Chris Archer Deal Provides Framework For Noah Syndergaard Deal Which Should Never Happen

Last year, the Rays traded Chris Archer to the Pirates for a package which included Tyler Glasnow, Austin Meadows, and Shane Baz. This was a somewhat unexpected blockbuster which has paid dividends for the Tampa Bay Rays who are currently in the thick of the postseason race.

Before the 2018 season, Meadows was rated by Baseball America as the 44th best prospect in baseball. That was a dip from his ranking six the previous season. That was due more to recurring injury issues than performance. Before being traded to the Rays, he had made his Major League debut, and he played 49 games for the Pirates hitting .292/.327/.468 (114 OPS+).

Glasnow was rated by Baseball America as the 23rd best prospect in baseball after the 2016 season. At the time of the trade, Glasnow had struggled in the Pirates rotation going 3-11 with a 5.79 ERA, 1.705 WHIP, 5.8 BB/9, and a 9.7 K/9 in 17 starts and 39 relief appearances. Still, Glasnow was a highly rated and touted young pitcher who had the “ceiling of a No. 1 starter.”

As if two Top 50 prospects who were Major League ready weren’t enough, the Pirates also sent Baz to the Rays. Baz was the Pirates 2017 first round draft pick (12th overall). Currently, Baz is rated as the 91st best prospect in the game by MLB Pipeline and the 88th best prospect by Baseball Prospectus. Overall, with Baz in the deal, that’s three top 100 talents for Archer.

At the time of the trade, Archer had three plus years of team control with him being owed $7.6 million in 2019 with a team option for $9 million in 2020 and $11 million in 2021. At that point in his career, Archer was 54-68 with a 3.69 ERA, 1.230 WHIP, 2.9 BB/9, and a 9.7 K/9. Of note, since a career best 2015 season, he had a 100 ERA+ in 2016, 103 ERA+ in 2017, and a 97 ERA+ at the time of the trade. FIP paints a similar picture with him having a 3.81, 3.40, and 3.62 in the successive time periods.

For his part, Noah Syndergaard is currently 44-26 with a 3.20 ERA, 1.150 WHIP, 2.1 BB/9, and a 9.7 K/9. He is currently arbitration eligible, and he is under team control for two plus years. Like Archer, he has regressed since his career best season, which was 2016. Currently, he has a 94 ERA+, and he has a 3.67 FIP.

On the FIP point, Syndergaard’s FIP is ranked 21st in the majors, and he is pitching in front of the worst fielding team in the National League with the Mets having a -58 team DRS. By contrast, when Archer had a 3.62 FIP at the time of the trade to the Pirates, he was ranked 30th in the majors while playing in front of the fifth best defensive team in all of baseball in 2018.

There are two other factors to consider with Syndergaard. First, he is a second half pitcher with his second half ERA 44 points lower and a WHIP 23 points lower. He also has had tremendous postseason success. In four starts and one relief appearance, he is 2-1 with a 2.42 ERA, 3.8 BB/9, and a 12.5 K/9.

Those postseason performances include an electric shutout inning in a clinching Game 5 of the 2015 NLDS. It also included his picking up a win in Game 3 of the 2015 World Series. He would also go toe-to-toe with Madison Bumgarner for seven innings in the 2016 Wild Card Game. When you have a pitcher who can match zeros with Bumgarner in a winner take all game, you know you have a special postseason performer.

Taking everything into account, Syndergaard is a better pitcher than Archer was when he was traded to the Pirates. Even with one less year of control, he is a more valuable trade commodity than Archer due to his being a top 20 starter in the league and his postseason experience. As a result, if the Mets contemplated trading Syndergaard, they should be receiving a more impressive haul than the three top 100 prospects the Rays received for Archer.

Given Brodie Van Wagenen’s trade history, a history which includes trading Justin Dunn and Jarred Kelenic in a deal for Robinson Cano and Edwin Diaz, he is not the guy the Mets should trust making this deal. Ironically, the guy you would trust is Chaim Bloom, who was part of the Rays braintrust when they pulled off the Archer deal. Of course, Bloom lost out on the Mets GM job to Van Wagenen.

Overall, if the Mets were receiving two top end Major League ready talents plus another top 100 prospect, they should absolutely consider trading Syndergaard. However, given Van Wagenen’s trade history, there’s no way you can trust him moving Syndergaard. As a result, Syndergaard needs to remain a member of the Mets for the foreseeable future.

8 Replies to “Chris Archer Deal Provides Framework For Noah Syndergaard Deal Which Should Never Happen”

  1. Blair M. Schirmer says:

    “As a result, if the Mets contemplated trading Syndergaard, they should be receiving a more impressive haul than the three top 100 prospects the Rays received for Archer.”

    —–While a more impressive haul would be nice to see, that the Pirates wildly overpaid for 3-1/2 years of an ordinary if durable, cost-controlled starter in his decline phase with the added benefit of being able to cut him if he collapses, won’t set the price in the eyes of a competent GM looking to deal for the declining Syndergaard.

    Fwiw, you deal Syndergaard as he’s getting expensive if you’re looking, not to contend, but rather to fake contention. Syndergaard’s the kind of guy contenders trade FOR, not deal away. In any case the Mets should keep him until the end of the season in order to rebuild his value, but unless they’re overwhelmed they aren’t going to get enough to make the deal worthwhile–certainly not in the sense of improving them for 2020.

    In the Rays case they had a sucker on the line in Pittsburgh, and reeled them in. A friend who follows the Rays much more closely than I do described 2018 as a season in which the Rays traded 2/3rds of a starting lineup and 4/5ths of a rotation and still won 90 games. Of course, why would the Wilpons want to bring aboard one of the architects of that astonishing feat when they could hire one of Jeff’s golf buddies? I mean, how hard can General Managing be, really? [/sarc]

    1. metsdaddy says:

      Here’s the part you’re missing. If you want a young front line starting pitcher with years of control remaining, you have to pay through the nose like this.

      Remember, the Mets don’t have to trade Syndergaard. A team has to do what they need to do to pry him away.

      1. Blair M. Schirmer says:

        If Syndergaard was in fact that, of course I’d agree with you. 2018 alone was a step backwards, though, with 2019 an even larger step backwards. He’s viewed as unreliable, a bit of a head case, and no contender would view him as their #1 or want to send him out there as their ace. As an unreliable if occasionally brilliant #2, sure, but it’s far from certain he’ll bounce back from his worst HR/9 since his rookie year, a rate double that of any year of his since 2015.

        Assuming the Mets don’t find a FO who thinks this is 2016, they’ll have to hang onto him until the end of 2019 and hope he gives them both a superb 1/3 of a season AND that another GM will believe that same 1/3 season speaks to a complete return to form. That’s not likely to happen, though. His stock is damaged. He’s had all of one terrific year since his partial rookie year. Like Nimmo now, he’s far, far from his peak.

        The question, really, is what does a #2 starter in significant decline, with 2 years left of team control get these days? Even last offseason, when Syndergaard was thought of much more highly than today, no one appeared to be willing to give up a top 10 prospect across MLB for him. The Padres weren’t giving up Tatis, Jr., despite having the best farm in the game. The Brewers didn’t want to package Hiura even though by most outlets he was top 20 rather than top 10.

        So what would Synder bring now? A once great CF prospect who’s still pretty good and with two years of control left, plus a solid if not stellar pitching prospect? That’s about it. Put another way, why would a team pay much more than that just because Syndergaard used to be a stellar pitcher with almost unlimited horizons? He just isn’t that guy any longer.

        Say the season ended tomorrow and the Mariners for some reason decided to go for it in 2020. The Mets need a CF so the M’s offer Haniger after his down year in 2019–Haniger and his 3 remaining years of team control. What else would they have to offer to pry loose Syndergaard, and why?

        1. metsdaddy says:

          In terms of Syndergaard’s past two years, last year he had the finger issue. This year, he has been really adversely affected by the new ball, and you could also argue by Ramos’ catching ability.

          As he’s adapted to the new ball and has the much better Nido, I think we’re going to see the Thor of 2015-2016.

          1. Kyle Snyder says:

            Everyone’s been affected by the new ball and not everyone’s pitching like Snydergaard. A team would trade for him in the HOPES that he’d pitch like he did in 2016, but that’s a pretty big mitigating factor.

            And of course teams weren’t willing to deal Tatis Jr or Hiura away. Look at what those two guys are doing now? They’re absolutely raking as middle of the order rookies playing premium positions. Those are who you build your franchise around. You’re valuing him like he’s Walker Buehler and in truth, he’s several years past that type of production/upside.

          2. metsdaddy says:

            He’s 20th in FIP, and he’s turning it back on lately.

Comments are closed.