Eaton to the Nationals for Giolito and more

[Teflon]

Nationals lead off hitters (Ben Revere, Trea Turner) had a seriously crappy .303 OBP last year. No wonder why Bryce Harper has never had a 100 RBI season. Eaton's a.360 on-base average guy which, while not elite, is very good  and should present Harper and the meat of the Nationals' order with a lot more scoring opportunities. Add Eaton's outstanding defense and team-friendly contract and this is an effective move that should immediately improve the team while they're in the midst of a current window of contention.

[markos]

From a certain point of view, this trade actually throws a little cold water on a potential Dozier deal:

 

- Depending on how much weight one puts into age curves and the value of defense, it is completely reasonable to value Eaton over Dozier for the next two years.

- On top of that, Eaton is paid less than Dozier over the next two years.

- And Eaton is under contract for THREE additional years at very reasonable costs.

 

So it isn't crazy to think that Eaton is a more valuable asset than Dozier, perhaps significantly more valuable.

 

Now, from the perspective of the return...

- Prospect projections definitely aren't perfect, but they do shed some interesting info. In this case, Chris Mitchell's KATOH+ projection system has identical rankings for both Giolito and De Leon. As another datapoint, Steamer projects De Leon to be significantly better than Giolito next year (3.34 ERA vs 4.93 ERA).

- From a scouting perspective, Fangraphs has Giolito at a 60 Future Value (FV) and Lopez at a 55FV. That matches Yadier Alvarez (60FV) and De Leon (55FV). Dunning gets a 45 FV, which is similar to Brock Stewart, Jordan Sheffield and Walker Buehler. 

 

So a package of Alvarez, De Leon and something else is arguably just as good as the package the Nationals gave up for Eaton. Given this, I think it is wishful thinking to get Alvarez and De Leon in a trade for Dozier. At the very least, it is just as crazy as the Eaton deal.

[jimmer]

Cracks me up when'experts' like Greg Amsinger on MLB Network say things like (paraphrase), 'Brett Gardner and Eaton are the same player and worth the same.  Cashman should consider trading him.'

 

And then he continues to dog out Eaton.

[biggentleben]

 

Nationals lead off hitters (Ben Revere, Trea Turner) had a seriously crappy .303 OBP last year. No wonder why Bryce Harper has never had a 100 RBI season. Eaton's a.360 on-base average guy which, while not elite, is very good  and should present Harper and the meat of the Nationals' order with a lot more scoring opportunities. Add Eaton's outstanding defense and team-friendly contract and this is an effective move that should immediately improve the team while they're in the midst of a current window of contention.

 

This. People very much underrate how badly the Nats missed Span last year in the lineup and in center. Turner is still a work in progress on his center field defense, but he did provide offense in center, which Revere didn't. He just didn't provide a leadoff hitter. 

[biggentleben]

 

From a certain point of view, this trade actually throws a little cold water on a potential Dozier deal:

 

- Depending on how much weight one puts into age curves and the value of defense, it is completely reasonable to value Eaton over Dozier for the next two years.

- On top of that, Eaton is paid less than Dozier over the next two years.

- And Eaton is under contract for THREE additional years at very reasonable costs.

 

So it isn't crazy to think that Eaton is a more valuable asset than Dozier, perhaps significantly more valuable.

 

Now, from the perspective of the return...

- Prospect projections definitely aren't perfect, but they do shed some interesting info. In this case, Chris Mitchell's KATOH+ projection system has identical rankings for both Giolito and De Leon. As another datapoint, Steamer projects De Leon to be significantly better than Giolito next year (3.34 ERA vs 4.93 ERA).

- From a scouting perspective, Fangraphs has Giolito at a 60 Future Value (FV) and Lopez at a 55FV. That matches Yadier Alvarez (60FV) and De Leon (55FV). Dunning gets a 45 FV, which is similar to Brock Stewart, Jordan Sheffield and Walker Buehler. 

 

So a package of Alvarez, De Leon and something else is arguably just as good as the package the Nationals gave up for Eaton. Given this, I think it is wishful thinking to get Alvarez and De Leon in a trade for Dozier. At the very least, it is just as crazy as the Eaton deal.

 

Based on what I've seen, I have Alvarez ahead of Lopez ahead of De Leon ahead of Giolito in my overall ranks.

[markos]

 

Based on what I've seen, I have Alvarez ahead of Lopez ahead of De Leon ahead of Giolito in my overall ranks.

Yeah, I don't think you will be the only one to rank them that way.

[biggentleben]

Yeah, I don't think you will be the only one to rank them that way.

I mentioned it to an independent scout in Cali, and he threw Kopech in the mix as well. He went so far as to say that of the five, Alvarez would lead, Giolito would be at the back end, and the three others (Lopez, De Leon, and Kopech) could really go in any order in his book in between. I don't have Kopech above Giolito, but crazy to think that Giolito could be #4 in the ChiSox system just a year after being top 3 in all of baseball.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Not to take away too much from Eaton, but it sounds like the Nats were motivated to move Giolito for something good while they still could:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nationals/why-the-adam-eaton-trade-wasnt-a-panic-move-for-the-washington-nationals/2016/12/08/e7acd08e-bd61-11e6-91ee-1adddfe36cbe_story.html

[Vanimal46]

 

I mentioned it to an independent scout in Cali, and he threw Kopech in the mix as well. He went so far as to say that of the five, Alvarez would lead, Giolito would be at the back end, and the three others (Lopez, De Leon, and Kopech) could really go in any order in his book in between. I don't have Kopech above Giolito, but crazy to think that Giolito could be #4 in the ChiSox system just a year after being top 3 in all of baseball.

Interesting stuff. Feels like Giolito was exposed last year after he was called up. He may just be one of those players who's highest value was before they even get close to the majors. He was so highly ranked on most every media outlets' prospect list entering the 2016 season. They could have gotten a king's ransom for him at the time.... 

[Mike Sixel]

 

Interesting stuff. Feels like Giolito was exposed last year after he was called up. He may just be one of those players who's highest value was before they even get close to the majors. He was so highly ranked on most every media outlets' prospect list entering the 2016 season. They could have gotten a king's ransom for him at the time.... 

 

That's the point that some here make.....what can you get for these prospects, that is "proven", so you can actually be good, not hope to be good. That presupposes that proven veterans will maintain their play.....but, it is why I always wonder why teams won't trade 3-7th round picks more in the NFL, since those picks rarely work out to be even average.

[Vanimal46]

 

That's the point that some here make.....what can you get for these prospects, that is "proven", so you can actually be good, not hope to be good. That presupposes that proven veterans will maintain their play.....but, it is why I always wonder why teams won't trade 3-7th round picks more in the NFL, since those picks rarely work out to be even average.

It's definitely a tight rope to walk across when it comes to prospects. Hard to tell if a consensus top 10 overall prospect in the game is really going to turn out that great, or if that's the highest value they'll ever have. It'd be interesting to see data from the top 10 prospects in the MLB each year and see how many exceed, meet, or fail to meet expectations. I think.... I'd lean towards seeing what you can get for the prospects that is proven. 

 

As far as the NFL, absolutely. I'd gamble on trading a draft pick for proven players every year. The fail rate on even 1st rounders alone has to be ~40%

[TheLeviathan]

 

It's definitely a tight rope to walk across when it comes to prospects. Hard to tell if a consensus top 10 overall prospect in the game is really going to turn out that great, or if that's the highest value they'll ever have. It'd be interesting to see data from the top 10 prospects in the MLB each year and see how many exceed, meet, or fail to meet expectations. I think.... I'd lean towards seeing what you can get for the prospects that is proven. 

 

As far as the NFL, absolutely. I'd gamble on trading a draft pick for proven players every year. The fail rate on even 1st rounders alone has to be ~40%

 

Part of it is financial.  The NFL salary cap is ridiculously small, so having depth from those late picks is vital.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Part of it is financial.  The NFL salary cap is ridiculously small, so having depth from those late picks is vital.

 

Right, that was the point of the link vanimal shared (this thread or another), that more young players are on rosters, because of the stars and scrubs nature of NFL contracts right now....Good point, Levi.

[Vanimal46]

 

Part of it is financial.  The NFL salary cap is ridiculously small, so having depth from those late picks is vital.

To piggy back off of Mike, I think I shared the link in another thread. Kevin Clark of The Ringer hit the nail right on the head concerning the NFL's stars and scrubs roster construction if you'd like to read it. 

"The NFL has an Age Problem" 

[TheLeviathan]

 

Right, that was the point of the link vanimal shared (this thread or another), that more young players are on rosters, because of the stars and scrubs nature of NFL contracts right now....Good point, Levi.

 

To piggy back off of Mike, I think I shared the link in another thread. Kevin Clark of The Ringer hit the nail right on the head concerning the NFL's stars and scrubs roster construction if you'd like to read it. 

"The NFL has an Age Problem" 

 

Ah yes, I read that.  I think you posted it over on VJ.  It's an excellent article, sorry if i was being redundant with a point already made.  I think I commented over there on it as well.

 

I think it is a major issue for the NFL right now.  They are casting off players at a younger and younger age and i'm convinced it is rarely anything to do with ability and more to do with money.

 

To steer it back to this forum, I'm also ok with being more aggressive dealing prospects.  But there is a financial component there as well.  I like to think a balanced approach is best.  Primarily use the farm, supplement with FA, and be aggressive at the right times to take a shot at surviving the crapshoot.

 

I think the Cardinals are pretty much the model franchise for this.  The Rangers have been underrated at it as well, even with some highly touted prospects flopping.