A Modest Approach to the Offseason (Preliminary Thoughts Part 2)

[Angelsjunky]

Consider this a followup to this thread from a week and a half ago but taking a slightly different approach. The conventional wisdom is that the team has a ton of huge holes to fill. But I want to question that a bit, or at least take a more conservative approach: that of first and foremost filling holes from within and only augmenting with free agency and trades if absolutely necessary. The last thing we want to see is Eppler doing a Dipoto and getting trigger happy and blocking the wealth of talented prospects the Angels have in the low minors. So I personally like the idea of taking a more moderate approach over the next year or two, at least in those areas (especially the OF and rotation) that have a lot of talent in the minors.

 

What We Have

First of all, this is a possible 2018 team with no trades made or free agents signed or re-signed:

C: Maldonado, Perez

1B: Cron, Valbuena

2B: Franklin, Fontana, Navarro, Fletcher

SS: Simmons

3B: Cowart, Valbuena

LF: Puello, Hermosillo

CF:Trout

RF: Calhoun

DH: Pujols

Rotation: Richards, Skaggs, Heaney, Shoemaker, Meyer; AAA/AA depth: Long, Barria, Smith, Scribner, Tropeano, Bridwell, Lamb, Jewell

Bullpen: Bedrosian, Parker, Middleton, Paredes, Alvarez, Ramirez, some of AAA depth above

 

What We Need (Biggest Holes)

OK, I'm not the guy who scans every team to figure out what trades might work from both ends - let's look to the hard-working @ettin or @Dochalo, among others, for that. But what I want to do here is to ask, would it be so bad to start with that as a basis and fill only those holes that absolutely need filling? I'd also like to point out that if you look at the above and consider players with some trade value that aren't listed above, you come up with a list of Escobar, Maybin, Norris, Petit, and Hernandez - all of whom could be dealt before the deadline to help fill some of these holes for next year.

The biggest holes are, in my opinion, 2B first and foremost, then 1B and 3B. I'm happy with C, SS, CF, RF, and DH isn't going to change. If we jump ahead to 2019, I think Thaiss is the Opening Day starter at 1B and Hermosillo in LF. So for those two positions, we're really only talking about a year.

Rotation: What stands out to me is the huge depth the Angels have for starting pitchers. Now there are a lot of question marks and players that may or may not be able to contribute at the major league level. But that's 13 pitchers who could potentially be a major league starter next year. Now most of them are in the #4-5 range, at least for next year, but some could be better than that and either way, that's a ton of depth. Whether or not the Angels go after a starter or two depends upon how Richards, Skaggs, and Heaney come back over the next couple months. If they all look good, there really doesn't seem to be reason for the Angels to sign any starters, as crazy as that might sound.

2B is probably the biggest hole, and I don't really see a player on that list above that is likely to offer at least league average performance. Leo Rivas might be the future at 2B, but he's at least a couple years away (raking in Orem), and on an accelerated path doesn't reach the majors until late 2019, probably 2020. David Fletcher is a solid stop-gap option, and could be a really nice UT player. But I'm not sure he'll be ready in 2018. So that means the Angels have a one year gap or more to fill. How about bringing back Howie? Walker probably expects, or at least wants, a 3+ year contract. Anyhow, let someone else figure that out. There are plenty of intriguing options out there, but most only available through trade. Regardless, this is the most obvious "must upgrade" position. But the point is, the Angels don't really "need" anything more than a one year player, like Howie, with Fletcher in 2019 and Rivas taking over sometime in 2020.

1B is arguably also "must upgrade" as Cron and Valbuena just don't hold muster to be regulars or even platoon at the biggest offensive position on the field. I suppose the Angels can hope that Thaiss develops quickly and is ready for the big leagues sometime next year - that is possible, but too soon to tell and we really need to see how he does in AA over the last couple months of the season. He's good enough that I'd hate to see Eppler go after someone like Hosmer, but not so good that if a Freddie Freeman could be had, the Angels should package him and bring in Freeman.

3B is a chronic problem, although Escobar has been solid and might be worth bringing back. I still want to see Cowart given a shot. I mean, why not? What's the hesitation? He's really developed nicely over the last couple years and seems to be major league ready. He might take a year or two to get to league average offensive production, but his defense will help make up for it. In other words, Cowart could hit .220/.300/.350 and be a 2 WAR player. But I think he has a .270/.340/.420 hitter in him, which makes him 3+ WAR. If not Cowart, maybe Valbuena.

LF is considered a hole by most, and I realize I'm going out on a limb in thinking that Puello and Hermosillo can hold down the fort. As I've said elsewhere, I'd like to see Puello given a solid audition in the majors this year, with Hermosillo promoted to AAA. If Herm does well, why not make him a September call up and see how he looks against major league pitching? If Puello can't transition from AAA to the majors and Hermosillo looks over-matched and like he'll need more seasoning--both of which are very likely, even probable--then you can look to re-signing Maybin or some other player. But I want to see these guys given a look this year and not assume the Angels need to spend money in LF.

Conclusion

The 2018 isn't nearly as bad as you might think, considering the struggles of this year. With a bit of health luck, the rotation could be solved from within. 1B, 2B, and LF all share something: they have good options in the future, but are questionable for next year, so really only need a short-term solution - if even that. 3B has no clear long-term plan, but could also be filled from within.

If the rotation is moderately healthy, it should at least be league average - with the possibility to be better if Richards is healthy and Skaggs and Heaney develop as hoped. If the holes above are filled with league average or better performers, the offense will be good to even very good, although still lacking the second star power bat to augment Trout (which is why a Freeman trade makes so much sense, even if it would cost a bundle).

So my view is: If Eppler is going to make a big trade, he's going to only do it for a big bat like Freeman. He might make moderate trades, say for a Cesar Hernandez to fill 2B, but it won't be a blockbuster like Freeman would require. To get Freeman, the Angels probably have to give up a package that is something like Matt Thaiss, Jahmai Jones, Grayson Long, and Elvin Rodriguez. Thaiss would be superfluous with Freeman; I'd hate to see Jones go, but Marsh is as good, Adell better, plus they have Hermosillo, the intriguing Deveaux, and the underrated Pearson. Long is solid but expendable; ERod someone who could be really good, but one of a few high ceiling starters in the low minors. That would be hard to swallow, but would give the Angels a second true star hitter and be trading from areas of depth.

Otherwise, I could see Eppler just nibbling, signing stop-gaps at 2B, 3B, and LF, and continuing the strong rebuilding project. But we shall see.

[stanick88]

Modest and moderate current team + moderate and modest continued approach = continued moderate and modest results. 

 

But I guess at some point we will have a good  farm system with this approach. And in 10 years when trout Is long gone we will have a good team. Well may be, we have a modest and moderate chance at that. 

[Troll Daddy]

Our biggest hole is a power impact bat with a sustainable .850+ OPS

I could careless what position he plays ... ok, maybe either 1st or 3rd

[Dtwncbad]

I want the Angels to NOT be a team that checks off position by position as good enough.

I want a relentless pursuit of becoming the best team in baseball.

For example, lots of depth at #4 and #5 starters makes me want to puke.  How do the top 3 match up against teams you will face in the postseason?  That is infinitely more important.

How many legit MOTO bats do you have?

Angels have one.

I want four or five.

If I am a car collector, I don't want to boast having more clean 4 cylinder Pontiacs than anyone else.

 

 

[Stradling]

13 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I want the Angels to NOT be a team that checks off position by position as good enough.

I want a relentless pursuit of becoming the best team in baseball.

For example, lots of depth at #4 and #5 starters makes me want to puke.  How do the top 3 match up against teams you will face in the postseason?  That is infinitely more important.

How many legit MOTO bats do you have?

Angels have one.

I want four or five.

If I am a car collector, I don't want to boast having more clean 4 cylinder Pontiacs than anyone else.

 

 

I agree, but much easier said than done.  I guess if the Angels signed Mous, Hosmer, Arieta and Darvish this off season we would be 2/3 of the way there.  

[Dtwncbad]

4 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I agree, but much easier said than done.  I guess if the Angels signed Mous, Hosmer, Arieta and Darvish this off season we would be 2/3 of the way there.  

I know it isn't easy and it is likely not realistic to have five MOTO bats.

What I want to see is focused, concentrated effort to address the rigjt things.

For example, tinkering to make 2B passable is, in a way, annoying.  Not that this wouldn't slightly improve the team. . .

It just that the lineup doesn't have enough impact bats.  That's the big problem.

The pitching doesn't have the #1 and #2 kind of horses that they need.

Lots of other problem become so much less relevant if you are top heavy in the rotation and have MOTO  bats.

The rest at that point is backfill.

I made the point too long, but I hate when a team is trying to improve the backfill by 10% when the foundation is not there.

Frontline pitching and big bats.

All hands on deck to draft, develop, acquire those pieces.

I am so flipping bored with discussing if Cowart can hit enough to hold down third, or if one of the 13 back of the rotation starters blah blah blah. . . For the most part, those things don't matter if you don't have the core pieces.

 

 

[Angelsjunky]

3 hours ago, stanick88 said:

Modest and moderate current team + moderate and modest continued approach = continued moderate and modest results. 

 

But I guess at some point we will have a good  farm system with this approach. And in 10 years when trout Is long gone we will have a good team. Well may be, we have a modest and moderate chance at that. 

I hear you, although this assumes everything else is static. The rotation should be greatly improved next year. I know we all feel burned, but I can't believe that all of Richards, Skaggs, and Heaney won't be able to come back. And then you have Barria and Long, who could be better already than Nolasco and Chavez.

Mind you, I'm not saying they should do anything, I just don't think Eppler should bust the bank and/or break the farm, when the Angels have a really nice group of prospects brewing in the lower minors.

 

1 hour ago, Troll Daddy said:

Our biggest hole is a power impact bat with a sustainable .850+ OPS

I could careless what position he plays ... ok, maybe either 1st or 3rd

I agree. Thaiss reaches that level in a best-case scenario. But as far as 1B goes, I think either you go really big (Freeman) or you hold out for Thaiss. I don't see going after a Hosmer, who is just a more expensive version of Thaiss' potential.

2 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I want the Angels to NOT be a team that checks off position by position as good enough.

I want a relentless pursuit of becoming the best team in baseball.

For example, lots of depth at #4 and #5 starters makes me want to puke.  How do the top 3 match up against teams you will face in the postseason?  That is infinitely more important.

How many legit MOTO bats do you have?

Angels have one.

I want four or five.

If I am a car collector, I don't want to boast having more clean 4 cylinder Pontiacs than anyone else.

 

 

How many teams have four or five MOTO bats? One or two? The Nationals and Astrols come to mind, but that's all.

Actually, let's do a bit of research. Let's define "MOTO" as an excellent hitter, which would roughly be a 130 wRC+ or better - that's not superstar level, but is the type of hitter that could be a middle of the lineup hitter for a championship team.

Teams with four MOTOs: Astros, Nationals, and Brewers.

Teams with three MOTOs: Dodgers, Reds, Marlins, Rays, Mariners

Teams with two MOTOs: Yankees, Indians, Tigers, Blue Jays, Cubs

Teams with one MOTO: Angels, Braves, Diamondbacks, Mets, Athletics, Giants, Pirates, Cardinals, Rangers, Orioles

Teams with none: Red Sox, Twins, Royals, White Sox, Phillies, Rockies, Padres

So what you're asking for is only had by three teams.

Anyhow, I agree in principle but would be a bit more moderate - start with trying to get another, and make sure there are no holes in the lineup.

[Angelsjunky]

@Dtwncbad, I hear you but it may not be possible. I mean, how many MOTOs and frontline starters are easily available? The only true MOTO avialable via free agency is JD Martinez, who will be very expensive and is a poor defender. There's also Alonso and one or two others.

Frontline starters? Not sure any are available next year, especially considering Arrieta has declined. Darvish is the only one I can think of without looking it up.

So the only way for the team to do what you want them to do in the short term, is shell out bucketloads of cash, probably exceed the luxury threshold, AND trade away the farm. And then we're left with a very good team that is very expensive and will get hold in the next two or three years. One that may not be able to extend Trout, and has traded away most of its best assets for the long-term future.

I'm all for making some good moves, even a big one or two (e.g. my proposes Freeman trade) but the bottom line is that they have to be sustainable and not rob the future to pay the present/near-future.

[Dtwncbad]

The point is the Angels have one legit middle of the order hitter.

Let's start with getting a second one.

Then a third.

When the winning is too much, then stop pursuing more.

I see zero #1 starters on this team. . .

This team isn't going anywhere with one legit 3/4/5 bat and no top of the rotation horse, regardless of maybe improving incrementally in other areas.

That's just my opinion.

That's all I am saying.

 

[Stradling]

4 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I know it isn't easy and it is likely not realistic to have five MOTO bats.

What I want to see is focused, concentrated effort to address the rigjt things.

For example, tinkering to make 2B passable is, in a way, annoying.  Not that this wouldn't slightly improve the team. . .

It just that the lineup doesn't have enough impact bats.  That's the big problem.

The pitching doesn't have the #1 and #2 kind of horses that they need.

Lots of other problem become so much less relevant if you are top heavy in the rotation and have MOTO  bats.

The rest at that point is backfill.

I made the point too long, but I hate when a team is trying to improve the backfill by 10% when the foundation is not there.

Frontline pitching and big bats.

All hands on deck to draft, develop, acquire those pieces.

I am so flipping bored with discussing if Cowart can hit enough to hold down third, or if one of the 13 back of the rotation starters blah blah blah. . . For the most part, those things don't matter if you don't have the core pieces.

 

 

I don't disagree but Cowarts glove is good enough that you literally have to ask that question.  I dislike Escobar, but he gets his share of hits.  Right now, with Trout, we may not have 4-5 MOTO bats, but Maybin, Kole, Trout and Escobar are allsolid guys.  Our catcher and shortstop are pretty damn good.  So it comes down to DH, 2nd and1st. Since we aren't really talking about this year we are going to have to address 3rd and LF as well.  

[Dtwncbad]

I am not against Cowart.  Give him a chance, that's all fine.

But I don't want to be the Padres.

Cowart is probably potentially a pretty clean 4 cylinder Pontiac.  Keep him.

I don't want all 4 cylinder Pontiacs.

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Dtwncbad said:

I am not against Cowart.  Give him a chance, that's all fine.

But I don't want to be the Padres.

Cowart is probably potentially a pretty clean 4 cylinder Pontiac.  Keep him.

I don't want all 4 cylinder Pontiacs.

So defense means nothing to do?  Tell me your thoughts on Simmons?  Is he a Hyundai or a Saturn?

[Angelsjunky]

Simmons is, according to fWAR, the 13th best player in the majors this year, among qualifiers.

[Dtwncbad]

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

So defense means nothing to do?  Tell me your thoughts on Simmons?  Is he a Hyundai or a Saturn?

I like defense more than the average fan.

Defense at third is fractionally as important as defense at short though.

Simmons is one half a tier away offensively from being a superstar player.  I love him.

[Stradling]

Ok.  While I don't believe what you're looking for can happen for a few years I don't disagree.  A team can win with the right offense, great defense, good starting pitching and a lights out bullpen.  

Persobally I want to see a team with balance rather than chase some middle of the order bats or top flight starters.  

[Dtwncbad]

13 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok.  While I don't believe what you're looking for can happen for a few years I don't disagree.  A team can win with the right offense, great defense, good starting pitching and a lights out bullpen.  

Persobally I want to see a team with balance rather than chase some middle of the order bats or top flight starters.  

Stupid hypothetical but just making a point for clarity.  Let's define balance I guess.

You would prefer five number 3 starters over a #1, #2, #2, #5, #5?

Both of those rotations make the playoffs.  And I know which of those two wins in the playoffs.

[Angelsjunky]

Right. We have to look at what actually is, and build from there. We all want more elite players, but they don't grow on trees. Maybe the only difference here is that @Dtwncbad is seemingly less patient than myself or @Stradling, and I'm guessing more willing to trade away the farm and spend big than I am (can't speak for Strad).

The point of my OP wasn't to say, "No big moves! Just stick with what we have." It was to say, "Let's see what we have if we plug holes from within, then localize and target the biggest holes."

Those biggest holes are 2B, 1B, 3B, and LF in terms of next year. As @Troll Daddy said, the biggest hole is a big bat, regardless of position. I think if you're Eppler, you look to bring in one big bat and fill the other holes either from within (e.g. Cowart, Puello/Hermosillo) or through low risk free agents that could still contribute (e.g. Howie).

The best bat on the free agent market is JD Martinez. While I like his bat, I don't like his defense and I dislike the fact that in a few years he'll be in decline, earning $25 million, and blocking younger and cheaper players like Adell, Marsh, Jones, and Deveaux - not to mention Hermosillo, who could be ready next year.

But I'm circling back around and will leave it at that.

 

[Dtwncbad]

I have some patience and I dont want to trade any of the farm unless it is a good deal to acquire a sustainable controllable impact player (What you hope the prospect would become).

I apologize if, to any degree, I steered the purpose of your OP from what you wanted the thread to be.

 

[Angelsjunky]

No, it is good stuff, my man - you raise good points and discuss intelligently. Keep it up.

[Angelsjunky]

3 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Stupid hypothetical but just making a point for clarity.  Let's define balance I guess.

You would prefer five number 3 starters over a #1, #2, #2, #5, #5?

Both of those rotations make the playoffs.  And I know which of those two wins in the playoffs.

I know you're asking Strad, but I wanted to reply to this. This is a good example of where the rotation and lineup are very different, and also where WAR is more useful for position players than pitchers. If you have nine position players all producing 3 WAR, it is theoretically the same as one with 9 WAR and eight with 2 WAR. That said, it also could be argued that the way players fit together in terms of WAR is more exponential than accumulative. In other words...

3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3+3 is the same as 9+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2, but if you multiple those numbers the first is far greater than the second. This would be an argument for balance over a more "top heavy" lineup.

But at least where the playoffs are concerned, a top-heavy rotation is probably better, if only because you only start 3-4 pitchers (I remember when it used to be 3, now it is 4). It is like of like, which rotation would you rather face:

A: Kershaw, Darvish, DeGrom, Nolasco; or

B: Corbin, Cobb, Shoemaker, Nova

The answer is obvious. The first is your 1,2,2,5, the second 3,3,3,3 (roughly speaking).

Of course the problem again comes back to the fact that #1-2 starters aren't easily found. So barring that, you try to get as many #3-4 types so you can avoid the #5 types. Right now the Angels have a bunch of #3-4 types, and two or three guys that could be #2 types next year.

As for the lineup, it is a bit different in that two 3 WAR players are generally better than a 6 WAR and a 0 WAR player, because as good as the first is, the next guy is just a huge hole and rally killer (although 4/2 might be the sweetspot). That relates to balance, I think.

So you start here: No major holes. Having the goal of at least league average performance at every position - the entire lineup, rotation (with a #4 starter being league average), and bullpen. Then you see which of those areas can be upgraded to star caliber, if any. But I think having no major holes is already a huge step towards being very good.

[Stradling]

20 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Stupid hypothetical but just making a point for clarity.  Let's define balance I guess.

You would prefer five number 3 starters over a #1, #2, #2, #5, #5?

Both of those rotations make the playoffs.  And I know which of those two wins in the playoffs.

No but I'd rather be realistic.  Also the team that wins in the playoffs plays great D and has a shut down pen. 

[Dtwncbad]

How can it be viewed that #4 starters are league average?  I'm baffled by that.

#3 staters are league average.

Or do we have to talk about league median?

I agree no holes matters a lot.

But at risk of being repetitious, if you are already just adequate at most positions, filling a hole with adequate makes you . . . adequate.

In that case the greater project is the fill the hole with excellence since there is a lack of excellence elsewhere.

 

 

 

[Dtwncbad]

4 minutes ago, Stradling said:

No but I'd rather be realistic.  Also the team that wins in the playoffs plays great D and has a shut down pen. 

We are not that far off on what we thinks wins.  What you said but also with at least one dominating starter helps a lot.

Sometimes I catch myself being conditioned to limit my expectations and then I remember this is supposed to be a premium franchise in a premium market and I get ambitious again thinking the team just simply must insist on excellence.

I am jealous of the Nats.  They can add two high quality bullpen arms and their fans should be maniacal about how that team is set up to win.

I want that.  I don't want to settle for hoping to catch lightening in a bottle or hope Cron can hit 16 homers playing 1B in the majors, or whatever.

All that said, no this doesn't mean I want monster contracts for 33 yr old fading players.

 

 

 

[ettin]

@Angelsjunky I get where you are going with this and your initial list at the top is almost certainly how Billy Eppler and the Angels have started out approaching the issue (and in fact they do this year-round continuously I imagine as they update depth charts throughout the year). It is a great starting point to the discussion.

Really the decision of what to do next is driven almost exclusively by Trout. If we want to win while he is here then one or more of the options you listed must be upgraded and I would argue that there are potentially several positions (LF, 2B, 3B, 1B, C, SP, and RP) that they can do so in 2018.

Part of the argument against Hermosillo, Puello, Valbuena, Cron, Cowart, the injured rotation pitchers, Perez, and all of the 2B options is risk variance. None of those players to date have shown solid consistent play across multiple seasons at the MLB level (maybe Richards is the sole exception). There is too much variability built into that group above to reliably expect them to perform out of the gate in 2018 or beyond even.

This is why the Angels will have to upgrade in at least two or more positions to improve their quality of play moving forward. I would argue they have to use some of their prospect pool and a lot of their cash to get the team in a state of not only quality but of depth behind that quality. It is of course not just about filling each position but having quality replacements as depth in case our primary player goes down to injury. That requires the application of resources (prospects/cash).

The potential problem I see in your reasonable argument is finding good short term solutions. For instance we could possibly trade for Michael Brantley in the off-season as he would be in his last year of control and could successfully fill our LF hole. However he will cost a not insignificant amount of prospects/players and there is no guarantee that Hermosillo or another internal option will be ready to play LF in 2019. Finding a one year option in the free agent market that is a quality option on a one-year deal is virtually impossible. Anyone who is good enough to improve the team significantly is not going to sign a one year deal, they will sign a multi-year deal.

Using the trade and free agent markets over the next few months is going to be a requirement for the Angels to compete successfully in 2018 if they have even an ounce of care about winning in the Mike Trout era. They have to trade and sign players between now and Opening Day 2018 that will really improve the entire team in order to effectively compete. More importantly by doing that they can use whatever prospects they have left as depth options. I would personally rather see the Angels acquire a good LF and see Hermosillo as a depth piece over the next 2-3 years. That would make me feel a lot more confident about our team.

I agree with your end view point by the way. Finding a bat like Freeman (or even Belt) would really add another level to the offense and as Fletcher pointed out Cesar Hernandez is a good choice for 2B and hitting lead-off. Eppler could also sign someone like Zack Cozart to play 2B too (which would provide additional SS depth behind Simmons). I could also see Eppler going big on someone like J.D. Martinez or Christian Yelich in LF or alternatively picking up an interesting near-ready prospect (or two, or three prospects) like Mark Zagunis (although the latter adds risk variance).

At 3B I think he wants some with proficiency at defense there so that is why I suggested Eugenio Suarez if he is available. He too has SS experience and could provide depth behind Simmons as well. You could go with Cowart but I would rather see Kaleb as a Super Utility across many positions to give him regular at-bats. Having him in a Super Utility role would allow us to carry an extra reliever as someone else on the board pointed out in another thread. He also becomes a better quality depth option in case of injury.

There are free agent catcher options if Eppler wants to improve there. However I think Billy may try to acquire a left-handed hitting catcher as back-up behind Maldonado because Machete has been played a LOT this season and so any back-up will get minimal playing time and having a left-handed bat there will allow Scioscia to play match-ups in later innings. So an offense-first left-handed bat as backup with at least average defense may be in our future which is why I suggested the Angels try for a C like Chance Sisco or Francisco Mejia that can hit RHP well. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Angels execute one deadline trade that nets them a left-handed hitting C (or at least a C that hits RHP well doesn't have to be left-handed necessarily).

The Angels need to add a SP and one of their options in free agency, Pineda, is now out of the picture with TJS. They need to sign at least one front-end type guy because what if all of our injured pitchers don't return? Suddenly our 2018 rotation goes from potential to existential. If we sign a starter and we get everyone on the DL back then Eppler can trade one of them or arrange it by optioning down Alex Meyer or someone else with options to maintain depth.

An Angels rotation without Richards or the signing or acquisition of a front-end guy leaves us with a rotation of mid and back-end starters and that just won't do the trick in a playoff series. I could see the Angels pursuing Yu Darvish, Shoei Otani (if he does actually come over) or perhaps trading for someone like Daniel Norris or Michael Fulmer from the Tigers or maybe Dylan Bundy from the O's or Marcus Stroman from the Jays (if any are actually available). Internally maybe Jaime Barria or Grayson Long might be ready but that is counting a lot on an unproven prospect at the Major League level (again risk variance).

If the Angels do sell off all of their spare part relievers we do have some options down in the Minors to replace them but then, again, there is risk built-in to that. Bullpen pieces like Eduardo Paredes, Adam Hofacket, Brooks Pounders, Cody Ege, Mike Morin, and Deolis Guerra are all options in middle relief. However the Angels could use one more guy as an option in back-end relief (and they have been rumored to be inquiring about Brad Hand of the Padres) so perhaps this is a line Eppler will pursue. Personally I'd rather trust Billy to scour the waiver wire as he did last year but the options that presented themselves in 2016 may not be as plentiful in 2017.

So from my view we need to find good options at LF, 2B, 3B, 1B, and SP. C and RP are probably less of a priority with Perez and the bullpen options listed above. Finding those good options will allow us to use some of the current options you presented as depth which strengthens the team further. We can't just be a Wild Card contending team, we have to be able to successfully challenge Houston and the other teams in the Division in 2018 and beyond.

Nice thread AJ, thanks.

[Angel Oracle]

Freeman would be coming back to where he grew up (Orange County - El Modena HS).   That could help in getting him to stay longer term, when contract expires after 2021 season, as he would only be 32 for most of the 2022 season.   Just as long as any new contract isn't Pujols like in 2022 dollars.   And even if not staying, they will have gotten hopefully 4 dominant seasons from him, nothing like a rental. 

If they are going to bring in someone big, at least see to it that they are under 30, not declining, and if possible a local product.  And as AJ said, only focus on true areas of need, and not areas where someone is nearly ready to contribute.