2023 Irrevocable Waiver Period (lol Angels)
- Thread starter DeadlySplitter
- Start date
Although this Spotrac page where it says they are $210k over is pretty popcorn-worthy...
https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/tax/
https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/tax/
Worth noting that each of the payroll tracking sites are estimating some of the costs included in the salary calculations, such as player benefits and salaries for 40-man players in the minors. So when it comes to teams that are that close to the cap, there likely isn't going to be a definitive answer about over/under the threshold.
Giolito will make his Cleveland debut on Monday in the opening game of a 3-game series against Minnesota that Cleveland essentially must sweep. It's the last series between the two this year and the Twins have a much easier schedule the rest of the way.
MLB Traderumors says it doesn’t look like it but the Angels could dump Rengifo or Estevez as they are signed for next year and a team might claim them.
LAA GM confirmed they did not make it under: https://www.latimes.com/sports/angels/story/2023-09-01/angels-luxury-tax-threshold.
Dumping all this talent means LAA is going to be tanking for a few years, right?
Wonder what Trout thinks of all this. He's going to talk to LAA brass over the winter about the team's direction: https://clutchpoints.com/angels-news-mike-trout-issues-cryptic-take-future-sidesteps-trade-question
Dumping all this talent means LAA is going to be tanking for a few years, right?
Wonder what Trout thinks of all this. He's going to talk to LAA brass over the winter about the team's direction: https://clutchpoints.com/angels-news-mike-trout-issues-cryptic-take-future-sidesteps-trade-question
UPDATE: Max Stassi has agreed not to be paid the rest of the season. The Angels WILL duck under the tax.
View: https://twitter.com/SamBlum3/status/1698398925219373446
View: https://twitter.com/SamBlum3/status/1698398925219373446
Or not? This organization man...
View: https://twitter.com/jefffletcherocr/status/1698412808118165952?s=46&t=Qz7I4ureqNulK1gfe3b-IQ
View: https://twitter.com/jefffletcherocr/status/1698412808118165952?s=46&t=Qz7I4ureqNulK1gfe3b-IQ
I'm surprised this didn't get any reaction here.
I started thinking, should the Sox try to trade for Trout? And what would that trade look like?
So first I went to Baseball Trade Values (yeah yeah yeah) and they've got his contract underwater by $95M. Ouch. He's due $37.1M per year from '24 to '30, his age 32-38 seasons. The past three years (including '23) he's played 36, 119 and 82 games. He still produces when he plays, with bWARs of 1.8, 6.3, and 2.7 those years. But will he be able to play enough to justify that salary? So Trout himself comes with big question marks.
Then there's the question of what the Angels would want. A lot probably comes down to Ohtani. If he signs elsewhere, do they concede it's time for a rebuild and try to get what value they can from Trout? If they are able to sign Ohtani, it's doubtful they'd also trade Trout, right? (Although a Nomar-like trade of a great but increasingly brittle player on the wrong side of his prime for a haul to supplement an Ohtani re-signing might not be a bad idea.) So, to build the farm or to trade for now?
On the Sox side, why would you trade for Trout, what would you do with him, and what would you trade? The Why is easy to answer -- because he's the greatest player of his generation and whenever he's on the field he's still incredibly valuable. What do the do with him -- I think his CF days are over, and you don't want him in RF in Fenway, so he plays LF and sometimes DH.
Before going any further, I'm going to opine that none of this makes sense for the Sox. In fact, I don't see taking on Trout (or the Angels trading Trout) make sense for any team. On the Angels side, they wold HAVE TO get something for the greatest player of his generation. But at this point to get a decent package they would likely have to pay a big chunk of that salary. On Trout's side, he wants to go to a playoff contender. But what contender is going to give up either a package of productive now players or a package of top prospects for even a subsidized Trout? (Oh wait, I forgot the Mets are in the league...).
I think at this point Trout and the Angels are stuck with each other.
What do you think?
Is that actually true? I went looking for sources and found several papers saying future performance was typically minimally or unaffected. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28714783/
OK, I researched some and I think that it does affect players usually even after their return, but after a year or so they often go back to their previous self. Giancarlo Stanton had it in June 2015 and then 2016 was the worst season of his career until 2022. On the other hand, Jose Ramirez had it in Aug 2019, sat out a month and was fine when he came back.
So I overstated things but I still think it's important to mention 'hamate' in any Trout discussion, he might not be fully back to himself until 2025 and he turns 34 that season.
Giolito isn't instilling much confidence... the first two innings include a home run, a couple singles, three walks – get's ahead 0-2 and then throws a parade of uncompetitive garbage – plenty of hard contact, a wild pitch... and now a grand slam. He's made every pitch look like a chore and has already thrown 50+ pitches. Syndergaard never looked this bad.
Biggest game of the year and he's already lost it in the top of the 2nd.
Biggest game of the year and he's already lost it in the top of the 2nd.
I hope Cleveland releases The Embedded White Sock as soon as the game is over. He even makes Carlos Correia look good.
I think LAA has got to be tanking and I can't imagine that Trout wants to be part of that. If that is accurate, they have to move Trout for enough to make it legitimate but nowhere near FMV. I also don't think that Trout is Chaim's type of acquisition - no excess value in that transaction.
I would guess the opposite. All of the players they dumped are on expiring contracts, and there's no real point in giving those players away for nothing unless you're resetting the luxury tax....and there's not much point in doing that if you're planning on being under the tax threshold next year. (I can't imagine they'd go through all of this upheaval to reset the tax just for a second-round comp pick.)
Plus they just raided their weak farm system to acquire a bunch of rentals at the beginning of August; I don't think they're going to change course that abruptly after one month.
They may not be actively tanking but they are going to be in a huge hole once Ohtani leaves. I guess they can try and spend a lot of money but they are really bad at that too. As @cannonball 1729 said, they could promote their prospects except they are already mostly all up or dealt for pointless reinforcements to a lost cause a month ago. Well done all around!!
If the Angels eat $80-90m of Trout's contract, that leaves around $170m over 7 years. If Trout can produce 3 wins/year, it would be worth it from the perspective of signing a new FA. But how many teams are at that time of their contending window that having Trout would be worth it and also able to afford the nearly $40m/year for him? Padres and Dodgers are both decent fits IMO. Even we are a good fit given our need for outfielders, payroll space available and the potential influx of cost-controlled players in two years.
It will certainly be interesting to see what LAA does.
I'm sure they are still thinking they have a slim chance of signing Otani and if that somehow happens, I guess they will sign a bunch of cheaper free agents and try to make a run for it.
But if they don't sign Otani - and while I don't follow LAA's farm system, this article (and everything else I've seen) says it's pretty barren - so I don't know how they acquire enough talent to turn themselves into a contender.
And even before that, they're going to have to come up with a plan for acquiring talent that is coherent enough to stop Trout from demanding a trade.
It's funny how baseball works. I can kind of understand why LAA did what they did but the article I linked to above suggests not trading Otani and trading their prospects to go all in on this season cost LAA (conservatively) $50M. One makes a $50M mistake in the real world; one ordinarily is not planning for the company's future.
Sports is different though, right? You're 100% right about how a $50M mistake would sink you in any other field, but that's because to many businesses $50M is a lion's share of what they make in a year. I'm not saying that Moreno sees this as a write off (he obviously doesn't considering he gave the green light to strip the team for parts a month later) but I don't think it's analogous. Another thing is that the Angels were also trying to do two things: convince Ohtani to stick around and get into the playoffs for the first time in seven years. I think that if you have these two extenuating circumstances, you take that gamble -- also the team was playing pretty decently up until the end of July. Not great, but my guess is that the idea is if they got some reinforcements, they'll be able to hop over a bunch of teams and sneak into the wildcard*. From then, who knows?
* Look at the Mariners. They were nine games (I think?) behind the Rangers in August, sold some parts prior to the deadline and then went crazy during August to where they are now leading the division. Does this happen every year? No, but it did this year -- only to the wrong team.
I get saving for a rainy day and getting rid of players for lottery tickets. But I don't think Ohtani is one of those guys you do that. For one thing, he's a huge draw especially if he's pitching that night. You get rid of him and you're damning your team to be in a situation where absolutely no one gives a shit about them (the Anaheim Ducks of MLB). Secondly, you're not going to come anywhere close to his worth, so do you want three so-so prospects plus the mantle of the guy that got rid of Ohtani? Ask Bloom how that's working out for him. I'll never give a FO or an ownership shit for going for it. I wish more would, TBH. It would make sports a lot more interesting.
I also think that if the Angels also weren't destroyed by injuries, this may have played out a little differently. But injuries did happen and now they look dumb. Like you said, it's funny how baseball works.
Maybe this has been asked/answered already, but why is the MLB waiver system the way it is? As in... why can one team put waiver claims in on a ton of guys, without having to move to the back of the line once they successfully claim a guy? That is, why could Cleveland claim a bunch of guys from the Angels all at once, instead of making a successful claim, then moving to the back of the line, giving other teams a chance?
Just a feature of the CBA? And why would it be set up like this? Seems entirely unfair.
Just a feature of the CBA? And why would it be set up like this? Seems entirely unfair.
I understand what you're saying and it makes perfect sense. My own perspective, however, is 180 degrees from yours. If I'm running a team, I'm trying to win, and for better or for worse, the system is set up so that the easiest and most reliable way to obtain the premium talent that is needed to win is to lose as many games as possible over a multiple-year period.
No one cares anymore that BAL traded Machado and they care less about what they got for Machado. All that people care about is that they picked Rutscman and Holiday at 1/1 (picks which any number of SOSH denizens could have made) and picked Kjerstad at 1/2 and Cowser at 1/5. (Rodriguez at 1/11 is a terrific pick too.) Plus, tanking teams get to find out if guys like Santander can play without any downside.
Don't want to relitigate what the Red Sox may or may not have done but if I were running LAA, and assuming I get ownership buy-in, I would have traded Otani and Trout (telling people "We owe it to him to get him to a contender") and worked on the next great team. I'm sure you're glad I'm not (nor is Mike Elias) running LAA.
I get what you're saying and I think it's smart. But for me, MLB (and the teams that make up MLB), is entertainment and I think that you have to give people reasons for coming to the ballpark and turning into your product.
You're 1000% right that no one in Baltimore cares that they traded Machado back in 2018. But for five seasons, the Orioles were pretty bleak and unlike the Angels, they at least had a handful of years where they were competitive and made the playoffs. Say they traded Ohtani and Trout in July, they're already sitting on a seven-year playoffless streak and now are looking down the barrel of a long rebuild. We're talking 13 years if the current FO gets it right? And this is the same FO who, aside from Ohtani and Trout, have shot themselves in the foot time after time after time after time trying to simply find complementary pieces to build around the two best players in the league. I wouldn't trust them.
How much would that hurt the franchise? Especially in a place like LA where the Dodgers are consistently competing for championships? (I know the Nats won in 2019, but they haven't been consistently good and the O's have been around a lot longer than them, so I think that they have more of a fan base in their area -- I could be wrong about that though).
I understand tanking, though I'm philosophically opposed to it, mostly because I find it to be an excuse for a team not to do their best in putting a winner on the field while putting cash in their pockets for five plus years; and that's assuming everything breaks right. I think that with the right FO, you can build the minor league as well as the major league team at the same time. The Angels did a horrible job at both, so the whole front office should be gutted and replaced from top to bottom. I'm not sure if Moreno has the stomach to do that.
When guys are put on the wire simultaneously, how do you determine which one is the team's first selection? The list comes out on a particular day, teams get 48 hours to make their claims, and then at the end of the 48 hours, players are awarded to the claiming team with the highest priority. It's not like each player is auctioned off individually where the Guardians can claim Giolito and then be told "back of the line" when Lopez and Moore come up. All three were put on waivers at the same time.
I think this was an outlier situation. It's fairly rare for that many desirable players to be on waivers all at once like that. Or that teams are in a position to want to claim multiple players at once. I don't think they're going to adjust the system for what is likely to be a once-a-year at most "problem".
This was kind of my feeling, I think if they'd been offered the franchise-altering package that some fans seem to think was out there for them, I think they would've taken it. I think instead too many teams were hesitant to give up a lot for two months of Ohtani before he moved on. I think instead he got offered some "well, this guy might be an above-average position player and this other guy might turn into a mid-rotation starter*." Which, okay, obviously guys like that are important and valuable, but if you're the Angels they're not really going to get you closer to contending in 2024 (like the Yankees getting Torres) and they're not going to be the type of player you use to jump-start a rebuild either (like the White Sox getting Moncada, Jimenez, Cease, and, uh, Lucas Giolito). Does it make sense to trade him just for the sake of not "letting him walk for nothing" if you're not getting anything all that exciting? Now, if we find out in the offseason that (for example) the Giants offered Harrison and Luciano, then that'd be a different story. And obviously none of this means "go trade for Giolito,," which really couldn't have worked out worse - but if they'd gone for Montgomery instead, we'd be having a different conversation.
* - in other words, the original Mookie trade.
The simple process should be that the team designates the order in which they’d prefer to get the players.
It's funny - we had this same discussion over in the Port Cellar because Danny Ainge was firmly on your side and believes you build a team by constantly improving - getting good players for average ones and excellent players for good ones. It worked for him because (1) KG managed to get himself to the Cs for much less than FMV and (2) he made a trade for draft picks that were very likely going to be very high. We'll see if it works for him with his current team.
I'll also note that the Os show the best and worst of tanking - best in terms of talent but worst in terms of ownership. I mean John Angelos crying that he can't afford to extend guys without raising ticket prices after 5 years of making money hand-over-fist? He really didn't fall far from the tree.
I understand your point and I'm sure you're correctly describing how the LAA front office was thinking but to me, what's interesting is that LAA did not even do what you suggest in the bolded - they took a third path and made a series of transactions that marginally increased their playoff chances but ended up costing them (conservatively) $50M.
To me, yes LAA was in a bad spot but at the same time, I would hope the front office of my team is realistic about evaluating the team (I mean that's their job, right?). Yes, the LAA wasn't going to get a "haul" for Otani. Yes, it would be a super bad look not to do anything and let him walk. But yes, it is monumentally stupid to light millions of dollars on fire just to "prove" you're doing everything you can to keep Otani.
If LAA could have gotten 3-4 useful major leaguers from trading Otani and Trout, and then find 3-4 premium and super premium players in the next few drafts while losing 110 games a year and then finding a couple of diamonds in the rough that other teams couldn't give opportunities to, that's team that will be reckoned with. That's basically how the Os got to where they are now.
It happens in fantasy football every week. A waiver priority system is pretty easy to accomplish.
Angels continue to freefall
View: https://twitter.com/samblum3/status/1699642737413488749?s=46
The Angels lost today to the Orioles. They were swept. They have lost 6 in a row, and 9-of-10. They're 8-25 since the trade deadline.
It's been bad. Very bad.
View: https://twitter.com/samblum3/status/1699642737413488749?s=46
The Angels lost today to the Orioles. They were swept. They have lost 6 in a row, and 9-of-10. They're 8-25 since the trade deadline.
It's been bad. Very bad.
Much ado about nothing:
“ How every player claimed off waivers is doing
Hunter Renfroe: .432 OPS, -0.4 fWar, DFA’d
Harrison Bader: .429 OPS, -0.2 fWar, on IL
Lucas Giolito: 6.88 ERA in 17.0 IP
Reynaldo Lopez: 0.00 ERA in 6.2 IP
Matt Moore: 3.86 ERA in 4.2 IP
Dominic Leone: 6.43 ERA in 7.0 IP”
“ How every player claimed off waivers is doing
Hunter Renfroe: .432 OPS, -0.4 fWar, DFA’d
Harrison Bader: .429 OPS, -0.2 fWar, on IL
Lucas Giolito: 6.88 ERA in 17.0 IP
Reynaldo Lopez: 0.00 ERA in 6.2 IP
Matt Moore: 3.86 ERA in 4.2 IP
Dominic Leone: 6.43 ERA in 7.0 IP”
The Reds designated Renfroe for assignment this afternoon, so he will again be on waivers soon if he is not already.
Cleveland also waived Matt Moore, who has been claimed by Miami. The Guardians needed to clear a roster spot in order to activate Shane Bieber from the 60-day IL. Bieber will rejoin the team in a start against the Orioles on Friday.