Initial Ideas on How to Improve the Angels This Offseason

[Dave Saltzer]

1 minute ago, totdprods said:

I think that's probably the bigger hang-up on that deal. I don't think Morin and Alcantara get it done. They'd actually probably prefer we take Ellsbury over Gardner.

Most likely they would, but his contract is longer (signed through 2020 with an option to buy out), more money tied up, and his production isn't potentially as good. I don't want LF tied up forever. They'd have to pay a lot more money to move Ellsbury, and I don't see them wanting to do that.

[totdprods]

14 minutes ago, Dave Saltzer said:

Most likely they would, but his contract is longer (signed through 2020 with an option to buy out), more money tied up, and his production isn't potentially as good. I don't want LF tied up forever. They'd have to pay a lot more money to move Ellsbury, and I don't see them wanting to do that.

What if they offered up a Top 15 prospect as well? I'm with you in that in far less interested in Ellsbury, but the Yanks have a ridiculous farm all of the sudden, and they actually could throw in an impact prospect if they were anxious to shed that contract. Freeing up 80% of Ellsbury's contract lets them bring back Chapman without adding to their payroll. Angels still get a (very costly) LF who still is an improvement and a blue-chip prospect as well. Heck they may even through in Refsnyder too.

As underwhelming and awful Ellsbury has been, he'd still be an improvement and is still putting up positive WAR. Gardner's remaining salary is peanuts to the Yanks, don't think it's hurting them much.

When the Meyer trade went down, I think Fletcher said Eppler could have gone a safer route, but he was far more interested in adding a prospect with much higher upside and potential, even if it meant greater risk. For that reason, I could see Ellsbury being the center of discussion more from the Yanks, with Billy eyeing a talent that could be much better than Refsnyder.

[Hubs]

We have to look at what the Angels need to do to be competitive. IMHO, they need to add around 75 runs to this lineup, to account for the lack of depth in the pitching staff. They also need to drop 75 runs out of the allowed category. 

What do you end up with if that happens? The 2014 Angels. Almost. They'd be at 792 runs scored, say 800 if we're feeling generous, and 652 runs allowed, which would put them at say 650 if we're being generous.

[Hubs]

How can they add / subtract 75 runs? If you use WAR, that's adding 7.5 WAR and subtracting 7.5 WAR and they should be there.

Getting a replacement level LF in here adds 25. We were so bad in LF, it's not even funny. 

Adding a player like Cespedes or Braun, gets you almost there. Adding a player like Valbuena over Escobar (or moving him to 2nd) gets you all the way there. Escobars value defensively saps his value offensively, maybe that's minimized if he were to go to 2nd.

Adding an innings eater to round out the rotation, with increased health gets you all the way to 7.5 WAR on the pitching side. Richards versus Lincecum/Huff/Olbertholtzer/Chacin is a huge upgrade. But depth is an issue, so give me a guy who can give you 200 innings in the 4 spot, and I'm happy.

[Ohtaniland]

The Yankees are shrewd and they have talent lined up waiting to get their chance at the big leagues. They'll be willing to move old expensive contracts for very little in return. 

[totdprods]

@Hubs they're more likely to try Valbuena at 2B than move Escobar there. I'm pretty sure they've even confirmed aloud he won't be moved from 3B.

[Dave Saltzer]

1 hour ago, totdprods said:

What if they offered up a Top 15 prospect as well? I'm with you in that in far less interested in Ellsbury, but the Yanks have a ridiculous farm all of the sudden, and they actually could throw in an impact prospect if they were anxious to shed that contract. Freeing up 80% of Ellsbury's contract lets them bring back Chapman without adding to their payroll. Angels still get a (very costly) LF who still is an improvement and a blue-chip prospect as well. Heck they may even through in Refsnyder too.

As underwhelming and awful Ellsbury has been, he'd still be an improvement and is still putting up positive WAR. Gardner's remaining salary is peanuts to the Yanks, don't think it's hurting them much.

When the Meyer trade went down, I think Fletcher said Eppler could have gone a safer route, but he was far more interested in adding a prospect with much higher upside and potential, even if it meant greater risk. For that reason, I could see Ellsbury being the center of discussion more from the Yanks, with Billy eyeing a talent that could be much better than Refsnyder.

A great idea, but I think they really want to get younger and form another nucleus like they had in the late 90s to develop together. So, i don't see them wanting to give up such a good prospect just to jettison Ellbury's contract. Which one would you take if you could pick one to offset the trade?

[totdprods]

1 hour ago, Dave Saltzer said:

A great idea, but I think they really want to get younger and form another nucleus like they had in the late 90s to develop together. So, i don't see them wanting to give up such a good prospect just to jettison Ellbury's contract. Which one would you take if you could pick one to offset the trade?

They definitely have a deep enough farm to part with a guy still, especially if they shed $60-80m as a result. That lets them go after Chapman this offseason and one of the big SP's next offseason without adding to the annual payroll, and they've been working on getting and staying below the lux tax. Dealing Ellsbury's contract helps them far, far more than Gardner's contract which is pretty short and cheap in comparison. Obviously, that's why the Angels would prefer Gardner as well, but if the Yanks offered someone much higher than Ref, it mirrors Eppler's mindset on the Meyer deal.

Only problem I see is that even in mega-deals involving huge salary trades with prospects involved, there is usually at least a significant piece going back as well. The Yanks could probably find someone willing to offer something much better than a Morin+package for the same Ellsbury+Top 15 guy package. 

Taking a glance at their farm, it's hard to see an ideal prospect ar first. They could probably afford to spare a SP or OF prospect, but I imagine dealing an OF is unlikely given that they're clearing that spot in this deal. I imagine they'll to after one of the big SP FAs available next year, so a SP prospect would be the likeliest target. Would love to get Kaprellian, but Morin+ isn't gonna do that, even if we took all of Ellsbury's contract.

[Inside Pitch]

2 hours ago, Dave Saltzer said:

I don't think Gardner and his contract have the value that the Yankees are paying either. 

In an offseason where the OF situation is what it is...  Gardner is much more valuable than you are letting on.

Gardner has been a 3+ WAR player in each of the last two seasons and is due to make 12.5, 11.5 and 12.5 mil over the next three years...  Colby Rasmus got a QO in 2015 worth 15 mil after a 2.5 WAR season...

Prices aren't going down -- OBP and defense are valuable.   Bret Gardner's bad batting average is causing people to underrate him.

 

[ukyah]

5 hours ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

Cowart is an elite 3B defender so I would guess he would be quite a good defender at 2B also.

that's the first reaction i had too. cowart's defense isn't a question, that will play anywhere. the question is his bat. 

i prefer escobar transitioning to second and going with a marte/cowart platoon, and see how that works out. the recipe for the angels winning over the next couple of years, is pitching and defense.

for whatever reason, the angels are 100% against moving escobar to second, or so it seems.

[Inside Pitch]

1 minute ago, ukyah said:

for whatever reason, the angels are 100% against moving escobar to second, or so it seems.

At this point and given they have tried guys like Green and JonnyG there -- you have to think there is something they have seen that makes them not even want to try it.  I can't recall them ever completely ruling out a guy at a different position as fiercely as they have with Escobar.   I wonder if they haven't tried him out there and it's just been brutal..

He's got to be Benny Hill theme song bad defensively at 2b or something.

[Mauch Won]

I had season tickets to Arizona baseball Refsnyder's last year there.  He plays a good outfield if they think his bat will work in the bigs

[Troll Daddy]

Howie Kendrick would be on my radar @1/10M 

 

 

[Brent Maguire]

I like the idea of obtaining Gardner but there's no chance the Angels get him with a package headlined by a mediocre reliever and solid but not great prospect. Gardner has posted a 2.3 WAR or higher in every single full season he has played in the majors and is still going pretty strong. He's basically a league average hitter who still runs the bases extremely well and plays above average defense in LF. His contract is extremely fair value for a guy of his skill set, even if he is getting up there in age. 

With that being said, I can definitely see the Yankees looking to move Gardner to continue to build some insane talent in the minors. I just don't see how the Angels acquire Gardner without giving up a package involving our best prospects we currently have. 

Enjoyed the article still though. I'm not big on Hellickson but if he's in the right price range and doesn't get the QO, he could make sense. I agree that the team absolutely needs to try to sign some relievers. There's no way the team can head into next season without adding some real talent in the pen. 

[Lou]

16 hours ago, Hubs said:

We have to look at what the Angels need to do to be competitive. IMHO, they need to add around 75 runs to this lineup, to account for the lack of depth in the pitching staff. They also need to drop 75 runs out of the allowed category. 

What do you end up with if that happens? The 2014 Angels. Almost. They'd be at 792 runs scored, say 800 if we're feeling generous, and 652 runs allowed, which would put them at say 650 if we're being generous.

Holy crap! 

Where the hell did you come from? 

[Inside Pitch]

17 hours ago, Hubs said:

We have to look at what the Angels need to do to be competitive. IMHO, they need to add around 75 runs to this lineup, to account for the lack of depth in the pitching staff. They also need to drop 75 runs out of the allowed category. 

What do you end up with if that happens? The 2014 Angels. Almost. They'd be at 792 runs scored, say 800 if we're feeling generous, and 652 runs allowed, which would put them at say 650 if we're being generous.

So -- for them to be competitive they would need create a 150 point run differential over what they had last year?  

The Angels were a minus 10 in that category in 2016.  There were three teams in all of baseball with a run differential of of 140 or better and only 4 teams total with at least a run differential of 101 or better.  The top number in the AL West was a +61.  The Rangers, owners of the best record in the AL came in at +8  If they did what you're talking about they wouldn't be competitive, they would be in the conversation for the best team in the AL.

The Angels may not be competitive - but they aren't a 150 run differential away from it either.

 

[ksangel]

Yankees have their LF of the future in Clint Frazier who they acquired from Cleveland in the Miller trade so maybe the Yankees would move him.  He was Cleveland's #1 prospect and in AA/AAA last year.

Gardner would be a good stop gap in LF for a couple of years...better than a Jon Jay type IMO. 

Maybe Thaiss could be a LF and in the majors in 2019?  Wasn't there talk of moving him to the outfield after playing 1B this year?

But the reality is the Yankees would want a couple of Angels top prospects to do that deal.

Pass on Ellsbury...

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

On 10/24/2016 at 9:41 AM, mulwin444 said:

You guys are a lot higher on SRod than myself.  I don't know, I guess I see a guy who's hit .230 .300 .700 over a decade and there's really not much there to look at.  Sure, he can play multiple positions and that has value but if you going for quasi-2B who can play elsewhere why not Chris Coghlan or Daniel Descalso?  

I wanted Chris Coghlan on our bench since he left the Marlins in what 2013..... Always seemed like a solid guy off the bench and in the clubhouse good 4th/5th OF'er also and could fill in for an injury.

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

18 hours ago, totdprods said:

They definitely have a deep enough farm to part with a guy still, especially if they shed $60-80m as a result. That lets them go after Chapman this offseason and one of the big SP's next offseason without adding to the annual payroll, and they've been working on getting and staying below the lux tax. Dealing Ellsbury's contract helps them far, far more than Gardner's contract which is pretty short and cheap in comparison. Obviously, that's why the Angels would prefer Gardner as well, but if the Yanks offered someone much higher than Ref, it mirrors Eppler's mindset on the Meyer deal.

Only problem I see is that even in mega-deals involving huge salary trades with prospects involved, there is usually at least a significant piece going back as well. The Yanks could probably find someone willing to offer something much better than a Morin+package for the same Ellsbury+Top 15 guy package. 

Taking a glance at their farm, it's hard to see an ideal prospect ar first. They could probably afford to spare a SP or OF prospect, but I imagine dealing an OF is unlikely given that they're clearing that spot in this deal. I imagine they'll to after one of the big SP FAs available next year, so a SP prospect would be the likeliest target. Would love to get Kaprellian, but Morin+ isn't gonna do that, even if we took all of Ellsbury's contract.

You aren't getting KAP for Morin +....... He's their future #1 and will be a stud! Though I was hopeful KAP would fall to us in the draft it wasn't going to happen. He was heavily scouted by Boston since 11th grade at Beckman and actually visited Fenway during his summer that year and again his first summer in the Cape Cod League. I was surprised the Yankee's got him actually...You might be able to pry some bully options from the Yankee's like maybe former Fresno State alum and Closer Garrett Mundell.

[Hubs]

5 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

So -- for them to be competitive they would need create a 150 point run differential over what they had last year?  

The Angels were a minus 10 in that category in 2016.  There were three teams in all of baseball with a run differential of of 140 or better and only 4 teams total with at least a run differential of 101 or better.  The top number in the AL West was a +61.  The Rangers, owners of the best record in the AL came in at +8  If they did what you're talking about they wouldn't be competitive, they would be in the conversation for the best team in the AL.

The Angels may not be competitive - but they aren't a 150 run differential away from it either.

 

2016 was an aberration. The Rangers got swept out of the playoffs as they were the luckiest team in baseball in reference to their differential. Also lets examine what I mean by competitve. I don't mean maybe win the division, and perhaps compete for the 2nd wild card. I'm talking about being competitive for the World Series Title. 

So perhaps 140 is too high, ok, but they need to be at over 100 differential in order to secure a division title and have a chance at the World Series.

In 2015 They had a negative differential but managed a winning record, whereas in 2014, their differential was 143. Right where it needed to be to be competitive and make the playoffs.

 

 

[Inside Pitch]

2 hours ago, Hubs said:

2016 was an aberration.

In the last three seasons there have been all of four instances of teams putting together run differences of better than 140.

2 hours ago, Hubs said:

The Rangers got swept out of the playoffs as they were the luckiest team in baseball in reference to their differential.

I agree the Rangers were lucky -- their record in one run games screamed as much.   But FWIW, this year's run differential champion team in the AL was the Boston Red Sox.   They got swept out of the playoffs too.

2 hours ago, Hubs said:

So perhaps 140 is too high, ok, but they need to be at over 100 differential in order to secure a division title and have a chance at the World Series

There have been seven 100 run differential teams in the AL in the last three years,    2014 had three of those teams.. The +143 run Angels were swept out of the playoffs by the + 27 runs Royals who also took out the + 112 Orioles -- again a sweep.   The Oakland A's +157 led the AL in plus runs and yet they failed to get out of the play in game.   2015 saw the AL leading +221 Blue Jays get taken out but the eventual WS Champion Royals +73.  The Royals took out the only other +100 team that year...  The Astros.    So far this year we have seen the AL leader in plus runs get taken out via sweep by the other +100 team, Cleveland.

Im not trying to argue Run differential isnt important or that it closely correlates with division winners etc etc.. but you're overshooting what the Angels need to make up by a pretty large margin.  If they can get over +75, they will be competitive, in the running for the division and a WS contender.   
 

[Hubs]

My initial idea focuses on free agency rather than trades.

1) Sign at least one of Justin Turner, Neil Walker, or Luis Valbuena or even two to improve infield. Signing both would be awesome, but may impact what else they can do. Still, I'm fine with giving Marte a shot in left if they grabbed these two. Two would mean no room for Yunel Escobar, but he's always tradeable.

2) Sign Jason Castro or Matt Weiters to improve the C position. Neither would break the bank. Even bringing back Soto helps offensively, but with Soto's injury history… Jett Bandy and Carlos Perez would be an okay tandem, but offensively I don't know if they could carry the load. 

3) Sign a non-tendered free agent starter like Hector Santiago. The Twins were pathetic last year and they only made the Santiago trade for the financial relief. Santiago looked bad and good at times for the Twins. He'll give you 190 innings at a 4 ERA and that is valuable. Backup Choice: Doug Fister.

4) Address left field with either Marte, or grabbing a solid player hoping for a rebound. Third time is the charm right? 

[Hubs]

Inside Pitch, 

Ok so 140 may be too much, but I think they need to go for 100. 

 

[Angel Oracle]

I like Marte as a more power/less speed version of the 2003-2004 Figgins, at 3B, 1B, LF, and DH.

Definately need to add a backend reliever, extra super util guy, #3/#4 starter, and a 2B.  Focus first on those FA's who wouldn't cost any draft pick (2nd round as well).   Need to continue to rebuild the farm, need to start anew in Latin America by June, and need to at least try to pursue Otani if he leaves Japan this off-season.

[Docwaukee]

I like a lot of the suggestions but there are truly a couple key things that are going to significantly move the needle. 

-First and foremost is Richards.  Getting 200 innings of 3.5 era to replace the 200 innings of piecemeal 5+ era is about 40-50 runs.  A lot of our other pitching performances wash each other out.  

the problem with the above is it's likelihood of happening and the collateral damage if it doesn't.  Even with some improved depth moves this off season, you aren't even coming close to replacing that level of production.  

 

Here is something I found interesting.  Last year, we were competitive.  We won 85 games and had some obvious holes.  

If you isolate the SP differences from this year to last:

2015 offense/defense + RP WAR  of 17.8 + 2.9 = 20.7

2016 offense/defense + RP WAR of 21.6 + 0.3 = 21.9

2015 SP WAR 8.7

2016 SP WAR 5.6

Richards 2015 WAR 2.6.  

The worst 200ip WAR for 2016 -1.6 

Exchanging 2015 Richards for the worst of 2016 makes up 4.2 WAR.  

The thing people don't realize is: 

1. It's really difficult to find a 3 WAR starter.  

2. Having one doesn't just add that value to the staff, but it also negates the negative value of what you replace.  

3. There isn't another pitcher available capable of performing even close to his level.

4. Our eggs are in one basket.  Again.