MLB top 40 trade Candidates

[Inside Pitch]

52 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

Has there ever been real, consistent evidence that the notion of "trade for a guy in mid-season so he can fall in love with your club and sign a long-term contract after the season" is actually a thing?  I see people mention it every year once chatter about the trade deadline begins--but it seems like it's pretty darn rare in reality as an executable strategy.

If you hear Teixiera talk, that's exactly what happened when he was traded to the Angels..  Dude said he LOVED it, the stadium, the fans the area - then the Yankees offered 8 years and 180 million and he decided he could buy love elsewhere.

Pretty sure that scenario has probably happened more often than the other one...

[Angels 1961]

49 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Off top of head I think Carlos Beltran, Matt Holliday, and Chris Davis all signed extensions after being dealt midseason. Nothing too recent but again, acknowledging it’s rare. Almost like a FA signing back with original club, like Aroldis did. 

I don’t think it happens but if Perry was already all jacked up on Story or Gray as a FA target and the team was close and a deal made sense, I’d imagine there’s a chance of him doing it even if they didn’t sign. 

J UP

[angelsnationtalk]

This all depends if we are buyers or sellers. And by sellers i mean trading Watson and that's it.

[Angelsjunky]

That list is bullshit. Where are Aaron Slegers, Justin Upton and Kurt Suzuki? 

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

Hendricks/Baez?.....

[eligrba]

The Angels aren't trading for anyone or trading anyone to get excited about.  With the exception of Trout and Ohtani, the Angel's roster is the equivalent of a first year expansion team roster.

[Angels 1961]

17 minutes ago, eligrba said:

The Angels aren't trading for anyone or trading anyone to get excited about.  With the exception of Trout and Ohtani, the Angel's roster is the equivalent of a first year expansion team roster.

That first year team surprised a lot of people. 1962 was best ever.If halos had just not wasted first pick in expansion back in December 1960.

[Angel Oracle]

47 minutes ago, Angels 1961 said:

That first year team surprised a lot of people. 1962 was best ever.If halos had just not wasted first pick in expansion back in December 1960.

Yet they did draft Fregosi, Chance, and Pearson in the second half of the draft.  I’d say they did pretty well in doing that.

[eligrba]

56 minutes ago, Angels 1961 said:

That first year team surprised a lot of people. 1962 was best ever.If halos had just not wasted first pick in expansion back in December 1960.

Hey!!! 

[Angels 1961]

45 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

Yet they did draft Fregosi, Chance, and Pearson in the second half of the draft.  I’d say they did pretty well in doing that.

Albie Pearson actually called Angels asking to be drafted by them. He was their last pick. 

[Angels 1961]

35 minutes ago, eligrba said:

Hey!!! 

Yeah you did win opener in 61. 

[Vegas Halo Fan]

On 6/3/2021 at 11:23 AM, jsnpritchett said:

Has there ever been real, consistent evidence that the notion of "trade for a guy in mid-season so he can fall in love with your club and sign a long-term contract after the season" is actually a thing?  I see people mention it every year once chatter about the trade deadline begins--but it seems like it's pretty darn rare in reality as an executable strategy.

I always think about the Cubs trading for Aroldis Chapman in 2016, believing that they had solved their closer issues for years to come - then Chapman went back to the Yankees after the season, even though he won a ring in Chicago.

[eligrba]

1 hour ago, Angels 1961 said:

Yeah you did win opener in 61. 

[Vlad27Trout27]

We're 5 games behind the Astros for the 2nd wildcard, we are finally healthy and playing well (except when Suzki is planning". We are buyers!

Getting Trout Back will be a big addition, once Detmer's is make's his debut, it should also a big addition to the rotation. 

Outside of that;

1. Othani is an MVP candidate, and 1 in the rotation. Outside of that we're lackiing a true 2, just a bunch of 3s/4s.

2. Sandoval has made a big leap, and is pitching like a solid 3. yet it's early. 

 

go add a number 2, add another 7th/8th inning guy, add another BP arm and go for it. 

 

[Angels 1961]

Deadline still 7 weeks away a lot can happen. 3 games with Oakland will tell a lot. If they are 7 or 8 games back they should sell. Will lose so many to FA this off season get something for them.

 

[totdprods]

There's quite a bit of time left before buying/selling really becomes more clear, but at this point I think the Angels will be buyers, if even marginally. This isn't simply because they've played better either. 

A couple weeks back, I posted that the Angels were in a good place to start winning over the next 6-8 weeks while Trout was out. Their schedule became much more favorable, they pitching/defense was starting to stabilize, several bats were underperforming...that's happened and hopefully, will continue. I don't think they'll climb to the top or become a force, but they should stay in the mix. 

If they do stay in the mix, it's likely because key guys like Bundy, Heaney, Iglesias are at least not sucking - and we're still too 'win now' to part with them if we're close. 
If we're out of it, it's because those guys didn't do well...and yeah, we might sell them off, but it won't be too beneficial. Spare parts or low-level guys. Nothing that would make a 'sale' too exciting. 

But if the Angels continue to play well and are in the mix, they might be primed to be one of the more active buying teams for a couple reasons...

1. Read that several teams, because of COVID and the rash of injuries, are really hesitant to part with upper-level prospects because they're essential depth now. That's whom the Angels would most likely want to target if they were selling, so that makes selling unlikely. 
2. What the Angels farm lacks in multiple, expendable quality prospects it makes up for in two areas; redundant AAA guys like Rengifo, Barria, Thaiss, Lund that are 'in demand' (see above) but yet to crack the Angels MLB team, and a plethora of lower-level guys with intrigue. Most teams won't part with talent for those lower-level prospects, but a few teams that are already well-stocked and deep into rebuilds, like Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Detroit, would probably be interested in those types. They also have guys like Boyd, Fulmer, Anderson, Fry, Rodriguez who will probably be available. 

[Vlad27Trout27]

22 minutes ago, Angels 1961 said:

Deadline still 7 weeks away a lot can happen. 3 games with Oakland will tell a lot. If they are 7 or 8 games back they should sell. Will lose so many to FA this off season get something for them.

 

shut up! we're fucking buying. Get this Negativity out of here! 

[Stradling]

Hey @totdprods, just my opinion, but if we are sellers because of poor performance of the guys we are selling, then we weren’t getting those MLB ready Upper Level prospects anyway.  So in our particular case that part doesn’t really matter.  

[Stradling]

Would you guys still consider trading Adell for Castillo considering the year Castillo is having for the Reds?  He is down to this year, and two more years of club control, but a 6.50 ERA his FIP is about 4.50 and he is allowing a ton of hits.  I think I heard on MLB network radio that his pitch usage is completely different than years past.  

[totdprods]

Just now, Stradling said:

Hey @totdprods, just my opinion, but if we are sellers because of poor performance of the guys we are selling, then we weren’t getting those MLB ready Upper Level prospects anyway.  So in our particular case that part doesn’t really matter.  

Hmm...maybe I typed it weird (not enough coffee) but that was the point I was making in a round-about way. 

Of late, the Angels have preferred acquiring guys who could contribute to the MLB team that year or next. Since a lot of teams are holding those players this year due to COVID and injuries, it'll be harder to match up to sell, regardless of how Bundy, Heaney, etc. are performing. Not impossible, but not as likely as a typical season. And they might still trade guys to clear playing time (Sandoval, Barria, Suarez, Detmers, Rengifo, etc.)

And for that same reason, I could see the Angels now being buyers - they have some AAA guys that are somewhat blocked, the type of players teams are hesitant to part with - Thaiss, Rengifo, Barria - that could come in handy for small buys, and they have a lot of lower-level guys they could make available for teams that are re-stocking their farms regardless of prospect level, like Detroit, Baltimore, Pittsburgh. 

 

[totdprods]

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Would you guys still consider trading Adell for Castillo considering the year Castillo is having for the Reds?  He is down to this year, and two more years of club control, but a 6.50 ERA his FIP is about 4.50 and he is allowing a ton of hits.  I think I heard on MLB network radio that his pitch usage is completely different than years past.  

I'm not 100% sure on Castillo since I haven't paid him much attention this season, but I would be completely open to any offers regarding impact SP/All-Star talent for Adell. I still think replacing Adell's short-term production is much more realistic than finding impact SP. Marquez keeps sticking out to me. The White Sox or Tigers as well, sometimes the Rangers even.

It will probably sting in 2-3 years, but hopefully by then the Angels will have made the necessary adjustments to stoke the farm to mitigate that. 

I'm just having a hard time seeing how we can pull the necessary improvements to the rotation by way of FA or smaller trades, and would much rather a deal involve one big name like Adell than several names like Jackson, Detmers, Paris, Kochanowicz. The farm isn't deep enough to take a big quantity hit. 

[wopphil]

1 hour ago, totdprods said:

 Marquez keeps sticking out to me. 

I was thinking about this just a day or two ago. If Adell could be the main piece in a Marquez trade, you have to think about pulling the trigger. And it isn’t totally unrealistic either. Marquez Is having a solid but not great year, he isn’t exactly cheap the next few years, and the Rockies suck. The Rockies and Angels would seemingly line up on a trade like this. 

[DMVol]

6 minutes ago, wopphil said:

I was thinking about this just a day or two ago. If Adell could be the main piece in a Marquez trade, you have to think about pulling the trigger. And it isn’t totally unrealistic either. Marquez Is having a solid but not great year, he isn’t exactly cheap the next few years, and the Rockies suck. The Rockies and Angels would seemingly line up on a trade like this. 

All things being equal, I would trade a premium OF prospect for an established pitcher, who has #1-2 type of ability, in a heartbeat....I guess I might be a little worried that Marsh seems to have stalled a bit....having him, in addition to Adell, has always made me a little less hesitant to trade Adell....

[totdprods]

34 minutes ago, wopphil said:

I was thinking about this just a day or two ago. If Adell could be the main piece in a Marquez trade, you have to think about pulling the trigger. And it isn’t totally unrealistic either. Marquez Is having a solid but not great year, he isn’t exactly cheap the next few years, and the Rockies suck. The Rockies and Angels would seemingly line up on a trade like this. 

Adell’s potential weaknesses might be negated a bit by mashing the fuck out of the ball in Coors. The Rockies don’t seem to mind players with some all or nothing capability.

It’s why I could also see Story being worked into a deal. Marquez’ struggles might make the Angels balk at Adell, and they’d never part with Adell for a pure rental, but with those values overlapping (and other pieces) they’d potentially match up well. Angels get a big rental boost (maybe more if they try to re-sign) and a big pitching piece in Marquez.

Edited June 12, 2021 by totdprods

[ukyah]

oh dear, here you guys go again. setting yourselves up for disappointment with grandiose what could be's. fingers crossed.