Gordon or Zobrist?

[tdawg87]

I'd be fine with Span so long as the Nats don't give him a QO. They shouldn't, but it could happen if they're desperate enough.

[Docwaukee]

not every free agent is going to end up like Hamilton or Pujols.  

 

Most end up disappointing but not to the degree of either of those guys.  

 

Is there a Torii type player in this crowd of free agents?  An Abreu?  An Escobar or an Ocab?

 

Or are they all pujols' and hamitons or GMJ's or Steve Finley, Ibanez, Hillebrandt?

 

In baseball, you rarely get what you pay for.  Another team already got it.  

 

If they haven't then you are paying a premium for something you might get. 

 

So where does the impact lie?  

 

Free agency is not a vacuum.  It's not just about what a signed player does relative to the money they are being paid.  It's about what you had previously.  

 

In the case of the halos, there is impact in free agency for 2016 and beyond even if the players they sign aren't as good as they once were.  Why?  

 

1.  Where are they going to come from otherwise?  You don't have prospects to fill in at 2b, 3b, or LF.  You have maybe 3 or 4 decent trade chips beyond Mike Trout and they are all club controlled for several years yet established major leaguers.  Are you willing to give them up for unestablished club controlled players?  To me, that's about as high risk as signing a free agent.  

 

2.  If payroll is 220mil or 150mil, who cares?  Again, it's not like you have a bunch of young guys in the minors beating down the door.  We have no international means to reload.  Should we play for last place with Mike Trout on the roster to get some unproven players via higher draft picks that will be almost ready when he's set to hit free agency?  All of our high priced players have no trade value.

 

3.  There are some obvious upgrades.  We were horrible in LF and 2b.  We could be horrible at 3b.  Everything else was meh to ok.  Going from the worst in the league at two positions to slightly above average at those spots is hugely impactful.

 

4.  You don't have to spend 400 million.  Impact can come in the form of average.  Which costs a lot less.  Slightly above average players at the positions we need would likely end up the 3rd and 4th best offensive players on the team.   

 

I'd rather lose trying to surround Trout with some talent and have some dark years 5 seasons down the road than to toil in mediocrity or sell off our valuable pieces so we might be good later.  

[tdawg87]

But Doc, all the free agents available this year are too old, or not as good as Mike Trout.

[marcosantinia12]

I think if the Angels are looking at staying under the Luxury Tax line, Howie Kendrick would be a good move.  I'd also sign Denard Span for LF and leadoff and ink Darren O'Day and suddenly the Angels look dangerous again. 

 

1. LF Span

2. RF Calhoun

3. CF Trout

4. DH Pujols

5. 2B Kendrick

6. 1B Cron

 

That goes from a bottom three offense to at least middle of the pack.  Then if have the late innings line up as Street, Smith, O'Day, Gott/Morin, we'd  only need to ask our pitchers to go 5 innings at a time, which in the case of Santiago, Weaver and Wilson, is a very good thing. 

 

If you figure Kendrick goes for 11 million a year, Span goes for 12 million and O'Day gets 7 million, that's 30 million total.  If we cut Murphy loose, cut Salas andtrade either Santiago or CJ, that 30 million becomes easily affordable, and probably goes a lot further than spending 25 million on guys like Heyward, Upton or Cespedes (good as they are). 

I fully agree. And even if they go over the tax, which I think they will, it should be minimal and spent on multiple plyers, not one superstar. I think this the ideal approach, go after 2nd or even third tier FA's and fill holes. Also, I know you are pretty big on Kubitza/Cowart (especially Kubitza) and personally I think we would be fine with them, but I would really push for a Martin Prado trade. If you can somehow push Cron to 7th with Prado hitting in front of him, the lineup all of a sudden becomes very deep. 

Something like:

1. Span

2. Kendrick

3. Trout

4. Pujols

5. Calhoun

6. Prado

7. Cron

8. Perez

9. Aybar

 

[marcosantinia12]

To be honest if Arte is tight we might as well roll the dice on our prospects rather than wasting money on one or more mid or lower tier free agents that will only improve our overall team performance incrementally.

 

I agree with you, Free agency this off-season is crucial, but this is where we start to disagree. I think we go over the tax limit and I think we kind of have to... With that being said, I do not think we blow completely past it and especially not tie our hands to long-term and incredibly expensive commitments. 

You mentioned that mid/low tier free agents barely improve team performance. I completely disagree. Will signing a Denard Span win us a champioship? No. But filling in holes with these types of players, such as the ones Scotty named will give you a better chance than 1 Heyward/Upton/Price/etc. 

The teams performance simply does not fall on superstar fire power alone. You mentioned getting Upton. Look at the Padres. Crazy off-season moves and completely recreated their roster, yet they were worse this year than they were last. 

I see your point, I really do which is why I agree that the angels will have to open their pockets this off season, but they should try to keep it at a minimum while appropriately filling their holes. Avoid large contracts, not because they are all bad like pujols/hamilton, but because we simply can't afford to take the risk at the moment. I think Heyward is a great option! I think that although he will not be a superstar, he will give you consistent all around production throught the length of his contract. I just don't think that at our current state, we can or should pull this off. If I were the cubs in the other hand, I make the gamble and sign at least 1 elite FA. 

At the end of the day getting a top tier still leaves holes. Unless your plan is to completely put the future years at risk and pick up various other top tier free agents to fill those holes as well. 

[ettin]

I agree with you, Free agency this off-season is crucial, but this is where we start to disagree. I think we go over the tax limit and I think we kind of have to... With that being said, I do not think we blow completely past it and especially not tie our hands to long-term and incredibly expensive commitments.

You mentioned that mid/low tier free agents barely improve team performance. I completely disagree. Will signing a Denard Span win us a champioship? No. But filling in holes with these types of players, such as the ones Scotty named will give you a better chance than 1 Heyward/Upton/Price/etc.

The teams performance simply does not fall on superstar fire power alone. You mentioned getting Upton. Look at the Padres. Crazy off-season moves and completely recreated their roster, yet they were worse this year than they were last.

I see your point, I really do which is why I agree that the angels will have to open their pockets this off season, but they should try to keep it at a minimum while appropriately filling their holes. Avoid large contracts, not because they are all bad like pujols/hamilton, but because we simply can't afford to take the risk at the moment. I think Heyward is a great option! I think that although he will not be a superstar, he will give you consistent all around production throught the length of his contract. I just don't think that at our current state, we can or should pull this off. If I were the cubs in the other hand, I make the gamble and sign at least 1 elite FA.

At the end of the day getting a top tier still leaves holes. Unless your plan is to completely put the future years at risk and pick up various other top tier free agents to fill those holes as well.

I think maybe my point was lost a little. I didn't say that someone like Span wouldn't improve the team but the incremental improvement of adding someone like Span in a cost conscious environment isn't terribly better than running out a prospect. Maybe it improves the team by a couple of wins over a season but does it dramatically improve our chances? Probably not and at that point you might just be better off not spending the money, in the cost conscious environment, and simply running out the prospect who might wildly perform up or down from his projection.

This ties into my primary point that Mike Trout's controllable years should not be wasted. Arte has a tremendous amount of resources (money) available and, to me, he should be spending that money for the right players to surround Trout with the supporting cast he needs and deserves.

To me that cast should start with Heyward (who I actually don't think is a superstar but he does everything pretty well and let's face it prices rise every year in FA) and will include others that I will speak about in the Primer. Filling our holes with the best players we can purchase on the free agent market (and through trade of some of our players/prospects) will generally increase the likelihood we win enough games to get a ticket to the promised land of the playoffs.

Doing anything less than that (i.e. only spending on lower tier players) with Mike Trout here, to me, is tantamount to not doing enough. Yes it's not my money but from a business perspective Arte just ate $60MM on Josh Hamilton so asking him to spend $60MM this offseason on Heyward and others plus the tax he'll incur in 2016 of about $10MM shouldn't be an obstacle.

We have the money (the Angels have ZERO debt), we have the resources, and we have the core of a contending team that almost made it to the playoffs this year. Push it over the top this offseason and build a group around Mike that will help carry him through his remaining years of control and maximize the opportunity to get another World Series ring in Anaheim.

That's just my opinion. I don't disagree that for instance Denard Span would help the team but I'm talking about maximizing overall team production by filling most of our holes through free agency and trade and keeping key prospects (think Newcomb and Ward for example) to drive Trout's remaining 5 years.

Edited November 4, 2015 by ettin

[Inside Pitch]

The Angels were a 98 win team just one year from now. They had holes and missed the playoffs by one game. I agree with what you're saying, but they aren't exactly going to the Phillies either.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

They not only had "holes" they had debilitating in-house issues that indicate an organization with dysfunction at multiple levels, especially the top levels.

Not exactly a warm and inviting situation for an outsider considering a move.

I'd say the Angels aren't going to be a top choice for top FA players who can pick and choose where they would like to play.

 

You may have missed it but the players pretty much let the guy causing the waves know what they thought about the situation.   Whatever splits there were in the front office, it seemed the clubhouse was fairly united.   Whether that's a good or bad thing remains to be seen.

[Inside Pitch]

Kendrick actually turns 33 in July 2016, granted still 2 years younger than Zobrist.

 

You're playing with dates -- 2015 will be Kendricks' age 32 season, and Zobrist's age 35 season.

[AngelsLakersFan]

Obviously I've already illustrated that I'm 100% with ettin on this one, but there is a larger point here.

 

There are no impact position players in this system for the foreseeable future. There may be some decent spare parts, or even potential mediocre starters, but no one who is going to come up and become part of the core of this team. Looking at the team as it is right now, the core is Mike Trout, Calhoun, and aging Pujols - maybe Carlos Perez if we are really lucky (Richards, Heaney, Skaggs, potentially on the pitching side). Everyone else is a spare part. What we don't need are more spare parts, we need to add to that core.

 

The Angels farm is not competitive, they refuse to scout the international market seemingly, their television contract is relatively new, and much larger than most teams. They are in much better financial condition than most teams it would seem - even with all the dead money they are something like 6th in payroll, after being as high as second, I believe.

 

In other words, spending money is what this team does. If we want to talk about changing directions we can, but different directions require different things. A rebuild requires losing, and spending time rather than money. A cost effective retool requires a strong core, and we aren't there right now. Anything else is a recipe for a 75-85 win team. 

[Angel Oracle]

I'm still hesitant to sign a guy coming off of hip surgery, turns 32, and relies on speed (Span).

[marcosantinia12]

I think maybe my point was lost a little. I didn't say that someone like Span wouldn't improve the team but the incremental improvement of adding someone like Span in a cost conscious environment isn't terribly better than running out a prospect. Maybe it improves the team by a couple of wins over a season but does it dramatically improve our chances? Probably not and at that point you might just be better off not spending the money, in the cost conscious environment, and simply running out the prospect who might wildly perform up or down from his projection.

This ties into my primary point that Mike Trout's controllable years should not be wasted. Arte has a tremendous amount of resources (money) available and, to me, he should be spending that money for the right players to surround Trout with the supporting cast he needs and deserves.

To me that cast should start with Heyward (who I actually don't think is a superstar but he does everything pretty well and let's face it prices rise every year in FA) and will include others that I will speak about in the Primer. Filling our holes with the best players we can purchase on the free agent market (and through trade of some of our players/prospects) will generally increase the likelihood we win enough games to get a ticket to the promised land of the playoffs.

Doing anything less than that (i.e. only spending on lower tier players) with Mike Trout here, to me, is tantamount to not doing enough. Yes it's not my money but from a business perspective Arte just ate $60MM on Josh Hamilton so asking him to spend $60MM this offseason on Heyward and others plus the tax he'll incur in 2016 of about $10MM shouldn't be an obstacle.

We have the money (the Angels have ZERO debt), we have the resources, and we have the core of a contending team that almost made it to the playoffs this year. Push it over the top this offseason and build a group around Mike that will help carry him through his remaining years of control and maximize the opportunity to get another World Series ring in Anaheim.

That's just my opinion. I don't disagree that for instance Denard Span would help the team but I'm talking about maximizing overall team production by filling most of our holes through free agency and trade and keeping key prospects (think Newcomb and Ward for example) to drive Trout's remaining 5 years.

Ok, I see your point. Although I am not fully on board with it, it makes sense. So long as Heyward is the only tier 1 player that we target and we are able to fill our other holes then I'm open to the thought of it. I'll pass on Greinke, Price, Upton, Cespedes, etc. The reason Heyward does make sense is that he will be a core of the team for the long haul, not a 2-4 year fixture. On top of that he is not a superstar but has little to no weaknesses and we should only see the best of him going forward (maybe he develops into an elite hitter, i don't know). 

Only thing I am worried about, aside from a massive commitment, is how we fill other holes. Or do we sacrifice those needs to pick up Heyward? Just out of curiosity, after signing Heyward what moves would you like to see happen to fill our other needs?

Looking forward to reading your Primer article btw.

[CaliAngel]

Do the Royals have money like a big market team now? I get that KC is a dump, but they just got a ton of revenue.

It's not always about the money. The opportunity to have another shot at a ring with the same group of guys who thinks they could do it again might sway some to take less money to stick around.

[Troll Daddy]

Trade for Todd Frazier

[ten ocho recon scout]

Great thread. Lots of good ideas and discussion. I agree with Doc, any upgrade to the LF, 2-3B positions will be huge. Even getting back to simple average production there will help immensely.

Marcossantinia i think has a good idea, that we should spend to plug multiple holes. But i have to go with ettin, that we need tl open the wallet. The best point you made, ettin, is that we just ate a huge chunk on the hamilton fiasco. Ive been thinking the same for a bit. While i dont advocate drinken spending, we seem to have no problem eating contracts like his, wells, gmj, etc. If the money is there, dont get cheap when we need it to improve.

Unfortunately donaldson isnt available. Nor are kershaw, mccutchen, votto, et etc to the big name people wed all feel good about spending big on. That said, guys like that rarely hit FA, and like we saw with grienke, regardless of if we decide we want him, someone else may have the same idea.

The only hitch (besides money) i see the this winter is whos available. Heyward would be great, so would upton, and id dig on cespedes too. The prob is we need at least 2 of those guys (or ones like them). But even if we went nuts and signed two (or say upton and span), we obviously couldnt play them all.

We need to add one of those guys, and somehow upgrade 2 and 3B. Not sure how to do that.

[ten ocho recon scout]

Ok, I see your point. Although I am not fully on board with it, it makes sense. So long as Heyward is the only tier 1 player that we target and we are able to fill our other holes then I'm open to the thought of it. I'll pass on Greinke, Price, Upton, Cespedes, etc. The reason Heyward does make sense is that he will be a core of the team for the long haul, not a 2-4 year fixture. On top of that he is not a superstar but has little to no weaknesses and we should only see the best of him going forward (maybe he develops into an elite hitter, i don't know).

Only thing I am worried about, aside from a massive commitment, is how we fill other holes. Or do we sacrifice those needs to pick up Heyward? Just out of curiosity, after signing Heyward what moves would you like to see happen to fill our other needs?

Looking forward to reading your Primer article btw.

agreed.

Its not that i dont like heyward, i do. Its just that i think of his bat as solid more than special. And our offense is hurting. Id feel more confidant in upton being "the man" if trout slumps than heyward.

I totally agree trout needs guys on base in front of him. And heyward would do a lot to help that. But i have a feeling pujols continues to decline and very realistically sees his home runs almost cut in half from last year. Home runs arent everything, but at this point hes not bringing much else. As much as we need tsble setters were gonna need a moto bat here soon as well.

To me a huge qiestion to how it all plays out is calhoun. If he doesnt rebound on up his obp, things are more bleak.

[Inside Pitch]

It's not always about the money. The opportunity to have another shot at a ring with the same group of guys who thinks they could do it again might sway some to take less money to stick around.

 

Sometimes it's just about ownership being asshats..   Glass has more money than Arte, but he's the new Pohlad...  Dude can spend but chooses not to.

[AngelsLakersFan]

Its not that i dont like heyward, i do. Its just that i think of his bat as solid more than special. And our offense is hurting. Id feel more confidant in upton being "the man" if trout slumps than heyward.

 

 

 

Last year Upton had a wRC+ of 120, Heyward's was 121. Steamer projections like Hayward by 7 points next season, while their career averages have Upton with a 3 point lead. They are essentially the same hitter, only Hayward is more on base focused, younger, and vastly superior on defense.

[ten ocho recon scout]

Yeah but how many rbi did heyward have?

Jk. I guess i just like uptons power more. I see a future of trout getting IBB more and more

[ettin]

Yeah but how many rbi did heyward have?

Jk. I guess i just like uptons power more. I see a future of trout getting IBB more and more

 

One of the main reasons I greatly prefer Heyward over Upton is that Jason can play all three OF positions whereas Upton pretty much a LF'der.

 

But I do like Upton in general and he certainly has a history of excellence as well but he seems less consistent than Heyward too.

Edited November 5, 2015 by ettin

[Second Base]

I think unless Heyward rediscovers his power stroke (most evidence points to the contrary), he just isn't a good option for the middle of the order.  He isn't too impressive with RISP last year or in his career, and while he has the power to go deep, it appears it isn't part of his game the way we once thought it could be.  

 

But he's probably turned into one of the better leadoff or #2 hitters in the game.  So if the goal is to get men on in front of Trout and Pujols, Heyward can do that.  But I'd also argue that Span could do that for much less.  The Angels greater need is for a run producer.

 

Upton's numbers with RISP were marginally better than Heyward last year, but across the career, there's much less of a difference.  Cespedes however, is a beast when it comes to hitting with men on.  Cespedes would make the biggest difference in our lineup given the need.

 

Again, I'm not saying we need to sign any of them, but if we're just building for next year, sure sign Cespedes.  If we're building for the next 4, go with Upton.  If we're building for the next 7, and feel like we have enough MOTO bats in the system, then sign Heyward.

[Docwaukee]

The most important consideration for the halos is the next five years.  The guaranteed Trout years.  

 

In fact, I think they want as little payroll commitment as possible for after that time.  

 

They are gonna want to leave as much payroll flex available to re-sign Trout and if things don't go well, they won't want dead money committed.  They'll have Santiago for 2 moe, Richards for 3 more and Calhoun for 4 more.  

 

So this offseason will be critical to find replacements for 3b, 2b, and LF for the next five years or so.  Maybe even to find SS replacement for Aybar this year to take over in 2017.  

 

How much better will Heyward be than Upton and Cespedes over the next five years?  My guess is not that much.  So if they are going to go big at any one particular position it will be for 5 yrs.  Not 10. Maybe they go 6 on a guy.  Maybe.  

 

They will also try to keep their draft picks.  

 

It adds up to Cespedes being the most likely target if they decide to go after a big name.  

 

Zobrist in an obvious choice regardless, but his skill set makes him valuable to so many teams so there is gonna be a ton of competition for him.  

 

Ian Desmond might be worth considering to play 2b.  But he's likely to be attached to losing a pick and who knows if he'd be willing to play a different position.  The reason I like him is that he's a buy low candidate and could replace Aybar next year.  

 

They've got a lot of options, but I just don't think Heyward is going to be one of them.  Mostly because of the length of the deal he's gonna get.  

 

At the very least, this place is gonna be hoppin. 

[Second Base]

As is typical Doc, you brought up a point that I either never considered or at the very least, hadn't put much thought into.

The idea that the Angels should focus on a 5 year window is very smart. At 28, Trout will require an amount of money that makes the 250 million we discuss with Heyward seem like couch change. We need to gear up for that while still going all in for the next half decade.

[ettin]

As is typical Doc, you brought up a point that I either never considered or at the very least, hadn't put much thought into.

The idea that the Angels should focus on a 5 year window is very smart. At 28, Trout will require an amount of money that makes the 250 million we discuss with Heyward seem like couch change. We need to gear up for that while still going all in for the next half decade.

Yet another reason why I should just get the rest of my Primer series out. Ten Ocho was right.... I do discuss this (the Mike Trout window) at length near the end of the series. In fact Mike Trout's five years of control should be the foundation of every decision that is made this offseason.

[Angel Oracle]

The one worry about Heyward is the Great RF Wall.

If he doesn't try to swing for the fences, he will be fine and raking in the doubles and triples and maybe the OPS will be in the low-mid .800s.

If he does try to swing for the fences, OPS will likely not get much above low-mid .700s. 

Edited November 5, 2015 by Angel Oracle

[Troll Daddy]

Finding a LH power bat to sandwich between Trout and Pujols would be ideal. Jason Heyward fits the bill ... but you're looking at a 8-10 year/200M commitment.

If your going to invest that type of money ... then you must get a #1 SP to go with it. It's like a matching set ... salt & pepper.