Trade analysis welcomed

[mjl]

well, right, but now that they've just gotten Trout are they now too attached to him to trade him for what you thought was an over-offer?

[TyWebb004]

First off, this league has been running for 20+ years. So the future value comes into play a good bit here.

I don't think anyone has a problem with the trade itself, though a lot of people (myself included) see this as a big win for Team A. The reasons are as follows...

1) Mike Trout was not shopped to anyone in the league. I personally would have given up the farm ($1 Wil Myers, $1 Profar, $6 Bryce Harper, and $16 Jennings). Yes, I am an Angels fan. I would have over traded.

2) The future value for this trade is huge for Trout. If Trout were to hit the open market he would fetch close to $70. The top player last year in Cabrera went for $63 I believe.

3) The team giving up Trout gave up the surest thing in all of baseball. What they got back in return is Goldschmidt for two seasons, and two players with a lot of risk involved. Trout will anchor his team for another six years.

As an added bonus, when a player is kept, you MUST keep him active. So if Puig continues his free swinging ways and ends up on the bench or back in Triple-A for any reason team B is going down fast and hard. If Wacha struggles and gets sent down, or sent to the bullpen, he's locked in your line-up as a starting pitcher. Are these events unlikely? Maybe, but Puig swung and missed more than any player in the league not named Chris Carter from the All-Star break on. I expressed concern about this in our 20 team RotoJunkie league where someone took him in the top 12 picks overall!

You talk about Puig's K rate, yet you got all defensive when I pointed out that Myers' K rate last year was 2% higher than Puig's. So you say that Puig will possibly struggle due to his high K rate and get sent down, but Myers will somehow overcome his K rate and flourish?

[TyWebb004]

First off, this league has been running for 20+ years. So the future value comes into play a good bit here.

I don't think anyone has a problem with the trade itself, though a lot of people (myself included) see this as a big win for Team A. The reasons are as follows...

1) Mike Trout was not shopped to anyone in the league. I personally would have given up the farm ($1 Wil Myers, $1 Profar, $6 Bryce Harper, and $16 Jennings). Yes, I am an Angels fan. I would have over traded.

What league are you a part of? There have been multiple owners that have stated that this was a lopsided trade in my favor. As a test, I posted the trade here to get some unbiased opinions. I honestly was not surprised by any of the responses, which were pretty much 50/50.

If you really wanted Trout, then you should have made them an offer like I did. I've got news for you....I wasn't the only team to make them an offer.

[Silentmist]

You talk about Puig's K rate, yet you got all defensive when I pointed out that Myers' K rate last year was 2% higher than Puig's. So you say that Puig will possibly struggle due to his high K rate and get sent down, but Myers will somehow overcome his K rate and flourish?

I think there is a huge difference between Myers and Puig as far as their K rate will be concerned this season. Myers actually showed growth as a hitter, and has at every level. Myers also knows how to take a pitch while Puig fell off the face of the planet as soon as pitchers stopped throwing him balls right over the heart of the plate. I'm more concerned about the fact that he swings and misses at everything so often.

[The Dane]

well, right, but now that they've just gotten Trout are they now too attached to him to trade him for what you thought was an over-offer?

Exactly. Seems to me that if you send your over-offer, you might get Trout for yourself.

Also, it seems to me like big-bat 1Bs are on the decline and Goldschmidt is a rarer bird than a 5-category OF, even given that Trout is the #1 fantasy commodity.

I think this trade is fair. The posters on this thread go back and forth on it. It's big, with huge ramifications, to be sure, but it seems fair. Just because a deal is big and not necessarily one you would make, doesn't make it shady.

Years ago, Jude Baldo and I made a trade in our long-time league while in the car on the way home. It was a 8-player deal that was essentially a swap of bench players. The BEST player in that deal was a young Bruce Chen, and I was giving him up. The league was up in arms that I had fleeced Jude. In retrospect, it was perhaps the most innocuous deal in the history of our league, but it caused huge unrest. Sit back, take a deep breath, and try to be salved by the knowledge that an unbiased group of fantasy guys thought the trade was fair, regardless of your feelings on the matter.

[gcstomp]

My pet peeve is post trade kvetching of how the deal should have been made different, announced OTB, whatever. This thread with plenty of responses shows not a one thinks it was lopsided, it was a well constructed balanced deal with pros/cons to both sides. I personally have had this type of response directed at me, as I tend to make more trades than the majority of owners. If I join a new league I will keep quite and stew, and remember the names that were mouthy. After I am in league awhile and consistently show I place in the money finishes/win more than everyone else, I will go full blast on the mouthy types, because I feel like I have earned that right. For all concerned, just roll with trades, what you feel looks not quite right often turns out different down the road, and owners have right to tend to their team as they see fit without commentary flying around.

[DMT]

I think this trade is fair. The posters on this thread go back and forth on it. It's big, with huge ramifications, to be sure, but it seems fair. Just because a deal is big and not necessarily one you would make, doesn't make it shady.

Agreed. I'm unclear who is involved in this trade and who is whining about it, and don't care enough to go back and check. But really, after seeing the 50/50 split of opinions on this board, if you (whoever that is) can't accept that this was a fair deal, then the problem is your ego, not the trade.

[TyWebb004]

I would like to thank everyone for their feedback. As Silentmist pointed out earlier, I was the recipient of Trout and Adams. Our league message board was littered with comments from 4 other owners ripping into the other team for making the trade. I'm not going to directly quote anyone, but there was at least one owner who called it the worst trade in league history. One would have thought that I traded them a couple of used puck bags("Slapshot" reference) for Trout and Adams. I guess the least I could have done was throw in some foil and a Charlestown Chiefs key chain(can't get those in stores).

[gcstomp]

It would be nice if the loon from your league who called it worst trade in league history issued an apology to you as well as other trade partner, as he was way out of line, silly, and mean spirited, as well as plain wrong. But herd mentality of dog piling is common and I am sure it will be a solid year before you get to even hear a murmur of "maybe I was wrong" from that group of 4.

[TyWebb004]

gcstomp...It seems that most of the negative reaction was caused by the shock of the trade. Most parties have digested the trade some more and have softened their stance.

[chancellor]

1) Mike Trout was not shopped to anyone in the league. I personally would have given up the farm ($1 Wil Myers, $1 Profar, $6 Bryce Harper, and $16 Jennings). Yes, I am an Angels fan. I would have over traded.

So you assumed he wouldn't trade Trout and you didn't make the offer and that's the other managers fault? Really?

The team giving up Trout gave up the surest thing in all of baseball.

I disagree. He has a 2-year average BABIP of .379. While I'll concede with his speed and LD% that he should have a higher BABIP than normal, something on the order of .380 for extended periods is unheard of. If his BABIP would drop to .340 - still well above the league average - his hitting stats would get dinged. His HR/PA dropped significantly last year. His SBs and SB success rate dropped off significantly last year. He's a very big guy at 230-235 lbs, so a decline in SBs is notable.

So if Puig continues his free swinging ways and ends up on the bench or back in Triple-A for any reason team B is going down fast and hard. If Wacha struggles and gets sent down, or sent to the bullpen, he's locked in your line-up as a starting pitcher.

Or, the most likely scenario, is that Matt Adams struggles or is just pedestrian out of the gate, Allen Craig's body can't handle RF, and is moved back to 1B and Adams sent to Memphis or gets benched and St. Louis brings up this fringe prospect named Oscar Tavares to man RF. And then Ty has a gaping hole at 1B for the year.

[KnuckleBalls]

Very well said Chancellor. With Taveras on the horizon, Adams could very well lose AB's or worse. I would put Puig closer to Vlad Jr. than "being on the verge of sent down".
Trading can be very difficult and especially one of this magnitude. Too many owners sit on their hands and do nothing and then bitch when someone else works a trade.

[Gregg]

I was in an NL league years ago in which I got a phone call from an irrate owner complaining how I ripped a guy off. When I talked to my trading partner he got the same call. Must have been a fair trade as we both ripped each other off.

There are very few trades made each year where I cannot pick a side that I like better. That doesn't mean that they were not fair. I must admit on the ones I can't pick a side on , seem to me to be the most fair. Kind of like this one.