Angels have more money to spend than we think?

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

Keeping the budget at around $165M is almost a 100% chance at having another missed playoff season with the best player in baseball and the reigning ROY.

[WeatherWonk]

10 hours ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

Keeping the budget at around $165M is almost a 100% chance at having another missed playoff season with the best player in baseball and the reigning ROY.

I disagree. Spending 30 mil more should put us in contention for a WC spot. It would be us, OAK and TBR. OAK needs to completely revamp their entire pitching staff.

Even NYY still have some holes to fill.

Winning the division is out of our reach, IMO. BOS and CLE are shoo-ins, too. 

[nate]

mlb.com beat writer is going to be the most homer of all the writers that cover the Angels.  I feel like it is pointless to read anything they write.

[TroutField]

2 minutes ago, nate said:

mlb.com beat writer is going to be the most homer of all the writers that cover the Angels.  I feel like it is pointless to read anything they write.

Also Maria Guardado is pretty awful in general since she has covered the Angels. I miss Alden Gonzalez, luckily she’s leaving to cover the Giants. 

[Dtwncbad]

45 minutes ago, WeatherWonk said:

I disagree. Spending 30 mil more should put us in contention for a WC spot. It would be us, OAK and TBR. OAK needs to completely revamp their entire pitching staff.

Even NYY still have some holes to fill.

Winning the division is out of our reach, IMO. BOS and CLE are shoo-ins, too. 

IF spending $30m can put the Angels into the postseason (if!), then spending up to the luxury tax would make them a legit WS champion contender.

I do not want the Angels to spend foolishly and execute "bad" contracts.  But I do want them to spend as much as they can to improve the team, especially if what we are saying above is true.

Imagine they spend $30m and get to the postseason and lose early where one more premium olayer could have made a difference between an early exit and a serious run.

Gee, so glad Arte stayed on his "budget" that is significantly lower that the luxury tax. . .

[WeatherWonk]

1 minute ago, Dtwncbad said:

If spending $30m can put the Angels into the postseason, then spending to the luxury tax would make them a legit WS champion contender.

I do not want the Angels to spend foolishly and execute "bad" contracts.  But I do want them to spend as much as they can to improve the team, especially if what we are saying above is true.

Imagine they spend $30m and get to the postseason and lose early where one more premium olayer could have made a difference between an early exit and a serious run.

Gee, so glad Arte stayed on his "budget" that is significantly lower that the luxury tax. . .

Well I'm with you on all that, especially if going over the threshold for 1-2 years (as has been explained to me) might only cost Arte 15 mil, total. 

For a rich owner like Arte, with the income stream he has, I think he should go up to the threshold every year and exceed it, if the right player comes along.

But it ain't my money...............

[Stradling]

Is Arte a “rich owner”?  

 

9th richest owner according to google

[Dtwncbad]

2 minutes ago, WeatherWonk said:

Well I'm with you on all that, especially if going over the threshold for 1-2 years (as has been explained to me) might only cost Arte 15 mil, total. 

For a rich owner like Arte, with the income stream he has, I think he should go up to the threshold every year and exceed it, if the right player comes along.

But it ain't my money...............

I said this in another thread but it fits here also.

Moreno said he would go over "for the right" player.

The right player is Trout.  Once in a lifetime player, and definitely once in (the rest of) Arte's lifetime. He earns $34m a year.

Moreno should spend $34m over the luxury tax with the overt, overexplained, clear message that he is trying to maximize the chance of winning with Trout, where the money over the plus tax is what the team pays Trout.

 

 

[Blarg]

I'm pretty amazed how simple everything is.

15 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

IF spending $30m can put the Angels into the postseason (if!), then spending up to the luxury tax would make them a legit WS champion contender.

Spend twice as much and the Angels are in the World Series. I mean, it's so obvious. Spend more money.

 

 

 

*Cue Dtwbcbad saying he wasn't what he wrote.

 

[Dtwncbad]

26 minutes ago, Blarg said:

I'm pretty amazed how simple everything is.

Spend twice as much and the Angels are in the World Series. I mean, it's so obvious. Spend more money.

 

 

 

*Cue Dtwbcbad saying he wasn't what he wrote.

 

Hey Blarg, being 100% serious here.  100%.  You are correct.  That isnt what I wrote.  The first word was "if" and I put "if" in parenthesis a second time for the dolts that have trouble with the concept of a PREMISE.

So look buddy.  It is clear you are either the irrelevant sniper I coined you before, only interested in being a dick, or you are literally too stupid to understand some prettys simple stuff.

If it is the first, F*ck off.  If it is the second, I apologize for being rude to the mentally challenged.

[T.G.]

 

[Dtwncbad]

Sounds like they made a little run at Corbin.  I really wanted Corbin.

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

43 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I said this in another thread but it fits here also.

Moreno said he would go over "for the right" player.

The right player is Trout.  Once in a lifetime player, and definitely once in (the rest of) Arte's lifetime. He earns $34m a year.

Moreno should spend $34m over the luxury tax with the overt, overexplained, clear message that he is trying to maximize the chance of winning with Trout, where the money over the plus tax is what the team pays Trout.

Arte said he would go over for the right player for 1 year but going over for Trout would likely be at lot longer than that, without cutting salary somewhere else in the second or third years of his extension. Although once Trout is extending who cares.

[Dtwncbad]

8 minutes ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

Arte said he would go over for the right player for 1 year but going over for Trout would likely be at lot longer than that, without cutting salary somewhere else in the second or third years of his extension. Although once Trout is extending who cares.

No disagreement.  I am simply laying out how I think Arte could be, a storyline that would serve him well in terms of being viewed as being dead serious about winning with Trout, and at the same time showing how his generosity is arguable spent on Trout specifically. . And how I think the media and fanbase would see it and cover it that way (if he executed it correctly).

[floplag]

Before we continue to talk about going over the tax threshold, shouldnt we get close to it?  
The presumed budget of approx $185M leaving some on the table as is, the tax isnt coming into play at all. 

[WeatherWonk]

Regardless of what Arte might spend, Trout is holding all the cards. He will get something close to the most Arte could offer, from another club. So if his motivation is being on a winner, Arte needs to make sure we are a winner. 

If Trout simply wants to go back east, there is nothing Arte can do about that.

I lived in SoCal so long (like about 45 of my first 55 years of existence) that I assumed that there would never be a better place to live. I was in So OC. But after traveling around a bit, I can see how the hub bub of SoCal doesnt appeal to many, despite the tremendous weather. It's lost it's appeal to me. I went and visited two years ago and, my God, how will the highways ever accommodate all those homes they are building along the Eastern and Foothill Transportation Corridors. It is insanity. The Valley, the Inland Empire, all along the 405 and most of SD County have been insane for some time.

[Hubs]

2 hours ago, WeatherWonk said:

I disagree. Spending 30 mil more should put us in contention for a WC spot. It would be us, OAK and TBR. OAK needs to completely revamp their entire pitching staff.

Even NYY still have some holes to fill.

Winning the division is out of our reach, IMO. BOS and CLE are shoo-ins, too. 

The Division is not out of the Angels reach. Oakland improved from 75 wins to 97 wins, based mostly on improving their staff, (826 runs allowed in 2017, 674 in 2018) But they also improved their offense by 74 runs.

The Astros could lose two starters, and their offense wasn't that good in 2018.

The Angels don't have as far to go to get to 674 runs allowed or lower, that can be accomplished by adding two reliable starters and cutting some of the poor bullpen performances and injury riddled staff. They do need to add 90-100 runs, though, and that's why they need a catcher, a 1B/RF bench bat,  and return to 2017 form by Upton and Cozart. A breakout performance from Ward or Adell would also greatly help the offense.

But getting from 723 runs allowed to less than 650 is highly likely with a single reliable 200 IP starter. The Angels were among the lowest IP by starting staff, in the majors.  That needs to be corrected.

 

 

[Dtwncbad]

2 minutes ago, Hubs said:

The Division is not out of the Angels reach. Oakland improved from 75 wins to 97 wins, based mostly on improving their staff, (826 runs allowed in 2017, 674 in 2018) But they also improved their offense by 74 runs.

The Astros could lose two starters, and their offense wasn't that good in 2018.

The Angels don't have as far to go to get to 674 runs allowed or lower, that can be accomplished by adding two reliable starters and cutting some of the poor bullpen performances and injury riddled staff. They do need to add 90-100 runs, though, and that's why they need a catcher, a 1B/RF bench bat,  and return to 2017 form by Upton and Cozart. A breakout performance from Ward or Adell would also greatly help the offense.

But getting from 723 runs allowed to less than 650 is highly likely with a single reliable 200 IP starter. The Angels were among the lowest IP by starting staff, in the majors.  That needs to be corrected.

 

 

I agree.  You really never know when a solid, good team suddenly wins way more games more than the previous year and when an elite roster regresses and just doesn't get it done in the win column (bad luck, injuries, some other non-baseball distraction, whatever).

I don't want the Angels to "hold back" on any solutions because they think that move by itself won't ge enough to catch the Astros.

[Docwaukee]

13 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I agree.  You really never know when a solid, good team suddenly wins way more games more than the previous year and when an elite roster regresses and just doesn't get it done in the win column (bad luck, injuries, some other non-baseball distraction, whatever).

I don't want the Angels to "hold back" on any solutions because they think that move by itself won't ge enough to catch the Astros.

Sorry, but 22 win improvements are fools gold unless it's progression from a young core realizing their potential.  2019 improvements need to be sustainable for more than 1 or 2 years.  While anything can happen, what is most likely has to guide your risk management.  

Can you grab guys who have a chance to give you more than expected just in case other teams falter or have bad luck?  sure.  But your long term resources are the real gold.  

[Dtwncbad]

1 minute ago, Dochalo said:

Sorry, but 22 win improvements are fools gold unless it's progression from a young core realizing their potential.  2019 improvements need to be sustainable for more than 1 or 2 years.  While anything can happen, what is most likely has to guide your risk management.  

Can you grab guys who have a chance to give you more than expected just in case other teams falter or have bad luck?  sure.  But your long term resources are the real gold.  

I understand what you are saying but I would stand by saying a 103 win team can absolutely win 89 games the next year and an 80 win team can absolutely win 90.

That's what I am talking about.  I certainly would not assume the Astros will only win 89.  But it is very important when you plan to also not assume they will win 103 again.

The Astros are the class of the division on paper.  But you gotta play the games.

I don't view it as a foregone conclusion that the Astros win 100 again.  I wouldn't be surprised if they did--nobody would.

But the Angels should build a roster to win and then play the games.

 

[Angel Oracle]

2 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

Sounds like they made a little run at Corbin.  I really wanted Corbin.

Not at 6 years/$140 million

[Angel Oracle]

1 hour ago, WeatherWonk said:

Regardless of what Arte might spend, Trout is holding all the cards. He will get something close to the most Arte could offer, from another club. So if his motivation is being on a winner, Arte needs to make sure we are a winner. 

If Trout simply wants to go back east, there is nothing Arte can do about that.

I lived in SoCal so long (like about 45 of my first 55 years of existence) that I assumed that there would never be a better place to live. I was in So OC. But after traveling around a bit, I can see how the hub bub of SoCal doesnt appeal to many, despite the tremendous weather. It's lost it's appeal to me. I went and visited two years ago and, my God, how will the highways ever accommodate all those homes they are building along the Eastern and Foothill Transportation Corridors. It is insanity. The Valley, the Inland Empire, all along the 405 and most of SD County have been insane for some time.

Yep, the only hope is making the 241/133/73/261 into freeways.

But that has two chances of happening!   Zilch and goose egg!

Developers!   Stop building in Orange County!   Just STOP it!

Got it?  Good!!!!

[Dtwncbad]

4 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

Not at 6 years/$140 million

I agree on the right side of my brain.  On the left side, I don't care how much they make.

[Hubs]

I think the 2018 Angels actually under performed.

The team was really unlucky. Then had a terrible 2nd half in the pitching department and the offense didn't step up.

They were 15-27 with a 5.21 ERA in the 2nd half. They went up to 4.93 Runs per game from 4.13.

 

[floplag]

1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

Sorry, but 22 win improvements are fools gold unless it's progression from a young core realizing their potential.  2019 improvements need to be sustainable for more than 1 or 2 years.  While anything can happen, what is most likely has to guide your risk management.  

Can you grab guys who have a chance to give you more than expected just in case other teams falter or have bad luck?  sure.  But your long term resources are the real gold.  

Not 100% true

We under performed out projections last year, a good 5-10 games as i recall.  Going into the season was the consensus was this was an 85-90 win team.   WE also had a myriad of bad luck things happen.   If we just get back to what we were supposed to be that picks up half the ground not even counting additions.  

Oak also sat on a horseshoe all year and blew theirs away, are they likely to repeat that? 

Yes we need a sustainable plan, noones ever said go ham for a one year run, but the thing is it doesnt have to be one or the other, it can be both.  Thats the one thing i dont get why people are so fast to dismiss the short term.