Joe Musgrove to the Padres

[Erstad Grit]

2 minutes ago, beatlesrule said:

 

 

I think that just shows Pirates are morons 

[Hubs]

14 minutes ago, beatlesrule said:

Didn't this trade prove that the trade simulator is worthless?

No, it proved that Ben Cherington and the Pirates got screwed again. The other trades this offseason have been dead on.

For the record I wouldn’t give up that for Castillo or Marquez. If they wanted to build a deal around Detmers and Adell ok, but I can’t see them Taking such a low value. Gotta keep Two OF. If taking on A Moustakas or a Blackmon deal made it easier to part with their Ace, then I would Do it, but I still don’t think they have enough.

[beatlesrule]

3 minutes ago, Hubs said:

No, it proved that Ben Cherington and the Pirates got screwed again. The other trades this offseason have been dead on.

For the record I wouldn’t give up that for Castillo or Marquez. If they wanted to build a deal around Detmers and Adell ok, but I can’t see them Taking such a low value. Gotta keep Two OF. If taking on A Moustakas or a Blackmon deal made it easier to part with their Ace, then I would Do it, but I still don’t think they have enough.

Again though, according to the simulator it was not a good trade so the simulator was worthless. Maybe other deals have been closer but this deal proved the simulator cannot be used as the be-all end-all.

[34red4]

3 minutes ago, beatlesrule said:

Again though, according to the simulator it was not a good trade so the simulator was worthless. Maybe other deals have been closer but this deal proved the simulator cannot be used as the be-all end-all.

It’s purpose is to help determine fair value. It has no power over teams who chose to trade for less.

[Stradling]

4 minutes ago, beatlesrule said:

Again though, according to the simulator it was not a good trade so the simulator was worthless. Maybe other deals have been closer but this deal proved the simulator cannot be used as the be-all end-all.

Ok so one trade makes the simulator worthless?  

[Jeff Fletcher]

The few people I talked to in the industry tonight think the Pirates did very well. 
 

The Padres gave up 3 of their top 20 prospects, which for the Angels would be like 3 of their top 10. 
 

And it’s not like Joe Musgrove is a Cy Young winner. I suspect 5 months ago a lot of you had no idea who he was. 

[Pancake Bear]

The whole point of the simulator is to give a general sense of value. Sometimes a given organization will value certain players or prospects more for one reason or another. For instance, Yankee fans think Andujar has a ton of value, but according to the sim he has almost no value. They only see his offense from several years ago and ignore the other factors that diminish his value. At the same time, another team might buy the upside and offer more value than the simulator calculates for him. There's also the fact that in Andujar's case, at this precise moment in time he is worth more to an AL team than an NL team due to the DH option (that could change imminently, but for the present it is true).

[Pancake Bear]

3 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

The few people I talked to in the industry tonight think the Pirates did very well. 
 

The Padres gave up 3 of their top 20 prospects, which for the Angels would be like 3 of their top 10. 
 

And it’s not like Joe Musgrove is a Cy Young winner. I suspect 5 months ago a lot of you had no idea who he was. 

Top 20 prospects before or after the ones they traded for Snell and Darvish? Also, Musgrove has been talked about here for quite a while. I think Scotty was talking him up around a year ago, iirc. For a team in desperate need of pitching, a lot of names that would be more obscure to other teams get talked about more. 

[Chuck]

3 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

The few people I talked to in the industry tonight think the Pirates did very well. 

The Padres gave up 3 of their top 20 prospects, which for the Angels would be like 3 of their top 10. 

And it’s not like Joe Musgrove is a Cy Young winner. I suspect 5 months ago a lot of you had no idea who he was. 

@Jeff Fletcher if you were to guess, do you see the Angels breaking the bank to land Bauer, do you see them signing a couple second tier guys like (Paxton, Tanaka, Walker, Odorizzi), or possibly one of Bauer or one from the second tier guys and a trade for an arm?

[Hubs]

1 minute ago, beatlesrule said:

Again though, according to the simulator it was not a good trade so the simulator was worthless. Maybe other deals have been closer but this deal proved the simulator cannot be used as the be-all end-all.

It’s just a good reference.

its not Gonna be 100% accurate.

 

[BTH]

14 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

The few people I talked to in the industry tonight think the Pirates did very well. 
 

The Padres gave up 3 of their top 20 prospects, which for the Angels would be like 3 of their top 10. 
 

And it’s not like Joe Musgrove is a Cy Young winner. I suspect 5 months ago a lot of you had no idea who he was. 

I think fans aren't necessarily upset about not acquiring Musgrove, but upset that he is yet another quality starting pitcher that they've failed to acquire.

Fans have started to realize that the Angels likely aren't going to spend the money necessary to sign Bauer, and Musgrove was one of the options that was realistic since he isn't making a ton of money. Now, the options seem very limited and that has fans in an uproar because it seems like they will fail to adequately address their starting pitching need again.

[Jeff Fletcher]

7 minutes ago, Pancake Bear said:

Top 20 prospects before or after the ones they traded for Snell and Darvish? Also, Musgrove has been talked about here for quite a while. I think Scotty was talking him up around a year ago, iirc. For a team in desperate need of pitching, a lot of names that would be more obscure to other teams get talked about more. 

Top 20 after the other trades

[Jeff Fletcher]

5 minutes ago, Chuckster70 said:

@Jeff Fletcher if you were to guess, do you see the Angels breaking the bank to land Bauer, do you see them signing a couple second tier guys like (Paxton, Tanaka, Walker, Odorizzi), or possibly one of Bauer or one from the second tier guys and a trade for an arm?

Your guess is as good as mine. 
 

I do think they’ll get at least one guy of the caliber you mention, but I have no idea who. 

[Pancake Bear]

2 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Top 20 after the other trades

Probably doesn't move the needle that much, but I would suspect it would be somewhere in the 8-12 range for the Angels at most. The only prospect of great note is Hudson Head. He'd probably be a top ten prospect for the Angels, but I doubt any of the others would be. 

[Jeff Fletcher]

2 minutes ago, Trendon said:

I think fans aren't necessarily upset about not acquiring Musgrove, but upset that he is yet another quality starting pitcher that they've failed to acquire.

Fans have started to realize that the Angels likely aren't going to spend the money necessary to sign Bauer, and Musgrove was one of the options that was realistic since he isn't making a ton of money.

Well, as I’ve said many many many times, if your farm system is bad, it’s hard to make trades. 
 

From 2010-15, the Angels farm system was abysmal, and they have slowly upgraded it to below average. The only way to upgrade it quickly is to do what the Pirates just did, but the Angels have never been willing to do that. 
 

If you don’t have enough good prospects to get established big leaguers, and you won’t trade established big leaguers to get prospects, you just have to rely on slowly building the system through the draft and hoping that free agency works. 

[Blarg]

I don't know why but I'd really like to see the Angels roll the dice on Archer. He is definitely a gamble but I think they can get him cheap on a one year deal and it would be a prove it year. His last chance to secure another longer contract by putting up some good numbers. 

[angelsnationtalk]

25 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

The few people I talked to in the industry tonight think the Pirates did very well. 
 

The Padres gave up 3 of their top 20 prospects, which for the Angels would be like 3 of their top 10. 
 

And it’s not like Joe Musgrove is a Cy Young winner. I suspect 5 months ago a lot of you had no idea who he was. 

If that's what netted Musgrove then I'd have to at least assume that the asking price for Gray or someone along those lines would be too much for the Angels to afford.

I really think this opens a major door for the Angels to make a run for Bauer. 

I can't see this organization being so openly honest about serious changes being needed and then only singing someone like Odorizzi who has a BIG question mark.

In my opinion, I just can't see Arte striking out on yet another chance to get a top pitching free agent. Just seems like certain scenarios are happening that is making the likelihood of Bauer to the Angels more of a reality then it's been with past pitchers. 

[Erstad Grit]

6 minutes ago, Blarg said:

I don't know why but I'd really like to see the Angels roll the dice on Archer. He is definitely a gamble but I think they can get him cheap on a one year deal and it would be a prove it year. His last chance to secure another longer contract by putting up some good numbers. 

I'd be great with bauer and a guy like archer

[BTH]

10 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Well, as I’ve said many many many times, if your farm system is bad, it’s hard to make trades. 
 

From 2010-15, the Angels farm system was abysmal, and they have slowly upgraded it to below average. The only way to upgrade it quickly is to do what the Pirates just did, but the Angels have never been willing to do that. 
 

If you don’t have enough good prospects to get established big leaguers, and you won’t trade established big leaguers to get prospects, you just have to rely on slowly building the system through the draft and hoping that free agency works. 

So "hoping that free agency works" is really the only option the Angels have right now then. The question is are they actually going to do that? Their payroll is already up there, and they're going to have to pay up to get the starters that they need.

The thing is, there are some starters out there on the free agent market, but it doesn't seem like they'll have enough money to get what they need.

[UndertheHalo]

11 minutes ago, Blarg said:

I don't know why but I'd really like to see the Angels roll the dice on Archer. He is definitely a gamble but I think they can get him cheap on a one year deal and it would be a prove it year. His last chance to secure another longer contract by putting up some good numbers. 

Dodgers were working him out last I saw.  They’re either taking forever to get a deal or didn’t care for what they saw. 

[BTH]

1 minute ago, UndertheHalo said:

Dodgers were working him out last I saw.  They’re either taking forever to get a deal or didn’t care for what they saw. 

I think Archer was just throwing at the Dodgers facility because he lives in the LA area.

[T.G.]

Archer doesn’t have anything left in his quiver.

[UndertheHalo]

5 minutes ago, Trendon said:

I think Archer was just throwing at the Dodgers facility because he lives in the LA area.

Possible I misunderstood 

[Pancake Bear]

57 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

The few people I talked to in the industry tonight think the Pirates did very well. 
 

The Padres gave up 3 of their top 20 prospects, which for the Angels would be like 3 of their top 10. 
 

And it’s not like Joe Musgrove is a Cy Young winner. I suspect 5 months ago a lot of you had no idea who he was. 

While MLB Trade Values isn't perfect, it at least gives a perspective on value. Here's how they rated each of the players traded as well as the top twenty Angels prospects (per the top 30 rankings released by Team AW today). I also included Sandoval, Barria, and Pena because the Padres gave up Lucchesi, so I was looking for someone on the Angels who might be comparable in value.

Pirates
36.2 Musgrove

Padres
6.3 Hudson Head
0.7 Omar Cruz
0.3 David Bednar
0.1 Drake Fellows

5.8 Joey Lucchesi

Mets
2.4 Endy Rodriguez

54.8 Adell 1
36.2 Marsh 2
8.5 Rodriguez 3
11.2 Detmers 4
15.9 Adams 5
4.1 Kochanowicz 6
6.3 Paris 7
8.2 Jackson 8
4.9 Jones 9
6.3 Vera 10
3.6 Yan 11
2.4 Calabrese 12
3.9 Ramirez 13
1.7 Rivera 14
4.3 Knowles 15
1.7 Holmes 16
0.7 Hernandez 17
2.4 Blakely 18
2.5 Deveaux 19
0.8 Naughton 20

10.3 Sandoval
4.8 Barria
2.2 Pena

Obviously Baseball Trade Values' system is not perfect, nor will it accurately assess how a given organization will value a given prospect/player. Still, it appears to me that it would not be correct to say that any of the Padres prospects other than Head would be in the Angels' top ten, and based on his rating he might be anywhere from 7-10. The other three would all be on the back end of the top twenty.

Adams is rated too high to be directly comparable to Head, but might be the closest option. Strictly based on rating, maybe Paris, Jackson, or Vera would be a decent comp for headliner.

Hernandez (17 on AW ranking) might be a fair comp for Cruz, maybe Reyes for Bednar (both relievers in their mid 20's), and Rivera (14 AW ranking) for Cruz.

So, you're looking at something along the line of:

One of Paris, Jackson, or Vera (7, 8, 10 on AW, or possibly Adams - #5), Rivera (14), Hernandez (17), Reyes (UR), and Barria/Sandoval.

Still a decent price to pay, but honestly I'd do it in a heartbeat if Adams wasn't part of the deal. If Adams was insisted on, I'd be less willing to give up Barria or Sandoval and would push for someone like Peters instead.

[Inside Pitch]

9 hours ago, Pancake Bear said:

Obviously Baseball Trade Values' system is not perfect, nor will it accurately assess how a given organization will value a given prospect/player. 

Any system attempting to gauge future value is limited by sample size or hype.   A guy like Dominguez of the Yankees who is 17 and looks like he's a third year LB for an NFL team is going to have his value propped up by the hype and his signing bonus.  Everyone else has to have a track record.

A lot of these guys in the lower reaches of the minors simply don't have the track record of success to project them out -- so it's only natural a system like this will fail to properly value them.