Four Things to Do Right Now

[Dtwncbad]

15 minutes ago, ettin said:

The only way I see Eppler trading Simmons is if he were to get a really good defensive SS back in return and I'm talking exceptional defender type. Maybe someone like Orlando Arcia comes to mind but beyond that maybe I just don't see it happening. I think the Angels may even extend Simmons moving forward as his defense is so much better than most everyone else that it is likely to decline only to really good as he exceeds 30 years old down the line.

I love Simmons and would prefer he be at the core of this team for a long time.

They just have so few resources to trade to restock.  Because of that I would reluctantly listen.

[ettin]

1 hour ago, Dtwncbad said:

Nobody wants to trade Trout to replenish the overall talent problem.

And everyone seems to see the "trade value might never be higher" angle on other players.

But nobody ever mentions the monster trade value window right now on Simmons?

The Angels could likely harvest more for Simmons now than they traded to get him.  He looks like he may be a far more complete player now with his bat.

I love the guy and I am not advocating getting rid of him.

But if we all routinely talk about what Trout would bring in a deal, where is the conversation on what Simmons would bring?

Trout is untouchable even if the offer was fair on paper.  You can't trade Mike Trout.  Most agree on that.  But for the right package, is Simmons untouchable?

I would say no.  I would take the call from other GMs and listen.

 

You do bring up an interesting alternative though Dtwncbad as the Brewers would/could be a match-up in that regard.

Three years of cost-controlled Simmons who would be a really massive upgrade from Arcia right now this season for the Brewers and Orlando Arcia and one of their outfield prospects would probably be the base of the trade.

Maybe an Orlando Arcia-Ryan Cordell for Andrelton Simmons-Bud Norris deal would work. Or possibly an Orlando Arcia-Brandon Woodruff based trade instead.

I LOVE Simmons work ethic and he clearly takes great pride in his defensive work and he seems like he really enjoys playing baseball so I think this is a total non-starter but it isn't an entirely crazy way to lower payroll a bit and add a couple of premium prospects.

Edited July 20, 2017 by ettin

[ten ocho recon scout]

2 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

I love Simmons and would prefer he be at the core of this team for a long time.

They just have so few resources to trade to restock.  Because of that I would reluctantly listen.

Ive been thinking the same for awhile. I love the guy, but he could bring us back 2 pieces. 

Im not saying do it,  not at all. But hes the only guy we have besides trout who could bring back a bonafide grade A prospect, with maybe a second B level.

[disarcina]

well -- trade Simmons?

I guess it could be considered and perhaps we could get a top quality starter for him.

but I have to say, A. Simmons has very quickly become one of my favorite Halos of all time -- he's a fabulous defensive SS -- perhaps the best the Halos have ever had at that position..........I think the only other Gold Glover we've had at SS was Orlando Cabrera --  I don't think Jim Fregosi won a gold glove there but not sure -- I think the SS gold glove awards were likely dominated by Luis Aparicio of Baltimore back then........

But A, Simmons is a fabulous defensive SS as he has shown this year -- he's not quite there but certainly in the same league as an Ozzie Smith/ Omar Vizquel. And now A. Simmons has found himself at the plate as well..........I wouldn't trade Trout and I like to build a team up the middle with a solid SS and that's A, Simmons --

Me? I wouldn't trade him. I think he's a tremendous ballplayer with a great attitude.

[NrM]

1. Arte sells the team

2. Release Pujols

3. Fire Scioscia

4. Embrace the rebuild, trade everyone not named trout

 

[tomsred]

Four things to do right now:

1)  Stop thinking so hard about things you can't control.

2)  Cancel budgeting for playoff tickets.

3)  Go to an Angels game, and embrace watching people, eating and drinking.  Tickets are cheap.

4)  Quit looking at and researching Angels statistical information.

[ettin]

11 minutes ago, tomsred said:

Four things to do right now:

1)  Stop thinking so hard about things you can't control.

2)  Cancel budgeting for playoff tickets.

3)  Go to an Angels game, and embrace watching people, eating and drinking.  Tickets are cheap.

4)  Quit looking at and researching Angels statistical information.

But, but, but, but.....

[Lou]

On July 19, 2017 at 7:43 AM, fan_since79 said:

The fans deserve a better product.

Why? 

[disarcina]

I like both Mr. Meesseks and tomsred 'four things to do' lists.

Is there any doubt here that Arte is biding his time waiting for the right time (coming soon) to sell the Club?

Pujols -- nice double last evening -- but he can only go so long  and certainly not to the end of his contract (when does that ten year deal end again?)

Scioscia will be here (in some capacity) as long as Arte owns the team.

I think the scenario plays out that Arte sells the team, Scioscia retires, new ownership finds a new role (hitting coach, special assistant, stadium tour guide) for Pujols.

I agree that everyone but Trout (and I would add A, Simmons) are expendable subject to trade.

I would keep some of the young arms - we got Meyer from Minnesota (and Nolasco as well) in that Hector Santiago deal -- I'd keep Meyer around. He is a serviceable mid-rotation starter with an upside......between Garrett Richards, Tyler Skaggs and Shoemaker -- one of them should be able to return and be productive -- we can't trade these DL type guys now anyway.

I guess the question of the day is -- when is Arte going to sell the club and what is his time line for doing that.  I am convinced he's waiting for just the right time when the team has reached a certain level of value and overall gain/ profit for Arte.  I think the bloom is off the rose for Arte owning an MLB team and now he's just treading water competing against corporate conglomerates........

[Dtwncbad]

This maybe isn't a direct response to the above poster specifically but I find it almost funny. . .that when Arte was front and center everyone basically screamed at him to be more invisible and let he baseball people do their jobs.  Now that he has done that, we hear all kinds of conjecture that Arte has lost his passion or "the shine has worn off on own a team" or whatever.

I have no idea how much enthusiasm he still has for owning this team and I thought we all wanted it that way?

[NrM]

1 hour ago, Dtwncbad said:

This maybe isn't a direct response to the above poster specifically but I find it almost funny. . .that when Arte was front and center everyone basically screamed at him to be more invisible and let he baseball people do their jobs.  Now that he has done that, we hear all kinds of conjecture that Arte has lost his passion or "the shine has worn off on own a team" or whatever.

I have no idea how much enthusiasm he still has for owning this team and I thought we all wanted it that way?

The napoli, pujols, hamilton involvement already set the franchise back 5-10 years. The damage has already been done.

And who knows how much he's been involved since then.

[Dtwncbad]

2 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

The napoli, pujols, hamilton involvement already set the franchise back 5-10 years. The damage has already been done.

And who knows how much he's been involved since then.

Not having Mike Napoli really hasn't been a big deal.  He was not going to make this team anything more than it has been.

Pujols is expensive but if the team was better few would care about that.  His value marketing wise would play a lot better while winning.

Hamilton was the one.  Bad deal.  And ugly ending.

Hamilton had real damage and changed the Angels ability budget wise to have at least one more significant impact player.

No those three did not set the franchise back 5-10 years.  That's a monster overstatement.

Hamilton all by himself caused the Angels to settle for a mediocre roster for probably the last 4 years.

 

[disarcina]

i like Arte as owner -- but I think reality has set in for him.

my post is not a criticism of Arte at all -- just my opinion from a very distant vantage point with zero 'inside' information about what I see -- as Yogi Berra once said: 'you can observe a lot by just watching.......'

The Hamilton deal -- we've discussed that ad nauseum here -- bad deal the day it announced (and most poster here said just that) and turned out to actually be worse than most posters predicted it would be (and the posters' predictions here - ON THE DAY OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT -- were not optimistic to say the least) -- the Hamilton deal was on Arte pretty much. He owns that one -- and fair criticism is directed at him for that signing --- but overall -- I've always like Arte -- I do think the MLB ownership gig competing against corporate conglomerates and then and the sour relationship with the City of Anaheim has worn thin for him.

Just IMO -- that and five cents won't buy you a cup of even terrible coffee these days......