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! 

     

IGNORED

Rosenthal: Angels looking to shed payroll


Second Base

Recommended Posts

we've had 74, 80, and 80 win seasons the last 3 years with guys like Giavotella, Carlos Perez, Danny Espinosa, Craig Gentry, Daniel Nava, Rafael Ortega, Jefry Marte, Luis Valbuena, Ben Revere, Cameron Maybin and Cliff Pennington in the lineup and Nolasco, Weaver, Chacin, Lincecum, Daniel Wright, Brett Oberholtzer, David Huff, Jesse Chavez, JC Ramirez, Troy Scribner, Deck Mcguire, Odrisamer Despaigne, John Lamb and Parker Bridwell making starts as well as umpteen pen arms from the scrap heap getting meaningful innings.  

during that time we've build up a legitimate farm system after having the worst one in baseball.  

We've been rebuilding.  

It's a little deceiving in that we've maintained a payroll among the top 10 during that time, but make no mistake, we have been rebuilding.  What we've done differently than most teams rebuilding is that Billy has tried to put he team in a position to remain competitive should everything go right.  It hasn't.  

Now that the farm is much improved to good not great, I can see why some would think it's time to change direction but based on what has worked for rebuilding teams in the past, it's still too soon.  

If we are trying to keep Trout and put ourselves in the best position to win during the period of his next contract, do we want to be the Atlanta Braves or the Boston Red Sox?  Those are both extreme examples, but the answer is obvious in my eyes.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, GrittyVeterans said:

I don't really understand this. How is he expecting to turn a profit this season? Is attendance going to increase by enough to make us profitable if we are a better team?

I'd love to see their profit numbers from 2002-2010

that quote was from prior to the 2018 season.  

Yes, if attendance goes because the team is winning then they generate more revenue but if winning costs 20 mil more in payroll then I'm sure it's offset.  

We had no positions from 2018 where a player in his first 6 years of control occupied that spot for the entire season.  Zero.  

The closest we had were Ohtani and Fletcher playing half the year each.  

The rotation had one guy at league min and two others in arb.  

Take 3 positions over the next couple years and plug in a combo of avg production at league min.  Say 2b, 3b and RF.  That's about $30 mil in payroll we'd have to spend elsewhere.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Second Base said:

I have to think Ohtani's addition was extremely profitable. Extra ticket sales, advertising, merchandise, including jerseys, increased exposure....

Arte turned a profit last year.

he also spent $25m on a posting fee though as well which likely isn't included in the payroll numbers we're privy to.  I am sure all those numbers are manipulated to some degree.  Like if Arte took a salary which would count toward the budget and decrease the overall profit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arte can say that stuff all he wants but he is only fooling some of the people.

Arte, don't cry about the income statement and pretend there is no balance sheet.

If you bought your house 30 years ago for cash, how is it going for you now?  Oh, are you "losing money every year" because you have expenses like insurance and you had to replace the carpet last year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot even begin to conceive how this club is possibly losing money whether it was last year, this year, or almost any time during Arte's tenure as owner. 
The overall value has risen significantly sine he bought the team, they carry no debt, have still one of the better TV deals, 3M attendance every year, merchandising windfall over Ohtani... 
If we are losing money, then baseball as a sport may well be doomed, we should be the poster child for how to run a team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of things.  One I don’t know the split but MLB licensed merchandise is split amongst all teams and the players.  I don’t know if the Angels get a bigger percentage of Ohtani merchandise sales but they certainly don’t get all of it just as the Yankees don’t get all Judge sales.  

Secondly, MLB teams are rich people toys.   If you lose a few million a year for 20 years but your team is worth a billion more, you’ll probably take that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Stradling said:

A couple of things.  One I don’t know the split but MLB licensed merchandise is split amongst all teams and the players.  I don’t know if the Angels get a bigger percentage of Ohtani merchandise sales but they certainly don’t get all of it just as the Yankees don’t get all Judge sales.  

Secondly, MLB teams are rich people toys.   If you lose a few million a year for 20 years but your team is worth a billion more, you’ll probably take that.  

I think the point is why even say you’re losing money? It just comes off as dramatic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Lou said:

"The Angels are wary of dipping into their farm system to improve the major-league squad, as they’ve worked hard to rebuild their prospect pool. Still, they have a relatively desperate need for pitching and are, therefore, looking to shed salary where they can."

open the links, gentlemen 

Why when we can wildly speculate without context instead...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, floplag said:

Clairvoyant now too, that explains a lot.  Though what i may or may not have said has to do with his comment is unclear. 

Yea, because you thought he was coming off as dramatic and not simply lying, sorry I was wrong about you despite being able to read thousands of posts and being able to create a pretty informed opinion.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Yea, because you thought he was coming off as dramatic and not simply lying, sorry I was wrong about you despite being able to read thousands of posts and being able to create a pretty informed opinion.  

Only i didnt say that.  So much for informed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Stradling said:

A couple of things.  One I don’t know the split but MLB licensed merchandise is split amongst all teams and the players.  I don’t know if the Angels get a bigger percentage of Ohtani merchandise sales but they certainly don’t get all of it just as the Yankees don’t get all Judge sales.  

Secondly, MLB teams are rich people toys.   If you lose a few million a year for 20 years but your team is worth a billion more, you’ll probably take that.  

Yes exactly.  And a number of times I have attempted to make this point, pointing out the massive equity growth, I have typically been attacked for suggesting that Moreno shoukd spend away equity to improve the team.  The important distinction is that you can "lose" $20m instead of $10m in operating expenses and still achieve an additional $70-80m gain in team equity.

It would almost be impossible to spend away the equity when it is growing at a pace of probably $80-100m a year.

The big negative result would be getting richer at just slightly a slower pace. . .with $2 billion in new wealth already achieved on the investment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Arte's contention he "lost" money is likely in relation to what was projected versus what was actually received.  I don't think anyone actually thinks he's losing money as owner of the Angels.  

 

As for the topic, one thing that seems to define Eppler, from what I have observed anyway, is a focus on efficient use of resources.  Example: why spend $15+ mil on a "closer" when you can get a reasonably close performance from someone at league minimum through the waiver wire or through minor league free agency.  There are certain areas he's willing to spend his money on while other areas are seen as opportunities to maximize  numbers at minimal cost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't expect (and I don't think anyone expects) Moreno to spend foolishly, or be inefficient, or to increase the payroll to $50m over the luxury tax.

What I do expect is to not hesitate to address an obvious need if it helps the team be a winner, even if it pushes payroll up a bit.

We can all talk about whether or not the team is close enough to World Series level or not, but I genuinely think that is a cop out.  That is what a Kansas City does.

A team like the Angels should be very concerned about an 88 win season over a 78 win season regardless of the postseason.

The interesting part of it is a franchise that wins regularly (even if they miss the postseason) builds a stronger fan base and improves the value of the team versus a team that either suffers losing seasons or just drifts at .500 for lengths of time.

You can very easily argue that if Moreno wants to watch every dime associated with this investment, he should be MORE willing to spend (again not foolishly) to build a history of winning seasons.

And even if the Angels don't win a championship with Trout, the win/loss legacy of Trout will matter in terms of the value of the franchise.  Trout is historical.  The more meaningful games he plays in the better for the value of the franchise, even if the meaningful games end up with the Angels missing the playoffs by one game (rather than finishing 15 games out where nobody was paying attention).

Moreno should be disciplined, but willing to spend on this team right now.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Because he is probably managing expectations.  Oh and that wasn’t flops point.  

He's not fooling anyone though...anyone with half a brain can look up how much he bought the team for and then simultaneously look on Forbes to see what the franchise is valued at today. 

Maybe he's trying to manage expectations but I think Doc is right that it's disingenuous to do it in that way.

He'd be better off saying we want to stay under the luxury tax until we have a commitment from Trout, or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GrittyVeterans said:

He's not fooling anyone though...anyone with half a brain can look up how much he bought the team for and then simultaneously look on Forbes to see what the franchise is valued at today.

Maybe he's trying to manage expectations but I think Doc is right that it's disingenuous to do it in that way.

He'd be better off saying we want to stay under the luxury tax until we have a commitment from Trout, or something like that.

This would make perfect sense and i would support that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, floplag said:

This would make perfect sense and i would support that.

I am sorry but don't they have a commitment from Trout for the next 2 seasons?  2 seasons in the prime of his prime?

It is borderline silly to introduce needing "a commitment from Trout" to put the right team on the field.  Trout already signed one extension and IS under contract right now because of his commitment.

Maybe Trout doesn't want to FURTHER commit to a team if they are so delicate that they must have a perpetual 9 or 10 WAR player to building around.

I am an Angel fan first more than I am a Trout fan.  But if I was a 9 or 10 WAR player, I probably want to be on a team where my performance is the difference between 95 wins and 105 wins, not the difference between 74 wins and 84 wins.

The Angels need to figure this out.  I doubt Mike Trout wants to be the guy that kept the Angels "competitive". . .

The Angels would be fools if they are waiting for Trout to FURTHER commit.  All that would do is convince him that the organization is more like the Twins than the Yankees.

Tony Gwynn is a neat story, but he is a bit lost historically compared to a Derek Jeter, isn't he?

Put the team around Trout so he has no choice but to want to stay, so he keeps one jersey AND he wins, and he knows the ownership will stay aggressive in trying to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I am sorry but don't they have a commitment from Trout for the next 2 seasons?  2 seasons in the prime of his prime?

It is borderline silly to introduce needing "a commitment from Trout" to put the right team on the field.  Trout already signed one extension and IS under contract right now because of his commitment.

Maybe Trout doesn't want to FURTHER commit to a team if they are so delicate that they must have a perpetual 9 or 10 WAR player to building around.

I am an Angel fan first more than I am a Trout fan.  But if I was a 9 or 10 WAR player, I probably want to be on a team where my performance is the difference between 95 wins and 105 wins, not the difference between 74 wins and 84 wins.

The Angels need to figure this out.  I doubt Mike Trout wants to be the guy that kept the Angels "competitive". . .

The Angels would be fools if they are waiting for Trout to FURTHER commit.  All that would do is convince him that the organization is more like the Twins than the Yankees.

Tony Gwynn is a neat story, but he is a bit lost historically compared to a Derek Jeter, isn't he?

Put the team around Trout so he has no choice but to want to stay, so he keeps one jersey AND he wins, and he knows the ownership will stay aggressive in trying to win.

I don't disagree with any of that. I'm just saying if Arte were up front about needing a commitment from Trout before he went past the luxury tax...well, at least you can understand it somewhat. Hiding behind the "we lost money in X, Y, and Z years" to "manage expectations" is really frustrating as a fan.

 

I definitely think we should be going hard after a WS the next 2 seasons.

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...