Why are people so eager to trade Marsh and Adell?

[floplag]

No one is eager, far from it, but realistically unless arte spends, which today he did so it all may change, they are/were our best chance at filling the need.
Its really that simple. 

[ThisismineScios]

Here's the other thing--the money you save on Marsh and Adell can be spent on pitching. By having two guys under control relatively cheap through 2026, you avoid having to go out and sign FAs. Your outfield is set for the next 5 years. Focus your $ on pitching. Otherwise, if you trade one of those guys, you're getting a guy on a 2-3 year deal max, and now have to replace them to get good production.

[totdprods]

33 minutes ago, ThisismineScios said:

Here's the other thing--the money you save on Marsh and Adell can be spent on pitching. By having two guys under control relatively cheap through 2026, you avoid having to go out and sign FAs. Your outfield is set for the next 5 years. Focus your $ on pitching. Otherwise, if you trade one of those guys, you're getting a guy on a 2-3 year deal max, and now have to replace them to get good production.

Or they flop and the FA pitching signs get hurt or suck as free agent pitchers tend to do.

(I agree with you, but, the flip side of that coin is true too)

Ultimately, I still feel that trading for impact pitching is the next best solution to developing it internally, followed by free agency. It is just easier to replace an outfielder in FA than a mid/upper tier SP. Usually cheaper. All of this is moot if the Angels continue to sign the wrong FA though. They don’t have a good track record with hitters or pitchers the last decade.

Free agency is just usually a horrible solution. Corbin was good for a year. Cole has already taken a slight step back by some measures. More often than not it just doesn’t pan out. Trades for top arms tend to be a little safer. In this scenario you are trading one minefield for another though, as hitters aren’t much safer via FA either. But I feel there’s a wider margin of error as opposed to impact pitching.

Edited November 16, 2021 by totdprods

[angelsnationtalk]

44 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Or they flop and the FA pitching signs get hurt or suck as free agent pitchers tend to do.

(I agree with you, but, the flip side of that coin is true too)

Ultimately, I still feel that trading for impact pitching is the next best solution to developing it internally, followed by free agency. It is just easier to replace an outfielder in FA than a mid/upper tier SP. Usually cheaper. All of this is moot if the Angels continue to sign the wrong FA though. They don’t have a good track record with hitters or pitchers the last decade.

Free agency is just usually a horrible solution. Corbin was good for a year. Cole has already taken a slight step back by some measures. More often than not it just doesn’t pan out. Trades for top arms tend to be a little safer. In this scenario you are trading one minefield for another though, as hitters aren’t much safer via FA either. But I feel there’s a wider margin of error as opposed to impact pitching.

This is usually the case, however a case for someone like Scherzer might work for something up to 3 years. it's higher AAV, but the longterm risk is way less. Plus, there's no draft pick attached to him. 

[totdprods]

16 minutes ago, angelsnationtalk said:

This is usually the case, however a case for someone like Scherzer might work for something up to 3 years. it's higher AAV, but the longterm risk is way less. Plus, there's no draft pick attached to him. 

I think Scherzer at 38 for 3 years is just as risky as someone age 31 for 7 years…sure, the chances of it hurting you for half a decade aren’t there, but at that age it could be just as much a wash.

Edited November 16, 2021 by totdprods

[Angels Never Die]

20 hours 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 very good points.

[angelsnationtalk]

5 minutes ago, totdprods said:

I think Scherzer at 38 for 3 years is just as risky as someone age 31 for 7 years…sure, the chances of it hurting you for half a decade aren’t there, but at that age it could be just as much a wash.

I'd say there's a chance he lasts better. So far he's been defying father time (yes I know "so far"). Bringing him in gets a true Ace as well as someone our young staff needs to listen to. He and Trout would lead the entire team. 

[ScottT]

I think those people want to see the Angels..... win

[totdprods]

18 hours ago, angelsnationtalk said:

I'd say there's a chance he lasts better. So far he's been defying father time (yes I know "so far"). Bringing him in gets a true Ace as well as someone our young staff needs to listen to. He and Trout would lead the entire team. 

I don’t disagree. He arguably had his best year last season. I’d have no problem if they signed Scherzer at all, unless it meant we were capped out and not doing anything over $1m or two for RP, C, SS.

But the risk of a 38 year old breaking down over a 3-yr deal has to be about the same, if not greater, than a 31 year on a 7-yr. Just hurts you for a lesser amount of time. 

[Stradling]

Maybe make the 3rd year a team option for $35 million and if it is declined then it’s a deferred buyout. 

[Mark68]

5 hours ago, totdprods said:

I don’t disagree. He arguably had his best year last season. I’d have no problem if they signed Scherzer at all, unless it meant we were capped out and not doing anything over $1m or two for RP, C, SS.

But the risk of a 38 year old breaking down over a 3-yr deal has to be about the same, if not greater, than a 31 year on a 7-yr. Just hurts you for a lesser amount of time. 

But I believe that a 6-man rotation can help Scherzer hold off Father Time due to less wear & tear on his 37-40 year old arm. Just like it should help Thor.