Stanton Clears Waivers

[totdprods]

3 minutes ago, zenmaster said:

I just don't see us getting involved in another long contract like this outside of Trout. We just ditched Hamilton (almost) and will be feeling the negative effects of the Pujols contract for another 4 painful years. I just don't think they want to risk it again with Pujols still having nearly half his deal left. 

Don't you all see this as similar to Pujols but with a stronger first 5 years? The last 5 years could end up being horrible. 

Of course it's similar and of course there's risk. It's never stopped the Angels from spending to the point of detriment before though so I don't think it can't be ruled out.

It could absolutely backfire but Arte has rolled the dice before, so it wouldn't be unprecedented for him to do it again.

[Dtwncbad]

It is significantly different than Pujols.

Stanton's deal captures age 27 through age 32 years, which are prime years and is over at age 37.

The Pujols deal didn't even begin until he was out of those prime years.

Look up what Pujols did age 27 to 32 and tell me you wouldn't want those numbers with his contract now about to expire, rather than what the Angels got from him from age 32 to now with 4 more years still hanging out there.

There is a HUGE difference.

 

[ten ocho recon scout]

49 minutes ago, Revad said:

Here's a look from the outside of Angels fandom at the chances of various teams acquiring Stanton by Grant Brisbee at SB Nation- guess where the Angels fall?

https://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2017/8/15/16151072/giancarlo-stanton-trade-rumors-yankees-cubs-red-sox-dodgers

 

 

I like the idea of building a moon base for trout.

I agree with that article. I dont see stanton moving, and if he does, it wont be here.

The dodgers make a ton of sense. But i also wonder if they balk at his price tag..not because they cant afford him,  ut because they dont "need" him.

The only part i disagree is the angels not being able to afford trout and stanton. Yes they can.

[stormngt]

43 minutes ago, zenmaster said:

I just don't see us getting involved in another long contract like this outside of Trout. We just ditched Hamilton (almost) and will be feeling the negative effects of the Pujols contract for another 4 painful years. I just don't think they want to risk it again with Pujols still having nearly half his deal left. 

Don't you all see this as similar to Pujols but with a stronger first 5 years? The last 5 years could end up being horrible. 

Stanton last five years would be 32-37.  Pujols first five years were 32-37.  Can't compare the two.

[ten ocho recon scout]

You could probably buy the city of Stanton for less money. Giancarlo is still worth more, though.

[zenmaster]

Would you guys do it if you could have 5 good years (similar to what he is now) and then 5 years where his numbers plummet similar to Pujols?

[ten ocho recon scout]

10 minutes ago, zenmaster said:

Would you guys do it if you could have 5 good years (similar to what he is now) and then 5 years where his numbers plummet similar to Pujols?

Personally, i would. I know theres some "fool me once" with that. But i think stanton is one of those rare cases where its worth it. Being that his front 5 years would be good enough (id think) to stomach the ending 

And i dont think hed drop off as bad as pujols. Pujols was obviously better at the same age. The question, for me, is whether pujols was really the correct age...

[m0nkey]

33 minutes ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

You could probably buy the city of Stanton for less money. Giancarlo is still worth more, though.

But then you'd be stuck with the city of Stanton

[ten ocho recon scout]

Just now, m0nkey said:

But then you'd be stuck with the city of Stanton

And sosh would still bat it 4th.

[zenmaster]

Trout, Pujols, Stanton batting 2,3,4 would be quite funny. We'd hear something about how the big power guy needs to hit cleanup!

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

4 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

The Marlins already are in the toilet in attendance even with Stanton hitting bombs.

That means nothing. He is still their only marketable asset for MLB and even the games on TV....

[Angel Oracle]

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

Stanton last five years would be 32-37.  Pujols first five years were 32-37.  Can't compare the two.

True, one big difference though is the durability of the two players through age 27.

Pujols seldom missed a game.  Stanton has missed significant action in half of his seasons so far.   That is a big risk to take on.

[stormngt]

4 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

True, one big difference though is the durability of the two players through age 27.

Pujols seldom missed a game.  Stanton has missed significant action in half of his seasons so far.   That is a big risk to take on.

Pujols seldom missed a game prior to age 32.  He seems to constantly be injured now.  

Anything we should have learned is that anyone can get injured.  Heany, Richard's, and Skaggs are all young.  Better is old.  

The injury risk is always there.  If your worried about it stay put of the FA market.

[Angel Oracle]

Risk is fine.   Risk for a guy still owed $295 million, and who has already been hurt a lot, is another story.   And that's even without the Hackilton history. 

[Chuck]

Jon Morosi of FOX Sports hears the Marlins are "willing to engage with other teams" on a possible Giancarlo Stanton trade.

Stanton cleared revocable waivers on Sunday, so he's eligible to be dealt to any club -- assuming he would not exercise his full no-trade protection. Miami's asking price is probably sky high even with Stanton owed more than $285 million on a mega-contract that runs through 2027. The 27-year-old slugger is batting .285/.376/.646 with a league-leading 44 home runs and 94 RBI in 116 games this season.

 

 

Source: Jon Morosi on Twitter

[ettin]

11 minutes ago, Chuckster70 said:

Jon Morosi of FOX Sports hears the Marlins are "willing to engage with other teams" on a possible Giancarlo Stanton trade.

Stanton cleared revocable waivers on Sunday, so he's eligible to be dealt to any club -- assuming he would not exercise his full no-trade protection. Miami's asking price is probably sky high even with Stanton owed more than $285 million on a mega-contract that runs through 2027. The 27-year-old slugger is batting .285/.376/.646 with a league-leading 44 home runs and 94 RBI in 116 games this season.

 

 

Source: Jon Morosi on Twitter

If the Angels took on all salary of both Stanton and Gordon the prospect price wouldn't be as high. $35M to AAV between the two of them with the likelihood that both would be off our books after 2020 (Stanton would opt-out probably and Gordon's option wouldn't have to be picked up for 2021).

Would still have plenty of payroll to lock up Trout and find a starter in free agency (not a top one though) or trade (more  likely with whatever trade currency we have left).

However this is all a moot point as the Angels didn't put in a claim so that sounds the bell that they too do not want to take on Giancarlo's full salary (and maybe they shouldn't) so as I have said before this is a real long shot. The Phillies or perhaps the Braves have a better shot at it overall.

[m0nkey]

Or, unfortunately, the dogs

[Angelsfan1984]

I would be surprised if This costs nothing but money and no prospects. If they ask for even a B level prospect tell them to kick rocks. I'm taking this deal all day long to protect Trout. Use the prospects to get higher end pitching and go from there.

[totdprods]

42 minutes ago, ettin said:

If the Angels took on all salary of both Stanton and Gordon the prospect price wouldn't be as high. $35M to AAV between the two of them with the likelihood that both would be off our books after 2020 (Stanton would opt-out probably and Gordon's option wouldn't have to be picked up for 2021).

Would still have plenty of payroll to lock up Trout and find a starter in free agency (not a top one though) or trade (more  likely with whatever trade currency we have left).

However this is all a moot point as the Angels didn't put in a claim so that sounds the bell that they too do not want to take on Giancarlo's full salary (and maybe they shouldn't) so as I have said before this is a real long shot. The Phillies or perhaps the Braves have a better shot at it overall.

Unless Stanton uses his no-trade clause. 
We don't know what Stanton want, but if he purely is only interested in leaving Miami for home, it could be down to the Dodgers and Angels.

[zenmaster]

29 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Unless Stanton uses his no-trade clause. 
We don't know what Stanton want, but if he purely is only interested in leaving Miami for home, it could be down to the Dodgers and Angels.

That doesn't bode well for us lol

[ten ocho recon scout]

As far as him getting hurt, off the top of my head, werent they all on kimd of understanable events? Like collisions, hit by pitches etc? (Not just saying he feels pain)

[totdprods]

6 minutes ago, zenmaster said:

That doesn't bode well for us lol

Well, I mentioned above, I don't think the Dodgers are quite as formidable here. 
They're nearly a perfect team right now. Historically, one of the best. I'm sure they'd love to add Stanton and no doubt could make room for him and have gobs of money, but with Bellinger, Seager, Verdugo, Taylor, Pederson, Puig they really have a pretty badass offensive unit for the foreseeable future. Some of those folks will start earning big extensions. 

If anything, their pitching is going to need some attention and money. With Urias hurt and having dipped into some SP prospect depth recently, that well isn't as deep and we've seen how expensive pitching is these days. They're probably better off spending Stanton money on pitching over the next few years. I think they'll be fine offensively in the meantime.

[floplag]

Just food for thought, but per various media today the Marlins are actually willing to discuss a trade for him.  
Clearly anyone on that club could be had if thats true, including Gordon more than likely.
Hold up appears to be the money of course,  but one has to believe that IF we were willing to take it on it wouldnt cost much in terms of prospects if anything. 
So why dont we got get both, plug Stanton into LF, move Cowart to third, give them back Maybin and Escobars expiring deals and start selling tickets for October?  
just a thought... lol 

Sources:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/mlb/report-marlins-open-to-giancarlo-stanton-trade-talks/ar-AAqcUGX?li=BBnba9I

https://twitter.com/jonmorosi?ref_src=twsrc^tfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.yardbarker.com%2Fmlb%2Farticles%2Freport_marlins_open_to_giancarlo_stanton_trade_talks%2Fs1_127_24548506

[red321]

baseball isn't like basketball. Expiring deals really don't mean shit.

If they were to deal it would require prospects...lots of them...

[floplag]

9 minutes ago, red321 said:

baseball isn't like basketball. Expiring deals really don't mean shit.

If they were to deal it would require prospects...lots of them...

Not if they expect us to take on the cash it doesnt, or at least takes far less and falls to the range of a farm like ours.   
Dont get me wrong i highly doubt it possible i just found it odd that they would admit it openly after noone claimed him suggesting they really hoped someone would.   Seems clear Jeter's group of new ownership wants to start fresh.  
Is it likely.. .of course not, but noone is taking on that contract plus giving up the farm for the privilege of doing so. 

Its worth consideration just for the mere possibility of him hitting behind Trout, lol