Yelich deal. Missed Opportunity?

[Jeff Fletcher]

On 12/8/2018 at 8:53 AM, Dtwncbad said:

The Brewers traded away some top prospects for Yelich, but it is almost impossible to view the deal as anything more than a solid win for Milwaukee.

https://reviewingthebrew.com/2018/09/08/milwaukee-brewers-prospects-yelich-trade/

Was it a mistake to not go get this guy?

What is your interest in pursuing Realmuto?

And I still cant believe the Marlins had Yelich, Ozuna, Stanton and Realmuto and concluded they needed to rebuild.  Four stud young players with years of control.

Here is your original post. I will respond to this sentence.

1. You can't "go get" anyone. All deals require the agreement of two parties, and sometimes three if the player has a no-trade clause.

2. Based on the package it took to get Yelich, I believe the Angels would have been making an ill advised risk to exceed that package because they didn't have the farm system depth to warrant using so much of it for a position where they already had a capable player. When you figure the value of an upgrade, it's not just who you're adding but who he's replacing.

Also, I doubt Yelich would have done what he did in the NL Central if he'd been in the AL West. Look at the ballparks. 

Finally, it's easy to say Yelich was going to do what he did, but it doesn't work that way. Lots of guys stall or go backwards. What would you have given up for Gary Sanchez a year ago?

As for the Realmuto question, I'd give up a lot for him because now the Angels farm system has had another year to get better, and he plays a position that's tough to fill. Not only do the Angels lack a catcher for 2019, no one is really knocking on the door for 2020 either.

[Docwaukee]

3 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

I don't have to re-read my own post to know what the intention or message was.

1). Damn Yelich turned out good.  Worth it for the Brewers.

2)  is Realmuto worth chasing?

3). The Marlins decision to rebuild was stupid.

But by all means spin the words into something else.

how the F are we supposed to know what the intention of your post is if it's not what you write?  

1. you haven't argued that.  you've argued that we should have obtained Yelich because of how good he became and how it was reasonable to think he would be that good based on the fact that he got 5 vote points for mvp in 2016 and finished 19th.  

2. A subject unrelated to Yelich.  2 years of control.  Different position.  older.  

3. probably

You spun your own words.  Claiming that the point of this thread was to discuss the premise of trading for a young stud player that could provide value over the next few years.  

Who is being dishonest here?  The people arguing the premise of the thread as stated or the guy who decided to change it?

 

[tdawg87]

[Stradling]

[Lou]

[Lou]

[Tank]

[IEAngelsfan]

I love AW.

[Lou]

[Dtwncbad]

11 hours ago, Dochalo said:

how the F are we supposed to know what the intention of your post is if it's not what you write?  

1. you haven't argued that.  you've argued that we should have obtained Yelich because of how good he became and how it was reasonable to think he would be that good based on the fact that he got 5 vote points for mvp in 2016 and finished 19th.  

2. A subject unrelated to Yelich.  2 years of control.  Different position.  older.  

3. probably

You spun your own words.  Claiming that the point of this thread was to discuss the premise of trading for a young stud player that could provide value over the next few years.  

Who is being dishonest here?  The people arguing the premise of the thread as stated or the guy who decided to change it?

 

I didn't argue that Damn it turned out well for the Brewers?  Dishonest. The first sentence said it in clear English.

"The Brewers traded away some top prospects for Yelich, but it is almost impossible to view the deal as anything more than a solid win for Milwaukee."

THE FIRST SENTENCE.

Look, this is evidently just one of those threads where a few guys get themselves off antagonizing somebody.  There is an ugly element of message board culture that sometimes just takes over.

[Docwaukee]

2 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

I didn't argue that Damn it turned out well for the Brewers?  Dishonest. The first sentence said it in clear English.

"The Brewers traded away some top prospects for Yelich, but it is almost impossible to view the deal as anything more than a solid win for Milwaukee."

THE FIRST SENTENCE.

Look, this is evidently just one of those threads where a few guys get themselves off antagonizing somebody.  There is an ugly element of message board culture that sometimes just takes over.

I am not looking to antagonize anyone.  I think a review of the Yelich trade is an interesting discussion especially considering how it could possibly relate to the Angels.  

maybe we are getting into semantics at this point, but you're not the only one that gets to decide what's relevant to a discussion.  If multiple reasonable posters are sort of missing the point of what you'd really like to focus on in discussion, then that might tell you a little something about how the discussion was set up.   

Honestly not trying to be a jerk or anything.  Just trying to point out that it feels like you moved the goal posts a bit.  

[Dtwncbad]

2 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I am not looking to antagonize anyone.  I think a review of the Yelich trade is an interesting discussion especially considering how it could possibly relate to the Angels.  

maybe we are getting into semantics at this point, but you're not the only one that gets to decide what's relevant to a discussion.  If multiple reasonable posters are sort of missing the point of what you'd really like to focus on in discussion, then that might tell you a little something about how the discussion was set up.   

Honestly not trying to be a jerk or anything.  Just trying to point out that it feels like you moved the goal posts a bit.  

Thank you for the civil response.  My frustration is this is exactly what I attempted to do (your sentence in bold above).

And I am personally convinced that this was shoved to the backseat in order for some posters to poke fun at, and pile on, a bunch of side show garbage junk that got in the way of that discussion.

And I get it.  This happens on message  boards all the time.

So here we are full circle.  The bold sentence above is what I had originally hoped would be discussed. . .complete with an expressed lead into if the Angels should be aggressive in chasing Realmuto. . .would that work out for the Angels or would the price be "too high" for fans that would be too worried about losing premium prospects. . .

[Stradling]

Ok, my answer is the same.  Realmuto is 26 years old and only controlled for two more years.  I would not make an offer better than what they reportedly turned down (Robles #4 prospect in baseball) at the trade deadline.  I don’t think it helps to pretend the price is less or to speculate they might value our guys more than they value what they turned down.  Value is value and if you turned down the consensus #4 overall prospect it tells you how much they value Realmuto.  I personally don’t value him and two years of control more than I value Adell or even Canning.  I could be very wrong.  

[Dtwncbad]

Let's say the price for Realmuto is high, and it appears the Marlins expectation is high, so that seems like a reasonable assumption. . .

Whatever elevated price it takes to get Realmuto I might prefer to spend on an ace or a different position player.  So much of Realmuto's appeal is his offense.  And I personally worry about any catcher maintaining their offensive game.

It has been since Trout (and then Brandon Wood before that) that I was as excited about an individual hitting prospect as I am about Adell.

I am OK trading him but only for a guy that I can envision being a really elite player that makes me completely giddy about having in the lineup or rotation.

Realmuto is pretty damn good though.

[Docwaukee]

4 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Thank you for the civil response.  My frustration is this is exactly what I attempted to do (your sentence in bold above).

And I am personally convinced that this was shoved to the backseat in order for some posters to poke fun at, and pile on, a bunch of side show garbage junk that got in the way of that discussion.

And I get it.  This happens on message  boards all the time.

So here we are full circle.  The bold sentence above is what I had originally hoped would be discussed. . .complete with an expressed lead into if the Angels should be aggressive in chasing Realmuto. . .would that work out for the Angels or would the price be "too high" for fans that would be too worried about losing premium prospects. . .

I think Yelich and Realmuto are vastly different in terms of when and how you acquire them.   

I consider Yelich similar to Simmons in that he was entering age 26 with upside and controlled at a very reasonable cost for 5 years.  That gives you a much longer window.  The difference is that Simmons was valuable almost purely because of his defense whereas Yelich is a top of the lineup type who also plays solid OF defense.  The latter is going to attract a lot more attention.  If it were possible to acquire Yelich for a similar package that Simmons garnered then Eppler would have been on that in a heart beat.  But the cost was far greater.   To the point that milwaukee essentially put a huge gouge in their farm to obtain him.  Something that would have been very questionable for the Angels to do because of their aging roster and numerous holes to fill.  A position we are still in.  

Realmuto may have a similar cost of acquisition due to positional scarcity even though he has less control and isn't as good.  If you are going to acquire a player like that, you better be ready to win because even if you extend him, you've put a huge dent in the cavalry of cost controlled talent you absolutely need to fill out your roster and maintain your flexibility.  

Think of it this way.   We've done a bit of a backward rebuild.  Normally, a team will almost gut their main club down to one or two guys and then build up through the farm.  When those farm pieces start to contribute, they go out and supplement with trades and free agents.  Prior to 2018, the core of our team in Trout, Simmons, Upton, Skaggs and Heaney aren't 0-3 guys that get you going.  They're the guys you'd acquire or have kept to supplement that core of young guys.  Now we need that core of young guys to supplement them essentially.  

Doing it the way we've done has created timing issues no doubt.  Most of that wasn't created by Eppler but he's trying to fix it and he knows damn well that any team that has given themselves a window has done some by developing an internal core of CHEAP controlled players. 

So I suspect that he's gonna lock up Trout long term, lock up Simmons long term and trust his process whereby the major league club starts to rely on Adell, Canning, Suarez, Rengifo/Jones, Thaiss, Ward, Sandoval, and others to actually contribute much the way we saw contributions from Ohtani, Barria, Buttrey, Anderson, and Fletcher this last year.  When that happens, we'll see him making that big trade for those one or two obvious  spots to fill.  

It's never going to be perfect but timing is everything.  

[Dtwncbad]

Timing is definitely a subject.  I want the Angels to be able to be very competitive over the next 7 years especially IF the Angels can manage to extend Trout, but I also am paranoid about this smaller window of 2019 and 2020 where so many high quality players on the roster are in their true prime now.

I don't ever want to waste money.  I don't want to waste prospects and yet I don't want to waste these immediate years either.

Trying to imagine the right moves with those concerns is quite an exercise.

[T.G.]

[Docwaukee]

7 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Timing is definitely a subject.  I want the Angels to be able to be very competitive over the next 7 years especially IF the Angels can manage to extend Trout, but I also am paranoid about this smaller window of 2019 and 2020 where so many high quality players on the roster are in their true prime now.

I don't ever want to waste money.  I don't want to waste prospects and yet I don't want to waste these immediate years either.

Trying to imagine the right moves with those concerns is quite an exercise.

it's hard for me to imagine a scenario where we appropriately accommodate both without really pushing payroll these next couple of years and then that has potential impact on 4-5 years from now.  

My ideal realistic (at least what I think is realistic) scenario is to supplement the pitching staff with year with a couple of guys on 2 year deals and getting as well as getting one solid pen arm.  Add ramos on a 2+1 as well.  

By mid year, we will know more about the prospect group at the top of our system as Adell and Rengifo should be ready to take spots if they already haven't.  Canning and Suarez will have gotten some time to cut their teeth.  I don't have a ton of confidence that either Ward or Thaiss will be an everyday major league player but I think there's an ok chance that one will.  Progression from Jones and Marsh would be great and then we've got a lot of guys in the low minors who have high ceilings.  Getting a couple of breakouts would be huge.  

Then for 2020, I make a move on a guy like Cole or Arenado.  Maybe both.  Again, in my ideal scenario, this would be Albert's last year and you could defer his final seasons worth of salary to give you more flexibility.  

Personally, I would be doing everything possible to dump Cozart if not now, then at the deadline.  

By the end of 2020, we'll have had two more drafts and the crop of A and below guys will now be in AA/AAA.  You'll have a farm that is likely better than it is now and you'll have a bunch of prospects ready to graduate to mlb likely creating some redundancy.  Houston got Cole for redundant/blocked parts and the Cards got Goldy for redundant or blocked parts.  The more advanced prospects are in their development, the more they are worth, even if they have yet to realize their potential.  The Yankees got two years of Paxton for 1 good prospect because he's essentially ready to go.  Paxton isn't a sure bet by any stretch, but I like that trade for the Yanks relative to where the rest of their team is situated.  That's the kind of trade we make two years from now.   

In essence, I think you can give yourself a chance to grab a WC spot in 2019 with a couple solid moves that don't impact 2021-2024.   

[Angel Oracle]

13 hours ago, Tank said:

+infinity, I was at that SummerSlam in 2013.

[Angel Oracle]

55 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok, my answer is the same.  Realmuto is 26 years old and only controlled for two more years.  I would not make an offer better than what they reportedly turned down (Robles #4 prospect in baseball) at the trade deadline.  I don’t think it helps to pretend the price is less or to speculate they might value our guys more than they value what they turned down.  Value is value and if you turned down the consensus #4 overall prospect it tells you how much they value Realmuto.  I personally don’t value him and two years of control more than I value Adell or even Canning.  I could be very wrong.  

Both you and Fletch make good points about Realmuto.

He is playing a position at a high level, that the Halos are struggling to fill.   

But, the Fish did turn down trading him for a guy (Robles) who is probably similar to Adell in potential.  

[Inside Pitch]

In honor of today's roster move, the real missed opportunity was having drafted Cowart, five picks before Yelich in 2010......   Yep..... 

[Blarg]

That is nothing compared to picking Baldoquin over Vlad Jr.

[Inside Pitch]

22 minutes ago, Blarg said:

That is nothing compared to picking Baldoquin over Vlad Jr.

"He not some raw prospect, he just needs at bats" -- Jedi Genius

[Docwaukee]

2 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

In honor of today's roster move, the real missed opportunity was having drafted Cowart, five picks before Yelich in 2010......   Yep..... 

 

12 minutes ago, Blarg said:

That is nothing compared to picking Baldoquin over Vlad Jr.

you both suck