Submitted by: JMAC the G.O.A.T.
December 23, 2021
Astros
| Name | Age | Level | P1 | P2 | Availablility | Years | AFV | Salary | Surplus | Low | Median | High |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Berrios | 27 | Majors | SP | Very low | 7.0 | 133.2 | 131.0 | 2.2 | 0 | 2.2 | 4.4 | |
| Gausman | 30 | Majors | SP | Low | 5.0 | 111.9 | 110.0 | 1.9 | 0 | 1.9 | 3.8 | |
| Groshans | Minors | SS | 24.5 | 19.6 | 24.5 | 29.4 | ||||||
| Jansen | 26 | Majors | C | Low | 3.0 | 30.0 | 9.3 | 20.7 | 16.5 | 20.7 | 24.8 | |
| Springer | 31 | Majors | OF | Very low | 5.0 | 124.0 | 118.0 | 6 | 5.4 | 6.6 | 7.8 |
I wouldn’t mind this one bit, but this is insanely inaccurate.
It’s not inaccurate, unless you went solely by the field value numbers (the AFV column above, which shows that the Blue Jays are giving up around $400M in field value and getting only about $85M back — that’s probably why it looks imbalanced to you).
But trades are based on surplus value — the amount of value over and above the contract — and there’s not much of that in Springer, Berrios and Gausman because they’re getting paid market value. That means this trade would require the Astros to take on almost $400M in salary commitments, which is something they would never do.