marcosantinia12

With no disrespect, I don't think you understand the magnitude of Trout. Perhaps that's why a deal would never occur, his value is simply too high and out of team's comfort zones. But if the possible best player of his generation was made available I have a hard time believing that one GM would not jump on a once in a life time opportunity.As for Correa, I can't argue about his potential. He looks like a clean young Arod to me, though a notch less talented (Arod being perhaps the biggest prospect the game has ever seen). I can see Correa possibly turning into a 30 HR / .290 BA / 100+ RBI shortstop. Key word is possibly, when Trout has already broken through those numbers and more and though he is no shortstop, CF has its own defensive rep where he is an elite talent as well. Not to mention the possibilities for Trout going forward... Possibly Trout can one day hit the 50+ HR mark later in his mature body years (28-32) and if (god forbid) he left the team for a hitter friendly stadium with lineup protection (Houston fits the bill). As far as 50 HR may seem, he was 9 away as a damn 23 year old playing in Anaheim with such little offensive talent surrounding him. Dare I say, 55-60 HR in an environment like Toronto during his prime? Those are steroid numbers in a time of pitcher dominance. As good as Correa is, and as big of a fan I am, one can only HOPE Correa will one day in his prime (or before) be as valuable as one of Trout's first 4 years. The guy has averaged out at as a 9.45 win player to date, which by the way Alex Rodriguez only once reached in his entire career (and arguably during his juicing days). WAR isn't the only evaluation of a player, but before you mention the position that Correa plays, which I think is very important, WAR takes note of that which is exactly why I am using that as a basis of evaluation. The fact of the matter is that Trout has shattered through the numbers that we can only hope of Correa one day achieving. You mention the fact that he is cheaper. You do realize that Trout's current financial standing is a good thing, not a burden right? And I'm not saying it in the sence relative to his skill, I'm talking about it being so valuable in general. Not only did we manage to buy out his Arb years where he could have possibly made $15, $22, $28 million (where as we are paying him $16, $20, $34), but we bought his early prime years for $34 million. Sounds about right as it would break a record for a position player. Think about this, Cabrera got $30 per year on an 8 year contract which would easily translate to $40-$45 mil for a 2 year contract. Add the fact that Trout is an overall more valuable player and younger, you're looking at a value of $50 mil EASY per year for 2 years of his service. And this isn't an exageration, if you believe in the WAR - Salary relationship, he is technically worth roughly 66 mil per year. His contract isn't only "good because it's Trout", is a bargain. Factor all of this and I don't even think the addition of Springer breaks it even. Perhaps with Reed-Pujols I might have gotten carried away, I'll give you that... Here is something I think would be VERY releastically accepted (if proposed of course): Correa Springer Reed for Trout CJ Cron CJ Wilson (and full 2016 commitment) EDIT: Im feeling like I'm even underselling Trout... F it, give me Correa, Keuchel, and Reed straight up for the best player in the game.

Houston wouldn't do the trade I proposed but to say they would pass u on Trout for Correa? I'm taking this as a joke.

Carlos Correa George Springer AJ Reed For Trout Pujols (and 30-40 million of his remaining 140) Emotion and marketing reasons aside, I would do that. Not only do we get young and athletic and another potential "face" in Correa, we get about 40-45 mil under the cap. How about Mookie Betts Yoan Moncada Devers Owens For Trout Pujols (same) ______________ Doc is right. There is no amount of value in players that a team would give back to acquire Trout. Not that there isn't a big enough haul, just that it would be so big that it would defeat the purpose of the other team to get better. They'd be practically exchanging 3 $3 bills and a $1 bill for a $10 bill. However, maybe we could take less talent back if we can rid ourselves of Albert. For instance, the Seager, Urias, Peterson trade for Trout wouldnt happen. Shoot, the Marlins asked for more in return of Fernandez. But throw Pujols and the majority of his co tract in there and I would do it. Just food for thought, I know the idea of trading the franchise player doesn't play well here... But there is some truth behind this thread, franchise vs Trout, what's more important? People forget and forgive very quickly if things turn out positively. If not, its a franchise-kille.r

I like it. They'll ask more than Bedrosian and Rasmus though... I think the Dodgers would ask for a couple of young prospects. Not highly valued talent but young talent nonetheless.

Coming from a Dipoto fan... his drafts were pretty abysmal. Definitely his biggest weakness. I dislike the high floor philosophy of drafting as well, though there is a lot of truth behind IP's post about it applying well to hitters but not pitchers. Maybe it's just the fan in me wanting something to be excited about. Honestly, I would be ok with a balanced draft strategy of high upside arms and high floor position players (Calhoun, Kubitza, overlooked types). The problem is there was no balance and when the result after 4 years is having one top 100 prospect in Newcomb then that's pretty concerning. I mean the other guy as of recent that kind of stands out is Chris Ellis and he doesn't even break the current top 10 prospects on the Braves. As far as his trades, I think he was able to flip for very good value for the most part. The Trumbo deal was my favorite - my least favorite being the Freese deal (mainly because of Grichuck). But even the Freese deal wasn't all that bad at the time. I didn't like it then either, but I understood it. We had an outfield log jam and needed a 3rd baseman pretty badly. I don't think his intentions were to flip for better value as much as it was to fill a need using our excess resource.

I was going to post this in the "pitchers/catchers" report threat but I haven't made a post in a while and I think it deserved its own thread. Seeing how our young pitchers develop/veterans bounce back is one of bright spots of this season. Despite of the disappointing off season, if the young guys can step up and the older guys give us a solid year, this season can be fun to watch. I'm especially interested in seeing what Skaggs can contribute. Maybe I am being overly optimistic but I can see him being Richards' left-handed complement. Maybe Richards being a very good number 2 and Skaggs being an average-low 2. I want to see a more experienced and polished Heaney. Maybe he can be Homer Bailey-esque (2012/2013 Bailey). Their peripherals are very similar aside from Bailey's superior so/9 rate (although they were similar in their rookie seasons). I still think that Santiago goes (maybe for a close to MLB ready OF/2B prospect)... but if he stays hopefully we can get something in between his two extremes from last year (1st half ERA: 2.33 ; 2nd half ERA: 5.47). Maybe stay around 3.40 -3.60 year-round. CJ is a good spring training away from being a big trade candidate but for the sake of this exercise, lets say he can replicate his 2014 performance and stay around 3.80. It shouldn't be too much to ask for, especially considering that he should be feeling better. Nick Tropeano reminds me of a young Shoemaker. I think he over performed last year but that's ok. I would gladly take a 4.00 ERA from him. What is interesting is his high so/9 rate which is higher than both Richards and Heaney. . He's had a history of high rates in the minors too and have looked to transition very well. Here's a thought... move him to the pen? temporarily at least. Assuming we do not trade away our current depth, we will have excess of starters and I think he is a good candidate to help in the bullpen. Matt Shoemaker. That's it, just Matt Shoemaker. I think we have a decent idea of what he will offer in 2016. We've seen both sides to him and we'll most likely see him settle down in the middle around a 4.00 ERA. I think he is another candidate for the pen. Hear me out on Weaver... I've joined those who have lost hopes of seeing a decent weaver pitch again... His loss in velocity is just too drastic to overlook. BUT, lets ignore 2015 for a second. It is a big outlier. Even without last season we can see Weaver's regression, but it is also unfair to overlook the fact that 1 season does not do him justice. What if he was/is injured? Seems like Weaver is the exact type of player who would play through or lie about having an injury. What if something with his mechanics was off? fatigue? I don't know, but perhaps a new season will bring a fresh start. Throwing the way he throws currently, he posted a 2.79 ERA in 11 home games last year so he can still be an effective pitcher. His 3 year averages prior to last season have him at 3.24 ERA. I am not trying to be in denial but his 2015 ERA of 4.64 simply can't be the end of it. Best case scenario, he is on a down trend, but 2015 was a season to forget. We get a 3.50 ERA with clutch home starts from Weaver. I'd be happy if we managed to get a sub 4 ERA from him in 2016. After all, he has managed to do so in all but 1 season since beginning his career (excluding last year). Finally, Richards. I know most of us here are hoping for him to be the ace that he has shown he can be. However, like I mentioned, I think he is merely a very good number 2, comparable to a Shelby Miller. I expect him to pitch around the 3.00 ERA mark, and if he can limit the homeruns/walks he can be more around 2.85-2.95. Of course, a lot of things have to go right and I am not taking account of possible injuries, trades, etc. But it will be interesting to see everyone and what they will provide nonetheless.

Initial thought : Yes. High upside guy, former top prospect, speedy and athletic, defense. Then I used the internet... The dude is 29 now??? Downtrend on speed, less than 160 games in 2 years. think I'll pass..

Agree, those numbers are pretty accurate to what I would like to limit expenses to as well. As far as trades, I'd avoid trading from that bunch (Skaggs, Heaney, Tropeano). From those, none are untradable but perhaps Skaggs is the least I'd like to let go of because of his diminished value due to injury and the high upside he has for us. Heaney I'd like to keep, but wouldn't deem as untradable. Tropeano is interesting because I can part with him for the right piece. The problem is that we are bidding on our SP depth to replace Weaver/Wilson next season meaning that we don't have the luxury to sell of in this area. Having a young 4/5 starter at league minimum for a few years definitely helps. AJ hit it on the head with Santiago, Wilson, Shoemaker in terms of what we should be looking into giving up. I'd prefer to send Santiago + Berosian for a decent,young, cost-controlled 2B/3B and sign one of the two OFer's. Of course, if we are unable to sign them due to high price tags, we have to look at the opportunity to trade for an outfielder. I don't really like this alternative though.

Looking at various threads, a lot of people seem to think that this is a horrible off season if we don't sign a big OF. Personally, I'd be very dissapointed like the most of you. I was just wondering where everyone here draws the line. If Cespedes indeed wanted more than Davis then he is completely delusional. I would rather pass than give a 6+ year to Cespedes (Upton I could swallow). The money concerns me less than the years but I wouldn't like to offer ridiculous AAV and hinder our options for the future in an attempt to stay under the luxury threshold. How does everyone here feel about spending on them? Personally, I think there is always a limit and if the final contracts end up being through the roof and we miss out on them I will be glad Arte learned his lessons from the past.

Hoping for .300 + BA and 30 SB. Edit: I may have to edit my profile picture also

A little late, but the best move in my opinion is the Escobar move. It stings that we gave up Gott. But more Lilley than not, he was due to regress due to not so impressive peripherals. We neededed to get a BP arm before trading him now, and still do (more so now). But, a relief arm is probabibly the best thing to be lacking bwlecause of how easy it is to acquire one (disregarding an elite arm of course). We have instead covered a position of great need at a great price. It is exactly what the team needed. I mentioned Escobar along with Walker, Prado, etc. Escobar had the highest OBP of the bunch, was the cheapest, AND has a cheap year option which boosts his value incredibly as compared to the other trade candidates. Best of all was that I knew we would have to give up value for a solid addition like Escobar. But I was thinking more along the lines of a Hector Santiago. Filling a crucial need all while keeping Santiago as a trade asset was pretty surprising. I like it.

I agree that Puig is a head case and club-house cancer like some have described him as... but the talent is there and I think he can be positively influenced. I don't buy the fact that pitcher's have adjusted to him. Maybe from his first (monster) season but he should play more like his 2nd than his 3rd going forward. You mention that the dodgers haven't been able to influence him, even with the veteran presence... however they have many other Divas themselves (although they got rid of some in Hanley and Kemp). He will feed off of those types of players. Even the Veterans can't keep him in check because he has the star power over them. Call me dellusional, but I think the Angels are one of the teams that could turn him around. Not only do they lack the Divas and Prima Donnas, but they have a core of leadership personalities in Simmons, Calhoun, and from what I've read Yunel Escobar. More than anything, I think Pujols and Trout would keep him in check. Pujols is a Veteran that Puig has to respect because of his accomplishments in the game and because Puigs "stardom" won't mean jack **** against a future 1st round HOF. Trout... He is the face of baseball. I remember someone putting up a clip of Puig with Trout and Pujols and he seemed genuinely respectful of the two. Without the negative influences, and most importantly playing alongside Trout and with Pujols taking him under his wings... Puig could turn into a good guy. He is a much different situation than Hamilton because Hamilton wasn't necessarily an immature, disrespectful, egocentric punk. Hamilton was just, well... dis-motivated (and you can add unaccountable). Hamilton simply didn't care anymore after he fell back into the drugs, and playing next to two future greats just didn't matter to him. I doubt that is the case who is a young guy with a fantastic future ahead of him. I'm sure he wants to win a ring, accomplish some personal accolades, and acquire the most money as possible. It's not like this means anything as I am not advocating for us to trade for Puig (which would mean Heaney/Richards/Calhoun going to LA). Plus we wouldn't even have the resources, other than those 3 to acquire him. But he could be useful for chemistry-reputable teams like SF, STL, KC, LAA, NYY, NYM.... STAY AWAY FROM BOS, OAK, WAS (They have something special going on with Harper. Bryce would get his head ripped off in a heated alteration with Puig).

I'm guessing this is in reponse to my last thread among others. And I can't agree with you more. I personally would prefer we go aggressively after Upton and then sign Kendrick (might as well add him on if we are going to break right trough the luxury tax). However, I think that we may miss out on Upton to another team like the Orioles who clearly have the money ready to spend (instead of Davis) and also have the need. I think it will come down to them just being more aggressive and us trying to be more low-key about it which will come to bite us in the ***. In the meantime of our Upton pursue, Gordon and Cespedes will go to other teams in which case we fall into the next tier. I think Span is a perfect fit for this team. His defense should be very solid in LF and he provides the prototypical lead-off hitter this team needs (Escobar is more of a 2 hitter IMO). He has a hig OBP, BA, and I think his speed will still be pretty good, albeit no longer extraordinary, even after his injury. Oh, and he's Left handed. The only part I disagree with you on is that Span isn't an impact player. I guess I do agree with that statement, but I believe he can be a player to make a huge difference and potentially put us over the top. On paper, Span isn't an impact talent, but when you bat him with Escobar in front of Trout, Pujols, and Calhoun he can make a huge difference in their production. Of course, I would much rather Upton. I know that you are not in favor of giving up a pick for a player like Span or Kendrick. I'll give you this - if we are going to sign one of them, then maybe not. The team will still have a hole in one of LF or 2B. But if we can get both, we'd be much more improved and competitive, despite not seeming like it on paper. I could live without the pick if so.

I don't see the Dodgers giving up Seager, he's the future face of their franchise. I think that because of this, they will overpay with an overwhelming amount of young talent. We're talking about a phenom pitcher who could very well turn into the Marlin's new ace in Urias , two top 50 ( well #54 and #58) pitching prospects, and Heredia who could very well have the highest upside of the bunch (except for Urias). and then you have Puig - an elite talent controlled long term for extremely cheap. I think a lot of us including myself have undervalued Puig immensely. Despite of his declining numbers, which I think are a bad evaluation for a player who has only played 1 complete season(if that), he clearly has the raw talent and incredible tools. I think he will be an .860 OPS hitter with an electrifying arm. That puts him with Cargo this season but he comes much cheaper and younger, and much higher upside. I think this is a trade, that if it happens, fans will rip the Marlins for not getting Seager, Urias, Pederson. I think this will be an overlooked and even better haul for Miami.

Wow, that was pretty bad lol. It was too early when I wrote this, thanks for the correction. I guess I'm in the minority here, but I'll stand by it. At first I was against giving up the pick unless it was for an elite talent, but things changed. We traded Newcomb and Ellis for a young and controlled defensive shortstop. That doesn't mean that it was a bad trade, but it is a change of focus. We can't half-way compete and half-way rebuild. If we traded away the two top prospects of our farm system for a non-impact player (depending on how you value defense) then there is no way that the team stops there. Not trying to turn this into another Simmons thread but if Simmons is the only acquisition it doesn't make sense. If we decide to put the best team on the field for 2016-2020 this makes sens, but in that case we go all in and sacrifice this year's pick and let the farm build through the next 5 years. The thing is that we have a pretty young core here. I've mentioned it before, but if we can complete that core, with preferably young players (although Howie doesn't fit that) then we'll have to sacrifice our farm. If we fill our roster with solid talent that is controlled long term, then we will not have a necessity for a very strong farm system. Our system, as it stands, is extremely week anyways. I would rather not turn into a team stuck in between rebuild and compete and neither build for the long term, nor compete for anything more than a 3rd place spot. As for the sign and trade idea, it could work. I think it would require a bit more than Hinshaw. Maybe something more like Jahmai Jones + Jose Suarez.

Looking at the names that are still unsigned, it's crazy how much talent is left in the FA pool, with seemingly little suitors. Of course, those players will be signed, it is just a matter of prices to fall down a bit before teams start engaging. Because of this, I'm pretty confident that the Angels will re-engage in the top tier outfielder chase. I feel like they'll be a bit too late however. These are my predictions in order of (Favorite,Runner-up,3rd place) for the more interesting players remaining on the market: 1. Upton - (Oriels, Rangers, Angels) 2. Davis - (Astros, Nationals, Oriels) 3. Cespedes - (Rangers, Oriels, Nationals) 4. Gordon - (Giants, Whitesox, Royals) 5. Desmond - (WhiteSox) 6. Chen - (Nationals, Dodgers) 7. Maeda - (Dogers) 8. Fowler - (Royals, Giants, Whitesox) 9. Kendrick - (Angels) 10. Span - (Angels, Royals, Mets) Others: Parra (Royals), Fister (Whitesox), Jackson (Indians/Whitesox), Gallardo (D-backs), Kazmir (Royals), Kennedy (Twins) I feel like the Oriels will have moved on from Davis and use that money aggressively to acquire one of Upton/Cespedes). I also feel like the Rangers will engage aggressively for the one that doesn't fall with Baltimore, probably division-friendly Cespedes. I see the Whitesox emerging as big players in the market, trying to pry away Gordon from their rivals but loosing to SF. They'll take Desmond and a very good deal in Fister. Maybe even Jackson for RF. The Angels will re-sign Howie to a very team-friendly deal due to lack of options for Howie and the obvious need for the Angels. A deal they can't pass up (F the pick). 2/22 + team option for 3rd year. We will end up with Span after missing out on Upton/Cespedes/Gordon. Howie-Span...Not a bad consolation. Other bold predictions: Dodgers trade Puig, Urias, Montas, Holmes, Heredia for Fernandez Marlins sign Parra and trade Ozuna to Indians for Bauer (obviously doesn't happen if 1st prediction is right) Dodgers trade Puig, Montas, Thompson for Carrasco (same) Dbacks sign Gallardo and trade DeLaRosa to TX for RP. Twins/Indians emerge as mystery team/s for an OF Pirates sign Latos (okay, okay, this one was just for the fun of it). I don't expect you guys to go too in depth with it, but what are people's overall predictions for the remaining FA's? The more intriguing ones at least. Any bold predictions?

Freeze didn't get a QO so he doesn't have a pick attached. It defeats the purpose of the trade for the receiving team.

Merry Christmas to you Dave, and to the rest of the AW family!

I'm a little late, but very good post AJ. Great read. Personally, I have a bit of a different view on the Giants however. I agree that they are a very solid and respectable organization. However, they have their own flaws that are overlooked because of the results they have achieved. I would say they are the most "achieved" or "successful" franchise in the past 6 years, but wouldn't say they are the best run organization. They have their share of mistakes like every team (Barry Zito, Tim Lincecum contracts). In fact, the 2004-2009 Angels were far superior than the 2010-2015 Giants with 567 total wins to 520. We can argue that the Giants were a better organization because they won more championships and it's hard to argue against that, but realistically the BETTER team was the Angels. I hate to say that the Giants were lucky, but a good amount of it has came into play. That's not to take anything from them, it's just that in each year that they won, they were not the most talented team. In fact they weren't even the best in their own division for 4 out of those 6 seasons. Maybe that is the recipe for success. Not having to be an amazing team on paper (Blue Jays) but be merely good for as long as possible and hopefully all the cards fall in place. I think that the key is being good enough to compete for a playoff spot each year. I think the team should be built in a balanced way, but primarily around pitching and defense. I think the Angels did it right in the 2000's but unfortunately things did not pan out. We can blame the manager or the assembly of the team, but realistically there are too many factors - injuries, depth, did they get hot at the right time? did their opponents get hot at the right time? and honestly... an ounce of luck. The best player in the game can have a 3 strikeout day. The best team in the game could have a horrible 3-game series. That is just a fact of baseball. The Marco Scutarro's and Ishikawa's of the world may rise to the occasion in unexpected times. A front office does not pick up someone like Ishikawa thinking that he will be a hero. With that said, I think we can all learn the lesson that the best team on paper may net the best resuts (record-wise) but not always bring home a championship. The Giants have done a well job of staying competitive for many years and have been fortunate that things have fell in their favor. I think they are a VERY well run organization but not one to mirror a team's blue print after. I think the team to model a franchise after would be the Cardinals (even if they have less championships in the timespan). Other notable teams include the Tigers (2009-2014 - 533W), Phillies (2006-2011 -558W). The problem with those teams, especially the Phillies, is that they ignored their team's aging. If they had traded the right guys for younger talent during their late successful years, they could still be a force today. The Angels team that I mentioned is also a great team to model. Now... here is the surprising one. It seems like the Yankees have been out of the picture since the early 2000's... In fact, the least amount of wins they have had in a season in the last 20 years is 84. Eighty four freaking wins! averaged out to 95 wins a season. Just to put it into perspective, their worst season since 1995 was the same as the Angels' 2015 playoff run in which they missed October baseball by one game. And that is not doing them justice because the 1994 and 95' seasons were not played in full - they made the playoffs both times. They have been very successful annually since 92'. So how is that for a team that spends? I'm not saying that a team HAS to spend to be competitive but if we look at the success of different teams (seasons records wise), results show that teams that spend correctly when necessary, have the most chances of winning. Of course sometimes this translates to 4 championships on 5 years like the Yankees dynasty... and sometimes to 0 and 6 like the mid 2000 Angels.

I like this idea. Ideally we can trade Santiago (5mil-arbritration predicted) for a young and cheap power reliever. Gives us plenty of flexibility (about 6-7 mil under tax) to sign an affordable guy like Fernandez. I would prefer trading Wilson, but unless we are getting equal value in return, I think it would be best to keep him in hopes that he regains his value and flip him at the deadline.

I will agree with you on that. This is a type of team that in my opinion can sneak into the playoffs (where any team can win) if all the cards fall in to the right place. There is very little room for error as in underachieving, injury, etc. I'm not trying to come off as encouraging of the direction we are going on, just pointing out that these transactions are a lot more welcoming than Matt Joyce. For me at least.

Mindblowlingly low, but again are we really going to evaluate them based on a selective small sample?

C'mon AO, you're basing that on very small sample sizes. Especially with the fact that their collective OBP is entirely skewed by the fact that Gentry had a horrible 14 game span.

And his name is Daniel Gentry... or Craig Nava (whichever you prefer). Denard Span Career: AVG: .287 OBP: .352 SLG: .395 SB-CS: 26-7 Defensive UZR (annual average) : 3.3 Daniel Gentry Career (Based on respective splits): AVG: .278 OBP: .366 SLG: .388 SB-CS: 19-5 Defensive UZR (annual average) : 5.86 *Averaged out Nava's and Gentry's stats into one player* Very, very similar numbers between the 2 (or 3) players. I'm very dissapointed on Arte's comments myself... but on a more positive note, I think we are completely overlooking how large of an upgrade we have acquired for LF. $2.375M is the cost for them according to Jeff Fletcher. Now, there is always the chance that these stats cant identically repeat themselves in a platoon the way we would like (ala Victorino-DeJesus) but Span comes with his own question marks. Of course I'd like on of the big 3 OF, or even Span for that matter, but we SHOULD be getting tremendous value in respect to the money that we are paying. The biggest need of the off-season IMO, was OBP. We have acquired a 3B man with a career .350 OBP, and a platoon that at a minimum should produce .340. That a long with pretty solid defense with the platoon, as well as a situational bat off the bench. I think that Eppler has done a well job with the minimal resources that Arte seems to be giving him. This isn't an "I love Eppler thread" (or anything like that, but just trying to add an optimistic outlook to the team after today's news). Hoping for Santiago and Gio to be flipped for Ryan Goins (defensive 2B), Brett Cecil, and DJ Davis. I'm probably underselling on Santiago, maybe add another mid tier prospect. Goins would be an offensive downgrade but he is much better defensively, which I think is critical with Simmons at SS. Plus he is still young and feel like he may have offensive upside higher than Giovotella's. Brett Cecil would be a great improvement for the pen, and Davis provides the high-ceiling prospect (OF) that our system lacks.

Man, this is very disappointing indeed... EDIT: I'm hoping for Arte to change his mind. It seems like he's been back and forth a long with Eppler. I think that Dochalo may be seriously onto something with his theory on the asking prices being too high. Otherwise, there is no reason for Arte to come out and say this publicly, specially when it could upset/demotivate some of the players of the club.