marcosantinia12

Seems like there is a lot of optimism from most folks but just thought it be interesting to see how his Japan numbers compare to Darvish. For the sake of comparison I only took years 19-21 for both since those are the only 3 full seasons Ohtani pitched in Japan. 

Darvish:
Age 19: 2.89ERA/ 115K/1.283
Age 20:1.82ERA/ 210K/0.828
Age 21:1.88ERA/ 208K/0.897

Ohtani:
Age 19: 2.61ERA/ 179K/ 1.172WHIP
Age 20: 2.24ERA/ 196K/ 0.909WHIP
Age 21: 1.86ERA/ 174K/ 0.957WHIP

Also, Darvish had a sub 2.00 ERA for 5 straight seasons from ages 20-24 and 6/7 years in a row of 200k+ (Although Darvish pitched more innings).

I do think he has more upside than Darvish due to his elite hit and miss stuff but for now I'll go with...

Floor: 3.90ERA/ 160K/ 1.3WHIP
Ceiling: 2.80ERA/ 180K+(Depending on innings)/ 1.05WHIP
Likely: 3.45ERA/ 160K/1.18WHIP

.240/.330/.480 with 15HR

I don't see him hitting over .270 at best but I do see him surprising with lots of power.

Cano is a first ballot HOF imo , the guy will be top 3 2B ever in HR by the end of next year if not this year. He has a lifetime average of .307 to go along with the power. He's also incredibly durable - has not played less than 156 games in a season since his rookie year a decade ago. Right now he's an easy HOF and arguably 1st ballot with a strong finish. 

10 hours ago, Stradling said:

Here is how I would construct the line up:

Escobar

Trout

Calhoun

Albert

Cron

Simmons

Espinoza

Maldonado

Maybin

 

Which I think is slightly off of what Sosh will do.  I think he will probably swap Trout and Kole.  

This is exactly the lineup I had in mind. Calhoun definitely should go behind Trout IMO. Also, I like Maybin batting 9th because in reality after the first time around the lineup, the number of a hitter is in the lineup doesn't really matter, just the order. In which case you have hitters behind Trout who can drive him in and you have 2 obp guys infront of him, all while giving Trout lots of AB's. 

On 12/13/2016 at 6:58 PM, AngelsLakersFan said:

Trout is going to be really excited when he hits FA and the Angels offer him the largest contract in MLB history to be the only guy on the team.

Sorry for the late reply , but I meant going all in as in building a contending team in 2018, '19, and '20, the last of Trout's years. I think you took it as pinching pennies to offer him lucrative contract. The Angels won't be able to outbid some of the other team's for him but maybe having a quality team in his last couple of years can be a selling point, if we can afford Trout anyway. Resigning him or not, creating the best possible team during the time we have with him should be a priority. 

23 minutes ago, Scotty@AW said:

The Angels yearly operating budget (which has almost nothing to do with the luxury tax) is 165 million or under.  Given how much we've been cleared of from Wilson and Weaver, I don't think Arte is interested in adding any more contracts he has to pay a great deal of money for.  At most, they'll spend 9 million more.  My best guess is they'll hover somewhere around 160 million, which is basically one more reliever. 

The Angels are currently in the process of lowering payroll from the Dipoto days.  We spent like a large market team for two years, and haven't spent any money like a small market team for three. 

That's why I think we're headed back toward being a mid-market team despite everything that indicates we're large market.  We aren't behaving like one, and haven't for three consecutive offseasons now. 

You may be right. That or Eppler/Moreno are trying to be as conservative as possible to have the funds to spend in the 2018 FA class. If that's the case, I'm all for pinching pennies right now so that we can go all in the last few years of Trout's contract. If there was one thing I'd really like to see this year is that we go after Tyson Ross which should be for short term anyway and would keep the team on low commitment from 2018 onward. 

2 hours ago, bloodbrother said:

Wow... very surprised that Soler is involved. I understand that premium value is being placed on back of the pen guys but that's a pretty big price to pay. Just a year ago they had him off-limits on talks for Miller and even some of the Rays starters. 

I think he could've been flipped in a package for an Archer or a Gray (or possibly even Quintana) who will be needed once Arrieta walks. 

3 hours ago, m0nkey said:

That was the asking price for Fernandez but evidently not the value, so I don't think you can make that comparison 

Very true, but then again lets look at the Trout fantasy trades. Not that Sale is on Trout's level in terms of value but he is as close as you can get really. In all reality, Sale isn't worth taking so much from the MLB team where Boston would have to include Bradley/Bennintendi because it would offset the upgrade of getting Sale. But, if I'm trading a guy of his caliber I'm asking for Moncada, Kopech, Basabe, flip Diaz with E-rod and include Devers (which is no throw in as the top 3rd base prospect in the sport). And it still works out for Boston as it doesn't take from their big league roster as Sale essentially replaces Rodriguez. 

HUGE haul, but you're getting one of the biggest commodities in the baseball. What pitcher has more trade value than Sale?
 

I think that Boston got the better end of the deal. Great return for ChiSox but it seems a bit light in my opinion when you look at other deals. This package is better than the Swanson deal but by how much? Sale is miles better than Miller and I'm not sure this package is that. The asking price for Fernandez was Seager, Pederson, Urias. Seager = Moncada, Urias = Kopech (and I'd say Urias is a bigger get) and Pederson >>  the other prospects. I'd say Sale has more value than Fernandez did last year due to his team-friendly contract and without the injury concerns (though his delivery is concerning). The cost of a guy like Sale I thought would atleast include Devers and Erod. Moncada stings but his need is reduced by the young and controlled core that Boston has. 

A team can expect to kill their farm to land a guy of Sale's caliber in an attempt to win it all. Boston keeps a strong system fronted by blue-chip prospects like Devers and Groome and gets a top 5 pitcher to go along with that core for 3 years at a reliever's salary.

I wonder how much Ross gets in the open market.

Not counting the one game he pitched last year, this is how his ERA in the last 2 years (approximately 400 innings) stack up to familiar names...

391IP   3.03 Ross
--------------------------------

437IP   3.32 Kluber
413IP   3.61 Archer
413IP   3.49 Hammels

Of course his ERA+ doesn't match up to those names because of Petco being factored in but I think it does not do him justice being an extreme ground ball pitcher that does not depend as much on park factors as others might. 
 

Turner is severely underrated, but the Angels are a longggggg ways from competing and he isn't going to change that. Why commit 60 + mil on a guy with a short-term window? It's not a losers mentality, or throwing in the towel to not be willing to do what needs to be done to compete. If it was a flyer on a guy then ok, take it, but that's a serious commitment suited for teams in win-mode that are a 3-5 win player (Turner) away from a shot at something bigger. 

Save all the money you can and retool to have the best team on the field 2-3 years down the road. 

Great example of selling high by AZ. Like I mentioned in the hot stove threat, I think the team can be a very surprising contender the coming season if all of the cards fall right. 

I really like the deal for AZ as well. Segura really broke out last year but I would expect some slight regression. Walker is a cheap, quality young pitcher with frontline upside. Of course going from Seattle to AZ doesn't help his cause but he has the stuff and I think that he's young enough where you can expect him to improve regardless of the stadium. As far as Segura, it is a loss in the lineup but Marte strikes me as Segura-light (though no power) and could himself benefit from leaving Safeco. 

Despite all the dirt the dbacks get, and deservingly so, Greinke, Miller, Corbin, Walker, and DeLaRosa/Ray/Bradley is a pretty damn good rotation if everyone can come close to approach in their expected performances. That's a big "if" of course.

On ‎11‎/‎17‎/‎2016 at 5:17 PM, eaterfan said:

Speed on the basepaths is nice, but it's of secondary importance. The name of the game is getting outs on defense and preventing them and hitting for power on offense. 20 stolen bases is only 20 more extra base hits over a season as far as total bases go. A guy who hits 40 doubles and steals no bases compares to a guy who hits 20 and steals 20 bases (roughly). 

Focusing on guys who steal bases instead of hitting and playing defense is like trying focusing on outfielders who have great arms instead of ones that cover a lot of ground and hit. A big arm is a nice tool but not as valuable as the other things.

That's actually an interesting take on it, and a very good one actually. Speed is pretty exciting but like you said, its just an extra base which really isn't much of a difference than hitting for more bases. I do think however, you're underestimating the other effects of speed... being able to score from 2nd, forcing the defense to make an out, situational base running options, and even the ability to cover more ground on the defensive side. Speed wouldn't turn the team around but we can look no further than the Royals to see that it can play a pretty big part in a team's success. Of course having a lockdown pen helps too lol

A year ago maybe. Bogaerts/Betts have a combined WAR of 12.5 at premium positions. 7 years of control vs 4 of Trout, I'll have to disagree. There's no sense in Boston trading Bogaerts and more for an upgrade of 2.5 wins from Betts to Trout. 

31 minutes ago, Scotty@AW said:

Every team in baseball thinks they have a shot. Guess what? There are NO amount of prospects you could offer that make Mike Trout expendable. 

Just as an example, let's take the Top 10 prospects in baseball. On a year to year basis, all ten will be major leaguers. But the average amount that turn into star players? Three. A star player is identified as a player worth 4-wins or more. Another 4 will be average major leaguers, which is 1-2 wins. Now if we calculate Mike Trout's prime years to equal an expected increase most major leaguers experience, you're looking at an 11-win player annually. 

Basically what all this means is that it would take you the top three prospects in all of baseball just to get you into the conversation, and likely numbers 4 and 5 to get a GM to seriously consider pulling the triggger. 

So if I'm taking 5 of the top 10 prospects in baseball, this would be like one team trading Yoan Moncada, Alex Bergman, Andrew Benintendi, Trey Turner and Victor Robles for Mike Trout. 

Guess what Yankees? Clint Frazier, Gleyber Torres and Gary Sanchez? They don't even come close to getting you into the conversation for trading a once in a lifetime player away.

Trout would never be traded straight up for prospects. It would require more than any team has available like you said. It would be an organization's top 2-3 prospects and 1-2 young MLB rising stars. I'm baffled at some of these "offers" when Seager, Urias, and Pederson were reportedly not enough for Jose Fernandez. And that's a Fernandez coming off of injury with 1.5 seasons worth of IP and with 2 years less control than Trout. A releastic offer would be Bogaerts, Moncada, Benintendi, and Groome + a low level high upside arm. At that point Boston would be hurting itself more than improving with the acquisition of Trout. The scary part is that's enough value, but what front office has the balls to pull the trigger?

Although Seager  won, deservingly so, given his offense at the position he plays (and surprisingly solid defense), I'm a big Turner fan. Kind of reminds me last year's AL ROY race where Correa's standout offense beat Lindor's all-around game (Even though Lindor got a whole win higher than Correa in as many games). Not to say that Correa and Seager aren't great all around themselves. Turner wasn't very far off from Seager either, his 2016 season projects at 7.3 WAR in 162 games. .340 BA, .567 SLG (good for 5th best in the majors if qualified) and havoc inducing speed. That's pretty damn dynamic right there. Let's not forget that he is a shortstop who's versatility has him playing another key position in Center field. So yeah, an argument could be made for Turner, who if he had played shortstop could have produced more WAR relative to playing time than Seager. Can't complain about Seager either, just wanted to make a case for Turner.

Yoenis Cespedes 5/122 w/ player option for 6^th year 18 mil.

Kenley Jansen 5/77

Aroldis Chapman 5/80

Edwin Encarnacion 3/75 w/ team option for 4^th year

Wilson Ramos 4/60 w/ opt out

Ian Desmond 5/85

Justin Turner 4/64

Josh Reddick 4/60

Jose Bautista 3/70

Dexter Fowler 5/90

Mark Melancon 3/45

Rich Hill 3/51 w/ team option for 4^th year

Ivan Nova 3/40 w/ 1^st year opt out.

Jeremy Hellickson 4/64

Neil Walker 4/60

Mark Trumbo 5/100
 

From that list, I could see Walker accepting QO due to his late season injury.

I like Reddick, always have but I don't think he's a good fit. Like some mentioned, he's had a hard time staying on the field and I doubt he improves on that going forward as he ages. We are a couple years from realistically competing and adding him wouldn't have much of an impact in the near future. How productive and healthy will he be ages 32+ when our team is in a better spot? Save the 70 mil and keep throwing out young guys (or invest in a cheap stop gap. Wait to invest money in 2018 when that FA class comes out and we're in a better position to win.

I thought the decision to bring him in early when needed was great. What I didn't agree with is the pitch count Roberts let Jansen get to. 50 is insane for a guy that's used to 1 inning of work. Injury issues aside, he's not close to the pitcher he is at 50 that he is at < 30. 

Calhoun fits in perfectly for Cleveland IMO. I think they'd be willing to give up good farm talent seeing as their competitive window has now opened and will remain that way for the next few years in which Kole will be under club control. They've been reluctant to spend $ in FA even this year with many OF that fit well like Fowler or even lower-cost options like Parra, Span, Aoki. 

I think if they would be willing to give up Frazier and 2 decent-good pitching prospects you'd have to listen.

As much as everyone here would hate to trade him to Boston, they have some very intriguing pieces... Kopech (6), Ball (10), Colye (13). 3 top 15 in a very deep system. Might be a stretch but that's what you ask for and if it can be done then you pull the trigger. 

How about Bogaerts, JBJ, Holt(supplement current club), Moncada, Benintendi, Espinoza and Kopech

That has to be intriguing.

The marlins wanted Seager, Pederson, Urias + 2 more for Fernandez. 

I think any package for Trout has to start with those 3, plus

DeLeon, Verdugo, and Yadier Alvarez. Outrageous package, but you only trade for a package like that. 

I think the Dodgers would be completely closed to trading Seager. In that case replace Seager with Puig and Alvarez with Holmes. Puig can then be flipped.

21 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

Maybe if they trade Simmons and Calhoun they'll be lucky enough to net a couple of Gold Glovers in the haul. Maybe one who can be a productive hitter as well. That would be great.

So in other words they're very valuable. Then you look for a very valuable return. Other teams see this too.

With that logic you don't trade RA Dickey for Syndergaard/D'arnaud because you will never see a Cy Young knuckleballer again.
Not saying Calhoun/Simmons bring back a Syndergaard but they're not bringing back a bucket of balls either. 

"I still feel the same way I felt before the year started: Stop worrying about the "Trout Window" and start worrying about building a team that Trout will want to be a part of for the rest of his career."

This.

I really don't see the chance for us to compete for the next 2 years. And I'd rather pinch pennies during that time and flip anything we can that can contribute after those 2 years rather than to continue to patch up the roster with bandages and be in a similar situation later on. In the meantime pick up the most & best talent you can that can contribute in 2018 and beyond.  

1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

you don't trade anyone who is productive with 4-5 years of club control if you have any intention of winning during that time.  

you don't trade starting position players 30 games into the season.  

you don't trade Mike Trout.  

1. Even if it means bringing back higher a potential return that would be controlled beyond 6 years? The team is very likely to not be competitive for the next 2 years regardless. 
2. I agree, Trade Deadline proposal.
3. Depending on the return, I disagree. But the proposal I'm making here is to keep him.