Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. Become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

The stupid patience thread


Second Base

Recommended Posts

Let me preface this by saying I feel like a much less attractive version of Mel Gibson in Braveheart when he's yelling, "hold!" Let's see if we can find a .gif on this.....

mel gibson braveheart GIF

Yeah there we go.

Anyway, we're all eagerly awaiting Eppler to shout, "Now!" And when he does, the organization will unleash a wave of prospects that will take the rest of baseball in sheer terror as they march to the first of several consecutive World Series wins. But I must preach patience before this happens. 

Look, I know it sucks. We want to be competitive, I mean we have freakin Mike Trout. That happens once in a lifetime for one lucky team and we just happen to be that lucky team. Pretty much the same with Ohtani, and Simmons glove too. But this rebuild isn't done yet. Yeah, it'll be glorious when Adell, Canning, Marsh, Thaiss, Jones, Rengifo, Maitan, Adams, Jackson and everyone else come up and start tearing stuff up. The Angels have enough talent stocked in this system that if things go right, we should see a pretty consistent stream of upside prospects breaking into the major league stage on a yearly basis beginning in 2020. When a team has that, and plays in a market large enough to support a decent sized payroll, magical things can happen. Just look at the Cardinals the last 15 years. 

That's going to be the Angels, and that's going to happen soon, but we need to not blow our wad on 2019 and hurt the long term outlook. The fact is the Astros are still one of the top three teams in baseball and should remain pretty competitive for the next five years. The A's go through cycles where they're great for 2-3 years, then crap for another five. Not bad considering what Beane and company have to work with. The Mariners are still a .500 team and will likely remain so while getting more and more expensive, as long as Dipoto sticks to his usual script. Nothing to worry about, but still, there here. And the Rangers have begun their own rebuild and won't be dangerous again for another five years or so. So the Angels window to make a move is 2020, or 2021.

From that point on, the plan is to run off a serious of playoff appearances spanning about a decade, and that'll be pretty awesome and we'll all party at Chuck's house in the PNW. We'll all sneak into the territory disgusised as Mariner fans, rip those stupid jerseys off to reveal a bunch of Trout and Ohtani unis, expect one person wearing a Scioscia one, which will be weird, and then we'll tear stuff up.

But we can't ruin this whole plan by spending on Harper and Machado, or investing in guys that had career years and got paid, or guys that'll get hurt. And we can't go off and trade our prospects for Realmuto when he'll cost all of them and still only hang around a year or two before he costs hundreds of millions that we need to save for Trout, Simmons and Ohtani. 

Those extensions are coming.....those prospects are coming....Pujols will be going....it will all come together. We just have to sit here and wait this stupid thing out first. I'm guessing it'll be worth it.

Patience, patience, patience.....and midiclorians....we need to develop something that detects them and weave that into our scouting regimen and use it to draft the next Trout if one ever exists. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but no, im not with this plan.   
We can make a couple 2-3 year deals to make the team be right there for the next 2-3 years and not have to wait for anything and simply have the kids take over as those deals run their course.
You said it yourself, we have Mike freaking Trout.  WE have 4 of the top 100 players offensively per the other thread.  We are not small market, we can spend.  There is literally zero reason this has to be the way. 
We can absolutely have it both ways, we do not have to wait for anything.
If this is the plan, it may cost us Trout, noone know what will happen but his comments suggest he isnt wasting his prime on a rebuild.   Simmons will be gone perhaps as well by then.  Upton maybe in his last year.  
I'm not asking for Machado/Harper, it doesn't have to be that nuts, the names I want could be had for less than either one of them combined.
I am 100% not on board with the patience plan and frankly cannot understand why anyone would be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, floplag said:

I'm sorry but no, im not with this plan.   
We can make a couple 2-3 year deals to make the team be right there for the next 2-3 years and not have to wait for anything and simply have the kids take over as those deals run their course.
You said it yourself, we have Mike freaking Trout.  WE have 4 of the top 100 players offensively per the other thread.  We are not small market, we can spend.  There is literally zero reason this has to be the way. 
We can absolutely have it both ways, we do not have to wait for anything.
If this is the plan, it may cost us Trout, noone know what will happen but his comments suggest he isnt wasting his prime on a rebuild.   Simmons will be gone perhaps as well by then.  Upton maybe in his last year.  
I'm not asking for Machado/Harper, it doesn't have to be that nuts, the names I want could be had for less than either one of them combined.
I am 100% not on board with the patience plan and frankly cannot understand why anyone would be. 

Because it works.

Because it builds a sustainable winner.

Because it is cost effective.

Because most fans connect more with home-grown stars than with free agents.

It appears that the Angels have made their decision independent of whether Trout stays or goes.  It is amazing that the team has not completely tanked during the rebuild, and would have been more competitive with some healthy pitching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, eligrba said:

Because it works.

Because it builds a sustainable winner.

Because it is cost effective.

Because most fans connect more with home-grown stars than with free agents.

It appears that the Angels have made their decision independent of whether Trout stays or goes.  It is amazing that the team has not completely tanked during the rebuild, and would have been more competitive with some healthy pitching.

A lot of things work, my point is that this isnt our only choice.
Winning can be sustained in a lot of ways.
Cost effective is a concern?  When did we become Tampa?
Fans connect with winning too.
I could understand this is we didnt have a choice, but we do.  If this is the path they take, throwing away 2 years of baseball and possibly Mike Trout, i cant support that.  You might as well trade him if thats your goal to compete in 21.

We could make a few key deals, compete now, let them go when its up for the kids and win not only in 21 but 19 and 20 as well.  Why does this have to be a choice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, floplag said:

A lot of things work, my point is that this isnt our only choice.
Winning can be sustained in a lot of ways.
Cost effective is a concern?  When did we become Tampa?
Fans connect with winning too.
I could understand this is we didnt have a choice, but we do.  If this is the path they take, throwing away 2 years of baseball and possibly Mike Trout, i cant support that.  You might as well trade him if thats your goal to compete in 21.

We could make a few key deals, compete now, let them go when its up for the kids and win not only in 21 but 19 and 20 as well.  Why does this have to be a choice?

Cost effective is always a concern because it is still a business and Albertross contracts drive decisions.  I agree that this is not the only choice.  However, three years ago, the Angels had no choice.  The fact that the Angels have a choice now is the direct result of being patient three years ago.  I don't think patience all of the time is a good idea, but impatience now could dismantle the current options earned by being patient, which will actually improve over time.  I want to believe that if Mike Trout told the Angels that he wanted to be traded to a competitor, Artie would oblige.  This off season my provide the final answer regarding Trout's future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, eligrba said:

Cost effective is always a concern because it is still a business and Albertross contracts drive decisions.  I agree that this is not the only choice.  However, three years ago, the Angels had no choice.  The fact that the Angels have a choice now is the direct result of being patient three years ago.  I don't think patience all of the time is a good idea, but impatience now could dismantle the current options earned by being patient, which will actually improve over time.  I want to believe that if Mike Trout told the Angels that he wanted to be traded to a competitor, Artie would oblige.  This off season my provide the final answer regarding Trout's future.

Again im not suggesting otherwise, only that it doesnt have to be one or the other.
The message of the OP, at least what i got out of it, was be patient well win in 2 years.  I see no reason we cant do both.  
This is the biggest free agent market in as long as i can remember, we have the best player on the planet and an amazing core, we do not have to accept being also rans, unless we choose to.  I choose not to support that plan.
I'm sorry i want my cake and eat it too, i want to make a run at the post season for the next 2 years instead of losing for 2 years and pinning my hopes on these kids being everything we hope and more in 21, and in this case there is no reason I cant have that.  
Its simply doesnt have to be one or the other, period, under any logical argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the next two years, I'd like to compete but I'd rather see them use money than prospects and since they aren't going to add Harper or Machado (which is smart), then they should restrict the contract length to two years.  If they do acquire someone via trade, I just don't want to see it be someone with two years of control where we give up considerable prospect currency.  

the patience should come in the form of not jumping the gun on giving up young players.  but spend away to improve the team.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, floplag said:

I'm sorry but no, im not with this plan.   
We can make a couple 2-3 year deals to make the team be right there for the next 2-3 years and not have to wait for anything and simply have the kids take over as those deals run their course.
You said it yourself, we have Mike freaking Trout.  WE have 4 of the top 100 players offensively per the other thread.  We are not small market, we can spend.  There is literally zero reason this has to be the way. 
We can absolutely have it both ways, we do not have to wait for anything.
If this is the plan, it may cost us Trout, noone know what will happen but his comments suggest he isnt wasting his prime on a rebuild.   Simmons will be gone perhaps as well by then.  Upton maybe in his last year.  
I'm not asking for Machado/Harper, it doesn't have to be that nuts, the names I want could be had for less than either one of them combined.
I am 100% not on board with the patience plan and frankly cannot understand why anyone would be. 

I think everyone here to a point agrees. I dont think anyone is against signing long term fixes, or even short term but effective bandaids. 

Its the trades that everyone is wary about. If its the right player, sure. The problem is, most of the "right" players will cost us the bulk of our farm....which makes the "right player" the "wrong time".

Lets say we gutted the farm for realmuto. Great. But were still lacking pitching, and a 3B.RF. 2B. Etc. (Not to mention realmuto will be a FA in 2 years)

So instead we trade for degrom. We still need a C. 3B. Etc etc. 

This is where the patience thing comes in. When the next crop of prospects hits, it will also coincide with pujols coming off the books...that may end up being huge...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

I think everyone here to a point agrees. I dont think anyone is against signing long term fixes, or even short term but effective bandaids. 

Its the trades that everyone is wary about. If its the right player, sure. The problem is, most of the "right" players will cost us the bulk of our farm....which makes the "right player" the "wrong time".

Lets say we gutted the farm for realmuto. Great. But were still lacking pitching, and a 3B.RF. 2B. Etc. (Not to mention realmuto will be a FA in 2 years)

So instead we trade for degrom. We still need a C. 3B. Etc etc. 

This is where the patience thing comes in. When the next crop of prospects hits, it will also coincide with pujols coming off the books...that may end up being huge...

Trust me i'm well aware of the timings, it comes down to one simply question, do you want to compete between now and then, or not?
In my head i see one trade worth the effort, one.  Hardly going to gut the farm, though it may cost a couple guys you may not want to lose, but anything worthwhile will whether its DeGrom, Realmuto... heck even Gray will likely cost someone you dont want to lose and we still have all the holes mentioned above.
Im not going to simply accept throwing away 2 years and likely losing Trout when we dont have to do either if we play the cards right.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I know is.  The Angels need to continue scouting well.  Good drafts and success in the international market.  Accumulate talent.  If they do that, things will fall into place.  It lets them be opportunistic with trades.  It let’s them control payroll.  

Also, avoid disastrous FA contracts.  I don’t think the angels should give anyone over 32 y/o more then a 2 year deal.  Ever.  It might be tough treading in the short term, but who cares.  They aren’t catching Hou/NYY/Bos in the short term most likely.  They need to purge their dependence on this type of player.  It won’t take that long for the first groups of their prospects to start impacting the major league team. 

Edited by UndertheHalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, floplag said:

I'm sorry but no, im not with this plan.   
We can make a couple 2-3 year deals to make the team be right there for the next 2-3 years and not have to wait for anything and simply have the kids take over as those deals run their course.
You said it yourself, we have Mike freaking Trout.  WE have 4 of the top 100 players offensively per the other thread.  We are not small market, we can spend.  There is literally zero reason this has to be the way. 
We can absolutely have it both ways, we do not have to wait for anything.
If this is the plan, it may cost us Trout, noone know what will happen but his comments suggest he isnt wasting his prime on a rebuild.   Simmons will be gone perhaps as well by then.  Upton maybe in his last year.  
I'm not asking for Machado/Harper, it doesn't have to be that nuts, the names I want could be had for less than either one of them combined.
I am 100% not on board with the patience plan and frankly cannot understand why anyone would be. 

I think this is pretty much what they’re doing. 

Since Eppler traded Newcomb, he has not traded a single good prospect. They haven’t given up a draft pick. They’ve spent all they could on the farm system.

They also haven’t tied themselves to any big contracts (well, except for Upton, but that one should be OK). 

They’ve instead just used a bunch of band aids to try to be as good as possible while waiting for the system to bloom. 

Its gotten them just what you’d think: mediocrity. But it hasn’t sacrificed any of the long term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, floplag said:

Trust me i'm well aware of the timings, it comes down to one simply question, do you want to compete between now and then, or not?
In my head i see one trade worth the effort, one.  Hardly going to gut the farm, though it may cost a couple guys you may not want to lose, but anything worthwhile will whether its DeGrom, Realmuto... heck even Gray will likely cost someone you dont want to lose and we still have all the holes mentioned above.
Im not going to simply accept throwing away 2 years and likely losing Trout when we dont have to do either if we play the cards right.
 

If I only had one choice of competing now or competing later, I choose later.  I could be wrong but it would mean that Eppler didn't do his job, Trout didn't stay and a lot of our prospects didn't work out.  I feel pretty good about the opposite for all three of those things.  Whereas I don't have a ton of confidence that we can win a division in 2019 unless we gut the farm.  

It just depends on what two years you want to play for if you start trading prospects instead of waiting for them to develop.  Adell and Canning is a hefty price to pay for one player with two years of control and that's what Degrom or Realmuto would cost plus a couple more from our top 30.  If you're gonna do that, you'd better be right.   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I think this is pretty much what they’re doing. 

Since Eppler traded Newcomb, he has not traded a single good prospect. They haven’t given up a draft pick. They’ve spent all they could on the farm system.

They also haven’t tied themselves to any big contracts (well, except for Upton, but that one should be OK). 

They’ve instead just used a bunch of band aids to try to be as good as possible while waiting for the system to bloom. 

Its gotten them just what you’d think: mediocrity. But it hasn’t sacrificed any of the long term. 

We (as a fan base) have been abused with a whole lot of bombed prospects over the last decade or so, and the FA signings haven't been any better at improving the team's position in the standings. 

This is a tough division with a SHORT window with Mike Trout, and serious strides need to be made now...next season..not 3-4 years down the line.

It's great that they are trying to build for the future, but the fact remains that serious runs need to be made in the next seasons, two seasons at the most. If this team doesn't make a run next season, we can kiss Trout goodbye, and without him, this org will be mediocre for a long time.

They need to put together a team that seriously competes next season. Not 2 3 4 years down the line...next year. IMO..If they are not playing meaningful baseball games in September of this coming season, they are in serious trouble.

Just the way I see it as a life long ( was there in the first week the Big A opened) fan.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, floplag said:

I'm sorry but no, im not with this plan.   
We can make a couple 2-3 year deals to make the team be right there for the next 2-3 years and not have to wait for anything and simply have the kids take over as those deals run their course.
You said it yourself, we have Mike freaking Trout.  WE have 4 of the top 100 players offensively per the other thread.  We are not small market, we can spend.  There is literally zero reason this has to be the way. 
We can absolutely have it both ways, we do not have to wait for anything.
If this is the plan, it may cost us Trout, noone know what will happen but his comments suggest he isnt wasting his prime on a rebuild.   Simmons will be gone perhaps as well by then.  Upton maybe in his last year.  
I'm not asking for Machado/Harper, it doesn't have to be that nuts, the names I want could be had for less than either one of them combined.
I am 100% not on board with the patience plan and frankly cannot understand why anyone would be. 

Agree. Been patient. There is now a 1-2 year window for serious contention. Not the best position to be in but it is what it is, and that's exactly what it is. It isn't going to change. Deal with it as it is...now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Homebrewer said:

If this team doesn't make a run next season, we can kiss Trout goodbye, and without him, this org will be mediocre for a long time.

Let’s say they very aggressively make changes to ensure they are contenders in the next 2 years. What does that cost? Giving up a lot of prospects? Signing free agents to bloated deals that will be horrible in 3 years?

Doesn’t that actually make it less appealing for Trout?

You don’t need to convince him you’re going to be good in 19-20. He has no choice where he plays in those years. You need to convince him you’re going to be good from 2021-2030. 

So, what do you suppose is the best way to do that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trout is going to cost a lot of money to lock up, and getting Albert's contract off the books will play a large in accomplishing that, but when you consider the extensions that both Simmons and Ohtani, the only way the Angels can afford that is not having any wasted money on the books, and having prospects that come in and play key roles. 

I mean cool, we'd have a Trout, Ohtani, Simmons and Upton locked up which is great to build around, but you'd still need a C, 1B, 2B, 3B and RF, and that's why you need Thaiss, Jones, Rengifo, Ward, Maitan, Jackson, Adams, Adell and Marsh. Because as good as those nine are, we'll need half of the them to work out, just to keep costs low and stay in contention. And even if that happens, Arte will still need to raise payroll in order to be even a moderate player in the free agent market.

You spend money now, you have less money to spend later. You trade prospects now, you're forced to fill those holes with free agents later, which costs even more money. 

The only way to build a sustainable winner is the develop your own talent on a constant basis and add to it with free agents here and there. That's not going to happen unless they stick to the plan. Yeah, it'll likely mean sacrificing 2019, but it will mean saving 2020-2028 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, eligrba said:

Because it works.

Because it builds a sustainable winner.

Because it is cost effective.

Because most fans connect more with home-grown stars than with free agents.

It appears that the Angels have made their decision independent of whether Trout stays or goes.  It is amazing that the team has not completely tanked during the rebuild, and would have been more competitive with some healthy pitching.

Lol we have a 2 year window with the best player in baseball...you are batshit crazy. Time to go for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I say I’m torn I really mean is I’m against trading Adell or Canning for anyone that has less than 4 years of control.  Would I take a chance and trade some of the others to get a guy like Arrenado who has one year left and is from so cal and would appear to be an easier yet expensive sign, sure.  

None of us have a crystal ball, we don’t know who is going to blossom into the next really good second baseman that plays a decade for us.  Is it Fletcher, Rengifo or Jones?  What if you keep the wrong one and trade the really good one to acquire a declining player in an effort to win now.   

Also, isn’t it nice to have highly ranked prospects again?  We’ve had a total of TWO highly ranked prospects (3 if you include Ohtani) in the last decade.  One is Trout the other we traded for Simmons.  The only ones who expected much from the others like Cron, Trumbo, Segura were die hard Angel fans.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Homebrewer said:

Agree. Been patient. There is now a 1-2 year window for serious contention. Not the best position to be in but it is what it is, and that's exactly what it is. It isn't going to change. Deal with it as it is...now. 

if it were true that the FO thought we only had a 1-2 year window of serious contention left, don't you think they'd be doing things a lot differently over the past three years?   And if they didn't do anything after 2015 when we were coming off two winning seasons in a row, what makes you think they're gonna do something now?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Stradling said:

When I say I’m torn I really mean is I’m against trading Adell or Canning for anyone that has less than 4 years of control.  Would I take a chance and trade some of the others to get a guy like Arrenado who has one year left and is from so cal and would appear to be an easier yet expensive sign, sure.  

None of us have a crystal ball, we don’t know who is going to blossom into the next really good second baseman that plays a decade for us.  Is it Fletcher, Rengifo or Jones?  What if you keep the wrong one and trade the really good one to acquire a declining player in an effort to win now.   

Also, isn’t it nice to have highly ranked prospects again?  We’ve had a total of TWO highly ranked prospects (3 if you include Ohtani) in the last decade.  One is Trout the other we traded for Simmons.  The only ones who expected much from the others like Cron, Trumbo, Segura were die hard Angel fans.  

Segura was a quality prospect that Dipoto traded for 2 months of Greinke. He was absolutely a top 100 prospect in the MLB at the time. Trumbo and Cron I agree...that was a bunch of nothing that we were praying on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I think this is pretty much what they’re doing. 

Since Eppler traded Newcomb, he has not traded a single good prospect. They haven’t given up a draft pick. They’ve spent all they could on the farm system.

They also haven’t tied themselves to any big contracts (well, except for Upton, but that one should be OK). 

They’ve instead just used a bunch of band aids to try to be as good as possible while waiting for the system to bloom. 

Its gotten them just what you’d think: mediocrity. But it hasn’t sacrificed any of the long term. 

I agree, but thats not what i got from the post.  From what i read the OP was suggesting i be patient till 21 to put a winner on the field, i see no reason we have to do that.
However, as you say, the bandaids and mediocrity dont have to be the theme either in my view.
I simply see no reason we cant both make a legitimate effort now thru FA, and wait for the farm to develop.  Isnt that how its really supposed to be?  Why am i supposed to accept one of the other from this team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...