The unthinkable, an ESPN writer suggests the Angels should trade Trout with Cubs as a possible landing spot

[spaincubsfan]

Well, another site has its own version of the Trout sweepstakes. :D :D

 

http://www.mlbdailydish.com/2016/5/6/11613348/mlb-mike-trout-trade-package-every-team

 

It actually lists the Cubbies as the team with the best chance to land him. This is fun anyway.

 

Earlier today, Grant Brisbee broke just how hosed the Angels are down in a lot more detail. In it, Brisbee breaks down all the avenues the Angels potentially have with such troubling news. He playfully suggests 'trading Mike Trout' as one of the options, elaborating thusly:

 

 

"Get out of here. There is roughly a 100-percent chance that Trout will outperform every single prospect he's dealt for over the next five years, even if you add their contributions together into a single number."

 

Challenge Accepted.

 

Let's set out a few rules for this though before we jump in. There have to be a couple caveats. First, the deal has to be fathomable to happen immediately and one that would make both the Angels and the other team presumably more competitive this year as well as in the future. That means that no, the Los Angeles Dodgers would not include Clayton Kershaw in the deal.

 

Second, we'll sort by teams that work, teams that work slightly less, and the rest of the teams that definitely want Trout on their roster. Teams that work will be teams that need a centerfielder and also boast the depth to make a suitable offer. Teams that work slightly less may not be contending this year or have some other lump that deters them from making a formidable offer. And the other group is everyone else because your team needs to be in here and your GM wants Trout on his roster no matter what.

 

Third, players on the disabled list are able to be traded for the purposes of this. Pretend everyone is healthy. Except for Richards and Heaney... Because then this doesn't work.

 

Teams that might actually work

 

Chicago Cubs

 

The deal: Javier Baez, Jorge Soler, Kyle Schwarber, Gleyber Torres, Duane Underwood, Billy McKinney, and Dan Vogelbach

 

The rationale: This deal could actually do it and the Cubs wouldn't even feel the loss other than in depth and in the farm. They'd be acquiring a 10-win player that would push Dexter Fowler into a corner outfield spot for bench players and a fraction of their farm which includes three top-100 prospects. Bench players that would immediately become roster players on the Angels and prospects that would make the farm system the apple of Keith Law's eye.

 

Likelihood: 1 percent. Still nah.

[JennieGarthAlgar]

No thank you on signing a 32-year-old Andrew McCutchen to some ridiculous contract. His defense has already completely eroded. He just won't be able to play center field by then. So he's a corner outfielder for the duration of a presumably lengthy, exorbitant contract. His value on the bases is all but gone. He's been making less and less contact.

 

He was a star, and probably still is. And the Pirates have been incredibly fortunate to have him for a long time, while he was a star. But he's already slowly falling off. And he's just not going to be a good value in 2019, let alone nearly a decade from now when that next contract might run out.

I just want to go on record, once again, as being one of the only people on the, "HOLY [expletive]! GO GET JIM EDMONDS!" bandwagon after the Padres dumped him. I was also possibly the only person on this entire forum that wanted to re-sign him after 2008 (to a minimum deal, of course). The guy then took a year off baseball and came back in 2010 and OPS'd .846.

 

Oh, ok then. I'm convinced. Give McCutcheon whatever he wants. And someone get Theo to hire CubbieSwagger for the FO because he's an oracle

[Cubbie Swagger]

In all seriousness... I was pretty drunk when I made the post about Edmonds last night, and it's only loosely related to what we're talking about. Not totally sure what my point was. I was drinking the cheap stuff, Bacardi, so I didn't quite have that Grey Goose level of clarity.

 

Of course I wouldn't be in favor of signing a clearly declining player to a massive deal. When Fielder was a FA, I didn't want anything to do with him. I actually haven't paid much attention to McCutchen's defense the past few years, so if there's been a big decline, that's certainly notable.

 

I am, however, an oracle. I assume the only reason I haven't heard from any MLB executives so far is that they just simply don't have my number.

[spaincubsfan]

More smoke from sportsmockery.

 

http://sportsmockery.com/2016/05/source-indicates-cubs-working-on-blockbuster-trade-for-former-mvp/

 

We’re about six weeks into the baseball season which usually means that trade rumors really start flying around. And there’s certainly no bigger one than what TerezOwens.com is reporting today.

 

“A source close to the situation tells us the Angels and Chicago Cubs are in early discussions to make a blockbuster trade for superstar outfielder Mike Trout. The 24-year-old outfielder is owed $15.25 million this year, $19.25 million next year and $33.25 million each of the following three years. The deal would be Mike Trout for 5 of the Chicago Cubs top prospects.”

 

Now, we’re certainly not saying that he’s the most reliable source in the game, but there have been recent rumors in Chicago surrounding such a deal, so this only adds fuel to that fire. There are numerous articles floating around the web claiming Chicago is investigating Trout, TerezOwens.com is the first one to put a source on it.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

they really are trying to make a mockery of sports

[Banedon]

Awful site reports from terrible source that unbelievable things are being talked about.

[UMFan83]

I'm sure its unfounded but w/e

 

Fowler, LF

Trout, CF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Heyward, RF

Montero, C

Russell, SS

 

That looks pretty good. Then next year

 

Trout, CF

Heyward, RF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Schwarber, LF

Russell, SS

Contreras, C

 

It's fun to day dream...of course Schwarber and Contreras are both strong candidates to go in that deal but whatever I'll just say it was Baez, Soler, Torres, Underwood, Happ or something.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

except Contreras would be with the Angels

[Tim]

I'm sure its unfounded but w/e

 

Fowler, LF

Trout, CF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Heyward, RF

Montero, C

Russell, SS

 

That looks pretty good. Then next year

 

Trout, CF

Heyward, RF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Schwarber, LF

Russell, SS

Contreras, C

 

It's fun to day dream...

And then Heyward opts out and Bryant convinces his old Vegas buddy to join the fun.

 

Trout, CF

Harper, RF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Schwarber, LF

Russell, SS

Contreras, C

[Ding Dong Johnson]

and since we're high, Schwarber turns into a whiz behind the plate and Georgie realizes his true potential

[Brian]

Our entire farm system for Trout and whatever they want to send back so we can still field minor league teams.

[minnesotacubsfan]

I'm sure its unfounded but w/e

 

Fowler, LF

Trout, CF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Heyward, RF

Montero, C

Russell, SS

 

That looks pretty good. Then next year

 

Trout, CF

Heyward, RF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Schwarber, LF

Russell, SS

Contreras, C

 

It's fun to day dream...of course Schwarber and Contreras are both strong candidates to go in that deal but whatever I'll just say it was Baez, Soler, Torres, Underwood, Happ or something.

 

If we could keep Schwarbs and Contreras and get Trout? Bye bye everyone else. Hell, I'd FB happier keeping Baez and Contreras because Schwarbs gets a lil redundant with Trout

[SRQCub]

I'm sure its unfounded but w/e

 

Fowler, LF

Trout, CF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Heyward, RF

Montero, C

Russell, SS

 

That looks pretty good. Then next year

 

Trout, CF

Heyward, RF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Schwarber, LF

Russell, SS

Contreras, C

 

It's fun to day dream...

And then Heyward opts out and Bryant convinces his old Vegas buddy to join the fun.

 

Trout, CF

Harper, RF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Schwarber, LF

Russell, SS

Contreras, C

 

 

.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Schwarbs gets a lil redundant with Trout

http://persephonemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/jon-stewart-huh.gif

[Sammys Boombox]

Maybe when Tommy and siblings inherit all their money and don't have dad telling them what to do with it they will agree that since they have too many political differences they won't spend against each other and instead will just buy even more awesome baseball players.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I'm sure its unfounded but w/e

 

Fowler, LF

Trout, CF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Heyward, RF

Montero, C

Russell, SS

 

That looks pretty good. Then next year

 

Trout, CF

Heyward, RF

Bryant, 3B

Rizzo, 1B

Zobrist, 2B

Schwarber, LF

Russell, SS

Contreras, C

 

It's fun to day dream...of course Schwarber and Contreras are both strong candidates to go in that deal but whatever I'll just say it was Baez, Soler, Torres, Underwood, Happ or something.

 

If we could keep Schwarbs and Contreras and get Trout? Bye bye everyone else. Hell, I'd FB happier keeping Baez and Contreras because Schwarbs gets a lil redundant with Trout

 

We could easily get Trout without giving up Contreras, Schwarbs, and Baez. Because they'd be asking for something more along the lines of Bryant and Russell as a starting point. When you have the kind of high priced, sinking ship that the Angels have, if they're going to trade Trout, it's going to be for nothing short of an instant rebuild.

[David]

spiegel and goff just had passan on and they were talking about this theoretical trade. spiegel said he wouldn't trade 4-5 of the cubs top minor leaguers (i believe contreras, torres, almora, underwood were the names mentioned) for trout. said he wouldn't void the farm system for one guy who could get hurt. he was appropriately laughed at by passan and goff, at least.

[KingCubsFan]

You have to give up one of Bryant or Russell but are able to pull off the trade without having to give up both. Which one do you trade? I lean Bryant.

[David]

You have to give up one of Bryant or Russell but are able to pull off the trade without having to give up both. Which one do you trade? I lean Bryant.

 

i trade russell. even if russell ends up the better player, it won't be THAT much better and bryant i already feel very certain about as a superstar.

 

oh and i traded him for the 24 year old best player of this generation, so i wouldn't cry over it no matter what he became anyway

[Ding Dong Johnson]

best player of this generation

http://cdnph.upi.com/sv/b/upi/UPI-2521436242114/2015/1/1f2618b2ebc748d319d52f33fbfa3dd7/Bryce-Harper-to-skip-Home-Run-Derby.jpg

 

Bryce says 2nd

[David]

bryce is wrong

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I wouldn't be so quick to make that statement so definitively

[David]

I wouldn't be so quick to make that statement so definitively

 

i would.

 

trout has 41 career WAR before his 25th birthday.

 

harper has 21 before his 24th. amazing, yes. and yet, not even close to trout.

 

even after his breakout last year, harper is at 11.5 from 2015-today. trout is at 11.4 in that same span.

 

mike trout is 7th since 1900 for WAR 25 and under, despite having at least 169 fewer games played than the next lowest (rogers hornsby) on that list. next next lowest have 263 more games played - mantle and arod.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=y&type=8&season=2016&month=0&season1=1900&ind=0&team=&rost=&age=14,25&filter=&players=

 

trout is baseball mt rushmore good. harper has a lot of catching up to do to be that.

[sneakypower]

if anybody overtakes Trout (won't happen), it might actually be Machado now that he's at SS

[CP_414]

I wouldn't be so quick to make that statement so definitively

 

i would.

 

trout has 41 career WAR before his 25th birthday.

 

harper has 21 before his 24th. amazing, yes. and yet, not even close to trout.

 

even after his breakout last year, harper is at 11.5 from 2015-today. trout is at 11.4 in that same span.

 

mike trout is 7th since 1900 for WAR 25 and under, despite having at least 169 fewer games played than the next lowest (rogers hornsby) on that list. next next lowest have 263 more games played - mantle and arod.

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=y&type=8&season=2016&month=0&season1=1900&ind=0&team=&rost=&age=14,25&filter=&players=

 

trout is baseball mt rushmore good. harper has a lot of catching up to do to be that.

 

I'd take Harper over the next 10 years. Defense peaks early, trout runs less than he used to, and Bryce is the better hitter.

 

There's not really a wrong answer here, but moving forward I'd take Harper.