The Value of a Prospect
.
Chris Taylor is more like $10-20M in NET value than $50M GROSS value on paper
A commenter within a thread, at a great blog, argued that you could reasonably trade Chris Taylor for Matt Kemp, with the Dodgers paying all or nearly all of his salary. If the M's could do that, or anything like that, it would be in the past tense now.
Take the idea that Chris Taylor $50M of pre-FA value. On paper that's true. On Fangraphs it shows up that way. But!, Only if you compare Taylor --- > rightward to FA's instead of comparing him
You would value Chris Taylor at $50M iff ---- > he were the last prospect on earth. Like the okra crop in Interstellar. The only kid left, then his worth would be right at $50M.
People completely overlooked this point five years ago, and it hasn't gained traction yet. The delta between your current pre-arb player, and the hot prospect standing behind him. The GM's get this very clearly, and we sabes don't begin to get it. So, there's a huge disconnect, a giant sector in which we fans shoot into the dark and always miss.
.
Practical Considerations
1. Matt Kemp appears to have solved his own swing (70% chance or more). This happens in baseball. Happens alla time. GM's will be well aware of this.
1a. As Gordon points out, if the Dodgers wanted to throw away $80M plus, they'd throw you Crawford or Ethier, and use Kemp themselves. I find taht debate point to be extremely tough to defeat.
...
2. It's true that some pre-arb "average/solid" players WILL be valued at $50M, mostly pitchers. Mostly young starting pitchers. Because they become your #3 starter, and the minor league org does not run into their back bumpers. (Also, Archie Bradley figures to be something other than an average player.)
2a. The real value of Chris Taylor is that he saves you weeding out time. You save a year or two of lousy performance at SS while you draw at the deck. That's not worth $50M, but it is worth something.
2b. Chris Taylor is himself an unsure thing, like Ketel Marte is. He has 136 AB's.
...
3. The Dodgers said they'd give $0 for a lighter return, or pay significant $ for a big return. Sounds about right to Dr. D.
3a. I'd give the Dodgers a whale of a lot for Matt Kemp, with them eating maybe 25% of the money, just to make the payroll more comfortable. Like, 3-4 very good prospects who come from superfluity ... Chris Taylor, Patrick Kivlehan, and maybe Roenis Elias or Brandon Maurer or something. Call it:
- Taylor
- + Kivlehan (or analogous hitter)
- + Maurer (or exciting cheap pitcher)
- + Throwin
- For Kemp, us paying $15M a year and the Dodgers $5M a year
That was kind of the way we got Cliff Lee. Maybe my trade is way off. It would be my starting point frame of reference .... I'd figure the Dodgers to demand Brad Miller for Taylor and deadlock the negotiations.
:: just noodling ::
.....
4. The M's are laser-focused on FA's first, before trades. It's after Hanley says No that they will click the windage down on the rifle sights to Jose Bautista, Matt Kemp, etc.
Enjoy,
Jeff