In the first major trade of the season, the Braves attempted to address their desperate outfield situation by swapping three prospects to the Pirates in exchange for nominal center fielder Nate McLouth. The deal is a lot more interesting than that, not least because what you’re about to read here and what at least one other BP analyst says will be fairly divergent. Any time you can get that kind of disagreement, you have an interesting deal.
The Braves’ end of the deal is simple: they get a major league outfielder. McLouth doesn’t have to repeat his peak season of 2008 to help the Braves. He doesn’t even have to play as well as he has so far this season (.256/.349/.470, with seven steals in as many attempts), although I’m sure they’d like to see some happy medium between the two. Braves outfielders have been so mind-alteringly bad that McLouth could go into a slump and still be outplaying all three starters. Garret Anderson, Jordan Schafer-demoted this week-and Jeff Francoeur have combined to be 12 runs below replacement level, and all three have come in below that pathetic standard. With his indifferent defense and his lack of speed, Anderson has been one of the worst players in the league.
The key part of the trade for the Braves is in who loses the playing time. If McLouth takes Gregor Blanco‘s place in center field, then much of the gain in acquiring him is washed away. Upgrading from Schafer to Blanco this week was a necessary change for a team desperately in need of some OBP. Blanco had a .366 mark last season thanks to a high walk rate, and if that number may be hard to reach again, a .270/.340/.350 line is achievable. Blanco should stay in the lineup now, with McLouth getting Anderson’s playing time. That would give the Braves two major league outfielders, where a week ago they had none. Benching or demoting Blanco as a result of this deal would turn it into, if not a wash, a much less attractive trade.
At 27, McLouth has retained more of his 2008 value than I expected he would, upping his walk rate, continuing to steal bases, and retaining some of the power spike he experienced a year ago. Taken together, his 2007-09 seasons are pretty stable, and the idea that 2008 was a peak is as much about playing time and arc—it was his first season as a full-time player, and he got off to a huge start—as it was about value. I like the comparison of McLouth to Rusty Greer, who walked more and hit more singles, but had less power and speed. Greer was also a corner outfielder stretched in center field, one whose defensive performance lagged behind his reputation due to a penchant for making highlight-reel catches. Like McLouth, Greer got his first full-time run at 26, and was a good player for a number of seasons before his body gave out at about 32 years old. I could see McLouth having that kind of career arc, which is a little more generous of an opinion than the one that I had of him two months ago. There’s still a sense that he’s a very good fourth outfielder who is a marginal starter, but even as I type that, I wonder if the concept is dead. How many “good fourth outfielders” exist any longer? The players I tag with that label all seem to end up starting; Shane Victorino, Gary Matthews Jr., Eric Byrnes all come to mind.
Bringing it back to the trade, I see the Pirates as having done all right in it. They traded a player at or near the peak of his value, whose useful career would not extend into their next run of success, for quantity. Gorkys Hernandez is hitting an empty .316 at Double-A with a high strikeout rate, which isn’t much to get excited about. For the Pirates, though, he becomes a rated prospect who could be a fair regular in a corner, at low cost, for a few seasons. To put it another way, he could be their next Nate McLouth. Neither Charlie Morton nor Jeff Locke is an impact prospect; both, however, continue to add to the Pirates’ depth, similar to how they added bodies in the Xavier Nady and Jason Bay deals a year ago. Talent accumulation is a reasonable goal for this organization right now, and this trade addresses that.
The most interesting thing to me about this trade is what it says about the industry’s evaluation of defense. The trade works because Nate McLouth was correctly valued, and that value takes into account that he’s not a good defensive center fielder. The Pirates, who would have as good a read on McLouth’s actual value as any team given that not only do they see him every day, but they employ Dan Fox as an analyst, took back a package that clearly did not value McLouth as a “Gold Glove” center fielder. If that deal were out there, if there were a team thinking of McLouth as a defensive stalwart, surely the return on him would have been better.
This strikes me as a turning point, the first time we’ve seen what amounts to a rejection of the conclusion of Gold Glove voters relative to the objective performance record. The industry has voted on Nate McLouth, and it’s saying that his defense is closer to the numbers, and therefore worthy of three OK prospects in a deal, rather than closer to his reputation and worth more. A true +20 center fielder—one who’s truly Gold Glove-caliber in the field—with McLouth’s bat would be a steal for this package; no one involved sees him as such.
The trade is a good one for both teams. The Braves upgrade a black hole, while the Pirates trade a player at or near the peak of his value for more building blocks. The real conclusion, though, is that the trade is a win for the industry. It signals an embrace of rational approaches to player evaluation that would have been hard to foresee 15 years ago.
Thank you for reading
This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.
Subscribe now
Between demoting Schafer, dumping Glavine, acquiring McLouth, and promoting Hanson, the Braves have become a significantly better team in the past 3 days.
I just think that its a fairly big upgrade for the Braves regardless of whether McLouth replaces Blanco or Anderson
Garrett Anderson hasn't hit for power and hasn't taken walks for basically the whole year. He's sucked long enough. Let's at least give Blanco a chance to suck for a while, if only for variety.
They've used up their quota of Blanco-sucking.
276/356/497 last season with 76 extra base hits. Signed for ages 27-28-29 at $5.5M per year which is well under market. Gold Glove, whether you agree with the voters or not.
Seems like an awfully meager return to the Pirates for what they gave up.
All I would say is that if I was forced to bet on which player had the better "true" defense [assume that could magically be determined after the fact]: A) a CF with a 94 Rate and a recent Gold Glove, or B) a CF with a 94 Rate and no Gold Glove votes, I would bet on A.
Also, people keep positing that McLouth's value would increase at the deadline. Why? It's a weird year in baseball given the economics, so who knows how that will affect moves at the deadline. Also, where might the Pirates get a better deal? If you assume the trade wouldn't be within the division and you exclude teams from the NL West who won't be in the race, that gives you the AL and the NL East. I know we are very far away from the deadline, and lots could happen between now and then to affect the dynamics of divisional races, but perhaps the Pirates played out possible trading scenarios with potential trading partners, and this was the best deal. Where else might they go and who could they get? Phillies, Mets? Red Sox, Yankees, Jays, Rays? The AL Central? Angels, Rangers?
It just might be that this trade now was likely to be the best they could get.
Meanwhile Gregor Blanco had a .259 EQA last year and his defense in CF is basically a wash with McLouth's. Decent, but nothing to write home about.
Early slump aside, the question is: would the Braves really think Nate McLouth's defense in LF is worth the difference in batting between Blanco and Anderson (who has a .238 EqA this year, but was around .275 the last two, and is hitting better lately).
Ideally, they'd let Francoeur find a new home, play Blanco in Center, McLouth in RF, Anderson/Diaz platoon in LF. More likely, they would just play McLouth in CF and let Francoeur continue to try to hack his way back into relevancy.
http://www.tribune-democrat.com/prosports/local_story_155001701.html
Also, I wonder about the extent to which "the industry has voted" in this deal. Is it clear that McLouth was shopped aggressively before settling for a trio of players I see as middling at best? Another rich pennant contender in the NL East, and at one in the NL Central, could use an upgrade in the outfield almost as much as the Braves could have done.
If a player had a horrible half-season, then had one good game, you wouldn't sit here and say "this is the turning point"? Joe, you're the one who always (and correctly) points us to how stupid looking at just April stats are?
Maybe you're right, in that this trade will signal the dawning of an era where defensive is evaluated by metrics as opposed to gold gloves and highlight reels. But you need more than one trade to make such a claim.
An efficient market therefore means that this is the "age of reason" where there aren't teams willing to overpay for a player of McLouth's caliber just because he made the all-star team and won a gold glove last year.
I think there's some merit to that argument, though it's easy to take it too far.
So IF this is a shift it will look like a bad trade until the paradigm has obviously shifted - then it could be reevaluated.
As a side note, based on a big ol' sample size of two, it appears as if the Pirates may be valuing groundball pitchers more than average.
Finally, Sheehan's thought that, "For the Pirates, though, [Hernandez] becomes a rated prospect who could be a fair regular in a corner, at low cost, for a few seasons," strikes me as pretty absurd. Why would they pay up for premium CF def., and then stick the guy on a corner? Furthermore, Hernandez could not look like more of a slap hitter than he has thus far in his career. If he does start for the Pirates in the next couple of years, it will almost certainly be at CF.
One reason for this is his baserunning. He's stolen 64 bases and been caught 5 times in his career.
Sure, he's stretched at CF, but he's good enough to stick and his bat (and baserunning) more than makes up for it.
He's not a star, but I don't see a star in the package the Braves gave up, either.
So, yeah, all in all, I'd agree that this is a good all around trade.
PECOTA has McCutcheon as an 850+ OPS guy through 2013. That's a major league outfielder. I agree he's no gold glover in center, but he'd be swell in left or right. If McCutcheon is anywhere near ready, the outfield of McClouth McCutcheon and Morgan puts 3 first class defensive players behind the their young pitching staff. That combo also has way more offensive potential between now and 2013 than an outfield with Gorkys Hernandez or the overrated Brandon Moss (current OPS .749)--who is the definition of a perfect 4th outfielder (And would be a way better 4th outfielder than say, Gorkys Hernandez, f'rinstance). Plus, if Moss DOES develop, they've got 4 first rate big league outfielders.
If I was a Pirates fan, I'd be apoplectic.
Next year you could trot out an OF of Gorkys/McCutcheon(at a corner OF spot)/Morgan that'll be even better defensively than this year's OF.
Morton is 25, but lighting up AAA and showed flashes of talent last year when called up. Anything you get out of Locke will not be realized for a couple years at least.
McLouth is good, but he is replaceable and risks future years of being a type of player with little power/speed and little ability to play center by the end of his contract. You just don't pay that kind of money for a corner outfielder who won't have the bat to hold that position.
What kind of money? 2 million this year, 4.5 million next year, and 6 million in 2011 is what McLouth is owed. He'll be 29 in 2011. What evidence is there he won't still have power and speed at age 29?
Look, I think McLouth is probably overrated (he's a lesser version of Jayson Werth), but at that price, you are more than getting your money's worth, either as a great offensive CF with crappy defense, or as a slightly above league-average corner OF. I don't get how you could think he's gonna age so badly in 2 years in his twenties to not be worth 6.5 million at his most expensive.
Assume the Pirates keep McLouth. It'd be a bad sign (though a sign of how the Pirates operated before the recent ownership change) if he's starting in the Pirates outfield a few years from now. Sure, he's better than replacement value, but does that mean you want to throw 4.5 million next year and 6 million in 2011 to that kind of player?
He just won a Gold Glove last year and just came off a good month, It appears there is little reason for McClutchen to spend more time in Triple-A. There are indicators that he might regress offensively (since last season was unexpected) and that he is not in in actuality a great (though serviceable) defensive player. The Pirates are finally cobbling together a young pitching staff and might improve in the upcoming years. Why not trade him while his value is at its highest and use that money for some other facet of the organization or to sign the next big draft pick?
However, I could be pessimistic in how I project McLouth. If you think McLouth will be a star on the next Pirates contending team, then yes, keep him. But I am unconvinced he will get much better and he could potentially get much worse. With that belief in mind, flip him for prospects/other trade chits and use the money on a superstar who will be on the next Pirates contending team.
I simply don't think this is a very good haul for a guy signed to a very reasonable contract considering his age and projected production. He's not going to fall off a cliff offensively in his peak years (these are his 27-29 years), and you're paying a total of 15 million over the next 3 years for a guy who according to Fangraphs was worth 16 million alone last season. That's a good deal even if he only produces the next 2 and a half years at 75% of what he did last year. I find it very hard to believe they'll get the same value out of the guys they traded for. I will be surprised if any of those guys are contributors to a contending Pirates team.
Yes, it does. Apparently, you haven't been following player salaries very closely. There is no one on this comment board besides you who would argue that McLouth's current contract has negative value.
We can't really project what a properly valued contract will be one or two years from now. When Peavy signed his contract, it was thought of as a great deal and now it's more viewed as an albatross. Established, albiet older major leaguers who were productive over the last few years haven't been able to sign major league contracts (Lofton, Edmonds, Durham, Pedro Martinez). Even if you look at the "premium" outfielders available over this offseason, Bobby Abreu got 5 million for 1 year, and Burrell/Dunn/Ibanez were all just around 8 million. Granted, all four are worse defensively than McLouth, but they are superior hitters as well. Andruw Jones and Juan Pierre could've been picked up for pennies on the dollar as well. Even Josh Willingham who is a better offensive player than McLouth and is just a year older than Willingham could've been acquired via a trade could've been picked up cheaply via trade by anyone who wanted him. The point is that McLouth has some value, but he's also replaceable.
Who knows what 4.5 million could buy in 2010 and 6 million could buy in 2011? McLouth has some value but he is also replaceable. Meanwhile the Pirates colud use that money on future draft picks, international signings or towards long-term contracts for rookies they perceive as superstars in the Alvarez mold.
Thus, I lean towards selling while his value is high before #1 his value drops from injury or ineffectiveness or #2 the trade value to acquire prospects is even more expensive. I also think it's a good idea to sell high when there are prospects who could be better offensively and defensively nipping at his heels and that he may end up being too old by the time the Pirates build a perennial contender. Willingham did not net much of a return for the Marlins so perhaps this was the best package of prospects that the Pirates could get for McLouth.
Just to reiterate so that you don't misunderstand me. McLouth has value, but he is replaceable. His contract looks cheap right now but the money might be better spent by the Pirates in 2010 and 2011. He has some offensive punch but he loses overall value if he shifts to a corner and various defensive metrics suggest that, though far from a bad defensive centerfielder, he's not a great one either and would have to switch positions as he ages. His value is at its peak so I think the Pirates were wise to trade him since I doubt he would hold up well as a starter by the time the Pirates have a championship team. Finally, there are prospects who can be better than him on both the offensive and defensive side of the ball.
To quote Branch Rickey, "I would rather trade a player a year too early than a year too late."
Do you really think McLouth will get better than he was last year? If he is forced to move off of center field, do you think his production would be enough to justify starting for a contending team? Do you think he is irreplaceable?
"Who knows what 4.5 million could buy in 2010 and 6 million could buy in 2011?"
Let's see...how about less than half of an Aaron Rowand contract ($12M/yr)? Read up on MORP if you need more examples.
The Pirates could and should have gotten way more. I hope one of the Steinbrenners brings this up at the next owners' meeting when the Pirates ask for more revenue sharing.
But really, in the end, this trade breaks a rule that I think all GMs should follow: don't trade for Braves prospects. Somehow that organization always knows which of their seemingly decent minor leaguers aren't actually any good. Maybe they've got Dionne Warwick on contract. And this trade sure displays her Value Over Replacement Psychic.
I would be surprised if the Braves are finished dealing. Francoeur will be the next to go.
Maybe I'm still miffed on Glavine. Why sign him if you don't think he can contribute? Why say his numbers at A ball don't matter about his skill level if you're the ones who assigned him to A ball for rehab?
And as for Hampton, he pitched well for the (painfully short) time he was healthy. Before he went on his 3+ year hiatus, he was an effective pitcher. No problem in scouting there.
I do agree that the Glavine thing was handled very poorly.
Hampton, though, was not a good deal. He had two marginaly effective years (though never broke 200 IP) but he was being paid as a superstar at that time. Even if part of his salary was being eaten up by Colorado (and as I remember, Florida too), just the idea of him being around forced the Braves to fiddle with their roster incase he got healthy.
Perhaps the Pirates just needed to dump payroll (even if it is a *mere* $15 million or so) to allow them financial resources for the upcoming draft.
Some cities have to "Wait 'til next year..."
Here in Pittsburgh it seems like we have to "Wait 'til....well, just keep on waiting". *sigh*
Mclouth will likely obp ~.360 and slg .480 for the next three seasons (this is PECOTA'S projection, not mine). His platoon split is not particularly severe (and he has actually reversed that split so far this season). The NL average ops for right fielders in 2008 was .803 and for left fielders it was .788. Mclouth will likely be significantly better than both these marks. Additionally, he is a high-percentage base stealer and in his career has been replacement-level defensively at both corners. How is this a fourth outfielder? How many NL teams would love this production from either corner? You have called him a fourth outfielder before, and I don't get it. I would love to hear your argument for describing him as such, and you might just able to convince me. But please back it up.
For this reason, I don't think this was two teams making a smart trade and valuing their players properly. I think it was one team pulling the trigger too early and dumping its best offensive player who was coming off an admittedly career season and was also signed to a manageable contract. I'm not saying the Pirates should have gotten a Jason Heyward-level prospect here, but I do think they should have at least gotten a little more upside. Hernandez doesn't have much of a place with the organization if McCutcheon is around (do you really think his bat will ever be good enough to play in a corner?), Morton isn't going to be more than a marginal 5th starter, and Locke, while having upside, is a huge question mark.
Pittsburgh has been going through a host of OF to find their CF in the past few years. Now that the find him and sign him to an incredibaly reasonable contract (even better on the age / dollar curve than Bay), they get rid of him to start the process all over again - by the author's own admission "To put it another way, he could be their next Nate McLouth."
Cleveland was successful in the 90s locking up players before they became free agents. Pitttsburgh obviously has decleared, with this trade, that they can't even field a trade to that standard. And Oakland was getting rid of players even as the approached ARBITRATION let alone FREE AGENCY.
Isn't it time for these franchises to find new ownership rather than continuing the charade? That should be your real outrage Joe - not demeaning a player that worked very hard for every achievement he's garnered because you think he got one you think he didn't deserve.
1- The entire baseball community suddenly reached the correct measurement of a player's defensive worth.. and correctly judged the players trade value based on his defensive worth.
Or
2- The Pirates just traded for lesser prospects than what another organization could have gotten for McClouth.
- Michael Scott
Joe would have you believe that the Pirates all of a sudden got as smart as he is because they just recognized some fielding metric that says Nate McLouth is a piece of crap ...
when in fact the Pirates are just making the same stupid moves they have for the last 17 years ...
"They traded a player at or near the peak of his value, whose useful career would not extend into their next run of success ..."
NEXT RUN OF SUCCESS ... you have got to be kidding ... there will be no next run of success just as there hasn't been one in the last 17 years ...
Last year .859 at home vs .846 away.
In 2007, .844 at home and .772 away.
In 2006, .697 at home and .661 away
The main dip in his performance so far in 2009 is hitting just .176 away but his HR rate is stable whether he's home or away.
Overall for three complete seasons, from 2006 to 2008, he has a .823 OPS at home and a .781 OPS away. He also has a platoon split of a .822 OPS vs RHP and only a .739 OPS vs LHP.
But his overall HR/AB rate for those three years is equal whether he's home (23 HR in 606 AB) or away (23 HR in 590 AB). He is hitting home runs at a higher rate this year (8 in 168 AB).
However, the main cause of his OPS spike at home over that three year period (2006-2008) is an increased rate of doubles (47 at home versus 38 away) and triples (8 at home versus 1 away). So, until this year, the increased home OPS performance can be attributed to more doubles and triples at home, not home runs. This year, the main difference in his OPS is his low road batting average.
I guess I can discuss this even more, but I'm not sure if it's worth writing another page long comment to respond to a two sentence critique that doesn't address other aspects of the comment I've written. In the end, you think McLouth is very valuable and I think he has value but he is replaceable.
I sympathize with Pirate fans- what's the sense in continually reloading when you never shoot?
Best line I've read here in a long time ...