Trade Rumors - Oswalt to Phillies

[taxman]

A $100M payroll team being paid market value is a .500 team.

I'm sorry, I didn't understand that you were just making things up.

[cpebbles]

Well, let's offer to trade Ryan for Oswalt straight up and see what happens.

I would say that I anxiously await Oswalt becoming the latest in a string of a dozen or so big-name, big-money pitchers being traded for packages that most fans laughed at, but I'm all too aware of Ed Wade's M.O. He's eventually going to be fired with Oswalt still in Houston because he isn't going to take a fair trade.

[cpebbles]

A $100M payroll team being paid market value is a .500 team.

I'm sorry, I didn't understand that you were just making things up.

$100 million minus 25 replacement-level salaries is $90 million. That is 20 to 27 wins on the open-market (Final 2010 free-agent values are not in yet). A replacement-level team is estimated at 44 wins. So actually it's a 64 to 71 win team.

[Vidor]

You might not be able to buy your way to a title, but you certainly could improve your odds by replacing Jeff Suppan with Roy Oswalt. Or Brendan Ryan with Roy Oswalt.

Is replaceability a measure of how valuable a player is? We should have no problem finding someone else who can hit .196 to play shortstop.

If Brendan Ryan had enough PA his .543 OPS would be the lowest in the league by a mile. (But don't worry, we still have the worst hitter in the league in our lineup).

[cpebbles]

Couldn't you maek the argument that a win to the Cardinals/Phillies/Rays/Reds/Any Contender is worth more than a win to the Astros who are aimlessly amassing wins while contenders are either trying to make it to the playoffs or assemble teams that will be capable of making deep runs once in the playoffs. The money is 16 million a year. That is a sunk cost. But, if he brings you a WS title instead of missing the playoffs completely, obviously that is going to skew the value of his contract to a team.

That argument has been made countless times, and even statistically supported. It's not a massive factor though. As a ~4 win player, Oswalt can be expected to increase the chances of the Cardinals winning a World Series by something miniscule like 2%.

[Jocephus]

Jerry Crasnick of ESPN.com reports that Roy Oswalt will not approve a trade unless his $16 million option for 2012 is picked up by his new team.
We already knew this last week, however Oswalt's recent comments on "restructuring" has confused the matter. According to Crasnick's understanding, Oswalt might be willing to defer some of the funds, nothing more.
Source: Jerry Crasnick
Related: Phillies, Cardinals

[taxman]

A $100M payroll team being paid market value is a .500 team.

I'm sorry, I didn't understand that you were just making things up.

$100 million minus 25 replacement-level salaries is $90 million. That is 20 to 27 wins on the open-market (Final 2010 free-agent values are not in yet). A replacement-level team is estimated at 44 wins. So actually it's a 64 to 71 win team.

Except that the total opening day payrolls for MLB were $3.69B. Therefore, with 2430 total wins available, each win is worth $1.518M, give or take a little rounding.

So, either:

1. Your estimate of the value of a win is incorrect ($90 million / $1.518M = approximately 59 wins); or
2. The market is compensating players improperly... but that can't be possible, since you've clarified that every front office knows how to value a win.

[skmsw]

A $100M payroll team being paid market value is a .500 team.

I'm sorry, I didn't understand that you were just making things up.

$100 million minus 25 replacement-level salaries is $90 million. That is 20 to 27 wins on the open-market (Final 2010 free-agent values are not in yet). A replacement-level team is estimated at 44 wins. So actually it's a 64 to 71 win team.

Except that the total opening day payrolls for MLB were $3.69B. Therefore, with 2430 total wins available, each win is worth $1.518M, give or take a little rounding.

So, either:

1. Your estimate of the value of a win is incorrect ($90 million / $1.518M = approximately 59 wins); or
2. The market is compensating players improperly... but that can't be possible, since you've clarified that every front office knows how to value a win.

Market value of a win is based on AVAILABLE players -- those who change teams. Not every player is available; the cost of those you can't have is irrelevent.

[InvincibleCakeEater]

1. Your estimate of the value of a win is incorrect ($90 million / $1.518M = approximately 59 wins); or
2. The market is compensating players improperly... but that can't be possible, since you've clarified that every front office knows how to value a win.

jeesh

He said market value. Get over it.

[taxman]

Market value of a win is based on AVAILABLE players -- those who change teams. Not every player is available; the cost of those you can't have is irrelevent.

BINGO!

No impact player is available via free agency during the season. Therefore, the "market value" of adding a player cannot be quantified in free agency dollars; the market value is set, as with all free markets, by the price the market will bear. In this case, Oswalt's value in trade is set by:

1. The players teams interested in Oswalt will offer;
2. The subset of the above teams that Oswalt will approve; and
3. The perceived value, relative to the potential public relations/ticket sales hit that the Astros may take by trading, that the Astros set as a minimum required return.

Free agent value and marginal wins per dollar have ZERO to do with in-season trades.