Youth Infusion 2019

[ettin]

1 hour ago, tdawg87 said:

Well if the youth is good, yes. It means the future is looking bright.

Gettin' good grades!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Future's so bright.....

 

 

 

 

 

Gotta wear shades.

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

5 hours ago, aznhockeyguy said:

If it wasn't for Dipoto, the Angels could've also had Grichuk and Clevinger still with the team. 

Everyone keeps acting like Grichuk is such a loss he's not.

This year his slash line is .181/.262/.394/.655, in 107 PA.

[GrittyVeterans]

The big losses turned out to be Segura, Clevinger, and Corbin

[GrittyVeterans]

I liked Dan Haren but that Skaggs and Corbin for Haren trade was a disastrous deal

It looks less bad because we were able to get Skaggs back in another trade, but man...

Reagins special

[tdawg87]

6 hours ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

Everyone keeps acting like Grichuk is such a loss he's not.

This year his slash line is .181/.262/.394/.655, in 107 PA.

That slash line is Ruthian, considering.

[Inside Pitch]

13 hours ago, tdawg87 said:

What does this even mean

It means people will talk about getting younger/better but refuse to suffer through the actual process.  It means they want to rail against what's already happened but feel the need to repeat it because "what about now."

To take a page out of Clod's book, Trout will do whatever the hell is best for him when that time comes.... the Trout window talk is stupid.  The Angels need to do what's best for the franchise too and Trout is smart enough to figure out if that's happening or not.  If that means they take their lumps this year and bring guys up or trade away Richards, so be it.   The ultimate goal should be fixing this team long term, not appeasing someone who by most accounts has a pretty solid grasp on things and seems relatively well grounded.  Is there any scenario where this team is better without Trout than with him?  NO..  But they need to focus on what they can control and Trout's decision making isn't one of those things .  When it's all said and done, nothing is likely to score more points with Trout that looking at this team and thinking it can be a winner for a long time...  Does anyone think he's holding on to 2014 as he looks at the next 10 years?  Would setting 2020-2023 back to win in 2018 make the Angels any more attractive to Trout or any other player?   Go look at the Astros salary/contract situation the next few years...  They have some hard choices to make, the Angels window is opening, not closing.

Canning, Thaiss, Ward..  all of them could be a part of the "now" as soon as this year and definitely will be by opening day of next year.  Obliterating the farm system because "what about now" would IMO be a pyrrhic victory at best.   If they are concerned about making Trout believe they really want to win -- well.  A certain yachtsman has more than enough money to do so, and there will at least two players coming available soon who check more boxes on the "right guy" list than anyone that's been available during his ownership.

Think big..  think beyond "now".

 

Edited June 12, 2018 by Inside Pitch

[TroutField]

1 hour ago, Inside Pitch said:

It means people will talk about getting younger/better but refuse to suffer through the actual process.  It means they want to rail against what's already happened but feel the need to repeat it because "what about now."

To take a page out of Clod's book, Trout will do whatever the hell is best for him when that time comes.... the Trout window talk is stupid.  The Angels need to do what's best for the franchise too and Trout is smart enough to figure out if that's happening or not.  If that means they take their lumps this year and bring guys up or trade away Richards, so be it.   The ultimate goal should be fixing this team long term, not appeasing someone who by most accounts has a pretty solid grasp on things and seems relatively well grounded.  Is there any scenario where this team is better without Trout than with him?  NO..  But they need to focus on what they can control and Trout's decision making isn't one of those things .  When it's all said and done, nothing is likely to score more points with Trout that looking at this team and thinking it can be a winner for a long time...  Does anyone think he's holding on to 2014 as he looks at the next 10 years?  Would setting 2020-2023 back to win in 2018 make the Angels any more attractive to Trout or any other player?   Go look at the Astros salary/contract situation the next few years...  They have some hard choices to make, the Angels window is opening, not closing.

Canning, Thaiss, Ward..  all of them could be a part of the "now" as soon as this year and definitely will be by opening day of next year.  Obliterating the farm system because "what about now" would IMO be a pyrrhic victory at best.   If they are concerned about making Trout believe they really want to win -- well.  A certain yachtsman has more than enough money to do so, and there will at least two players coming available soon who check more boxes on the "right guy" list than anyone that's been available during his ownership.

Think big..  think beyond "now".

 

 

1 hour ago, Inside Pitch said:

It means people will talk about getting younger/better but refuse to suffer through the actual process.  It means they want to rail against what's already happened but feel the need to repeat it because "what about now."

To take a page out of Clod's book, Trout will do whatever the hell is best for him when that time comes.... the Trout window talk is stupid.  The Angels need to do what's best for the franchise too and Trout is smart enough to figure out if that's happening or not.  If that means they take their lumps this year and bring guys up or trade away Richards, so be it.   The ultimate goal should be fixing this team long term, not appeasing someone who by most accounts has a pretty solid grasp on things and seems relatively well grounded.  Is there any scenario where this team is better without Trout than with him?  NO..  But they need to focus on what they can control and Trout's decision making isn't one of those things .  When it's all said and done, nothing is likely to score more points with Trout that looking at this team and thinking it can be a winner for a long time...  Does anyone think he's holding on to 2014 as he looks at the next 10 years?  Would setting 2020-2023 back to win in 2018 make the Angels any more attractive to Trout or any other player?   Go look at the Astros salary/contract situation the next few years...  They have some hard choices to make, the Angels window is opening, not closing.

Canning, Thaiss, Ward..  all of them could be a part of the "now" as soon as this year and definitely will be by opening day of next year.  Obliterating the farm system because "what about now" would IMO be a pyrrhic victory at best.   If they are concerned about making Trout believe they really want to win -- well.  A certain yachtsman has more than enough money to do so, and there will at least two players coming available soon who check more boxes on the "right guy" list than anyone that's been available during his ownership.

Think big..  think beyond "now".

 

Spot on, post. Nice job 

[Cdaniel]

1 hour ago, Inside Pitch said:

It means people will talk about getting younger/better but refuse to suffer through the actual process.  It means they want to rail against what's already happened but feel the need to repeat it because "what about now."

To take a page out of Clod's book, Trout will do whatever the hell is best for him when that time comes.... the Trout window talk is stupid.  The Angels need to do what's best for the franchise too and Trout is smart enough to figure out if that's happening or not.  If that means they take their lumps this year and bring guys up or trade away Richards, so be it.   The ultimate goal should be fixing this team long term, not appeasing someone who by most accounts has a pretty solid grasp on things and seems relatively well grounded.  Is there any scenario where this team is better without Trout than with him?  NO..  But they need to focus on what they can control and Trout's decision making isn't one of those things .  When it's all said and done, nothing is likely to score more points with Trout that looking at this team and thinking it can be a winner for a long time...  Does anyone think he's holding on to 2014 as he looks at the next 10 years?  Would setting 2020-2023 back to win in 2018 make the Angels any more attractive to Trout or any other player?   Go look at the Astros salary/contract situation the next few years...  They have some hard choices to make, the Angels window is opening, not closing.

Canning, Thaiss, Ward..  all of them could be a part of the "now" as soon as this year and definitely will be by opening day of next year.  Obliterating the farm system because "what about now" would IMO be a pyrrhic victory at best.   If they are concerned about making Trout believe they really want to win -- well.  A certain yachtsman has more than enough money to do so, and there will at least two players coming available soon who check more boxes on the "right guy" list than anyone that's been available during his ownership.

Think big..  think beyond "now".

 

This times a thousand!  Great post!

[floplag]

1 hour ago, Inside Pitch said:

It means people will talk about getting younger/better but refuse to suffer through the actual process.  It means they want to rail against what's already happened but feel the need to repeat it because "what about now."

To take a page out of Clod's book, Trout will do whatever the hell is best for him when that time comes.... the Trout window talk is stupid.  The Angels need to do what's best for the franchise too and Trout is smart enough to figure out if that's happening or not.  If that means they take their lumps this year and bring guys up or trade away Richards, so be it.   The ultimate goal should be fixing this team long term, not appeasing someone who by most accounts has a pretty solid grasp on things and seems relatively well grounded.  Is there any scenario where this team is better without Trout than with him?  NO..  But they need to focus on what they can control and Trout's decision making isn't one of those things .  When it's all said and done, nothing is likely to score more points with Trout that looking at this team and thinking it can be a winner for a long time...  Does anyone think he's holding on to 2014 as he looks at the next 10 years?  Would setting 2020-2023 back to win in 2018 make the Angels any more attractive to Trout or any other player?   Go look at the Astros salary/contract situation the next few years...  They have some hard choices to make, the Angels window is opening, not closing.

Canning, Thaiss, Ward..  all of them could be a part of the "now" as soon as this year and definitely will be by opening day of next year.  Obliterating the farm system because "what about now" would IMO be a pyrrhic victory at best.   If they are concerned about making Trout believe they really want to win -- well.  A certain yachtsman has more than enough money to do so, and there will at least two players coming available soon who check more boxes on the "right guy" list than anyone that's been available during his ownership.

Think big..  think beyond "now".

 

I actually agree with most of this, but its really not the intent of the Trout talk.

To begin with, the "Trout" window talk is not stupid.  This isnt Albert part deux, he will hit FA in his prime if it happens.  Can you imagine being the team that lost that, for nothing but a draft pick?  That not only gets GMs fired, it gets them incinerated.

Look i have no problem with a youth infusion under normal circumstances, none, teams needs it everything cant be filled thru FA its no practical.  In any other timeframe i would be 100% ok with this.  Frankly if not for Trout is would be leaning in favor of it as most of our top FA signings in recent years havent exactly been great investments.  We have a lot of good young talent that im excited to see play.

But if thats the plan for 2019, a youth movement, you might as well consider trading Trout.  Thats reality.   Im not knocing the youth, im not suggesting its a bad idea, but when you have the best player on the planet, you dont lose them, for nothing.  We have zero control, thats true, hes going to do whats best for him, we need to do whats best for the Angels organization.   I still root for the name on the front far more than the back so im ok with many options.  Losing Trout to FA and getting zero return, cant be one of them.  

[Inside Pitch]

57 minutes ago, floplag said:

I actually agree with most of this, but its really not the intent of the Trout talk.

To begin with, the "Trout" window talk is not stupid.  This isnt Albert part deux, he will hit FA in his prime if it happens.  Can you imagine being the team that lost that, for nothing but a draft pick?  That not only gets GMs fired, it gets them incinerated.

Look i have no problem with a youth infusion under normal circumstances, none, teams needs it everything cant be filled thru FA its no practical.  In any other timeframe i would be 100% ok with this.  Frankly if not for Trout is would be leaning in favor of it as most of our top FA signings in recent years havent exactly been great investments.  We have a lot of good young talent that im excited to see play.

But if thats the plan for 2019, a youth movement, you might as well consider trading Trout.  Thats reality.   Im not knocing the youth, im not suggesting its a bad idea, but when you have the best player on the planet, you dont lose them, for nothing.  We have zero control, thats true, hes going to do whats best for him, we need to do whats best for the Angels organization.   I still root for the name on the front far more than the back so im ok with many options.  Losing Trout to FA and getting zero return, cant be one of them.  

My post wasn't directed at any one person but rather the larger narrative that "it's now or never" which is often attached to the "Trout window" talk.  

The Angels don't need concern themselves with anything other than building a better team, one that's capable of winning beyond 2018.  He's under contract through 2020, by most accounts he likes SoCal, he's likes his relationship with the team and it's fans... If he walks away from a team capable of winning it all in years 2021 and on then whatever...  It can't be controlled.  They have a farm system on the cusp of producing talent, they have contracts that will expire and even their worst case financial drain will be gone by 2021..  The Angels don't lack for money.  Paying Trout 40 mil a year for ten years would be as easy as cutting Valbuena's current salary and applying it to Trout, other teams looking to do that are going to need to have the open payroll, so believe it or not the Angels have a slight edge there, but ultimately money may not have anything to do with it...   Likewise, winning now won't mean a hill of beans in 2020 when the Angels will actually be in danger of losing Trout ....  Again, I view the Angels window as currently opening -- not closing..   Now if the argument is just win now... that's a different discussion.  Build a team capable of long term success and hope for the best with Trout.   The easiest way to win him over imo -- make him trust the process.   

Lastly... on a personal level... IF the Angels' decision making puts any weight on public opinion again then they will have learned nothing from the Albert Pujols fiasco.   

 

Edited June 12, 2018 by Inside Pitch

[floplag]

1 hour ago, Inside Pitch said:

My post wasn't directed at any one person but rather the larger narrative that "it's now or never" which is often attached to the "Trout window" talk.  

The Angels don't need concern themselves with anything other than building a better team, one that's capable of winning beyond 2018.  He's under contract through 2020, by most accounts he likes SoCal, he's likes his relationship with the team and it's fans... If he walks away from a team capable of winning it all in years 2021 and on then whatever...  It can't be controlled.  They have a farm system on the cusp of producing talent, they have contracts that will expire and even their worst case financial drain will be gone by 2021..  The Angels don't lack for money.  Paying Trout 40 mil a year for ten years would be as easy as cutting Valbuena's current salary and applying it to Trout, other teams looking to do that are going to need to have the open payroll, so believe it or not the Angels have a slight edge there, but ultimately money may not have anything to do with it...   Likewise, winning now won't mean a hill of beans in 2020 when the Angels will actually be in danger of losing Trout ....  Again, I view the Angels window as currently opening -- not closing..   Now if the argument is just win now... that's a different discussion.  Build a team capable of long term success and hope for the best with Trout.   The easiest way to win him over imo -- make him trust the process.   

Lastly... on a personal level... IF the Angels' decision making puts any weight on public opinion again then they will have learned nothing from the Albert Pujols fiasco.   

 

Again i mostly agree, but you cant remove Trout from the window of opportunity talks completely as is a large reason that window is even unlocked.  I agree that the window is more opening than closing, but what we do in the next couple years will determine whether it gets slammed back in our faces. 

We have zero control over what he decides, but hes made his feeling known in terms of wanting playoff baseball.  If the front office is either unwilling to make every effort to make that happen, of for whatever reason it doesn't believe we can be that team in the next couple years, then we have a problem, and they have a tough decision to make.  

There is no scenario where they can simply let him walk away, none, that cant be allowed.  This is why the "now or never" talk has some merit. Our chances of convincing him to stay are directly relevant to what happens in that window.
 

[Angel Oracle]

16 hours ago, Griffey's Corner said:

sometimes the best trades are the ones you do not make. A lot of people on here talk about the golden era of Angels baseball from 2002-2009..... the one thing about that era was we kept the core of prospects intact. We did not do a lot of trades for rentals.

Agreed, although a trade here and there for someone with more than a year of club control isn't bad either.   Rentals can come back to bite a team in the rear.  

It's not good to keep every prospect like Stoneman did, but it is definitely highly preferred compared to the Dipoto approach of gutting the farm.

[nando714]

I feel like we are relying on every one of these guys coming up to be a hit 

 

[T.G.]

Infusion of youths or yutes?

[Inside Pitch]

28 minutes ago, nando714 said:

I feel like we are relying on every one of these guys coming up to be a hit 

Define hit...   Because simply getting league average output out of 3B, 1B and RF would make for upgrades.   

Maybe more importantly, the system is developing a second tier of prospects that are creating depth where there wasn't any.

How good do you think they need to be for the Angels to benefit?  or be able to allocate dollars to other areas?

[Angel Oracle]

31 minutes ago, True Grich said:

Infusion of youths or yutes?

Now I'm hungry for grits.

[Chris]

I'm looking forward to a lineup in 2020 or 2021 vaguely similar to this (too early SICK LINEUP):

2B Jones

RF Adell

CF Trout

DH Upton

LF Marsh

SS Simmons

1B Thaiss

3B Ward

C Maldonado

 

I'm hoping we are able to extend Trout, Simmons, and Maldonado to make that possible.  I'm also optimistic we hit on most of our prospects.  I'm willing to go thru some growing pains to make that happen.  It took a couple years for guys like Aybar and Kendrick etc. to settle in.  If we get some nice surprises along the way like JMF, Fletcher, or Hermosillo sure.  Other guys like Kinsler and Calhoun are just placeholders unfortunately.  Hope they can contribute now.  If Ward doesn't hit maybe Maitan.  We have some depth / options.

 

 

 

[floplag]

26 minutes ago, Chris said:

I'm looking forward to a lineup in 2020 or 2021 vaguely similar to this (too early SICK LINEUP):

2B Jones

RF Adell

CF Trout

DH Upton

LF Marsh

SS Simmons

1B Thaiss

3B Ward

C Maldonado

 

I'm hoping we are able to extend Trout, Simmons, and Maldonado to make that possible.  I'm also optimistic we hit on most of our prospects.  I'm willing to go thru some growing pains to make that happen.  It took a couple years for guys like Aybar and Kendrick etc. to settle in.  If we get some nice surprises along the way like JMF, Fletcher, or Hermosillo sure.  Other guys like Kinsler and Calhoun are just placeholders unfortunately.  Hope they can contribute now.  If Ward doesn't hit maybe Maitan.  We have some depth / options.

 

 

 

While i hope it works out, assuming that every one of them turns out to be a good, not even great, major leaguer is a huge stretch. 
Why would guys like Trout and Simmons or even Upton go thru growing pains at this point?  it wont happen, they will all eave asap.  If thats the plan then start trading them while they have max value and quite pretending to be a contender. 

[nando714]

1 hour ago, Inside Pitch said:

Define hit...   Because simply getting league average output out of 3B, 1B and RF would make for upgrades.   

Maybe more importantly, the system is developing a second tier of prospects that are creating depth where there wasn't any.

How good do you think they need to be for the Angels to benefit?  or be able to allocate dollars to other areas?

Hit- coming up and being everyday players , putting up avg to above avg numbers. It’s like we’re just thinking these guys are gonna come up and fix all the issues. Maybe 1 will..2 is a stretch...the rest might fall on their face. 

3B, 1B, RF . That’s a lot of positions

[ksangel]

19 hours ago, aznhockeyguy said:

I can't blame Dipoto for that trade.  The trade worked out well for both sides.  Grienke pitched well for the Angels and obviously Segura developed into a top hitter and was blocked by Aybar and Kendrick at the time.  I don't think it's as bad as what the A's gave up to get Jeff Samardzjia a few years ago.

Isn't the back side of that trade the one that hurts - having to give up Sean Newcomb for a shortstop? 

Keep Segura and that trade doesn't occur.

[Angel Oracle]

7 minutes ago, ksangel said:

Isn't the back side of that trade the one that hurts - having to give up Sean Newcomb for a shortstop? 

Keep Segura and that trade doesn't occur.

It could still have occurred.    Imagine Segura/Simba up the middle (2B/SS) and in the lineup.    The pitcher is there now to eventually absorb losing Newcomb, especially having two lefties already in the rotation.   

[Inside Pitch]

41 minutes ago, nando714 said:

Hit- coming up and being everyday players , putting up avg to above avg numbers. It’s like we’re just thinking these guys are gonna come up and fix all the issues. Maybe 1 will..2 is a stretch...the rest might fall on their face. 

3B, 1B, RF . That’s a lot of positions

Fair enough -- league average is what I would define it as too.  Anything above that would be gravy.   

As far as what to expect goes...  Ward and Thaiss are both showing solid discipline skills, so there is at least the HOPE they aren't park induced mirages.   The OF situation may take a bit before it's settled.   All the talented kids are still working their way up.

[eaterfan]

2 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

Define hit...   Because simply getting league average output out of 3B, 1B and RF would make for upgrades.   

Maybe more importantly, the system is developing a second tier of prospects that are creating depth where there wasn't any.

How good do you think they need to be for the Angels to benefit?  or be able to allocate dollars to other areas?

The second tier of prospects and pitching is what has really improved.

The glory days of the Angels system featured 2 deep at nearly every position. 

Mathis - Napoli, Kotchman - Morales, Callaspo - Kendrick, Aybar - Wood, MacPherson, Weaver, Santana. 

The system is getting to the brink of that... The pitching is producing beyond expectations. If people don't follow the minor league thread then maybe you wouldn't know, but in addition to a bunch of young starters like Trop, Heaney, Ohtani, and Skaggs the system has Barria, Canning, Suarez who whould be solid starters with a little upside, and guys like Rodriguez and Soriano who have high ceilings but have a wider range of outcomes possible.

The outfield depth is absolutely insane. Adell, Marsh, and Deveaux all have All-Star potential. That's 3 guys with CF defense and corner outfield bats. Plus Upton is with the team for 4 more years. The infield features Rivas and Jones at 2B, plus a fringe prospect in Fletcher. SS is a little thin but Simmons isn't old and we have Rengifo and Rivas. In a year or two we'll know what Ward and Thaiss are. But finding a 1B isn't the hardest thing in the world when you aren't hamstrung by $25 - 30 million with Pujols. 

The Angels really only need one of the outfielders to "hit" during Trout's window and a MIF and a CIF would be nice. 

Even though the Angel's system in the glory days didn't really produce a star and half the guys "busted" it was the foundation for a great stretch in franchise history. The system right now has nearly that much depth. If this draft class pans out then I think we're there.

[Inside Pitch]

22 minutes ago, eaterfan said:

The second tier of prospects and pitching is what has really improved.

The glory days of the Angels system featured 2 deep at nearly every position. 

Mathis - Napoli, Kotchman - Morales, Callaspo - Kendrick, Aybar - Wood, MacPherson, Weaver, Santana. 

I just made reference to this very fact in another thread...   And it's exactly what made that farm system so stout -- they were able to miss on one guy and still have someone come up and provide excellent value.

23 minutes ago, eaterfan said:

The system is getting to the brink of that... The pitching is producing beyond expectations. If people don't follow the minor league thread then maybe you wouldn't know, but in addition to a bunch of young starters like Trop, Heaney, Ohtani, and Skaggs the system has Barria, Canning, Suarez who whould be solid starters with a little upside, and guys like Rodriguez and Soriano who have high ceilings but have a wider range of outcomes possible.

The outfield depth is absolutely insane. Adell, Marsh, and Deveaux all have All-Star potential. That's 3 guys with CF defense and corner outfield bats. Plus Upton is with the team for 4 more years. The infield features Rivas and Jones at 2B, plus a fringe prospect in Fletcher. SS is a little thin but Simmons isn't old and we have Rengifo and Rivas. In a year or two we'll know what Ward and Thaiss are. But finding a 1B isn't the hardest thing in the world when you aren't hamstrung by $25 - 30 million with Pujols. 

The Angels really only need one of the outfielders to "hit" during Trout's window and a MIF and a CIF would be nice. 

Even though the Angel's system in the glory days didn't really produce a star and half the guys "busted" it was the foundation for a great stretch in franchise history. The system right now has nearly that much depth. If this draft class pans out then I think we're there.

I don't think everyone is following our system as much as closely as those of us in the minor league thread every day.  I totally get why people are slow to come around on whats happening there, particularly when you see a lot of the media online still talking about our farm system as it it was two years ago.   The farm under Eppler has come around much faster than I believe any of us could have hoped for -- it's likely ahead of where Stoneman was in his third year.

[eaterfan]

4 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

I just made reference to this very fact in another thread...   And it's exactly what made that farm system so stout -- they were able to miss on one guy and still have someone come up and provide excellent value.

I don't think everyone is following our system as much as closely as those of us in the minor league thread every day.  I totally get why people are slow to come around on whats happening there, particularly when you see a lot of the media online still talking about our farm system as it it was two years ago.   The farm under Eppler has come around much faster than I believe any of us could have hoped for -- it's likely ahead of where Stoneman was in his third year.

I hadn't even mentioned any of the guys who can't realistically be counted on to help the team in the next 2.5 years. Guys like Maitan or this year's draft class.

My only disagreement is that I think the prospect media recognizes how good and deep the system has gotten over the last 2 years. Keith Law, BA, and especially Fangraphs seem to be really excited about our system. If a person doesn't pay attention to it they won't find it. The larger baseball media hasn't really caught on yet, though.