Why Escobar Might be Traded

[Lou]

2 hours ago, AngelsFanSince86 said:

I agree.  Personally I just feel that we have more to gain by trading him (for the right price of course), then holding on to him just for the possibility of contending next year.  If everything that needs to go right to contend next year goes right it likely will not matter if Escobar is on the team.  Martin Prado will be a FA and so will Freese.  Both of them have been more valuable by WAR standards.  Both have played better defense than Escobar and both have an equal or higher OPS+.  Sign one and your back to where you started plus whatever you get via trade.

 

Don't be so sure.  He's 2 years removed from 3 consecutive .250 BA seasons.  His value comes from leveraging a contending teams desire to have an offensively producing 3B.  Teams know he is having a good year THIS year.  At 34 years old and having an offensively inconsistent career its no guarantee his value will hold after this season.  Three teams that fit this perfectly are: Giants, Mets, and Royals.  They all have solid 3B that have been sidelined due to injuries.  Duffy may return soon for the Giants, but if not they remain a trade suitor.  His value for them is at its peak right now.  At the end of the season they have no need to trade for Escobar.  

 

For example:  A team like the Royals may value Escobar highly because they could use him this year in place of Moustakas and if Moustakas doesn't look like he is going to be ready to play at the beginning of next year then they have Escobar's option to fall back on.  Plus Escobar's salary is relatively cheap.  Escobar has virtually no trade value to them at the end of the year though.Most of the value comes from being able to plug him in right now.

Great post. I get your reasoning about KC, but i'm sure they're happy with Cuthbert.

He started off slowly, but has an ops of about .840 after June 1st 

Edited July 14, 2016 by Lou

[AngelsFanSince86]

2 minutes ago, Lou said:

Great post. I get your reasoning about KC, but i'm sure they're happy with Cuthbert.

He started off slowly, but has an ops of about .840 after May 1st 

Yeah he's been solid.  It will really come down to how these next couple of weeks go for them.  If he cools off they may find themselves not wanting to rely on a rookie with no track record come October.  Who knows though.  In the end Escobar is only worth trading if they are going to get one of a teams top prospects. That may not be possible.  There is not point in trading him for a package that doesn't have much of a chance of filling any holes in the future.  I guess my hope is that Eppler is listening with the intent to sell high if that opportunity comes along.  

[AngelsFanSince86]

1 hour ago, ettin said:

As a friendly reminder I outlined the likeliest trade suitors here: https://angelswinblog.blogspot.com/2016/07/2016-los-angeles-angels-trade-candidate.html

Right now it is the Royals or the Giants that make the most sense for Escobar (the 3B version of him at least). Certainly a contending team might consider him at 2B or even LF to put his bat in the lineup so there are always dark horse candidates like the Indians that might become stronger solutions when you consider Escobar's potential versatility.

Indians would probably need him at 3B.  Uribe is not doing them much good.

[Lou]

2 minutes ago, AngelsFanSince86 said:

Yeah he's been solid.  It will really come down to how these next couple of weeks go for them.  If he cools off they may find themselves not wanting to rely on a rookie with no track record come October.  Who knows though.  In the end Escobar is only worth trading if they are going to get one of a teams top prospects. That may not be possible.  There is not point in trading him for a package that doesn't have much of a chance of filling any holes in the future.  I guess my hope is that Eppler is listening with the intent to sell high if that opportunity comes along.  

My guess is that's exactly what he's doing and I have no problem with that. I think people here are overestimating what type of return we can get for Escobar.

 

 

[ettin]

2 minutes ago, Lou said:

My guess is that's exactly what he's doing and I have no problem with that. I think people here are overestimating what type of return we can get for Escobar.

 

 

If the demand is high he should get a Heaney-like return. If it is low then we may end up waiting until the offseason or next trade deadline.

[Chris]

Bye Bye Escy

[Lou]

30 minutes ago, ettin said:

If the demand is high he should get a Heaney-like return. If it is low then we may end up waiting until the offseason or next trade deadline.

I really don't think we'll get anyone near a player like Heaney

[ettin]

1 minute ago, Lou said:

I really don't think we'll get anyone near a player like Heaney

You have to remember that the Kendrick for Heaney trade happened in the OFFSEASON with one year of total control on Kendrick.

We are at the trade deadline where value is, at times, wildly inflated and Escobar has 1 1/2 years of control and he and Kendrick are not dissimilar players in terms of total production so the value comp is similar in a lot of ways in my humble opinion.

As with everything in business demand for the product is the key.

[Chuck]

I see the Indians as the best possible suitor at this time. 

Since Rajai Davis is having a good season, and they have Zimmer and Frazier in the fold, how about Escobar and Nava for Tyler Naquin?

Solves our LF problem.

[eaterfan]

19 minutes ago, ettin said:

You have to remember that the Kendrick for Heaney trade happened in the OFFSEASON with one year of total control on Kendrick.

We are at the trade deadline where value is, at times, wildly inflated and Escobar has 1 1/2 years of control and he and Kendrick are not dissimilar players in terms of total production so the value comp is similar in a lot of ways in my humble opinion.

As with everything in business demand for the product is the key.

Kendrick was 2 years younger and was a better player. Kendrick was coming off a 5 WAR season (5.3 BR, and 4.7FG). He also put up a 3.5 the year before that. Escobar put up a 2 last year and is on about the same pace this year. I still favor trading Escobar and the value of veterans increases at the deadline, but Escobar is about half the player Kendrick was at the time he was traded.

[ettin]

31 minutes ago, eaterfan said:

Kendrick was 2 years younger and was a better player. Kendrick was coming off a 5 WAR season (5.3 BR, and 4.7FG). He also put up a 3.5 the year before that. Escobar put up a 2 last year and is on about the same pace this year. I still favor trading Escobar and the value of veterans increases at the deadline, but Escobar is about half the player Kendrick was at the time he was traded.

It's not what you've done but what have you done for me lately.

At best you are going to use a 3-year running average which would be about 3 WAR and I will state again that Yunel has 50% longer control than Kendrick and is potentially being sold at the trade deadline where players generally sell at about a 30%+ premium of their actual value. Additionally Yunel's combined remaining contractual dollars is about $1MM more than Kendrick's remaining year of contractual control was.

That would put Escobar into a Heaney-like return which was simply just a rough statement from me it could be a bit up or down from that value but the comp is pretty close from a value perspective.

EDIT: I should note that Escobar's 3-year running average is like 1 WAR so yes there is a discrepancy in running WAR but I still believe, based on his longer control and increased trade deadline value that he will bring back a single good prospect and/or two or more mid-level prospects.

[Troll Daddy]

Ettin 4 GM ... seriously, one of the most knowledgeable posters here . 

Lets hope if Escobar is traded that it's in the neighborhood of what you deem possible ... otherwise we should hold on to him. 

[Oz27]

1 hour ago, hangin n wangin said:

Maybe Heaney after his UCL tear.

Heaney if both of his arms fell off, maybe. I'm all for trading Escobar and I think we'll get a decent return, but we aren't going to do anywhere near as well as we did with the Heaney deal.

[Lou]

3 hours ago, ettin said:

..and is potentially being sold at the trade deadline where players generally sell at about a 30%+ premium of their actual value. 

I'm sorry, but unless you have some facts to back this up, it sounds like something you just made up 

[Lou]

3 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

I see the Indians as the best possible suitor at this time. 

Since Rajai Davis is having a good season, and they have Zimmer and Frazier in the fold, how about Escobar and Nava for Tyler Naquin?

Solves our LF problem.

Davis is a FA after this year and there's no way we get Naquin for Escobar and Nava. In 176 PAs, he is batting .314 , .374 obp, .965 ops with 9 HRs.

he's also under club control until after Pujols' contract expires. 

[eaterfan]

18 minutes ago, Lou said:

I'm sorry, but unless you have some facts to back this up, it sounds like something you just made up 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/an-attempt-to-find-the-the-market-price-for-wins-in-july/

Here's an article that basically says that a projected win you acquire in July costs you about twice what it will in the offseason. It's certainly not an exact science because the sample size is so small. But basically it's pretty fair to assume that Ettin probably underestimated what the increased value for a deadline piece is.

[ettin]

2 hours ago, Lou said:

I'm sorry, but unless you have some facts to back this up, it sounds like something you just made up 

Here are your facts: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/an-attempt-to-find-the-the-market-price-for-wins-in-july/

I read this back in 2014 and there are other articles similar to it out there.

The bottom line is at the time of that article being written the average free agent value was about $6-7MM per win. At the trade deadline the top players traded (Price, Samardzija, etc.) were valuated at $15MM per win . Teams that are doing well know they have a shot at the Championship and are willing to pay the steeper price to improve their teams. That is why I stated that the premium is usually around 30%+ on player value based on who the player is. Someone like Escobar should have about a 30% or more premium on his value. If someone like Chris Sale became available he'd be worth about double what he's normally valued at in offseason trade.

Here are some other interesting articles regarding player valuation if you're inclined to read them:

http://www.hardballtimes.com/methodology-and-calculations-of-dollars-per-war/

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/valuing-midseason-trade-targets/

http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2015/7/29/9052019/trade-prices-july-vs-the-offseason

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/figuring-out-jose-fernandezs-trade-value/

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/a-retrospective-look-at-the-price-of-a-win-part-two/

 

[Blarg]

Proofiness. 

[Blarg]

Oh hangin you really don't want to match wits with Lou. 

[Chuck]

Point is, if we cannot get either a LF, SP or future shut down closer for Escobar, keep him and hope the Angels shit is together for a 2017 run.

[Chuck]

Another obstacle in trading Yunel Escobar is the A's Danny Valencia who is better defensively, more power and is hitting for average this season. He's on the trade block and teams who need a 3B will most likely hit up the A's before the Angels for his services. 

[DMVol]

11 minutes ago, Chuckster70 said:

Another obstacle in trading Yunel Escobar is the A's Danny Valencia who is better defensively, more power and is hitting for average this season. He's on the trade block and teams who need a 3B will most likely hit up the A's before the Angels for his services. 

There may be some teams that call us about Escobar who don't want to pay the A's price for Valencia.....whether we'd get a decent enough offer under those circumstances to trade Escobar is the question....don't know.....

[Lou]

Robert, thanks for the links! Don't have time to read them all right now but I appreciate the information. Taking the link headers, it appears that these articles prove what the values would be in theory.(if my assumption is wrong, let me know) How do we know it actually plays out this way? 

Again, thanks for the info

[eaterfan]

18 minutes ago, DMVol said:

There may be some teams that call us about Escobar who don't want to pay the A's price for Valencia.....whether we'd get a decent enough offer under those circumstances to trade Escobar is the question....don't know.....

I may be in the minority, but I'd certainly like for them to try to move Escobar if at all possible. I don't need a guy like Heaney in return. Just a decent prospect or two. I don't think it's even giving up on next season. I think there is a decent chance Cowart could produce at an equal or better rate than Escobar and at the very least won't produce much worse. I'd rather have Cowart, $8 million for a bullpen arm, and a decent prospect or two than Escobar. 

Escobar isn't just a one year rental, is getting older, has a reasonable (though not super cheap) contract, it's the deadline, and is hitting well right now. His value will never be higher. The only hope that he'd get more next year is that the market for 3rd basemen is considerably larger.

[ettin]

6 minutes ago, Lou said:

Robert, thanks for the links! Don't have time to read them all right now but I appreciate the information. Taking the link headers, it appears that these articles prove what the values would be in theory.(if my assumption is wrong, let me know) How do we know it actually plays out this way? 

Again, thanks for the info

We don't. Market forces are what they are. If Eppler doesn't receive an offer he believes is fair or if he is asking too much for the product he is selling then deals won't happen.

Some of the articles (particularly the Hardball Times one) actually look back at what really happened. Not all of them are trade deadline valuation articles either but they talk about player valuation in general which I find interesting and thought you might too. So to answer your question not all of them are theory. Essentially the price of a win increases by approximately 10% each season on an annual basis but market forces sometimes increase or decrease that number. The value of a win in 2017 should probably be somewhere in the $8-9MM range give or take.

Typically if you were selling someone like Escobar in a normal market he'd have about  close to $10MM in surplus value (about what a good mid-tier prospect would cost). In a trade deadline market that value could rise as high as $20MM or so (a good prospect in the Top 40-70 range give or take) subject to market demand for his services (which is where the variability really plays in to the equation).

If you're strictly looking at teams that only need a 3B then the demand may not be as high since there are only perhaps 2-3 teams in need of that. If teams are looking at him for 2B and LF (which is quite possible) then his market expands and more teams get involved in the bidding process helping to maximize the Angels possible return.

Although this valuation of wins isn't perfect Lou it is reasonably and effectively accurate for making rough decisions on player market value. Of course it doesn't fully encapsulate projected growth of a player, actual scouting of a player's real talents, mental makeup, etc but it is close enough to be quite useful.

A typical A ball prospect, because they are so far away from the Majors and have not developed fully, probably has about $5MM-$10MM of actual market value. A good one like Anderson Espinoza has more (maybe upwards of $15-20MM) but the fact remains that it is A ball we are talking about not AA or AAA where the competition is a lot more fierce. That is why I felt that trade was a little light for the Padres as even a conservative valuation of Pomeranz's remaining value was probably around $20MM. Clearly the Padres project him to be really special (and he might end up being that too) but that is putting a lot of faith and a chunk of the team's future into a single A ball prospect in my opinion. It was a risky move that could pay off big or lose big on.