floplag

the fact that the question has to be asked illustrates why its a bad idea. you could run those names out there sure, but you wont get the production you had

i only trade Trumbo for a 2-3 type starter, then get someone to fill that spot in FA like Hart, Inanez or even bringing back Morlaes in that capacity.  if its a middle of the road 3-4 type starter i dont deal Trumbo, period.

We could deal Kendrick or Aybar, who we already have replacements fo, and get a starter of that quslity i think as 2B and even @@ seem to be of more value than previous years.

Difference being that half of that 100 plus mil won't count against the lux tax and we don't lose a draft pick. Plus he is younger than both.

but statistically, he projects to be the same player.

you are right.. we could go over the top on the posting fee but the playuer isnt going to settle for crap salary so...  

were not going to get him for the 8 or 9 mil we have left under the cap so you haveto factor that in too if your going to play the other cards.. is he worth being assessed the luxury tax penalty?

That is really not logical.  The posting bids are hidden so no one really knows what the other is bidding.  Therefore there will be no bidding war.

no, there wont be.. they will throw stupic numbers, since they can... and they will win.

either way the assumption is that he would cost about the same as Darvish between fee and salary... would you pay that is the question.. on the assumption that is accurate.. would you pay Darvish money or close to it for this player?

i would not

Im sorry but if we deal Trumbo for prospects, i for one am gonna be pissed.

you dont give up a 30/100 guy for prospects... especially not when you have a limited window for actually winning on a team thats built to win now.
you do that and we get worse, not better, for the next 2-3 years.
count me out on that.. anyone that wants to talk Trumbo better come with equally impactful talent.

he will be a Yankee, or a Dodger... the rest is moot.

lets look elsewhere as far as im concered as this guy is no Darvish and wont be worth the cost

he doesnt have Darvish stuff.. he will not tanslate as well.

one thing i saw prjected him at a 3+ ERA assuming he translates in the same way Darvish did... which isnt bad, but also inst worth 100+ Million at least not to me.

basically he would be about the same as Garza or Kuroda... would you pay 100 mil for either of those guys?
sure he might do better, but thats a huge gamble

For me, the word significant is telling... speculation aside, i am assuming that if we are giving something significant, we must be getting something significant.

The bottom line is that this team as is sits right now has a limited window... we cant sit back and build the farm.  If we are making deals it has to be with an eye more on today, than tomorrow... thats the reality of where we are as an organization.

Perhaps true, but if you are going to be a national writer you cant let your old beat writer bias come into it.  Borjous is the same guy he was when we had him... and yet he somehow makes the cardinals better when he was considered a 4th OF at best when they talked about him last year... whatever

is that io read article like Gammons review of the Cardinals, and with the addition of Borjous they supposedly look pretty strong, yet when we had him we didnt seem to have anything special?

Im not if that speaks to a lack of confidence in our staff from the baseball community or what, but it sure seems funny that they were considered lesser players when they were here.

cant seem to edit typos in title... sorry

Hi Dave,

 

This is not about a Trout vs. Bourjos playing CF argument. As I postulated to Chuck in an earlier post, there is no reason to not move Trumbo, the more desired piece in the current trade marketplace, and play an OF of Trout (LF), Bourjos (CF), and Hamilton/Calhoun (RF/DH). Thus Peter's value is maintained and he is given an opportunity to increase his value in 2014 and show what I think you would agree is a decent offensive player with gold glove aspirations and capability.

 

Those arguments about Trout in LF were originally based on the false belief that Trout's offensive performance suffered because he wasn't playing CF and nothing more.

 

Being a fan of the Angels has nothing to do with evaluating this trade. Yes we need to see how it turns out over the long run to fully evaluate it, but you can look at the surface of the trade and make determinations as well.

 

Aybar, Kendrick, and Trumbo were all free to be traded. Bourjos had nothing to do with whether or not middle infielders were moved. If the organization decided Trumob was more important than Peter then there is nothing I can do about that, but I do disagree with it.

 

Based on injury research players with back issues are more likely to see their performance suffer and Freese has a back issue. Giving up a year of control (for Freese) and age is questionable in my opinion.

 

Finally I, for one, am not in full-blown panic. There are other moves that have to be made. Maybe the other moves will improve the team enough that this trade will be overlooked. Maybe we will get lucky and see an improved Freese.

 

Beyond that though I am going on the record stating that we did not extract good value for Bourjos and that is an opinion from a die-hard Angels fan.

 

There are a lot of reasons not to deal Trumbo actually... 30/100, those guys dont grow on trees.

no flop, it isn't a priority. We have a defensive option there that isn't a great offensive option. But offense isn't our big need on this team so replacing that defensive specialist 3B with a mediocre 3B with better offense isn't a priority move. 

 

Oh, and I don't think anyone here is claiming Bourjos would have netted us a real valuable SP.

uh huh you realized you just outlined why this wasnt a bad deal. right?

and what did we lose here that affects possible tades for a SP? Grichuck might have been a nice throw in but the center peice of any deal for a SP wil be Kendrick or Trumbo so.. again, one deal into the off season and everyone is losign their friggin minds thingking off season over when we are better today than yeesterday.

oh puleese Chuck. 3B is not a big problem here. We don't have great options there right now, but that is low on the priority list. Offense is NOT the issue this team needs to address. We made a marginal upgrade in a position that wasn't critical while trading low on a very good player. 

3B has been a problem for years now. 

oh and by definition, when you say "we dont have great options there", that means it IS a priority. 

If you guys legitimately think Borjous was going to get us anything of real value in the Starting Pitcher market, you are over valuing.

bourjos was not a 4th OF

you would play him over Calhoun?  i wouldnt, the number suggest we shouldnt so.. unless you mena he was 5th or worse, please tell me why you think he should start and who you would bench?

Given the assumption that Pujols is the starting 1B, which he claims to be healthy, that puts Trumbo at DH, with an OF of Hamilton, Trout, and Calhoun.. none of which i would play Borjoud over at this time.

I see it isnt a popular deal...
I see it like this. Freese upgrades 3B and Salas is still probably an upgrade in the bullpen by the numbers pver most of what we ran outthere last year.
Borjous was a 4th OF and losing Grichuck sucks but he was what 7 on the depth chart?
It does have a win now feel to it, but lets be honest, isnt that what we are built for right now?

Bottom line, i like it, i think the value makes sense and the team is better today than it was yesterday.

lies, damn lies, and statistics.. if you truly beleive this, or think that we are somehow better off, you are dreaming and drinking the koolaid.
Those who have found jobs are part timers with no benefits, and many have either lost their bebefits or simply given up.
basing anything on the amount of claism being made at this time when i still see major layoffs and other such things that do not speak to people having replaced those incomes is a joke, seriously, a joke

Has anyone ever thought that the cost going up is caused by the insurance companies that are just using the excuse of the ACA to jack up their prices?

the better question is why didnt those who wrote obamacare consider this and create a rider preventing it ?  nevermind they were too busy expecmting themselves to worry about us.. silly me

I think whats come to bother me the most in recent years is how many people we see leave our organization and do better with other coaching staffs..or come to our ogranization and do worse than they should.

If there has ever been a situation that required change in the voice and message, we are it.

We have too much tlaent to be as bad as we have been over the last couple years

zero interest, we need the contracts we have to pan out

He is far from the only issue... when i see guys like Santana and others posting superior stats after leaving, im ready to can the entire coaching staff.

winning or losing is one thing, playing without caring or a complete lack of balls is something i cant stomach.
i could live with losses, if it was a good effort, wouldnt like it, but i could handle it... what i see in this team this year is anything but and a lot of missing tecticles and intenstinal fortitude.

I was never a fan of the Hamilton signing, but if I remember correctly, you started a number of threads practically begging the Angels to sign Hamilton.

I was fine with letting Santana and Haren go. Santana was way too inconsistent with the Angels and Haren had a poor year and there wasn't any signs that his 2013 season would be any better. I don't like who Dipoto signed/traded for to replace those guys.

i did, and that is not what im referring to either.

im referring to the pitching changes.. i still think the hamilton signing was the right move

and perhaps the thesis on why we need change...

i saw the article today about Haren, and after the other rrecent articles about Santana it occured to me how much better we would be if we had left well enough alone in terms of Haren, Santan, and Morales... iinstead of trying to do whatever the hades it was we were trying to do.

i dont know if we blame the front office, the coaching staff... both?

I mean bad move after bad move.. combined with the continual stream of poayers doing better after they leave us, makes me wonder WTF we were trying to do.

another fine example of ostrich syndrome... deciding not to pursue this on the basis of overpopulation is way wrong reasoning

Well isnt this just the icing on the cake of a pathetic season....
you think MLB will bail us out like they are the Yankees?

the only reason would be simply bad deals, otherwise get rid of them like Callaspo.

This is the best would could do for one of the games better relievers right now?

His numbers prior to this year at lower levels were nothing compared to this year...