If you missed the overnight news, the Tampa Bay Rays do what they do, and send the controlled starting pitcher Blake Snell to the Padres for a package of prospects. Michael discussed the trade and the immediate implications here.
There are a few things I wanted to get into this morning to trade from a Cubs-related perspective.
First, there are the obvious Yu Darvish things. First, it now seems very plausible that the reason why the Darvish rumors have been heating up the last few days is putting pressure on the rays to get something done on Snell. I’m financially inclined to think that the Padres would always prefer the much cheaper Snell, so pushing in that direction makes more sense than, for example, getting the Cubs and Padres close, and then the rays fluttered in unannounced, saying, ‘Hey, what about Snell ?! ‘
However, let’s think that the Padres and Cubs were really talking about Darvish, as reported, and we now know a group of prospects that the Padres were willing to handle for an effective, controlled starting pitcher. Before comparing the relative value of Snell and Darvish, we need only comment on the outlook package as a theoretical return on Darvish. It looks … good? I would not say it’s overwhelming, but it’s pretty strong:
Pat Luis Patiño is a leading prospect in the biggest league (top 10-15 prospect in the entire baseball).
⇒ Cole Wilcox was a talent in the first round in this year’s draft that was mostly insignificant, but the Padres got him in the third round with a huge bonus of $ 3.3 million (19th overall final value) . It was immediately considered the top ten in the loaded Padres system.
⇒ Blake Hunt was an agreement in the 2017 draft that has had helium ever since, and is now a top 100 type for at least one service. He has just turned 22 and is likely to be in AA this year.
⇒ Francisco Mejia is a household name because he has been a top-30 prospect at Cleveland for a long time, but has struggled badly this past season. Most still think the bat will play in the big ones, but at 25 his chance to establish himself as a regular catcher fades. He’s a post-hype guy. A good one. But an old man.
This is a strong dang package. It does not lower your jaw (mostly because I think we can not say for sure exactly what caliber prospects Wilcox and Hunt are still outsiders), but I doubt anyone in the industry would say that the rays are not good value did not get.
… but would you take it for Darvish if you were the Cubs? This is not a clear yes or no to me. Again, it will depend a lot on how you feel about Wilcox and Hunt, which is so hard to know after a year like 2020. It also depends on whether you think Mejia’s bat and glove can play in, say, the left field. . It’s close to me as a return for Darvish. So the heartstrings are not enough to turn me around to pull the trigger. Maybe that’s why the Cubs did not do it. We will probably never know how close things actually came.
OK, but here’s the related question you need to investigate: do Darvish actually has as much trade value as Snell? Less? More?
Well, at first glance, I would tell you that this is a very close question – closer than what Snell’s Cy Cy 2018 in 2018 would make you think. Since seeing a slight decrease in speed, he has been dealing with shoulder fatigue, an elbow issue that required minor surgery and a broken toe. He threw only 157.0 overs between 2019 and 2020, which is partly pandemic, partly a matter of sustainability. We know of his problems with the third time by ordering the post-season, and his results over the past two years have been just “pretty good”. Snell, 28, will earn $ 41 million over the next three years.
In pure performance, Darvish has been the far, much better pitcher over the past two seasons. And hey, that matters a lot! However, the things are pretty obvious. Darvish is six years older and has also dealt with injury issues. Darvish will earn $ 62 million over the next three years. Darvish has a 12-team non-trading list that has influenced things, and is a modest additional thing to its value.
Honestly, I think the two are very close in total value. Snell has youth and a much lower salary on his side. Darvish is the man you would rather have on the hill. Given the financial state of the game, gut Snell says it probably has more trading value. But it’s probably closer than people think, and close enough that our practice of thinking of trading as a ‘for Darvish’ package is not useless.
So what does the Snell trade say about Darvish’s trading value? on the market? Well, I would say it confirms that three years of a stud jar is still extremely valuable. So there it is. However, I think we can not underestimate the dollars either. The times are enough that so many teams are flat and not adding a penny to the payroll right now. So it’s a lot to ask a team to accept a $ 62 million guarantee, even for a stud. Now you have also removed one of the most aggressive buyers from the market.
To me, the Snell trade confirms that a man like Darvish has great trade value – even in this prospect-obsessed climate – but that does not mean that the Cubs can, can or should trade him.
As for other Cubs-related implications here, there is the fact that a NL candidate, not in the Cubs division, has received a significant boost. In the end, it only matters if you face the team in the post-season (such a relatively small thing that it’s hardly worth considering), or if you fight it out with the team for a Wild Card col. Since we do not yet know what the play-off format for 2021 will be, I will not stress too much about it. Oh, also, the NL Central is going to suck, so there will be enough extra victories to be in 2021 for the ‘best’ teams in the Central.
Finally just a comment on the nature of the rays. This is what they do. It works for them. Develop a stud, expand the stud, swap him and his contract for more prospects. Rinse, repeat. I can not talk about how Rays fans can feel about it, but I will say that it bothers me that the Rays do not supplement their team with short-term additions to free agent to be even better. It also bothers me that the Cubs were not able to do these kinds of trades themselves – imagine periodic exchange a man for a substantial return, but can your team also supplement annually with a substantial payroll (notwithstanding 2021)? Do it three years ago, and perhaps you do not face the situation you now face?
Anyway. Ultimately, my take away from this trade is for the Cubs: a Darvish trade is now much less likely, Darvish is extremely valuable (for the Cubs, not just ‘the market’), and I’m mostly ambivalent about whether the Cubs could / should / would have done the same trade for Darvish.