Braves & Guardians

Trades

Players

Back

Braves & Guardians

July 15, 2021

Braves

Name Age Level P1 P2 Availablility Years AFV Salary Surplus Low Median High
Freeman Minors 2B 39.9 31.9 39.9 47.9
Jones Minors 3B 22.5 18 22.5 27
Karinchak 25 Majors RHRP Low 4.5 41.9 16.7 25.2 20.2 25.2 30.2
Ramirez 28 Majors 3B 2B Medium 2.5 127.4 28.7 98.7 78.9 98.7 118.4
Valera Minors OF 18.5 14.8 18.5 22.2

Guardians

Name Age Level P1 P2 Availablility Years AFV Salary Surplus Low Median High
Albies 24 Majors 2B Very low 6.5 218.1 41.5 176.6 158.9 194.2 229.6
12 Comments
  1. Big Bat

    I think it’s absurd that those values are that close. I’m actually laughing as I type this.

    • John Bitzer

      The biggest absurdity is Albies’ contract. He’s the most underpaid player in baseball, and since he’s only 24, will continue to be for six and a half more years. That’s where all the surplus value comes from.

      • Big Bat

        Oh I agree that Albies contract is so ridiculous that his value is on another level. I think we would probably agree that he is untradeable because of it. I say that because no team, not just Cleveland, is giving that much talent for 1 player. I don’t recall it ever happening anyway. Especially when his performance has been good, but not great.

      • Kyle Taft

        What would a “fair” trade for Albies look like? He does have a lot of surplus value, is an All Star, and under team control for a long time.

        • John Bitzer

          Once a player gets to a certain level of surplus value like this, he’s essentially untradeable (unless the team wants to take a big on-paper loss). Most teams just won’t put up the capital, or don’t have it in the first place. The highest-value player I’ve seen traded since studying the market was Yelich, who was around 117 at the time. Nothing since has come close.

          On this site, we have two options: show the on-paper surplus, or put a cap on the surplus so it’s more realistic. Both approaches are valid, but at the moment we’re showing the former.

  2. Kyle Taft

    A reasonable guess about his contract: more money went to covertly getting his family out of a bad situation.

    But yes, the contract is crazy. It’s not in baseball team’s nature to give out money in the goodness of their heart, but this contract screams for a reworking.

  3. jerry Hoines

    I think that contracts effect the players value too much on this site. This proposal is evidence of that.

    • John Bitzer

      Not exactly — see my comment above for more explanation on this.

      • jerry Hoines

        I understand the logic behind the contract value but to me, the average user of this site is more interested in making realistic trades for dream players of team needs. This trade to me shows that the contract forces any hypothetical trade to be unrealistic. No, the Braves probably aren’t trading Albies but if they did there is no way they’d get that much for him from any team. Another example is Lindor. Again, probably (definitely) not going to be traded but having his value negative because of his contract makes a hypothetical trade unrealistic. Just to get rid of him they would have to include a haul of prospects? The formula you use keeps things realistic in the idea of players that aren’t going anywhere can’t go anywhere but is unrealistic for someone who wants to see a “but if they did” type of trade. I wish there was a way to evaluate trades more based on talent and potential and less on contract

        • John Bitzer

          You’re not alone. We get that feedback a lot. And yet, time after time we see that the salary/contract situation matters a great deal. The Arenado trade is a shining example, and we were right on that one, as well as many others. GMs have set budgets, and that limits what they can do, so based on all our observations, the equation we use seems to correlate well to reality.

Submit a Comment