Angels the "Mystery Team" in on Machado?

[Chuck]

9 minutes ago, Sean-Regan said:

Pujols, for one. 

Yep.

I remember when the Dodgers were supposed to sign Vlad Guerrero that there was a mystery team involved, but if I remember correctly everyone thought it was the Orioles, not the Angels. 

[Stradling]

I honestly think most of us that woulnd’t mind seeing this happen are just bored with how this off season has gone.  

[WeatherWonk]

2 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Or....

Maybe they could actually talk to Trout and tell him the plan.

“The best laid schemes o' mice an' men / Gang aft a-gley.”

Besides, isn't the plan "we have a lot of young talent that we are HOPEFUL will come through and allow us to compete for a WC spot at some point in the next 2-3 years, Mike." At best, a  one-game shot at the playoffs will be a selling point?

Houston will be tough for at least that long. They have three tier 1 prospects (Tucker, Whitley, Alvarez), not to mention Valdez and James who have already made it to the bigs, and were only tier 2 and 3 prospects. We have one tier 1 prospect, Adell, who hasnt hit in AAA yet.

Then, there's that infield of Bregman, Correa and Altuve who will be together through 2021, at least. Correa is a FA in '22, Bregman in '23 and Altuve in '25. Alvarez takes over first from Guriel who DHs, I guess, till he is a FA in 2023, Tucker replaces Reddick or Springer. This assumes that Bregman and Correa dont get extended the way Altuve did.

Talk about keepin' the line movin'...............

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, WeatherWonk said:

“The best laid schemes o' mice an' men / Gang aft a-gley.”

Besides, isn't the plan "we have a lot of young talent that we are HOPEFUL will come through and allow us to compete for a WC spot at some point in the next 2-3 years, Mike." At best, a  one-game shot at the playoffs will be a selling point?

Houston will be tough for at least that long. They have three tier 1 prospects (Tucker, Whitley, Alvarez), not to mention Valdez and James who have already made it to the bigs, and were only tier 2 and 3 prospects. We have one tier 1 prospect, Adell, who hasnt hit in AAA yet.

Then, there's that infield of Bregman, Correa and Altuve who will be together through 2021, at least. Correa is a FA in '22, Bregman in '23 and Altuve in '25. Alvarez takes over first from Guriel who DHs, I guess, till he is a FA in 2023, Tucker replaces Reddick or Springer. This assumes that Bregman and Correa dont get extended the way Altuve did.

Talk about keepin' the line movin'...............

Yep and all of those guys will get expensive.  Next year they lose Verlander and Cole.  That is after losing three guys from this years rotation.  

[robblin17]

What's the latest you think these guys will hold out until? Is it possible they do not sign before pitchers and catchers report?

[tdawg87]

The Angels aren't going to set the market for Trout.

[UndertheHalo]

I think the Angels should just do an uber move and sign Machado and Trout simultaneously.  That would be cool. 

[ettin]

1 hour ago, UndertheHalo said:

I think the Angels should just do an uber move and sign Machado and Trout simultaneously.  That would be cool. 

Yes that would give the team a big lyft.

[UndertheHalo]

7 minutes ago, ettin said:

Yes that would give the team a big lyft.

And I thought of it all on my own !

[Second Base]

Think of all the reasons why signing Manny Machado would be a good thing for the Angels. Now think of all the reasons why it isn't feasible or likely.

Simply put, the latter is more likely, by a mile.

Now ask yourself, is Billy Eppler an intelligent GM?

And one last question. Do you think if the common fan can see all the reasons why this is a terrible idea, do you think an intelligent professional, whose job it is to build a team can see that too?

The Angels aren't in on Machado. We could go through all the reasons why or we can keep it nice and short. 

[Docwaukee]

I've got no problem if the Angels want to spend more money to add better players that can help for now and in the future.  

I just don't like Manny Machado.  

but here's something to consider.  A Simmons extension is likely going to cost you at least 5/100.  Probably closer to 5/125.  Including his 2020 season, that 6/140.  Or an AAV of 23.3m.  

If you can get Machado at 8/220 or an aav of 27.5m, (plus that extra 2 years) does it make sense to trade Simmons after this year (who, as a 4-5 WAR player likely has very good value on the trade market), and get a couple of players including a pitcher with #1 potential and maybe our catcher of the future while only adding about 4m in AAV starting in 2021?  What if Simmons has indicated that he's got no interest in an extension?  

If Simmons wants to stay that may change people's minds, but should it?  I love Simmons, but adding Machado for 8 years from age 26-33 for an extra 4m in AAV PLUS two top prospects who are essentially major league ready vs. keeping Simmons for age 30-35 on just a little less money per year seems like something the team should absolutely consider.  

[UndertheHalo]

12 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Think of all the reasons why signing Manny Machado would be a good thing for the Angels. Now think of all the reasons why it isn't feasible or likely.

Simply put, the latter is more likely, by a mile.

Now ask yourself, is Billy Eppler an intelligent GM?

And one last question. Do you think if the common fan can see all the reasons why this is a terrible idea, do you think an intelligent professional, whose job it is to build a team can see that too?

The Angels aren't in on Machado. We could go through all the reasons why or we can keep it nice and short. 

Wait ? Why is signing Manny Machado a “terrible” idea ?  It’s not your money.  Why do you a give a shit ? The Angels can afford Manny Machado.  It’s a question of whether the ownership wants to cut into their profits to give him that contract.  Stop acting like a billionaire owner and his Major League Baseball team are barely scraping by. 

Unbelievable.  This is a very good to great 26 y/o player that we’re talking about.  And we have baseball fans on a baseball message board that have somehow galaxy brained themselves into thinking it’s a “terrible idea” 

 

Edited January 15, 2019 by UndertheHalo

[ettin]

50 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I honestly think most of us that woulnd’t mind seeing this happen are just bored with how this off season has gone.  

That may be true in most cases but Machado's attitude potential aside, he is a projected 5 WAR player who has had three seasons of 6+WAR in the last four years. Guess what I am trying to say is that Manny is not a nothingburger on the field of play and would add to our team if the Angels get crazy and go there.

[ettin]

1 hour ago, UndertheHalo said:

I think the Angels should just do an uber move and sign Machado and Trout simultaneously.  That would be cool. 

Also I am sure Moreno wouldn't mind going over the Luxury Taxi.

[UndertheHalo]

I get the reality of why they won’t sign him.  What I absolutely do not understand is why a fan would convince themselves that it would be a bad idea.  The Angels could draft players for next 10 years and conceivably fail to bring in a player as good as Manny Machado.  

[Angelsjunky]

11 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I just don't like Manny Machado.  

Ra...

Nevermind.

[Docwaukee]

1 minute ago, UndertheHalo said:

I get the reality of why they won’t sign him.  What I absolutely do not understand is why a fan would convince themselves that it would be a bad idea.  The Angels could draft players for next 10 years and conceivably fail to bring in a player as good as Manny Machado.  

it's all about two things.  Is he going to fit in and based on his behavior to date, that's questionable.  Is his contract going to limit our ability to do other stuff.  Based on Arte's track record of sticking to set budget, the answer would be yes.  So is he worth those two risks?  The answer is maybe.  

[Stradling]

21 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I've got no problem if the Angels want to spend more money to add better players that can help for now and in the future.  

I just don't like Manny Machado.  

but here's something to consider.  A Simmons extension is likely going to cost you at least 5/100.  Probably closer to 5/125.  Including his 2020 season, that 6/140.  Or an AAV of 23.3m.  

If you can get Machado at 8/220 or an aav of 27.5m, (plus that extra 2 years) does it make sense to trade Simmons after this year (who, as a 4-5 WAR player likely has very good value on the trade market), and get a couple of players including a pitcher with #1 potential and maybe our catcher of the future while only adding about 4m in AAV starting in 2021?  What if Simmons has indicated that he's got no interest in an extension?  

If Simmons wants to stay that may change people's minds, but should it?  I love Simmons, but adding Machado for 8 years from age 26-33 for an extra 4m in AAV PLUS two top prospects who are essentially major league ready vs. keeping Simmons for age 30-35 on just a little less money per year seems like something the team should absolutely consider.  

This sounds an awful like the logic behind trading Trout.  Can you imagine getting another teams two best young players, their top 5 prospects and then you get $35 million extra to spend each year?  

[Docwaukee]

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

This sounds an awful like the logic behind trading Trout.  Can you imagine getting another teams two best young players, their top 5 prospects and then you get $35 million extra to spend each year?  

except that Simmons has quantifiable value that one could expect to see in return.  Trout doesn't.  

you'd still have to find the right trade partner, but that's much easier for Simmons than Trout.  

I still view the biggest obstacle overall is choosing Machado over Simmons in terms of their character.  Which gives me tremendous pause.  

[Blarg]

I really don't think the Angels are interested in Machado's attitude for 8 years. If they could structure a 4th year buyout, essentially giving them the ability to kick him off the team for a minimal penalty, then the risk may be worth it. 

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Dochalo said:

except that Simmons has quantifiable value that one could expect to see in return.  Trout doesn't.  

you'd still have to find the right trade partner, but that's much easier for Simmons than Trout.  

I still view the biggest obstacle overall is choosing Machado over Simmons in terms of their character.  Which gives me tremendous pause.  

Yea, I get that completely.  

[Jeff Fletcher]

28 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

I've got no problem if the Angels want to spend more money to add better players that can help for now and in the future.  

I just don't like Manny Machado.  

but here's something to consider.  A Simmons extension is likely going to cost you at least 5/100.  Probably closer to 5/125.  Including his 2020 season, that 6/140.  Or an AAV of 23.3m.  

If you can get Machado at 8/220 or an aav of 27.5m, (plus that extra 2 years) does it make sense to trade Simmons after this year (who, as a 4-5 WAR player likely has very good value on the trade market), and get a couple of players including a pitcher with #1 potential and maybe our catcher of the future while only adding about 4m in AAV starting in 2021?  What if Simmons has indicated that he's got no interest in an extension?  

If Simmons wants to stay that may change people's minds, but should it?  I love Simmons, but adding Machado for 8 years from age 26-33 for an extra 4m in AAV PLUS two top prospects who are essentially major league ready vs. keeping Simmons for age 30-35 on just a little less money per year seems like something the team should absolutely consider.  

Andrelton Simmons is going to be 31 when his next contract begins.

Last season there were 3 players in the major leagues who started more than 30 games at SS at age 31 or older. (Brandon Crawford, Jordy Mercer, Alcides Escobar.)

And do you know how many started more than 30 games at SS past their 32nd birthday last year? Zero.

Now, Andrelton Simmons is great and I fully expect him to be an outlier. But not to the point that he's getting a 5-year, $100+ M deal.

[Lou]

48 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Last season there were 3 players in the major leagues who started more than 30 games at SS at age 31 or older. (Brandon Crawford, Jordy Mercer, Alcides Escobar.)

 And do you know how many started more than 30 games at SS past their 32nd birthday last year? Zero.

I'm not going to lie, this really surprises me. 

[Docwaukee]

39 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Andrelton Simmons is going to be 31 when his next contract begins.

Last season there were 3 players in the major leagues who started more than 30 games at SS at age 31 or older. (Brandon Crawford, Jordy Mercer, Alcides Escobar.)

And do you know how many started more than 30 games at SS past their 32nd birthday last year? Zero.

Now, Andrelton Simmons is great and I fully expect him to be an outlier. But not to the point that he's getting a 5-year, $100+ M deal.

I hope you are right.  I personally don't think the above 31 data applies to Simmons as if he were mortal.  His defense is beyond comparable to even outliers.  He's a legit 4-5 win player but I guess it boils down to whether you think defensive metrics are accurate in terms of establishing his worth.  I would be thrilled to get him for less than 20m per season on an extension.  

[ettin]

1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

except that Simmons has quantifiable value that one could expect to see in return.  Trout doesn't.  

you'd still have to find the right trade partner, but that's much easier for Simmons than Trout.  

I still view the biggest obstacle overall is choosing Machado over Simmons in terms of their character.  Which gives me tremendous pause.  

Personally I think keeping Simba should be the next highest priority behind keeping Trout. He has fantastic character and no one is harder on themselves when they make a mistake, his desire for perfection and his work ethic set him apart. I say extend him.