1. Evaluating trades by the player rater is like picking a candy bar based on the nutritional content - YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG. First, who the hell knows how ESPN or Yahoo or CBS ranks their players? It's loosely based on reality but I wouldn't give it much credit. Second, the player rater only tells you about what's happened in the past. You're trying to evaluate what the given players will do in the future. Sure, you have to give the first half of the season its due, but you're being deliberately disingenuous if you take Hanley's 1st half (and ONLY that) as a predictive indicator of his 2nd half.
2. If I'm giving up 1 player and getting 3, I'm going to have to drop 2 players. I'll also have a gaping hole at SS. Neither of these are trivial factors. You can't just look at the effects on your team, you have to look at both sides of a trade. The marginal upgrade I'm getting at OF and RP is almost certainly negated by having to plug in Cliff Pennington at SS.
3. Closer "on a good team" is pretty meaningless. Closers on bad teams get plenty of save opps, if only because their teams don't win many blowouts. Brandon League and Jonathan Papelbon both have 23 saves. The Mariners have lost 17 games in a row. The Red Sox are the best team in baseball. Q.E.D.
I've taken the time to explain why this is a bad trade. Anyone with a passing understanding of fantasy baseball knows this is bad trade. If you take the time to look at it from the other guy's perspective, you'll also see it's a bad trade. Honestly, this is the kind of trade I'd propose if I was trying to take advantage of someone who didn't know a lot about fantasy baseball. It helps one team a LOT by freeing up 2 roster spots and getting an elite player at a scarce position, and it fouls up another team by giving them more hitters than they can play at OF/UTL and gives them a huge hole at SS. But hey, at least Victorino and Quentin are higher on the player rater!
his other SS is jose reyes who is currently the best SS you can own, hanley is his second SS, player rater is not "loosely based on reality" it is done by the computer to calculate who gives the most value to a team, also he has Leo Nunez who could be traded an no longer be a closer similar to K-Rod, there have also been talks of quentin being traded to philly, which would increase his value being in a better lineup, and would also be a nice combo with victorino and utley (who he owns) in that lineup,i wasn't only looking at my teams effects
Value is subjective. Saying that Brennan Boesch has been the 63rd most valuable player this year says very little about a) how valuable he would be to MY team and b) how valuable he'll be FROM NOW ON.
The fact that the other team has Reyes doesn't really change this trade. In a redraft I can't imagine how you get Reyes and Hanley on the same team unless you start 2 SS. Even then, it's wacky. If you start 2 SS, then it's an even more scarce resource and being able to start Hanley and Reyes is the biggest competitive advantage imaginable and I'd need a king's ransom to trade one. If you start 1 SS, then, again, HOW did he end up those two, and if I was in that position I'd look to flip him for one (1) elite player at a position of need, not 3 decent players.
Hanley for Quentin, Putz and Victorino is a bad trade, and arguing about the player rater or his team composition isn't going to make it a good trade.
I agree with hockeykid in the fact that I would in no way accept that trade although he may have been a bit harsh in his explanation.
IMO, when trading an elite player I want to get a hell of a lot in return. Quentin, Victorino and Putz, imo are decent, but no where near top tier players. Is Victorino still injured? Putz, just coming off an injury could turn into a mess (like nathan's first return from the DL) so that would have to be taken into account as well.
I agree that the player ranking, while somewhat useful, is in no way good enough to give it much weight. Just look at how many times it has a player on the DL listed above others? I think it is a useful tool to see if player a and player b are in the same ball park of each other when evaluating, but a lot more needs to be taken into account that those algorithms surely don't.