With the season almost over, I figured I'd take a quick look at some key MLB transactions, via win shares.

 

The Yankees traded Javier Vazquez, Brad Halsey and Dioner Navarro to the Arizona Diamondbacks for Randy Johnson. Johnson has earned 14 win shares, Halsey six and Vazquez twelve. While the D'backs earned more in total, Johnson was the best pitcher in the deal. Given that Aaron Small also earned six win shares, I would call this a win for the Yankees.

 

The Orioles traded Jerry Hairston and two minor leaguers for Sammy Sosa. Hairston earned ten win shares compared to just four for Sosa. A clear win for the Cubbies.

 

The Athletics traded Mark Mulder to the St. Louis Cardinals for Danny Haren, Kiko Calero and Daric Barton. Mulder earned fourteen win shares and Haren earned thirteen. Calero earned five. Considering the disparity in salaries and that the A's garnered a top prospect in the deal, this is a slam dunk for the A's.

 

Less I be accused of Moneyball bias however, the A's also traded Tim Hudson to the Braves for Juan Cruz, Dan Meyer and Charles Thomas. This move may look better in the future, but the trio combined for zero win shares, compared to thirteen for Hudson.

 

The Brewers acquired Carlos Lee from the White Sox for Scott Podsednik and Luis Vizcaino. Lee earned 24, Podsednik earned 12, and Vizcaino earned six. A win for the Brewers.

 

The New York Yankees traded Kenny Lofton to the Phillies for Felix Rodriguez. Thirteen to one for Lofton.

 

The Washington Nationals traded Maicer Izturis and Juan Rivera to the Los Angeles Angels for Jose Guillen. Guillen earned 18 win shares, Rivera eight and Izturis six. It is worth noting that Izturis could have taken the place of Christian Guzman, who earned two win shares this season. Still, a win for the Nats.

 

The LA media blasted Paul DePodesta for failing to re-sign Adrian Beltre. Beltre has earned 13 win shares while his replacement, Antonio Perez, has earned 11. Perez is paid $300,000, while Beltre is in the neighborhood of $14 Million, so it appears DePodesta made the right move. However, 2004's mid-year trade looks very good for the Marlins, as Lo Duca, Encarnacion and Mota combined for 34 win shares, compared to 17 for Hee Seop Choi and Brad Penny.

See, I told everyone at the time it was a good trade, but no one listened. Encarnacion has been much better after getting his needed shoulder surgery.

See, I told everyone at the time it was a good trade, but no one listened. Encarnacion has been much better after getting his needed shoulder surgery.

I think the overwhelming media consensus was that DePodesta was on crack. The Dodgers replaced Encarnacion with Jayson Werth, so it wasn't too bad a deal for them. Their real problem is they still do not have an adequate replacement for Paul Lo Duca.

Good analysis. Here's a couple of points:

 

The Yankees traded Javier Vazquez, Brad Halsey and Dioner Navarro to the Arizona Diamondbacks for Randy Johnson. Johnson has earned 14 win shares, Halsey six and Vazquez twelve. While the D'backs earned more in total, Johnson was the best pitcher in the deal. Given that Aaron Small also earned six win shares, I would call this a win for the Yankees.

With any other team, I'd consider this a short-term win and a long term mistake, as the Yankees look like they could use Halsey and Vazquez for next year when Mussina and Johnson age one more year. But it's the Yankees - they'll probably sign Burnett and trade for another top-shelf starting pitcher in the offseason.

 

The Orioles traded Jerry Hairston and two minor leaguers for Sammy Sosa. Hairston earned ten win shares compared to just four for Sosa. A clear win for the Cubbies.

Yeah, no kidding. At the time, I was a little skeptical of the deal, in that I wasn't sure that the Cubs got enough for Sammy Sosa (remember, Cliff Floyd was mentioned in trade rumors for Sosa earlier this year), but I wouldn't have imagined Sosa completely falling off like he did in 2005.

 

The Athletics traded Mark Mulder to the St. Louis Cardinals for Danny Haren, Kiko Calero and Daric Barton. Mulder earned fourteen win shares and Haren earned thirteen. Calero earned five. Considering the disparity in salaries and that the A's garnered a top prospect in the deal, this is a slam dunk for the A's.

I'm reserving some judgment on this deal until I see how Mulder performs in the playoffs but, right now, this is looking like a complete embarrassment for the Cardinals. Haren has already arguably outperformed Mulder this year, was considerably cheaper, and that's not counting the value that Calero has had this year, and that Barton will have in the future. If Mulder chokes in the playoffs, this deal could turn out to be very, very ugly.

 

Less I be accused of Moneyball bias however, the A's also traded Tim Hudson to the Braves for Juan Cruz, Dan Meyer and Charles Thomas. This move may look better in the future, but the trio combined for zero win shares, compared to thirteen for Hudson.

Now that the A's are virtually out of the playoffs, I'd expect to see a wave of articles decrying Billy Beane for this trade, as I'm sure that Ratto and other media pundits will say that Hudson would have made the difference in the pennant race (even though it's been the offense that has been the problem for the A's, not the pitching this year). Dan Meyer and Juan Cruz could have some future value, but this one is looking like a coup for Atlanta.

 

The Washington Nationals traded Maicer Izturis and Juan Rivera to the Los Angeles Angels for Jose Guillen. Guillen earned 18 win shares, Rivera eight and Izturis six. It is worth noting that Izturis could have taken the place of Christian Guzman, who earned two win shares this season. Still, a win for the Nats.

I'm not sure I'm on board for this one. For one, Guillen has had more at-bats than Rivera and Izturis combined, so the win share difference is somewhat deceptive. Secondly, the gap between Guillen and Rivera isn't as large as the gap between Izturis and Guzman, especially if you consider Rivera and Izturis's stats to be slightly deflated by Mickey Hatcher's inexplicable hatred of the walk.

 

Guillen's the superior player in the deal and he's undoubtedly contributed to the Nationals' amazing run this year, but I think the price for his services might have been a bit too steep.

 

The LA media blasted Paul DePodesta for failing to re-sign Adrian Beltre. Beltre has earned 13 win shares while his replacement, Antonio Perez, has earned 11. Perez is paid $300,000, while Beltre is in the neighborhood of $14 Million, so it appears DePodesta made the right move. However, 2004's mid-year trade looks very good for the Marlins, as Lo Duca, Encarnacion and Mota combined for 34 win shares, compared to 17 for Hee Seop Choi and Brad Penny.

Let's be fair for a second. Antonio Perez wasn't the intended replacement; Jose Valentin, he of the .172/.326/.269 line, was originally manning the hot corner. Also, it should be noted that just over half of Perez's season has come at third, as he's started 32 games there compared to 26 games at 2B/SS. There's no doubt Perez is a valuable player (in fact, Perez coupled with Oscar Robles has made for an interesting infield rotation), but he was not directly affected by Beltre's departure, as much as he was a beneficiary of LA's injury problems.

 

The big problem here is the Marlins trade. Not only is there a dip in overall win shares for Los Angeles, but there's a huge dip in competitive advantage by position. Lo Duca was overrated as a catcher, but he's still considerably better than the alternatives that the Dodgers have used and a fair shake better than the Matheny's and JD Klosser's of the world. Furthermore, while Choi has been decent when he has played, he's certainly not the everyday player that the Dodgers need at first base.

 

No argument that DePodesta was smart to let Beltre walk, though. Beltre was one of the riskiest free agents out there, with a 2004 that screamed "walk year." In retrospect, I'm a little surprised that columnists didn't take the Mariners to task for the Beltre signing like they did the Sexson pickup (which probably worked out better for the club).

 

The Athletics traded Mark Mulder to the St. Louis Cardinals for Danny Haren, Kiko Calero and Daric Barton. Mulder earned fourteen win shares and Haren earned thirteen. Calero earned five. Considering the disparity in salaries and that the A's garnered a top prospect in the deal, this is a slam dunk for the A's.

I'm reserving some judgment on this deal until I see how Mulder performs in the playoffs but, right now, this is looking like a complete embarrassment for the Cardinals. Haren has already arguably outperformed Mulder this year, was considerably cheaper, and that's not counting the value that Calero has had this year, and that Barton will have in the future. If Mulder chokes in the playoffs, this deal could turn out to be very, very ugly.

 

Going 16-8 with a 3.70 something ERA is worse than going 13-12 with a 3.70 something ERA? Uhhh alright.

 

 

The Athletics traded Mark Mulder to the St. Louis Cardinals for Danny Haren, Kiko Calero and Daric Barton. Mulder earned fourteen win shares and Haren earned thirteen. Calero earned five. Considering the disparity in salaries and that the A's garnered a top prospect in the deal, this is a slam dunk for the A's.

I'm reserving some judgment on this deal until I see how Mulder performs in the playoffs but, right now, this is looking like a complete embarrassment for the Cardinals. Haren has already arguably outperformed Mulder this year, was considerably cheaper, and that's not counting the value that Calero has had this year, and that Barton will have in the future. If Mulder chokes in the playoffs, this deal could turn out to be very, very ugly.

 

Going 16-8 with a 3.70 something ERA is worse than going 13-12 with a 3.70 something ERA? Uhhh alright.

Here's a comparison of the stats between Haren and Mulder:

P	W	L	ERA	K/9	K/BB	OPS	IP	CG
Haren	13	12	3.81	6.73	3.02	.720	210.0	3
Mulder	16	8	3.72	4.75	1.68	.748	201.0	3
 
QUALITY OF BATTERS FACED		OPS	dOPS
Haren	.266	.331	.428		.759	-.039
Mulder	.255	.319	.404		.723	+.025

Looking at these, you can see that Mulder and Haren are comparable in ERA and innings pitched, but Mulder has a better win-loss record and Haren wins in terms of the other peripheral stats.

 

As far as ERA goes, there are a couple of factors to consider: for one, even though Oakland is reputed for being a pitcher-friendly park, Busch Stadium actually played with a park factor that favored pitching last year (if anybody could find this year's park factor for Busch, that would be awesome). Even discounting that, Haren is accumulating these stats in a league with a designated hitter, whereas Mulder virtually gets a free out every trip through the lineup. You can see the difference in BPro's quality of batters faced, which I've quoted above.

 

Also look at the "dOPS" that I have marked up there, which is the difference between the OPS of the batters each pitcher faced, and each pitcher's opposing OPS. Haren faced more difficult batters and actually managed to perform better against those batters than the average AL pitcher (note the negative difference), whereas Mulder ended up performing slightly worse.

 

The ERA difference between the two is already almost negligible and, when you factor in strength of opposition and how each pitcher fared against that opposition, Haren actually pulls ahead a little bit, in my opinion.

 

So how in the world did Mulder end up winning 16 games while Haren only won 13? At first, you'd think run support was the culprit, but Haren actually has better run support: he's ranked 14th in all of baseball with 5.87 r/g, while Mulder received "only" 5.28 (ranked 33rd in MLB). It really looks like a matter of luck, with Mulder being the beneficiary of a charmed life. BPro approximates that Mulder's "expected win-loss record" is 13-10, meaning that most pitchers with his ERA and peripherals historically held records that averaged out to thirteen wins and ten losses. From what I've seen of Mulder's outings this year, I could definitely buy luck as a possibility.

 

Finally, you can't compare these two without comparing their salaries:

Haren	$323,500
Mulder	$6,550,000

Haren has provided comparable (and arguably) better performance to his team for a fraction of the cost of Mark Mulder's 2005 salary, so so I'll edit my statement to say this: Danny Haren has provided a greater value to his team than Mark Mulder has this year.

Ok thanks for clearing that up. I love Mark Mulder but I agree he's declining fast.

But it's the Yankees - they'll probably sign Burnett and trade for another top-shelf starting pitcher in the offseason.

Who do they have to trade? They don't have a thing in the minors to offer to another team and with the FA market being pretty shallow this year, it'll be like the trading deadline this year with teams asking the moon and the stars for even marginal guys.