Why the Orioles Were Willing to Trade E-Rod for Miller

There’s been a lot of discussion on Camden Depot about the Andrew Miller trade. Most of our writers and writers in general have concluded that Eduardo Rodriguez was worth considerably more than Andrew Miller and that this was an overly expensive move. The poll on the Camden Chat link indicated that readers were split between being cautiously optimistic and feeling that while Miller was a good pickup he was not worth E-Rod.

Before the trade deadline I looked at how traded prospects do compared to average prospects and determined that they did significantly worse.  The interesting thing about specifically looking at Eduardo Rodriguez is that we already know a number of things about him. We know the Orioles were willing to trade him. We know that he wasn't very effective in Bowie. He is now fully healthy and has put together two dominant performances for Portland. I have been told that if he continues being dominant in Portland he is expected to be a top 100 prospect in 2015. I am an analyst and not a scout and am therefore reluctant to discuss whether this is the case. However, I know that as of midseason he wasn't ranked in anyone's top 50 prospects. For this article I am presuming that he will not be ranked as a top 50 prospect in 2015 by Baseball America and therefore will never be considered a top 50 prospect by Baseball America. If he does well in 2015 then I expect him to reach the majors and be ineligible for prospect ranking lists. 

This means that one way to determine E-Rod’s value is by looking at all pitching prospects that were ranked in the top 100 at least once but never ranked in the top 50. Some prospects ranked in the top 100 do make it to the top 50 in a future year. It seems reasonable to presume that those prospects will do better then ones that never make it to the top 100. In addition, E-Rod was traded this year so we can include him in a category with other traded pitching prospects. Here’s a chart showing value by year group and whether a prospect was traded.

Years	Traded	N Rows	Actual Value	Expected Value
1990-1993	N	42	1.283	0.960
1990-1993	Y	17	-0.523	0.960
1994-1997	N	42	2.548	2.481
1994-1997	Y	15	0.402	2.481
1998-2002	N	50	3.754	3.025
1998-2002	Y	19	-0.241	3.025
2003-2006	N	43	2.932	3.318
2003-2006	Y	16	0.852	3.318
2007-2010	N	46	2.156	2.189
2007-2010	Y	13	2.632	2.189

It turns out that traded pitching prospects that never become top 50 prospects were pretty much worthless from 1990-2002. Teams did a very good job at keeping the ones that were successful. They were more valuable in 2003-2006 and especially valuable in 2007-2010. There’s one problem though with this analysis. The best traded pitching prospect that was never ranked in the top 50 was John Danks. He was ranked in both 2003-2006 and 2007-2010 which means his numbers are included in both categories. Looking at valuations from 1998-2010 and 2003-2010 may be more helpful then just looking at 2007-2010 valuations.

Years	Traded	N Rows	Actual Value	Expected Value
1998-2010	N	134	2.944	2.836
1998-2010	Y	44	0.624	2.890
2003-2010	N	86	2.362	2.734
2003-2010	Y	27	1.113	2.816

If I am correct that E-Rod will never become a top 50 prospect then his value should $7 or $8 million as opposed to $15 or $20 million. One of the benefits of a small sample size is that it allows us to look at all the members of the sample in question. Attached is a link to a list of all the traded pitchers from 2000-2013 that were ranked in the top 100 but never in the top 50.

John Danks is the main success story. Guys like Daniel Hudson and Matt Harrison have done well also. Jake Odorizzi and Nate Eovaldi are promising young pitchers although neither looks particularly good according to RA9-WAR. A.J Cole and Trevor May are still young and may be productive. John Maine and Chris Perez had a few good years. Troy Patton was a decent LOOGY. But the vast majority of these guys have been worthless. A closer look shows limited value in this data set.

Jon discussed why Miller can be valued at $3 to $5 million based on fWAR. Using this valuation it appears that the Orioles only overpaid by $2 or $3 million. E-Rod still has more value than Miller* but it becomes more understandable why they’d make that deal. No one wants to pay more than necessary to make a trade but $2 to $3 million isn’t a huge blow. Given that the Red Sox and Orioles are in the same division it makes sense that we’d be forced to pay a “tax”.

* That sentence originally stated that Miller has more value than E-Rod. That was a typo.

Of course, using fWAR presumes that it values relievers properly. If reliever chaining undervalues high leverage relievers and therefore deflates their fWAR values then the Miller deal may be even better than it looks.