Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

The Official 2020-2021 Hot Stove Offseason Thread


rafibomb

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, angelsnationtalk said:

I agree with what some are saying for a trade in Lindor and McKenzie for Adell and others. If Heaney is included then the Angels would only take on roughly $13.7M. 

If there was a trade anywhere close to that then the Angels are still extremely flexible financially. It doesn't get us an Ace, but leaves us with a good prospect who might be MLB ready and the room to add another solid arm + outfield
Can still add:
Pederson 2yr/$18M
Tanaka 3yr/$39M

Bundy/Tanaka/Ohtani/Canning/McKenzie/Barria

Fletcher/Lindor/Trout/Rendon/Ohtani/Pederson/Upton/Walsh/Stassi

Realistically, I think our offseason budget is somewhere around 25-30mil total to spend.  If we trade for Lindor, who will cost 20mil+ in arbitration, we likely don't have room for the other moves you mentioned.

The Indians are a great trading partner for us in that they definitely need young, talented OFers, and that is where we are deepest.  

Unfortunately, the problem is that the Indians are mainly focused on offloading payroll right now, which means they are focused on trading Lindor.  I like Lindor a lot, but he just doesn't make any sense for us.  We don't have a lot of money to spend, and if we traded for Lindor, he'd basically eat up almost all of what we have available.  For a team that so desperately needs pitching, it doesn't make sense for us to pursue him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dochalo said:

why would the Indians even remotely think about trading Plesac or McKenzie?  They're both pre-arb so they have a ton of control and are super cheap.  

I also don't see how Lindor makes any sense for this team.  

Agreed on Lindor.

The thinking re: Pleasac/McKenzie is moreso that the Indians, for quite some time, have been looking to acquire young, talented OFers.  As great as the Indians are at pumping out dominant SP prospect after dominant SP prospect, they are rather lackluster in developing OFers and have been trying to acquire some via trade.

So, just for me personally, I suggest Adell for Pleasac because it would be for the Indians what it is for us - they would be trading from their organizational strength (pitching) to ameliorate their organization weakness (OF).  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Warfarin said:

Realistically, I think our offseason budget is somewhere around 25-30mil total to spend.  If we trade for Lindor, who will cost 20mil+ in arbitration, we likely don't have room for the other moves you mentioned.

The Indians are a great trading partner for us in that they definitely need young, talented OFers, and that is where we are deepest.  

Unfortunately, the problem is that the Indians are mainly focused on offloading payroll right now, which means they are focused on trading Lindor.  I like Lindor a lot, but he just doesn't make any sense for us.  We don't have a lot of money to spend, and if we traded for Lindor, he'd basically eat up almost all of what we have available.  For a team that so desperately needs pitching, it doesn't make sense for us to pursue him.

They can do it...

Lindor $21.5M
Heaney $8M 

Contracts swapped Angels would only add $13.5M to payroll. 

This leaves $16.5M to spend so fine then…
Renfroe $4.3MM
Tanaka 3yr/$39M (13MAAV)

Takes us right around the target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts on Lindor...

Originally, my interest in Lindor was when Bauer was really the only frontline arm on the market. Availability of Gray, Snell, and Darvish changes that a bit. I felt that Bauer was unlikely, and there wouldn’t be any other proven, high-impact arms available, so I would opt to improve the defense/offense by looking at Lindor.

Given the Brad Hand non-tender, it’s clear Cleveland badly needs to save money. They’re motivated to move Lindor. But I’m not sure it will be easy. With Gregorius, Semien, and Simmons all available in FA - and all three likely to come on relatively small deals - and a mega-FA class next offseason, I’m not sure there is necessarily going to be multiple teams willing to pay a big price for Lindor. So I saw it as an opportunistic move for the Angels - again should Bauer not be realistic. 

But most of all, in addition, the trade was as much about acquiring McKenzie as it was Lindor, if not more. Adell for Lindor isn’t fair for the Angels, and based on their 2020 performances and the premium of pitching, I doubt Cleveland moves McKenzie for Adell one for one, especially because as @Dochalo mentioned, they don’t really have to.

That’s where I could see the three players together making up the bones of the deal. And I look at the Betts deal for comparison. Very similar situation. Replace Betts with Lindor, Verdugo with Adell, Graterol with McKenzie. From there, it could go different directions. Maybe the Angels take Carrasco too (comparable to Maeda) and help Cleveland save more money, and offer back some cheap rotation help like Barria or Sandoval, especially since both could be squeezed out of the rotation with Carrasco and McKenzie joining Bundy, Heaney, and Canning. Matt Thaiss and Luis Rengifo both don’t have clear playing time here with Walsh breaking out and Lindor joining the team. Both would be cheap and both would fit some of Cleveland’s needs. Carrasco gives them a bit of insurance should Heaney and Bundy walk at end of year too. The Angels could probably toy with other lower-level prospects if need be, and could also discuss Hedges. 

Angels: Lindor, McKenzie, Carrasco (taking on ~$30m)

Indians: Adell, Barria/Sandoval/Suarez, Rengifo (who they liked for Kluber), and Thaiss (and save quite a bunch)

For the Angels, they become a win-now team in 2021. Maybe Lindor is just a hired gun and they get the comp pick. Maybe they consider an extension.

Rotation: Bundy, Heaney, Carrasco, Canning, McKenzie, Ohtani

Bullpen: TBD

Lineup: Lindor SS, Walsh 1B, Trout CF, Rendon 3B, Ohtani/Pujols DH, Upton LF, Ward/Marsh/Schebler RF, Stassi/Bemboom C, Fletcher 2B

Looks fine to me. It winds up being more like McKenzie for Adell, and a trio or so of young, potentially decent players for one year of Lindor and Carrasco, and much needed salary relief for Cleveland. They could touch up pen and catcher with whatever money is freed up non-tendering. 

Edited by totdprods
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, angelsnationtalk said:

They can do it...

Lindor $21.5M
Heaney $8M 

Contracts swapped Angels would only add $13.5M to payroll. 

This leaves $16.5M to spend so fine then…
Renfroe $4.3MM
Tanaka 3yr/$39M (13MAAV)

Takes us right around the target.

We have horrible pitching and you're advocating trading heaney for 1 year of lindor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll also add that the Angels could run into a tricky spot this year or next when it comes to Ward, Jones, Thaiss, Rengifo, Barria, Suarez, Sandoval...guys will start running out of options, won’t get enough playing time to develop, won’t be good enough to justify playing them over pursuing other acquisitions.

Knowles, Deveaux, and a ton of pitchers are Rule 5 eligible next winter, so sooner rather than later, Minasian might need to deal a couple of those names just to clear the pipes somewhat. And it might be best to do it sooner rather than later in the event a couple lose significant value due to lack of enough playing time to develop or impact the team, sort of like how Cron bounced around a bit too often his first few years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Angels: Lindor, McKenzie, Carrasco (taking on ~$30m)

Indians: Adell, Barria/Sandoval/Suarez, Rengifo (who they liked for Kluber), and Thaiss (and save quite a bunch)

For the Angels, they become a win-now team in 2021. Maybe Lindor is just a hired gun and they get the comp pick. Maybe they consider an extension.

Rotation: Bundy, Heaney, Carrasco, Canning, McKenzie, Ohtani

Bullpen: TBD

Lineup: Lindor SS, Walsh 1B, Trout CF, Rendon 3B, Ohtani/Pujols DH, Upton LF, Ward/Marsh/Schebler RF, Stassi/Bemboom C, Fletcher 2B

Looks fine to me. It winds up being more like McKenzie for Adell, and a trio or so of young, potentially decent players for one year of Lindor and Carrasco, and much needed salary relief for Cleveland. They could touch up pen and catcher with whatever money is freed up non-tendering. 

Dude, you are way, way too light on the trade package. I think you would have to add Canning or another couple of high level prospects (Rodriguez, Adams) to get this much talent back from the Indians. 

As I understand it, Carrasco has up to three more years of club control at reasonable prices. McKenzie has six or so. And Lindor has superstar potential, though has regressed the last two years. In any event, to get all three of these guys, I’d readily part with Adell, any one position prospect not named Marsh, any one pitching prospect, and some other solid piece. So something like Adell, Rodriguez, Adams and Rengifo, and even that probably wouldn’t be enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Erstad Grit said:

We have horrible pitching and you're advocating trading heaney for 1 year of lindor

No.

Full trade I proposed earlier in thread was Adell/Heaney/other lower tier prospects
for
Lindor/McKenzie

The money swapped from Lindor and Heaney allows Angels to still pursue someone like Tanaka and Renfroe

Fletcher, Lindor, Trout, Rendon, Ohtani, Upton, Walsh, Renfroe, Stassi

Tanaka, Bundy, Ohtani, Canning, McKenzie, Barria.

I know trading Adell is tough, but I don't mind especially when it fills two areas. We get a good pitching prospect back with control and a gold glove shortstop (something the Angels usually like to have).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

The idea of giving up assets for Lindor just to watch him leave after the season makes no sense to me.  If we were one player away then sure. But we are 3-5 pitchers away. 

You wouldn’t trade for Lindor and then watch him leave. Similar to the Dodgers and Betts you’d trade for Lindor then sign him to long term contract. Otherwise there’s no point in trading for him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can't really afford to trade for Lindor, we just can't add another 30+ mil to our payroll and we'll be paying 90 mil on 3 guys, which is  one the main reason why we're in this mess. Games has changed to getting younger and development. 

With that said, i also feel like Bauer price tag may be out of our reach, like a few said, i think we'll have about 20-30 mil to spend. I wouldn't mind going after a few mid-rotation type of arms, a closer and a second baseman. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading some of the trade proposals people on this site come up with, it seems like some of you think the Angels are the only team other teams can trade with.  The bottom line is that if you want an elite player, and aren’t willing to put together a package of elite prospects, some other team will and the team will never improve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of this talk of trading for Lindor just doesn't make sense.  Again, we probably have about ~25-30mil to spend.  Lindor will cost around 20mil.  The Indians do want to unload salary, but if you want an idea as to what he will fetch via trade, look at the Betts deal last offseason as a good barometer.  It'll cost a lot just to get Lindor.  Adell is probably a bit of an overpay, but the Indians are not going to ship Lindor + McKenzie for Adell + lower level prospects.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

You wouldn’t trade for Lindor and then watch him leave. Similar to the Dodgers and Betts you’d trade for Lindor then sign him to long term contract. Otherwise there’s no point in trading for him. 

But dissimilar to the Dodgers they aren’t paying two other guys $35 million a year for the next 6-10 years.  Also dissimilar to the Dodgers the Dodgers have virtually zero holes to fill on their roster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Dodgers got:

  • one year of Betts ($27m), at the time
  • David Price (3/$48m, BOS paid other half)
  • and a Top 50 RP/SP prospect 

That’s pretty close to:

  • Lindor (1/$20m)
  • Carlos Carrasco (4/$48m)
  • Triston McKenzie (Top 50 SP)

That’s about as close as you can get to an exact comparison...Lindor makes a little less.

They gave up:

  • Verdugo (a Top 25 OF prospect)
  • Downs (a top 75 IF prospect)
  • Wong (unranked)
  • Maeda 

Adell is pretty much equivalent to Verdugo here. I don’t think there’s much difference in being a Top 5 prospect or a Top 25 prospect, but it’s worth noting still, especially if Cleveland particularly likes Adell. And no, I wouldn’t equate Barria/Sandoval/Suarez to Maeda, Thaiss to Wong, or Rengifo to Downs as exact fits, but I don’t think the discrepancy is insurmountably huge. Just how bad does Cleveland need to save money? How thin is the market for Lindor with the current virus climate, and current and future SS FA crops? How much do they like Adell? Is it a difference that could be made up by including Adams? By swapping out Rengifo for Jackson, Vera, Paris, or Blakely? I won’t pretend to guess at that, but like I said, I don’t think it’s insurmountable to close that gap.

We needed pitching last year, yet when we missed on Cole, we (Arte?) immediately pivoted to Rendon instead of that money being spread to Keuchel, Ryu, Bungarner, etc., virtually any other pitching. I could see the Angels being fine with Lindor walking even at the end of the year, taking the QO pick, and drafting best pitcher they could get. Or maybe they go deep into the playoffs and Arte wants to keep that intact and throws down more coin on Lindor with Pujols’ deal up and Upton a year out. He doubled down on offense before with Hamilton.

It’s not really the way I would proceed but I don’t think it’s totally beyond the pale.

Edited by totdprods
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

But dissimilar to the Dodgers they aren’t paying two other guys $35 million a year for the next 6-10 years.  Also dissimilar to the Dodgers the Dodgers have virtually zero holes to fill on their roster. 

Agreed I’m not advocating for them signing him. I’m just stating you can’t trade for him and not re sign him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...