[lex24]

Lex, your Ketel Marte trade proposal made it into The Athletic today!

He panned it.  Not surprising.  And I wouldn’t trade  Luciano  and Marte for Ketel.

After reading Bowden's response, and thinking about my initial reaction, I believe that 1) I was wrong and 2) that Bowden is similarly wrong. We both established the correct facts but arrived at the wrong conclusion. If I were Bowden I would have answered with the following (acknowledging that The Athletic's format wouldn't allow for such a detailed analysis):

1. Ketel Marte is very valuable asset. He's projected by Fangraphs to be worth 3.8 WAR next year but is signed to a one-year contract for $8 million with two additional team options totaling $22 million more. He'll play next year at 28 years old. How much would he be worth if he was a free agent?

There have been three free agent second basemen or centerfielders signed so far:

Starling Marte, 33 years old, 3.0 projected WAR, 4 x $19.5 million.
Marcus Semien, 31 years old, 4.5 projected WAR, 7 x $25 million.
Chris Taylor, 31 years old, 2.2 projected WAR, 4 x $15 million.

Given the ages of these three players one should assume that teams are expecting to recoup most of the contract's value in the front part, regardless of how the contract itself is structured. If Semien was willing to sign a one year contract with two team options the first year might well be $40 million, given his projection. Given that Starling Marte's contract starts at age 33 a one year contract with two team options might start at $25 million or more.
Taylor is three years older than Ketel Marte and has a much lower projected value but his contract serves as a baseline.

On the open market it's fair to assume that if Ketel Marte was open to a one year contract with two team options he would be looking at total compensation of around $90 million over three years. Given that he is only going to be paid $30 million that's a $60 million underpay.

2. If the Giants were offering prospects (and/or young cost controlled major leaguers) they would need to propose a very strong package to equal Marte's surplus value, starting with Luciano and Ramos as well as several others near the top of their rankings.

3. However, there's Madison Bumgarner, whose contract has strong negative value and is an anchor on Arizona's baseball operations. He's due $60 million over the next three years. He's projected by Fangraphs to be worth 1.0 WAR next season. He'll play next year at 32 years old. How much would he be worth as a free agent?

These are the starting pitchers signed so far who Fangraphs projects to produce less than 1.5 WAR:

Andrew Heaney, 31 years old, 1.4 projected WAR, 1 x $8.5 million.
Corey Kubler, 36 years old, 1.4 projected WAR, 1 x $8 million.
Jordan Lyles, 31 years old, 0.9 projected WAR, 1 x $7 million.
Michael Wacha, 30 years old, 1.3 projected WAR, 1 x $7 million.

It's a fairly narrow band which Bumgarner fits into. On the open market he would be looking at a one year deal in this range. A three year deal is obviously not realistic, but theoretically he might get a total of $15 million over that time, meaning that he's far from worthless but is being overpaid by about $45 million.

4. The delta between Marte's underpay and Bumgarner's overpay is only around $15 million, a manageable figure which can probably be filled by second tier prospects such as Bishop and Santos and a pair of lower minors lottery tickets. Possibly a higher ranked prospect than Santos would be required but critically the overall package doesn't need a top prospect to be included in this scenario.

5. Duggar also doesn't need to be included in the deal given the above assumptions, and the Giants shouldn't be trading him. 1) He's their only projected starting position player under 30, 2) Marte is a terrible centerfielder whose best position is second base, playing him in centerfield full time would materially diminish his value and change all of the calculations above. Moreover, if Arizona is inclined to move Marte in order to rebuild they won't value a player like Duggar highly, given that he will be into his thirties when they contend again.

6. The Giants are a high-revenue team (even though they haven't been acting like it) meaning they should use their economic power to acquire talent instead of trading top prospects. Taking on Bumgarner's contract is the ideal way for them to improve their team, even if they ended up releasing him at some point. If the Diamondbacks are in reset mode then this is the opportunity to eliminate dead money while acquiring prospect volume.

7. Fangraphs projects San Francisco's best player in 2022 to be Brandon Crawford, producing 2.6 WAR. If the Giants acquired Ketel Marte he would be projected to be their best player by a significant margin and they would only be committed for one year (in the event of catastrophic injury or suspension), three years maximum. It's a no-brainer for them and taking Bumgarner is a reasonable cost. Would the Giants sign Marte for one year at $25 million with two $25 million options ($25 million being $10 million a year average for Marte's salary and $15 million a year average for the portion of Bumgarner's salary which is an overpay)? of course they would, and they would be willing to trade some non-top level prospects for that opportunity. If the Diamondbacks are in actual rebuild mode then this scenario is plausible for them as well.

8. Non-elite prospects for Marte and Bumgarner makes sense, whether it's realistic depends on whether SF is willing to spend money in the form of taking on an onerous contract and whether Arizona is willing to trade a very valuable player in order to reduce payroll and start over - their fans won't be pleased, and it's an admission of making a terrible decision in signing Bumgarner.

I like your response a lot more…..  I did think Bowden missed the point on Bumgarner.  Although, I still hold out hope that he can regain some of his former prowess.  It’s rare, but not unprecedented.  Verlander being a good example. (Although his fall was shorter and less precipitous)

[lex24]

Lex, your Ketel Marte trade proposal made it into The Athletic today!

He panned it.  Not surprising.  And I wouldn’t trade  Luciano  and Marte for Ketel.

After reading Bowden's response, and thinking about my initial reaction, I believe that 1) I was wrong and 2) that Bowden is similarly wrong. We both established the correct facts but arrived at the wrong conclusion. If I were Bowden I would have answered with the following (acknowledging that The Athletic's format wouldn't allow for such a detailed analysis):

1. Ketel Marte is very valuable asset. He's projected by Fangraphs to be worth 3.8 WAR next year but is signed to a one-year contract for $8 million with two additional team options totaling $22 million more. He'll play next year at 28 years old. How much would he be worth if he was a free agent?

There have been three free agent second basemen or centerfielders signed so far:

Starling Marte, 33 years old, 3.0 projected WAR, 4 x $19.5 million.
Marcus Semien, 31 years old, 4.5 projected WAR, 7 x $25 million.
Chris Taylor, 31 years old, 2.2 projected WAR, 4 x $15 million.

Given the ages of these three players one should assume that teams are expecting to recoup most of the contract's value in the front part, regardless of how the contract itself is structured. If Semien was willing to sign a one year contract with two team options the first year might well be $40 million, given his projection. Given that Starling Marte's contract starts at age 33 a one year contract with two team options might start at $25 million or more.
Taylor is three years older than Ketel Marte and has a much lower projected value but his contract serves as a baseline.

On the open market it's fair to assume that if Ketel Marte was open to a one year contract with two team options he would be looking at total compensation of around $90 million over three years. Given that he is only going to be paid $30 million that's a $60 million underpay.

2. If the Giants were offering prospects (and/or young cost controlled major leaguers) they would need to propose a very strong package to equal Marte's surplus value, starting with Luciano and Ramos as well as several others near the top of their rankings.

3. However, there's Madison Bumgarner, whose contract has strong negative value and is an anchor on Arizona's baseball operations. He's due $60 million over the next three years. He's projected by Fangraphs to be worth 1.0 WAR next season. He'll play next year at 32 years old. How much would he be worth as a free agent?

These are the starting pitchers signed so far who Fangraphs projects to produce less than 1.5 WAR:

Andrew Heaney, 31 years old, 1.4 projected WAR, 1 x $8.5 million.
Corey Kubler, 36 years old, 1.4 projected WAR, 1 x $8 million.
Jordan Lyles, 31 years old, 0.9 projected WAR, 1 x $7 million.
Michael Wacha, 30 years old, 1.3 projected WAR, 1 x $7 million.

It's a fairly narrow band which Bumgarner fits into. On the open market he would be looking at a one year deal in this range. A three year deal is obviously not realistic, but theoretically he might get a total of $15 million over that time, meaning that he's far from worthless but is being overpaid by about $45 million.

4. The delta between Marte's underpay and Bumgarner's overpay is only around $15 million, a manageable figure which can probably be filled by second tier prospects such as Bishop and Santos and a pair of lower minors lottery tickets. Possibly a higher ranked prospect than Santos would be required but critically the overall package doesn't need a top prospect to be included in this scenario.

5. Duggar also doesn't need to be included in the deal given the above assumptions, and the Giants shouldn't be trading him. 1) He's their only projected starting position player under 30, 2) Marte is a terrible centerfielder whose best position is second base, playing him in centerfield full time would materially diminish his value and change all of the calculations above. Moreover, if Arizona is inclined to move Marte in order to rebuild they won't value a player like Duggar highly, given that he will be into his thirties when they contend again.

6. The Giants are a high-revenue team (even though they haven't been acting like it) meaning they should use their economic power to acquire talent instead of trading top prospects. Taking on Bumgarner's contract is the ideal way for them to improve their team, even if they ended up releasing him at some point. If the Diamondbacks are in reset mode then this is the opportunity to eliminate dead money while acquiring prospect volume.

7. Fangraphs projects San Francisco's best player in 2022 to be Brandon Crawford, producing 2.6 WAR. If the Giants acquired Ketel Marte he would be projected to be their best player by a significant margin and they would only be committed for one year (in the event of catastrophic injury or suspension), three years maximum. It's a no-brainer for them and taking Bumgarner is a reasonable cost. Would the Giants sign Marte for one year at $25 million with two $25 million options ($25 million being $10 million a year average for Marte's salary and $15 million a year average for the portion of Bumgarner's salary which is an overpay)? of course they would, and they would be willing to trade some non-top level prospects for that opportunity. If the Diamondbacks are in actual rebuild mode then this scenario is plausible for them as well.

8. Non-elite prospects for Marte and Bumgarner makes sense, whether it's realistic depends on whether SF is willing to spend money in the form of taking on an onerous contract and whether Arizona is willing to trade a very valuable player in order to reduce payroll and start over - their fans won't be pleased, and it's an admission of making a terrible decision in signing Bumgarner.

I like your response a lot more…..  I did think Bowden missed the point on Bumgarner.  Although, I still hold out hope that he can regain some of his former prowess.  It’s rare, but not unprecedented.  Verlander being a good example. (Although his fall was shorter and less precipitous)