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! 

     

Why are people so eager to trade Marsh and Adell?


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

It seems that a lot of folks can't resist thinking of multiple ways to trade Marsh and/or Adell. I just don't get it. Well, I get that the Angels need pitching, but this is the beginning of the offseason with lots of free agents available, and Minasian has $50M or more to spend. I also know that $50M isn't enough get everything they need to make them a clearcut contender, but shouldn't other options be considered first before trading away two quality young pitchers?

The Angels haven't had a position player prospect with star potential since Trout. And now they have two that aren't just prospects, but major league ready. Marsh was essentially a league average player last year, even while still struggling at the plate, so the potential for stardom is there. Adell made leaps and bounds from 2020, and so the trajectory is going in the right direction.

Why so intent on trading these guys?

$50M is limited, but with that you can sign a very good starter, an elite closer, a good middle infielder and/or a #4ish starter and a solid infielder, and maybe even have a few bucks to spare for a veteran reliever. So maybe you still need to bolster the bullpen, but there are other options of players to trade, and by that point you have the big pieces.

Now if the Marlins call and say they want Marsh for Meyer, I might say "Sorry, Marsh is off the table but we've got this kid named Jo Adell." But even then I'd hesitate and maybe not make that trade.

I want to see these kids play - as Angels.

They both proved to me this past season that both are absolutely 100% worth keeping. I don't think anyone wants Plan A for the Angels to be trading either of them. 

But for me some of the things to consider are...

  • Starting pitchers acquired by trade tend to be a little safer investment than those available in free agency. They tend to be younger. You are getting someone you want, as opposed to selecting the best available from free agency
  • Not perfect logic, but the FA pitchers are there because at least somewhere along the lines, teams let them reach free agency. With a trade you're trying to match up with a team that might not WANT to trade an arm, but needs to in order to fill a need
  • Risk of investment. If you lose Luis Castillo to TJS, you're losing $7.5m salary this year. Yes, you lost prospect capital too, but those players likely weren't adding value to the MLB club. If you lose Max Scherzer or Robbie Ray to TJS, you're watching $25m+ burn that you badly needed. 
  • Quality OF production being more readily available in free agency - Soler, Joc, Canha, Taylor, Rosario, Marte, even Kole Calhoun are all reasonably priced and most cheaper than even mid-tier FA SP. Sure, they could crap out and not be good, but finding a quality corner outfielder midseason is a lot easier and cheaper than a quality SP replacement. Case in point, the Braves. And you'd ideally still have the other of Marsh or Adell in-house.

 

Edited by totdprods
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's trade dilerium. Somehow making transactions grips the board because leaving some things alone is too boring. The Angels are not a ball club with surplus players. So trades are never going to balance out what was given up in cost control, like Adell and Marsh, for players received with salary burdens along with additional salary to cover the positional hole created. 

Trade delirium. Take some nyquil and get some rest, people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

As I mentioned in the other thread, Adams’ stalled development makes it a moot point on trading either Marsh or Adell.   Both are important to the team’s future.

It's not stalled development yet.  It's a bad year.  He's not remotely close to being Nonie or Chevy Clarke.  He's young enough where the tools are loud enough to still carry weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Blarg said:

It's trade dilerium. Somehow making transactions grips the board because leaving some things alone is too boring. The Angels are not a ball club with surplus players. So trades are never going to balance out what was given up in cost control, like Adell and Marsh, for players received with salary burdens along with additional salary to cover the positional hole created. 

Trade delirium. Take some nyquil and get some rest, people. 

Arte has the money to fix what he needs to, and if he wants to save money over the long haul keeping those two around would be the smart play.  But, forest, trees....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking for myself, I am not eager to trade Adell/Marsh.

I simply am willing to trade one of them if it is necessary in order to get a front-end SP, because that is what the Angels need.

Even if Adell/Marsh become 3-4 WAR outfielders, it's easier to find and sign that production in free agency than it is to find and sign front-line SP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

It's not stalled development yet.  It's a bad year.  He's not remotely close to being Nonie or Chevy Clarke.  He's young enough where the tools are loud enough to still carry weight.

True, but it does delay further his MLB debut to where both Adell and Marsh need to be kept for at least the next two seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll also add that we cannot really acquire two #1-#2 type SP via FA. I mean, we could, but that almost promises no Iglesias or even other additions.

With Marsh or Adell, you could sign a #1 and feasibly acquire a #1-2 via trade, like Castillo, Marquez, Sonny Gray, simply because their salary would fit the budget. Pair those arms with Ohtani and you have a killer #1-3 in your rotation as opposed to maybe a more balanced team or rotation. 

Edited by totdprods
Link to comment
Share on other sites

at a time when starting pitching is such a hole on this team, it might be necessary to trade one of them for a frontline starting pitcher. i'm not eager to do that, but it might a necessity.

the last thing you want to do is over-value your prospects and end up with another brandon wood on your hands, a player who could have netted this team miguel cabrera once upon a time.

i hope we can sign the necessary starting pitching this offseason so that trading one or both of them is no longer under consideration. i'd prefer to keep both of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, totdprods said:

They both proved to me this past season that both are absolutely 100% worth keeping. I don't think anyone wants Plan A for the Angels to be trading either of them. 

But for me some of the things to consider are...

  • Starting pitchers acquired by trade tend to be a little safer investment than those available in free agency. They tend to be younger. You are getting someone you want, as opposed to selecting the best available from free agency
  • Not perfect logic, but the FA pitchers are there because at least somewhere along the lines, teams let them reach free agency. With a trade you're trying to match up with a team that might not WANT to trade an arm, but needs to in order to fill a need
  • Risk of investment. If you lose Luis Castillo to TJS, you're losing $7.5m salary this year. Yes, you lost prospect capital too, but those players likely weren't adding value to the MLB club. If you lose Max Scherzer or Robbie Ray to TJS, you're watching $25m+ burn that you badly needed. 
  • Quality OF production being more readily available in free agency - Soler, Joc, Canha, Taylor, Rosario, Marte, even Kole Calhoun are all reasonably priced and most cheaper than even mid-tier FA SP. Sure, they could crap out and not be good, but finding a quality corner outfielder midseason is a lot easier and cheaper than a quality SP replacement. Case in point, the Braves. And you'd ideally still have the other of Marsh or Adell in-house.

 

All of this is reasonable, and I get the logic of trading one for a similar value young starter.

But my concern is this: The best franchises--that is, those that put their team in a place of contention most frequently--all have one thing in common: they have strong farm systems and mostly build from within. Some have more money than others, but all develop players well. For the last decade, the Angels have been caught in this place of having some money but a mediocre to terrible farm system. The major league team has been consistently decent enough--in an 80-win sort of way--that it always seems that they're just a few pieces away from being good, but they never quite get there. We can blame injuries and bad decisions, but a lot of that is they're not producing enough good young players, who are cheap and club-controlled for the first six years. So the team is always fraying around the edges, with little cheap young depth to call upon.

Marsh and Adell will be very cheap for the next 5+ years, and both have a better chance of being solid contributors or better than almost any pitching prospect, simply by virtue of not being pitchers, who are more volatile. Right now, the Angels need to hold onto those likely sources of cheap, relatively dependable value, while continuing to build up the farm so that they have a pipeline of young players continually infusing the major league team with talent. They've got some young pitchers in development, so the pitching staff isn't entirely without a future of quality arms. 

Meaning, I'd rather they take a conservative, Stonemanian route and horde prospects, especially the better ones like Marsh and Adell. Any trades, aside from little moves like Ward for a reliever, should be about bringing young players in, not shipping them out. This is not to say that I would be totally against a package centered on Adell for a Castillo or Alcantara type, but I wouldn't overly push for it, especially with how many prospects it would take to get a young pitcher like that (and those types of trades rarely happen). And when it comes to one-for-one possibilities, like Marsh-for-Meyer, I just don't think you want to trade a quality young outfielder with star potential for a pitching prospect yet to see major league hitters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t really think most fans are “eager to trade Marsh and/or Adell.”

I think fans are simply eager to solve the ongoing problem of the team clearly lacking the quality starting pitching necessary to contend.

Finally having some bodies of value as possible trade pieces causes fans to pay attention to that way of possibly solving the problem.

I am eager to see a better team on the field.  That might mean sign pitchers and watch Adell and Marsh as Angels.  And it might mean one of them gets traded.

I think the high interest is in fixing the problem, not specifically in trading those guys away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be fine with the Angels trading anyone on the roster if it meant I could watch the team in October again. No one is off-limits to me. 

(Not that I trust their ability to judge pitching.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mark68 said:

Though I am not eager to trade either, I understand that you have to give to get. If we can get a solid young controllable starter by trading one of Marsh or Adell, they have to entertain the possibility.

This.

I dont think anybody is eager to trade them. In fact I think everyone wants to keep them. But if one brought back a legit SP with a few years of control, you have to consider it.

Personally, and I have no idea how to pull it off or who it would be, if we were to trade one, Id prefer a C or SS instead of a pitcher. And spend the money on pitching. 

Then hope the young, good C or SS comes into his own the same time as the marsh/adell we kept, and hope that detmers, sandoval and one of the 100 pitchers we drafted this past year to become a core

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eager?  or willing.  

I'd rather not.  Unless the return is an ace with at least 3 years of control.  AND a replacement in the form of a legit major leaguer for an OF spot.  

At the end of the day though, I like home grown players and if the production is similar I much prefer dancing with the girl we brought.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big difference between being eager to trade one of them and realizing that if we are going to acquire a stud frontline pitcher or stud pitching prospect, it is likely we will have to trade one. I don't want to trade either one of them, but I also am sick of having shitty patchwork pitching and taking gambles on reclamation projects. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Dochalo said:

eager?  or willing.  

I'd rather not.  Unless the return is an ace with at least 3 years of control.  AND a replacement in the form of a legit major leaguer for an OF spot.  

At the end of the day though, I like home grown players and if the production is similar I much prefer dancing with the girl we brought.  

Yeah - I'll echo the sentiments of others in this thread in that I don't think anyone is really eager to trade them, but rather just recognize that if we acquire a young, good SP, we likely have to part with one of them in that process.

I personally would rather just hang onto both of them at this point.  There are enough FA SPs such that I think we can reasonably acquire 2 of them to fill out our rotation - Ohtani, FA SP, FA SP, Sandoval, Suarez, Barria, Detmers would be our top 6, and we'd have some depth options with Canning, Diaz, Junk, etc.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Warfarin said:

Yeah - I'll echo the sentiments of others in this thread in that I don't think anyone is really eager to trade them, but rather just recognize that if we acquire a young, good SP, we likely have to part with one of them in that process.

I personally would rather just hang onto both of them at this point.  There are enough FA SPs such that I think we can reasonably acquire 2 of them to fill out our rotation - Ohtani, FA SP, FA SP, Sandoval, Suarez, Barria, Detmers would be our top 6, and we'd have some depth options with Canning, Diaz, Junk, etc.

 

First, welcome back, haven't seen you post since around opening day.

I also think that the reason why people are including the two in trade scenarios are

-They have been used to having the Angels brought up as interested parties in FA arms so often, only for those deals to come to naught, as well as a history of FA arms crapping the bed on arrival.  Although Minasian is a second year GM and should be given the benefit of the doubt that he will be wiser than the choices made in the past, there is understandably some flashbacks to missing out on surer FA bets and the resulting signings.

-The Angels OF is one of their few areas of immediate surplus, and their top two trade pieces just so happen to be OFers.  Replacing an OF position is Geico Caveman easy compared to quality starting pitching.

With Upton gone after this year it would be ideal to not have to trade Marsh/Adell and have a Marsh/Trout/Adell OF.  We should admit though that the Angels are in a two-year window to make the leap from playoff pretenders to legitimate contenders.  Getting two quality starters by FA and/or a trade that does not include Marsh/Adell is certainly preferable, but until we start seeing Minasian have some success with pitching where his predecessors have not, our collective confidence level makes trading one of them a more acceptable outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Junkballer said:

First, welcome back, haven't seen you post since around opening day.

I also think that the reason why people are including the two in trade scenarios are

-They have been used to having the Angels brought up as interested parties in FA arms so often, only for those deals to come to naught, as well as a history of FA arms crapping the bed on arrival.  Although Minasian is a second year GM and should be given the benefit of the doubt that he will be wiser than the choices made in the past, there is understandably some flashbacks to missing out on surer FA bets and the resulting signings.

-The Angels OF is one of their few areas of immediate surplus, and their top two trade pieces just so happen to be OFers.  Replacing an OF position is Geico Caveman easy compared to quality starting pitching.

With Upton gone after this year it would be ideal to not have to trade Marsh/Adell and have a Marsh/Trout/Adell OF.  We should admit though that the Angels are in a two-year window to make the leap from playoff pretenders to legitimate contenders.  Getting two quality starters by FA and/or a trade that does not include Marsh/Adell is certainly preferable, but until we start seeing Minasian have some success with pitching where his predecessors have not, our collective confidence level makes trading one of them a more acceptable outcome.

I like your take plus "Geico Caveman" is a great Marsh reference.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

It seems that a lot of folks can't resist thinking of multiple ways to trade Marsh and/or Adell. I just don't get it. Well, I get that the Angels need pitching, but this is the beginning of the offseason with lots of free agents available, and Minasian has $50M or more to spend. I also know that $50M isn't enough get everything they need to make them a clearcut contender, but shouldn't other options be considered first before trading away two quality young pitchers?

The Angels haven't had a position player prospect with star potential since Trout. And now they have two that aren't just prospects, but major league ready. Marsh was essentially a league average player last year, even while still struggling at the plate, so the potential for stardom is there. Adell made leaps and bounds from 2020, and so the trajectory is going in the right direction.

Why so intent on trading these guys?

$50M is limited, but with that you can sign a very good starter, an elite closer, a good middle infielder and/or a #4ish starter and a solid infielder, and maybe even have a few bucks to spare for a veteran reliever. So maybe you still need to bolster the bullpen, but there are other options of players to trade, and by that point you have the big pieces.

Now if the Marlins call and say they want Marsh for Meyer, I might say "Sorry, Marsh is off the table but we've got this kid named Jo Adell." But even then I'd hesitate and maybe not make that trade.

I want to see these kids play - as Angels.

I agree. I like the potential. If we can sign free agents, I'd say let's. And if we can trade anyone else for pitching, I'd say yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...