The Angels should consider trading Trout - ESPN

[Mad5577]

I would ask the Dodgers for urias, Seager, Peterson, puig, plus them taking on the contracts of pujols and hamliton, 

 

[ettin]

First rule of Angels fight club: You do NOT trade Mike Trout!

Second rule of Angels fight club: You do NOT trade Mike Trout!

.....

Infinity rule of Angels fight club: You do NOT trade Mike Trout!

Fill in the blanks.

[Troll Daddy]

The Angels aren't trading Trout ...STFU already!

[Stradling]

8 minutes ago, Troll Daddy said:

The Angels aren't trading Trout ...STFU already!

Or you can stay out of threads that have titles referring to trading Trout.

[WallyWorld]

If this were any of the major sports except baseball I'd agree it's silly to trade Trout. But it's baseball - one guy in your lineup just doesn't make that big of a difference. I think a lot of the fans on here underestimate just how bad of a spot this franchise is in. Trading Trout is no guaranteed ticket back to contention in a few years but it's a gamble the Angels should make IMO.

[Stradling]

4 minutes ago, WallyWorld said:

If this were any of the major sports except baseball I'd agree it's silly to trade Trout. But it's baseball - one guy in your lineup just doesn't make that big of a difference. I think a lot of the fans on here underestimate just how bad of a spot this franchise is in. Trading Trout is no guaranteed ticket back to contention in a few years but it's a gamble the Angels should make IMO.

Until you realize you can't get anywhere near fair value for him.  I'll ask you, what kind of annual WAR would you expect back in a trade.  Remember you are giving up 9.  

[WallyWorld]

24 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Until you realize you can't get anywhere near fair value for him.  I'll ask you, what kind of annual WAR would you expect back in a trade.  Remember you are giving up 9.  

I'd be looking for 3-4 premium prospects plus at least 1 young major league proven talent. Even if the prospects don't all pan out, I think you could match that WAR total or do better.

plus then you're covering multiple holes on your team, or cresting multiple other trade scenarios, etc.

 

 

[Stradling]

Ok if you get four or five players and you get a 12 WAR total return annually, then you probably are a worse team.  

[halobob]

NBA is a star league, MLB is a team league.  Sure there will be some people that come out to see Mike Trout play, but the majority of the fan base wants to go and see the Angels win.  If the Angels win (and aren't ridiculous with their ticketing prices/policies) the stadium will be full.  The majority of people don't want to go to a game in August when the Angels are 15GB even with Mike Trout on the team.  If the Angels were 1 game up on the division in August without Mike Trout, many people would be wanting to go to the Angel game.  That being said, I would absolutely trade Trout for the right package (that package including taking salary off of our hands and a boatload of prospects/major league ready players).  Pretty much only the Dodgers can offer that package...if Trout has to be in Dodger blue so the Angels are in the playoffs in 2018, so be it.  

[SoWhat]

Trout for Betts, Moncada, Benintendi, Shaw, Devers, Swihart, and Espinoza.

[halobob]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

Until you realize you can't get anywhere near fair value for him.  I'll ask you, what kind of annual WAR would you expect back in a trade.  Remember you are giving up 9.  

What is the WAR of unloading the Pujols contract?  I'm actually curious as to what value that brings the Angels because it would be a big factor in the Trout trade.  Assuming Arte never wants to break the luxury tax threshold, that contract is much more devastating to the Angels than it would be to the Dodgers who seem to not really care about spending if it would net them a player like trout.  The Angels essentially have 2 options at this point if they do not want to surpass the luxury tax threshold:

1.  Trade every player of value that will no longer be cheap and/or on the team in 2019.  Pray that the little value we have in those players pans out enough to where we can fill in the holes on our team in the FA offseason going into 2019.  

2.  Trade Trout in a trade where you can unload Pujols and his entire contract and get 5-6 young controllable assets (probably not realistic but who knows what the Dodgers would be willing to do).  Trade all others of value who will not be here on + value contracts beyond the 2017 season.  

I think option 2 gives the Angels a much better chance at being a playoff team by getting the Pujols contract off the books and getting solid prospects/major league ready talent.  That being said, option 1 has the chance to be successful but management needs to realize that trying to win in 2017 and 2018 is useless.  Sign a bunch of players to 1 year deals in each of those seasons and trade them at the deadline for future assets.  In fact, the Angels should sign Lincecum now, not to help the team this year, but to hope that he has a great 2 months and trade him at the deadline for future assets.  If the Angels are essentially viewing the luxury tax as a hard salary cap, they need to take a page out of the Ducks handbook and get young controllable assets.  

Also, it has to be taken into consideration that Trout has been much more valuable to the Angels in the past and for next season while his salary is still reasonable.  Trout is much less valueable on a per dollar basis in 2018 when he will be making 34M/yr for the next 3 years.  It will still be a valuable contract, but not nearly as valuable as it has been in the past or as valuable as it is with this years salary of 16M.

[Jeff Williams]

Outrageous thought, but will have fun with it.  Halos looking snake-bitten with injuries again, damn Santa Ana River, need friggen Indian medicine god on this one!

Working from a base package to start, whether he might reel in return 2-3 of the current top MLB 100 prospects from the Nationals:  RHP Lucas Giolito (1); SS/2B Trea Turner (9); RHP Eric Fedde (74), that might work for a suitable players'-under-control-foundation, saving from FA spending some years ahead.  Angel Stadium confines are conducive to Turner's hitting style and play. 

It would put Trout closer to home, but wouldn't giving the Nationals Trout with Harper doom baseball contenders for years ahead, though?  Geez, and if DT becomes President, he might form major conglomerated partnership to buy the team, pump them full of money, and he looks like Fidel Castro with the Nationals representation!               

[WallyWorld]

FWIW, Jeff Fletcher said in this week's OC Register podcast that it would be silly of the Angels to not at least entertain the thought.

But I don't think Fletcher knows what he's talking about, it's not like he gets paid to write about baseball. 

[Chuck]

6 minutes ago, Jeff Williams said:

Outrageous thought, but will have fun with it.  Halos looking snake-bitten with injuries again, damn Santa Ana River, need friggen Indian medicine god on this one!

Working from a base package to start, whether he might reel in return 2-3 of the current top MLB 100 prospects from the Nationals:  RHP Lucas Giolito (1); SS/2B Trea Turner (9); RHP Eric Fedde (74), that might work for a suitable players'-under-control-foundation, saving from FA spending some years ahead.  Angel Stadium confines are conducive to Turner's hitting style and play. 

It would put Trout closer to home, but wouldn't giving the Nationals Trout with Harper doom baseball contenders for years ahead, though?  Geez, and if DT becomes President, he might form major conglomerated partnership to buy the team, pump them full of money, and he looks like Fidel Castro with the Nationals representation!               

If they threw in Michael Taylor and Anthony Rendon I'd think about it..

But probably still end up passing. 

I wouldn't trade Trout unless the franchise was still a mess in the same year as the final year of his contract and we weren't going anywhere in the standings -- plus Trout didn't given any indication of wanting to sign long term with the Angels. 

[Stradling]

Would you rather have one guy that gets you a 9 WAR or four guys that each get you 3?  

[Chuck]

2 minutes ago, WallyWorld said:

FWIW, Jeff Fletcher said in this week's OC Register podcast that it would be silly of the Angels to not at least entertain the thought.

But I don't think Fletcher knows what he's talking about, it's not like he gets paid to write about baseball. 

You can tag Fletch in your post since he's a member here. 

[ScottT]

Trout's been at 9 WAR for four years.  You aren't going to get four guys that have consistently put up a 3 WAR for the last four years.  You are going to have to roll the dice a bit.  

[AngelsLakersFan]

15 hours ago, WallyWorld said:

I'd be looking for 3-4 premium prospects plus at least 1 young major league proven talent. Even if the prospects don't all pan out, I think you could match that WAR total or do better.

plus then you're covering multiple holes on your team, or cresting multiple other trade scenarios, etc.

 

 

So maybe, Kotchman, McPherson, Kendrick, Wood, & Lackey circa '05?

[greginpsca]

Two reasons why they don't trade Trout. 1. Season ticket sales for next season could drop off dramatically. He puts butts in the seats. 2. I doubt the org feels they could get enough value talent and dollar wise from another team.

[AngelsLakersFan]

1 hour ago, Jeff Williams said:

Outrageous thought, but will have fun with it.  Halos looking snake-bitten with injuries again, damn Santa Ana River, need friggen Indian medicine god on this one!

Working from a base package to start, whether he might reel in return 2-3 of the current top MLB 100 prospects from the Nationals:  RHP Lucas Giolito (1); SS/2B Trea Turner (9); RHP Eric Fedde (74), that might work for a suitable players'-under-control-foundation, saving from FA spending some years ahead.  Angel Stadium confines are conducive to Turner's hitting style and play. 

It would put Trout closer to home, but wouldn't giving the Nationals Trout with Harper doom baseball contenders for years ahead, though?  Geez, and if DT becomes President, he might form major conglomerated partnership to buy the team, pump them full of money, and he looks like Fidel Castro with the Nationals representation!               

I would only consider that trade if the Nationals threw in Harper, and even then I'd turn it down because there is no long term upside.

[ettin]

There is a thing called scarcity and Trout is at the top of the food chain. The fact that he is a 10 WAR player and no one is above him creates added value to an already extremely valuable player. Trading him now would be selling very low even if you get a haul back from a team like the Dodgers for instance. His production, youth, positional scarcity, and actual player pool scarcity create a player so valuable that the Angels would be stupid to trade him.

Nothing any team could offer, without breaking, in part, their own teams to get him, would be worth his value right now.

The Angels need to see what the rest of this season brings (you never know stranger things have happened) and if by the deadline we're behind potentially sell off Santiago, Escobar, Street, Smith, Soto, Wilson, Calhoun, and Salas where it makes sense and rebuild/retool the team towards a serious run in 2018.

This doesn't mean the team can't or won't compete in 2017, they will. But the reality now is that Richards and Heaney won't be back until mid-2017 and by then we may be out of the playoff race and quite frankly there is no guarantee that either one will come back fully healthy and READY to contribute in the last half of next year. What is more likely is that either or both of them will be better prepared for the 2018 season.

So the goal, if the Angels continue to flounder, is to sell off pieces of our team that will not contribute past 2017 (and maybe even pieces that would contribute in 2018 such as Huston Street). The Angels should seriously consider extending Kole Calhoun through 2020 or longer and build a core around Trout, Calhoun, Pujols, Cron, Simmons, Skaggs, Heaney, Richards (consider extending him if he returns healthy), Tropeano, and Bedrosian (future closer).

Retooling, if we flounder this year, could allow us to bring in another quality starter by packaging up Santiago and, for instance, Salas to get a Heaney like return. Additionally a combination of the rest of our trade-able assets could bring back potential players for LF, 2B, 3B, the rotation, and the bullpen depending on what Eppler can find out in tradeville.

My recommendation from a layman's point of view is for the Angels to focus, if and only if they are out of the race, on acquiring a quality mid or front-line rotation starter, a LF, and a 2B as their primary goals. A bullpen addition (think someone like Mychal Givens or Alex Reyes for instance) that could compete for our closer position (assuming Street is out of the picture) would be good too to give Bedrosian some competition (and as backup in case of injury). These acquisitions will need to be near-MLB ready or even already promoted to the Majors so that they can effectively help the team in 2018.

Just my 2 cents on where we have to go now. What this all means though is that we CAN build around Mike Trout and still compete moving forward. A 2018 rotation could easily consist of Garrett Richards, Andrew Heaney, Nick Tropeano, Tyler Skaggs, and Nate Smith for instance. If Kole is extended you'd have an OF that still has Trout and Calhoun plus a quality LF we either obtain through trade or free agency. You'd have an IF with a 2B acquisition, a 3B acquisition or Cowart/Kubitza, Simmons, and Cron. Pujols will DH (we'd still need a power bench bat that can hit RHP). Bullpen will be led by Bedrosian and company.

If the 2020 trade deadline arrives and we haven't extended Trout and we're not in the pennant race then guess what? Time to trade Trout at that point only in my humble opinion. Even then Trout will bring back a huge haul.

Edited May 10, 2016 by ettin

[Docwaukee]

5 minutes ago, ScottT said:

Trout's been at 9 WAR for four years.  You aren't going to get four guys that have consistently put up a 3 WAR for the last four years.  You are going to have to roll the dice a bit.  

then I don't.  at this point, their our dice.  Trout is worth as much in trade 2-3 years from now as he is right now.  Why?  Because no one could meet the asking price right now.  The package of everything they got is still the same later on.  Plus it gives you 3 more off seasons to figure it out.  

Here is something to keep in mind about a major league draft

We have the 16th pick.  

Here are some highlights from the 2009 draft from the 16th pick and beyond

1st round: Pollock 17, Shelby Miller 19, Trout 25, Richards 42, 

2nd: Arenado 10, Kipnis 14, Matz 23, LeMahieu 30, Corbin 31

3rd: Seager, Wil Myers, Joe Kelly, Marisnick

4th: Ryan Goins, Adam Warren

5th: Brandon Belt

7th: Keuchel, Khris Davis

8th: Goldschmidt, Dozier

9th: Brock Holt

10th: Yan Gomes

12th: Nate Karns

13th: Matt Carpenter

16th: Scooter Gennett

18th: Stroman

20th: JD Martinez

21st: AJ Ramos, Trevor Rosenthal

22nd: Mike Fiers

23rd: Matt Adams

Granted, I understand the odds of getting more that 2 or 3 of these guys in any given draft, but what if we got 4 or 5 and what if one was Paul Goldschmidt?  

Wouldn't you like to see what Eppler has in his bag of tricks for the next 2 or 3 drafts or who we might sign as a free agent?  Wouldn't you like to have Trout around for at least 3 more years to find out if it's working?  What if you trade Trout and only a couple of the prospects actually work out?  

Fortunes can change very quickly especially when you are lining up for a top 10 protected pick for next year.  

Sometimes teams wait too long to trade their star player.  You almost can't wait too long to trade Trout.  You have to spend the next 3-4 years exhausting every possible avenue to convince him to stay, and if that doesn't work, then you move on.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Angel Oracle]

Great points Doc, the next step then has to be to improve the scouting, if they haven't done so already.    We can have as many picks as possible, but if the scouting is mediocre it won't really matter.

I do wonder if Arte Moreno even understands the importance of having good scouting.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Angel Oracle

[Jeff Williams]

4 hours ago, Stradling said:

Would you rather have one guy that gets you a 9 WAR or four guys that each get you 3?  

Careful now, you're getting into Buzzie Bavasi territory by that comment.  "I could get 2 pitchers with 20 wins vs giving Ryan a million dollars."  Yeah, that worked out! 

[Jeff Williams]

3 hours ago, greginpsca said:

Two reasons why they don't trade Trout. 1. Season ticket sales for next season could drop off dramatically. He puts butts in the seats. 2. I doubt the org feels they could get enough value talent and dollar wise from another team.

We were lucky to win a WS.  Halos fan are so fair weather, it's not even funny!