I’m almost fully recovered from my once a year virus. I’m certain it was contracted from children during Thanksgiving. I have no proof of this but I remain firmly committed to that opinion until it is falsified.
In any event, I was thinking about this MLBTR post regarding the Royals desire to not trade Zack Greinke within their division. I’ve never been able to understand the logic of that decision and it continues to elude me. As far as I can tell, the only reason to not trade within the division is because you’re afraid you’d lose the trade. But if that’s the premise, should you be making the trade with ANY team?
There’s obviously a couple of different scenarios in which you would look to trade a player. The Royals are looking to extract future value by moving an asset (Greinke) that is valuable now. So let’s say that they trade Greinke to the White Sox for Tyler Flowers. In the short term, the Royals will lose a few more games but that shouldn’t matter because they’re likely acknowledging they can’t win in the short term. In the long term (2-3 years), they gain wins and have removed a key future asset from a competitor. So long as you’re receiving value back from a team that is comparable to your asset (and don’t get caught up on the fact that Flowers isn’t comparable; just trying to flesh out the point) why does it matter what team it comes from?
The opposing point side of that swap would be when the Cardinals moved David Carpenter for Pedro Feliz. The Cardinals attempted to leverage an asset with future value for one that could help within the immediate term. The Astros get a piece that may help them in the long run and the Cardinals filled a gap in the short term. (I’m facetious with this example as well but you get where I’m headed).
Things may be more difficult with swaps of MLB players for other MLB players but that should still be an analytical decision to my mind. Let’s say the Royals have the White Sox as a 90 win team next year and the Royals consider themselves a 92 win team. If they swap Grienke for, say, Alexi Ramirez and prospects and the White Sox also have a comparable replacement for Ramirez in the system, that may catapult them ahead in the standings on paper. That is to say if the gains between the acquisition and what they are replacing (Greinke versus #5 pitcher) are greater than the losses between the moved player and their replacement (Alexi Ramirez and some AAA player) to push the White Sox past the Royals in the division, they would balk.
Presumably they’d be less concerned about pushing some non-divisional foe ahead a few more games. This still seems like a case-by-case decision calculus and yet we often find teams make blanket statements regarding players and intradivision trades.
There’s also a fan element to this. Royals fans would likely be more vociferous against a trade (regardless of the returns) if they are forced to watch a formerly beloved player shut them down on a regular basis. The masses are not inspired by careful quantified risk analysis. They are moved by complete games against their teams.
So, I’m curious, are there other reasons not to do an intra-division trade? Is it just too risky that you might ever be improving your opponent too much to make it worth it when that opponent could prevent your entrance to the playoffs?
What if the Cardinals wanted to trade Colby Rasmus or Adam Wainwright to the Cubs? Or the Reds? Is there a return you could accept that would be palatable? You needn’t be specific. Finally, would you require more from an intra-division foe in return than you would from another team?
I’m curious what your thoughts are on intra-division trades.
Entries (RSS)
I think that you’re more or less on the money with all of it. I can see the team acknowledging they won’t win short term wanting more for what they’re giving up if it’s intra-division for the exact reason you stated above – the sting is probably a little less when the guy that used to be your guy shuts you down on a continued basis for the remainder of the season, because you *somewhat* got a little bit extra for him. Even though it was stated otherwise, I still believe this is part of the reason why we didn’t get Oswalt this past year.
I think a pretty clear-cut situation in which you would not want to do an in intra-division trade is if the trade is a salary dump by a contending team. For example, the Braves felt compelled to trade Javier Vasquez last year after he came off of a top 5 Cy Young-caliber season. The Braves had a surplus of pitching, and were trying to trade either Vasquez, or preferably Derek Lowe. They still viewed themselves as contenders for at least the wild card, so they wouldn’t want to trade Vasquez to say the Marlins, Phillies, or Mets. Nationals probably wouldn’t have mattered much either way. Trading Vasquez to an intra-division rival for pennies on the dollar as a means of salary relief would not benefit the Braves in the short or long term (performance-wise, not budget-wise). This is one scenario where I see trading a player to an out-of-division team for lesser return is palatable
It seems to me like the poorer team never really has a chance to obtain a quality prospect in those situations.
A generic fifth-place team can trade their starting third baseman to a perennial front-runner for a C+ prospect but it’s a miracle if the prospect ever becomes a major league starter. That means they traded a veteran for less than what they had.
(In the meantime, they have “hope” but that’s about it.)
These days, it seems like the trade value of a veteran player must be equal or better than possible draft pick compensation. If the player wouldn’t bring a compensation pick if he left in free agency, you’re back to the first example (vet for C+ prospect).
I’ve never really understood the whole “don’t trade within your division” mentality either, but I can definitely see not trading with a major blood rival. For example, as a Cardinal fan, I would be much more agreeable to trading Colby to, say, Pittsburgh, than to the Cubs. . .particularly if Pittsburgh would have the necessary assets coming back to us. But shipping Colby off to the AL Central for lesser players than what Pittsburgh could offer would be asinine IMO and only hurt our organization. If you trade with a major rival like the Cubs, however, you better make sure you win that deal, and typically the organization who received the better player (Colby!) usually comes out on top.
The fan’s position must be distinguished from the team’s position here. The Cubs rivalry may be galling (in a rather condescending way…) to us as fans, but for the franchise, ANY deal that decreases the team’s chance to win its division, and to flourish in the long run (acknowledging that there’s tension between these, and balancing the tension is important), must be avoided, whether it’s with a nominal “rivalry” team or someone else. If the Cubs had something we need more than we need Raz (they don’t), and their own need for him would be less (it isn’t), then I would be no more and no less willing to make that deal than if the Pirates were in the same boat (they don’t either). Compare to Milwaukee or particularly Cincinnati, however, and the situation would be different: I would not deal with either of those teams unless I was CERTAIN that we would win the trade, by a significant margin, because those are the two teams that have a chance to be better than ours for the next few years. I’d rather deal with Chicago than Cincinnati at this point, never mind the rivalry, because doing so is more likely to have the outcome I desire: that St. Louis wins the division for the next few years, rather than Chicago (who won’t) or Cincinnati (who might).
Speaking of trades has anyone checked up on daryl jones numbers lately?… i saw he made the coastal allstar team… his avg. was near .320, obp. over 450 and was slg. over .600 with 5 hr already… those are some pretty good power numbers that we havent seen from him in a long time. Could we be seeing Daryl Jones returning back to the 2008 form… guess the removal from the 40 man has sparked a flame in him.
even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then. I wouldn’t get excited about it until I knew more about the quality of pitchers that he’s facing.
Funny how some of you guys who never get a chance to even watch some of these players play that go only strickly by what others hear and say have so much negativity to say about some of these players. Anyone that hits .330 with power in the Florida State Leauge has some talent for the big leagues. that is a pitching dominated league everyone knows that Lets not forget that Rasmus hit .250 in that league at the same age… Daryl Jones for instance hits .280 hits loses power and stolen bases due to a leg injury yet manages to still make the Double A allstar team and futures game and yet some of you call that a down year. Think about hldow many people would love to hit .280… ok so he has a bad year this year. and you guys are so quick to right him off… And yet when the guy starts to show some promise and maturity in his baseball skills you guys still have nothing good to say… these guys go out and work hard to get better everyday that is the whole point of the minor leagues. some it just takes longer than others. Just think its funny how a guy like Jones can do well and have everyone jump off the bandwagon so quickly after a down year in 2010. Cause i dnt consider a .280 avg a down year in 2009.
The problem is Chambers has eclipsed Jones, he’s injury prone and he hasn’t show he can master AA, better yet AAA. The chances of him becoming a productive major leaguer at this point are slim to none. Does he really deserve a promotion to Memphis? If not, does he deserve a third year in Springfield? I don’t think it’s a bandwagon thing – I think Jones has not lived up to expectations
Rasmus and Jones signed in 2005. Rasmus passed through Palm Beach in 2006, but Jones not until 2008.
If the Cards were high on Jones, they would not have removed him from the 40 man, regardless of what we write here.
Jones may improve, but right now, his stock is down.
Looks like the Cards signed Berkman for 1 year @ 8 million. Hard to believe that Allen Craig couldn’t be counted on to hit 14 hrs and bat .248 for the league min. They just screwed Jon Jay and Allen Craig. Earlier in the week they screwed Tyler Greene and Brendan Ryan. Maybe, the org needs to realise that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side of the fence. They could get the production that Berkman & Ryan T bring out of the guys they already have at this point and for less money.
http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.jsp?ymd=20101204&content_id=16255992&vkey=pr_stl&fext=.jsp&c_id=stl
Successful teams need depth. Craig can backup Berkman and Holliday; if there are injuries, he will get some playing time.
A matter of perspective. I prefer to think of this as Berkman taking Randy Winn’s roster spot. Can anybody be upset with that?
Lance Berkman can’t be any worse of a fielder than Chris Duncan was, and if he hits like he did at the end of the year I would be happy. One interesting thing about the Berkman signing is that Craig might get some work at third now.
Like RC Warrior always says over on Brian’s site, they’re building the kind of team LaRussa wants. It’s not always a good situation for young players — unless they’re really, really good and keep their mouths shut — but he’s a proven winner with that kind of team.
I agree with you, but I don’t blame a team for not wanting to trade to division rivals. The goal of most trades is to make both teams better somehow. Equal value trades can improve both teams. A good example is the J.D. Drew trade, at least if you look at it in terms of its impact on the 2004 season. The Braves needed a slugger, and they got it for one year. The Cardinals’ rotation was abysmal in 2003, they desperately needed to revamp their staff, and Marquis and King were important parts of the 105-win team. It was a win-win. In that scenario, it’s better that the Braves were made better and not, say, the Astros or Cubs.
Didn’t Wainwright come over in the JD Drew deal as well?
That one definately worked out!!!