The Official (2024) Los Angeles Angels Trade Deadline Thread

[totdprods]

3 minutes ago, AngelStew43 said:

I’d still be trying to ply Brett Baty from the Mets, if I’m Perry.

I keep wondering if there’s a scenario where we “buy” a prospect by taking on some bad money too. Wouldn’t hurt to try and nab a vet SP to add to 2025 rotation with Sandoval out, and gives them more flexibility in considering dealing Anderson, Canning or Detmers now or later.

[m0nkey]

I like it, former prospect for prospect swap 

 

[mmc]

 

[totdprods]

Just now, m0nkey said:

I like it, former prospect for prospect swap 

 

I think Yorke was also up against R5 eligibility and they had a roster crunch in the future. Believe I read the Dodgers have a ton of guys about to hit a crunch too. 

[m0nkey]

2 minutes ago, mmc said:

 

Well there you go @totdprods 

[Inside Pitch]

2 minutes ago, totdprods said:

I think Yorke was also up against R5 eligibility and they had a roster crunch in the future. Believe I read the Dodgers have a ton of guys about to hit a crunch too. 

Check out the logjam of arms at the top of their MLB pipeline list.

[mmc]

 

[totdprods]

16 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Check out the logjam of arms at the top of their MLB pipeline list.

Makes so much sense to swing a deal there, both clubs match each other’s needs so well.

[Ochocinco!]

16 minutes ago, totdprods said:

I keep wondering if there’s a scenario where we “buy” a prospect by taking on some bad money too. Wouldn’t hurt to try and nab a vet SP to add to 2025 rotation with Sandoval out, and gives them more flexibility in considering dealing Anderson, Canning or Detmers now or later.

It’s not the greatest option but Nestor Cortes seems to be available… looks like Yankees want guys that they can plug into the lineup. Idk what a Rengifo for Nestor plus stuff would like like but that would give us atleast 1 MLB level arm for the rotation next year outside of Soriano

[mmc]

 

[mmc]

 

[Second Base]

Speaking with a front office friend of mine: “The Angels have offers right now, one of which is ours, that would give them eight of their top ten prospects in their system. They just have to not screw this one up.”

[Fake Chow]

Can you give us a hint on the org that would be sending 8 of their top 10 prospects?

[Ochocinco!]

Just now, Fake Chow said:

Can you give us a hint on the org that would be sending 8 of their top 10 prospects?

Dodgers

[jsnpritchett]

2 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Speaking with a front office friend of mine: “The Angels have offers right now, one of which is ours, that would give them eight of their top ten prospects in their system. They just have to not screw this one up.”

Sorry, but I'm not buying that. They'd get 8 guys who would rank higher than Moore, assuming Dana and Rada are the top 2? I find that very hard to believe. 

[jsnpritchett]

1 minute ago, Fake Chow said:

Can you give us a hint on the org that would be sending 8 of their top 10 prospects?

 

Just now, Ochocinco! said:

Dodgers

I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying 8 of the guys the Angels would acquire would slot into the top 10 prospects in the Angels system--not that one team would be sending 8 of their top 10 to the Angels. 

[Fake Chow]

Just now, jsnpritchett said:

Sorry, but I'm not buying that. They'd get 8 guys who would rank higher than Moore, assuming Dana and Rada are the top 2? I find that very hard to believe. 

I read that as the org trading with us giving up 8 of their 10 top prospects.  

[jsnpritchett]

Just now, Fake Chow said:

I read that as the org trading with us giving up 8 of their 10 top prospects.  

Nope. Re-read it. "They" and "theirs" refer to the Angels in that post. 

Edited July 29 by jsnpritchett

[totdprods]

I imagine that means between the different offers they have for their different players, they would collectively add 8 guys to their Top 10.

[Second Base]

I believe I didn’t communicate this correctly. If they indeed except the multiple offers, they have on the table or several of their players, eight of their top 10 prospects will have been acquired at this deadline. We are not talking about one deal.

[jsnpritchett]

Just now, totdprods said:

I imagine that means between the different offers they have for their different players, they would collectively add 8 guys to their Top 10.

Yes, that's what I said--but I still don't buy it, because as I said, that one mean one of Moore, Dana, or Rada would no longer be in the top 10. Do you really think the Angels are going to get 8 prospects that are better than one of those three?

[Fake Chow]

1 minute ago, jsnpritchett said:

Nope. Re-read it. 

Reading it that way kind of pisses me off. HA!

 

With that said, I could get over it pretty quickly if that was true and we got a bunch of talent added to our system.

[Inside Pitch]

6 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

 

I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying 8 of the guys the Angels would acquire would slot into the top 10 prospects in the Angels system--not that one team would be sending 8 of their top 10 to the Angels. 

Clearly it's the Vikings and they're trying to make people stop talking about the Herschel Walker trade.

[jsnpritchett]

Just now, Second Base said:

I believe I didn’t communicate this correctly. If they indeed except the multiple offers, they have on the table or several of their players, eight of their top 10 prospects will have been acquired at this deadline. We are not talking about one deal.

You communicated it just fine. People can't read. Ha ha. 

My issue with it is that I just don't think the Angels are going to collectively acquire 8 guys who are better than one of Rada, Dana, and Moore. That would pretty much mean they're getting 8 top 100-125 guys.

[Second Base]

I assume he’s talking about Anderson, Rengifo, Ward, Canning, Detmers, the bullpen, etc.