LambeauLeap1250 WSSP


  
Go to page Previous  1, 2  [ 39 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply

David Price

Author Message
Offline  Re: David Price
#21

Posted: December 11, 2019, 8:39 PM Post
Posts: 20382
turborickey said:
MillerParkSouth said:
I would love to get Price, Benintendi and cash for a middling prospect as a salary dump for the Red Sox. I don't care about helping them, I care about making the Brewers better and Price+ does that.


NOT if we are on the hook for 48 million or more.


You are talking about Price like he's just terrible. He is still a pretty effective pitcher. $48M doesn't buy what it used to. In this market, you'd be really hard pressed to find a better deal than 3/48 for a pitcher with the resume and numbers of Price, much less pick up extra for him. 3 years is not a terribly long commitment.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#22

Posted: December 11, 2019, 10:23 PM Post
Posts: 101
adambr2 said:
turborickey said:
MillerParkSouth said:
I would love to get Price, Benintendi and cash for a middling prospect as a salary dump for the Red Sox. I don't care about helping them, I care about making the Brewers better and Price+ does that.


NOT if we are on the hook for 48 million or more.


You are talking about Price like he's just terrible. He is still a pretty effective pitcher. $48M doesn't buy what it used to. In this market, you'd be really hard pressed to find a better deal than 3/48 for a pitcher with the resume and numbers of Price, much less pick up extra for him. 3 years is not a terribly long commitment.

Three years is how long we will likely have Yelich. Not a bad move imo


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#23

Posted: December 11, 2019, 10:41 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 6460
http://forum.brewerfan.net/viewtopic.php?p=1278996#p1278996

I stand by my comments that Benintendi is overrated - in three full seasons his career OPS is just under .800, which is nothing special for a corner OF. He's a product of the East Coast prospect hype machine. Nice player but he was only ~2 WAR player last year and he is now arbitration eligible so he won't be much of a bargain. The Red Sox will need to include more than Benintendi to move Price, either in young major league ready talent or in cash.

While taking on Price will be a big financial commitment, if the Brewers do, I think they can fill several holes.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#24

Posted: December 12, 2019, 12:00 AM Post
Posts: 2866
I'd be interested willing if:
They got him down to 60/3 (eat 36 mil min)
I got another 15 mil in prospect value.
Net cost 15 mil a year. I see that as reasonable.
Mata Flores take away some of their past INT spending

They'd have to be pretty desperate for me to play along. That's the point though.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#25

Posted: December 12, 2019, 9:41 AM Post
Posts: 2110
bdpecore said:
Three years is how long we will likely have Yelich. Not a bad move imo


Not to derail topic, I would be planning for Yelich for two more years. We can't keep him in 2022 and only get a pick back as compensation. He will be traded at the deadline in 2021 or at the end of that season. Hopefully the plan isn't to just try and win because Yelich is here. Develop the Rays plan of being good consistently, and hope for better luck to get to playoffs, go further.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#26

Posted: January 26, 2020, 1:55 PM Post
User avatar
Posts: 5773
Location: Phoenix, AZ
The Red Sox were willing to deal Betts and Price together but are also asking for two top prospects in a deal. Betts is still getting interest from some teams but it looks like teams are not willing to take on Price's contract. I find it interesting that teams are not willing to take on Price's contract though it maybe that teams are not willing to give up the two top prospects if they are taking on all of Price's contract.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#27

Posted: January 26, 2020, 5:45 PM Post
Posts: 2866
Price is overpaid by at least 36 million. Betts is on a 1 year deal. Why would anyone eat a 3 year overpaid contract to get an expiring. The Price deal hurts your chances of keeping Betts from the jump. I mean really who can take on 59 million dollars this year and line up a long term extension for Betts while having 32 mil a year on Price.

Boston basically saying let them eat cake.

Betts is worth about 8-13 million dollars of value on his 1 year 27 mil deal. Price isn't worth 20 mil per over 3 years. So you are negative 19-26 in value and they need 2 top prospects? Boston should deal Betts and Price for nothing, then just sign Betts back next year. Effectively dumping Prices 32/3 for a rental.

I hate this big market way of thinking and I hope every other team tells them to stick it.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#28

Posted: January 26, 2020, 6:00 PM Post
Posts: 2071
Location: Madison, WI
With the Betts for Myers + prospects (San Diego) trade rumors from a few days ago, I went and did some math on these guys.

Just taking the 3 year numbers for Betts, he's been an average 7.7 bWAR/fWAR player the last three years. However, that number is inflated because of a really high 10.65 bWAR/fWAR in 2018. Personally, I think he should be valued more around 7 WAR and, if so, his surplus value is +36 million (would be +42.3 million if using 7.7 WAR). Personally, I think it would be really hard for the Red Sox to get more than 36 million in value back for a player that is only under contract for one more year and will for sure be testing free agency next off-season. The BaseballTradeValue site has him at +50.7 million and IMO that's a crazy number for one year of a guy.

Price's contract looks pretty horrible. Over the last three years he's been a 2.3 bWAR/fWAR player per season. Then we go with subtracting 0.5 WAR per season due to his age. That puts him at 1.8 + 1.3 + 0.8 = 3.9 WAR total over the next three years. Since he earns 96 million over those three seasons, I have him at a whopping -60.9 million in surplus value. The BaseballTradeValue site has him at -55.3 million, so our numbers are pretty close there.

Bottom line is that Betts' positive value does not offset Price's negative value. I would be interested to know just how much of Price's contract the Red Sox would be willing to eat?

Since the Padres and Wil Myers came up a couple days ago... I have Wil Myers being much less of a negative than the TradeValues site (I have Myers at -33.1, the TradeValue site has him at -55.3).

There would be nothing wrong value-wise with a Betts + Price for Myers + 1 back end of top 300 prospect...but I just don't think the Padres could take on both the Betts and Price contracts (even when subtracting the Myers deal)...the Red Sox would have to include a big chunk of cash which would really bump up the prospect return. Just for the crazy deal that will never happen, let's speculate on putting all these pieces in a deal that I think would represent fair value.

Surplus values are my surplus values, not from the TradeValue site:

Padres get:
OF - Mookie Betts (+36 million)
LHP - David Price (-60.9 million)
30 million dollars

Red Sox get:
OF/IF - Wil Myers (-33.1 million)
C - Luis Campusano (23.3 million)
RHP - Michel Baez (14.3 million)


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#29

Posted: January 28, 2020, 6:24 PM Post
Posts: 101
I have a feeling Stearns might look into acquiring Price at the trade deadline if Boston is willing to eat a significant potion of his salary in his final two years (say $30MM). In return for doing so, the Brewers could take on most if not all of his remaining salary in 2020 (~$16MM) to help Boston get under the tax threshold. Its a great way to add a impact player without having to give up a huge prospect haul while leaving the Brewers on the hook for $17MM per over the final two years.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#30

Posted: January 28, 2020, 6:53 PM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 7290
JosephC said:
With the Betts for Myers + prospects (San Diego) trade rumors from a few days ago, I went and did some math on these guys.

Just taking the 3 year numbers for Betts, he's been an average 7.7 bWAR/fWAR player the last three years. However, that number is inflated because of a really high 10.65 bWAR/fWAR in 2018. Personally, I think he should be valued more around 7 WAR and, if so, his surplus value is +36 million (would be +42.3 million if using 7.7 WAR). Personally, I think it would be really hard for the Red Sox to get more than 36 million in value back for a player that is only under contract for one more year and will for sure be testing free agency next off-season. The BaseballTradeValue site has him at +50.7 million and IMO that's a crazy number for one year of a guy.

Price's contract looks pretty horrible. Over the last three years he's been a 2.3 bWAR/fWAR player per season. Then we go with subtracting 0.5 WAR per season due to his age. That puts him at 1.8 + 1.3 + 0.8 = 3.9 WAR total over the next three years. Since he earns 96 million over those three seasons, I have him at a whopping -60.9 million in surplus value. The BaseballTradeValue site has him at -55.3 million, so our numbers are pretty close there.

Bottom line is that Betts' positive value does not offset Price's negative value. I would be interested to know just how much of Price's contract the Red Sox would be willing to eat?

Since the Padres and Wil Myers came up a couple days ago... I have Wil Myers being much less of a negative than the TradeValues site (I have Myers at -33.1, the TradeValue site has him at -55.3).

There would be nothing wrong value-wise with a Betts + Price for Myers + 1 back end of top 300 prospect...but I just don't think the Padres could take on both the Betts and Price contracts (even when subtracting the Myers deal)...the Red Sox would have to include a big chunk of cash which would really bump up the prospect return. Just for the crazy deal that will never happen, let's speculate on putting all these pieces in a deal that I think would represent fair value.

Surplus values are my surplus values, not from the TradeValue site:

Padres get:
OF - Mookie Betts (+36 million)
LHP - David Price (-60.9 million)
30 million dollars

Red Sox get:
OF/IF - Wil Myers (-33.1 million)
C - Luis Campusano (23.3 million)
RHP - Michel Baez (14.3 million)

Dude, you are one of the best posters on this site. I love what you do. And without screaming or hyperbole or belittling others. Thanks so much.

PS - in Betts' value, do you account for the fact that you would be able to net - at minimum - a comp pick for him? Just curious.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#31

Posted: January 28, 2020, 11:56 PM Post
Posts: 2866
I still really hate the notion of 8mil per WAR. One of these sites should really look into a sliding scale that reflects it more accurately.

For example Cain, by that math earned more than half his contract in the 1st year.
He has 57.4 mil in the bank.
He needs 2.85 WAR over the next 3 years to be worth his contract.

Sogard/Gyoko platoon at 1.8 WAR. They cost a combined 7.5 mil.

There needs to be something that states WAR beyond 3 = X per. WAR beyond 6 = X per.

I'll buy that Betts is worth 56 mil popping off 7 WAR himself. But I still don't like the math of it.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#32

Posted: January 30, 2020, 8:02 AM Post
Posts: 763
TheAthletic is saying the Red Sox and Dodgers have talked about Betts/Price going to LA. That’d be pretty gross to see.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#33

Posted: January 30, 2020, 9:30 AM Post
Posts: 2071
Location: Madison, WI
reillymcshane said:

PS - in Betts' value, do you account for the fact that you would be able to net - at minimum - a comp pick for him? Just curious.


No. Because a comp pick would not directly be involved in a deal.

If Betts was traded to the Padres, and the Padres turned out to be bad and they decided to flip Betts in July, then San Diego wouldn't get back "comp pick value" in the trade because the next team isn't getting a comp pick as it would be a mid-season acquisition.

But Betts would be unlikely to move in-season if the Dodgers acquired him. So in that situation it would make sense to consider a future comp pick as part of the value of the deal.

I prefer to keep future comp picks out of the equation when figuring surplus value. That's not to say it should be ignored after a deal is made, at that point we can look at the player/teams involved and try to judge how a future comp pick contributes to the deal.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#34

Posted: January 30, 2020, 11:46 AM Post
User avatar
Global Moderator
Posts: 2822
TJseven7 said:
I still really hate the notion of 8mil per WAR. One of these sites should really look into a sliding scale that reflects it more accurately.


There were a couple recent FanGraphs articles examining the cost of a win on the free agent market...

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-cost-of ... y-in-2020/

...& if that amount should be applied linearly...

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/is-the-cost ... ll-linear/

This article is a little older, from 2017, but it breaks down $/WAR by position, which also appears to vary quite a bit...

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-evoluti ... ent-costs/


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#35

Posted: January 30, 2020, 11:52 AM Post
Posts: 2110
JosephC said:
With the Betts for Myers + prospects (San Diego) trade rumors from a few days ago, I went and did some math on these guys.

Just taking the 3 year numbers for Betts, he's been an average 7.7 bWAR/fWAR player the last three years. However, that number is inflated because of a really high 10.65 bWAR/fWAR in 2018. Personally, I think he should be valued more around 7 WAR and, if so, his surplus value is +36 million (would be +42.3 million if using 7.7 WAR). Personally, I think it would be really hard for the Red Sox to get more than 36 million in value back for a player that is only under contract for one more year and will for sure be testing free agency next off-season. The BaseballTradeValue site has him at +50.7 million and IMO that's a crazy number for one year of a guy.

Price's contract looks pretty horrible. Over the last three years he's been a 2.3 bWAR/fWAR player per season. Then we go with subtracting 0.5 WAR per season due to his age. That puts him at 1.8 + 1.3 + 0.8 = 3.9 WAR total over the next three years. Since he earns 96 million over those three seasons, I have him at a whopping -60.9 million in surplus value. The BaseballTradeValue site has him at -55.3 million, so our numbers are pretty close there.

Bottom line is that Betts' positive value does not offset Price's negative value. I would be interested to know just how much of Price's contract the Red Sox would be willing to eat?

Since the Padres and Wil Myers came up a couple days ago... I have Wil Myers being much less of a negative than the TradeValues site (I have Myers at -33.1, the TradeValue site has him at -55.3).

There would be nothing wrong value-wise with a Betts + Price for Myers + 1 back end of top 300 prospect...but I just don't think the Padres could take on both the Betts and Price contracts (even when subtracting the Myers deal)...the Red Sox would have to include a big chunk of cash which would really bump up the prospect return. Just for the crazy deal that will never happen, let's speculate on putting all these pieces in a deal that I think would represent fair value.

Surplus values are my surplus values, not from the TradeValue site:

Padres get:
OF - Mookie Betts (+36 million)
LHP - David Price (-60.9 million)
30 million dollars

Red Sox get:
OF/IF - Wil Myers (-33.1 million)
C - Luis Campusano (23.3 million)
RHP - Michel Baez (14.3 million)


When calculating Betts surplus value, just want to double-check you accounted for what he will be paid in 2020? Is the current cost of 1.0 war = $9M?


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#36

Posted: January 30, 2020, 7:56 PM Post
Posts: 2071
Location: Madison, WI
Roderick said:
JosephC said:
With the Betts for Myers + prospects (San Diego) trade rumors from a few days ago, I went and did some math on these guys.

Just taking the 3 year numbers for Betts, he's been an average 7.7 bWAR/fWAR player the last three years. However, that number is inflated because of a really high 10.65 bWAR/fWAR in 2018. Personally, I think he should be valued more around 7 WAR and, if so, his surplus value is +36 million (would be +42.3 million if using 7.7 WAR). Personally, I think it would be really hard for the Red Sox to get more than 36 million in value back for a player that is only under contract for one more year and will for sure be testing free agency next off-season. The BaseballTradeValue site has him at +50.7 million and IMO that's a crazy number for one year of a guy.

Price's contract looks pretty horrible. Over the last three years he's been a 2.3 bWAR/fWAR player per season. Then we go with subtracting 0.5 WAR per season due to his age. That puts him at 1.8 + 1.3 + 0.8 = 3.9 WAR total over the next three years. Since he earns 96 million over those three seasons, I have him at a whopping -60.9 million in surplus value. The BaseballTradeValue site has him at -55.3 million, so our numbers are pretty close there.

Bottom line is that Betts' positive value does not offset Price's negative value. I would be interested to know just how much of Price's contract the Red Sox would be willing to eat?

Since the Padres and Wil Myers came up a couple days ago... I have Wil Myers being much less of a negative than the TradeValues site (I have Myers at -33.1, the TradeValue site has him at -55.3).

There would be nothing wrong value-wise with a Betts + Price for Myers + 1 back end of top 300 prospect...but I just don't think the Padres could take on both the Betts and Price contracts (even when subtracting the Myers deal)...the Red Sox would have to include a big chunk of cash which would really bump up the prospect return. Just for the crazy deal that will never happen, let's speculate on putting all these pieces in a deal that I think would represent fair value.

Surplus values are my surplus values, not from the TradeValue site:

Padres get:
OF - Mookie Betts (+36 million)
LHP - David Price (-60.9 million)
30 million dollars

Red Sox get:
OF/IF - Wil Myers (-33.1 million)
C - Luis Campusano (23.3 million)
RHP - Michel Baez (14.3 million)


When calculating Betts surplus value, just want to double-check you accounted for what he will be paid in 2020? Is the current cost of 1.0 war = $9M?



Yes, 7 WAR * 9 = 63 - 27 million in salary = 36 million in surplus value.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#37

Posted: January 30, 2020, 8:25 PM Post
Posts: 2071
Location: Madison, WI
TJseven7 said:
I still really hate the notion of 8mil per WAR. One of these sites should really look into a sliding scale that reflects it more accurately.

For example Cain, by that math earned more than half his contract in the 1st year.
He has 57.4 mil in the bank.
He needs 2.85 WAR over the next 3 years to be worth his contract.

Sogard/Gyoko platoon at 1.8 WAR. They cost a combined 7.5 mil.

There needs to be something that states WAR beyond 3 = X per. WAR beyond 6 = X per.

I'll buy that Betts is worth 56 mil popping off 7 WAR himself. But I still don't like the math of it.


I use the 9 million because that's what the Point of Pittsburgh blog used to calculate prospect surplus values and, primarily, I want to keep major leaguers on the same scale just to make my life easier.

However, I think the 9 million per WAR works best when doing these trade value judgements and let me use an example to illustrate why.

Betts in on a 1 year deal for 27 million and then he is eligible for free agency. Using bWAR/fWAR data, I've estimated him as a 7 WAR player for 2020.

Sogard is on a 1 year plus option year for 4 million in 2020 and then a minimum 500k buyout for 2021. For simplicity, let's just say he's on a 1 year, 4.5 million dollar deal and is a free agent after the season. I would estimate him as a 1.1 WAR player for 2020, just took the average bWAR/fWAR over the last three years to come up with that figure.

Let's use the 9 million per WAR estimate:
Betts = 7 WAR * 9 = 63 million - 27 million in salary = +36 million in surplus value
Sogard = 1.1 WAR * 9 = 9.9 million - 4.5 million in salary = +5.4 million in surplus value

Let's use the 5 million per WAR estimate:
Betts = 7 WAR * 5 = 35 million - 27 million in salary = +8 million in surplus value
Sogard = 1.1 WAR * 5 = 5.5 million - 4.5 million in salary = +1 million in surplus value

It initially looks like Betts holds more value using the 5 million per WAR estimate. +8 for Betts / +1 for Sogard gives Betts an 8x advantage.

However, IMO completely fails when taking into account the real world money aspect of the deal. Which is the two following would likely considered to be a more even trade.

5 WAR model = Team A gets Betts (+8 million in surplus value), Team B gets Sogard (+1 million in surplus value) + 7 million in cash
9 WAR model = Team A gets Betts (+36 million in surplus value), Team B gets Sogard (+5.4 million in surplus value) + 30.6 million in cash

So not only for the Point of Pittsburgh prospect surplus value estimates, I use the 9 million/WAR number for reasons illustrated in the Betts/Sogard example above.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#38

Posted: January 30, 2020, 9:59 PM Post
Posts: 2866
"Let's use the 9 million per WAR estimate:
Betts = 7 WAR * 9 = 63 million - 27 million in salary = +36 million in surplus value
Sogard = 1.1 WAR * 9 = 9.9 million - 4.5 million in salary = +5.4 million in surplus value

Let's use the 5 million per WAR estimate:
Betts = 7 WAR * 5 = 35 million - 27 million in salary = +8 million in surplus value
Sogard = 1.1 WAR * 5 = 5.5 million - 4.5 million in salary = +1 million in surplus value"

This is where I think the issue is though. If you look across FA it's pretty fair to say players in the 1-2 WAR range actually have a valuation of roughly 4 mil per WAR. They get short term low risk deals for about this price. I don't dispute the 9 per on Betts. He's the type who gets a monster deal of 35/7 where he is worth 56-63 mil while being a 7 WAR guy but the longevity of the deal flips into negative territory as he ages. Win now, lose later. With that in mind, I strongly dispute the stagnation across the levels of impact. You only have 25 roster spots to gain WAR. What's better a guy pulling 7 or 7 guys pulling 1? Simple math they are equal but in reality it's much more difficult to have a 7 war player than 7 1 WAR players.

I think about it the same was as NFL QBs. Mahomes signs his deal and he becomes the #1 paid QB in the league. It's a bargain the moment the ink dries. But other teams will pay other starting QBs 25-30 mil who have no where near the same impact because that's what QBs cost. In that scenario I see a richter scale like effect to the valuation. I know NFL teams don't follow that as they are too scared of the scarcity at the position but I believe it's there. WAR is the same way. There has to be a richter scale like alteration in the tiers of WAR. Instead of 1 being 1 and 2 being 10. 1 WAR 4, 2 WAR 5, 3 WAR 6, 4 WAR 7, 5 WAR 8, 6-7 WAR 9 per WAR achieved.

If you want to say Betts is 9 per because he's north of 6 WAR in 1/25th of your roster I'm perfectly fine with that.
I don't think Sogard is 9.9 mil in value because he's only 1.1 WAR. 5.5 mil sure. 9.9 no.
One is evaluated properly, one is evaluated poorly by a faulty standard. So with that in mind, the valuation on Price becomes a problem. Even if he holds constant at 2.3 WAR you'd likely be looking at 6 mil per WAR at that level. 7 total WAR over the next 3 years on a tier 2>3 level. Making his contract worth 42 mil over the next 3 years, roughly. (It could get worse than 2.3 WAR as age degrade projects.) 14 per vs the 32 he's paid puts him at a 54 million dollar deficit for that contract.

Another example is Cain. 5 years 80 mil. Fgraph values his 5.7 WAR 1st year at 45.4 million. They use 8 and sub 6 war you can make that case. That leaves 4 years of 34.6 mil value to break even. Now year 2 he plummets to a 1.5 WAR season. They say that's worth 12 mil. Still 8 used as the measuring stick. I don't think he was worth more than 7.5 mil as a 1.5 WAR player. One train of thought leaves 3 years and 22.6 mil to earn for break even. One leaves 3 years at least 26.1 mil left to earn for break even.

Also in both flat examples 7 or 8 Sogards is worth a Betts. In mine it would take roughly 36 Sogards to be worth Betts. It's a nonsensical hypothetical but 7 Sogards for a Betts doesn't seem right.

That's what I'm getting at here. I just do not think you can use the same value per WAR throughout. I think WAR/roster spot has to be factored in to a degree. Betts is 7 war coming from 4%, 1/25th of your roster. It would take 6-7 Sogard's to get that WAR which is around 25% of your roster. That should matter for something.

It's not that Betts is wrong. Price and Myers are wrong. Myers as a 1 WAR player costing 67.5 mil over the next 3 years is -55.5 mil. Price as a 2.3 WAR players costing 96 mil over the next 3 years is -54 mil. If you degrade him like you do with the .5 WAR projection he's worth 9 6.5 and 3.2. 18.7 making him a -77.3. If the same is done on Myers he's basically 67.5 mil of nothing. These are both terrible deals and I think the flat 9 per WAR doesn't put that in the right context.

Head to head Myers traded for Price is an interesting case. One is terrible and 10 mil cheaper per year. The other is terrible but more useful at 10 mil more per year. If the teams swapped them it actually makes a lot of sense straight up. Boston shaves 10 mil, SDP gets a player that has some worth (small) on the field.


 Top
 
Offline  Re: David Price
#39

Posted: February 04, 2020, 8:09 PM Post
Posts: 763
Involvement of third team also possible in #RedSox-#Dodgers blockbuster, source tells The Athletic. Again: Betts and Price would go to Dodgers, Alex Verdugo and others to Boston.

Per Rosenthal


 Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Go to page Previous  1, 2  [ 39 posts ]  New Topic   Add Reply
  


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search this forum (phpBB search):
Jump to:  
Search entire board (Google search):
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Test