AngelsWin.com Today: Exploring an Angels-Giancarlo Stanton trade

[ABC]

4 hours ago, tdawg87 said:

The writers of these articles are going to start getting pissed if the entire article keeps getting copied and pasted. Jeff Fletcher already commented on it. @Chuckster70

[Tank]

13 minutes ago, #CF8x said:

pictures of @Brian Ilten can only be used with permission due to copyright laws. i hope you got proper permission to use this.

[ettin]

4 hours ago, tdawg87 said:

The writers of these articles are going to start getting pissed if the entire article keeps getting copied and pasted. Jeff Fletcher already commented on it. @Chuckster70

Sorry tdawg it was my first opportunity to use the 'confused' emoticon.

[Tank]

the idea of stanton and trout for at least four years together in their prime is pretty darn stimulating.

not @tdawg87 level of stimulating, but i can see that neighborhood from my yard.

 

also have to consider how appealing that duo would be to other prospective free agents...

[ettin]

4 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

I would only consider a Stanton trade if:

1) It doesn't impact a Trout extension; in fact, if love to see the Angels work out a Trout extension before trading for Stanton, but perhaps it wouldn't be finalized until the trade actually happened. Bringing him in would likely make Trout happy.

2) It doesn't involve Adell and one of Jones or Marsh. 

I'm pretty much fine with anything else.

Thay said, I think you underestimate what the Marlins would require--and get--even if they don't take on any contract. Giancarlo has pretty much legitimized his massive contract with his 44 HR through 117 games played...he's one of the ten or so most valuable position players in the game and still relatively young. If he hit free agency now someone would likely give him 10/$300MM or 12/$350MM.

For the Angels to be taken seriously, I think they'd have to give up something like Calhoun (who is cheap enough that the Marlins would want him), Jones, Barria, a Rodriguez, and maybe someone like Lund or Sanger. 

 

1) It won't, we have plenty of cap space to add a Trout extension. I would love that too but I am tending to agree now more with @Dochalo and others who indicated the 2018-2019 off-season is when we'll likely see this once Harper and Machado are signed and their prices are set to better understand what Mike should receive as fair compensation.

2) It will likely involve one of Jones or Marsh (probably Jahmai)

I think if he hit free agency now he'd get 10 years, $350M give or take.

[ettin]

4 hours ago, Brent Maguire said:

Stanton is being paid pretty appropriately correct? Based on his actual production and the contract he has, any team taking on the whole deal shouldn't have to give up a ton in return. That right there is the biggest roadblock for any trade and it's why I think the Marlins have to kick in cash in any deal because a straight salary dump doesn't seem likely. I would guess they eat just enough to get the prospects they want back but don't send more than 100 million dollars back in any deal. 

Hi Brent, I think your base free agent WAR dollar value may be too low. Matt Swartz's recent series on FanGraphs seems to point to the free agent dollar per WAR value is above $10M per WAR. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/trends-in-free-agent-spending-on-hitters/

There is a lot of variation in free agency dollars per WAR pricing depending on what models you use. Currently I'm using $10.5M which may be a touch high. Using that value he has about $72M in surplus value if you assume he opts-out in 2020 or about $57M in surplus value if you keep him over his entire contract assuming a 0.5 WAR drop per year after his age 30 season (I think you started the drop on his age 30 season in the article).

Either way this will cost us someone like Jahmai Jones and probably 2-3 other mid-tier type prospects I think. Or alternatively it might cost us Jaime Barria and the same 2-3 type mid-tier prospects. Something like that.

[ettin]

3 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

I think you're talking about the OC Register's articles. Anyhow I asked Fletch to look into because it's something that needs to be addressed on their side, not ours. We don't dictate if an article is just brief w/intro with a link to read the rest or full, that's on the publisher's side to fix. 

WE DID NOTHING WRONG! WE RUN A BIG, BEAUTIFUL WEBSITE! ITS A TREMENDOUS WEBSITE! I BET YOU DIDN'T KNOW THAT? NOT MANY PEOPLE KNOW THAT!

[ettin]

3 hours ago, totdprods said:

I could see Calhoun being of interest. He is affordable by Marlins standards and gives them a productive player to at least keep them a fringe contender, provided they don't sell off everyone else. He'd be flippable for prospects too if he rebounds - something they wouldn't be getting much of by dealing Stanton and his contract.

I don't see any reason why the Angels would have to or need to trade Kole Calhoun. It would be counter-productive. You all assume that Stanton will play RF. It could be they move him to LF or move Calhoun to LF. This will be a pure prospect trade I think with perhaps Maybin going to the Marlins as a salary off-set for AAV (if they do it now and not during the off-season).

EDIT: Or alternatively they do a three-way trade and flip Maybin to the Nationals, Orioles, or another team.

Edited August 18, 2017 by ettin

[ettin]

2 hours ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

Meh, not necessarily. In reality if they locked up both, its not drastically more than pujols/hamilton.

That said, id rsther pay more money to go see the dodgers right now than angels. (For clarity, i would never go see the dodgers and would never watch them over the angels. But im sure their fans are happier paying more for a ticket than we are paying a little less to see a lot less)

Turn in your man card for even spouting that vile filth! I don't care if you provided a parenthetical caveat!!!!! Your punishment is 50 floggings from tdawg!

[ettin]

1 hour ago, TroutTrumbo said:

Do any of you think that Arte will pay Stanton and Trout 70-80 mil a season ( figure to extend Trout will cost 40 mil a season) and Still pay Albert his 30 mil? That doesn't leave much for the rest of the roster. 

I still think you don't win without a productive farm to supplement the enormous salaries. It seems like too many ifs for Arte to go for right after Hamilton comes off the books.

Yes we have plenty of payroll space for both.

[ettin]

1 hour ago, Dave Saltzer said:

To at least get a serious conversation going, my bet is we'd have to offer Calhoun, Barria, Pérez or Ward, and Hermosillo while taking on all the money. The Marlins could either keep Calhoun or trade him for 1-3 other prospects from another team (he's still in demand by many teams). That gives them a current ML OF replacement, cost controlled pitching, catching, and a cheap OF replacement. 

 

We could expand the deal to possibly include Gordon and we'd replace Hermosillo with Jones and another pitching prospect such as Rodríguez. 

 

As much as I love Calhoun, and want to see Hermosillo succeed as an Angel, I'd be stoked to get Stanton. Pairing him and Trout for years would make for a lot of great games. Sure, there's a lot of risk in Stanton's contract, but, we would have that risk trying to acquire any major FA to be comparable to him. His deal is not that outrageous, other than in length. 

 

As noted above, inflation will happen. Arte seems content to spend up to the luxury tax. Over the length of the contract, the luxury tax will continue to go up. So, that would allow room for us to keep him and Trout. And, while Pujols is here, we would get the cheap, controlled years of Thaiss, Ward, and Cowart/Rojas (for 3B, especially if we expand and include Gordon). 

 

If we could get Stanton for something like this, I'd do it. 

Drop Calhoun out of that and that is pretty close to the ask we'd have to pay.

[Brent Maguire]

49 minutes ago, ettin said:

Hi Brent, I think your base free agent WAR dollar value may be too low. Matt Swartz's recent series on FanGraphs seems to point to the free agent dollar per WAR value is above $10M per WAR. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/trends-in-free-agent-spending-on-hitters/

There is a lot of variation in free agency dollars per WAR pricing depending on what models you use. Currently I'm using $10.5M which may be a touch high. Using that value he has about $72M in surplus value if you assume he opts-out in 2020 or about $57M in surplus value if you keep him over his entire contract assuming a 0.5 WAR drop per year after his age 30 season (I think you started the drop on his age 30 season in the article).

Either way this will cost us someone like Jahmai Jones and probably 2-3 other mid-tier type prospects I think. Or alternatively it might cost us Jaime Barria and the same 2-3 type mid-tier prospects. Something like that.

Thanks for the response. So his overall worth may be closer to 330-350 million based on this model, which means you can switch out Rodriguez and plug Jones in for my first hypothetical of taking on the whole deal. I still believe it's a bit pricey to take on the full deal AND dump 2-3 legitimate prospects but that may be the asking price. I did find it curious that the 3 teams that Jon Morosi listed as suitors(Angels, Giants and Nationals) all are probably in the bottom tier of farm systems. That makes me think that the Marlins might be more interested in shedding the contract rather than eating money and getting legit prospects back but I could be reading into it too much. 

[ukyah]

2 hours ago, Troll Daddy said:

What we do know is that the Marlins got a call from the Angels .

i never read that.

[ten ocho recon scout]

51 minutes ago, ettin said:

Turn in your man card for even spouting that vile filth! I don't care if you provided a parenthetical caveat!!!!! Your punishment is 50 floggings from tdawg!

It disgusted me to say it, too. But thats how strongly i felt saying yes, i would pay 15 bucks to drink canned beer if it meant watching trout and g stanton chest bump.

Shoot, 25 a beer for that mirage.

[Glen]

If we got Stanton you'd have to figure he would hit after Trout, and immediately start getting more walks from hitting in front of Pujols.

[ten ocho recon scout]

25 minutes ago, Randy Gradishar said:

Yeah, I really don't get including Calhoun either. He's basically free and has produced the same average WAR as Stanton in his career.

Stanton just has more upside (but also less consistent), is younger, and is obviously trending much better than Calhoun this year.

Stanton and calhoun arent comparable. At all, really. Maybe kole has a better glove(?). But as for WAR, remember stsnton has missed considerable time, which effects it. Hes still 20 more WAR career vs calhoun, with another year of service

[ten ocho recon scout]

18 minutes ago, Brent Maguire said:

Thanks for the response. So his overall worth may be closer to 330-350 million based on this model, which means you can switch out Rodriguez and plug Jones in for my first hypothetical of taking on the whole deal. I still believe it's a bit pricey to take on the full deal AND dump 2-3 legitimate prospects but that may be the asking price. I did find it curious that the 3 teams that Jon Morosi listed as suitors(Angels, Giants and Nationals) all are probably in the bottom tier of farm systems. That makes me think that the Marlins might be more interested in shedding the contract rather than eating money and getting legit prospects back but I could be reading into it too much. 

Interesting observation. It depends hoe much info morosi has, but that does make sense if its the case.

I still say of stanton is indeed on the block, its goung to cost more than we have. We can absorb the whole deal of we choose, but i think theyll end up (if they move him, big if) still getting rid of almost all the money, plus get a legit package in return.

[ten ocho recon scout]

6 minutes ago, Glen said:

If we got Stanton you'd have to figure he would hit after Trout, and immediately start getting more walks from hitting in front of Pujols.

The good news with that is pujols' triple play numbers will decrease his double play numbers, so people wont get to knock him for that anymore.

[Dave Saltzer]

1 hour ago, ettin said:

Drop Calhoun out of that and that is pretty close to the ask we'd have to pay.

While I'd be ecstatic if we didn't have to include Calhoun, my bet is just picking up the money and the prospects I offered would not be enough to get the deal done, especially if other teams are involved. Kole is by far one of our most tradable assets that could net some top-tier Ed prospects in return. That would and could make our deal too good for Miami to pass up. Kole represents a tradable commodity and value. Make no mistake, I'd miss him, as he is fun to watch and one of our guys, but, to get Stanton, we'd have to pay. 

 

And, as for the person asking why we'd have to trade something, we aren't doing this I  isolation. Other teams can and will make offers. We aren't the only ones who can just absorb payroll. Players with Stanton's power don't come along very often, especially in their prime years. They aren't truly going to give him away. Yes, they can always pull him back. Most teams place most players on revocable waivers to get the discussion going for the off season. 

[ten ocho recon scout]

^ that right there. Prospect wise, we would struggle to keep up with most other teams. Theres more than a few who can afford him. I just think our odds are slim. 

[Lou]

3 hours ago, Randy Gradishar said:

Yeah, I wasn't very clear there. I realize he has to be traded now, but it has been brought up that every team passed on just taking his salary when they had the chance. So why would they now do that plus prospects?

The only reason I can think of is that the Marlins told everyone they wouldn't just let him go if a claim was made, so teams let him clear. Or maybe teams just assumed that was the case. But is that even true that a team can pull back a player when he's claimed? And would teams respect Miami's warning?

Yes, the Marlins could have pulled him back. 

[Lou]

5 hours ago, Randy Gradishar said:

Stanton over Calhoun is what, 1 or 2 WAR?

This isn't even close. Currently: 

Stanton = 5.3 WAR

Calhoun = 0.7 WAR

 

[Rico]

4 hours ago, Glen said:

If we got Stanton you'd have to figure he would hit after Trout, and immediately start getting more walks from hitting in front of Pujols.

Less walks for Trout.

[Stradling]

Everyone including Calhoun in this deal, are you suggesting to do this trade in the off season?  If you aren't, have you heard one mention of Kole clearing waivers, because I haven't.  If he hasn't cleared waivers he can't be traded.  

[stormngt]

8 hours ago, ettin said:

Hi Brent, I think your base free agent WAR dollar value may be too low. Matt Swartz's recent series on FanGraphs seems to point to the free agent dollar per WAR value is above $10M per WAR. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/trends-in-free-agent-spending-on-hitters/

There is a lot of variation in free agency dollars per WAR pricing depending on what models you use. Currently I'm using $10.5M which may be a touch high. Using that value he has about $72M in surplus value if you assume he opts-out in 2020 or about $57M in surplus value if you keep him over his entire contract assuming a 0.5 WAR drop per year after his age 30 season (I think you started the drop on his age 30 season in the article).

Either way this will cost us someone like Jahmai Jones and probably 2-3 other mid-tier type prospects I think. Or alternatively it might cost us Jaime Barria and the same 2-3 type mid-tier prospects. Something like that.

I know this is off topic but this is concerning.  Based on your evaluation of WAR, a player with 1.0 average over a ten year career should be paid 100 million dollars.  That is scary.