Trout/Stanton/Arte

[Dtwncbad]

I hope Jeter gets embarrasingly destroyed by a savvy GM in whatever the final Stanton move is.

[Ohtaniland]

 

36 minutes ago, ettin said:

A mix of MLB replacements and prospects is probably what the Marlins are looking for in any deal. Particularly if they can sell it well to their fan base:

 

Jeter: "Look we acquired a great player in Kole Calhoun, a former #1 prospect in Kaleb Cowart, and a top prospect in Chris Rodriguez!!!!"

 

Well that should end the discussion quite quickly. 

 

But seriously, would you do that deal if you were the Marlins? 

 

 

 

[Dtwncbad]

11 minutes ago, Calzone said:

 

 

Jeter: "Look we acquired a great player in Kole Calhoun, a former #1 prospect in Kaleb Cowart, and a top prospect in Chris Rodriguez!!!!"

 

Well that should end the discussion quite quickly. 

 

But seriously, would you do that deal if you were the Marlins? 

 

 

 

The whole discussion is hard to have because the element that dictates how much talent they get back is how much of the salary does the acquiring team take?

Unless you know that answer then discussing names is pointless.

The Marlins are not going to get a boatload of talent back if they don't absorb some of the salary.

They are posturing right now but in the end, the money attached to Stanton is literally the currency in determing what they get back.

If I was the Marlins, I would be going the opposite direct and start asking for what prospect packages I could get by paying 25% of Stantons annual contract.

They would save 75% and be able to land a very impressive package that would actually impact their future.

[ten ocho recon scout]

1 hour ago, ettin said:

I think a major issue Miami has to deal with is their new stadium 

FiFY

[WeatherWonk]

There is something incredibly dysfunctional about an organization that allows Albert to bat 3rd or 4th in the lineup for an entire year (and behind Trout, no less), while the Angels were struggling to score runs. Even when Upton arrived, there's Albert at cleanup;  many times leading off the second inning with his .286 OBP last year. When that happens, figure we wont have a probable chance to score again, until at least the 4th. That doesnt seem like Eppler, to me. I would have put Cron or Calhoun or even Simmons ahead of Albert.

It could be Sosh;  the man whom Arte signed to an ill-advised, long-term contract years ago. But Sosh usually learns faster than this. Not much faster, though.

Anyway, this is the season where Arte shows us what he is made of. This is the season where he agrees to spend, without getting the the way of the GMs plan with a FA of his own liking. The old saw since Hambone left was "wait till 2018". 

Well, it's here. And if Upton is our big splash, well, I am feeling disappointed. I think a regression in Upton's numbers is probable (no surprise, after a potential walk year). All it would mean is that he is returning to his career norm. Is that so surprising? Of course, his career norm looks good compared to the LF we have had out there since I-dont-know-when. But for 22 mil/year?

If that's basically all there is, and Albert returns to clean-up in 2018,  then how many runs per game MORE might we score?  A season-long, healthy Trout will be a plus, of course. But if all we do is find "bargains" at second and the status quo at first and third (Cron and Valbuena), we're another tick towards midnight on the mindset of Trout re-signing after 2020. It wont be enough runs to compete, unless our pitching actually remains healthy for an entire season. And that's something we keep waiting for, without fruition.

Apologies, but 2nd biggest market, 11th in payroll (even carrying the baggage of Hambone and Albert), 3+ million a year in attendance, aint cuttin' it for me.

Think about this. If Arte is making 150 mil/year FROM THE TV CONTRACT ALONE, all he has to do to break even is to NET 10 million/year, if the starting payroll in 2017 was 160 mil (according to Steve the Ump).

I think Arte should be willing to go OVER the tax threshold by up to 10 mil. He can afford it, ferchrisakes.

[WeatherWonk]

21 hours ago, ettin said:

I think a major issue Miami has to deal with is their new stadium and their fan base's reaction to another massive tear-down.

I havent heard. Is there a major problem with their new stadium;  the one that Loria conned the citizens into building?

[JarsOfClay]

On 11/18/2017 at 8:50 AM, Stradling said:

They are hellbent on reducing salary and are looking to trade their young MVP, who is marketable, and anyone else that gets paid.  

Miami owner gave Stanton a 13 year lifetime contract.  Arte gave Trout 6 years.  Trout's not getting traded (yet), but he's still leaving while in his prime. So what's the difference?

On 11/18/2017 at 8:50 AM, Stradling said:

Arte will never trade Trout to reduce salary, NEVER.  That’s not to say he won’t trade him, but he wouldn’t do it for any other reason than Trout wanting out.  

Somewhere a fan in Cinncinnati is making a Trout/Votto/Castellini post where they praise the owner of the Reds for giving Votto a lifetime contract and wont lose him to another team while mentioning how lucky they are to not have an owner as stupid as Arte. 

 

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, JarsOfClay said:

Miami owner gave Stanton a 13 year lifetime contract.  Arte gave Trout 6 years.  Trout's not getting traded (yet), but he's still leaving while in his prime. So what's the difference?

Somewhere a fan in Cinncinnati is making a Trout/Votto/Castellini post where they praise the owner of the Reds for giving Votto a lifetime contract and wont lose him to another team while mentioning how lucky they are to not have an owner as stupid as Arte. 

 

Of course you think it’s a foregone conclusion he will leave at the end of this contract.  Good job being consistent.  

[ettin]

2 hours ago, WeatherWonk said:

I havent heard. Is there a major problem with their new stadium;  the one that Loria conned the citizens into building?

No I am speaking to the fact that Miami invested in a big, beautiful stadium and are taking a gigantic dump on the on-field product (again).

Jeter and company have a perception issue that they are trying to manage with their fan base. Forget about the conning you are talking about and focus on how a fan is going to view the trade of Stanton and possibly other players. Miami's management has to do their best to control the image they are projecting. One way to do that is to get a mix of players and prospects in any trade to show they are still competing (even if many of us know they are not really) while rebuilding. Personally I would avoid running my operation that way but the Marlins in particular have a more troublesome perception they have to address compared to other clubs.

[Corona]

Artes not a bad owner and it’s great that he’s willing to spend, but he needs to be a little less controlling in terms of personnel.  

[Angel Oracle]

8 minutes ago, Corona said:

Artes not a bad owner and it’s great that he’s willing to spend, but he needs to be a little less controlling in terms of personnel.  

The bright side is that Hackilton was the last time he had input into a major signing.   Maybe lesson finally learned?   Just don’t do a 180 degree turn as a result. 

[Angel Oracle]

Jeter and company had better not act like Loria part deux.   The fans may never, eeever come back if so?

[JarsOfClay]

3 hours ago, Stradling said:

Of course you think it’s a foregone conclusion he will leave at the end of this contract.  Good job being consistent.  

Trout is gonna get 400m contract at least.  Arte could have kept him for 12 years for about 250m, now if he wants to resign trout it's gonna cost him an extra 200m.  Arte wont pay that much, plus the yankees and dodgers can and will outbid for him.

Trout is on pace to be one of the greatest players ever, and definitely go into the HOF as an angel but Arte seriously blew it. He gives a 35 year old Pujols 10 years, but gives a 22 year old Trout 6 years?  So stupid.

It's going to be as big a blunder as the Babe Ruth trade.  But keep praising how lucky we are to have Arte.

[Angel Oracle]

How do we know that Trout didn't turn down a 12 year deal?

Contracts per year will be a lot higher in 2021 than they were in 2015.

[JarsOfClay]

4 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

How do we know that Trout didn't turn down a 12 year deal?

Contracts per year will be a lot higher in 2021 than they were in 2015.

Trout said himself he wanted a lifetime contract in the 10-12 year range, but the angels only wanted to give him 6.

[Stradling]

9 minutes ago, JarsOfClay said:

Trout is gonna get 400m contract at least.  Arte could have kept him for 12 years for about 250m, now if he wants to resign trout it's gonna cost him an extra 200m.  Arte wont pay that much, plus the yankees and dodgers can and will outbid for him.

Trout is on pace to be one of the greatest players ever, and definitely go into the HOF as an angel but Arte seriously blew it. He gives a 35 year old Pujols 10 years, but gives a 22 year old Trout 6 years?  So stupid.

It's going to be as big a blunder as the Babe Ruth trade.  But keep praising how lucky we are to have Arte.

For starters Albert wasn't 35.  When he gave Trout the contract it was the largest contract ever for pre arbitration eligible player in the history of the game.  All we care about is whether or not Trout stays, who cares about the money?  

By the way, you have serious reading comprehension issues if you think I was praising Arte.  I was rather saying, be careful what you wish for, because it can certainly be worse.  

[Dtwncbad]

10 minutes ago, JarsOfClay said:

Trout said himself he wanted a lifetime contract in the 10-12 year range, but the angels only wanted to give him 6.

You got it wrong.  They should have signed him to a 25 year contact the day they drafted him.  And, wait til the last round to draft him so he doesn't have the leverage of a first round draft pick!

25 years at major league minimum.

[AngelsLakersFan]

On 11/20/2017 at 10:33 AM, ten ocho recon scout said:

Agreed. Stanton (or a move like that) is a long term piece.

Again, i rhink its a huge commitment, and not one maybe we should chase. But it would be nice to aquire long term guys versus the last few years. And there are no stanton's in our system..and any bat like him in FA is going to cost similar.

The thing I always come back to with Stanton is, the opportunity costs.

Say you don't put resources into Stanton... the ~$25/yr.. the prospects. That is one position that you then have to fill each year at its own cost. We saw last year, the price of left field and second base were around ~$10m, plus some minor league pieces, and what did we get out of that? We got jack shit! We do that all the time too, and have for as long as I can remember. We  raid the rather expensive bargain bin and come up empty, so we raid it again. Finley, Mathews, Wells, Blanton.... all perfect examples of what happens when you pass on the big ticket item, or don't have access to one.

[ten ocho recon scout]

3 hours ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

The thing I always come back to with Stanton is, the opportunity costs.

Say you don't put resources into Stanton... the ~$25/yr.. the prospects. That is one position that you then have to fill each year at its own cost. We saw last year, the price of left field and second base were around ~$10m, plus some minor league pieces, and what did we get out of that? We got jack shit! We do that all the time too, and have for as long as I can remember. We  raid the rather expensive bargain bin and come up empty, so we raid it again. Finley, Mathews, Wells, Blanton.... all perfect examples of what happens when you pass on the big ticket item, or don't have access to one.

Totally agree.

Im probably repeating what ive said in other posts here. But looking at the last decade or so, we signed vlad, torii, pujols and hamilton. Obviously 2 great, one good to bad, one horrible. Its easy to look at the most recent two and shy away from any other big contract.

But in doing so, it ignores what to me were the two biggest FA mistakes in the last 10 or so years. Balking at beltran, and balking at beltre, both for the price tag. 

Beltran wanted and got 105 for 6 years or so (of the top of my head). We said fuck off (even though the team coveted him since KC), when he was a perfect fit. Could slot second in front of vlad and GA, was a sosh type (conact hitter and baserunner). Anyway, we said no...then gave finley 14 mill over 2 years. Then gmj 50 mill over 5. Then torii 90 over 5. Torii was great...but the "vlad window" passed (and we were honestly one bat away from likely another WS appearence in the lackey/vlad/franky era). So we paid roughly 150 million for the same position (CF) spread around 3 guys, in the same time frame (06-13).

Beltre same thing. We said no, went baragain hunting, and stupidly paid wells roughly 15 or so less than beltre wanted.

The mistake in both moves is simple. And its the same now. Both beltre and beltran, and now stanton (but to a lesser extent to be fair) represented something we really needed, AND HAD NO REALISTIC ALTERNATIVE IN OUR SYSTEM. So you have to look at FA....all 3 of those guys were/are hot commodities. Its not going to get any cheaper going forward.  

Like you said, stanton is expensive as hell, but weve seen the results of mediocrity. At least when we balked at beltran, the team top to bottom was solid, and we had very interesting prospects. With beltre, the team was still better balanced than now, with some interesting prospects (trumbo, bourjos, etc). Now, and for the near and maybe 3 year timeframe, we have trout, upton (who i think slows by 2020 to good, not star), and probably too much faith in simmons (who im not knocking, i love the guy) and calhoun. The rest is ugly.

We can maybe tidy it up with a decent 2B and 3B. But the last several years, when weve penny pinched, the results have been pretty terrible. Were theowing around names like kinsler and morrison...that just screams matt joyce to me. Moustakas might be a nice suprise. But he may also be david freese..and thats not gonna be enough either, i think.

[Warfarin]

1 hour ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

Totally agree.

Im probably repeating what ive said in other posts here. But looking at the last decade or so, we signed vlad, torii, pujols and hamilton. Obviously 2 great, one good to bad, one horrible. Its easy to look at the most recent two and shy away from any other big contract.

But in doing so, it ignores what to me were the two biggest FA mistakes in the last 10 or so years. Balking at beltran, and balking at beltre, both for the price tag. 

Beltran wanted and got 105 for 6 years or so (of the top of my head). We said fuck off (even though the team coveted him since KC), when he was a perfect fit. Could slot second in front of vlad and GA, was a sosh type (conact hitter and baserunner). Anyway, we said no...then gave finley 14 mill over 2 years. Then gmj 50 mill over 5. Then torii 90 over 5. Torii was great...but the "vlad window" passed (and we were honestly one bat away from likely another WS appearence in the lackey/vlad/franky era). So we paid roughly 150 million for the same position (CF) spread around 3 guys, in the same time frame (06-13).

Beltre same thing. We said no, went baragain hunting, and stupidly paid wells roughly 15 or so less than beltre wanted.

The mistake in both moves is simple. And its the same now. Both beltre and beltran, and now stanton (but to a lesser extent to be fair) represented something we really needed, AND HAD NO REALISTIC ALTERNATIVE IN OUR SYSTEM. So you have to look at FA....all 3 of those guys were/are hot commodities. Its not going to get any cheaper going forward.  

Like you said, stanton is expensive as hell, but weve seen the results of mediocrity. At least when we balked at beltran, the team top to bottom was solid, and we had very interesting prospects. With beltre, the team was still better balanced than now, with some interesting prospects (trumbo, bourjos, etc). Now, and for the near and maybe 3 year timeframe, we have trout, upton (who i think slows by 2020 to good, not star), and probably too much faith in simmons (who im not knocking, i love the guy) and calhoun. The rest is ugly.

We can maybe tidy it up with a decent 2B and 3B. But the last several years, when weve penny pinched, the results have been pretty terrible. Were theowing around names like kinsler and morrison...that just screams matt joyce to me. Moustakas might be a nice suprise. But he may also be david freese..and thats not gonna be enough either, i think.

You make some good points in here, but I'd consider Stanton as perhaps more of a "luxury" for us as opposed to a true necessity.  Now, if we were the Giants, and had not one decent outfielder, I'd totally agree with you and say that he is a true, genuine need.  However, we have the best player in the game in CF, one of the best offensive LFers, and a very steady and underrated RFer.   Beyond those three, we have a lot of minor league OF talent as well.  OF is probably the one area that we are totally set, which is why I think of Stanton as more of a luxury than a necessity.

On this current team, I'd say 2B and 3B are moreso areas of true necessity.  We have absolutely no plan for 2B and no legitimate talent in the pipeline.  We have Valbuena/Marte to occupy 3B for this year, but they don't exactly inspire confidence, and we have no real minor league talent being developed there either.  Cowart has a great glove, but he screams utility infielder at best currently.

[ten ocho recon scout]

^agreed. And i almost wrote stanton being a luxury, funny enough.

Still, i think sooner rather than later were gonna need a MOTO bat...especially if trout leaves. Trout and upton are gonna be a nice combo, but i think in 2 years or so, that whole picture could be different. Im not sure what the FA market will look like then. And im not sure which of our prospects will be sucxessful, or even projects to be a power guy.

I totally agree the infield needs to be fixed. I just think stanton is a long term piece vs the guys were tslking about at 2B and 3B.

Ive said all along were not getting stanton. But i want to argue we should because its a lot more fun to daydream about that and why than the logan morrison thread

[Dtwncbad]

For the record, if Stanton does by chance become an Angel, I am always calling him Mike Stanton.

Or maybe Trout could be a total smart ass and change his name to Giancarlo Trout to mock Stanton.

[Lou]

How would that be mocking Stanton? 

Is Trout's middle name Giancarlo? 

[Lou]

10 hours ago, Corona said:

Artes not a bad owner and it’s great that he’s willing to spend, but he needs to be a little less controlling in terms of personnel.  

What exactly is he controlling? 

[Lou]

13 hours ago, JarsOfClay said:

Miami owner gave Stanton a 13 year lifetime contract.  Arte gave Trout 6 years.  Trout's not getting traded (yet), but he's still leaving while in his prime. So what's the difference?

lol @ lifetime contract. They heavily backloaded the contract and gave him an opt-out, so this lifetime deal was actually a six-year deal for $107M. The Marlins were never going to pay him the $325M. If he didn't exercise the opt-out they were trading him. Hell, he's only just finished Year 3 and they're already getting rid of him. 

Arte is giving Trout $144.5M for six years.