Is a trade for Trout out of the question?

[HighHeat19]

This maybe a far fetched idea but it does have some merit.

 

Brewers receive:

Trout- Will still be in his prime when Brewers contend. 17' Salary $20,000,000

 

 

Angels receive:

Braun- Angels are on his trade list. 17 Salary $20,000,000

Guerra- Much needed Starter for L.A. 17 Salary $507,000

Thornburg- Much needed relief pitcher for L.A. 17 Salary $2,200,200

Gennett- L.A. has a current hole at 2nd base. 17 Salary $3,000,000

Broxton- Takes over immediately in CF for Trout. 17 Salary $507,000

Nelson- Will be 30 the time Brewers compete. 17 Salary $507,000

 

This trade may seem fantasy like but I could see this working for both teams. If you really want to push the envelope. You could balance the salaries by adding Garza for Pujols if the Angels see the Pujols contract as a lead lifejacket. However, I would want Matt Thaiss for taking on Pujol's contract.

 

Yes? No? or am I out of mind with this offer? At least with the initial offer.

[adambr2]

First, Trout has a full NTC. Can't see Milwaukee high on his preferred destination list.

 

That package also isn't enough. You can't make up for quality with quantity and even though there is some quality in that deal, it isn't close to enough to land Trout. There is not a single prospect in that system to rebuild their farm which is what I'm sure they'll want to do if they ever trade Trout. My guess is if we were in the position to even try to pursue him, which we're not, you'd probably have to offer all of Brinson, Hader or Ortiz, Ray, and Isan Diaz right off the bat just to get them to even pick up the phone and listen.

[HighHeat19]

Well, I forgot about the no trade clause. Moderators can delete this post/thread.

[adambr2]

Well, I forgot about the no trade clause. Moderators can delete this post/thread.

 

Hey, it never hurts to speculate. I think there's a good chance Trout ends up agreeing to go somewhere. Just doesn't seem like a fit right now, doubt he would want to go to a small market to be part of a rebuild, and because we're rebuilding I don't think we'd be wanting to part with the prospects that it would take.

[reillymcshane]

Well, I forgot about the no trade clause. Moderators can delete this post/thread.

Hey, it's all fun. Can't hurt to play with an idea. I might spark some other good discussions as well.

[MilwaukeeBeers]

TBH with you I don't think that's even close to enough. Sure quantity is good, but even if Trout was on the last year of his contract he'd still command Arcia TO START + multiple blue chips. Honestly the LAA are fools to even consider dealing him he's a generational talent. To think we could have had him...

 

Damn you Mark Teixieira!!!

[JosephC]

Pretending there wasn't a no trade clause in place. This would be too light in terms of quality and too light from the prospect end. If I'm the Angels I'd ask for 3 MLB pieces and 3 top minor league pieces. Not unreasonable at all for a talent like Trout.

 

I'd say:

Braun

Thornburg

Gennett

Brinson

Hader

Ortiz or Bickford

[jerichoholicninja]

If you want to destroy any chance of the Brewers being competitive in the next 10 years I suppose it's possible.

[brewcrewdue80]

Agree on account what good does it do to have Trout with absolutely no Pitching to speak of.

[homer]

It could work but pretty much every single one of the top minor league pitching prospects has to pan out. I don't see any of the six guys listed outside of maybe Broxton on the next contending team. And if he continues to improve you have to think they'll trade him to make room at some point.

[MrTPlush]

It could work but pretty much every single one of the top minor league pitching prospects has to pan out. I don't see any of the six guys listed outside of maybe Broxton on the next contending team. And if he continues to improve you have to think they'll trade him to make room at some point.

To bad we just traded them for Trout in this situation.

[homer]

It could work but pretty much every single one of the top minor league pitching prospects has to pan out. I don't see any of the six guys listed outside of maybe Broxton on the next contending team. And if he continues to improve you have to think they'll trade him to make room at some point.

To bad we just traded them for Trout in this situation.

 

 

I'm going off the original proposal in this thread which admittedly is not close to enough.

[MadThinker88]

I'll take the Angels side on this one. Trust me, the cost is greater then you realize. For the best player in baseball, I need someone that is at least in the CURRENT top 10. Absent that the package must be overwhelming as most fans will crucify the Angels FO for moving Trout away.

 

At this time, the Brewers do not have a player that is top 10 in all of baseball. That means a massive package of talents. Current and future talents.

 

If you don't want me to hang up on you, I need the following players (non negotiable): Villar, Arcia, Hader & Nelson.

 

I also need 3 of the following group: Jorge Lopez, Ryan Braun, Thornburg, Brinson, I. Diaz, any pick Brewers might get in competitive balance lottery this year (if no pick received, this option unable to be used).

 

I'll be nice enough to let you choose the 3 from that group but those names/ picks are the limit of the group.

[MNBrew]

I'll take the Angels side on this one. Trust me, the cost is greater then you realize. For the best player in baseball, I need someone that is at least in the CURRENT top 10. Absent that the package must be overwhelming as most fans will crucify the Angels FO for moving Trout away.

 

At this time, the Brewers do not have a player that is top 10 in all of baseball. That means a massive package of talents. Current and future talents.

 

If you don't want me to hang up on you, I need the following players (non negotiable): Villar, Arcia, Hader & Nelson.

 

I also need 3 of the following group: Jorge Lopez, Ryan Braun, Thornburg, Brinson, I. Diaz, any pick Brewers might get in competitive balance lottery this year (if no pick received, this option unable to be used).

 

I'll be nice enough to let you choose the 3 from that group but those names/ picks are the limit of the group.

That's like the Von Hayes trade, except Trout's turned out to be all the player and way more that Hayes was estimated to be -- and for much longer than Hayes was before Cleveland traded him.

 

It's funny how Braun's past transgressions -- for which he's long admitted and accepted full culpability, and since moved on honorably -- and the injury stuff from years past color folks' thinking enough now like they're still immediate issues (the injury thing, of course, is still present to some extent now, but the guy still averaged playing 6 out of 7 days a week). It's also frustrating how Braun is SO undervalued as an asset by many on this site that so many of you feel that A) we should trade him no matter what, even for a lesser return, and B) we should expect to pay a good chunk of his salary in any deal. . . . Yet if we were, for instance, Cardinals fans looking at him as an impending acquisition and knowing how the Cardinals operate (much as we often don't like it), we'd know it would be typical Cardinals form to pay 3-4 good young assets for him AND take on his full contract in spite of his current age. That being the case, and given that any comparable FA matching Braun's track record of production would earn at least $5M/year more on the open market, there's no reason at all to include any cash in a deal -- witness Yoenis Cespedes, who's less of a player than Braun in every aspect of his game except his arm strength!!! (and also has 5 fewer years of experience while only 2 years younger than Braun and, career-wise, only average 6 more games played per year than Braun including the year Braun only played in 60-ish).

 

When one of the game's top catchers on a way-friendly deal and a fireballing entering-his-prime closer (only a year older than Chapman) having a great year only net you 3 of a team's top 10 prospects, there's no realistic way Mike Trout costs any team 7 good (elite, in Braun's case) players and top prospects. . . .

 

Yes, Trout (career .963 OPS) is about the most-elite bat in the game -- a notch up from Braun (career .910 OPS -- almost all of the difference being in Trout's stellar walk rate (btw, Trout K's at a notably greater rate than Braun)) in most facets of the game -- but Braun's still an elite bat, too, and costs and average of $4M/yr. less than Trout. . . .

 

Re-stated, sure, Braun's a step down from Trout, but Braun's still a step up from almost the entire rest of MLB hitters. So if you offer Braun in a trade, you only offer 2 top young players and maybe, at most, one other decent asset (whether decent MLB player or a 3rd prospect).

[trwi7]

If the Angels decide to trade Trout, they're going to be rebuilding, which makes pretty much every one of the players except maybe Broxton not wanted by them.

 

For Trout you probably start with Arcia, add one of Ray and Brinson, two of Ortiz, Hader and Bickford, two of (Isan) Diaz, Diplan and Phillips and then maybe a wildcard like Nathan Kirby or someone like that.

[adambr2]

I'll take the Angels side on this one. Trust me, the cost is greater then you realize. For the best player in baseball, I need someone that is at least in the CURRENT top 10. Absent that the package must be overwhelming as most fans will crucify the Angels FO for moving Trout away.

 

At this time, the Brewers do not have a player that is top 10 in all of baseball. That means a massive package of talents. Current and future talents.

 

If you don't want me to hang up on you, I need the following players (non negotiable): Villar, Arcia, Hader & Nelson.

 

I also need 3 of the following group: Jorge Lopez, Ryan Braun, Thornburg, Brinson, I. Diaz, any pick Brewers might get in competitive balance lottery this year (if no pick received, this option unable to be used).

 

I'll be nice enough to let you choose the 3 from that group but those names/ picks are the limit of the group.

 

So Villar, Arcia, Hader, Nelson, Lopez, Thornburg, and a competitive balance pick for Trout.

 

Gotta say, I still don't think that's enough.

[brewcrewdue80]

So how much money are the Angels sending if we're giving them 6players? I understand including a Villar or Arcia, but not both, not with Hader&Thornburg. And of course you cant possibly take Trout w/o putting Brinson in the trade. Since the void in CF needs replacing.

 

It'd probably go Villar, Thornburg, Brinson, Hader, Isan Diaz. +someont in the 20-25 ranking in Brewers system.

For Trout and 5mil per year remaining on contract.

[endaround]

Wow these are nowhere near enough. Trout is a consistent 9(!!!!!) win player. That means he is worth about $75-80 million per year. For the reamin years on his contract he is being paid $119 million. There is $181 million in excess value there. You would need to start with Davies, Brinson and Hader and then build on that with like Arcia and Diaz. The Angles aren't taking back older risks like Villar or Broxton except as tertiary pieces. And they aren't taking on guys who may be out of the major leagues by next year in Nelson and Gennett.

[MadThinker88]

So how much money are the Angels sending if we're giving them 6players? I understand including a Villar or Arcia, but not both, not with Hader&Thornburg. And of course you cant possibly take Trout w/o putting Brinson in the trade. Since the void in CF needs replacing.

 

It'd probably go Villar, Thornburg, Brinson, Hader, Isan Diaz. +someont in the 20-25 ranking in Brewers system.

For Trout and 5mil per year remaining on contract.

 

...................

 

Computer voice: "your party is no longer on the line"

[brewcrewdue80]

So how much money are the Angels sending if we're giving them 6players? I understand including a Villar or Arcia, but not both, not with Hader&Thornburg. And of course you cant possibly take Trout w/o putting Brinson in the trade. Since the void in CF needs replacing.

 

It'd probably go Villar, Thornburg, Brinson, Hader, Isan Diaz. +someont in the 20-25 ranking in Brewers system.

For Trout and 5mil per year remaining on contract.

 

...................

 

Computer voice: "your party is no longer on the line"

 

5 top 100 prospect. 2 that have produced now to that ranking in Thornburg and Villar. Near 7WAR in those 2. And thats with Villar losing Def WAR playing 3rd. Stays at 2b/SS hes 4.5+. Those are the lowest of the 5. Brinson/Hader are both top 40. Diaz is top 75 and Id believe top 30 by midseason.

 

Click? How about you tell me the better offer proposed to you by another team?

20-25 has Demi O, Jake Gatewood, Brandon Woodruff, via MLB ranks.

 

You know what League Angels play in? AL....position players must get on avg at least 75 more PAs over 140 game period. Thats why I put Villar over Arcia because to me Villar has higher Offensive tools. Vs Arcia's Defensive tools. Diaz is going to be so good offensively off all 5 I see him becoming AS and 5+WAR producing at 2b. Brian Dozier/Roughned Odor type of excitement with bat. Hader reportedly a legit TOR potential.

 

That is 3AS 1 very good Late Inning tpye. And Brinson who I fear being a Leonys Martin type of disappointment.

 

Still. Dont Like that offer? The ceilings are high in the prospects. Villar. Thronburg.

Again, throw me better offers from other teams before saying just Click.

[3and2Fastball]

I think it'd be more like Trout for Braun, Arcia, Nelson, Hader, Brinson, Villar

[adambr2]

I think the way this conversation is unfolding is kind of illustrating the point that there just isn't an offer out there good enough for Trout.

 

This is the dilemma for the Angels. They can't get fair value for Trout, he's just too valuable. In any case of them trading him they'd want a boatload of prospects. Most teams do not even have a good enough farm system to even pursue him. On the other hand, they're not winning right now with him, so it doesn't really pay to even have a Trout talent on the roster if you'll never win with him.

[HighHeat19]

The point should be that 1 Trout doesn't = a playoff team as we can see in the Angels the last few years. So why would you give a high number of touted prospects and all star vets for 1 guy? From what everyone's saying as far as what you need to trade for Trout. And looking at each side of the fulcrum equally. I take the package of players vs 1 Trout. Give me a Braun, Brinson, Hader, Guerra, Thornburg, Bickford any day over a Trout. As the old saying goes, no I in team.

[MKE81]

The point should be that 1 Trout doesn't = a playoff team as we can see in the Angels the last few years. So why would you give a high number of touted prospects and all star vets for 1 guy? From what everyone's saying as far as what you need to trade for Trout. And looking at each side of the fulcrum equally. I take the package of players vs 1 Trout. Give me a Braun, Brinson, Hader, Guerra, Thornburg, Bickford any day over a Trout. As the old saying goes, no I in team.

I couldn't agree more. I think we all agree he's an elite player even with just the HOF players. Even if he's a 9 WAR the cost, both in terms of prospects/vets and financial, is insanely absurd that it doesn't even make sense to do it.

 

Between Braun, Villar, Thornburg + Arcia, Brinson, Diaz (not to mention Ray, Phillips, Erceg, Clark, Nottingham given they're AL) + Hader, Ortiz, Bickford, Woodruff. The Brewers absolutely have enough talent to land Trout. Doesn't make sense to do so (not that people are saying it does but...)

[adambr2]

The point should be that 1 Trout doesn't = a playoff team as we can see in the Angels the last few years. So why would you give a high number of touted prospects and all star vets for 1 guy? From what everyone's saying as far as what you need to trade for Trout. And looking at each side of the fulcrum equally. I take the package of players vs 1 Trout. Give me a Braun, Brinson, Hader, Guerra, Thornburg, Bickford any day over a Trout. As the old saying goes, no I in team.

I couldn't agree more. I think we all agree he's an elite player even with just the HOF players. Even if he's a 9 WAR the cost, both in terms of prospects/vets and financial, is insanely absurd that it doesn't even make sense to do it.

 

Between Braun, Villar, Thornburg + Arcia, Brinson, Diaz (not to mention Ray, Phillips, Erceg, Clark, Nottingham given they're AL) + Hader, Ortiz, Bickford, Woodruff. The Brewers absolutely have enough talent to land Trout. Doesn't make sense to do so (not that people are saying it does but...)

 

It depends what your existing supporting cast and financial flexibility is though, too. I agree it doesn't make any sense for us to do so.

 

The one team I could possibly see it making sense for is the Yankees. They have a top tier farm and therefore have the pieces to pull it off, but they also have a good enough existing team to contend, not to mention plenty of financial flexibility to not only acquire Trout, but keep him in town. A player like Trout could push them over the top and make them WS favorites.