Is it really so complicated?

[Revad]

Sign the best option for LF and if necessary next year trade someone for prospects to get under the cap. We compete this year and restock the farm next year. We may need to eat some money depending on the prospects and contract involved but don't forget next year's crop of FA is poor so it would seem we'd be dealing from a position of strength.

I get it that the player we sign may require a no-trade clause but we do have other players that don't.

[tdawg87]

They will be under the tax next year regardless. Between Weaver and Wilson they will be freeing up 31 million. Not to mention all the smaller signings that bring it closer to 40 mil.

Some people will point out *jefffletchercough* that we have holes to fill next year too and will need payroll space to do so. But we have holes RIGHT NOW, and plenty of players worthy of filling them are available. Next year this won't be the case.

It makes too much sense. But of course Arte doesn't see it this way. Sometimes this organization makes me wonder if I've stepped into the Twilight Zone.

[bloodbrother]

It's about economics. You heard Arte say it from a yacht party

[wopphil]

This team should have little difficulty getting under the tax next year, even if they were to sign a big name LF. Weaver, Wilson, Smith, Salas (who will finally have to be non-tendered), Soto, Escobar, Gentry and Nava is about $50 mil on this year's payroll. The team could also trade Santiago and/or Street if need be.

Plenty of ways to get under the cap, even with a big signing.

Edited January 9, 2016 by wopphil

[Stradling]

They could sign a big name free agent and possibly get under the tax by the end of the year. The tax is calculated at the end of the season. If they play poorly after acquiring someone, then be sellers at the deadline.

[bloodbrother]

Hard to believe this team would go another season with Pujols being the batter hitting next to Trout. Sure hope that's not the case for the next 5 years that Trout's under contract.

[Ohtaniland]

Hard to believe this team would go another season with Pujols being the batter hitting next to Trout. Sure hope that's not the case for the next 5 years that Trout's under contract.

That's Blasphemy to some.......

It seems like the organization went from "no worries....we have Albert Freaken Pujols" to "no worries....we have Mike Freaken Trout".

[Angelsjunky]

I still think the Angels sign one of Upton or Cespedes, that they're playing a game of chicken to bring the price down. Cespedes, for instance, might have cost 6/$150MM a month go but in another month could be closer to 5/$100M now.

[Stradling]

By "some" you mean Scioscia. Also since you brought it up, outside of the F Yu we got Pujols celebration, show us where at any given time this board thought everything was fine because we have Trout or anyone else. Sure there are individuals that are more positive than others but board sentiment for a long time is the team is flawed. So, yea we've had worries.

[Stradling]

I still think the Angels sign one of Upton or Cespedes, that they're playing a game of chicken to bring the price down. Cespedes, for instance, might have cost 6/$150MM a month go but in another month could be closer to 5/$100M now.

Me too

[gotbeer]

We won't be under the cap next year.  Especially if we spend big on a long term FA this year.  Keep saying that we have money being freed up next year all you want. 

 

But the reality is, our farm sucks, and we don't have cheap replacements.  Sure, we lose salary next season.  But for CBT purposes, we are already at $145 million.  We lose 2 starting pitchers or at least 1 1/2 starting pitchers and 2 relievers next season.  If we sign someone for $20 AAV this season, that's bumps us up to $165 million.  2 good relievers are about $5 million a piece.  That's $175.  A good starter will be at least $12 for a 3/4 range.  So that's $187. 

 

It also means that we are all in on Garrett Richards.  If he can't handle the #1, then we truly are going way over in order to be competitive next season. 

[Ohtaniland]

By "some" you mean Scioscia. Also since you brought it up, outside of the F Yu we got Pujols celebration, show us where at any given time this board thought everything was fine because we have Trout or anyone else. Sure there are individuals that are more positive than others but board sentiment for a long time is the team is flawed. So, yea we've had worries.

The one thing that Arte has done is spend money to build a winner. There are so many teams that don't spend at all. Arte pays for star players year after year. We, part of the 3 million show up every season to support the team. I'm sure Arte is deeply disappointed that the players over the years haven't delivered him one stinking championship.

When Arte shocked the world and signed Albert Pujols I'm sure that he thought that this was the guy that was going to get him that championship. Albert was the guy that was going to take away the pain left from GMJ to Vernon Wells. He even ended up throwing in Josh Freaken Hamilton to help seal the deal.

So with Pujols, Hamilton and Trout in the same lineup how could we have not won it all? I'm sure that Arte has learned that you can't just sign big checks to big name players and expect the trophies to roll in. Arte said that he would go over the tax for the perfect player and perfect situation. I don't think that Arte believes there is a player out there on the open market that will deliver that championship.

Edited January 9, 2016 by CALZONE

[laagamer]

We're already all in on Richards. It really is a shame he got injured. Last year might have been a lot different if he wasn't coming off injury.

[Angelsjunky]

Next year Weaver and Wilson are off the books - that's $40M, as is Joe Smith, another $5.25M, and Geovany Soto, $2.25M - so $47.5M off the books with four players lost. Might as well throw in Nava and Gentry and bring it up to around $50M.

 

Meanwhile, increased salaries go to Trout, Pujols, Simmons, Street, and Pennington to the tune of $8.75M.

 

So the net difference between the two years is about $41M, but the Angels are down two starters, a catcher, a reliever, and a left fielder - plus increases in arbitration for players like Richards, Calhoun, Shoemaker, Gia, Santiago, etc. I have no idea how much that costs, but let's bring it down to around $30-35M of funds from this year's current payroll.

 

*Weaver/Wilson can be replaced from within, with the Angels going with some combination of Richards, Heaney, Skaggs, Santiago, Shoemaker, and Tropeano.

*Soto can be replaced by the Perez/Bundy platoon that many thought we were going with this year.

*Smith can probably be replaced by an adequate reliever of some kind for a few million.

*Another option is not picking up Escobar's option and going with Cowart or Kubitza, which would save another $6M before paying Cowart/Kubitza.

 

Anyhow, the bottom line is that the Angels will have somewhere in the range of $20-30M more next year, if they don't make any further signings this year. That would mean they could PROBABLY sneak in a Cespedes or Upton and not go over the cap next year.

[AngelsLakersFan]

 I'm sure that Arte has learned that you can't just sign big checks to big name players and expect the trophies to roll in. 

 

It's amazing now naive we make billionaire Arte out to be on this board. Then again, maybe he really did think he could just sign two questionable marquee players to absurd contracts and that was all it was going to take...

[wopphil]

We won't be under the cap next year. Especially if we spend big on a long term FA this year. Keep saying that we have money being freed up next year all you want.

I don't agree. Lots of high prices vets coming off the books next year. And higher priced arbitration guys like Richards, Calhoun and Santiago could be traded, if necessary, for cheaper pieces. Even Simmons and Street could be moved.

Given what the Braves got for Shelby Miller, I think it stands to reason that Richards could bring back two useful, cheap players. If he has a good year and the team tanks, perhaps you move him for two good arms (Skaggs/Heaney types). And you save yourself $10 mil in the process.

Do the same for Santiago and Calhoun and you can massively slash from this year's payroll.

Edited January 9, 2016 by wopphil

[Stradling]

The one thing that Arte has done is spend money to build a winner. There are so many teams that don't spend at all. Arte pays for star players year after year. We, part of the 3 million show up every season to support the team. I'm sure Arte is deeply disappointed that the players over the years haven't delivered him one stinking championship.

When Arte shocked the world and signed Albert Pujols I'm sure that he thought that this was the guy that was going to get him that championship. Albert was the guy that was going to take away the pain left from GMJ to Vernon Wells. He even ended up throwing in Josh Freaken Hamilton to help seal the deal.

So with Pujols, Hamilton and Trout in the same lineup how could we have not won it all? I'm sure that Arte has learned that you can't just sign big checks to big name players and expect the trophies to roll in. Arte said that he would go over the tax for the perfect player and perfect situation. I don't think that Arte believes there is a player out there on the open market that will deliver that championship.

This literally has nothing to do with my response. Unless you were referring to Arte when you said "no worries".

[tdawg87]

We won't be under the cap next year. Especially if we spend big on a long term FA this year. Keep saying that we have money being freed up next year all you want.

But the reality is, our farm sucks, and we don't have cheap replacements. Sure, we lose salary next season. But for CBT purposes, we are already at $145 million. We lose 2 starting pitchers or at least 1 1/2 starting pitchers and 2 relievers next season. If we sign someone for $20 AAV this season, that's bumps us up to $165 million. 2 good relievers are about $5 million a piece. That's $175. A good starter will be at least $12 for a 3/4 range. So that's $187.

So...they'll be under the tax like we've been saying.

[ispy45]

This team should have little difficulty getting under the tax next year, even if they were to sign a big name LF. Weaver, Wilson, Smith, Salas (who will finally have to be non-tendered), Soto, Escobar, Gentry and Nava is about $50 mil on this year's payroll. The team could also trade Santiago and/or Street if need be.

Plenty of ways to get under the cap, even with a big signing.

Street has a no trade clause

[tdawg87]

This literally has nothing to do with my response. Unless you were referring to Arte when you said "no worries".

 

He just needed to make sure you saw his narrative again since you've only read it 549 times this offseason, and that is simply not enough. Now you're up to 550!

[DMVol]

....Cespedes, for instance, might have cost 6/$150MM a month go but in another month could be closer to 5/$100M now.

Or less....just doesn't look like anybody is willing to bite on Cespedes or Upton right now....

[Second Base]

The math says they'll be under. The owner says they don't have the money, the reporter that's trying to be edgy by contradicting everyone says there'd be holes to fill with no money to fill them.

I gotta go with common sense and call bulls___. Fletcher says we' need another catcher, yet he doesn't bring up Bandy. He says we'll need two more starters, yet by next year, we'll have Richards, Heaney, Skaggs, Santiago, Shoemaker, Tropeano and Nate Smith ready for deployment with the added depth coming from Kyle McGowin and potentially Greyson Long. Joe Gatto should still be at least a couple years off.

Fletcher also says we'll need a 3B despite the fact that Escobar has a cheap option and we have Cowart and Kubitza. He started we'll need a RP, and while there are internal candidates abound, we could still swing a trade for one quite easily.

Brief math inside my head, but if we sign a LF for 20 million a year, it will push us 16 million over the luxury tax threshold. Weav and CJ's AAV together is around 35, Smith is 5, and the smaller ones add up to another 5, which comes to 45 million. Subtract the 20 from the LF and its 25 million. Add in arbitration and we're down to 10-15 million to work with next year, with "openings in the rotation, catcher, utility infielder and RP. The first three are solved internally, and the RP either in FA or trade. If it's FA you figure another 6-7 million. Aggressively speaking, you're still looking at residing 3-8 million under budget next year after filling all holes.

The long term outlook is also quite promising, seeing as Hamilton's 25 million will be coming off the books the following year, though that will be negated by the need to lock up Richards, Calhoun, Skaggs and Cron shortly thereafter.

[wopphil]

The long term outlook is also quite promising, seeing as Hamilton's 25 million will be coming off the books the following year, though that will be negated by the need to lock up Richards, Calhoun, Skaggs and Cron shortly thereafter.

I wouldn't commit to going long-term with any of those guys. If you can trade them for young, cheap talent, you have to consider doing so.

Again, look at what the Braves got for Miller: a starting pitcher, an outfielder, and their future shortstop. Imagine if we had made that deal instead. We'd still have Aybar and Newcomb, and our long term payroll obligations would be far lower.

[Tyler]

Thinking they might trade Santiago for Blackmon.

[bloodbrother]

Take a hitter out of Coors and you're left disappointed. Place a pitcher in Coors and you're left disappointed. Deal makes sense for both teams but I'd expect both to end up not enjoying much success for the swap