Gordon tied to Stanton?

[floplag]

I read a comment on Twitter about the conversations between the Giant and Marlins and it suggested that Gordon came up, perhaps MIA trying to package them
I wonder, if that was the price how many would be interested? 
I gotta think the prospect costs would be minimal with that price tag

[itsKnoppUitsme]

I think that we should do whatever the hell it takes to bring G.S.

back home to So.Cal and in an Angel uniform for years to come!

Trout, Upton. Stanton, YES F'N PLEASE!

[SoWhat]

Makes too much sense for the Angels, so you know what that means...

[Ohtaniland]

7 minutes ago, artesmustache said:

He's there for the taking and I have to believe we'd be one of the few places he'd waive his no-trade clause for. 

Stanton in right

Calhoun to first

Anybody at seond

Valbuena/Cowart at third

Non-tender Cron or swap for a bullpen piece

Move in the fences and have these guys just launch. Our pitching sucks anyways so we may as well be entertained

 

Valbuena, Cowart and Anybody all suck. Anybody needs to retire because he’s been here way too long.

 

[ettin]

26 minutes ago, floplag said:

I read a comment on Twitter about the conversations between the Giant and Marlins and it suggested that Gordon came up, perhaps MIA trying to package them
I wonder, if that was the price how many would be interested? 
I gotta think the prospect costs would be minimal with that price tag

Hi Flop,

It has been mentioned multiple times across multiple outlets regarding Miami wanting to shed significant payroll and using a Stanton trade with one (or more) of Dee Gordon, Martin Prado, Junichi Tazawa, or Brad Ziegler attached.

Gordon, based on his 3-year running average of 2.25 WAR, likely has minimal surplus value over the remaining three guaranteed years of his contract (not including his option). This simply means that by himself he could probably be acquired for two throwaway prospects.

The Marlins really need to trim payroll and Stanton has to go for sure and they probably need to shed Gordon, Prado, and at least one of their relievers to hit their stated goal. Forcing interested Stanton teams to take one of those other contracts helps them get to that goal. However if they have enough interest in Gordon, Prado, et al they may not have to force an acquiring team to accept one of those other players.

Bottom line is yes you are right a team that takes away most or all of Miami's payroll obligations will probably be their preferred trading partner. That is one reason why I believe we actually do have a shot at Stanton because we also have needs at 2B, 3B, and RP. Do we want all of them? Probably not but it certainly gives us better position over other teams in talks if we are going down that path.

[Stradling]

While I don't really think Stanton is the best way to spend money, I wouldn't turn down a trade for him and Gordon.  If that was too happen, I would just put Cowart at third base and roll with great defense.  I would assume that Calhoun would have to go to Miami or to someone else to make room in the outfield for Stanton.  You would have the best outfield in baseball and probably the best defensive infield in baseball.  You would have a leadoff hitter in Gordon, Trout batting 2nd, Upton, then Stanton.  That moves Albert to at least 5th in this scenario.  I guess Cron would play first although as has been mentioned, bringing on Gordon and Stanton don't really kill the luxury tax figure, so you could technically go out and get the guy that goes for closer to value, than someone that will be overpaid.  

[ten ocho recon scout]

22 minutes ago, artesmustache said:

 

Move in the fences and have these guys just launch. Our pitching sucks anyways so we may as well be entertained

 

I like the way you think. Might make pujols a good contract again, too.

[DMVol]

1 hour ago, SoWhat said:

Makes too much sense for the Angels, so you know what that means...

It doesn't make financial sense...too much Pujols money left on the books...

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

... I would assume that Calhoun would have to go to Miami or to someone else to make room in the outfield for Stanton...

In theory anyway, you could solve 1b with Calhoun, he's played a little there...Erstad was a good defensive OF'er who played a passable 1b....

[Stradling]

4 minutes ago, DMVol said:

It doesn't make financial sense...too much Pujols money left on the books...

In theory anyway, you could solve 1b with Calhoun, he's played a little there...Erstad was a good defensive OF'er who played a passable 1b....

Well to really make it work you’d like that contract of Koles gone.  

[DMVol]

34 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Well to really make it work you’d like that contract of Koles gone.  

I don't think Stanton is realistic even with Calhoun's money gone...shame because he'd love to play with the Angels....Pujols was a game changer....just can't make those kind of dumb signings and not pay to the piper....I guess Stanton is a dumb signing too but he's in his prime at 28...Pujols was declining when we signed him, on the wrong side of 30...

[Second Base]

I would willingly overpay for Stanton and Gordon. Like assuming both their contracts, plus Calhoun, Jahmai Jones, Matt Thaiss, Chris Rodriguez and Jesus Castillo. 

Yes, we'd be cash strapped for the next 4 years, and yes, it would take two more years after this just to get our farm back where it needs to be....

But Gordon, Trout, Stanton, Upton, LoMo.....

That's a lot of runs.

[yamsi12]

dreams

[JarsOfClay]

45 minutes ago, DMVol said:

I don't think Stanton is realistic even with Calhoun's money gone...shame because he'd love to play with the Angels....Pujols was a game changer....just can't make those kind of dumb signings and not pay to the piper....I guess Stanton is a dumb signing too but he's in his prime at 28...Pujols was declining when we signed him, on the wrong side of 30...

Pujols the gift that keeps on giving. 

Looking back though the angels should have let Upton opt out and went after Stanton instead.  They would have had been able to add Stanton and Gordon's contract and move Calhoun to LF.  Arte Morono strikes again.

[VariousCrap]

23 minutes ago, Scotty@AW said:

 

But Gordon, Trout, Stanton, Upton, LoMo, Pujols

That's a lot of runs.

 

Added #5 to your line-up and seriously, still wow.

[Stradling]

9 minutes ago, JarsOfClay said:

Pujols the gift that keeps on giving. 

Looking back though the angels should have let Upton opt out and went after Stanton instead.  They would have had been able to add Stanton and Gordon's contract and move Calhoun to LF.  Arte Morono strikes again.

No way do you let Upton opt out in hopes of trading for Stanton, especially when you’ll be giving up talent to get Stanton.  Upton is a lot better than you give him credit for and it wasn’t an overpay to get him.  

Just curious, when was the last time the Angels did something right in your eyes?  

Edited November 23, 2017 by Stradling

[Ochocinco!]

How many threads do we need on Stanton

[JarsOfClay]

9 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Upton is a lot better than you give him credit for and it wasn’t an overpay to get him.  

He's too inconsistent.  A 2 war player one year and a 5 war player the next.  I dont think you should guarantee 25m a year for that kind of a player.  Also resigning him after a monster year where he can opt out is stupid.   He's 30 years old now and this is likely his last contact.  What does he have left to play for now? He can stuff crack up his nose tomorrow and the angels are on the hook for the next 5 years.  It's a sucker's deal and the angels bit.

14 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Just curious, when was the last time the Angels did something right in your eyes?  

When was the last time the angels did something right in anyone's eyes?  lol

But to answer your question:  Billy Eppler.

[Stradling]

But @JarsOfClay you are advocating acquiring Stanton who struggles to play a full season, has two full seasons in his eight year career and had a 2.5 WAR in 2016.  How can you be so critical of Upton if you are ok with twice the years and almost three times the money to Stanton with those question marks?

Edited November 23, 2017 by Stradling

[tdawg87]

Even though I'm 99.9% certain we aren't getting Stanton, it would be hilarious if Eppler called on Gordon and the Marlins were like "If you want Gordon you're going to have to take Stanton too" and Eppler's like "Oh well if you insist....".

[JarsOfClay]

16 minutes ago, Stradling said:

But @JarsOfClay you are advocating acquiring Stanton who struggles to play a full season, has two full seasons in his eight year career and had a 2.5 WAR in 2016.  How can you be so critical of Upton if you are ok with twice the years and almost three times the money to Stanton with those question marks?

Actually I'm advocating getting Stanton and Gordon.  Gordon would finally solve the leadoff/2b problem and Stanton is a once in a generation type of player like Trout.  Stanton's health is a concern but he's so good it's actually worth the risk to me.

Trading for Stanton alone doesn't really make much sense.

[arch stanton]

I still think Gordon goes in a Stanton package then gets flipped with a little salary eaten by both the Marlins and the trade partner. A team willing to part with a decent prospect will get a cheap Gordon eventually 

[Troll Daddy]

2 hours ago, DMVol said:

It doesn't make financial sense...too much Pujols money left on the books...

In theory anyway, you could solve 1b with Calhoun, he's played a little there...Erstad was a good defensive OF'er who played a passable 1b....

Didn’t Erstad get a passable GG at first base

[Warfarin]

1 hour ago, Scotty@AW said:

I would willingly overpay for Stanton and Gordon. Like assuming both their contracts, plus Calhoun, Jahmai Jones, Matt Thaiss, Chris Rodriguez and Jesus Castillo. 

Yes, we'd be cash strapped for the next 4 years, and yes, it would take two more years after this just to get our farm back where it needs to be....

But Gordon, Trout, Stanton, Upton, LoMo.....

That's a lot of runs.

I think if you agree to take BOTH Stanton and Gordon, you won't have to give prospects back at all.  We'd effectively be taking 350 million dollars of payroll off their books.  

For the year, it'd add about 35 million dollars of payroll.  We could probably do that and still be under the cap, and add perhaps one mid-tier reliever (resign Petit?  or sign a LHP like McGee?).

Let's say we actually did the above and gave back a few token prospects.  What would the lineup be?

2B  Gordon (L)

CF  Trout (R)

RF  Stanton (R)

LF  Upton (R)

1B Calhoun (vs R) or Cron (vs L)

DH  Pujols (R)

3B  Valbuena (vs R) or Marte (vs L)

SS  Simmons (R)

C  Maldonado (R)

 

Right-handed heavy, but yeah, that is a pretty robust lineup.  If Calhoun is inserted into the trade, then just sign LoMo and plug him in at first instead.

[ten ocho recon scout]

What if miami says trout for stanton? Then we dont have to worry about trout leaving in 3 years, and it opens up number 27 again. 

[Second Base]

42 minutes ago, Warfarin said:

I think if you agree to take BOTH Stanton and Gordon, you won't have to give prospects back at all.  We'd effectively be taking 350 million dollars of payroll off their books.  

For the year, it'd add about 35 million dollars of payroll.  We could probably do that and still be under the cap, and add perhaps one mid-tier reliever (resign Petit?  or sign a LHP like McGee?).

Let's say we actually did the above and gave back a few token prospects.  What would the lineup be?

2B  Gordon (L)

CF  Trout (R)

RF  Stanton (R)

LF  Upton (R)

1B Calhoun (vs R) or Cron (vs L)

DH  Pujols (R)

3B  Valbuena (vs R) or Marte (vs L)

SS  Simmons (R)

C  Maldonado (R)

 

Right-handed heavy, but yeah, that is a pretty robust lineup.  If Calhoun is inserted into the trade, then just sign LoMo and plug him in at first instead.

I don't think I agree with that. There is surplus value to Stanton and Gordon. Not a ton, but they are worth their respective contracts, and then a little more.

Not just that, look at it from the Marlins perspective. They have these great players, they aren't going to let them go for nothing. It works from a financial standpoint, but not from a baseball standpoint. They're rebuilding and they need financial freedom and prospects to do it.

Stanton wants to be on the West Coast, so we don't have worry about his NTC, but we do need to find something that works for both organizations. 

Sending Kole Calhoun opens a spot in our outfield and but also lessens the financial burden we take on, but also doesn't give the Marlins what they want. We need to add players and prospects that make it worth it. 

Jam Jones is a prospect you can feel comfortable stepping into a role like Yelich has which makes this more intriguing. Then if we add Matt Thaiss to the deal, it's one that works for both sides. And to get Gordon, Rodriguez is a local Miami product with huge upside and Castillo gives them a mid-back end option. They undoubtedly accept that deal.

So while it's a ridiculous amount to give up, it's also a ridiculous amount to get back.

The Angels are immediately World Series contenders and will remain so for the next 3 years at minimum, possibly more. The Marlins have the building blocks and financial freedom to compete 5 years from now.