Schoop, Gausman, and Bundy Trade Expectations

[Chito]

Schoop and Gausman could help them an awful lot.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Chito said:

Schoop and Gausman could help them an awful lot.

If I'm the Brewers I'm not sure I want to trade a ton to improve the teams chances in 2018-2019.

[Bradysburns]

40 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yea, I'm sure they can get a lot more for two months of Schoop than one year and two months. 

Do you think they could have gotten more for Manny last offseason? Just curious. I see what you're saying... but it ain't that simple. 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Bradysburns said:

Do you think they could have gotten more for Manny last offseason? Just curious. I see what you're saying... but it ain't that simple. 

Yes

The ability to recoup a first round pick with a QO alone increased his value.

[Morgan423]

8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yes

The ability to recoup a first round pick with a QO alone increased his value.

Everyone always forgets about this.

[Bradysburns]

10 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yes

The ability to recoup a first round pick with a QO alone increased his value.

I don't know the QO rules very well. I assume the Dodgers cannot get a draft pick with a rejected QO, because they acquired him midseason? Whereas if they'd acquired him last season, they could have made a QO?

Regardless, it doesn't quite answer my question, which was: Could we have gotten more by trading him last season? (It says that theoretically, we SHOULD have been able to get more last season... but the market was totally different then.)

I don't think we can KNOW with any confidence whether we could have gotten more by trading him last offseason. 

Same with Schoop. Unless we hear actual offer details this season, and can then compare them to offers next season... we're essentially spitballing. 

My point is, we'd be selling low on Schoop this year. His OPS has plummeted nearly 200 points, down to around .667, versus last year (his best) at .841. Again, unless someone blows me away, I like keeping Schoop until his numbers improve. 

 

[Can_of_corn]

19 minutes ago, Bradysburns said:

I don't know the QO rules very well. I assume the Dodgers cannot get a draft pick with a rejected QO, because they acquired him midseason? Whereas if they'd acquired him last season, they could have made a QO?

Regardless, it doesn't quite answer my question, which was: Could we have gotten more by trading him last season? (It says that theoretically, we SHOULD have been able to get more last season... but the market was totally different then.)

I don't think we can KNOW with any confidence whether we could have gotten more by trading him last offseason. 

Same with Schoop. Unless we hear actual offer details this season, and can then compare them to offers next season... we're essentially spitballing. 

My point is, we'd be selling low on Schoop this year. His OPS has plummeted nearly 200 points, down to around .667, versus last year (his best) at .841. Again, unless someone blows me away, I like keeping Schoop until his numbers improve. 

 

Yes you are right, we can't know.

That's a really obvious fact, that we can't know with 100% certainty things we don't have complete information on.

Here is the part where I roll my eyes again.

 

Now back to Schoop.  You know he had an oblique injury right?

You know that oblique injuries tend to suppress offensive performance for a period of time after a position player returns from the DL right?

You know that Schoop has been smoking hot in July right?

 

Why do you think his value is particularly depressed?

If you know all that certainly teams know all that.

[DirtyBird]

22 minutes ago, Bradysburns said:

I don't know the QO rules very well. I assume the Dodgers cannot get a draft pick with a rejected QO, because they acquired him midseason? Whereas if they'd acquired him last season, they could have made a QO?

Regardless, it doesn't quite answer my question, which was: Could we have gotten more by trading him last season? (It says that theoretically, we SHOULD have been able to get more last season... but the market was totally different then.)

I don't think we can KNOW with any confidence whether we could have gotten more by trading him last offseason. 

Same with Schoop. Unless we hear actual offer details this season, and can then compare them to offers next season... we're essentially spitballing. 

My point is, we'd be selling low on Schoop this year. His OPS has plummeted nearly 200 points, down to around .667, versus last year (his best) at .841. Again, unless someone blows me away, I like keeping Schoop until his numbers improve. 

 

Yes, you can get more for a player when they have a season and a half of control, primarily because it creates a larger market. When a player is traded at the deadline of the final year of their contract, the potential trade partners are limited to big market teams, who can buy replacements, or teams that believe they are legitimately a player away from winning a World Series. Young teams competing for a playoff spot aren't going to give away legit prospects for one outside shot at a World Series. But, they might be willing to get involved with a guy that gives them two shots.

Teams like Atlanta, Philly, Milwaukee, Arizona, Colorado, Seattle and Oakland this year weren't going to give up future pieces for a Machado, but they would be more willing for a Schoop type (talent & contract) player.

Bigger market = bigger return

[Bradysburns]

20 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Yes you are right, we can't know.

That's a really obvious fact, that we can't know with 100% certainty things we don't have complete information on.

Here is the part where I roll my eyes again.

 

Now back to Schoop.  You know he had an oblique injury right?

You know that oblique injuries tend to suppress offensive performance for a period of time after a position player returns from the DL right?

You know that Schoop has been smoking hot in July right?

 

Why do you think his value is particularly depressed?

If you know all that certainly teams know all that.

You might want to get your eyes checked. They might roll out your head at this rate!

Seriously though, I've already stated why Schoop's value is depressed. You disagree that it's depressed. You think it's exactly what it was last year, during his career year... Interesting theory, but not a very good one. 

Also, I used the word "know" with a qualifier. But feel free to ignore those pesky details in order to score your points. 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Bradysburns said:

You might want to get your eyes checked. They might roll out your head at this rate!

Seriously though, I've already stated why Schoop's value is depressed. You disagree that it's depressed. You think it's exactly what it was last year, during his career year... Interesting theory, but not a very good one. 

Also, I used the word "know" with a qualifier. But feel free to ignore those pesky details in order to score your points. 

Check my eyes?  You might want to get your eyes checked.  I didn't say Schoop's value wasn't lower than last year.  I certainly don't think it's exactly what it was last year.

If you were to reread what I wrote you will see that I said "particularly depressed".  I don't think teams were going to treat Schoop as a five win player after last year and they won't treat him as a replacement level player now.

 

[Bradysburns]

14 minutes ago, DirtyBird said:

Yes, you can get more for a player when they have a season and a half of control, primarily because it creates a larger market. When a player is traded at the deadline of the final year of their contract, the potential trade partners are limited to big market teams, who can buy replacements, or teams that believe they are legitimately a player away from winning a World Series. Young teams competing for a playoff spot aren't going to give away legit prospects for one outside shot at a World Series. But, they might be willing to get involved with a guy that gives them two shots.

Teams like Atlanta, Philly, Milwaukee, Arizona, Colorado, Seattle and Oakland this year weren't going to give up future pieces for a Machado, but they would be more willing for a Schoop type (talent & contract) player.

Bigger market = bigger return

Fair points, and similar to Can o' Corn's. 

But you are trying to convince me of something I already believe.

All else being equal, added control years adds trade value to a player. 

But with Schoop, again, all isn't equal... He has struggled through the whole first half of the season. He had an oblique. I get that, too. But I don't think that has been impacting him the whole first half. 

Schoop himself acknowledges his struggles, and says zero about oblique strains:

"“I know I’m better than this, and I’m going to get it sooner or later. And when I get it, it won’t stop. … I’ve gotten my outs already in the first half [of the season]. I’ve gotten my outs, so the second half is my time. I’m going to go out there and punish them like I didn’t in the first half.”"

I do understand where you and Corn are coming from. I think we just disagree about Schoop's present-day perceived value. 

[Bradysburns]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Check my eyes?  You might want to get your eyes checked.  I didn't say Schoop's value wasn't lower than last year.  I certainly don't think it's exactly what it was last year.

If you were to reread what I wrote you will see that I said "particularly depressed".  I don't think teams were going to treat Schoop as a five win player after last year and they won't treat him as a replacement level player now.

 

Well played. You're right. I missed that. You also qualified your point, and I'm closer to agreeing with you there. 

I'm not saying Schoop's perceived value is replacement level. Teams aren't stupid (arguably). 

But let me riff off your secondary point.

I suspect teams would be treating Schoop as an all-star-caliber player now if he were still OPS'ing in the mid-.800s. I think (as I suspect we'd agree) that Schoop will revert back to an .800-plus OPS in the second half and into next season... at which point, if he's on a tear in June and early July... we might get more for him then than we would now. That's all I'm saying. 

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, Bradysburns said:

Well played. You're right. I missed that. You also qualified your point, and I'm closer to agreeing with you there. 

I'm not saying Schoop's perceived value is replacement level. Teams aren't stupid (arguably). 

But let me riff off your secondary point.

I suspect teams would be treating Schoop as an all-star-caliber player now if he were still OPS'ing in the mid-.800s. I think (as I suspect we'd agree) that Schoop will revert back to an .800-plus OPS in the second half and into next season... at which point, if he's on a tear in June and early July... we might get more for him then than we would now. That's all I'm saying. 

Sure, if he was performing at a five win level two years in a row that would change math.

But last year was very possibly an outlier for Schoop and if it is than the lost control will hurt as much or more than putting up a 2-3 win season will help.

With Schoop's lack of plate discipline he might not ever reach his 2017 level of performance again and his defense at second isn't going to improve.

[Frobby]

13 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Sure, if he was performing at a five win level two years in a row that would change math.

But last year was very possibly an outlier for Schoop and if it is than the lost control will hurt as much or more than putting up a 2-3 win season will help.

With Schoop's lack of plate discipline he might not ever reach his 2017 level of performance again and his defense at second isn't going to improve.

That’s the thing about Schoop — he doesn’t really have an established, consistent level of offensive performance.   We have some feel for his power capabilities, but his on base capabilities are really up in the air.    Overall if I’m an outside evaluator I probably believe his career numbers are about indicative of his midpoint expectation, maybe slightly bumped up to discount his rookie season.   And yes, I expect his market value today exceeds what it’ll be next July.

[Flacco Machado]

Not a good outing for Gausman.

Although, those rain delays did not help.