2018 Hot Stove League

[UndertheHalo]

It would be fairly pathetic if the Angels allow the Reds to foil them with Grandal. 

[beatlesrule]

2 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

It would be fairly pathetic if the Angels allow the Reds to foil them with Grandal. 

I wouldn't get your hopes up with Grandal. Not sure if he's going to the Reds but the Angels simply can't afford him if the budget rumors are true.  He also costs a draft pick which is another no no with Eppler.

[UndertheHalo]

3 minutes ago, beatlesrule said:

I wouldn't get your hopes up with Grandal. Not sure if he's going to the Reds but the Angels simply can't afford him if the budget rumors are true.  He also costs a draft pick which is another no no with Eppler.

I don’t have “hopes” really with Grandal.  If they bring him on that’s fine.  He’ll make the team better.  If they don’t I can live with not gambling on a 30+ year old catcher and keeping the intl money and the pick.  

But the Angels were after Ramos.  So presumably the FO is targeting that position.  They can afford Grandal.  If they lose out to the Reds (the team noted above).  It’s sorry. 

Edited December 22, 2018 by UndertheHalo

[beatlesrule]

Ramos cost less and had no draft pick attached. If Eppler really does only have 12 million or so to work with, there's no way he can get Grandal and RPs.

[UndertheHalo]

They aren’t going to spend any money on relievers.  And I don’t believe the hard budget stuff.  We’ll see what happens. 

[Stradling]

31 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

It would be fairly pathetic if the Angels allow the Reds to foil them with Grandal. 

Why would it be pathetic?  If they overpay to get him then how is it pathetic that the Angels didn’t get him?

[floplag]

22 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

They aren’t going to spend any money on relievers.  And I don’t believe the hard budget stuff.  We’ll see what happens. 

i believe it, to a point.  We all know Arte has said many times he will spend to win for the right person.   
What i find a little confusing is what exactly that means.  Does that mean only one, or two or up to whatever or?  There are 2 generational talents out there both of which would be huge upgrades for us, one of which is at a spot we dont have a long term answer for at any level.  One would think that would qualify.  

[beatlesrule]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

i believe it, to a point.  We all know Arte has said many times he will spend to win for the right person.   
What i find a little confusing is what exactly that means.  Does that mean only one, or two or up to whatever or?  There are 2 generational talents out there both of which would be huge upgrades for us, one of which is at a spot we dont have a long term answer for at any level.  One would think that would qualify.  

It qualifies 100% but that doesn't mean Arte actually will go over for the right player. Could all be posturing on his part. Also, I'm sure they could make MM's salary this year so they don't go over the tax. Regardless though, the Angels weren't one of the top 3 finalists so there's a slim chance they get him.

[UndertheHalo]

11 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Why would it be pathetic?  If they overpay to get him then how is it pathetic that the Angels didn’t get him?

How much do you think it’ll take to beat the Reds, man ?

On some level this is a competition.  If they have to move out of their ideal price range so be it.  Obviously you don’t want to go wild.  But realistically it won’t be like that.  I’m just saying that it would be bad if they want Grandal and they let a relatively poor team, like the Reds beat them out by like a million dollars or something stupid. 

[Chuck]

Mark Feinsand of MLB.com believes the Diamondbacks could use Archie Bradley to entice teams to take on Zack Greinke's contract in a trade.

Greinke is owed $104.5 million over the next three seasons. That contract is an unnecessary burden for a team that is rebuilding after losing Paul Goldschmidt, Patrick Corbin and A.J. Pollock via trade and free agency. The team might want to emulate what the Mariners did with their trade of the overpaid Robinson Cano along with ace closer Edwin Diaz to the Mets for elite prospects Jerred Kelenic, Justin Dunn and others. The Diamondbacks could pair stud reliever Archie Bradley with Greinke and trade them for prospects in addition to the cost savings. Over the last two seasons Bradley has registered a 2.68 ERA with 154 strikeouts in 144 2/3 innings. If he stays in Arizona he will likely serve as their closer in 2019.

 

 

Source: MLB.com

[Chuck]

Mark Feinsand of MLB.com reports the Tigers are likely to trade outfielder Nicholas Castellanos before Opening Day.

The Tigers are rebuilding after losing 98 games this past season and Castellanos is their best trading chip. He batted .298/.354/.500 with 23 home runs and 89 RBI in 2018. He will turn 27 years old in March and will be a free agent next offseason. The Tigers want to avoid a repeat of their 2017 scenario with J.D. Martinez when he was in his final season of team control. They held onto the superstar too long before trading him to the Diamondbacks in July for the low price of Dawel Lugo, Sergio Alancantara and Jose King. Feinsand believes Castellanos is the second-best outfielder available this winter behind Bryce Harper and could net the Tigers multiple good prospects in return.

 

 

Source: MLB.com

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, floplag said:

i believe it, to a point.  We all know Arte has said many times he will spend to win for the right person.   
What i find a little confusing is what exactly that means.  Does that mean only one, or two or up to whatever or?  There are 2 generational talents out there both of which would be huge upgrades for us, one of which is at a spot we dont have a long term answer for at any level.  One would think that would qualify.  

No there isn’t two generational talents out there.  Machado is an all star but not a generational talent.  Harper is way too inconsistent to be considered a generational talent in my eyes. I’ll say this and let it sink in, in the last three years Upton has a higher WAR than Harper. The potential is there and the OBP is insane.   I just reserve generational talent for guys like Trout, Griffey, Bonds.  Now it wouldn’t surprise me if he grows into that but he isn’t that.  

[UndertheHalo]

6 minutes ago, floplag said:

i believe it, to a point.  We all know Arte has said many times he will spend to win for the right person.   
What i find a little confusing is what exactly that means.  Does that mean only one, or two or up to whatever or?  There are 2 generational talents out there both of which would be huge upgrades for us, one of which is at a spot we dont have a long term answer for at any level.  One would think that would qualify.  

I think it just means there’s flexibility.  I don’t think it’s that complicated.  It’s a case by case thing. 

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, UndertheHalo said:

How much do you think it’ll take to beat the Reds, man ?

On some level this is a competition.  If they have to move out of their ideal price range so be it.  Obviously you don’t want to go wild.  But realistically it won’t be like that.  I’m just saying that it would be bad if they want Grandal and they let a relatively poor team, like the Reds beat them out by like a million dollars or something stupid. 

Well if you have to give him 4 years and between $48-60 million, yes they can have him at that point.  The rumor is he has a 4 year offer, which could be false but I could see a team with a low payroll overpaying.  

[UndertheHalo]

3 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Well if you have to give him 4 years and between $48-60 million, yes they can have him at that point.  The rumor is he has a 4 year offer, which could be false but I could see a team with a low payroll overpaying.  

He was always going to cost between 12 and 15 AAV Strad.  If we’re balking at that then we’re not serious about getting him. 

[floplag]

4 minutes ago, beatlesrule said:

It qualifies 100% but that doesn't mean Arte actually will go over for the right player. Could all be posturing on his part. Also, I'm sure they could make MM's salary this year so they don't go over the tax. Regardless though, the Angels weren't one of the top 3 finalists so there's a slim chance they get him.

Id like to think it isnt posturing, i believe he wants to win.  

 

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

No there isn’t two generational talents out there.  Machado is an all star but not a generational talent.  Harper is way too inconsistent to be considered a generational talent in my eyes. I’ll say this and let it sink in, in the last three years Upton has a higher WAR than Harper. The potential is there and the OBP is insane.   I just reserve generational talent for guys like Trout, Griffey, Bonds.  Now it wouldn’t surprise me if he grows into that but he isn’t that.  

There are those who would disagree with you on that, and i think we as Angel fans are a bit spoiled comparing people to Trout.  I do agree however that neither of them is of that level but is it extraordinarily rare for a person of thier talent level and potential to reach FA at their age.  generational or not, semantics or not, i would think that should still come close to the "right player" definition. 
I personally would have much more interest in Machado as he better fits the orgs needs, and as you say Harper has had some consistency issues.

1 minute ago, UndertheHalo said:

I think it just means there’s flexibility.  I don’t think it’s that complicated.  It’s a case by case thing. 

Granted, but if these players dont meet that definition, who does?  Top all stars in their primes and clear upgrades, if this isnt the definition, then it may never actually occur. 

[UndertheHalo]

The debate here is whether the Angels need a guy like Grandal.  If you don’t think so then fair enough.  But the cost is the cost.  If the Angels think they need him they have to play the game. 

[floplag]

1 minute ago, UndertheHalo said:

He was always going to cost between 12 and 15 AAV Strad.  If we’re balking at that then we’re not serious about getting him. 

Yeah, pretty much this.  If we werent willing to go that high we probably shouldnt have bothered making the call.  Especially after Ramos got what he did, 12M become the minimum number.    3/39 i think was Fancreds early projection. 

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

He was always going to cost between 12 and 15 AAV Strad.  If we’re balking at that then we’re not serious about getting him. 

Four years?

[floplag]

Just now, UndertheHalo said:

The debate here is whether the Angels need a guy like Grandal.  If you don’t think so then fair enough.  But the cost is the cost.  If the Angels think they need him they have to play the game. 

is the need even a question really?  I would think its obvious.  The answer doesnt have to be Grandal, but we must upgrade at C if we are serious about making any kind of challenge in 19.  WE dont have the offense yet and its the only real spot left to make that change.  

[ettin]

Grandal will command $16M to $20M per season on a 4-year deal. His comp is similar to McCann.

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, ettin said:

Grandal will command $16M to $20M per season on a 4-year deal. His comp is similar to McCann.

If this is true then no way in hell would I be ok with giving Grandall $80 million. 

[Stradling]

I’d rather go with Briceno

[UndertheHalo]

3 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Four years?

I mean if that’s the price.  3 years or 4 years whatever.  Again, if the belief is that the Angels need him then so be it.  The Angels aren’t a poor team and a contract like that won’t kill them. 

Its important I think to assess what the Angels prospects are of getting a better player or equal player for cheaper or digging something up internally.  I think the prospects of an internal solution are poor for the Angels in the short to mid term.  I think if you don’t like Grandal and want to patch work it this year that’s fine.  But im not sure really who that other player in the near future may be.  I honestly haven’t it looked into it.  Regardless.  The Angels are going to end up paying approximately that price for a decent catcher from outside of the organization. 

Do we want to keep getting nothing offensively out of the position ? We can probably keep doing that with Maldanado trades.  It’s a question of whether you think that’s a workable thing for a team trying to win. 

[Stradling]

3 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

I mean if that’s the price.  3 years or 4 years whatever.  Again, if the belief is that the Angels need him then so be it.  The Angels aren’t a poor team and a contract like that won’t kill them. 

Its important I think to assess what the Angels prospects are of getting a better player or equal player for cheaper or digging something up internally.  I think the prospects of an internal solution are poor for the Angels in the short to mid term.  I think if you don’t like Grandal and want to patch work it this year that’s fine.  But im not sure really who that other player in the near future may be.  I honestly haven’t it looked into it.  Regardless.  The Angels are going to end up paying approximately that price for a decent catcher from outside of the organization. 

Do we want to keep getting nothing offensively out of the position ? We can probably keep doing that with Maldanado trades.  It’s a question of whether you think that’s a workable thing for a team trying to win. 

My only response is Albert. That was the price.  Obviously it won’t destroy the team but if Erin is right on the price it would be a huge hit. We look at Kole or Cozart contract and cringe.  This would be the same.