The state of the trade market

I had the same initial concerns expressed by teamnasty when I first heard of the trade. I was at the game last night and Diekman bounced back well from his previous one batter walk outing. Still think he has some control issues but beginning to feel better about him being included.

Heard interview of Daniels and he said with the details of money being transferred around Hamels was only costing about $12 mil a year. So that makes him affordable. I think one thing Daniels will never say but is in play here is very few elite pitchers are going to come here as a free agent. The heat, the hitters park, being able to get more money by going to NY or LA all plays a part. I had felt prior to the deadline I would rather use the $20+ mil Hamels would make to pursue a free agent and keep all those prospects. But if did only end up costing $12 mil then they could not have got a top of rotation pitcher for that. And very good chance they might have been shut out completely in the free agent pitcher competition.

Given the train wreck that has been the rotation last 2 years Daniels was probably thinking could not let that happen again. Daniels also made the comment that a part of the reason for doing the trade was Philly taking on the Harrison contract. That makes me wonder if he does not expect Harrison to hold up.

As it stands right now expect to see rotation this time next year of Darvish, Hamels, Nick Martinez, Martin Perez with the 5th slot being filled with Colby or someone obtained this winter or a competition between Gonzalez, Tepesch, or Luke Jackson. To be successful though I think they need to add a RH bat over the winter to break up the sting of LH batters that make it easy for opposing managers to match up their bullpen usage late in games.

In reality the cost of Hamels is much more than $12 million a year given the young talent given up in the deal. Just taking a look at the money alone however begs the question: is Texas' position in the competitive balance cycle robust enough to justify throwing 12 million per year for several years for Hamel's age 31+ seasons or would it be wiser to spread that money around it's development system, or even among several positions? In my opinion the latter is the much wiser choice. For Rangers fans in the short term it will be more enjoyable to watch Hamels, Darvish (if healthy a gigantic if) Fielder try to win some games. But it's even more enjoyable in the long run to build a sustainable winner year after year.

In reality the cost of Hamels is much more than $12 million a year given the young talent given up in the deal. Just taking a look at the money alone however begs the question: is Texas' position in the competitive balance cycle robust enough to justify throwing 12 million per year for several years for Hamel's age 31+ seasons or would it be wiser to spread that money around it's development system, or even among several positions? In my opinion the latter is the much wiser choice. For Rangers fans in the short term it will be more enjoyable to watch Hamels, Darvish (if healthy a gigantic if) Fielder try to win some games. But it's even more enjoyable in the long run to build a sustainable winner year after year.

As I noted before, the talent given up was sustainable. They kept superior prospects, Joey Gallo and Nomar Mazara, as well as solid prospects Lewis Brinson, Luis Ortiz, and Luke Jackson. The only top 50 prospect they gave up was (#49)Jake Thompson, whose #3 ceiling doesn't match Hamels' current or likely near future level of production. And Hamels at 31 isn't facing a drastic drop in production from now to 35, when his contract runs out. So, the solid deal they are getting on a legitimate #2 starter is still a good one.

And, as I noted before, the Rangers position in the "competitive balance cycle" is definitely solid in the mediocre AL West. Fielder, Odor, Andrus, Moreland, Gallo, Hamels, Darvish...and even Profar, Choo, and Hamilton add up to a sound basis for a solid AL West team. Texas shouldn't wait for the perfect year to try to compete; they have the ability to compete for the next few years, and even now. Hamels will definitely help them do that for years. And it isn't an either/or. They can pay for Hamels and put money back into the farm system. Hamels' contract is hardly prohibitive of that, and Texas' ownership can certainly afford it.

Also, considering TN's previous faith in a study showing little faith in a position prospect's ability to succeed, I'm surprised he sees Texas' package including 2 position prospects (not in BA's top 50) as too much for Hamels:

In 2011 Scott McKinney of Royals Review studied 14 years of data on Baseball America's top 100 annual prospects in MLB and found that 63% percent of position players in fact flamed out at levels below Gregorious' production. Most far below, at replacement level.

From the interviews I have heard I think Daniels believes there is still plenty left in the prospect pipeline even after giving up 5 prospects the future is not much impaired. Except for Alfaro the cream of the crop was retained. He clearly believes they still have a deeper farm system than most teams even after this trade.

A bit late for the thought but would still be interested in responses.

Does it make any difference in the decision to be buyers or sellers at trade deadline whether you have a shot at a division win or just a shot at the one game wild card play in game?

A bit late for the thought but would still be interested in responses.

Does it make any difference in the decision to be buyers or sellers at trade deadline whether you have a shot at a division win or just a shot at the one game wild card play in game?

I would think it SHOULD make a difference, I don't know if it actually DOES. I suppose each team is different. I think Toronto helped themselves the most but they also gambled the most. If they don't get at least to the division series then they made a huge mistake.

Yes it makes a difference. No sense in mortgaging a farm system to increase one's odds to play a coin flip play in game. In Toronto's case however they got Tulo on the cheap, I'm very supportive of that deal.

Yes it makes a difference. No sense in mortgaging a farm system to increase one's odds to play a coin flip play in game. In Toronto's case however they got Tulo on the cheap, I'm very supportive of that deal.

Firstly, unless one has a crappy system like the Angels or Orioles, a team should never mortgage its farm system, period. A.J. Preller of the Padres certainly learned that this year. Nobody mortgaged their system at this trade deadline, although the Blue Jays did give up the best of their pitching prospects, who are quite talented. Daniel Norris and Jeff Hoffman both have #2 starter potential, were BA's 18th and 33rd top MLB prospects, respectively. Jairo Labourt and hard-throwing Miguel Castro are also very talented, and crafty young lefty Matt Boyd just threw a great game for Detroit. So, if they make the playoffs and Tulo stays healthy--a big if--it was worth the price; if not, it wasn't.

As to the difference between trading for a chance at the division title and a chance at the Wild Card playoff, it's just a matter of degree. A team should be willing to pay more for the division shot. However, if a team only has a chance at a wild-card playoff spot, they still have a shot at the rest of the playoffs and the title. So, they should be still be willing to trade substantial, but sustainable, talent.

given that both world series teams were wild card survivors last year it seems a good gamble. the way things are shaking out I feel confident they will catch the Yankees before October. either way their fan base is very loyal, and starved for any kind of meaningful sept/oct. baseball. I believe it was the right time to make these moves.

Just learned something new on the Hamels trade. I went to check how Matt Harrison has done since the trade and his game log showed no games pitched since July 27. Not one pitch thrown for the Phillies. That was strange I thought to myself. Looked at their active roster and no Harrison. Looked at their 40 man and Harrison appeared to be on the 15 day disabled list. What?????? No further information. Went to MLB.com and clicked a few times to get to the page listing all the injury news across all of MLB. He was not listed. So I went to one of my yahoo leagues and searched for him because they usually have a little news box on players. Clicked on it and that provided the rest of the story. Harrison has been disgnosed as having hyperthyroidism. The news box went on to speculate that was the reason for his recent weight loss and loss of velocity.

Everything I had been hearing on him was his velocity was gradually increasing. So now wondering......
How much of that did Rangers know before the trade? How much did they share with Phillies? If Philly knew did Rangers say in order for the quality and quantity of prospects to be included that were Philly would have to take on Matt and be the ones to eat his remaining guaranteed salary. If so then this trade is better for the Rangers than I originally thought and one has to start considering it a good deal for Rangers in spite of giving up 5 quality prospects.

I feel bad for Matt. He worked hard to get back and now another setback. But for Rangers I can understand why they wanted to get out of the contract and make it someone else's headache.