ESPN on what it might take to trade for Snell

[BTH]

If the Angels are willing to trade that much prospect capital, they should shop that package around and see if they can get a better pitcher than Snell for that same package.

One thing that the Angels front office would know that we don't is what the asking price for Snell is in comparison to the asking price for Márquez or Gray. The asking price could be the same, higher, or lower.

[Angel Oracle]

I don’t like the idea of trading THREE of the top 5 prospects.   The Halos aren’t the Dogs or Padres.

 

[Lou]

What happens to Upton?

Who DHs for Keirmeier? 

[Junkballer]

The inclusion of Adell and Detmers seems to take advantage of the results of Adell's ill-advised fast-tracking last year and underrepresent his value.  If they do ask for the subject group, Minasian should hold firm to swapping out Detmers with another arm but the Rays have no incentive to acquiesce early.  How long can Minasian wait before just moving on if the Rays are intent on dominating the deal?  Hope he is good at playing chicken with multiple deals in the mix.

[Hubs]

I have to think that if they’d pulled off the Pederson Trade, Adell wouldn’t have been called up.

[Stradling]

That is a horrific trade for the Angels.  

[Pancake Bear]

If Adell's stock has fallen that far, they definitely shouldn't trade him. 

[AngelsLakersFan]

4 hours ago, Second Base said:

Yeah, it's a load. It would be a long and hard discussion, but hopefully neither side chokes. It really would be the climax of the off-season. There's a lot of build up to this potential trade though. It would come with a huge relief though on the Rays part, financially speaking. Snell isn't some slap-dick prospect though. His fastball is firm and he's very experienced in big situations like this. 

We've spent years rebuilding the farm system to get to the point where we can maybe afford to make a move like this. I just can't imagine the team blowing their load on Kiermaier and Snell. I think we have to do better.

[Docwaukee]

I don't get the Kiermaier thing.  Is Trout really going to shift positions at this point?  

I seriously doubt it.  Plus, Kiermaier is due over 25m over the next two years.  

If the halos are taking on that much salary they better not even trade one of our top 7.  Even without including Kiermaier, that's not a trade I'd like to see the Angels make.  

[ukyah]

8 hours ago, Warfarin said:

Great defender is probably underselling his abilities.  He has consistently rated as the best defensive CF in the game for years now.  For a CFer, that's huge.  It'd also create the domino effect of shifting Trout to LF, where he'll likely be one of the best defensive LFers in the game, and a tremendous defensive upgrade over having Upton out there.  It'd be a way that a single move creates two huge defensive upgrades, much in the same way that acquiring Iglesias did the same (with Fletcher shifting to 2B).

The more I think about it, the more I really hope we can swing a deal for both Snell + Keirmaier, as it'd just do so much to help our team on the whole.

i don't know it reminds me of the peter borjous experiment, which didn't pay the dividends we all expected and trout's defense suffered in LF as well, at least that's what i remember.

[Warfarin]

8 minutes ago, ukyah said:

i don't know it reminds me of the peter borjous experiment, which didn't pay the dividends we all expected and trout's defense suffered in LF as well, at least that's what i remember.

That's actually a good reference, although Keirmaier is better offensively.  He is by no means good, but his career wRC+ is 97, which basically means he is league average for a CF, whereas Bourjos carried a career wRC+ of 84.  I think Keirmaier is better defensively, too.

Still, it's a fair point to make.  I would like to think Trout could adjust, though, and play elite level defense in LF if it came to this, but who knows.

[Stradling]

Say what you will about Peter Bourjos’ bat, the dude was a GREAT center fielder.  He was better defensively than Trout.  Better routes, just as fast.  

[Stradling]

Also Bourjos couldn’t steal a base but was possibly the best base runner I’ve ever seen.  He cut a base better than anyone I’ve seen. Too bad it takes a lot more to be a successful major leaguer. 

[Warfarin]

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Also Bourjos couldn’t steal a base but was possibly the best base runner I’ve ever seen.  He cut a base better than anyone I’ve seen. Too bad it takes a lot more to be a successful major leaguer. 

https://www.fangraphs.com/players/peter-bourjos/2578/stats?position=OF

What's interesting is if you actually look at his stats, he put up some pretty good years in terms of fWAR with us, even while playing limited amounts.

Posting a 1.3 and 1.8 fWAR in just under 200 PAs is actually rather impressive.  Projected over a full season, that would have made him a 4-5 fWAR player, which he was in 2011.

[Capital_Dave]

This proposed trade would hurt us in two ways.  Kiermeier would only exacerbate our outfield logjam.  Upton is a sunk cost and there's no way we're paying him $20M a year to be a part-time player.  And even if you keep him in left and put Trout in right, then where in the world are you putting Adell and Marsh?  

Not only that, but you're also dealing away three of the best prospects in a fairly shallow minor leagues system?  Hell no.

 

[ScruffytheJanitor]

Damn... I guess my idea of "Packy Naughton for Snell straight up" isn't going to cut it?

I'll admit; this trade is pretty damn fair; it also doesn't make a ton of sense from either side. 

[ScruffytheJanitor]

1 hour ago, Capital_Dave said:

This proposed trade would hurt us in two ways.  Kiermeier would only exacerbate our outfield logjam.  Upton is a sunk cost and there's no way we're paying him $20M a year to be a part-time player.  And even if you keep him in left and put Trout in right, then where in the world are you putting Adell and Marsh?  

Not only that, but you're also dealing away three of the best prospects in a fairly shallow minor leagues system?  Hell no.

 

Well, the idea is that we have Trout-Kiermeier-Upton this year, then Trout-Kiermeier-Marsh next year (with Upton sliding into a DH/4th OF/Backup 1B (?) role). 

We also wouldn't have to worry about Adell, since the Rays would probably want the guy we traded to them playing in their OF. 

[Stradling]

For you guys saying it’s fair, how?  Keirmeier has negative trade value base on his salary and lack of offense.  Yet the trade goes from Adell and filler for Snell to Adell, Detmers, Suarez and Paris AND you take on Keirmeirer and his contract?  
The very most I would give up for those two would be Adell, Barria and Jackson or Yan. 

[ScruffytheJanitor]

10 hours ago, Stradling said:

Also Bourjos couldn’t steal a base but was possibly the best base runner I’ve ever seen.  He cut a base better than anyone I’ve seen. Too bad it takes a lot more to be a successful major leaguer. 

If he could have added ONE more skill at the plate -- doubles power, On Base percentage -- he could have been Tim Locastro. 

[Stradling]

Just now, ScruffytheJanitor said:

If he could have added ONE more skill at the plate -- doubles power, On Base percentage -- he could have been Tim Locastro. 

If he added OBP he would have been a 4-5 WAR player. 

[Warfarin]

15 minutes ago, Stradling said:

For you guys saying it’s fair, how?  Keirmeier has negative trade value base on his salary and lack of offense.  Yet the trade goes from Adell and filler for Snell to Adell, Detmers, Suarez and Paris AND you take on Keirmeirer and his contract?  
The very most I would give up for those two would be Adell, Barria and Jackson or Yan. 

I think what we are saying is it "realistic," not fair.  To get Snell, we likely have to overpay.  I don't think TB *HAS* to trade him, as their payroll is still very low.  I don't think TB is in the same situation as the Cubs, Reds, Rockies, etc.

Still, in terms of the proposed deal, I'd push to get Detmers removed and have a low level prospect in his place.  Adell, Suarez, Paris, and a low-level minor leaguer (Knowles?) would be more palatable for me than having Detmers included.

[Stradling]

I’d also assume taking on the extra $11 million of Keirmeirer takes us out of the running for Bauer. 

[ScruffytheJanitor]

22 minutes ago, Stradling said:

For you guys saying it’s fair, how?  Keirmeier has negative trade value base on his salary and lack of offense.  Yet the trade goes from Adell and filler for Snell to Adell, Detmers, Suarez and Paris AND you take on Keirmeirer and his contract?  
The very most I would give up for those two would be Adell, Barria and Jackson or Yan. 

Mainly because the price for cost-controlled #2 starters is pretty high. We keep imagining that Adell is enough, but don't forget -- Lance Lynn cost a top-100 prospect all by himself. Also -- it's hard to imagine the Rays are in a rush to trade him. I wouldn't blame the Rays for starting with Adell-Paris-Detmers as their asking price. 

[Warfarin]

5 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I’d also assume taking on the extra $11 million of Keirmeirer takes us out of the running for Bauer. 

My guess is if we genuinely wanted Bauer, we would not agree to take on the 11mil to Keirmaier.  Likely doing so shows we never intended to pursue him.

[Warfarin]

3 minutes ago, ScruffytheJanitor said:

Mainly because the price for cost-controlled #2 starters is pretty high. We keep imagining that Adell is enough, but don't forget -- Lance Lynn cost a top-100 prospect all by himself. Also -- it's hard to imagine the Rays are in a rush to trade him. I wouldn't blame the Rays for starting with Adell-Paris-Detmers as their asking price. 

Right, I agree.  I would still push to sub in another prospect in place of Detmers - Jackson, Knowles, etc.  Maybe we could negotiate it down to Adell, Paris, Barria, and another non-pitching prospect.  Again, it would feel like an overpay probably to us fans, but as you said, that's the cost to someone like Snell.

So in that regard, I think perhaps it is more ideal for us to pursue someone like Gray or Darvish.  Neither should command that kind of package.