Source: Angels "have to be" in on Darvish

[Second Base]

Speaking with someone unaffiliated with the team, he says the Angels have to be in on Darvish, citing that they've been courting him since he was in high school.

He also says that without draft pick compensation, they won't get another opportunity to acquire a pitcher of his caliber and corner the "Japanese Market."

I realize the irony because just a few hours ago, I was telling @totdprods that we couldn't afford him.

I wonder what that contract might look like.

[UndertheHalo]

has this source proven reliable with MLB FA in the past ?

[DMVol]

Just not sure Eppler wants to spend that much on one guy....

[totdprods]

It just makes too much sense. 

I still feel like the Angels are going to go 'all-in' for these next three years, and for the same reasons you just mentioned about Darvish, it makes since to pounce now.

Eppler is too crafty and cautious to scorch-earth the team and the farm, but I truly feel there will also be a significant trade within the next calendar year, if not this offseason. This is a good team now - if you can add Darvish without destroying payroll and somehow land Yelich without hurting your MLB team, this team is suddenly right up there with the Astros, Yankees, Cubs, Indiana, and Dodgers.

 

[Stradling]

21 minutes ago, Scotty@AW said:

Speaking with someone unaffiliated with the team, he says the Angels have to be in on Darvish, citing that they've been courting him since he was in high school.

He also says that without draft pick compensation, they won't get another opportunity to acquire a pitcher of his caliber and corner the "Japanese Market."

I realize the irony because just a few hours ago, I was telling @totdprods that we couldn't afford him.

I wonder what that contract might look like.

Scotty, I have thought all off season we would consider him.  I think he and Ohtani would boost actual attendance and not just tickets sold.  The only issue I have with this is the “citing him since high school” narrative.  The entire front office has turned over the last three years.  Unless your source is saying the Angels are in on him because Eppler has courted him since high school.  I’m not trying to say it isn’t so, I just don’t get that part.  

[Tank]

You have to at least kick the tires on Darvish and see what he's looking for in years and cash. If he's affordable, he makes us a better team.

[Warfarin]

I appreciate the sentiment, but this is just someone speculating aloud the same way we have been.  The Angels could use a top of the rotation starter and have some, but not a ton of money.  Darvish is a top of the rotation starter, but amongst the rumored teams interested (Yankees, Dodgers), they're basically tapped out financially and would require someone to absorb some of their contracts.  There really aren't a ton of options left.

It's easy to connect the dots and lead it to the Angels, but I am still somewhat skeptical.  We would need to shed ~7-10mil, I imagine, to make this happen (assuming Darvish gets 20mil AAV).

[Rico]

27 minutes ago, Stradling said:

The only issue I have with this is the “citing him since high school” narrative.  The entire front office has turned over the last three years.  Unless your source is saying the Angels are in on him because Eppler has courted him since high school.  

I think this.  Just how they said Eppler had a relationship with Ohtani from his Yankee days.

[Rico]

There is money that can be made for Arty if we can corner the Japanese market.  I imagine they are already talking about selling Angel broadcast rights in Japan.

[Warfarin]

So okay, let's say we do sign Darvish and somehow snag him at 20mil AAV.  Realistically, we would need to shed roughly 10 million to ensure we can stay below the luxury tax level.  Who do we trade and for what?  

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Warfarin said:

So okay, let's say we do sign Darvish and somehow snag him at 20mil AAV.  Realistically, we would need to shed roughly 10 million to ensure we can stay below the luxury tax level.  Who do we trade and for what?  

I don’t think we can realistically drop $10 million.  We could drop around $2 million by letting Cron go.  If we signed Darvish, you could see a Shoemaker trade to clear another $4 million.  Maybe you find a taker for Valbuena instead of Cron, but doubtful.  

[Rico]

We don't NEED to stay under the luxury tax level.  That is a choice by Arty.  We can choose to go over now while other teams are saving for those big ticket guys they might not even land.

[Second Base]

5 minutes ago, Warfarin said:

So okay, let's say we do sign Darvish and somehow snag him at 20mil AAV.  Realistically, we would need to shed roughly 10 million to ensure we can stay below the luxury tax level.  Who do we trade and for what?  

The penalty in that case would be 1.7 million. 

[UndertheHalo]

1 minute ago, Scotty@AW said:

The penalty in that case would be 1.7 million. 

How reliable is the source Scotty ? Is this an opinion or is there actually some smoke here ?

[Warfarin]

1 minute ago, Rico said:

We don't NEED to stay under the luxury tax level.  That is a choice by Arty.  We can choose to go over now while other teams are saving for those big ticket guys they might not even land.

You are correct in that we don't, but it does seem to be a point we do not cross.

Moreover, I don't think going over the luxury tax level once is a big deal, but I think Arte would want to avoid being a "repeat" offender and setting up a situation where we repeatedly exceed the level.  If we signed Darvish, could we find a way to stay below the luxury level in future years?  It might not be so easy.

[GrittyVeterans]

Darvish

Ohtani

Richards

Heaney

Skaggs

 

I'd be down

[wopphil]

8 minutes ago, Warfarin said:

You are correct in that we don't, but it does seem to be a point we do not cross.

Moreover, I don't think going over the luxury tax level once is a big deal, but I think Arte would want to avoid being a "repeat" offender and setting up a situation where we repeatedly exceed the level.  If we signed Darvish, could we find a way to stay below the luxury level in future years?  It might not be so easy.

The pay threshold goes up in subsequent years, so as long as spending doesn't get too crazy, the team could extend Trout and still remain within a reasonable shot of the cap.

[arch stanton]

Kinsler, Valbuena, Johnson, Wood, even Richards can all come off the books after the season to reset the CBT penalty if that's a problem

[Second Base]

2 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

Kinsler, Valbuena, Johnson, Wood, even Richards can all come off the books after the season to reset the CBT penalty if that's a problem

I do believe that @totdprodsis right in that if the Angels do indeed sign Darvish, they'd let Richards walk (assuming a healthy year) and collect a draft pick while replacing him with a low cost option like Barria.

[Warfarin]

11 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

Kinsler, Valbuena, Johnson, Wood, even Richards can all come off the books after the season to reset the CBT penalty if that's a problem

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JJEzXDdi1FoAVCxpssrNq04unxs39JIJg6CRn-IPM1c/pubhtml#

Let's use math to play around with some theoretical examples, assuming we sign Darvish this offseason and blow past the luxury tax level.

Next year, we have 115mil of luxury tax AAV on the books already.  Adding Darvish at 20mil AAV puts us at 135mil.  Eyeballing the arbitration eligible players, we'll probably add 30-35mil more (let's use 35mil to be conservative).  That puts us at 170mil.  Add in the cost of filling out the roster with minimum-level players, and that gets us around 175mil.  The cap will be 206mil.

The above will be FAs as you described.  Let's say we resign Maldonado at 7mil AAV, that puts us at 182mil.  We have holes at 2B (or 3B, depending on where Cozart pivots to), 1B (Valbuena leaving), and possibly in the rotation (if Richards leaves).  Realistically, if we want to avoid being repeat offenders, we'd have roughly 18 mil left to spend to fill 2 holes.  It can be done, but it would certainly rule us out from acquiring any of the significant FAs next offseason.  It also means we probably let Richards walk.

[arch stanton]

We can't be top flight at every position. If they spend $20 mil a season for a pitcher then we get lower tier CI's

[Ohtaniland]

I think Arte has spent $200M on this year’s roster (includes Ohtani posting) so far. I think he’s done. But.....

 

[Second Base]

12 minutes ago, Warfarin said:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1JJEzXDdi1FoAVCxpssrNq04unxs39JIJg6CRn-IPM1c/pubhtml#

Let's use math to play around with some theoretical examples, assuming we sign Darvish this offseason and blow past the luxury tax level.

Next year, we have 115mil of luxury tax AAV on the books already.  Adding Darvish at 20mil AAV puts us at 135mil.  Eyeballing the arbitration eligible players, we'll probably add 30-35mil more (let's use 35mil to be conservative).  That puts us at 170mil.  Add in the cost of filling out the roster with minimum-level players, and that gets us around 175mil.  The cap will be 206mil.

The above will be FAs as you described.  Let's say we resign Maldonado at 7mil AAV, that puts us at 182mil.  We have holes at 2B (or 3B, depending on where Cozart pivots to), 1B (Valbuena leaving), and possibly in the rotation (if Richards leaves).  Realistically, if we want to avoid being repeat offenders, we'd have roughly 18 mil left to spend to fill 2 holes.  It can be done, but it would certainly rule us out from acquiring any of the significant FAs next offseason.  It also means we probably let Richards walk.

I think that's generally the idea, though my guess is they'd have Matt Thaiss claim the 1B spot (or at least 120 games of it) at the league minimum and either allow someone like Jose Miguel Fernandez or David Fletcher to man 2B or use one as utility infielder and trade or sign a 2B or 3B.

Either way, I think the team will want to maintain a buffer between their payroll and the luxury tax limit in anticipation of the Trout, Simmons and Ohtani extensions.

[Dollar Bill]

1 hour ago, Rico said:

There is money that can be made for Arty if we can corner the Japanese market.  I imagine they are already talking about selling Angel broadcast rights in Japan.

Those are MLB rights, not the Angels' rights. International broadcast rights fees are shared revenue (with an exception for the Blue Jays in the Toronto market).

[101halo]

If what I'm about to say had any merit, you'd assume Darvish would already be on the team quickly after Ohtani, but still interesting to me to think about... 

...Advertising contracts. Darvish is big enough in US at this point to get big commercials and/or ad deals. Is Ohtani, yet? If he isn't, does Darvish being here mean they could get joint deals that would help supplement how low Ohtani's base salary is? Without the team breaking the spirit of the CBA and how the international talent acquisition pool is supposed to work in MLB? Probably just a random theory, with no basis in reality. 

Plus, I'm still skeptical we spend any additional money on a big multi year contract this offseason.