I offered. He countered. Should I do it? WHIR! :)

[Neboguy]

Lets break it down . . .

Ellsbury + Dye > Braun

Bell > Capps

BUT . . . the gap between Bell and Capps is much smaller than Ellsbury + Dye and Braun.

You need to receive another player to make it even . . .

Ellsbury, Dye, Capps for Bell, Braun, and Lowe(Or Rios) is much more fair

[Fade2White12]

Ellsbury + Dye > Braun

You can't evaluate trades like it is a simple math equation. Although the production of Ellsbury and Dye added together will obviously be more than Braun's final stats, you can't treat it that way. In this case, 2 + 2 < 3.

You could even look at it like trading picks. Dye was an 8th Rd pick, Ellsbury a 5th. I'd say I'd probably trade an 8 and 5 for a mid 1. There is a reason why Braun was taken between picks 5-7 overall.

[Neboguy]

Actually, you CAN treat it like a simple math equation, as that is what fantasy baseball comes down to. Numbers. He would be losing too much and not getting back enough. The determining factor is he is not filling a position where he is weak. If he were trading for Ian Kinsler or Jose Reyes when he had Luis Castillo at 2B or Mike Aviles at SS, then we could take the math equation a little more lightly. But in this case, he's not actually improving his team to where this trade makes sense.
Sure he is getting a big name player in Braun, but Ellsbury and Dye will outproduce Braun by 150+ fantasy points plus bat close to Braun's average. If he were trading Adam Dunn or Chris Young, where he would be gaining a significant amount of Batting Average, it may make more sense.
Who cares who was drafted where, that will all change next year and would change this year if teams drafted now.
To end this confidently, essentially, this owner is making an upgrade at closer and losing a significant amount of offense.

[ChewbaccaDefense]

The "math equation" logic is faulty. Yes, Dye and Ellsbury put together would add up to more production than Braun. BUT, that is not the correct way of looking at it because the team would be starting Braun AND another player. So therefore, the question that you have to ask is "how much increase will I have if I start Braun and another player and will those numbers outweigh what I am giving up in Ellsbury and Dye?" Braun should produce more than Ellsbury this year. Will he produce more than Ellsbury and the replacement level player that will take Dye's spot in the lineup? Further, what are the keeper implications? Braun is a better keeper than Ellsbury and likely will remain that way.

I generally would take this trade. Especially in a keeper league. Dye's star is fading and Ellsbury may never rise more than what he is right now; a guy who can steal a lot of bases. Braun has a big bat in a time where there aren't a lot of 40 HR type of guys arond. You are getting the best player in the deal and the difference

[Fade2White12]

Sure he is getting a big name player in Braun, but Ellsbury and Dye will outproduce Braun by 150+ fantasy points plus bat close to Braun's average. If he were trading Adam Dunn or Chris Young, where he would be gaining a significant amount of Batting Average, it may make more sense.

Aristotle once said that the whole is more than the sum of its parts. Essentially, you're arguing the exact opposite.

Remember my little equation (2+2<3)? Think of it more like 2+2<3+2's replacement. If you just go to Fangraphs, take a look at Ellsbury, Dye, and Braun's projections for 2009 (from Bill James for example). Ellsbury+Dye-Braun= a difference of about 74/-4/29/40/-0.024.

Do you think it would be hard to find an OF replacement, either on his bench or on the WW, that will score more than 74 R, hit negative 4 HR, drive in 29 RBI, and hit .262? Because that's all he'd have to find in order to equal the production of both Ellsbury and Dye.

Yes, fantasy is about numbers, but how you evaluate them is not just simply adding up player A and B's stats and comparing it to one player. So, since he is getting an upgrade at RP, and probably has enough SB to compete, it's an IMO no-brainer.

[Millhouse]

Wow, can of worms I opened ...but GREAT discussion and thanks for the input. He pulled out of the deal once Braun was involved, but he kept downgrading while asking me to upgrade, so I also told him to take a hike

[Neboguy]

I guess I did fail to incorporate the fact that another player would start in place of Dye/Ellsbury. Thanks for pointing that out. But one point I'd like to argue is projections. Bill James is a good stat projector, but you can't use projections as a base for all statistical evaluations, as Ron Shandler's projections would warrant a player of 86R 5HR 46RBI 24SB and .288 AVG to make up the difference. In a competitive league, a player of this caliber usually doesn't come off the waiver wire very often. Everybody projects differently.

I don't believe Aristotle played fantasy baseball, but in fantasy baseball, the sum of the parts IS greater or even equal than the whole. As in a 5X5 league, you need to be competitive in all 10 categories in order to reach the largest whole (League Champion). The whole can not be greater if the parts of the sum are less than others.

[Fade2White12]

Bill James is a good stat projector, but you can't use projections as a base for all statistical evaluations, as Ron Shandler's projections would warrant a player of 86R 5HR 46RBI 24SB and .288 AVG to make up the difference. In a competitive league, a player of this caliber usually doesn't come off the waiver wire very often. Everybody projects differently.

I don't own Forecaster so I can't comment on Shandler's projections. That being said, it was only one example. But the statistics you put up (which would be best case scenario, especially AVG wise) is a player that would barely be drafted. That's basically a Fred Lewis. Plus, the OP has players on his bench, obviously of a higher talent than the WW *or they wouldn't be occupying a bench spot.*

I don't believe Aristotle played fantasy baseball,

Very astute.

but in fantasy baseball, the sum of the parts IS greater or even equal than the whole. As in a 5X5 league, you need to be competitive in all 10 categories in order to reach the largest whole (League Champion). The whole can not be greater if the parts of the sum are less than others.

The problem with this above statement is that you are using my words in a much different manner and context than I was, ie evaluation of trades. I'll pass on commenting further since the OP's trade has died anyway. But good luck on your team Millhouse, and don't hesitate to post it on the Cafe for our input.