Cubs Trade Candidate Breakdown: Nico Hoerner

[Tryptamine]

Double post on the usual bug.

Edited November 18, 2024 by Tryptamine

[Bertz]

BBTV is great, but it is just a WAR -> Dollars calculator.  If, for example, you're at a point on the calendar where the only projection system currently showing on Fangraphs has your 2B who's generally +8 to +10 per year is only listed as +0.5, that's context you need to understand.  Likewise any prospect valuations you see listed in November are going to be based on stale prospect ratings from July or August.  That's context people should account for that they probably don't.

People who point to a difference of like 26 vs 23 on there as if it's at all meaningful should be shunned until they take a data literacy course at their local community college.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

10 minutes ago, Bertz said:

BBTV is great, but it is just a WAR -> Dollars calculator.  If, for example, you're at a point on the calendar where the only projection system currently showing on Fangraphs has your 2B who's generally +8 to +10 per year is only listed as +0.5, that's context you need to understand.  Likewise any prospect valuations you see listed in November are going to be based on stale prospect ratings from July or August.  That's context people should account for that they probably don't.

People who point to a difference of like 26 vs 23 on there as if it's at all meaningful should be shunned until they take a data literacy course at their local community college.

I liken it to Steamer.  It is objective and consistent and useful to those ends, but has enough holes that I wouldn't consider it a gold standard or a refutation of a well-articulated argument on an individual basis.

[harmony]

2 hours ago, Bertz said:

BBTV is great, but it is just a WAR -> Dollars calculator.  If, for example, you're at a point on the calendar where the only projection system currently showing on Fangraphs has your 2B who's generally +8 to +10 per year is only listed as +0.5, that's context you need to understand.  Likewise any prospect valuations you see listed in November are going to be based on stale prospect ratings from July or August.  That's context people should account for that they probably don't.

People who point to a difference of like 26 vs 23 on there as if it's at all meaningful should be shunned until they take a data literacy course at their local community college.

A projection system that ignores an injury and surgery is flawed as well.

One interesting comp would be Nico Hoerner and Seattle catcher Cal Raleigh, two players taken out of college in the 2018 draft.

Over the past three seasons Hoerner has posted 12.8 fWAR, valued at $102.6 million. Over the same period Raleigh has posted 13.9 fWAR, valued at $111.5 million.

Hoerner is guaranteed $23.5 million over his final two years of team control, Raleigh is under team control for three seasons with a projected 2025 salary of $5.6 million.

Baseball Trade Values currently assigns Hoerner a surplus value of $19.2 million and Raleigh a surplus value of $37.5 million. With the $23.5 million left on his contract, BTV projects Hoerner with a future value of $42.7 million over the two years. BTV projects Raleigh with $28 million in salary and a future value of $65.5 million over the three years.

In other words, BTV projects Hoerner to be worth $21.4 million annually and Raleigh to be worth about $21.8 million annually.

A healthy Raleigh has one added year of team control, but are Hoerner's injury risks taken into account? Given the injury risk, does Hoerner's guaranteed money reduce his trade value?

Earlier this month, beat reporter Patrick Mooney at The Athletic wrote: "Even if Hoerner’s estimated return won’t be known until he reports for spring training, this setback would seemingly take that trade concept off the table."

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5899464/2024/11/05/cubs-nico-hoerner-injury-matt-shaw/

Feedback is welcome.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

14 minutes ago, harmony said:

A projection system that ignores an injury and surgery is flawed as well.

One interesting comp would be Nico Hoerner and Seattle catcher Cal Raleigh, two players taken out of college in the 2018 draft.

Over the past three seasons Hoerner has posted 12.8 fWAR, valued at $102.6 million. Over the same period Raleigh has posted 13.9 fWAR, valued at $111.5 million.

Hoerner is guaranteed $23.5 million over his final two years of team control, Raleigh is under team control for three seasons with a projected 2025 salary of $5.6 million.

Baseball Trade Values currently assigns Hoerner a surplus value of $19.2 million and Raleigh a surplus value of $37.5 million. With the $23.5 million left on his contract, BTV projects Hoerner with a future value of $42.7 million over the two years. BTV projects Raleigh with $28 million in salary and a future value of $65.5 million over the three years.

In other words, BTV projects Hoerner to be worth $21.4 million annually and Raleigh to be worth about $21.8 million annually.

A healthy Raleigh has one added year of team control, but are Hoerner's injury risks taken into account? Given the injury risk, does Hoerner's guaranteed money reduce his trade value?

Earlier this month, beat reporter Patrick Mooney at The Athletic wrote: "Even if Hoerner’s estimated return won’t be known until he reports for spring training, this setback would seemingly take that trade concept off the table."

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5899464/2024/11/05/cubs-nico-hoerner-injury-matt-shaw/

Feedback is welcome.

I would start with deconstructing how they're arriving at those future values.  

In your previous link they mention using a $/WAR of just over 9 million as a baseline, which seems reasonable, plus some positional adjustments and their own future projections.  So some combination of positional adjustments and their projections are estimating Hoerner to be worth less than 5 cumulative WAR over the next 2 years, and just over 7 for 3 years for Raleigh.  

Given that Nico plays up the middle(at both positions) at an elite level and Raleigh has been one of the more durable catchers in the game, both of those feel like severe underestimates when you consider their consistent production and age.  

At a minimum, given the context of a team trading for either, you would assume an acquiring team would be bullish on them continuing their current levels through their team control and value them as such.  Maybe that dynamic doesn't quite work for all players or in an agnostic tool like BBTV, but it does work that way in practice(and is part of why trades are harder than they used to be!).  That dynamic also applies to any uncertainty about Nico's surgery recovery, like I mentioned upthread.

[Jason Ross]

1 hour ago, harmony said:

A projection system that ignores an injury and surgery is flawed as well.

One interesting comp would be Nico Hoerner and Seattle catcher Cal Raleigh, two players taken out of college in the 2018 draft.

Over the past three seasons Hoerner has posted 12.8 fWAR, valued at $102.6 million. Over the same period Raleigh has posted 13.9 fWAR, valued at $111.5 million.

Hoerner is guaranteed $23.5 million over his final two years of team control, Raleigh is under team control for three seasons with a projected 2025 salary of $5.6 million.

Baseball Trade Values currently assigns Hoerner a surplus value of $19.2 million and Raleigh a surplus value of $37.5 million. With the $23.5 million left on his contract, BTV projects Hoerner with a future value of $42.7 million over the two years. BTV projects Raleigh with $28 million in salary and a future value of $65.5 million over the three years.

In other words, BTV projects Hoerner to be worth $21.4 million annually and Raleigh to be worth about $21.8 million annually.

A healthy Raleigh has one added year of team control, but are Hoerner's injury risks taken into account? Given the injury risk, does Hoerner's guaranteed money reduce his trade value?

Earlier this month, beat reporter Patrick Mooney at The Athletic wrote: "Even if Hoerner’s estimated return won’t be known until he reports for spring training, this setback would seemingly take that trade concept off the table."

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5899464/2024/11/05/cubs-nico-hoerner-injury-matt-shaw/

Feedback is welcome.

I won't rehash too much of what others have said. TT did a good job, and almost assuredly better than anything I could have done, to explain what I agree with: I think BBTV does a disservice to both players in their modeling. I'm a big Cal Raleigh fan, he feels like he's among the more slept on players league wide - BBTV must be sleeping on him too. 

Regardless, cheers to the proper discourse. Welcome to the boards!