Trade Adell (+ club control through 2026) for Snell (3 years, $42M left on contract) straight up?

[ScottT]

Bauer and Snell.

Not a fan of either guy, but sign me up.

I dont think the Rays do that, though.

[Junkballer]

I just see a straight up swap as unlikely in the extreme, one reason, of several,  that the risk/reward being much higher for the Rays than Angels.  Snells floor and upside are pretty well established, and the three years remaining on his contract mitigate injury concerns to an extent.  Adells atrocious debut has exposed flaws.  Not saying that the Rays would not consider him to still be a prime prospect, however, we can be sure that their view of his floor has lowered.  On top of this, I have little doubt that they will get several offers that include at least more than one prospect, which by the nature of dealing with prospects, mitigates the risk of a one to one swap, and that some of those offers will include higher end pitching prospects.  

[Rollinghard]

Bauer and Snell = Playoffs (when Trout and Rendon are still in their prime.) 

Adell = A dream or a nightmare.

Can somebody explain to me how Adell got ranked so high as a prospect when he has so much trouble tracking and catching fly balls. His running gate has too much bounce. I mean somebody somewhere along the line must have noticed it. Yeah Mike Trout wasn't great in 2011 but he could always shag a fly balls with ease.  Trout has always had good jumps, good routes, good speed. Adell, not so much.  

[Hubs]

I would rather have Marquez. He’s the only available starter I would trade Adell for. Marsh, Adams, Detmers sure. Adell is gonna be the better hitter long term. 

[Justin]

11 minutes ago, Rollinghard said:

Can somebody explain to me how Adell got ranked so high as a prospect when he has so much trouble tracking and catching fly balls. 

Often the biggest factor in prospect rankings is potential. Many scouts saw elite-level athleticism in Adell; that was a bigger factor than his strikeouts or his trouble tracking balls. Because the latter can be corrected with coaching and experience. You can't teach elite-level athleticism. 

[Stradling]

I can pretty much guarantee Trout would look much worse as a RF than in CF.  I can guarantee that Adell would look better defensively in CF than in RF. 

[DMVol]

2 hours ago, Justin said:

Often the biggest factor in prospect rankings is potential. Many scouts saw elite-level athleticism in Adell; that was a bigger factor than his strikeouts or his trouble tracking balls. Because the latter can be corrected with coaching and experience. You can't teach elite-level athleticism. 

Warning:  Nobody has ever paid me to evaluate players and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night....That said, watching Adell this year, I tend to think his ceiling is more Upton than anything else....Even during his first call up, when he struggled at the plate, Trout's defensive instincts were off the charts....Adell looked athletic but maybe not the best instincts, kind of like Upton....Trout is certainly athletic but defensively he has always been instinctive, as was Torri Hunter....You can correct defensive shortcomings, to some extent, but I'm not sure you can coach the instincts that Trout has and Hunter had....I would expect Adell can and will do a lot better at the plate. But I don't know how good he can be.....maybe Upton, streaky with pretty consistent power...never a high average or consistent contact guy....that is the great unknown with him.  And being another Justin Upton isn't a bad thing, just not the uber prospect that some see him as....

[Justin]

2 minutes ago, DMVol said:

Warning:  Nobody has ever paid me to evaluate players and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night....That said, watching Adell this year, I tend to think his ceiling is more Upton than anything else....Even during his first call up, when he struggled at the plate, Trout's defensive instincts were off the charts....Adell looked athletic, more like Upton, than Trout or, say, Torri Hunter (who I always thought was really instinctive)....You can correct defensive shortcomings, to some extent, but I'm not sure you can coach the instincts that Trout has and Hunter had....I would expect Adell can and will do a lot better at the plate. But I don't know how good he can be.....maybe Upton, streaky with pretty consistent power...never a high average or consistent contact guy....that is the great unknown with him.  And being another Justin Upton isn't a bad thing, just not the uber prospect that some see him as....

Adell definitely looks more like Upton or Hunter than he does Trout. 

Wait...

[BTH]

I would do that deal from an Angels perspective, but I don't think the Rays would.

And if the Rays wanted to do that deal, I'd be concerned because the Rays are generally smarter than other teams. It would lead me to believe that they know something about Snell that others don't.

[Angelsjunky]

2 hours ago, Second Base said:

For me, it's a yes vote based on expected value. 

I expect Jo Adell to ultimately settle in as a 3-5 win player on an annual basis. Some years, he'll be good, some, he's going to be a sure-fire all-star. On average, a 4 win player.

I expect Brandon Marsh to also be a 3-5 win player annually. He's a different player than Adell but the end value will be the same. Better OBP and defense. Less game changing power and all that goes with it. On average, a 4 win player.

I believe Jordyn Adams is going to be a 3-7 win player. His defense it's that good, and he'll have enough bat and power to keep him relevant. Basically, Adams will be everything Peter Bourjos should've been, based on his age 24 season. On average, a 5 win player.

In other words, Justin Upton, Rusty Greer (adjusted for era), and Kenny Lofton, albeit with more power and less SB and average. Or those basic types of players.

 

2 hours ago, Second Base said:

Snell pitched will enough last year to tell us two things. 1 - His down year in 2019 was a small blip in what will otherwise be a strong run through his prime years. 2 - That 1.89 ERA in 2018, will likely be the high point of his career. Very very rarely is a pitcher that good for an extended period of time. So ultimately, I expect Snell will likely be a 4-win pitcher on a yearly basis.

But not all wins are allocated equally. The Angels will have plenty of value in the outfield, but not as much on the mound. They need mound value and therefore, I would trade Adell for Snell. 

The money owed to Snell doesn't appear to be a franchise changing amount, and three years is fine when you're referring to that value taking place during Trout and Rendon's prime. Whereas Adell's value likely takes place after Trout is 33 and Rendon is in his mid-30's. That value would be good to have on hand for continuity purposes, but if Marsh and Adams are on hand, it is already covered and therefore a surplus.

In short, Adell is a surplus value, being traded for a necessity. So yes.

 

 

Yes. If the Angels didn't have Marsh and Adams, I'd say no to the trade, but given that they do--not to mention Deveaux, Knowles, Ramirez, Calabrese, Rivera, and Holmes--they've got tons of prospect depth in the OF.

[ScruffytheJanitor]

2 hours ago, Second Base said:

Snell pitched will enough last year to tell us two things. 1 - His down year in 2019 was a small blip in what will otherwise be a strong run through his prime years. 2 - That 1.89 ERA in 2018, will likely be the high point of his career. Very very rarely is a pitcher that good for an extended period of time. So ultimately, I expect Snell will likely be a 4-win pitcher on a yearly basis.

Crap -- I re-read the rule book, and I am pretty sure the Angels aren't allowed to have a pitcher with a WAR above 2. 

Seriously, though, this is spot on-- I wouldn't be surprised if Marsh wasn't slightly more valuable than Adell at all -- even if Adell has a much higher probability of hitting 40 Hrs/ season. I also have Snell pegged *slightly* lower at 3.2 WAR/ 162 gms. Still, though: compared to our #5 starters over the past 5 years (which he would really be replacing), it will feel like early-aught's Pedro is leading our rotation. 

[ettin]

This is a big no for me, in a straight-up trade.

From my perspective Blake Snell is worth centering a trade around a good (think Top 50 but not Top 15) prospect but Jo Adell, despite his early flaws (and we talked about his K% ad nauseum, before, and how he might struggle in his first season or two in the Major's) has a tremendous amount of value tied up in not only his potential offense but his very good defense. He is worth more than Blake Snell, so we would need to get more back from the Rays to even consider this a win for us. Even then I am not fond of the idea of not getting the right value back.

Trading Adell could be a solution for Minasian in terms of filling multiple needs (say Snell plus a reliever plus a prospect or something similar) but I am not a fan of this Snell for Adell straight-up, I think it would be a mistake.

[Blarg]

I think Ettin's slide rule may have broke and did his valuations on a Ti 60. 

[Angel Oracle]

Let this sink in.  Aside from 2018, Snell has averaged just under 5 innings a start.

Is that because of a) pitch counts, b) TB being very conservative with starting pitching innings, or c) endurance concerns?

[Second Base]

Having said all that, if I were the Rays, no I wouldn't make that trade. The Rays almost won the World Series last year and the team is young and not going through any fundamental personnel changes. Financially, it's tight, but they can afford Blake Snell. He's the staff ace and has three years left on his contract. The Rays window of contention is right now. No reason to close it by trading away assets.

Jo Adell headlines a trade like this, but he isn't the only piece. He would help the team in the future, but won't be truly impactful for another 2-3 years. For now, a trade like this would require Adell, Heaney and Canning plus money to offset the costs.

There's no reason the Angels should be paying that.

After 2021, the price goes down. Snell is a year older with a year less of control. Canning and Adell will both be more developed and Heaney would be a free agent. So this time next year, three price is probably Adell straight up, by which time the trade may favor both teams but the Rays will still be in their window contention so the answer would still be no.

Two years from now, one year of Snell doesn't get the Rays Adell. It might get Canning, maybe. But again, the Rays will be hearing the end of their window, so that's when the trade becomes more of a reality.

The reason why a trade for Snell has less to do with the pieces and more about the timing. The Rays are in their window of contention. The Angels are trying to open theirs.

 

[Second Base]

29 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

In other words, Justin Upton, Rusty Greer (adjusted for era), and Kenny Lofton, albeit with more power and less SB and average. Or those basic types of players.

 

Yes. If the Angels didn't have Marsh and Adams, I'd say no to the trade, but given that they do--not to mention Deveaux, Knowles, Ramirez, Calabrese, Rivera, and Holmes--they've got tons of prospect depth in the OF.

Yes, I think Upton/Hunter have been and remain solid comps for Jo Adell. He's more athletic than both of them, but the end result should be the same, which is someone that's either an all-star or a borderline all-star every year for a decade. For Hunter that was between ages 25-34. For Upton, it was 21-30. For Adell, I'm guessing it's for to be 23-32. 

[DMVol]

1 hour ago, Justin said:

Adell definitely looks more like Upton or Hunter than he does Trout. 

Wait...

[Second Base]

And I think that creates a fascinating case study for Mike Trout. If a regular star player (as if there were such a thing) has an elite reign (where they are an all star or in the conversation) of approximately 8-10 years. Those guys, like Upton and Hunter, are clearly a tier below Trout.

Trout is a superstar, potentially the best that's ever existed, but he's hardly the first. But Trout may be the first in the modern era to have his career not inherited by military service (God willing), detailed by injuries, or tainted by steroids. So how long is the elite reign of these superstars? We don't know because of the reasons I stated above, but hopefully Trout gives us some insight into that.

Trout is clearly bigger, stronger, faster, and better than Mays and Mantle, but the game is also bigger, stronger, faster and better. So the comparison of dominance might actually be the same.

Willie Mays - Because if military service we don't know for sure when his may have started. Maybe 21, but for sure 23. 23-36 is where Mays should've been an all-star but because of voting back then he was an all-star a lot more times than he probably deserved. But still, that's a 14 year window. 

Mickey Mantle - Derailed by injuries, some self inflicted. But 20-32 seems to be good window. Hard to know for sure, it may have been longer. He gathered more all-star nominations than that but likely fort hood past and not his present. But still, 13 years. 

Ken Griffey Jr. - Detailed by injuries that took their toll. But maybe, maybe a care could be made for ages 20-37, which would be an 18 year reign. But that's optimistic.

Barry Bonds - Steroid tainted. But his likely would've been 22-33, so likely 12 years. But because of steroids, it was closer to 20. 

Alex Rodriguez - Steroid tainted and impossible to know. He likely took steroids from age 25-31. But not sure what that window should've been. Maybe 20-32, 13 years? 

Albert Pujols - Speculation. There's reason to doubt his age and his cleanliness during an era where reports indicate 80% of baseball players were taking PED's. 

Mike Trout- We know it started at 20. Maybe it ends at 32. Maybe 36. Who knows?

 

 

[ettin]

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

I think Ettin's slide rule may have broke and did his valuations on a Ti 60. 

I see, I get the Radio Shack jokes and @tdawg87 gets the Shake Shack jokes?

[ettin]

1 hour ago, Angel Oracle said:

Let this sink in.  Aside from 2018, Snell has averaged just under 5 innings a start.

Is that because of a) pitch counts, b) TB being very conservative with starting pitching innings, or c) endurance concerns?

This is a good point but I think that working in a six-man rotation in Anaheim might alleviate the workload overall (but may not help with the game-to-game endurance... shrugs).

Don't get me wrong, either, I like Snell, but I don't think he is worth Adell straight-up.

[Blarg]

42 minutes ago, ettin said:

I see, I get the Radio Shack jokes and @tdawg87 gets the Shake Shack jokes?

Fess up, you had a TI in high school. 

[Rollinghard]

3 hours ago, Justin said:

Often the biggest factor in prospect rankings is potential. Many scouts saw elite-level athleticism in Adell; that was a bigger factor than his strikeouts or his trouble tracking balls. Because the latter can be corrected with coaching and experience. You can't teach elite-level athleticism. 

Mr. Olympia does not make a MLBP. Oh and by the way, elite-level athleticism includes eye hand coordination and the ability to track a moving object on the run. Just watch the video when he robs Springer of a HR. He was lucky he didn't lose that one too. 

[Warfarin]

All this talk about the Rays window of contention being right now .. yes, it is, but it is also next year, the year thereafter, etc.

The Rays just went to the WS and they have baseball's best farm system.  That team is stacked and has talent literally everywhere.  They are the Dodgers, minus the huge payroll.

The reason they do, in part, is because they know when to trade players and yield the most return to keep their team contending despite having a minuscule payroll budget.

I see Snell as highly likely to be traded, because it will just further their ability to contend now AND in the future.  They are a very, very well-run, smart team.

[failos]

20 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Fess up, you had a TI in high school. 

Who didn’t? Mine had games

[Warfarin]

Since I see the Rays as unlikely to do a straight-swap of Snell for Adell, I would propose Adell and a low level prospect for Snell + Kiermaier (who carries negative trade value).

Have Kiermaier play CF and provide elite defense.  Shift Trout to LF and suddenly, he becomes one of the best defensive LF'ers.

Trade Upton, 30mil, and a modest prospect to the Giants (or some contender), which will save ~10mil of payroll space this year (effectively canceling out the extra cost of Kiermaier).

Sign Joc Pederson to play RF.  Even if Joc is just mediocre in RF, we still have close to an elite defense, with great defense at 3B, SS, 2B, CF, LF, C.  Minasian will have acquired an ace and built a really strong defense all in one offseason.