SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
|
Post by chud on Nov 8, 2013 11:04:48 GMT -5
The only thing better than hot stove baseball is winning the world series, and since we have both, this is the best time of year. What I'm about to propose is total baseless speculation, although i'm trying to base it in some type of reality...We keep talking about Stanton, is he worth trading for isn't he worth it, despite the fact that he might not even be available...and i think why everyone focuses on a 24 year old power hitting star being available is that everyone assumes the Marlins won't have the money to sign him long term...which may be totally accurate.
But what about this...I think that the Sox and Angels actually match up extremely well if the Angels would be willing to discuss Trout. I know, I know, Trout is probably untouchable, but hear me out. The Angels gambled and lost huge with two unmovable contracts in Pujols an Hamilton...two older position players w/ $100m plus contracts ($200m w/ Pujols) that no way is anyone taking on...Can the Angels afford to give another $100m + contract to a position player? Maybe...but can they be competitive and have three $100m position players, two of which are past/way past their primes? I'm not sure they can. And if they can't, what's the point... Again, they gambled and lost, no use crying over spilled milk...how can they absorb those contracts and compete...of course by surrounding them selves with cheap, young talent...and w/out a very good farm system, that means acquiring that cheap young talent.
The Sox could absolutely provide them w/ that talent on both sides of the field...a package of JBJ, Owens, WMB, and probably one of the following Webster, Renaudo, Barnes could do it. This would then fill the gap for the Sox in CF, and the Sox could make Trout one of their $100m + position players when the time comes as he fits every things they'd want to invest in of course and join Pedroia as the face of the Sox. It then gives the Angels their CF and 3B, along w/ the young pitching they so desperately need. While admittedly leaving the sox thin in young pitching...but they have 6 starters at the MLB level and could survive it for a while until they restock a bit...
Again, probably never going to happen, but i think the match up is right there...so if we're discussing Stanton, why not Trout.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Nov 8, 2013 11:24:55 GMT -5
So the Red Sox get Trout and keep Bogaerts.... Awesome if Cherrington doesn't get this done he should be fired.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowell4president on Nov 8, 2013 13:19:44 GMT -5
Couple things, I'd say it would require Two of Webster, Renaudo and Barnes to do it as well as another lower tier prospect along with JBJ, Owens and WMB. Also, Although we'd be dealing 3 of our top pitching prospects, we wouldn't actually be spreading ourselves all that thin in the minors for young pitching. Stankiewicz, Ball will both jump a level or two over the course of next season, we also have newly signed hinojosa, Workman, Rubby, Wright, one of barnes, renaudo and webster, as potential starters and potential bullpen arms in britton, Alex Wilson, Villarreal, and Brian Johnson.
|
|
|
|
Post by curiousle on Nov 8, 2013 13:28:31 GMT -5
Sorry, I was just getting ready to jump in bed with Megan Fox and saw this.....(Odds are about the same)
|
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Nov 8, 2013 13:29:01 GMT -5
unrealistic
|
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Pereira on Nov 8, 2013 13:32:57 GMT -5
Wouldn't they just try to move Hamilton and Pujols, similar to how the Red Sox moved Crawford and Gonzalez, instead of trading Trout, if they were so concern about their payroll? Also, jmei has discussed Trout's worth already: forum.soxprospects.com/thread/1381/mike-trout-worth |
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 8, 2013 14:00:32 GMT -5
Couple things, I'd say it would require Two of Webster, Renaudo and Barnes to do it as well as another lower tier prospect along with JBJ, Owens and WMB. Also, Although we'd be dealing 3 of our top pitching prospects, we wouldn't actually be spreading ourselves all that thin in the minors for young pitching. Stankiewicz, Ball will both jump a level or two over the course of next season, we also have newly signed hinojosa, Workman, Rubby, Wright, one of barnes, renaudo and webster, as potential starters and potential bullpen arms in britton, Alex Wilson, Villarreal, and Brian Johnson. This is my biggest gripe with these trade proposals. No MLB team is going to trade a 50 cent player for four nickels and eight pennies. Mike Trout is the Best Player on the Planet who has four years of team control left, and the Angels will never be desperate enough to trade him for a deal comprising only B+ prospects, no matter how many you offer them. The asking price for Trout starts with Bogaerts and Buchholz, and tack on a few other guys for good measure. (Or taking on Pujols' onerous contract, and probably Hamilton's too, which you can discuss in the above link.) |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 8, 2013 14:54:22 GMT -5
Trout literally could become the best baseball player ever. No GM is going to chance being the guy who traded the greatest baseball player ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Nov 8, 2013 15:50:04 GMT -5
Sorry, I Mike Trout was just getting ready to jump in bed with Megan Fox and saw this.....(Odds are about the same) Trying to bring a realistic scenario into this discussion |
|
|
|
Post by mainesox on Nov 8, 2013 17:08:10 GMT -5
Wouldn't they just try to move Hamilton and Pujols, similar to how the Red Sox moved Crawford and Gonzalez, instead of trading Trout, if they were so concern about their payroll? Also, jmei has discussed Trout's worth already: forum.soxprospects.com/thread/1381/mike-trout-worth This might belong in the Potential 1B Trade Targets thread, but am I the only one who would consider trading for Pujols if the Angels ate a decent portion of his contract (say $75M, or roughly 35% of his remaining contract)? |
|
|
|
Post by bgeer091 on Nov 9, 2013 19:30:36 GMT -5
There is absolutely no chance he's moved. Like Chris said, he has the potential to be the greatest player ever. What's next? Bryce Harper??
The only big bat potential we could acquire IMO is CarGO. That's it IMO. Stanton/Trout/Harper aren't available.
|
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 9, 2013 20:38:21 GMT -5
Trout literally could become the best baseball player ever. No GM is going to chance being the guy who traded the greatest baseball player ever. Too bad Arte Moreno burned up his payroll financing No No Nanette signing Pujols and Hamilton. As crazy as it sounds, I think Trout actually will be traded, probably during the 2017 season. Because at this point the Angels have pretty much blown any chance they might have had to keep him there long-term. |
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 10, 2013 12:12:03 GMT -5
Unless the Angels are actually out of money, I think they'll resign Trout, soft cap be damned. No penalty that MLB could force them to pay would be as big as losing Trout. The next CBA will likely be a pretty huge bump over the current one, and Hamilton's contract comes off the books the year Trout is eligible for free agency.
|
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Nov 10, 2013 17:46:28 GMT -5
Unless the Angels are actually out of money, I think they'll resign Trout, soft cap be damned. No penalty that MLB could force them to pay would be as big as losing Trout. The next CBA will likely be a pretty huge bump over the current one, and Hamilton's contract comes off the books the year Trout is eligible for free agency. But their window is (potentially) closing. Because let's just suppose that Mike Trout, New Jersey native and best baseball player in the world, hasn't spent his whole life dreaming of playing for mediocre-to-bad Angels teams. Once he hits arbitration he'll never have to worry about money again. And if he does hit free agency, he's pretty much going to be able to sign with whoever he wants for however much money he wants. Point is, the Angels should have signed him already and the longer they go without doing that, the more obvious of a choice free agency becomes for him. |
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,977 
|
Post by jimoh on Nov 10, 2013 20:44:34 GMT -5
No, I think the key here is that we have The Freedom Trail, and we're not really using it that much anymore. If we offer the Freedom Trail, and maybe throw in the USS Constitution, and Brentz, we can make this happen. The Angels would finally be able to compete with Disneyland
|
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Nov 10, 2013 21:39:07 GMT -5
I would rather win than have the best player in the world. So I would be willing to trade or at least listen to proposals for Trout if I was the Angels. Because what they have is not working. That being said you would have to have a big set of balls to make the deal. Because if you miss you would be crucified for ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdiaz1 on Nov 10, 2013 23:00:52 GMT -5
Sorry, I Mike Trout was just getting ready to jump in bed with Megan Fox and saw this.....(Odds are about the same) Trying to bring a realistic scenario into this discussion Mike could do a whole lot better. Also though it is far from a perfect tool, and something that I suspect exists mostly for entertainment purposes. Fangraphs Dollars of value "metric" shows that Trout alone provided more value (52.1 million) than the cost of his and both of Pujos' and Hamilton's contracts combined (48.6 million AAV). To put it this way: paying 50 million dollars for 14 WAR is actually not a bad deal. It just so happens that in this case 11 of Wins are coming from one guy making the league min, while the other 3 Wins are coming from the guys making 10/240 and 5/123. |
|
|
