Bullpen Arms: A review of the Market

[TroutCron]

My guess is that Eppler will wait out the market and sign a guy in Jan or Feb for one year or on a minor league contract. Same for a fourth outfielder.

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

Pirates could be looking to deal one of their lefties!!!!

 

Let's go get a Bastardo!~

[Jeff Fletcher]

I trust when this thread began no one thought Ziegler was going to get 16 million bucks. 

It would have been cool if they had Street, Bailey and Ziegler though. 

[ettin]

8 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I trust when this thread began no one thought Ziegler was going to get 16 million bucks. 

It would have been cool if they had Street, Bailey and Ziegler though. 

At this point I'll consider us lucky if we pick up one of Anthony Swarzak, Drew Storen, Javier Lopez, or J.P. Howell at this point.

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

2 minutes ago, ettin said:

At this point I'll consider us lucky if we pick up one of Anthony Swarzak, Drew Storen, Javier Lopez, or J.P. Howell at this point.

Could be good gets and signing Storen would allow us to deal if Street comes back healthy as another guy with closer background..

[Docwaukee]

maybe not 8, but 6 or 7.  

the escalating cost of relief pitching on the FA market is directly correlated to the insane values being placed on relievers via trade.  

I guess if we're afraid to pay 7-8 mil a year for a reliever,  then we're not getting one worth having.   

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

19 hours ago, Dochalo said:

maybe not 8, but 6 or 7.  

the escalating cost of relief pitching on the FA market is directly correlated to the insane values being placed on relievers via trade.  

I guess if we're afraid to pay 7-8 mil a year for a reliever,  then we're not getting one worth having.   

Isn't that what we were paying Justin Speier per year?.....

 

*EDIT*

MA BAD!~ He was one of the highest paid free agents at the time if memory serves? For a middle/setup guy at the time.

2007		Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim	$3,750,000	?
2008		Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim	$4,250,000	?
2009		Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim	$4,750,000

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

19 hours ago, Dochalo said:

maybe not 8, but 6 or 7.  

the escalating cost of relief pitching on the FA market is directly correlated to the insane values being placed on relievers via trade.  

I guess if we're afraid to pay 7-8 mil a year for a reliever,  then we're not getting one worth having.   

Doc if Arte' is pinching that tight even for bully help and a 4th OF..... I wouldn't assume he is LONG here? Thoughts? That just seems like a disconnect from the fan base. I understand he has a top 10 payroll though. I just think he doesn't believe the entire fan-base is that educated regarding the ins n outs of the business side?  He's making good $ and the new tv $$$$ hits also right?

[Docwaukee]

57 minutes ago, SlappyUtilityMIF said:

Doc if Arte' is pinching that tight even for bully help and a 4th OF..... I wouldn't assume he is LONG here? Thoughts? That just seems like a disconnect from the fan base. I understand he has a top 10 payroll though. I just think he doesn't believe the entire fan-base is that educated regarding the ins n outs of the business side?  He's making good $ and the new tv $$$$ hits also right?

I have come to realize that Arte isn't the starry-eyed type he's been labelled.  I think he's very calculated and very disciplined.  He knows (as most owners probably do) where his payroll can be relative to the rest of his operational outlay and revenue.  He believes, though, that the general fan is enamored by high profile players like Pujols, Hamilton and Trout.  So he puts his eggs in those baskets.  He's probably not wrong that we are, he's just been wrong about making that the primary motivation for constructing a baseball team as opposed to the subtle things that GM's and front office personnel are paid to notice.  Like decline curves and player motivation.  

Now he has Mike Trout.  There is no player you can put next to him that would motivate a fan to come see the halos that wasn't going to already.  So spending on that player doesn't make any sense.  

He, and a bunch of other owners are making tons of money.  There is little doubt to that.  He's got no debt and a golden goose.  The team winning would be nice, but it's merely a means to an end of running a successful business.  To me, that's the baseball disconnect.  I think this year is a critically important year for the halos not only from a player performance standpoint, but from a fan commitment standpoint as well.  Coming off an injury plagued season of 74 wins is ok, but Eppler made very subtle patches to the holes at 2b, LF and in terms of both SP and RP depth relying on progression and health.  If it doesn't work, I think we will see a bit more fan outcry than we've seen the last two years.  

But I am not sure any of that matters to Arte.  I truly think his payroll for 2019 is set.  We'll bring in a couple of high profile players and win an off season.  Hopefully, he'll let his baseball people decide who those players are.  We'll see how long his goose will lay golden eggs for him before wins and losses becoming a motivating factor again.  I think he's betting that he can pull it off for at least two more years.  

Why would you sell something that put's ten's of millions of dollars in your pocket and is pretty damn fun to have?  

The complicating factor in all of this is the stadium.  They can opt out of the lease by no later than Oct 16th, 2018.  New stadium generally require owners to take on debt.  Something he's been reluctant to do.  Could he be in negotiations with LT Global to sell the team and let them fund a new stadium?  Maybe.  It wouldn't surprise me.  The top ten franchises are valued at 6-7 times revenue minus debt with some calcs for EBITDA in there.  According to forbes, the Angels are listed at about 4 x revenue and have no debt.  They are ranked 8th on that list and have the lowest value to revenue of any top 10 franchise.  It makes me believe that they are worth closer to 2 billion and they are in line for that shiny new stadium which drives up long term value even though the initial outlay is substantial.  So I could see him selling off his majority share of the team and letting someone else handle the headaches.  

You never know whether that's good or bad for the fans.  I'm inclined to think a new owner would hit the 2018/19 market hard and make a statement by extending Trout through the end of his career.  Another reason why a Trout extension might not be on the radar right now.  

We need to have Fletcher ask Arte if he's setting the team up for a sale.  

[SlappyUtilityMIF]

4 hours ago, Dochalo said:

I have come to realize that Arte isn't the starry-eyed type he's been labelled.  I think he's very calculated and very disciplined.  He knows (as most owners probably do) where his payroll can be relative to the rest of his operational outlay and revenue.  He believes, though, that the general fan is enamored by high profile players like Pujols, Hamilton and Trout.  So he puts his eggs in those baskets.  He's probably not wrong that we are, he's just been wrong about making that the primary motivation for constructing a baseball team as opposed to the subtle things that GM's and front office personnel are paid to notice.  Like decline curves and player motivation.  

Now he has Mike Trout.  There is no player you can put next to him that would motivate a fan to come see the halos that wasn't going to already.  So spending on that player doesn't make any sense.  

He, and a bunch of other owners are making tons of money.  There is little doubt to that.  He's got no debt and a golden goose.  The team winning would be nice, but it's merely a means to an end of running a successful business.  To me, that's the baseball disconnect.  I think this year is a critically important year for the halos not only from a player performance standpoint, but from a fan commitment standpoint as well.  Coming off an injury plagued season of 74 wins is ok, but Eppler made very subtle patches to the holes at 2b, LF and in terms of both SP and RP depth relying on progression and health.  If it doesn't work, I think we will see a bit more fan outcry than we've seen the last two years.  

But I am not sure any of that matters to Arte.  I truly think his payroll for 2019 is set.  We'll bring in a couple of high profile players and win an off season.  Hopefully, he'll let his baseball people decide who those players are.  We'll see how long his goose will lay golden eggs for him before wins and losses becoming a motivating factor again.  I think he's betting that he can pull it off for at least two more years.  

Why would you sell something that put's ten's of millions of dollars in your pocket and is pretty damn fun to have?  

The complicating factor in all of this is the stadium.  They can opt out of the lease by no later than Oct 16th, 2018.  New stadium generally require owners to take on debt.  Something he's been reluctant to do.  Could he be in negotiations with LT Global to sell the team and let them fund a new stadium?  Maybe.  It wouldn't surprise me.  The top ten franchises are valued at 6-7 times revenue minus debt with some calcs for EBITDA in there.  According to forbes, the Angels are listed at about 4 x revenue and have no debt.  They are ranked 8th on that list and have the lowest value to revenue of any top 10 franchise.  It makes me believe that they are worth closer to 2 billion and they are in line for that shiny new stadium which drives up long term value even though the initial outlay is substantial.  So I could see him selling off his majority share of the team and letting someone else handle the headaches.  

You never know whether that's good or bad for the fans.  I'm inclined to think a new owner would hit the 2018/19 market hard and make a statement by extending Trout through the end of his career.  Another reason why a Trout extension might not be on the radar right now.  

We need to have Fletcher ask Arte if he's setting the team up for a sale.  

Great reply! Thanks Doc!