The Two Parts to Evaluating Any Trade

There are two essential parts to evaluating any trade made by your favorite team:

  1. Should your team be buying or selling right now?
  2. Is the trade of value to them?

I think the first part, for the Dodgers in this trade, is wrong.  They should be sellers at the deadline.  It’s obvious this line-up isn’t great, the pitching stinks and they’re gonna have some holes in the rotation to start next year that, barring some gift of God, won’t be filled. The time to rebuild for next year should start about now and I still firmly believe seeing what’s available for Andre Ethier isn’t a bad idea.

On the second part, though, the Dodgers did good.  Pimentel might be of value at the major league level.  He’s still pretty far away, though, and he repeated Rookie ball two years in a row.  This was for a decent every-day outfielder with above-average on-base skills the last two years, who’s only getting paid about $250,000 the rest of the way.

The Royals traded a surplus and the Dodgers filled a deficit for this season. In return, the Royals received a player who may make the Majors in four years.

Some are complaining that Pimentel is a high-upside arm. Maybe true, but to be honest, this isn’t trading a sure-thing. This isn’t Carlos Santana in 2008 or Josh Bell in 2009. Pimentel’s got a ways to go and it’s possible that even if he makes the majors, the best he does isn’t better than what Vicente Padilla puts out.

Sometimes this gets lost. You see a prospect and look at how good he CAN be, but the chances of that happening are kinda slim. There are enough high-upside prospects in the Dodgers’ system. In this case, the Dodgers traded a surplus and the Royals filled a deficit.

Call to the Pen says this was a clear win for the Royals, though he seems to be looking too much at May’s/Pimentel’s numbers than their skills.

TBLA’s Eric Stephen makes a very convincing argument that Podsednik is having a lucky season and a half. I rebutt: even if his luck changes for the worse, he’s replacement player, which neither Garrett Anderson nor Xavier Paul is right now.

Fangraph’s Dave Anderson makes a solid point that this is what the Dodgers can afford and in that, it’s an OK trade.

I don’t think anyone’s arguing this trade was a clear win for the Dodgers, but that it didn’t hurt them much for the future and helps them right now, which is basically what rental trades should be.

MOKM doesn’t like this trade. My prospects!

Jack Taschner’s been designated. Hooray!



Filed under Hot stove, Los Angeles Dodgers, MLB, prospects

3 responses to “The Two Parts to Evaluating Any Trade

  1. Pingback: The Morning Commute: July 30, 2010 «

  2. Pingback: How to Evaluate a Trade « Dingers

  3. I bow down humbly in the presnece of such greatness.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s