I had a rare experience growing up that very few sports fans will have going forward. I got to see my favorite player play for my favorite team for his entire career.
Growing up, I was an Orioles fan, and my favorite player was obviously Cal Ripken. Occasionally, you’d hear rumors that the Orioles might let him walk, or might trade him. But you knew that this wouldn’t happen. Ripken was the face of the franchise. He was a Baltimore Oriole, and that would always be the case. If he didn’t end his career in Baltimore, fans would have rioted.
Of course, this was also during a time when you didn’t hear a lot about market sizes. The Yankees still paid for the biggest names, but it was still possible for small market teams to re-sign their best players. That’s not the case now.
Today’s reality is that small market fans can’t get attached to their best players. Eventually, those players are going to get traded, or are going to leave via free agency. It’s a harsh reality when you realize that kids growing up watching baseball today will never have that Cal Ripken to follow over the long-term, spanning from when they played as him in the back yards, to when they watched him hit a majestic final All-Star Game home run while in high school. Now there’s a choice: You can either follow one player his entire career, or you can follow one team. But if you want to follow your favorite team, and the team your favorite player plays for, then you will most likely be rooting for two different teams at some point in time.
This reality hits Pittsburgh pretty hard right now, as it becomes more apparent that Andrew McCutchen will be traded this off-season, possibly even in the next week.
Losing McCutchen eventually was inevitable. He would have been gone as a free agent after the 2018 season, or traded next off-season. This is obviously a huge subject, warranting discussions about the many different aspects of the deal. To break it all down, I wanted to put together a primer, adding the proper perspective to every aspect of an Andrew McCutchen trade.
The Emotional Side
In any trade that involves a player like McCutchen, you’ll have two sides to the deal: the business side and the emotional side. It’s difficult to separate those two when evaluating a deal. The business side relies around logic and numbers, looking at the reality of small market economics and trade values. The emotional side can be illogical, looking at very good reasons for a trade, and dismissing them simply because the personal investment in that specific player outweighs any other value the team could get.
That’s not to say that one side is better than the other, or that the emotional side should be more logical. But in order to break a potential McCutchen trade down, the business and the emotional side need to be separated into separate arguments. That said, neither of them can be ignored completely, and both must be given the proper attention.
We’ll start with the emotional side, because that’s going to be the most important thing for a lot of people in a McCutchen deal.
The reason emotions will be so high in this situation is because McCutchen is a unique player. I’d go back to Barry Bonds and say that McCutchen is the best player in about two decades to play for this franchise. But McCutchen’s appeal isn’t just his production on the field. It’s about the man off the field.
Bonds wasn’t likable in Pittsburgh. He was never really an embraceable icon across baseball. Elite player? Absolutely. But he didn’t have the same mass appeal that someone like Ken Griffey Jr. had. Andrew McCutchen has that appeal. He’s an exciting player to watch on the field, and he’s a great person off the field. He uses his fame to further good causes, he can be entertaining and joke around in his interactions with the public, and he’s generally just a good guy. He’s the type of guy you can root for, and who you will never regret rooting for.
The business side of this says that Austin Meadows is close to ready in Triple-A, and could be an impact outfielder in the future. It could end up saying that the Pirates got a good return for McCutchen, and made a smart move for a small market club. But none of that really matters from the emotional side.
The emotional side is so strong that the Pirates could get every top prospect in the Nationals’ system, watch all of them reach their upside, watch Meadows become an impact player, and there would still be a part of the deal that would sting. Everything could work out great in the trade, and there would still be part of the trade that would be bad, just because of the player Andrew McCutchen is.
I don’t want to knock the other players here. I’ve been covering Austin Meadows for parts of four seasons now, and he’s an extremely nice guy. He’s also a guy you want to cheer for. He’s got the upside to be an impact player in the majors, possibly as good as McCutchen was in most years. But there’s just something that McCutchen has — that “it” factor — which most players aren’t going to have. And that’s what makes the emotional side of this deal so difficult.
The Business Side
The business side of a trade is cold. It strips all emotion and looks at the facts. It’s not a human approach, but more robotic. You need the emotional side so that you don’t just go around looking at players as assets or numbers on a spreadsheet, but instead look at them as real people. But part of any trade evaluation involves stripping the human elements away and just looking at those numbers on a spreadsheet.
In terms of the business side of things, there are two things to consider about a potential McCutchen move. The first one is obviously the return on the deal, along with other future deals that follow the move. Obviously we can’t discuss the actual return until it happens, but I will go into detail about evaluating the deal in a vacuum in a bit. First, I want to look at the more important part of the business analysis, and that’s how small market teams need to operate.
I’ve been saying for years on this site that small market teams need to have a non-stop cycle of talent from the minors. They need to bring up young talent before the MLB talent is ready to leave. Then, they need to trade the MLB talent to get more young talent to repeat the process in the future.
We’re seeing that process in a McCutchen deal. McCutchen wouldn’t realistically stay in Pittsburgh for the rest of his career, unless he was willing to give up well over $100 M to make that happen. But even then, it probably wouldn’t make sense. The Pirates would be paying big for his decline years, and they have Austin Meadows ready to take over soon.
Meadows is one of the best prospects in baseball. He was rated 10th overall in Baseball America’s mid-season rankings, and has the potential to be an impact hitter at the plate, similar to what McCutchen has been throughout his career. Even if he falls short of his highest upside, you’re looking at a guy who should put up 4.0 WAR or better in the majors. Stripping away the emotion, it doesn’t make sense to pay big money for McCutchen’s decline years when you have Meadows ready to take over at a fraction of the price, and probably putting up better numbers at his young age than McCutchen will in his early-to-mid 30s. Even if you could extend McCutchen, it makes more sense to go with Meadows moving forward.
That’s definitely a small market problem. Large market teams can extend McCutchen and don’t have to worry about prospects. When McCutchen breaks down, they will just eat his salary and go on to sign the next big free agent to replace him. But small market teams don’t have that luxury.
So the Pirates will trade McCutchen, replace him with Meadows, and hope that the return for McCutchen helps stock the system for the next round of trades. And if you’re thinking to yourself “We will just go through this again with Starling Marte and Gregory Polanco”, then in theory, you are right.
The latest rumors have the Pirates targeting Victor Robles, who is right up there with Meadows in terms of being one of the top prospects in baseball, but also a guy with plenty of projection who could end up just as good as McCutchen. I realize I’ve used the phrase “just as good as McCutchen” for two players, and that’s high praise, but we’re also talking about two prospects who rank around the top ten in baseball. These are very good players we’re talking about here, with some really high upsides.
If all works out, then Robles would be ready before Marte’s contract expires, which means we would go through this again in a few years, with Robles in the Meadows role, and Marte in the McCutchen role. And then maybe the prospects the Pirates get for Marte would be the eventual replacement for Gregory Polanco a few years later. And Polanco’s return could be the eventual replacement for Meadows. And the Meadows return could be the eventual replacement for Robles. And the Robles return could…I’m getting a headache.
Now that’s all in theory, and the reality is that prospects aren’t guaranteed, and the Pirates wouldn’t have a 100% success rate. But that’s the risk they have to take if they want to try and compete for the longest term possible. They also don’t need a 100% success rate to accomplish this, as long as they are successful more often than not. This gets into the abilities of Neal Huntington and the scouts trying to find players, and I’m going to stop the conversation right there. I don’t want to go off on that tangent, and the truth is that I don’t think anyone really has the information to say whether the Pirates can try and compete for the long-term, because they are just entering their first chance at trying to compete for the long-term.
The downside to the business side is the realization that, as a small market fan, you’ll never have a situation where you can get attached to a player, because eventually they will be traded or will leave via free agency.
The Battle of Emotions vs Business
I just want to add a quick section here noting that some people will be letting their emotions dictate their response to any deal, while some people will look at it from the business side. There’s nothing wrong with either approach. It’s going to be impossible to have calm discussions and debates about this issue, but the best approach would be to recognize where a person is probably coming from. If you’re taking the business view of the deal, then you’re probably not going to have success arguing your points to someone taking the emotional view, and vice-versa.
But as I said above, the best approach would be to try and see both sides, realizing that while it makes business sense, it might never look like a good deal from the emotional side. At the same time, while it might leave a sour taste from the emotional side, there would be legit business reasons to make this deal. The best way to get through this in a civil manner (and that seems very unlikely) would be to recognize both sides, and try to identify where you and other people are coming from with their views.
The Loss in Attendance
There has been one argument I’ve seen that a McCutchen trade will lead to a decline in attendance. I think this is true to an extent. If the Pirates end up winning, then the drop off won’t be that big. The Pirates had McCutchen from 2009-2012, but attendance in those years was down compared to when they were winning in 2013-2015. And they had McCutchen last year when attendance dropped while they were losing.
When McCutchen leaves, there will be some fans who leave with him. Some of them might come back, and some might be gone for good. I know first hand that this is the case. I was an Orioles fan my entire life until Ripken retired. About two or three years after that happened, I stopped following the team. Part of that was because my favorite player was gone, and part was because I didn’t like the owner of the team. And I think it’s fair to say that this combination would exist in Pittsburgh for some people after a McCutchen trade.
So if the Pirates trade McCutchen, then have another losing season next year, we could see a swift decline in attendance. Probably not below where they were pre-2013, but definitely not close to the 2013-2016 figures. But if they start winning without McCutchen, the attendance probably won’t see a hit, since fans would value winning a lot more than having their favorite player on the team. That doesn’t mean they wouldn’t care McCutchen is gone. It’s just that winning is the quickest way for the Pirates to bring people back after a McCutchen deal.
Why Trade McCutchen at a “Low Value”?
One of the most common things I’ve seen is the question about whether the Pirates should trade McCutchen this year, due to his low value. McCutchen is coming off the worst year of his career, both offensively and defensively. His offense did rebound to some more normal numbers in the final two months, and the Pirates have chalked up the defensive struggles to his shallow positioning, which is backed up somewhat by advanced metrics.
The focus on the down year ignores the value of the extra year of control. Let’s assume that a lowered value for McCutchen is equal to 4.0 WAR per year. That’s more than he had last year, but less than he had in the previous five years. And realistically, McCutchen isn’t going to fall below that due to one down year, all because of his name value. If a down year equaled 4.0 WAR per year, then McCutchen would have a trade value of $35.9 M.
Let’s say that McCutchen bounces back for the Pirates in 2017, and they trade him next off-season at a value of 6.0 WAR. While he would have more value, the trade value would remain about the same. His trade value for one year in 2018, at 6.0 WAR, would be $33.7 M. So the return would be about the same.
You could argue that they’d get more value on that side by getting his production for the 2017 season. If he returns to being a 6.0 WAR player, then they would be getting about $34 M in value from him for his production in 2017.
The flip side to this is wondering what happens if he has another bad year. I don’t want to project him at another replacement level year, but let’s say he drops down to a 3.0 WAR in 2017. With two down years in a row, you’re less likely to get a favorable return for him next off-season. At that point, a 3.0 WAR trade value would be $9.7 M, which is barely enough for a prospect just inside the top 100. You’d get $10 M in value in 2017, but overall, you’d see a loss, and an even bigger loss in the long-term when you factor in the decline in future value from the prospects.
It’s all about the level of risk you want to take. I think that McCutchen is worth 5.0 WAR/year, which would be about $52 M in trade value. That would buy a hitting prospect outside of the top ten in Robles, and a pitching prospect just inside the top 50 like Reynaldo Lopez. If you make the deal now, you risk losing out on extra value, with McCutchen’s value to the team and his trade value next year being a combined $68 M if he returns to being a 6.0 WAR player.
However, if you bank on the comeback and go for more value, you run the risk that he doesn’t bounce back, which could result in a massively lower return and lower value overall. So do you take the $52 M in value right now, or do you gamble and try to go for $68 M in value, with the risk of dropping to $27.9 M in value (being a bit more generous here by giving him a 3.5 WAR in this scenario) if he does struggle again?
Evaluating the Trade in a Vacuum
I just spent a lot of time discussing the individual trade values, and that is largely going to be what a McCutchen deal will be evaluated on from the business side of things. We’ll see if the values match up, and then the long-term success of the deal will be determined by how the prospects perform.
But there is more to the deal in the short-term. A trade of McCutchen can’t be evaluated in a vacuum when thinking about the 2017 season. It can’t just be about the prospects they receive in return. There are a lot of scenarios that could spin off from a deal.
The Pirates could indirectly acquire starting pitching help through a McCutchen deal. They could do this by trading prospects, and possibly some of the prospects acquired in the McCutchen deal, to get an established pitcher. Or, the Pirates could just use the savings from McCutchen and add to their team in other methods — either via free agency, or taking on salaries in trades.
They’re currently at around $86.6 M for their projected 2017 salary. If we assume they have a budget of $100 M, then that would leave them room to sign a pitcher like Ivan Nova, but not much else. Or it could allow them to sign Derek Holland and a reliever like Neftali Feliz. But without McCutchen, the Pirates would be down to $72.6 M, giving them a lot more room to spend. They could add someone like Nova, then add pieces to the bench and the bullpen. Or they could take on salary in a trade, and still have room for extra help.
I’d be surprised if the Pirates didn’t end up spending up to that $100 M amount. In fact, I’d be downright shocked, especially after they’ve been near the $100 M mark the last few years. They should be set up to spend and upgrade in a lot of areas with the money they’d have after a McCutchen deal.
Replacing McCutchen
I wrote an article at the start of the off-season about how the Pirates could replace McCutchen, and actually upgrade the team overall. Most of that involved trading him for MLB ready pitching, and using the money for pitching. But it also involved upgrading the defense by subtraction, since he was the worst defensive center fielder in the league last year.
I’d expect the plan without McCutchen to be similar to the end of the 2016 season when the Pirates were mostly playing without Marte. They used Josh Bell a lot in right field, with David Freese and John Jaso splitting time at first base. Bell got some starts at first base, and when he did, the Pirates had guys like Adam Frazier getting starts in the outfield. I could see a similar alignment in 2016, with no real starter at those two spots, but 4-5 players rotating time, with Bell getting a starter’s workload, and Freese getting the second biggest role.
Bell doesn’t exactly provide strong defense anywhere he’s playing, but that was a given no matter if McCutchen is on the team or not. By moving him to the outfield, you upgrade the defense at first base with Freese and Jaso. The overall offense would be downgraded compared to a normal year from McCutchen, but that’s where the added pitching would play a big role in making up for that lost value.
Austin Meadows would be the eventual full-time replacement, and I could see him arriving by the middle of the 2017 season at the earliest. I could also see the Pirates trying to add an outfield option for depth, trying to find the next version of Matt Joyce for the start of the season.
**Our 2017 Prospect Guide will be released in mid-January. This is the 7th year we’ve done the book, and we moved the publishing date back this year so that we could include any players acquired in a McCutchen deal, or any players traded away. The book features profiles and scouting reports on every player in the system, and can be pre-ordered here, with discounts for subscribers.
**Pirates and Nationals Discussing Andrew McCutchen, Nats Want a Deal Done Today. Nothing was completed today, but the Nationals reportedly want a deal done before the non-tender deadline tomorrow at 8 PM.
**Speaking of that non-tender deadline, here is my preview from earlier in the week, looking at the moves the Pirates could make.
**Report: Jung Ho Kang Charged With DUI, Leaving the Scene of an Accident. So how about that David Freese extension?
**Pirates Notes: The 2017 Bench, Bonilla’s MLB Deal, Eric Wood and the Rule 5 Draft. A few notes on some of the transactions over the last few days.
**CBA Updates: 10-Day DL, All-Star Game Doesn’t Count, League Minimum Raises. Some good changes with the latest details on the new CBA.
