Dodgers Interested in Francisco Lindor - Should the Angels look into this?

[Angelsjunky]

14 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

that just feels like parts to me.  if you've only got Simmons for 1yr, then it's more than a +4 WAR difference.  Lindor is going into his age 26 season and Simmons is coming off one where he had sub 2 WAR.  

Barria is a #5.  maybe.  

Jackson and Knowles just finished rookie ball.  

Ward is barely even a guy.  

To get Lindor, the conversation starts with one of your top guys if not thee top guy and at least one more really good one.  Or a guy who's just lost his prospect status.  

 

OK, fair enough. My offer isn't un-like trades I used to make back when I played fantasy baseball, when a new guy entered the league and you weren't sure how knowledgeable they were.

That said, I think you're under-estimating Simmons a bit, or at least I hope you are. He was never quite right all year and isn't exactly old at 30. I expect a bounce-back season at 4+ WAR, especially as it is his contract year. Lindor is great, but also fell off substantially last year. I expect him to bounce back, but maybe ~6 WAR is his expected norm. That's why I said +2 per year, but forgot Simmons is only one year.

But you're right, the difference is +8, if Simmons is good for 4 and Lindor for 2x6 = 12.

I do think the trade could be made without losing Adell, but it would probably require Marsh and I agree that Barria and Ward are spare parts you throw in to pad a deal. Probably a more realistic trade is Simmons, Canning, Marsh and one of Ward/Walsh.

[Docwaukee]

2 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

OK, fair enough. My offer isn't un-like trades I used to make back when I played fantasy baseball, when a new guy entered the league and you weren't sure how knowledgeable they were.

That said, I think you're under-estimating Simmons a bit, or at least I hope you are. He was never quite right all year and isn't exactly old at 30. I expect a bounce-back season at 4+ WAR, especially as it is his contract year. Lindor is great, but also fell off substantially last year. I expect him to bounce back, but maybe ~6 WAR is his expected norm. That's why I said +2 per year, but forgot Simmons is only one year.

But you're right, the difference is +8, if Simmons is good for 4 and Lindor for 2x6 = 12.

I do think the trade could be made without losing Adell, but it would probably require Marsh and I agree that Barria and Ward are spare parts you throw in to pad a deal. Probably a more realistic trade is Simmons, Canning, Marsh and one of Ward/Walsh.

that's almost exactly the trade I would have proposed.  

Lindor was hurt and missed spring training.  

One of the big things for me is the overestimation of trade value in Jackson and Knowles.  Those guys have some serious upside but the just finished rookie ball.  It took Rivas and Uceta to get Max Stassi.  Teams tend to put a disproportionate value on guys close to the majors.  The Cole trade by the bucs was terrible but it just goes to show how valuable those types of guys can be over a guy like Jackson.  A couple of fringe top 100 guys who are ready to step in a be major leaguers are way more valuable than a couple of fringe top 100 guys in the low minors.  Even if only 1 of 3 or 4 rookie league guys ends up being an excellent prospect at AAA, that one prospect has more value than those 3 or 4 in rookie ball.  Marsh could now centerpiece a deal for one of the top players in baseball.  That wasn't the case a year ago.  

[Docwaukee]

btw, even though Simmons, Canning, Marsh and one other is a good deal for both sides, I wouldn't do it in any way shape or form.  I also believe that Simmons will rebound but it's on the Halos to take the risk that he does.  

[ukyah]

"Having a superstar like Lindor on the books for roughly $40MM over a two-year span is still a bargain even for a smaller-market team like the Indians, of course, so there’s certainly value in keeping him around.  But given how the Tribe shopped Bauer and Corey Kluber last offseason before eventually moving Bauer at the deadline, it wouldn’t be a shock to see the front office at least discuss Lindor with other teams this winter if for no other reason to see what a rival could potentially offer.  Needless to say, the Indians would want a haul of MLB-ready talent and prospects to move the All-Star shortstop, but if Cleveland finds a team willing to meet that price, a Lindor trade can’t be ruled out."

 

this is the reality of trading for lindor. everything else is just noise. the angels want lindor? be prepared to gut the farm system and pay lindor top dollars. it's not happening in anaheim.

[eligrba]

I think the Angels could use some pitching.

[zenmaster]

They'd probably want Adell, Marsh, Simmons and others and then our payroll would skyrocket when he's getting $30M / year in the near future. He's great though.

[JarsOfClay]

Although it would be great to have Lindor, the Angels should be focused in acquiring pitching and nothing else. It's been 5 straight years of almost the entire pitching staff getting torn UCL's or spending the majority of the time on the DL. It has reached crisis level.

At this point, all resources should be invested towards improving the pitching staff. Fill in the rest of the positions with temporary stop gaps.

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

If Lindor were to be available via trade he's going to cost more than some of the packages people are mentioning likely one headlined by Adell.  I'd love to have him but he's going to weaken the farm and the Angels would still need pitching.  If Arte wants to go bonkers and sign at least 2 legit pitchers (Cole or Strasburg plus another) then make a big trade for a bat I"m all for it but I don't think that's very likely.

[Shortslugger]

Keeping Adell and acquiring a solid Starter is the only thing that the Angels management should be looking into. 

[floplag]

I dont see it as being feasible from any angle.  Its not a need, we have other holes, and the cost would be prohibitive.  He might be the one one of the few guys in the league that would be an upgrade over Simmons, but at the end of the day we still have Simmons.  Its creating a problem that doesnt exist.

[VariousCrap]

If the Angels want Lindor, they can always wait until he becomes a free agent.  Trading the players it would take to get him is not worth it.  Not to mention, the Dodgers can top any realistic offer the Angels make.

Edited October 29, 2019 by VariousCrap

[T.G.]

I say we go all in...

That's some good stuff right there.

[CanadianHalo]

Even though I said last offseason Simmons had offensively peaked and would only go downhill, I still can’t justify spending our limited resources on Lindor when SS isn’t a need.

Lindor and an upgrade offensively at SS is a luxury that the Angels simply can’t afford

[Angel Oracle]

4 hours ago, Shortslugger said:

Keeping Adell and acquiring a solid Starter is the only thing that the Angels management should be looking into. 

Excellent first post, welcome aboard!      Signing Cole and one solid 2nd starter and a catcher should be the main goals this off-season.

Edited October 29, 2019 by Angel Oracle

[ettin]

20 hours ago, Dochalo said:

It would cost Adell for sure.  

Perhaps that would be their ask but they do have a payroll constraint and they are still contending and have holes to fill. Getting good MLB talent back (Simmons) has value too. Just floating the idea it isn't out of the realm of possibility based on where both teams are.

[ettin]

19 hours ago, Dochalo said:

two years of control and then he costs 30+ mil per.  He's also gonna cost 17m in arb for 2020 and probably 25m in 2021.  

The latter of which does bring down his overall value. However, that being said, Adell is a price that they could ask for and we would still have to send one or two other quality prospects on top of that if a prospect haul is what the Indians want.

[ettin]

18 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

Obviously upgrading shortstop isn't a priority, but if Lindor is really available, you have to at least float the idea. I like your package (ahem), and think it is do-able. Maybe Simmons, Barria, Jackson, Ward, and Knowles? 

Two more years of club control for Lindor, and then a mega-contract, but after Pujols is gone. Trout, Lindor, Ohtani, and possibly Adell if he is as good as we hope, would give the Angels four bonafide superstars.

It is a priority in the sense of "What do we do after Simmons leaves?". When you look out into the market for good defensive SS's that can hit for at least average League wRC+, the island is pretty bare except for Simmons and Lindor in the near future. Correa is not a good defensive SS and neither are the others floating out there when you compare them to Simmons (God) and Lindor (pretty good).

So to me this is either "extend Simmons" (which I am perfectly happy with by the way) or acquire a SS of the future in Lindor (assuming you think you can extend him which the Indians are not going to be able to do).

In the end it is a major strategic priority that needs to be addressed this off-season in my opinion.

[ettin]

16 hours ago, ScottT said:

They'll ask for a lot more than Adell.  The Angels need pitching more than anything and they have more than capable., much cheaper, middle infielders. It's just not a good match. It wont happen

I think you are all completely glossing over the approximate $43M that Lindor will be paid in arbitration over the next two years. That still gives him a lot of surplus value but those salaries reduce what a team will have to pay in return in a trade.

To be clear he will cost a lot but the Indians will not keep him past the end of next year and could move him now to maximize value. Right now in my opinion he has approximately $100M in surplus value. Someone like Simmons has about $15M-20M, Barria probably something like $30M, Canning $40M-$50M?, Adams about $20M? If the Indians really are focusing on competing and lowering payroll, Simmons plus Canning plus Adams plus 1-2 more prospects isn't that far fetched.

And Adell has probably close to $70M give or take in value, so yes they could easily ask for him and take other prospects or maybe someone like Barria. If they ask for Adell I just say extend Simmons and call it a day.

[winhalos]

6 hours ago, VariousCrap said:

If the Angels want Lindor, they can always wait until he becomes a free agent.  Trading the players it would take to get him is not worth it.  Not to mention, the Dodgers can top any realistic offer the Angels make.

Yep! in two years we will have the Pujols money off the books too and one more year of Upton. Simmons be here at least one year, have a stop gap guy at short for a year and then if really interested, go after Lindor when he's a FA

[T.G.]

It appears that you have all forgotten that the Angels have Baldoquin.  Who needs Lindor?

[UndertheHalo]

Thinking this is a real possibility for the Angels is basically thinking trades in MLB the show are somewhat similar to real trades. 
 

there are about a thousand reasons why this can’t happen for the Angels. 

[ettin]

15 hours ago, ukyah said:

"Having a superstar like Lindor on the books for roughly $40MM over a two-year span is still a bargain even for a smaller-market team like the Indians, of course, so there’s certainly value in keeping him around.  But given how the Tribe shopped Bauer and Corey Kluber last offseason before eventually moving Bauer at the deadline, it wouldn’t be a shock to see the front office at least discuss Lindor with other teams this winter if for no other reason to see what a rival could potentially offer.  Needless to say, the Indians would want a haul of MLB-ready talent and prospects to move the All-Star shortstop, but if Cleveland finds a team willing to meet that price, a Lindor trade can’t be ruled out."

 

this is the reality of trading for lindor. everything else is just noise. the angels want lindor? be prepared to gut the farm system and pay lindor top dollars. it's not happening in anaheim.

Players like Simmons and Canning are MLB-ready talent. This is not simply a "prospect-haul" scenario in all probability when you look at the Indians current window of contention. That being said if the Indians do want pure prospects for Lindor then we shouldn't consider this at all (because we would have to give up Adell) and extend Simmons.

 

9 hours ago, eligrba said:

I think the Angels could use some pitching.

Yes but consider that this potential trade isn't exclusive of obtaining pitching. Certainly there is payroll to consider which may rule it out on our end but I think Arte is going to have to go into unchartered payroll territory no matter what this off-season if he really wants to impressively improve the team.

8 hours ago, floplag said:

I dont see it as being feasible from any angle.  Its not a need, we have other holes, and the cost would be prohibitive.  He might be the one one of the few guys in the league that would be an upgrade over Simmons, but at the end of the day we still have Simmons.  Its creating a problem that doesnt exist.

Shortstop IS a problem that exists. If we do not extend Simmons we will have nothing to fall back on at the end of next season. Andrelton and Lindor are two of the best defensive shortstops in the League right now (Mondesi and 2-3 others are too) that are either already on the team or are potentially available. Eppler, who HIGHLY values defense, has to be thinking about the long-term strategic impact at SS long-term, this season. Good defensive shortstops are in short supply and ones that can actually hit above League average that are good with the glove are in even shorter supply. Correa, Seager, and even Story are not at the same level defensively as Simmons/Lindor. Baez is another option too.

I just don't think Eppler will accept mediocrity, defensively, at SS and thus this off-season needs to find a solution of which there are not too many (Simmons, Lindor, Baez?) good choices, long-term, that are average or above with the bat.

7 hours ago, VariousCrap said:

If the Angels want Lindor, they can always wait until he becomes a free agent.  Trading the players it would take to get him is not worth it.  Not to mention, the Dodgers can top any realistic offer the Angels make.

Yes they can choose to wait and bridge the gap, ASSUMING Lindor enters free agency. If the Dodgers trade for him you don't think they will use that opportunity over the next year to give him a mega-contract to stay? Then the best defensive SS choices become players like Mondesi, Baez (assuming he isn't extended too), et al. (It is a group of no more that 5-6 SS's I just can't look it up from work right now).

7 hours ago, True Grich said:

I say we go all in...

That's some good stuff right there.

If it makes sense (not Adell), then yes we should.

7 hours ago, CanadianHalo said:

Even though I said last offseason Simmons had offensively peaked and would only go downhill, I still can’t justify spending our limited resources on Lindor when SS isn’t a need.

See my response to Flop above. The need is a strategic one of what we are going to do to fill the SS position longer-term. Is it extend Simmons? Is it trade for Lindor or Baez and extend them? Is it running out a stop-gap SS in 2021 and then pay for a free agent SS in the 2021-2022 off-season (among a group of who knows because the good ones are likely to be extended prior to this off-season market)?

It is a gamble that the defensively-minded Eppler has to be thinking about heavily this off-season in my humble opinion.

Quote

Lindor and an upgrade offensively at SS is a luxury that the Angels simply can’t afford

This may very well be true. If the price involves Adell don't do it. In fact it may be too high of a price period even in a package of MLB and prospect talent too. In that case extend Simmons or look at Baez. Good defensive shortstops that are at least average with the bat are in really short supply over the next handful of years, this is a fact as of right at this moment in time.

[ettin]

33 minutes ago, winhalos said:

Yep! in two years we will have the Pujols money off the books too and one more year of Upton. Simmons be here at least one year, have a stop gap guy at short for a year and then if really interested, go after Lindor when he's a FA

I seriously doubt Lindor ever hits free agency.

[Mark68]

Yes, please! Even if it costs Adell.

 

Unfortunately, it would probably cost Adell+. 

[ukyah]

2 hours ago, ettin said:

Perhaps that would be their ask but they do have a payroll constraint and they are still contending and have holes to fill. Getting good MLB talent back (Simmons) has value too. Just floating the idea it isn't out of the realm of possibility based on where both teams are.

i'm sorry, but you are drastically underestimating his trade value and drastically overestimating his salary impact on the indians. i already posted a link to highlight the actual ask. that's all i have to say on this subject. i know it's fun, people like to dream.

edit: i just saw your reply to me in the previous multi quote post. 

one thing: canning is mlb ready talent. simmons is not. simmons is a 30 year old 8 year league veteran, that can in no way be reasonably defined as mlb ready "talent", which is a synonym for prospect in this case.