A's Trade 3B Donaldson to Toronto

[notoriousgod71]

I think anyone wanting to see this as a good move by Beane are forgetting how frequently these kinds of moves by him don't work out.  The Tim Hudson trade was a disaster, the Dan Haren netted only one thing of value and that was flipped for Matt Holliday who was flipped for a poor package.

 

He doesn't have nearly as sterling a record trading as he does drafting and signing.  Lawrie has struggled to be league average, Nolin's K rate has declined as he advanced with most people giving him a fourth starter ceiling, and Graveman is likely a reliever.

 

They gave that up for an elite defender with a 126 and 142 OPS+ the last two seasons who has four years of team control left.  Sorry, but as a guy with a lot of respect for what Billy Beane has done, this stinks of another Tim Hudson deal.  In fact, the package here makes me think they know something about Donaldson the rest of us don't.

 

His drafting is not that amazing either. He's the guy that thought Joe Blanton and Jeremy Guthrie were the best pitchers in the draft when in the first round alone you have Greinke, Hamels, Cain, and Kazmir.

[Mike Sixel]

And yet, they never lose 90 games, and retool quickly. Why do people feel the need to belittle him? He's what TR wants to be, a GM that never really loses, retools quickly, and keeps his team competitive most every year. 

[jokin]

And yet, they never lose 90 games, and retool quickly. Why do people feel the need to belittle him? He's what TR wants to be, a GM that never really loses, retools quickly, and keeps his team competitive most every year. 

 

....In a division with 3 opposing teams that are renowned for their rather spendthrifty ways in much better ballparks.

[Mike Sixel]

On one page, people are arguing to trade Plouffe while his value is high, becuase he's not that good and not young....and on one page people are arguing that Beane made a bad trade for three prospects and a MLB starter, for a guy that is a year older than Plouffe (I think).

[TheLeviathan]

On one page, people are arguing to trade Plouffe while his value is high, becuase he's not that good and not young....and on one page people are arguing that Beane made a bad trade for three prospects and a MLB starter, for a guy that is a year older than Plouffe (I think).

Did you just compare Josh Donaldson and Trevor Plouffe with no caveats? It's that kind of stuff that makes discussions about Beane so polarizing.

[Mike Sixel]

Where did I compare them at all? I compared the belief that Plouffe and Dozier should be traded RIGHT NOW because they are at peak value, and Donaldson should not be traded. No place did I compare the players. 

[TheLeviathan]

Where did I compare them at all? I compared the belief that Plouffe and Dozier should be traded RIGHT NOW because they are at peak value, and Donaldson should not be traded. No place did I compare the players.

 

You clearly link Plouffe to this particular haul and equivocated the two scenarios as the same. I'm bordering on speechless.

 

The point is that they didn't get peak value given the timing and value of Donaldson.

[Mike Sixel]

No, I linked people saying they should not have traded him, but the Twins should trade Plouffe. No where did I comment on the haul received, nor did I compare the players. It was a comparison of situations. Could have typed "Dozier" instead of "Plouffe" for all I care.....

[twinsfan34]

I thought of Plouffe in this situation. He's very similar to Lawrie. Plouffe is perhaps even a little better, at least from a production standpoint on OF.  He's not near as good as Donaldson though. I would have taken Donaldson as is for Plouffe + 3 similar prospects as the A's got in our system.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=5247&position=3B

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=7462&position=3B

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/plouftr01.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/l/lawribr01.shtml

[twinsfan34]

His drafting is not that amazing either. He's the guy that thought Joe Blanton and Jeremy Guthrie were the best pitchers in the draft when in the first round alone you have Greinke, Hamels, Cain, and Kazmir.

 

Good points as well. He also gets away with taking pitchers (#3, #4 starters) who wouldn't have done as well in other ballparks, but play 81 games in Oakland vs say, 81 games in the homer dome.

 

Twins are a top 5 most successful team of the past 30 years if you consider it in terms of playoffs appearances and World Series. Yankees, Red Sox, Giants, Cardinals, Twins, & surprisingly, the Marlins. The A's are in the next tier with one WS.

[Mike Sixel]

Thirty years? What does that time frame have to do with TR or Beane? I am just curious why you chose that time frame.

[ashbury]

Moderator's note: This is a discussion thread about a particular trade, becoming derailed by an extended side topic of Billy Beane's body of work, segueing into a comparison to the Twins' GM, and becoming rancorous as a result. Please start a separate thread if you want to discuss these broader matters.

 

^{(And just to be clear, tangents themselves are not usually a problem when they continue to relate directly to the topic.  Donaldson versus Lawrie defensively, fine.  Factors underlying this trade, fine.  But, Beane has never lost 90 games, the value of making the postseason versus winning it all... let's stick to the topic.)}

[Riverbrian]

There is no question that Donaldson has been the better player. But... I absolutely love Brett Lawrie.

 

He's still awfully young with Potential in every facet.

 

As for defense... Donaldson is good but Lawrie and Arenado with the Rockies are in a different room. Everybody else pales.

 

If I'm Beane... I roll the dice and make this trade and sleep fine afterwards.

 

Lawrie's biggest problem has been health. He's very Maueresque in that sense.

[JB_Iowa]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/franklin-barreto-the-key-to-the-josh-donaldson-trade/

 

While Lawrie will be the player watched most closely in 2015 from this deal, one exec I talked to last night said Franklin Barreto is the key to the deal, so let’s start with him.

 

,,,,

 

Barreto is about as polished as a kid his age can be, with his position the only question, so if Oakland wants to move him quickly, moving him to second base could mean getting him to High-A later in his age-19 season and being a possible call-up to the big leagues late in his age-20 season if everything continues at this rate: think Rougned Odor.

[TheLeviathan]

No, I linked people saying they should not have traded him, but the Twins should trade Plouffe. No where did I comment on the haul received, nor did I compare the players. It was a comparison of situations. Could have typed "Dozier" instead of "Plouffe" for all I care.....

 

You should really go back and read your first post.  The only similarity Josh Donaldson and Trevor Plouffe have is the position they play and even that one of them plays at a totally different level.  So to compare the tradability of those players is a bit silly.  It'd be like arguing trading Arcia is like Trout because they're both arb. eligible outfielders.

 

The thread about Plouffe and this one should have no connection because there is literally no comparison between the two nor the haul that could be received for them.

[USAFChief]

You should really go back and read your first post.  The only similarity Josh Donaldson and Trevor Plouffe have is the position they play and even that one of them plays at a totally different level.  So to compare the tradability of those players is a bit silly.  It'd be like arguing trading Arcia is like Trout because they're both arb. eligible outfielders.

 

The thread about Plouffe and this one should have no connection because there is literally no comparison between the two nor the haul that could be received for them.

I don't see the huge difference between Plouffe and Donaldson. I guess we'll see going forward.

[TheLeviathan]

I don't see the huge difference between Plouffe and Donaldson. I guess we'll see going forward.

 

Let's look at the difference the last two years:

 

Player A: 329 hits, 68 2B, 53 HR, 193 RBI, 478 SLG, 152 BB, 240 Ks, 145 and 126 OPS+, Gold Glove Caliber defender

 

Player B: 255 Hits, 62 2B, 28 HR, 132 RBI, 407 SLG 87 BB, 221 Ks, 92 and 110 OPS+, mediocre defender

 

These are relatively close to the same player to you?  Is that just perception or how did you arrive at that conclusion?

[Mike Sixel]

The As added three minor leaguers in exchange for degrading at third base......this is precisely the kind of Trade this board would love if the Twins made it.

[big dog]

The As added three minor leaguers in exchange for degrading at third base......this is precisely the kind of Trade this board would love if the Twins made it.

Personally, not speaking for anyone else, I would not love this trade if the Twins had made it.  In fact I would be upset.  I would prefer having one, even a couple top-ten MVP candidates rather than three more minor leaguers at the moment.  The A's probably don't have the 40 man roster issues the Twins do.

 

It seems like the Blue Jays, rather than the A's, made the kind of trade people here frequently propose (trading quantity for quality), except the Jays were unfortunately not able to include Duensing.  I bet they tried to offer Liam Hendricks (who is back with them again after leaving the Royals).

 

I can see how it might have made sense to the A's.  My original objection to it was as part of a pattern I characterize as constant meddling (or hyperactive reshuffling).  I don't think it's a crazy trade on its own merit as an isolated event, though I'm not knowledgeable enough to make an argument about who won or lost.

[USAFChief]

Let's look at the difference the last two years:

 

Player A: 329 hits, 68 2B, 53 HR, 193 RBI, 478 SLG, 152 BB, 240 Ks, 145 and 126 OPS+, Gold Glove Caliber defender

 

Player B: 255 Hits, 62 2B, 28 HR, 132 RBI, 407 SLG 87 BB, 221 Ks, 92 and 110 OPS+, mediocre defender

 

These are relatively close to the same player to you?  Is that just perception or how did you arrive at that conclusion?

They are about the same age. Part of the difference in counting numbers is due to games played. Part of the difference might be made up going forward when you consider Donaldson went downhill a little in 2014 over 2013, Plouffe just the opposite. Both are at this point good defenders, which is about all I'd feel comfortable saying about defense.

 

I'd prefer Donaldson, but as I said, the difference isn't as big as you've made it out to be.

[TheLeviathan]

They are about the same age. Part of the difference in counting numbers is due to games played. Part of the difference might be made up going forward when you consider Donaldson went downhill a little in 2014 over 2013, Plouffe just the opposite. Both are at this point good defenders, which is about all I'd feel comfortable saying about defense.

 

I'd prefer Donaldson, but as I said, the difference isn't as big as you've made it out to be.

 

So games played is held against Donaldson because he's on the field and producing?  Their age is what makes them similar? And you lump them together as "good" defenders?  Wha?

 

Donaldson finished fourth in the MVP voting, was a starting all-star, and by basically every stat and measurement available a significantly better player.  I'm not "making that out" to be anything....that's sort of just how it is since Donaldson's production is what it is.  There is virtually nothing about Plouffe that makes him a similar caliber of player.

[TheLeviathan]

Just so things are clear this difference:

 

The last two years Donaldson has outproduced Plouffe by a full season's worth of Plouffe's RBIs (60), almost twice as many homeruns, twice as many walks, 80 points better slugging, 75 hits, 60 OPS+,, lights years in defense....and there isn't a big difference?

 

That's roughly the same difference between Mike Trout and Jason Werth, by the way.  Just for a point of reference.

[Rosterman]

I like Billy Beane. He purposely plays the underdog and wants to win playing that part.

 

For some reason, he doesn't want franchise players.

 

He trades one guy for four. Looks good on paper.

 

But Donaldson is a stud. You could have paid him about what you are paying Billy Butler for the next three years to still play for you and probably increase his worth more than, say, Butler will.

 

That's what I don't understand about this move. You overpay Butler for three years. You trade off a dynamite third baseman who you still have control...sure you get a third baseman that could be an okay replacement, a couple of pitchers, a throw-in. 

 

I just know that if I was a baseball player, I wouldn't buy a house in Oakland.

[jokin]

 

As for defense... Donaldson is good but Lawrie and Arenado with the Rockies are in a different room.

 

Everybody else pales.

 

 

 

Manny Macchado... screams "debate..."

[big dog]

I like Billy Beane. He purposely plays the underdog and wants to win playing that part.

 

For some reason, he doesn't want franchise players.

 

He trades one guy for four. Looks good on paper.

 

But Donaldson is a stud. You could have paid him about what you are paying Billy Butler for the next three years to still play for you and probably increase his worth more than, say, Butler will.

 

That's what I don't understand about this move. You overpay Butler for three years. You trade off a dynamite third baseman who you still have control...sure you get a third baseman that could be an okay replacement, a couple of pitchers, a throw-in. 

 

I just know that if I was a baseball player, I wouldn't buy a house in Oakland.

and if I lived in Oakland I'd never spend a hundred bucks on a jersey with a player's name on it.  Well, that's not actually true- I'd love to have a Rudi jersey.

 

Good point about Butler.  I'd rather have Donaldson many times over.  Even arguing that he couldn't trade Butler for 4 people still leads you to wonder what problem Butler solves that couldn't have been solved for a lot less money, or by getting a different player in a trade for Donaldson.

[biggentleben]

I like Billy Beane. He purposely plays the underdog and wants to win playing that part.

 

For some reason, he doesn't want franchise players.

 

He trades one guy for four. Looks good on paper.

 

But Donaldson is a stud. You could have paid him about what you are paying Billy Butler for the next three years to still play for you and probably increase his worth more than, say, Butler will.

 

That's what I don't understand about this move. You overpay Butler for three years. You trade off a dynamite third baseman who you still have control...sure you get a third baseman that could be an okay replacement, a couple of pitchers, a throw-in. 

 

I just know that if I was a baseball player, I wouldn't buy a house in Oakland.

 

Franklin Barreto is a throw-in in the same way Miguel Sano or Alex Meyer would be a throw-in to a trade.  He's not in the Buxton class of prospect yet, but for current trade value, there's not much else the Twins could roll out on their prospect list with more trade value.

 

Read that I said trade value, however, as prospect lists and rankings are not a trade valuation and no list maker would ever assume them to be such, which is why I always find it humorous to hear "to get Superstar X, team Y would have to give up their #1, 2, 4, and 8 prospects" and disappointment when none of the return is in the top 5 of said list.  Barreto is one of the highest trade value prospects in the second-tier of trade value right now, and that first tier only has about 5-10 names.

[markos]

Franklin Barreto is a throw-in in the same way Miguel Sano or Alex Meyer would be a throw-in to a trade.  He's not in the Buxton class of prospect yet, but for current trade value, there's not much else the Twins could roll out on their prospect list with more trade value.

 

Read that I said trade value, however, as prospect lists and rankings are not a trade valuation and no list maker would ever assume them to be such, which is why I always find it humorous to hear "to get Superstar X, team Y would have to give up their #1, 2, 4, and 8 prospects" and disappointment when none of the return is in the top 5 of said list.  Barreto is one of the highest trade value prospects in the second-tier of trade value right now, and that first tier only has about 5-10 names.

Can you please explain this distinction further? I'm having a hard time understanding why there would be a huge difference between trade valuation and prospect rankings. Also, I'd like to know who the 5-10 prospects are in the first tier. I don't really know anything about prospects, but I think that if my team had Barreto, there are at least 5 shortstops I would rather have. Just off the top of my head:

Addison Russell

Francisco Lindor

Carlos Correa

Cory Seager

JP Crawford

 

I'm sure there are other shortstops that I'm not even aware of that could be added to this list. 

[TheLeviathan]

Yeah, markos is right, he's not as high-end a prospect as some are making it out.  Good point about Butler too.  I'd much rather have spent that 30M to retain Donaldson than do anything with Butler.

[Mike Sixel]

Retaining Donaldson with the money does not add players, though. That's clearly what the GM wanted to do, degrade at 3B, and add prospects. 

 

But, not a fan of the Butler signing at all.

[TheLeviathan]

Retaining Donaldson with the money does not add players, though. That's clearly what the GM wanted to do, degrade at 3B, and add prospects. 

 

But, not a fan of the Butler signing at all.

 

If he merely wanted to add players he didn't have to move his former MVP candidate.   This was an attempt to sell high before his price escalated.  The problem is that they went out and spent what it would've probably taken to retain him for 3 of the next 4 years of team control on a dude that can't play in the field, can't run, and can't hit for power.  

 

Yes, he restocked some talent in doing so, but seems unnecessary when you can afford to throw 30M at someone like Billy Butler.