Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to comment and join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium Member today for an ad-free experience. 

     

IGNORED

John Sickels top 20 Angels prospects for 2016


Angelsjunky

Recommended Posts

Nothing surprising, really. As someone pointed out in the comments, Sickels has 13 Cubs prospects and 17 Brewers prospects rated higher than the Angels #2.

 

I suppose it is of note that Roberto Baldoquin didn't make the 20, instead in the "other" category. I'd like to see a full, healthy year from him before calling him a dud, but boy is that in danger of being Dipoto's parting shot across the bow.

 

The only players on that list that I am at all excited about are Ward and Jones. Some of the others could turn out to be decent major league platoon players, even one or two regulars, but those are the only two that seem to have any degree of star potential (emphasis on "any degree of" and "potential").

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It started with Reagins and continued with JD. Constantly trading top prospects. Thanks to that philosophy the Angels haven't won a playoff game in six years and have no depth.

This is why so much of the roster is made up of journeyman

 

Trading prospects isn't a bad thing so long as you're actually proficient at acquiring them.  Firing a bunch of people chiefly responsible for having kept that pipeline full has proven very costly.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am disgusted with the state of the farm like the rest of you, but there are a few things to note in defense of the Angels: first, being generally competitive the last 15 years has resulted in a lower draft position. We have had no opportunity to draft the Kris Bryant and Carlos Correa types.

Second, by spending money on free agents (which we all want), we have lost picks.

And third, because the team wants to compete and not rebuild, we haven't generally traded our vets for prospects.

So while we bitch about the farm, a better farm would probably mean a less competitive organization.

And if we really want to restock the farm, we can. Simmons, Richards, Calhoun, Heaney, Skaggs (eventually) and Santiago would all bring back good/great prospects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree.  Look at every successful team in the last decade.  They did it with a good mix of home grown talent and FA/Trade acquisitions.

 

What exactly do you disagree with?   I'm not arguing for trading away every prospect, I'm saying you can trade prospects so long as you're actively replacing them with MORE prospects.   Most Angels fans understand this team has been at its best when it relied on home grown talent.

 

I think the other part of it is that the Angels simply haven't been very good at drafting and developing prospects. As great as the 2009 draft was, 2010 was simply awful and greatly damaged the farm. Those are the players who should be coming into the majors right now.

 

As bad as the 1st round failures of that draft may have been that draft actually did produce a MLB player of some merit -- Kole Calhoun.    Cam Bedrosian, Cowart -- they could still pan out.   Donn Roach, AJ Schugle and Josh Osich (who i think didn't sign) have all at least made it to MLB.  By most accounts graduating even one player of Calhoun's caliber is enough to make a draft class successful.  They may have crapped out on their high risk, high reward guys, but at least they hit on their low ceiling high floor guy.

 

Now consider this -- 18 of the 38 guys drafted in 2012 are either not employed as players or retired, this despite the focus having shifted from what it had been in the past to surer bet college guys...  I'm betting RJ Alvarez still pans out and has a career as a MLB reliever, ditto O'Grady, so they won't have crapped out completely but that's looking like a much worse draft.  

 

I'd argue the worst recent draft for the Angels was 2011..   Cron will have made it -- Bandy likely make it and Clevenger could turn out to be very good (traded for Pestano), but when you look at the players that were available in rounds 3-8 of that draft and how little the Angels have to show for it.....it's ugly.  Seriously, guys like Ken Giles, Tony Cingrani, Mookie Betts, Greg Bird, Marcus Semien, Tony Delscalfani, Kyle Hendricks, Carson Smith and that Quakenbush guy in SD.

Edited by Inside Pitch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sickels is the best in the business. Pretty solid list, he sums it up quite aptly, we have a lot of 3-4-5 starters and a lot of role players. We're better at developing pitchers for sure.

I think the only one on here I disagree with us Kubitza, but then again I find myself disagreeing with most on him.

Also, though I don't advertise here anymore, the MWAH top prospect countdown is still in full swing, you guys can go over there and read up on these kids if you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am disgusted with the state of the farm like the rest of you, but there are a few things to note in defense of the Angels: first, being generally competitive the last 15 years has resulted in a lower draft position. We have had no opportunity to draft the Kris Bryant and Carlos Correa types.

Second, by spending money on free agents (which we all want), we have lost picks.

And third, because the team wants to compete and not rebuild, we haven't generally traded our vets for prospects.

So while we bitch about the farm, a better farm would probably mean a less competitive organization.

And if we really want to restock the farm, we can. Simmons, Richards, Calhoun, Heaney, Skaggs (eventually) and Santiago would all bring back good/great prospects.

 

Your argument is sound but it ignores the fact that there are other teams who draft low but have managed to maintain a strong farm, and remain competitive year after yeaer. Without doing any research, the Red Sox and Cardinals come most readily to mind.

 

The players you list are all young and cost controlled. You don't trade players like that until you absolutely have to (before they go to free agency). For example, if the Angels aren't on the upswing by 2018, I think you consider trading Garret Richards, or simply let him go elsewhere and enjoy the draft pick compensation. The same might go for the others at their appropriate time. But for now, you keep all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what it is.  'high floor' cheap college seniors.  Turns into 4/5 starters, middle relievers, 4/5th OFers and utility infielders.  

 

Pretty much any of those types of guys are available as cheap FAs, or off the waiver wire.  Plus the ones that you are picking up from other teams likely have some level of experience.  Why waste your draft on guys that are readily available at any given point.  This mostly applies to the position player side of things.  They did pretty well with pitching.  

 

I'd like to see them draft for a bit more upside with position players.  It's more important to find that one everyday player per draft who could be an Allstar than getting a 4th/5th OFer, and two until infielders.

 

the system lost two B+ (newcomb and clevinger), a B (ellis), and a few other B-/C+ guys that would have added some depth.  It would still be a bottom 3rd system, but not the worst in baseball.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just look at Reagins and Dipoto being hired by Moreno, plus his reluctance to invest in scouting and development.

The ONLY foreign player brought in the past 3 years (Baldoquin) appears to be a dud, and cost $16 million to boot ($8 mil plus $8 mil penalty). 

 

I don't mind drafting college players, especially if a Sonny Gray or Michael Wacha is available.

But making them the emphasis in the draft is not the way to go, ultimately.   That seems to be where Dipoto went wrong.

 

We have either totally eschewed college players, or drafted too many.   It's time to go to a better mix, with more emphasis on HS draftees and drafting the best available player (unless an absolute need exists).

 

I hope Eppler turns out to be fine.   If not, Moreno will be 0-3 in GM hires.

Edited by Angel Oracle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope the focus has shifted onto the draft, international FAs, scouting, and building up the minors - if those have truly turned into top priorities it'll make this offseason much more palatable and understandable. The Yankees always did a fairly good job of maintaining a farm - they never seemed to really have a top system and the prospects were overrated often, but they did a good job of maintaining a well stocked system that they very often dealt from for MLB-ready fixes. Parallels the Angels gameplan under Moreno nicely.

Edited by totdprods
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ill say this, if the reason Arte Moreno has suddenly ceased his willingness to financially support the major league team is because he's chosen to reallocate his funds into the draft and international signing, then I wouldn't be as upset.

If we do things right, we can have a very good system again in three years.

But nothing in Moreno suggests this is the plan. After July, we can't sign anyone for over 300k which excludes us from all the top talent, and most indicators suggest we won't be making too many 300k signings because our international budget is still by all reports, minuscule. Furthermore, as we hired Eppler, there was no basic turnover in scouts or even minor league coordinators. Ric Wilson even has retained his job, which means he's survived two different front office upheavals now. The Angels appear to be doing the same thing they've done for three years in the draft, which is heavily focus on high floor low ceiling collegiate talent with 1-2 decent prep prospects each draft. So far, the results haven't been promising.

Overall, it looks like the major league team will no longer be supported and the minor leagues will not change. If ever there were a time for a potential rebuild, I think you're looking at it. You have to either support Trout with the money for bars around him, or you have to spend to develop prospects to surround him. But you can't just stop spending and not make any changes to the worst system in the minors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the other part of it is that the Angels simply haven't been very good at drafting and developing prospects. As great as the 2009 draft was, 2010 was simply awful and greatly damaged the farm. Those are the players who should be coming into the majors right now.

 

Yep, that was more on Reagins than Eddie Bane.

 

From my understanding from EB that is. 

 

The 2010 draft was a cluster****. Only Cowart can save it at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn, I really hoped we would have signed Yoan Moncada. The guy looks like he's going to be a top of the lineup, maybe even 3rd in the lineup offensive stud down the not too distant road for the Red Sox.

 

F'n Dipoto. I love the guy but he seriously left us with little in the farm, only for Eppler to deal away our two top prospects for a defensive-minded SS. 

 

Ugh! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scotty, I thought we were already fairly well into Year One of the Baldoquin restrictions, with our second (and final) year starting this next signing period. You'd have a better idea than I would though.

Even if Arte and Eppy are prioritizing the farm, it still doesn't have to be something showing immediate indications, though I am hesitant to believe that's the case still from what we've seen so far. But if Eppler is as methodical and meticulous as he has seemed to be (and as some reports have indicated) I can see how he may still be using even his first year as a year to assess the in-house staff and potential replacement candidates.

Guess what I'm saying is instead of cleaning house completely and hiring on the fly and having three years to work with his impulse assessments and hirings, maybe he's taking a route where he uses the first 6-12 months to assess, consider hirings, and 'spend' year one focusing on that aspect rather so he goes into years 2-3 with the exact staff and knowledge he wants.

Ric Wilson aside, maybe there are some Dipoto-era and long term employees he wants to keep around based on the Dipoto's reputation and the Angels relatively strong past 15 years.

Anywho, just think there wasn't an immediate house cleaning since we can't spend on international prospects for another year anyway. That time might be better spent completely overhauling the staff and systems in place rather than hiring a bunch of guys to scout folks we can't even sign.

Edited by totdprods
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ill say this, if the reason Arte Moreno has suddenly ceased his willingness to financially support the major league team is because he's chosen to reallocate his funds into the draft and international signing, then I wouldn't be as upset.

If we do things right, we can have a very good system again in three years.

But nothing in Moreno suggests this is the plan. After July, we can't sign anyone for over 300k which excludes us from all the top talent, and most indicators suggest we won't be making too many 300k signings because our international budget is still by all reports, minuscule. Furthermore, as we hired Eppler, there was no basic turnover in scouts or even minor league coordinators. Ric Wilson even has retained his job, which means he's survived two different front office upheavals now. The Angels appear to be doing the same thing they've done for three years in the draft, which is heavily focus on high floor low ceiling collegiate talent with 1-2 decent prep prospects each draft. So far, the results haven't been promising.

Overall, it looks like the major league team will no longer be supported and the minor leagues will not change. If ever there were a time for a potential rebuild, I think you're looking at it. You have to either support Trout with the money for bars around him, or you have to spend to develop prospects to surround him. But you can't just stop spending and not make any changes to the worst system in the minors.

 

The question for me is -- are they bad scouts or were they focusing on the wrong thing?   If they were following a directive then for all we know they may have succeeded while the plan itself failed.   We are all going to have a better idea of what this team is doing come June. It's going to be a long painful wait.  

Edited by Inside Pitch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...