Dave Saltzer

His AAV would be less than his actual cash payout (I think his AAV would only be about $9.5 million). If we want to stay below the luxury tax, that is a valuable asset. Last year he had a WAR of 3.6 and his career numbers are 270/341/483. By way of comparison Moustakas would cost twice as much in AAV and his a career line of 251/305/425. In his career year last year,l he was worth 1.8 WAR according to baseball reference. And, there's no way we're signing Moustakas for less than a 5-year deal. So, as a comparison, is Longoria worth it?

Okay, just speculation because I'm *hoping* the collective wisdom of the board may be greater than what I can come up with at this point (been rather sick and going on very little sleep). But, I read that the Rays may go full rebuild at mlbtraderumors.com and started to wonder if Longoria made any sense. Yes, he's on the wrong side of 30, but so are most of the 3B options we are looking at. Yes, his OB is trending down, but he would still be a big improvement over what we got out of the position. His defense is still solid. His contract is affordable and would give us plenty of room to add a 2nd baseman, upgrade 1B, and possibly add a pitcher. So, my two questions to the board are these: 1) Does Longoria make sense for us? 2) If so, what would it take to get him?

My bet is that Jonah Wesley will not be added to the 40-man and he will get taken. That's too bad as I still like him as a prospect and believe he has the stuff to make it.

Calhoun is a valuable trade chip. So, if we are going to get something, we have to give something. Or, the other possibility is that they could move Calhoun back to 1B and we could upgrade RF. That would upgrade the offense overall.

There's something fishy about those Florida teams.

I won't argue that Hernandez is the better option. But, that doesn't mean we line up as well with his team to get a deal done. We can't let the ideal be the enemy of the good. If our choices are Gordon or someone else with even worse problems and issues, then, Gordon becomes the option. No doubt I, and everyone, would prefer Hernandez. As for getting Hernandez for Lund and De Los Santos, that's a quite an undervaluation by the authors. My bet is it would take a lot more.

It was the Rays who made their first appearance in the WS in 2008, not the Marlins. It's fixed now.

My mistake. I shall correct it.

Where's the part about the player saying he's getting into the best shape of his life to come play here?

Wrong. Reagins' biggest mistake was firing Eddie Bane. Period. Not even close. He did that for all the WRONG reasons. That set this franchise back tremendously.

Wrong. Reagins' biggest mistake was firing Eddie Bane. Period. Not even close. He did that for all the WRONG reasons. That set this franchise back tremendously.

I would love it! But, if they don't want it, then, I'd rather keep Trout.

Hey Jeff, I'm just looking out for you! I still want you to have the space to give us the updates. I agree that most likely, it will be Dodgers, Yankees, and Mariners in that order that have the best shot at signing him. While I'm sure that Eppler and co. will check the tires on it, I don't think our offer will beat what they will propose.

Here's a different way that a team could hypothetically skirt the issue to funnel more money to him: If it's really about the money for the player, does it really matter where the paycheck comes from? Imagine this: A hypothetical team approaches its advertising partners to "market" and "promote" him in the stadium and on local broadcasts only. The hypothetical team could reduce the amount it charges to advertise in the stadium to offset the payment to Ohtani, and I don't think the league could do much about it. That way, Ohtani gets his money now, if it's really about the money, and the team stays within the MLB rules. It's not like anyone could complain that there are so many bobbleheads for him, or other give aways, or even other marketing features. And, Ohtani would still be able to pursue any national advertising campaigns for TV commercials and things. It would all be local revenue used to offset the salary. Just another thought. Personally, my bet is he wants to be a 2-way star. I've talked with many scouts about him, and almost all of them: 1) see him as a 1-dimensional player for their team (they wouldn't take the risk on him playing in the field or hitting daily and injuring his pitching); and 2) that some team out there will let him play both sides of the game. They all feel that may play a big role in signing him. Some things in our favor: 1) playing with the greatest American player in our generation may appeal to him; 2) The large Japanese community here; 3) The relatively relaxed and calm environment compared to other teams and markets. Some things that work against us: 1) the ridiculously tiny press box which would make it nearly impossible for the Japanese media to keep up on him (if he has any desire to be a global star, especially in Japan, he will care that the associated media can provide him); 2) concerns whether it would upset Trout to have another generational talent possibly becoming the face of the franchise (I wouldn't want to upset Trout to sign Ohtani); 3) payroll issues (could we afford him and Trout long-term); 4) how do we guarantee him ABs without cutting into Pujols' playing time, especially if Upton doesn't opt out (not that anyone on here would complain about it--but we would need a plan, and we would need Scioscia to actually implement the plan). If we could swing it, sure, I'd love to get him. It's really up to Arte to decide how much he wants to open things up. Personally, I think he should, as it would make the franchise even that much more valuable if he ever wanted to sell it.

Good writeup, and I'll read and comment more on it later. I'd say I'd move two players up 1 tier--Adell to tier 1 (I get the risk that he might not make it, but if he does, he could be an All-Star level talent for several years), and Canning up to Tier-2. With our need for pitching, and his skill set, I'd say Canning easily has an above average expectation of being a solid contributor. If you wanted to be a bit more bold, I'd move Rivas up 1 tier as well to tier 3. Again, I can look at it more later if you want.

I would rate him as a solid A, and believe he could grow into an A+. I hold the A+ in reserve for those with so much longevity that they are bringing in all sorts of team historical perspectives. If Victor is here another 5-10 years, he could move into that A+ ratings. Things that he does incredibly well: multi-tasks and runs multimedia and the broadcasts, shows emotion, calls out players for bad plays, has a sense of humor, interacts with fans, and calls things out the way they are. You can definitely tell what he would like to say at times but can't, and it makes the broadcast even better. If he's here (which I hope he is) for another 5-10 years, where he becomes THE voice for the team (and hopefully calls a world series or two for us), then I'd move him up to the A+. For me, that rating has more to do with longevity than with his skill. He has the talent to be an A+ announcer, and I want hi around for many more years to see him earn it.

Agreed. And, they can add Stanton to the current payroll without going over the luxury tax. Whether they want to or not is a separate question, as is whether it makes baseball sense to do so. Marketing Trout and Stanton together should be a no-brainer, so, if they want to make the move, and if it makes baseball sense, they can do the deal.

No. Remember, that's the price (although I think that number is a bit high) to pay for 1 WAR on the FA market. Until then, there are some price controls on it. But yeah, it's still scary sick money.

I haven't heard a word about Calhoun clearing waivers. But, we never hear about any players that clear waivers either, unless some reporter leaks it, like Stanton. I do know that most teams now try to put almost every player on waivers to start the discussions for the off season, and to possibly clear waivers. And, I do know that the Angels could still try to put Calhoun through on waivers. So, it wouldn't be impossible to do the deal now, assuming Calhoun has or will clear waivers. You are right that it would be easier to do in the off-season, but, getting Stanton now would help us a lot more for this season. So, I'd prefer it to be done now.

While I'd be ecstatic if we didn't have to include Calhoun, my bet is just picking up the money and the prospects I offered would not be enough to get the deal done, especially if other teams are involved. Kole is by far one of our most tradable assets that could net some top-tier Ed prospects in return. That would and could make our deal too good for Miami to pass up. Kole represents a tradable commodity and value. Make no mistake, I'd miss him, as he is fun to watch and one of our guys, but, to get Stanton, we'd have to pay. And, as for the person asking why we'd have to trade something, we aren't doing this I isolation. Other teams can and will make offers. We aren't the only ones who can just absorb payroll. Players with Stanton's power don't come along very often, especially in their prime years. They aren't truly going to give him away. Yes, they can always pull him back. Most teams place most players on revocable waivers to get the discussion going for the off season.

To at least get a serious conversation going, my bet is we'd have to offer Calhoun, Barria, Pérez or Ward, and Hermosillo while taking on all the money. The Marlins could either keep Calhoun or trade him for 1-3 other prospects from another team (he's still in demand by many teams). That gives them a current ML OF replacement, cost controlled pitching, catching, and a cheap OF replacement. We could expand the deal to possibly include Gordon and we'd replace Hermosillo with Jones and another pitching prospect such as Rodríguez. As much as I love Calhoun, and want to see Hermosillo succeed as an Angel, I'd be stoked to get Stanton. Pairing him and Trout for years would make for a lot of great games. Sure, there's a lot of risk in Stanton's contract, but, we would have that risk trying to acquire any major FA to be comparable to him. His deal is not that outrageous, other than in length. As noted above, inflation will happen. Arte seems content to spend up to the luxury tax. Over the length of the contract, the luxury tax will continue to go up. So, that would allow room for us to keep him and Trout. And, while Pujols is here, we would get the cheap, controlled years of Thaiss, Ward, and Cowart/Rojas (for 3B, especially if we expand and include Gordon). If we could get Stanton for something like this, I'd do it.

Chuck, I've timed him at 1.85 to second once, and consistently in the 1.9 to 1.95 range. Never heard any complaints by any pitchers about him. They like working with him. People have given him some crap from where he was picked and because of Mathis, but he is is own player, and should be evaluated as such. I'm still very high on him as a player. He's not Adell, Jones, or Canning, but he definitely should not be overlooked as a prospect, and is in the 6-10 range, IMHO.

This is where I am right now. We can address more offense in the Of, which should be easier to acquire, especially until our OF develops. Maybe we should go after one of the top tiered pitchers, such as Darvish, but Gordon leading off, getting rid of Escobar's bad defense at 3B, makes a lot of sense right now.

I'd be more willing to trade for Gordon and keeping Cowart at 3B over signing Moustakis, losing our 2nd round pick and international money, and still having money to improve elsewhere on the team. At least right now, that's how I'm leaning.

Since we don't pay the luxury tax, we'd give up our 2nd round pick and $500k in international bonus pool money. And, we'd lose the slot money for our 2nd round pick. This year, we would have lost Canning. Or Brandon Marsh. Or James Jones. Still not sold on it. If it were Machado or Arenando, we'll count me in. But the low walk rate really scares me off.