AngelsWin.com Today: Angelswin.com 2018 Primer Series: Introduction

[tdawg87]

4 minutes ago, ettin said:

Also if you don't believe me, @Jeff Fletcher mentioned it here: http://www.ocregister.com/2017/09/28/as-justin-upton-ponders-his-future-with-angels-winning-is-the-key/

Or you can look at Roster Resource (they have Upton included in their $142M number but not Nolasco or Street and also they are using actual salary not AAV so be careful because Pujols and Trout are actually paid more than their AAV): https://www.rosterresource.com/mlb-los-angeles-angels-info/

EDIT: Also there is certainly a possibility I F'd up somewhere or my Excel spreadsheet is miscalculating but I feel very confident in the numbers. It may be off slightly due to some items I will mention in the Monday Finances article but it shouldn't impact the total number much.

I probably could have questioned your figures in a more respectful way. I didn't mean to imply you were wrong. I just had the impression the payroll situation was far more tight next year. 

I'm glad to see this doesn't appear to be the case. Though of course ultimately Arte decides where he wants to keep it. Hopefully he opens his checkbook because we really need help. I'm ok with him not going over the threshold or not wanting to. The penalties are pretty brutal after a couple years.

[ettin]

2 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

I probably could have questioned your figures in a more respectful way. I didn't mean to imply you were wrong. I just had the impression the payroll situation was far more tight next year. 

I'm glad to see this doesn't appear to be the case. Though of course ultimately Arte decides where he wants to keep it. Hopefully he opens his checkbook because we really need help. I'm ok with him not going over the threshold or not wanting to. The penalties are pretty brutal after a couple years.

Actually I didn't take it that way so no worries.

HalosHeaven did their own breakdown here: https://www.halosheaven.com/2017/10/9/16380104/angels-2018-payroll-outlook

They, however, are off by at least $23M based on me just looking at their actual salary figures. Trout alone is at $24M AAV so that is $11M off of their number right there. Upton is another $6M, Pujols another $3M, Simmons is off by about $2.5M, and Nolasco's buy-out is covered by the Twins ($1M). So they say $152M in actual but it is really only about $129M based on a quick visual and much closer to my $122M in AAV.

Again I know my number isn't exactly right because there are factors that I can't pinpoint accurately but I do believe my number is fairly close. Might be off by about $3M-5M potentially but it is in the correct ballpark.

[Ohtaniland]

Great read guys, good quality stuff but did Albert die and suddenly vaporize because he’s still going to be making $27M in 2018 and hitting in the middle of the order yet nobody mentions him. Are we building a team around Trout while trying to work around Pujols? He’s a financial burden that can’t be ignored.

Anyway the primer is terrific as usual. It’s sets up the beginning stages of a solid plan moving forward. Hopefully some of this stuff comes to fruition. Spend smart Arte!

 

[Second Base]

11 minutes ago, ettin said:

Actually I didn't take it that way so no worries.

HalosHeaven did their own breakdown here: https://www.halosheaven.com/2017/10/9/16380104/angels-2018-payroll-outlook

They, however, are off by at least $23M based on me just looking at their actual salary figures. Trout alone is at $24M AAV so that is $11M off of their number right there. Upton is another $6M, Pujols another $3M, Simmons is off by about $2.5M, and Nolasco's buy-out is covered by the Twins ($1M). So they say $152M in actual but it is really only about $129M based on a quick visual and much closer to my $122M in AAV.

Again I know my number isn't exactly right because there are factors that I can't pinpoint accurately but I do believe my number is fairly close. Might be off by about $3M-5M potentially but it is in the correct ballpark.

I think another argument in favor of spending big has to be the Dodgers. In order the jumpstart the system, they traded for expensive players while keeping their draft picks. These expensive acquisitions didn't cost prospects either, and it held the team over until a wave of young talent arrived, thus lessening the financial burden and creating what will be a perennial contender.

I think if the Angels bring in Stanton and more, it will make them a very competitive team until  Barria, Thaiss, Ward, Canning, Jones, Marsh, Adell, and Rodriguez all arrive. That's a huge amount of talent that hits within a couple years of one another, that can sustain the team for a decade.

[ettin]

20 minutes ago, Scotty@AW said:

I think another argument in favor of spending big has to be the Dodgers. In order the jumpstart the system, they traded for expensive players while keeping their draft picks. These expensive acquisitions didn't cost prospects either, and it held the team over until a wave of young talent arrived, thus lessening the financial burden and creating what will be a perennial contender.

I think if the Angels bring in Stanton and more, it will make them a very competitive team until  Barria, Thaiss, Ward, Canning, Jones, Marsh, Adell, and Rodriguez all arrive. That's a huge amount of talent that hits within a couple years of one another, that can sustain the team for a decade.

I'll discuss this more but I really believe that one or more of these prospects will not be with us in the next two years. Particularly at least one, possibly two, of Adell, Marsh, and Jones, and I suspect that Ward, Thaiss, and even Rodriguez might be expendable. Barria is almost a lock to stay while Canning is probably a keeper too.

[ettin]

23 minutes ago, Calzone said:

Great read guys, good quality stuff but did Albert die and suddenly vaporize because he’s still going to be making $27M in 2018 and hitting in the middle of the order yet nobody mentions him. Are we building a team around Trout while trying to work around Pujols? He’s a financial burden that can’t be ignored.

Anyway the primer is terrific as usual. It’s sets up the beginning stages of a solid plan moving forward. Hopefully some of this stuff comes to fruition. Spend smart Arte!

 

There will of course be a Primer piece talking about DH. Really Albert's time hitting in the middle-of-the-order will come to an end if the Angels manage to acquire another big bat beyond Upton. Stanton is still a long-shot but if another big bat comes in Pujols will have to move to the 5 or even 6 spot. It's time. Doesn't matter how much he is making if he isn't producing. Let's hope he catches his third wind here in 2018 and 2019.

Pujols at this stage certainly takes up a lot of payroll space but he isn't a crippling anchor. So the answer is the team is building around Mike Trout and Albert is sucking up about 12% of team AAV which hurts but doesn't incapacitate.

[tdawg87]

It will cost at least two of those guys to get Stanton. There's no way the Marlins look at the Angels' outfield prospect situation and say "nah we'll take your 23rd and 28th best prospects and a ptbnl." 

I'm well aware that the big part of a potential trade is taking all of his contract. But Upton was a salary dump and we still gave up two valuable pieces, and Upton isn't anywhere near as valuable as Stanton. If a trade were to occur (IMO it won't, but it's fun to discuss) my guess is it would cost one of Adell or Jones, plus Barria and maybe a lower pitching prospect or two. That sounds like a steep price to pay, and for the Angels it is, but it's a price many other teams can easily match. Ultimately I think it comes down to the best overall return Miami can get whilst paying the smallest amount of Stanton's remaining contract. The more they pay, the more they'll get in return. I think the Angels would HAVE to take Stanton's full contract plus possibly another salary dump (Chen?) to have a shot.

I also think one of those guys listed will be packaged with Calhoun for a pitcher. Obviously if Upton isn't retained and the Angels can't get Martinez to replace him then Kole isn't going anywhere. But I think he's the most valuable trade piece we have. I definitely think he'll be shopped this winter. 

Edited October 28, 2017 by tdawg87

[arch stanton]

18 minutes ago, ettin said:

I'll discuss this more but I really believe that one or more of these prospects will not be with us in the next two years. Particularly at least one, possibly two, of Adell, Marsh, and Jones, and I suspect that Ward, Thaiss, and even Rodriguez might be expendable. Barria is almost a lock to stay while Canning is probably a keeper too.

Unless he becomes a dealbreaker for a huge trade then Barria is set to ride the options express next season. Hopefully Nate Smith is healthy enough to be his platoon partner. 

Regarding the top OF prospects, Marsh is the leftie and Adell is the huge upside making Jones the likeliest trade bait.  

[ettin]

@tdawg87 @Scotty@AW

I have to correct something I said earlier.

I just read an article that Alden Gonzalez wrote back in November 2014 about Stanton's contract and he said something that caught me off-guard: http://m.angels.mlb.com/news/article/101826708/giancarlo-stantons-deal-brings-mike-trouts-more-into-focus/

Because Stanton has an opt-out after 2020, his AAV is calculated in the years before and after the opt-out. So for the 2015-2020 period his AAV is $17.833M (107M/6 years). After the opt-out it jumps up to $29.714M (208M/7 years). I had never seen this before so I went and looked it up in the CBA and although the language there is convoluted he appears to be 100% correct.

So really that $25M AAV is actually $17.833M through 2020 and if Stanton stays it leaps up to $29.714M in the 7 years after that.

Which makes Stanton incredibly attractive. I have to think Eppler is going to pull out all the stops to get him.

 

[ettin]

9 minutes ago, arch stanton said:

Unless he becomes a dealbreaker for a huge trade then Barria is set to ride the options express next season. Hopefully Nate Smith is healthy enough to be his platoon partner. 

Regarding the top OF prospects, Marsh is the leftie and Adell is the huge upside making Jones the likeliest trade bait.  

Agreed on all of that, particularly Marsh because of his lefty bat. If he is the real deal the other two are more likely to go than him I think. Besides if you extend Upton and tack on one more year you have him through 2022 and if you extend Trout you have him the rest of his career basically so why would you need three top OF prospects? Yes I know we need depth but I'm just saying that 2 out of 3 could be expendable in that scenario. If Trout doesn't stay you could probably trade him for a top OF prospect anyway.

[tdawg87]

24 minutes ago, ettin said:

@tdawg87 @Scotty@AW

I have to correct something I said earlier.

I just read an article that Alden Gonzalez wrote back in November 2014 about Stanton's contract and he said something that caught me off-guard: http://m.angels.mlb.com/news/article/101826708/giancarlo-stantons-deal-brings-mike-trouts-more-into-focus/

Because Stanton has an opt-out after 2020, his AAV is calculated in the years before and after the opt-out. So for the 2015-2020 period his AAV is $17.833M (107M/6 years). After the opt-out it jumps up to $29.714M (208M/7 years). I had never seen this before so I went and looked it up in the CBA and although the language there is convoluted he appears to be 100% correct.

So really that $25M AAV is actually $17.833M through 2020 and if Stanton stays it leaps up to $29.714M in the 7 years after that.

Which makes Stanton incredibly attractive. I have to think Eppler is going to pull out all the stops to get him.

 

And since Kole would be traded it would only add 9 total million towards the threshold.

Please do this. 

[tdawg87]

Until Fletcher comes in and ruins my day with his stupid facts, this makes entirely too much sense.

Which is why the Dodgers will get him at half price for their 25th and 29th best prospects and a whiff of Cody Bellinger's taint.

Edited October 28, 2017 by tdawg87

[Second Base]

Comparing Upton's situation with Stanton is worthwhile.

1. Upton's contract isn't a bargain, but it is fair. The same with Stanton.

2. Upton was going to opt out at the end of the season, and with the QO, the Tigers would have banked a comp pick regardless, so our offer had to be greater than the comp pick. Long would've been equal, but Elvin pushed it over the edge.

3. Stanton is gone in two years anyway, and in FA, he'd get 30 million a year, so the deal is logical. For the Marlins, they're looking at shedding the contract and getting more than the comp pick. So if we assume someone like Rodriguez is equal in value to the comp pick, now we simply need to offer more value and outbid other teams. That's where the OF surplus comes in. If we offer Jones, that puts us toward the front of the pack, but it doesn't pull the trigger. The Marlins will ask for one final piece to dream on, and I think that's someone with upside but questionable outcome like Jake Jewell. Jewell himself isn't a deal breaker, but when combined with a youngster like Julio Garcia, they present something that could pay dividends.

So I believe that if the Angels offer Jones, Rodriguez, Jewell and Garcia for Stanton and take the entirety of his contract, that would get this deal done. 

It's a haul, but not back breaking. 

I couldn't do it though, not without contractual assurance that he will not opt out, and I don't know why he would do that when it likely gets him more money, just like Upton will.

[Blarg]

Or we ignore Stanton and his opt out contract and develop those kids. 

I really don't want another salary pig from their 34-38 year old seasons. I also don't want to spend all of the minor league currency on a guy that can walk in two years.

Fawning over this injury plauged player and thinking he is going to be productive after his middle thirties is head in the sand. There is no ecenomic break even for me on this deal.

Edited October 28, 2017 by Blarg

[ettin]

10 hours ago, tdawg87 said:

Until Fletcher comes in and ruins my day with his stupid facts, this makes entirely too much sense.

Which is why the Dodgers will get him at half price for their 25th and 29th best prospects and a whiff of Cody Bellinger's taint.

Which is why I'm putting our odds at about 10%-15% but it sure does make a shit-ton of sense from my point-of-view.

1 hour ago, Scotty@AW said:

Comparing Upton's situation with Stanton is worthwhile.

1. Upton's contract isn't a bargain, but it is fair. The same with Stanton.

2. Upton was going to opt out at the end of the season, and with the QO, the Tigers would have banked a comp pick regardless, so our offer had to be greater than the comp pick. Long would've been equal, but Elvin pushed it over the edge.

3. Stanton is gone in two years anyway, and in FA, he'd get 30 million a year, so the deal is logical. For the Marlins, they're looking at shedding the contract and getting more than the comp pick. So if we assume someone like Rodriguez is equal in value to the comp pick, now we simply need to offer more value and outbid other teams. That's where the OF surplus comes in. If we offer Jones, that puts us toward the front of the pack, but it doesn't pull the trigger. The Marlins will ask for one final piece to dream on, and I think that's someone with upside but questionable outcome like Jake Jewell. Jewell himself isn't a deal breaker, but when combined with a youngster like Julio Garcia, they present something that could pay dividends.

So I believe that if the Angels offer Jones, Rodriguez, Jewell and Garcia for Stanton and take the entirety of his contract, that would get this deal done. 

It's a haul, but not back breaking. 

I couldn't do it though, not without contractual assurance that he will not opt out, and I don't know why he would do that when it likely gets him more money, just like Upton will.

If you think about it a little further if we get out to the end of 2020 and Stanton has enjoyed playing here you have to believe we may wind up in a very similar situation to what we have now with Upton potentially opting-out for, at best, a modest increase in salary. Assuming we trade for him and Giancarlo likes playing here we could wind up renegotiating and adding a little bit of money onto his contract and keeping him long-term through the rest of his career.

Could you imagine an extended Trout and Stanton together forever through their mid-to-late 30's?

9 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Or we ignore Stanton and his opt out contract and develop those kids. 

I really don't want another salary pig from their 34-38 year old seasons. I also don't want to spend all of the minor league currency on a guy that can walk in two years.

Fawning over this injury plauged player and thinking he is going to be productive after his middle thirties is head in the sand. There is no ecenomic break even for me on this deal.

Respectfully disagree here. These kids could turn into nobody's and we will have wasted 3 years of the best player in baseball and perhaps one of the greatest to ever play period.

You have a well-known quantity (Trout) vs. several unknowns (Adell, Marsh, Jones, Rodriguez, et al) who will take at least 2+ years to actually make the MLB level and even then may take more than a year to acclimate to that level.

Right now Eppler needs to identify only the few, key prospects he has to keep for our future and then market the rest, as needed, to improve the team now and next year. Nothing else matter except the time we have left with Mike Trout. It is the best opportunity we will probably ever have in the history of the franchise.

Now we could obviously disagree about whom the Angels invest their resources in so I get that you don't care for Giancarlo. There are OTHER options that could improve our team though he is not the only one but he represents one of the more likely opportunities. Potential 7 WAR players don't grow on trees. When you look at Stanton's 3-year WAR average it is about 4.8 WAR so that is probably where you evaluate him at in terms of cost to acquire which puts him at about $100M in surplus value for the next 3 years which is almost certainly the time range all teams are using to evaluate him as a trade target.

[Blarg]

I think the Stanton contract is a trap. Also, the three year window is a trap as well. You are creating the same sense of urgency to accommodate one talent on the roster which leaves your franchise in shambles again trying to force a Championship and having to deal with the aftermath. 

[Jeff Fletcher]

I think an idea that you all need to get used to is that the AAV payroll and the luxury tax may not be the important numbers. As I mentioned in another thread, the actual payroll is this year going to be significantly higher than the AAV payroll.

The actual payroll is what determines the true bottom line: Did you make more than you spent?

[ettin]

4 minutes ago, Blarg said:

I think the Stanton contract is a trap. Also, the three year window is a trap as well. You are creating the same sense of urgency to accommodate one talent on the roster which leaves your franchise in shambles again trying to force a Championship and having to deal with the aftermath. 

Why is it in shambles?

You build around your superstar, period. We have him guaranteed for the next three years. Waiting for multiple prospects to develop when you can use some of them to improve your team now is the smart way to go. Also if you have already spoken to Trout and communicated your desire to extend him and he agrees based on winning now, guess what you make the team better now, not later. In the end we want to keep Mike Trout and the only way to do that is create the best winning environment in Anaheim in 2018 and beyond.

I think you are taking what I said to the extreme end of the spectrum Blarg. I'm not saying dump all of our prospects. I'll speak more about this in the Eppler's Strategy section. You keep the ones you absolutely need and the rest are currency, AS NEEDED, to make trades. Remember that moving forward we should have more trade-able MLB assets moving forward as well. Players like Shoemaker, Parker, et al will need to be moved in 2019 or 2020 and they can bring back prospects for example.

For instance I believe Jaime Barria is staying for sure, we will need him, as Arch said earlier, to ride the shuttle up and down. He will be an instrumental piece in 2018 I think. I also suspect Griffin Canning will be kept as well, because he will probably start in the low Minors and ride up the levels fast to act as depth and eventually replace one of our departing starters. Jose Suarez looks like a real keeper to me. One of Brandon Marsh and Jo Adell will probably be kept long-term while the other, along with Jahmai Jones could be moved if we fill up our Major League outfield with Upton, Trout, and possibly Stanton (because Upton will probably renegotiate for an extra year or two taking him out to 2022 or 2023, if Trout is extended he is here for 10+ more years, and Stanton could be gone after 2020 requiring a replacement).

This isn't a Dipoto fire sale of all useful assets, it is a targeted selection of absolute keepers while the rest are used to improve the team now, not later.

[ettin]

2 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I think an idea that you all need to get used to is that the AAV payroll and the luxury tax may not be the important numbers. As I mentioned in another thread, the actual payroll is this year going to be significantly higher than the AAV payroll.

The actual payroll is what determines the true bottom line: Did you make more than you spent?

True, agreed. Everything relies on Moreno's willingness to spend. Right now there is about a $16M delta between actual and AAV heading into 2018 with Upton staying and Nolasco and Street's options being picked up. Actually it is still about $16M even if the Angels don't retain Upton and decline both Nolasco's and Street's options.

[Blarg]

Your superstar has only three years before he can choose where to play. Now you've got both Trout and Stanton that could bail. 

But if Stanton stays, you have Upton on a renogiated contract, Pujols money still on the books, just where is your money for the Trout extension? If he does it's four players taking up more than $120 million of your payroll. 

It can be done but what does it require to assemble the other 21 players on the roster? Well, no big money for the rotation, the support cast on the infield has to remain under the cap and you have Simmons for the same window as Trout. If he continues to play at the current level he's going to be expensive to re-sign.

Economics in baseball has to be more than a three year window.

Edited October 28, 2017 by Blarg

[Ohtaniland]

16 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Your superstar has only three years before he can choose where to play. Now you've got both Trout and Stanton that could bail. 

But if Stanton stays, you have Upton on a renogiated contract, Pujols money still on the books, just where is your money for the Trout extension? If he does it's four players taking up more than $120 million of your payroll. 

It can be done but what does it require to assemble the other 21 players on the roster? Well, no big money for the rotation, the support cast on the infield has to remain under the cap and you have Simmons for the same window as Trout. If he continues to play at the current level he's going to be expensive to re-sign.

Economics in baseball has to be more than a three year window.

Very well stated. When it all adds up you still have to pay 25 guys on the roster. That’s pretty tough when four guys eat up $100M +

[Second Base]

I thought I read a story somewhere about the Angels workable yearly budget being at 180 before they start worrying about being in the red.

[Docwaukee]

Nice job as usual Robert.  

Enjoyed reading the discussion as well.  Not to poop on the Stanton party, but we're not getting both him and Upton.  

I've seen our CBT AAV number around 150 mil if Upton stays and we don't exercise options.  And that includes benefits.  Whereas the real number is around 160 mil right now

I think our max real number to start the year is 190.  While the numbers work to bring in Stanton and stay below the threshold, I just don't see it happening.  I think it would be great though so I am hoping for it.  

I have seen some mention that they would go in now and not wait for the bidding wars of 2019, but I feel the opposite.  I think that market is going to run out of money at some point and there are going to be some really good players available for less than expected.   Particularly with SP.  

Remember, we've got all of Luis Valbuena and maybe Richards as well as a couple smaller numbers coming off after 2018 with a bunch more arb money being added.  

Honestly, I think Eppler is gonna make some moves that no one expects.  

[Ohtaniland]

1 hour ago, Blarg said:

I think the Stanton contract is a trap. Also, the three year window is a trap as well. You are creating the same sense of urgency to accommodate one talent on the roster which leaves your franchise in shambles again trying to force a Championship and having to deal with the aftermath. 

I think they should stop worrying about the “Trout window” and just build the team as if he doesn’t exist. Put together the best affordable talent that includes an infusion of youth. Just leave the CF position alone. If Trout decides he wants to leave hopefully he’ll let us move him instead of leaving us via the open market. 

[Lou]

27 minutes ago, Calzone said:

I think they should stop worrying about the “Trout window"

Who is they?