Benintendi + what is 10 WAR? I'm not the one who said Boegarts.
mike trout trade proposal
- Thread starter lenny79
- Start date
Benintendi + what is 10 WAR? I'm not the one who said Boegarts.
And I'm saying you have to pay more than equal value to get Trout.
And you're run out of town immediately.
chop2chip
Well-known member
You responded to my post where I implied X by saying "5 WAR SS".
Nope.
chop2chip
Well-known member
I mean... as shown above... that was certainly what was being discussed and you interjected. Are you challenging my point (the second quote above) or what? I can't tell
Huh? I'm saying that I never said it would take Betts, Moncada, and then 10 more WAR. I said Benintendi, who I don't think is close to 10 WAR. So you'd have to add another big piece to get there. I'm not the one who said Betts, Moncada, Benintendi AND Boegarts.
When I said 'you're not trading Trout for equal value,' I just meant that it will take more than equal value to get him. That doesn't mean I think it would take 10 WAR more than equal value.
And you're wrong for not taking Trouts massive contract into aCount. No team will overpay in prospects to add a 20 million dollar salary.
It's Mike Trout. His salary is a bargain.
I did the longhand explanation of the surplus value the Angels have gotten from Trout's deal thus far, but the site's acting up and it disappeared. To explain the short version, the Angels will break even on that 6 year/$144.5 million contract IF Trout amasses roughly the same amount of WAR Freeman delivered in 2014 between now and the end of this season and he RETIRES IN OCTOBER.
Don't know what anyone can add to that other than WOW!
Not if they wanted to be competitive. Lower payroll teams can't have a guy making $40 million and expect to contend. No matter how good the player is.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
This proposal would be enough to get Coppy committed.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Nope.
Those 3, taking Pujols's salary, Jackie Bradley, Devers, Espinosa, Travis, and Kopech, maybe.
Realize the closest to Trout being traded we've seen is Miggy, MIggy netted 2 top 10 prospects. ALso came with taking off the absolutely worthless Willis contract. Several other quality players. ANd Miggy only had 2 years IIRC of team control. Trout has at least 4 years of control.
How is the A-Rod trade not similar? Sure, at 28 years old when he was traded he wasn't quite as young as Trout is now, but he was clearly the best player in the game with a lot of control left.
Betts and JBJ is a massive overpay for Trout even if Trout were making league minimum still. Betts is the 2nd best CFer in the game behind Trout and isn't that far off him. Not the Sox would ever offer this, but the Angels would do extremely well to get Betts, Bentendi, and Moncada for Trout considering the control, money savings, and total value of that package. That's one current 6+ WAR player and two more potential 5+ WAR players for one 9 WAR player with 4 years of control left at a premium contract.
Good gosh.
Not sure about the league min part but JBJ and Betts combined have been more valuable than Trout this year. Of course there is the 'will they continue to play this well' scenario as you know what your getting with Trout.
chop2chip
Well-known member
Trout may or may not be available. That question isn't interesting to me. The interesting question is what qualifies as a win/win trade from a baseball ops perspective.
Betts and Bradley wouldn't be enough for me. If I ran the Angels, I would offer Trout, Pujols, and Simmons for Betts, X and Devers. It would clear a ton of money off their books, replace Trout with arguably the second best young player in baseball, upgrade at short stop, and they get a top 15 prospect.
Boston probably loses this trade from a value stand point, but I think they make the trade still since its Trout. The tough pill to swallow would be the money.
Betts and Bradley wouldn't be enough for me. If I ran the Angels, I would offer Trout, Pujols, and Simmons for Betts, X and Devers. It would clear a ton of money off their books, replace Trout with arguably the second best young player in baseball, upgrade at short stop, and they get a top 15 prospect.
Boston probably loses this trade from a value stand point, but I think they make the trade still since its Trout. The tough pill to swallow would be the money.