Three Analysis Tools applied to Two Trade Proposals

How does one even go about making trade proposals now that BTV is paywalled? And more importantly, how would you know that trading the Modesto Nuts for Gunnar Henderson isn’t a realistic option even if the numbers say so? We can talk about win curves and positional needs, but can we quantify other aspects of this beyond the Cameronesque efficiency that BTV and other valuation models are based upon. In this article I will lay out three possible considerations in evaluating a proposal and then evaluate two trade proposals based on those considerations.

Three Valuations of a Trade.

The three components under consideration are: WAR obtained above market value (Woamv), net WAR in the forthcoming season (nWfs), and tnW – nWfs approximation (tna). There is one additional component that is a little bit more nebulous but was necessary in the computation (as might be obvious from the description): total net WAR(tnW),

Why three components? Well, I have heard of a triple bottom line, but I’m not an MBA. Essentially there are very few decisions one can make in life that don’t have multiple impacts to consider. These three components address different perspectives on team building based on a franchise’s philosophy, budget, and likelihood of being competitive at a given time. I will address each in turn.

tnW

Total net WAR is a measure of the accumulation of WAR because of the trade without respect to when that WAR will be realized or the relative monetary cost of it. This could be an evaluative method that a team which is open to spending lots of money will likely prioritize over a team less inclined to do so. It is also an evaluative method that will be prioritized for teams that are hoping for an extended window of contention, and in some cases perhaps rebuilding teams. Teams like the two who were just in the World Series could be considered perennial tnW teams. The 2019 Seattle Mariners were a rebuilding team that was at least somewhat in the tnW mold as they were willing to take on salaries as they traded aging players for prospects. But this metric is measuring multiple things simultaneously, so should be broken down additionally.

Woamv

This is essentially the way WAR is typically discussed in trade proposals: the more WAR you are able to get below free agent values, the better. BTV trades are based on this principle as was everything Dave Cameron ever wrote at his various sites. It’s certainly one way to value trading, and 15 years ago teams that understood this might have had a competitive advantage on those that didn’t. But most teams get it now. It’s possible that this single metric is so much more important than the others mentioned that trades should be valued only on this metric and the others only be considered on the same axis as positional value, for example. But the way teams approach the salary cap related to their contention suggests that is not likely the case. What we can say for certain is that this is definitely a metric that is valued by cost averse teams such as the Mariners.

One difference between this valuation and the one at BTV is that I am putting it in terms of WAR instead of dollars. It’s easier for me to conceptualize it in those terms.

nWfs

Net WAR in the forthcoming season (nWfs) is not a new concept at Lookout Landing, though perhaps never framed in quite this way before. We all have an understanding of windows of competition. Rebuilding teams will prioritize different things than competing teams.

Consider the following thought experiment. A team has purchased ten WAR at the friendly neighborhood WARstation, and this WAR could be distributed in one of three ways: a) 5 WAR in the next 2 consecutive seasons, b) 2 WAR in 5 consecutive seasons, or c) 5 seasons of varying WAR- 0,1,2,3,4. We all have a good sense of what type of team will select each option. A team that is near the close of its contention window will clearly pick option a). A team that is very clearly in a rebuild will choose option c). And a team that is transitioning from rebuild to contention might choose option b) if it thinks it will probably start competing in one of the next three years and have an extended window. (Also a reasonable choice if a team just wants to win 54% of its games for half a decade.) Of course real baseball trades don’t happen at convenience stores and are much more complicated. But it illustrates the point that the win curve can influence what choices a team makes in player acquisition in a way that can be quantified.

nWfs is a metric that is specifically meant to capture the change in predicted WAR specifically for the next season. It doesn’t consider WAR over a longer period or how efficiently that WAR was obtained. It is a metric that captures the win now portion of the contention window.

tna

totalnetWAR – netWARintheforthcoming season approximation (tna) is a measure of all the WAR obtained that is not likely to be realized in the forthcoming season. tnW is an amalgamation of a few things, so this is a metric which will try to separate out some of that. tna is essentially the opposite of nWfs. Sort of. It’s not always easy to put a clear timeframe on development, so the moment when the predicted wins shows up (if it even meets that prediction) or over how many years is a bit more ambiguous. Hence the need for the word approximation at the end. In this simplified metric, we are only removing the immediately forthcoming year and assuming that a fast rebuild will be able to gather a large chunk of the tnW if it doesn’t come in the year immediately following the trade. tna follows a pretty simple formula: tnW-nWfs. As long as we have already calculated those other two values, tna will be easy to come by.

The Trades

I will be analyzing two trade proposals using this methodology. These are my own valuations based on guestimations from Fangraphs data. Please feel free to quibble with me about the numbers if you think they are off. I’m sure that some of you are better at this than I am.

Proposal #1: Mariners trade Mitch Haniger and Tyler Locklear to the Cardinals for Ryan Hensley and 10 million dollars (the difference between the salaries of Haniger and Hensley).

First let’s break down the valuation of each player according to these 4 metrics.

Now let’s look at how each team would be impacted by this trade proposal

In this scenario, both the Mariners and the Cardinals are moving the WAR in the direction that would benefit them the most. The Mariners are consolidating all of the WAR into a single season without having to pay any additional money than they would have otherwise. The Cardinals are pushing that WAR into later years when it will more likely benefit them. The Cardinals are also a team that is not averse to spending with some significant money coming off the books this year, so they might be willing to take on dead money to improve their long term outlooks.

Of interest in this deal is that the Cardinals would net more WAR overall, but not as efficiently as the Mariners. This tracks with each teams philosophy, but could be adjusted by either adding minor pieces or taking on less of Haniger’s salary.

Proposal #2: Phillies trade Johan Rojas to the Orioles for Cedric Mullins.

Before breaking down the valuations, I wanted to address the glaring question most of you have. Why am I looking at a trade proposal on Lookout Landing that doesn’t involve the Mariners? Well, the reality is that I’ve been thinking about a three team trade that would net the Mariners Bohm and Kjerstad, but an appealing package didn’t come to fruition before the World Series was over, and now it’s Friday. So you’ll have to get by on this little chunk of it.

Now let's look at how each team would be impacted by this trade proposal

The only player the Phillies want to move on from more than Bohm is Rojas. And they will need an outfielder to replace him, preferably a centerfielder. Mullins is ideal in one way in that 2025 is probably the Phillies last hurrah with their current squad. But is it really worth it to spend so much in every other metric here in order to obtain that incremental value? Maybe.

Also, the error bars on Rojas's future value are probably huge. He might not ever put up positive WAR again, but he has over parts of two seasons in spite of the crater in his offense from this past year. The Orioles have a knack for turning such things around, so it's easy to see their interest even as they are in contention. They are also the team in this equation least likely to spend money, so shedding Mullins salary and possibly finding a cheap replacement for years to come is desirable as they are just entering what appears to be a longish window.

Ultimately, I don't think this trade would happen as is. Mullins isn't much of an upgrade, and unless the trade is also shoring up other areas (like third base), the Phillies would probably just look at what it would take to get Luis Robert. They probably have the pieces for it.

Conclusion

Regardless of how you might feel about these two trade proposal, I hope that you find the analytical tools helpful in creating your own scenarios. nWfs and tna in particular are some features that I hope you will all consider in your dream packages.

Finally, just a reminder that your imagination is beautiful. Don't let anyone shame you for it.