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

Is the 'Arte Factor' a concern?


Docwaukee

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, WeatherWonk said:

I am worried that what we are experiencing is a Reverse Arte Factor, based on these horrible signings. He's become gun shy, even with regards to  mid-level signings that wont hamstring us;  the way the aforementioned signings did.

And, based on what ratings services have written about our farm system, he is navigating the waters of ownership in new territory. It is an enticing Siren;  the song of cost-controlled talent from within.

They extended Upton. They gave Cozart a decent amount of money. What do you consider mid-level signings? 

I think the reason we're "gunshy" is because Arte has always operated to a certain budget...always..that hasn't changed. Right now our payroll is pretty high..so we can't throw as much money to any player we want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, floplag said:

If hes frustrated he has no reason to be as his limited budget is part of the reason we are where we are.  He had to know what kind of GM Eppler was when he hired him and what his plan would be.  

The news and impression around us are extremely unclear and contradictory.  Well spend for the right players, but we have a limited budget.  Were looking at trades more than FA, but were not going to hurt the development of the farm.   Our priority is pitching, yet we havent signed one and let some go?    I think its pretty clear this off season has not gone as they hoped it would to date.  Keeping it close to the vest is one thing, confusing the hell out of everyone is another.   Being involved in talks doesn't show anything when you are 15-20% lower than the winners.   Is actually winning at the ML level on the short term a priority at all? 

Its just my opinion but I think the players are picking up on that making us a far less attractive destination at least until we know if Trout is staying or not.   If we cant win with him it seems, who wants to come here and be left with the aftermath if he leaves.  I think that might be hurting us the most.  If we cant win with him, who wants to come here and get stuck with the aftermath.  Whatever is going to happen with that, needs to get done like, yesterday.   I get you might have to wait on Harper/Machado to finalize the money but damn, say something to get that concern off the table.     



The Angels have supposedly made four offers to FA SP's and those players chose other teams.  What else can he do?  You can't force a player to sign.  There is still plenty of time for Eppler to get things done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, VariousCrap said:



The Angels have supposedly made four offers to FA SP's and those players chose other teams.  What else can he do?  You can't force a player to sign.  There is still plenty of time for Eppler to get things done.

Offers that were 15-20% lower than others, at least in the case of Happ.. does that even count?   you could offer 25$ and a lifetime supply of Del Taco at the I-5 location just to say you made offers, but were they realistic?  
I dont know what the others were maybe they were more in line but at this point we are in my opinion simply not an attractive destination and will have to overpay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, floplag said:

Offers that were 15-20% lower than others, at least in the case of Happ.. does that even count?   you could offer 25$ and a lifetime supply of Del Taco at the I-5 location just to say you made offers, but were they realistic?  


Do you actually think Happ deserved the contract he got?  If the Yanks or other teams are willing to overpay for players, what can you do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, VariousCrap said:


Do you actually think Happ deserved the contract he got?  If the Yanks or other teams are willing to overpay for players, what can you do?

No, not at all, but whether or not he "deserved" it is meaningless.  Very few players actually deserve their FA contracts.   We need at least 2 SP as we sit right now, 2 good ones if we plan to actually compete and the list of ones that are available is getting smaller.   Im a little more worried about whether this team deserves to win over someone else monopoly money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, floplag said:

No, not at all, but whether or not he "deserved" it is meaningless.  Very few players actually deserve their FA contracts.   We need at least 2 SP as we sit right now, 2 good ones if we plan to actually compete and the list of ones that are available is getting smaller.   Im a little more worried about whether this team deserves to win over someone else monopoly money. 


They have to make Kikuchi a priority and sign him.  They simply have to.  After that, they can perhaps trade for another starter or look to one of the remaining free agents.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Meaningless?  Ok.  So offer the most despite whether or not the player is worth it.   

You know as well as i do what a player is worth or what they deserve and what they get rarely match.  Look at Harper and Machado, anyone really think either of them deserve north of 300M?  i sure dont.  

Has any of the top FA this off season gotten what they deserved versus what it took to sign them?  Almost everyone i can think of was north of that.   Only one that was about right off the top of my head was Suzuki maybe. 

Im not suggesting i would have liked the deal or that we should have done it, only that suggesting we made legitimate offers is kinda not true when it was nearly a 20% difference.   Thats an awful large variance to consider legitimate.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, hangin n wangin said:

They extended Upton. They gave Cozart a decent amount of money. What do you consider mid-level signings? 

I think the reason we're "gunshy" is because Arte has always operated to a certain budget...always..that hasn't changed. Right now our payroll is pretty high..so we can't throw as much money to any player we want.

You think our payroll is HIGH right now?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, WeatherWonk said:

You think our payroll is HIGH right now?

 

Well, I mean, relative to what Arte's yearly budget for the team is and the fact that we are trying to build the right team around Trout, yea....

By that I mean, I think the team is trying to avoid giving out Pujols type contracts.

Also, whether people want to admit it or not, Pujols' contract hurts..... So yea, I think payroll is an issue. Relative to our glaring position weaknesses and the fact that we still have the guys that will get their arbitration money, I would say it's on the higher side. I would like to know why you disagree. We don't just throw money around like the Dodgers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, floplag said:

You know as well as i do what a player is worth or what they deserve and what they get rarely match.  Look at Harper and Machado, anyone really think either of them deserve north of 300M?  i sure dont.  

Has any of the top FA this off season gotten what they deserved versus what it took to sign them?  Almost everyone i can think of was north of that.   Only one that was about right off the top of my head was Suzuki maybe. 

Im not suggesting i would have liked the deal or that we should have done it, only that suggesting we made legitimate offers is kinda not true when it was nearly a 20% difference.   Thats an awful large variance to consider legitimate.  

So then why be critical of Eppler for choosing to not openly overpaying guys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ettin said:

So based on your other posts @Dochalo I can see where your head is at right now which is we appear to have missed out on a series of free agent pitchers (Corbin, Eovaldi, and Happ) and and are now left with a bare kitchen cabinet and it appears we don't have enough resources to fill it up with all the food we need to serve Christmas dinner.

To be frank I think your concerns are legitimate on some level but I also think that there is still a lot of off-season left and there is enough low-hanging fruit in the trade market to still fill the cabinet without breaking the farm system.

The CBT threshold is just an artificial construct that I think we often concern ourselves unnecessarily about. Moreno has exceeded it one time for a very minor amount. He can do so again and the penalty will not be that much if he does not exceed the $226M or even $246M mark over a two year period. My point about this latter comment is that I don't think Arte is afraid to go over the $206M by a modest amount (I am thinking upwards to the $226 amount - somewhere in between).

Which again makes me come back to what can we do still and I think there is still a LOT of off-season left to improve the team. If we lost a prospect like Brandon Marsh (because we have Adell and Jordyn Adams to replace Calhoun and Upton respectively) or Jose Suarez (because we have Patrick Sandoval and Nate Smith to replace him) would we really be in bad shape by making a couple of trades for starters and perhaps a catcher and then use the extra space for a Trout extension and perhaps a reliever?

Sonny Gray for a couple of low-level prospects? Robbie Ray and Alex Avila in exchange for Brandon Marsh and Leonardo Rivas? Jose Urena in exchange for Jose Soriano and a couple of low-level prospects? Grab Jedd Gyorko for a couple of mid-tier prospects? Shore up the bullpen by signing a reliever like Ottavino, Soria, Robertson, Clippard, or Miller for example? Most of that would cost about $35M give or take?

There is plenty of time left to improve in my opinion. Yes Moreno might intervene but we can do nothing about that and it may be a good thing not a bad one. Machado and Harper are both very talented players and a contract with one or more early opt-outs (or insurance) vastly decreases our exposure and risk. Signing either one would keep us under the $226 CBT Tier 1 level (about $215M or so) and would only result in a $2M-3M tax penalty for 2019. That is not much in the scheme of baseball team payroll numbers.

I don't think they go there to be honest based on Eppler's comments and I am fine with that. Some of those moves above would be great and would make us competitive without destroying our future (Adell, Canning, Sandoval, Rengifo, Adams, Madero, et al).

Let's get closer to Spring Training and see where we are at.

you the man and I love the stuff you write, but you've mentioned a bunch of moves that would make me throw up in my mouth.  Plus, any mention of Arte over the threshold isn't worth us even talking about.  Adding Harper or Machado at some of the numbers you've mentioned would be a death sentence financially if we also kept Trout at the number you've talked about.  

And that's my biggest concern.  We do a bunch of the above and Arte sticks to his budget.  Plus we thin the farm system out considerable and end up where we were 3 years ago with a 2 year window of possible.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Stradling said:

So then why be critical of Eppler for choosing to not openly overpaying guys. 

Im not actually criticizing anyone at this point aside from pointing out that coming in second third fourth whatever and being 20% off the mark isnt really in the mix as much as people want to give it credit for in my opinion.   They talked, exchanged numbers, in the end were not close. 
At some point however were going to need to do something considering we still need a rotation for 19.  Anyone that is an actual upgrade to give us a chance to compete, will likely have some degree of overpay attached.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, floplag said:

Im not actually criticizing anyone at this point aside from pointing out that coming in second third fourth whatever and being 20% off the mark isnt really in the mix as much as people want to give it credit for in my opinion.   They talked, exchanged numbers, in the end were not close. 
At some point however were going to need to do something considering we still need a rotation for 19.  Anyone that is an actual upgrade to give us a chance to compete, will likely have some degree of overpay attached.  

you do understand that the final number isn't the first number right?  It's called a negotiation.  Yanks and Halos probably started out pretty similar.  Yanks come over the top which would require us to go over the top of that.  Something we weren't willing to do.  Would it make you feel better if we lost out with the same bid?  The number is irrelevant.  

If the halos were also at $140 mil for Corbin it actually wouldn't instill confidence but make me question their sanity.  It actually makes me feel better that we aren't trying to out bid some of the other teams.  

You also have to know when the other side is using you as a pawn to get more money from the team they really want to be with.  

We were in.  If we thought we could obtain the player and it made sense to do so, we would have bid more.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

you the man and I love the stuff you write, but you've mentioned a bunch of moves that would make me throw up in my mouth.  Plus, any mention of Arte over the threshold isn't worth us even talking about.  Adding Harper or Machado at some of the numbers you've mentioned would be a death sentence financially if we also kept Trout at the number you've talked about.  

And that's my biggest concern.  We do a bunch of the above and Arte sticks to his budget.  Plus we thin the farm system out considerable and end up where we were 3 years ago with a 2 year window of possible.  

See but that is my point: The number is not life-threatening if you provide the opt-outs and pay more money up front in the first 1-3 years. Heck, add insurance. You will make it almost impossible for the player to not choose to leave. But everyone keeps focusing on the $400M number rather than the short-term hiring of a superstar free agent. Again I expressed that this is unlikely to happen, it is one avenue among many avenues, I am not advocating it, just discussing it.

Throw up in your mouth? Really? The only real loss in that scenario is Brandon Marsh (a personal favorite of mine by the way). If your goal is extending Trout, then Adell takes over right field and Jordyn Adams (or Brandon Marsh, you pick) takes over in left field when Upton's time is done. The damage you speak of to our farm system is mitigated by the current depth of said farm system.

Also talking about Moreno going over the threshold is just as arbitrarily speculative as discussing his involvement or lack thereof in player acquisition, so if that isn't worth talking about neither is the latter.

You know I love you Jason and you have my deepest respect. Personally, at this moment in time, I think I am still seeing the glass half-full. That could certainly change when we hit the end of February one way or the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, floplag said:

Im not actually criticizing anyone at this point aside from pointing out that coming in second third fourth whatever and being 20% off the mark isnt really in the mix as much as people want to give it credit for in my opinion.   They talked, exchanged numbers, in the end were not close. 
At some point however were going to need to do something considering we still need a rotation for 19.  Anyone that is an actual upgrade to give us a chance to compete, will likely have some degree of overpay attached.  

There is a discipline involved in this process that Eppler must follow or we end up spending a lot of money for on-field product that doesn't move the needle enough to matter.

This is why @Dochalo is concerned right now because our rotation needs work and good solutions are falling off the board at pretty hefty prices (which was to be expected in this heavy open payroll environment). Do you chase the shiny objects or stick to your game plan? That is the conundrum the team is in right now.

We are right on the cusp of accelerating into real competitiveness but Billy has to be careful here of what resources he applies where. A really wrong move can set this whole process back while a really good one can push it forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lou said:

one thing a lot of you fail to realize is that when you give out a contract to a player that includes opt-out provisions you must do so with he assumption that he won't exercise them. 

exactly.  an opt-out is for the player.  It actually creates an additional layer of uncertainty for the team.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ettin said:

Do you chase the shiny objects or stick to your game plan? 

if you're a good businessman and trust the people you have hired to run your company, you stick to your game plan. doing otherwise gets you guys like Pujols and Hamilton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Lou said:

still wrong. 

Like it or not, Arte is running a business. If what you claim is true, then you can't ever complain about a player's salary. 

I didn't claim anything other than this business is a free market.  You want the player you pay the price, merit isnt the issue.   Most players in this game are grossly overpayed as a result. 

 

11 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

you do understand that the final number isn't the first number right?  It's called a negotiation.  Yanks and Halos probably started out pretty similar.  Yanks come over the top which would require us to go over the top of that.  Something we weren't willing to do.  Would it make you feel better if we lost out with the same bid?  The number is irrelevant.  

If the halos were also at $140 mil for Corbin it actually wouldn't instill confidence but make me question their sanity.  It actually makes me feel better that we aren't trying to out bid some of the other teams.  

You also have to know when the other side is using you as a pawn to get more money from the team they really want to be with.  

We were in.  If we thought we could obtain the player and it made sense to do so, we would have bid more.   

Very aware thank you but yes, losing with the same bid is different in my opinion. 
If he chooses someone else due to better chance to win or be close to home or whatever that a very different scenario than choosing them as we were significantly under price.  
Im not suggesting they didnt make an effort only that they reached a point they decided not to pass.  Probably fiscally correct in truth but the reality is that we still have holes to fill and the upgrades are coming off the board quick.

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...