How Much is Too Much to Acquire Mike Trout?
It’s the holy grail for any team competing for a fantasy title, maybe even more so in a 5×5 league – the opportunity to add Mike Trout mid-season (assuming, you know, that you did not have him PRE-season).
In the FanGraphs Experts ottoneu league, I am in the midst of negotiating for just that opportunity. My team in this 5×5 league currently sits in 6th* place, but only 6.5 out of 3rd and with some upside. For example, the team in first is currently tops in strike outs – but has also thrown 110 more innings than any other team. He’ll be dropping in K, W, and Saves as other teams catch up once he hits the IP limit. So I want to make a run, and how better to do that than with Trout.
*All stats as of Saturday, so they may be out of date by the time you read this.
My team has four obvious statistical weaknesses. I sit 11th in ERA and WHIP, tied for 8th in Saves, and tied for 9th in AVG. At first glance, this makes Trout a less than ideal acquisition, as he only helps with one. But there are other factors.
I am fourth in SB, but only 4, 6 and 12 SB from the teams ahead of me. I am tied for third in HR, but there are four teams in a tight race for 8, 9, 10, or 11 points from that category. R and RBI are not as close, but if I can add 5 HR, 7-10 SB, and some average, I could easily pick up 4-5 points from the counting stats alone, plus a few more in average.
But at what price? The initial ask from Eno Sarris, Trout’s current owner, was both Mookie Betts and Addison Russell, plus others, for Trout and some additional “win-now” pieces. I pushed back on both and finally settled on making this offer:
My $15 Yasmany Tomas, $10 Addison Russell, $5 Michael Taylor and $5 Jameson Taillon for his $56 Trout, $29 Starlin Castro, and $1 John Axford. So what do I gain?
Start with this – Russell and Taylor have barely played for me. My OF, when healthy, is Jacoby Ellsbury, Carlos Gomez, Ryan Zimmerman, Brandon Moss and Mookie Betts, with Jake Marisnick and Seth Smith on the bench. My MI is Kolten Wong, Hanley Ramirez, and Brandon Crawford, with both Betts and Russell also available.
With all of my injuries, Hanley does find himself in the OF on occasion, with Taylor and/or Russell getting playing time. Tomas hasn’t been used much (Nolan Arenado at 3B) but figures to play plenty of OF now that he is eligible.
Let’s assume that the rest of the way, with my current roster, I use Tomas full-time, Taylor once a week (~15% of the time), and Russell twice a week (~30% of the time), but if I make the trade, I use Trout full-time and Castro 45% of the time (basically making up the time that both Taylor and Russell would have played. Here are the lines for the Tomas/Taylor/Russell trio vs. Trout/Castro:
Trio: .264 AVG, 14 HR, 52 R, 56 RBI, 7 SB
Duo: .293 AVG, 24 HR, 82 R, 78 RBI, 16 SB
Gaining 10 HR takes me from 9.5 to 11 points (+1.5 total); gaining 30 R takes 31 back to just one back from gaining another point); 22 RBI does little for me; 9 SB takes me from 9 points to 11 points (+3.5 total). It’s a bit harder to calculate the impact on average, but it looks like gaining 4-5 points there seems reasonable. That’s already a 7.5-8.5 point gain.
In addition, I am adding Axford’s saves. He’s not an elite closer, by any means, but if he can get me 10 saves I otherwise wouldn’t, that is another four points – so 11.5-12.5 total. That takes me into 3rd place and hurts the two teams ahead of me.
It isn’t enough to win, but it makes a big impact. The cost though? Well, I straight up lose Taillon, and I go from keeping Tomas at $17 and Russell at $12, plus having an option on Taylor at $7 pending his performance, to likely cutting a $31 Castro and making a tough call on a $58 Trout.
So, as I asked above – how much is too much for Trout? Well, maybe this much? It’s a tough call. Getting back a healthy Ellsbury, adding Tomas to my depleted OF, maybe using my trade chips on an elite closer…all of these things could make the price for Trout too much to pay.
Right now, the offer is sitting on there, awaiting Eno’s reply. For now, my take is that flags fly forever, and I want to make a run at my second title in this league. I am much closer to that title with Trout than without. But if Eno turns me down, I probably won’t lose much sleep.
A long-time fantasy baseball veteran and one of the creators of ottoneu, Chad Young's is the Managing Editor for RotoGraphs, and can be heard on the Keep or Kut Podcast. You can follow him on Bluesky @chadyoung.bsky.social.
fwiw, I would have jumped on Betts/Addison for Trout+
Yeah, I wouldn’t cling to Betts with Trout on the table, especially with the outfield you already have. For 8 years I never won a title in my league. During 2012 spring training, I made a trade for Trout. Now I have 3 consecutive titles.
Oh, and Betts won’t qualify for IF in the future. His value goes down next year.
Part of the reason I didn’t move them both is that my team is so thin right now. Giving up Betts, Russell, Tomas, and maybe others might make my starting lineup stronger, but leaves me with 0 depth, which blunts the positive impact for this year AND increases the long-term cost.
I’m not as experienced in this format, but if I’m the Trout owner that offer isn’t making me think about selling him. I’m not a huge Russell believer fantasy-wise, though.
Enos gonna laugh at this weak offer. Also he doesn’t like Thomas.
I doubt Eno will laugh. We discussed options via email before this was made an official offer and it is basically what he said he would consider. He doesn’t love Tomas, true, but Tomas has been hitting and hitting well since coming up, will have multiple position eligibility for 2015 and 2016, and has real upside.
I made an offer for Trout recently — AL only ten team
Lindor $2
Archer $10
R Davis $9
4
Trout $46
Crisp $8
That looks pretty weak to me, you gotta stop up your game. Kinda throws off the article when you didn’t exactly break the bank for Trout
To some extent, that is the point. This is a pretty sizable offer when you add in the long-term value, but I agree that I am not going crazy – and yet it is STILL questionable if Trout is going to impact my team enough to make this make sense.
So you offered scraps for Mike Trout? How is this an article?
Which of those pieces are scraps? Taillon is still a top pitching prospect and could be up as soon as this year; Taylor is on a 20/20 pace right now, assuming 620 PA; Russell should be a top-tier fantasy SS by next year; and Tomas is on pace for double-digit HR and SB while posting a great batting average. All are below market value and can/should be kept for a few years at least.
Michael Taylor has a whiff rate of 33.5% and an ISO of .153, which is an awful combination, he’s hitting in the .220s with a projection from all major systems to stay there, but you think he’s a keeper in a league shallow enough that you start him 15% of the time?
Taillon just went on the DL with an elbow issue a year after Tommy John surgery and his underwhelming numbers were suggestive of injury.
Russell has only played 3 games at SS, may not qualify at that position next year, and this year is ranked 22nd among 2nd-basemen in terms of wRC+’ No doubt, he is an excellent prospect but suggesting he will be elite at SS next year is a bit of a stretch.
12 teams and 40 players per team, with unlimited keepers, as long as you can afford them – if a player is going to go 20/20 with a low average, he is a keeper at that price, pretty easily. The only real question is he has a job. I’d happily play him more often if he played more often.
“Taillon just went on the DL with an elbow issue a year after Tommy John surgery and his underwhelming numbers were suggestive of injury. ”
What? He has just returned to Extended Spring Training maybe 2-3 weeks ago. There is no new injury news. He’s progressing as figured. The 7 day DL assignment from Indianapolis in early April was merely procedural.
As far as “underwhelming numbers” go, have you had a look at Gerrit Cole through the minors? Underwhelming to say the least. The Pirates have an organizational philosophy for their young pitchers to be fastball-centric and pitch to contact. None of their pitchers are going to have eye-popping numbers.
Chad, one nit to pick with you as well. There is a 0% chance Taillon will be up this year. It’s not going to happen. Post Super-2 deadline 2016 is best case scenario.
Taillon at 6$ or 7$ next year is not a good keeper. There is no value at that price.
@Alice Cooper
You wrote: “The Pirates have an organizational philosophy for their young pitchers to be fastball-centric and pitch to contact. None of their pitchers are going to have eye-popping numbers.”
Well, if by pitch-to-contact you mean hitting the catcher’s glove, then Tyler Glasnow has pitched-to-contact, with 13.26 k/9 innings in A ball and 11.36 in high-A.
@Chad Young
You wrote: “The only real question is he has a job. I’d happily play him more often if he played more often.”
Which is why he is worth so little as a keeper. Sky-high K-rate with just moderate power is a recipe for losing playing time.
When you trade for Mike Trout you do so for as close to a guarantee of high performance this season as you will find. You can only expect that a trading partner wants some certainty in getting keepers too, so guys who are an injury risk (Taillon) or a playing time risk (Taylor) aren’t especially appealing. Russell is projecting to be worth less than his price this season; Tomas may be a marginal surplus value this year. If you want to land Trout you will likely need to include someone who is already out-producing his price and by a significant amount, and none of the players you offered hit that mark.
Yes I did write that. And my statement is 100% correct. You took the one guy who has stood out in the Pirates system and made him your example. He is the exception, not the rule. If you’re using baseball card stats to evaluate Pirates pitching prospects, you’re making a mistake.
Unfortunately, Pirates Prospects (website) is now behind a pay wall or else I could link you to several articles about the Pirates “fastball academy” in the minors. In lieu of that, here’s an article from Bucs Dugout that features an interview with minor league pitcher Angel Sanchez. I’ll highlight the important parts if you don’t want to read the whole thing…
DM- “The Pirates talk a lot about stressing the process over results”
AS- “The other thing was to pitch to early contact, to get a lot of ground balls and not to get deep in the counts”
DM- “Clint Hurdle and Ray Searage often talk about the organizational philosophy of pitching inside, inducing early contact and pounding the strike zone early”
AS- “I want to go focus on strikes and not throw too hard.”
DM- “In order to get early contact and the early outs?”
AS- “Yes, yes, exactly.”
http://www.bucsdugout.com/2015/5/20/8628451/following-the-altoona-curve-angel-sanchez-discusses-adopting-the
More Searage: “My philosophy has been with the organization,” Searage said. “Staying aggressive, pitching inside, first pitch strikes and getting ahead and staying ahead. And making something happen with three pitches or less.”
http://www.bradenton.com/2014/02/17/4997900_pittsburgh-pirates-pitching-coach.html?rh=1
Chad Chad Chad. This is pretty embarrassing.
The answer to your title is: Nothing you’ve offered so far.
Keep in mind this is the ottoneu Fantasy Baseball league where they can keep players as long as they have the salary to keep them. Trout at $56 maybe to expensive for a rebuilding owner to hold onto when he can get future pieces like Russell and Betts at a lower cost and still have salary cap room for more.
Still the offer is a bit low for Trout.
The offer may be low, but you’ve hit the major point – this year, Trout offers a lot more value. But next year I can either have $58 Trout or Russell, Betts and $36 to spend on another OF. I could, for example, keep Ellsbury, Betts and Russell, instead of Trout.
You could… and you’d be worse off.
Frank and Joe,
I’m not certain what I would do if I were Eno. But that isn’t a terrible offer. Maybe I value holdovers more than you guys. But all four of the players Chad offered are high upside players on the fairly cheap. What really would you expect him to offer? I have Todd Frazier at $2. I have Matt Harvey at $10. Would you trade those two away forever for one year of Trout? Or maybe keeping Trout at $0 profit?
I like the offer. And yes, I would have done it for Betts and Russell.
Trust the wisdom of Lennon/McCartney: Money can’t buy me Trout.
oops that was meant for Phil, one above.
A couple things. 1) The article title is “how much is too much to aquire Mike Trout?” The offer doesn’t blow me away like the title would suggest. 2)League specific dynamics come in to play, I get that. Having Russel for $20 in 5 years sounds great. Maybe Yasmani Thomas is worth $17 next year, I don’t know, I wouldn’t want him. 3) Based on the podcast I don’t think Eno is looking to throw in the towel, and he would be if he makes this deal. Also, what about Castro? Is his value less than $30 in that league now?
Some people just have no idea how Ottoneu works here, lol. This is pretty close Chad, but in the end… Those flags fly forever, like you said. Go for it.
12-team mixed, team doing well, bench depth is there to consolidate.
Considering offering Pujols, Gallo and one of Gray/Shields/Richards/Salazar to Trout’s owner…seem right?
As a Trout owner, that deal seems pretty reasonable to me. Might get ‘er done, depending on salaries involved.
Chad, when everyone is telling you the offer is weaksauce, well…
Not everyone is telling him it’s weak Vince. I’m very surprised all of you have such little value in the players Chad is trading away. The Cubs traded BOTH Hammel and Shark (can’t spell his name) for Russel. I know it’s not Trout but trading high salary players for one years use gets you little more than cheap upside in return. That’s what Chad is doing. One year of Trout…..or maybe keep him at lost value for multiple years of high upside in return. And multiple years of multiple players. If Eno is playing for next year and the future, he’s looking for just this type of influx. In the end, not everyone is telling Chad it’s a weak offer.
Just traded Trout the other day, plus Gattis and Perkins, for Kershaw, Belt and Gardner. 12 team mixed redraft 5 x 5. Needed the Ks and ratios.
I drafted Trout in my league as a minor leaguer. I came in first place the year he broke out, a narrow second place his next season to a team with rookie Alex Fernandez and a 50 homer Chris Davis, and sucked last year. In my league, Trout can be kept at a great price for 3 more seasons…. but I traded those 3 seasons of cheap control for six seasons each of Kris Bryant and Joc Pederson. So far it is working out.
I only come here for the articles, I have no idea what types of leagues you are talking about. The leagues I play in wouldn’t even allow this trade. Even with at the high price (unless the rest of your team is just hopeless) I can’t see any benefit to dumping Trout off, for really anybody. As a keeper, Trout is proven to be the best fantasy player in the majors and that doesn’t look to change anytime in the next decade. Can’t imagine giving him up for any prospects.
I traded Kluber, Springer, Tulo and Zo Cain for Trout in keeper league. That might be giving up too much. This? This is childs play…please. Up your offer, that sauce is weak
I think some of these comments forget that this is a keeper league, he’s offering about as much as makes sense for him, and offering any more wouldn’t be helping his team. That’s why the title is actually very clever, its saying that he’s not worth as much as everyone thinks.
I get it, but Trout is the only name here that is sure for the next several years to come. For a Trout owner, you don’t get a single player who is currently as good or even a single player that figures to be as good. Seems a pretty long shot to deal Trout for nothing but prospects and hope they all reach their peak potential in the next couple years.