insane haul. That is two high quality outfielders, and two top half rotation pitchers. There are only a handful of teams in baseball even capable of even matching an offer like that. As I said only one team in baseball has a group of prospects that will be ready fairly soon together and that is the Cardinals. However the Cardinals need those players to take over for all the holes they have opening up on the roster. They aren't going to trade Taveras, Miller and Roesenthal to plug a hole at shortstop while then creating a hole in RF and the 3 and 4 spots of their rotation. The Diamondbacks wanted Taillon and Marte from the Pirates. It's great to try hard and get prospects who are close to being ready. However that is the reason the Pirates said no. It makes no sense to trade Marte to acquire Upton because you're plugging one hole for another. Or in this case simply getting a better outfielder at the cost of a top pitching prospect. If you look at the deal Upton ended up getting traded for it was a hitting prospect below Marte and a pitching prospect. Neither player would of been major league ready. It's fine for teams to have pie in the sky expectations but that is why the players don't get traded. You start high with demands and eventually it gets met when you start to lower them to realistic expectations.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/14/2013 10:57 AM

Re: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


OK.  I've put my money where my mouth is by offering to send you my Canadian coins if the deal happens.  I have about 5 of them.  biggrin

If the trade doesn't happen in a reasonable amount of time, you will owe me 5 US coins, including at least one quarter.tongue

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote

Posted: 02/14/2013 11:22 AM

RE: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


As to the thinking that you have to include a top 20 prospect in a trade I don't believe that to be the case.

First off only 14 teams have top 20 prospects

Texas, Baltimore, St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Arizona, Cincinnati, Chicago Cubs and Boston all have one top 20 prospect.

Seattle, Pittsburgh, New York Mets, Minnesota, Miami and Cleveland all have two top 20 prospects.

You can pretty much start eliminating teams from the start. Texas is out because they have Profar. Baltimore is out because they have Machado. Tampa Bay is out for financial reasons, The Cubs have an all-star shortstop already. Minesotta and Miami are rebuilding. Cleveleand and Boston's top prospects are shortstops. Cincinnati doesn't have the payroll room to add another big contract and the Cardinals need their top prospect to replace Beltran.

That only leaves you with three possible teams in the New York Mets, Seattle and Pittsburgh. You could always add Arizona in the mix because they are being run so poorly you can't really predict what you will do. You would never want to limit yourself to so few teams by demanding a top 20 prospect back in a deal. The more prospects you get the better chance to get better value. Three top 100 prospects is a good get in a trade. You have to be able to find an organization that is able to spare that many prospects however.

Take the Blue Jays for instance. They acquired Jose Reyes, Mark Buehrle, Josh Johnson and Emilio Bonifacio for three top 100 prospects. They rank 70th, 72nd and 82nd. They also gave up Henderson Alvarez and Yunel Escobar. Alvarez would rank as a type B prospect and Escobar was traded for a type B prospect. So you have a value determined for a trade.

I don't think you factor in the salary ramifications of a deal. When a player makes so much money they lose value or reach a point where they have a negative value. The Blue Jays got all those good players and gave up 3 bottom third prospects and a couple of B level guys.

In order to get RA Dickey however they had to pay through the nose because his salary is so low. He offers a tremendous amount of surplus value. To get one player the Jays had to give up a top 10 hitting prospect and a top 30 pitching prospect.

There is a direct relation to how much a player makes and how much of a return you can expect in a trade. As the salary goes up the return goes down. At a certain point you retain minimal value because why would you trade for a 25 million dollar player and give up a whole bunch of prospects when you can just sign a similar player and it only costs money in free agency. That's why the Red Sox could only get a couple of B level prospects for Beckett, Gonzalez and Crawford. When you're value is exceeded by your salary you fail to have much value as a player. It's how the Pirates were able to acquire AJ Burnett for nothing and have the Yankees pay for more than half the contract. The Pirates could offer Clint Barmes to the Yankees tomorrow and they could get back Mark Teixeira. Not because the value of the two players is equal but because Teixeira has negative value. Assuming gradual decline and that Teixeira would be worth about 3.0 WAR going forward, the Yankees would have to pay a team 18 million dollars of the remaining 90 million owed in order to give away Teixeira for free. For Arod at 2.0 WAR projected for the life of the contract the Yankees would need to eat 54 million of the 114 owed to him just to make it worthwhile for the other team. That isn't even factoring in the fact Arod is likely to miss the season so he has zero asset value in 2013 which puts the real number the Yankees would have to pay at 70 million out of 114 owed.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/14/2013 11:30 AM

Re: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


Relax.

5 coins, including a quarter.

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote

Posted: 02/14/2013 11:30 AM

Re: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 



gr1111 wrote:

OK.  I've put my money where my mouth is by offering to send you my Canadian coins if the deal happens.  I have about 5 of them.  biggrin

If the trade doesn't happen in a reasonable amount of time, you will owe me 5 US coins, including at least one quarter.tongue

HaHA

It doesn't quite work that way.  Just because the Pirates have the ability to pull off a trade doesn't mean they will.  They might be scared off by the salary of Tulowitzki or his injury record.

This wasn't designed to be the Pirates are going to make a trade it was designed to determine the value to acquire Tulowitzki.  The framework is pretty much in place.  You can just substitute pieces from each organization that will fit.  15 teams can pretty much be scratched out because of finances, in a rebuilding phase or simply don't have the prospects to pull off a deal.  I'm sure the Dodgers would love to have Tulowitzki.  The problem is they don't have the prospects to pull off a deal.  That is how they were able to get Hanley Ramirez for so little.  Ramirez had declined to the point where his salary exceeded his production.  So the cost to acquire him was simply the 96th ranked prospect in baseball.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/14/2013 11:48 AM

Re: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


I just think you're assuming too much in your attempt to make Tulowitzki to the Pirates make sense. You're assuming Polonco and Heredia make jumps up the prospect rankings, but isn't it possible that other prospects on other teams make leaps as well? You're assuming that the Rockies will trade Tulowitzki due to their lack of pitching, yet you have them getting back Heredia, and "B" level pitchers in the Pirates organization. The Mariners would blow that offer out of the water. 

You're a trip!
Blame it on "a certain someone"
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/14/2013 12:03 PM

Re: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 



fishmong wrote: I just think you're assuming too much in your attempt to make Tulowitzki to the Pirates make sense. You're assuming Polonco and Heredia make jumps up the prospect rankings, but isn't it possible that other prospects on other teams make leaps as well? You're assuming that the Rockies will trade Tulowitzki due to their lack of pitching, yet you have them getting back Heredia, and "B" level pitchers in the Pirates organization. The Mariners would blow that offer out of the water. 

You're a trip!
I think Katoy's reasoning and logic is fairly accurate with one exception... where I agree with GR is that I think Colorado would want Cole or Taillon instead of Heredia.  Now, I don't think the Pirates would even entertain that option at all simply because I don't think they have any interest in paying any player an 8 figure salary.  I do think McCutchen could be an exception, but I'm willing to bet that he'll be traded before Spring Training 2016.
#fringeprospect
Reply | Quote

Posted: 02/14/2013 12:22 PM

RE: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


The post was to determine the value of Tulowitzki not that the Pirates are going to or should acquire him. Just what would be fair cost if they could. This is a Pirates message board so it doesn't make a lot of sense to make a post of what the Mariners could put together as an offer for Tulowitzki.

The Mariners could probably put together a better package because they have more pitching. However pitching is less valuable in trade than hitting.

Franklin, Walker and Paxton is what it would cost the Mariners. They might want to do that they might not.

As for the increase in value I was generally pretty conservative projecting modest increases. I'm more thinking guys will move up as guys graduate off the list. Profar, Bundy, Myers, Bauer, D'Arnaud, Cole, Wheeler, Skaggs, Olt, and Miller are all likely to come off this list. That is just in the top 30. A lot of guys will simply move up just because someone needs to replace a spot. They then get the players designated value.

I don't think it's a huge reach to think that Polanco will fall in the top 25-50 range. The risk is there both ways. He could be a top 25 player or he could fall off the list. Every extreme is possible. With prospects you always have to use some level of projection. Both Polanco and Barnes are projected as 5 tool players and had very strong seasons in 2012. These are players that usually end up ranked very highly in prospect lists. The Pirates have a strong group of B level pitchers in Holmes, Kingham and Glasnow. Now chances are they won't all pan out but there is a good chance that one of them does take the next step.

It also depends how an organization likes a player. Personally I'm not a big fan of Franklin. Franklin is almost a lock to move off of shortstop. He'll still be a good player but if the move happens his prospect value drops significantly as second baseman don't carry the same value. Alen Hanson has a similar situation. If he can stay at shortstop he could be a top 10 prospect. If he has to move to second base well he's going to take a hit as well.

As for Walker I think he will be a good pitcher but I don't think he is any kind of certainty to be any better than Luis Heredia. I would rather have Heredia and Kingham over Walker. Heredia and Walker have similar upsides and I would prefer the security of having multiple guys as oppose to all my eggs in one basket. Pitchers are very volatile. You can go from a top 10 pitcher to 90 in a single year. That is why they are valued the way they are. There isn't much difference between the 6th best pitcher and the 19th best pitcher. trying to determine who will be the better pitcher between Taillon, Miller, Nicolino and Crick is pretty much a crap shoot.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/14/2013 1:03 PM

RE: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


As for the increase in value I was generally pretty conservative projecting modest increases. I'm more thinking guys will move up as guys graduate off the list. Profar, Bundy, Myers, Bauer, D'Arnaud, Cole, Wheeler, Skaggs, Olt, and Miller are all likely to come off this list. That is just in the top 30. A lot of guys will simply move up just because someone needs to replace a spot. They then get the players designated value.

I don't think it's a huge reach to think that Polanco will fall in the top 25-50 range. The risk is there both ways. He could be a top 25 player or he could fall off the list. Every extreme is possible. With prospects you always have to use some level of projection. Both Polanco and Barnes are projected as 5 tool players and had very strong seasons in 2012. These are players that usually end up ranked very highly in prospect lists. The Pirates have a strong group of B level pitchers in Holmes, Kingham and Glasnow. Now chances are they won't all pan out but there is a good chance that one of them does take the next step.

I wasn't saying that Polonco wouldn't rise in the rankings as much as I was saying there will be other prospects that rise with him. If Polonco and Heredia are a year closer to the Majors, aren't other prospects on other teams also a year closer to the Majors. So as attractive as Polonco and Heredia might be a year from now, there will also be other prospects with improved stocks that are equally attractive right? 

The Mariners could probably put together a better package because they have more pitching. However pitching is less valuable in trade than hitting.

It also depends how an organization likes a player. Personally I'm not a big fan of Franklin. Franklin is almost a lock to move off of shortstop. He'll still be a good player but if the move happens his prospect value drops significantly as second baseman don't carry the same value. Alen Hanson has a similar situation. If he can stay at shortstop he could be a top 10 prospect. If he has to move to second base well he's going to take a hit as well.

As for Walker I think he will be a good pitcher but I don't think he is any kind of certainty to be any better than Luis Heredia. I would rather have Heredia and Kingham over Walker. Heredia and Walker have similar upsides and I would prefer the security of having multiple guys as oppose to all my eggs in one basket. Pitchers are very volatile. You can go from a top 10 pitcher to 90 in a single year. That is why they are valued the way they are. There isn't much difference between the 6th best pitcher and the 19th best pitcher. trying to determine who will be the better pitcher between Taillon, Miller, Nicolino and Crick is pretty much a crap shoot.

The premise of trading is that the Rockies need pitching. Whether hitting or pitching has more trade value is kind of irrelevant as the Rockies have hitting and need pitching. As far as Frankin vs Polonco, I'd like to point out the Rockies have Carlos Gonzalez and Dexter Fowler signed up in the outfield for multiple years, and they have David Dahl, who is as good as Polonco, coming up in the farm system. While you might like Polonco more than Nick Frankiln, the Rockies might want the middle IF prospect over the OF prospect all things being equal.

If you'd rather have Heredia and Kingman over Walker, the #5 prospect in all of baseball according to Mayo, that's fine. You might be overvaluing the prospects from you're favorite team, as people are prone to do. Would you rather have Heredia and Kingman over Walker and Paxton? Walker and Hultzen? Hultzen and Paxton?
Blame it on "a certain someone"
Reply | Quote

Posted: 02/14/2013 1:48 PM

RE: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


No I wouldn't rather have Heredia and Kingham over a combination of players from Seattle. I don't consider Walker an elite arm. He's ranked high because he reached AA at a young age. I hate this line of thinking. You're a better prospect because the team moved you up aggressively even though you really didn't pitch well. Jose Tabata made the majors at 21. He wasn't ready. I understand the purpose of dinging prospects because they're too old for a level but I strongly disagree with the logic that you should hype up a prospect simply because he played against older competition and discount the results as was obviously done with Walker and his 4.69 ERA. What was the purpose to skip high A? If he dominates you can always move him up. There is no chance I would pick Walker over Cole.

It's a bad strategy to only go after pitching prospects. If you take three pitching prospects from a team then chances are two of them will fizzle out. If your're getting a package of players it's best to hedge your bets and get some of both. Hitters are easier to predict. If you have too many good prospects at a position you can make trades. Having too many quality prospects certainly is a good problem to have.

As for the infield/outfield issue. Take the best player and let the rest work itself out. Polanco looks to me to be a better player than Franklin.

You're missing the point though. This was never about the Pirates being the only option for Troy Tulowitzki if they decide to move him. Other teams can certainly put together fair packages and it would simply be which offer Colorado likes best. They might see value in stockpiling outfielders allowing them to trade Fowler and Gonzalez for 3 or 4 players each and they can fill holes in those trades. The purpose of this was to put together a fair offer with the value of Tulowitzki and the value as determined by evaluating previous trades that it would cost the Pirates to acquire in trades.

There was precedent set in many previous trades and the values generally are pretty consistent. If Tulo has 55 million in surplus value that's the price it will cost to acquire him. It could move up, it could move down. There are all kinds of variables here. Lots of teams could just not be interested at all in Tulowitzki because of his injury history. We're talking about a guy who has missed 246 games over the last 5 years. Meaning out of 5 years he's missed 1.5 seasons. He's also coming off of major surgery and he missed all that time in his age 23-27 seasons. What kind of time could he possibly miss during his age 28-36 seasons?

The more I think about it the more it worries me and I just wouldn't even bother at such a high price. Get a glove first shortstop who will be cheap and play strong defense. Upgrade at a less physically demanding position where the player is more likely to stay healthy. Maybe try your luck in free agency. If you're going to pay 7 years and 144 million for Troy Tulowitzki then why not see if you can get Robinson Cano for 8 years and 200 million? Keep all your prospects and you can move Walker back to third and Alvarez to first base. Cano has missed 10 games total in the last 6 years and is a left handed hitter. The Yankees don't want to go that long or that high on him.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/14/2013 3:52 PM

RE: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


 Pitching represents a strong part of the game of baseball and it's difficult to really do anything without it.

It's a bad strategy to only go after pitching prospects...

The clear answer to you're point is to go after a mixed package with stronger pitching prospects. The whole premise is the Rockies need pitching. If they traded Tulo for Profar and Olt, they still need pitching!

I strongly disagree with the logic that you should hype up a prospect simply because he played against older competition and discount the results as was obviously done with Walker and his 4.69 ERA. What was the purpose to skip high A? If he dominates you can always move him up. There is no chance I would pick Walker over Cole.

Maybe they rank him so high due to some projection in addition to his AA statistics. His fastball is supposed to be pretty good and he was just 19 in AA, maybe the Mariners front office wanted to push him, make him deal with some failure, instead of him over-matching Hi-A hitters with his fastball.

Personally I'm not a big fan of Franklin. Franklin is almost a lock to move off of shortstop. He'll still be a good player but if the move happens his prospect value drops significantly as second baseman don't carry the same value.

Polanco looks to me to be a better player than
Franklin.

Polonco is 6 months younger than Franklin. Here are his numbers
Career 1025 AB's .273/.347/.413 22 HR 89 SB
2012: 437 AB's .325/.388/.533 16 HR 40 SB Low A

Franklin
Career 1403 AB's .283/.351/.458 42 HR 56 SB
2012 535 AB's .278/.347/.453 11 HR 12 SB AA-AAA

For comparisons sake here are Franklin's numbers when he was in Low A 2 years ago.
574 AB's .281/.351/.485 23 HR 25 SB

I don't see why you like Polonco more than Franklin?



Blame it on "a certain someone"
Reply | Quote

Posted: 02/15/2013 5:57 AM

Re: The value of Troy Tulowitzki 


Speaking of shortstops and the Rockies .... Colorado just acquired Reid Brignac from the Rays. I realize that Brignac is a terrible disappointment to the Rays but Colorado obviously sees something in him. Perhaps you're onto something here, Katoy.


wille'


Wille'
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >