Jonah Keri: The Angels have tweaked their hot stove approach as they try to build a better supporting cast around Mike Trout

[floplag]

5 hours ago, Stradling said:

Ok so with all the red flags about Machado you don’t need hindsight to know it’s an incredibly risky contract.  Hell it wouldn’t be hard to argue that signing Harper is a horrible mistake based on his WAR the last three years and his declining defense.  It would be very easy to see Flop Jr and DT Jr bitching about Arte’s commitment to winning when he doesn’t spend money in five years when the Manny or Harper contracts blow up in their face.  

Do i really need to remind you, again, that i never asked for Harper or Machado in any of my plans?
Not even on the same page as this point i was very clear about preference.  
Wanting him to spend, and wanting him to spend stupid, are NOT the same thing.  
The only thing ive said about it is that we could afford it if we wanted to, nothing more.  

[Docwaukee]

47 minutes ago, GrittyVeterans said:

I get what you’re saying but Pujols didn’t come remotely close to the range of reasonable production for his contract and CJ Wilson came pretty close. Probably needed 40 WAR out of Pujols over the 10 years for it to be reasonable and you aren’t even getting half of that

i don’t think it’s fair to compare

going strictly by the number where WAR is worth about $9m per in free agent dollars, we'd need about 27 WAR.  He was at 14.6 bWAR through his first 5 years.  He had a hugely negative year in 2017 and was minimally positive in 2018.  He's gonna be about halfway short at least.  

Wilson's deal was 5/75 so he needed about 8.3 WAR.  He ended up with a little over half at 5.5 WAR.  

So CJ's contract will end up a bit better than Albert's but still pretty bad.  

[Docwaukee]

6 hours ago, floplag said:

Misguided to me usually refers to the decision at the time, not in hindsight, but no matter.   You are correct everything was shit under him, but not necessarily related or dependent.  Spending on FA doesnt eliminate farm development for example, he borked up on both but not because of one or the other he was just that bad that he managed to do both.
Just my opinion  

when I say he committed any and all resources to the major league club, he did exactly that.  Under his regime, he Angels cut staff dedicated to player development and scouting so there'd be more available dedicated to the major league club.  He also signed free agents that cost draft picks and they put very little into their latin america/intl areas.  Again, so they could spend it at the major league level.  He also traded away anyone of value from the farm and anyone he traded from the major league club went to other major league talent instead of players that needed development.  See Trumbo, Kendrick, Bourjos, Morales, Chatwood, Walden, Jepsen, Callaspo, Conger etc.  Other than a few scrap heap guys, he never traded for anyone who hadn't at least gotten some time in mlb.  

The org direction was absolutely one dimensional.  

[Second Base]

Here we are on page 4 and we're still debating CJ's contract. It's a slow offseason folks. Next thing you know, we'll be debating Shea Hillenbrand vs Steve Finley, or the acting methodologies of Lou Diamond Phillips vs Robert Downey Jr., or God forbid, what the more collars all mistake was, not giving Trout the lifetime extension he wanted, or signing Josh Hamilton. 

Just a lot of stuff that I didn't think anyone wants to talk about. 

Here's fun one to think about....where would the Angels be if Eppler was hired back in 2011, and not Dipoto. Possibly no Albert, no Hamilton, may still have Segura, the farm may have been rebuilt by 2015, the Angels could be coming off of four consecutive playoff appearances and we'd read less about Trout wanting to win and more about when he'll sign that extension that's keeps him an Angel for life. 

[GrittyVeterans]

11 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Here we are on page 4 and we're still debating CJ's contract. It's a slow offseason folks. Next thing you know, we'll be debating Shea Hillenbrand vs Steve Finley, or the acting methodologies of Lou Diamond Phillips vs Robert Downey Jr., or God forbid, what the more collars all mistake was, not giving Trout the lifetime extension he wanted, or signing Josh Hamilton. 

Just a lot of stuff that I didn't think anyone wants to talk about. 

Here's fun one to think about....where would the Angels be if Eppler was hired back in 2011, and not Dipoto. Possibly no Albert, no Hamilton, may still have Segura, the farm may have been rebuilt by 2015, the Angels could be coming off of four consecutive playoff appearances and we'd read less about Trout wanting to win and more about when he'll sign that extension that's keeps him an Angel for life. 

The bottom paragraph is what I can’t agree with fully. Arte was getting Pujols no matter who the GM was and probably Hamilton too. After Kendra broke his leg it became probably a no brainer. He wanted the big splash in the LA market. The true disaster Dipoto engaged in was not ending up with either Yoan Moncada or Vladimir Guerrero Jr(or both). He fucked up BIG TIME there. The drafting is another failure by Dipoto. 

So if Eppler was GM in 2011, we probably still have Albert but we also probably land a top prospect which could have either been flipped for a top flight SP(like Chris Sale) or simply plugged into a hole. The farm system in general would have been stronger likely. 

 

[Dtwncbad]

17 hours ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

.599

I wonder if the Angels could save another couple bucks if they found .599's at some other positions. . . 

[nate]

The sheer number of Angels fans on this board that want the Angels to spend indiscriminately is astonishing, especially in the wake of the Pujols/CJ/Hamilton disasters.

IMO, none of the FA signings by other teams make any sense for the Angels and I am glad they are being smart about it.

[Blarg]

The only upcoming free agent worth signing to a long multi-year contract will be sitting in the Angels dugout starting in spring training. 

[Docwaukee]

8 minutes ago, Blarg said:

The only upcoming free agent worth signing to a long multi-year contract will be sitting in the Angels dugout starting in spring training. 

Scioscia is going to be a special assistant?  

[Stradling]

38 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

Scioscia is going to be a special assistant?  

From your keyboard to God’s ears.  

[Dtwncbad]

20 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Machado has a career .761 OPS on the road. 

I wonder how else we can slice up his numbers to pretend that .297/.367/.538 isn't really that good.

 

[tdawg87]

4 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I wonder how else we can slice up his numbers to pretend that .297/.367/.538 isn't really that good.

 

Well he literally used half his numbers so yeah.

[Dtwncbad]

Just now, tdawg87 said:

Well he literally used half his numbers so yeah.

Machado hits .000 in games he doesn't get a hit.  Concerned.

[Stradling]

Machado is really good every single person on here knows that.  We also know he is an expensive primadona.  Will he be worth the money, who knows.  To me watching him would be like watching a more expensive, more talented version of Escobar.  Super frustrating talent to watch. 

[Dtwncbad]

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Machado is really good every single person on here knows that.  We also know he is an expensive primadona.  Will he be worth the money, who knows.  To me watching him would be like watching a more expensive, more talented version of Escobar.  Super frustrating talent to watch. 

No disagreement.  You never know if ANY signing will be worth the money.  But if you want to aim high and take a crack at landing an MVP caliber player, doing so on a 26 year old that fits your team positional need is about the best you can ask for.

I would enjoy Harper far more than Machado.

Neither is happening and that is absolutely OK.  I just don't like nonsense reasons why it cant or shouldn't happen.

Machado is an extremely good fit for what the team needs offensively.  So it is a little fun to think about.

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Dtwncbad said:

No disagreement.  You never know if ANY signing will be worth the money.  But if you want to aim high and take a crack at landing an MVP caliber player, doing so on a 26 year old that fits your team positional need is about the best you can ask for.

I would enjoy Harper far more than Machado.

Neither is happening and that is absolutely OK.  I just don't like nonsense reasons why it cant or shouldn't happen.

Machado is an extremely good fit for what the team needs offensively.  So it is a little fun to think about.

The only reason they need is it completely ruins the payroll going forward.  Combined with Trout and Upton and Albert it is simply a bad decision to spend that much on 4-5 players.  

[Dtwncbad]

7 minutes ago, Stradling said:

The only reason they need is it completely ruins the payroll going forward.  Combined with Trout and Upton and Albert it is simply a bad decision to spend that much on 4-5 players.  

So don't sign a superstar because then you wont be able to afford to sign a superstar?

The farm looks like it will be able to feed the MLB roster with inexpensive players going forward, Pujols money will fall off, and the luxury tax threshold will continue to go up.

Not saying it isn't work for the GM to adjust some pieces going forward but the notion that it isn't feasible is just incorrect.

I really would like to see the Angels continue to be wholly committed to having an excellent farm and part of the value of that success is that you will be able to land players like Harper or Machado.

To me it isn't one or the other.  The magic is how having the excellent farm allows you to make a move like Machado or Harper.

[tdawg87]

41 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Machado hits .000 in games he doesn't get a hit.  Concerned.

....what?

[Jeff Fletcher]

44 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I wonder how else we can slice up his numbers to pretend that .297/.367/.538 isn't really that good.

 

I just don’t believe Machado is a good investment. Period. 

His career outside of the bandbox of Camden Yards, plus his makeup issues, lead to me to believe I’d rather not invest $300+ million in him. 

He had to be on his best behavior for just 3 months, and he couldn’t do it. Now if he was putting up Mike Trout numbers every year, I might not care, but what if he’s just a .280/.360/.450 guy? Is it worth it? 

To me? No.

 

[Dtwncbad]

3 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I just don’t believe Machado is a good investment. Period. 

His career outside of the bandbox of Camden Yards, plus his makeup issues, lead to me to believe I’d rather not invest $300+ million in him. 

He had to be on his best behavior for just 3 months, and he couldn’t do it. Now if he was putting up Mike Trout numbers every year, I might not care, but what if he’s just a .280/.360/.450 guy? Is it worth it? 

To me? No.

 

I get it.  I think he is pretty douchey and immature.  But that's also the easy narrative right now.  But I also think he is pretty damn good baseball player, a potential game changer every at bat, and potentially entering some of his best years.

Lets just say I would not be surprised at all if in 10 years this board is full of "we should have signed Machado" posts.

[Stradling]

25 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I get it.  I think he is pretty douchey and immature.  But that's also the easy narrative right now.  But I also think he is pretty damn good baseball player, a potential game changer every at bat, and potentially entering some of his best years.

Lets just say I would not be surprised at all if in 10 years this board is full of "we should have signed Machado" posts.

Yep and in ten years I’ll be calling it revisionist history like I am with Beltre.   

[Inside Pitch]

2 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

I wonder how else we can slice up his numbers to pretend that .297/.367/.538 isn't really that good.

Yes, because pointing out his performance in more than half his at bats in a neutral setting is cherry picking....   

For his career, Machado has an ops+ of 121.  Tim Salmon finished his career at 128 was at 132 through age 25 albeit half the games...   ARod at the point of his career was at 138.   Giancarlo Stanton... Dude was at 144 when he got his 325 mil extension...   The difference is NOT insignificant.

Spoiler

Omg those numbers are bigger than Manny's!!!!!!111!!!!

So, yeah, that batting line isn't that great....

Edited December 25, 2018 by Inside Pitch

[Dtwncbad]

20 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Yes, because pointing out his performance in more than half his at bats in a neutral setting is cherry picking....   

For his career, Machado has an ops+ of 121.  Tim Salmon finished his career at 128 was at 132 through age 25 albeit half the games...   ARod at the point of his career was at 138.   Giancarlo Stanton... Dude was at 144 when he got his 325 mil extension...   The difference is NOT insignificant.

  Reveal hidden contents

Omg those numbers are bigger than Manny's!!!!!!111!!!!

So, yeah, that batting line isn't that great....

I won't argue that he is better than ARod.  No shame in that.

The comparisons to the others?  Uh, did you forget he pays 3B (and SS)?

Show me Stanton playing third and then I will gladly listen to how Machado isn't as good offesively as Stanton.

[jessecrall]

I doubt doubt that Machado will be a valuable, 5-6 WAR player for the next few seasons. But what about after? That's where the "Johnny Hustle" and makeup issues come in. Will he work hard to maintain his abilities even as age slows him down? Do you want to spend $30 million a year on a 32-year-old Machado, particularly if he's a douchebag who antagonizes opposing players and engages in bizarre and even violent antics that turn off fans? Jeff's point about him needing to be on his best behavior for all of 3 months and not pulling it off is a good one; what's he gonna be like when he's already got the money? 

[Inside Pitch]

2 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

I won't argue that he is better than ARod.  No shame in that.

The comparisons to the others?  Uh, did you forget he pays 3B (and SS)?

Show me Stanton playing third and then I will gladly listen to how Machado isn't as good offesively as Stanton.

His negative 1.2 WAR at SS this year argues he doesn't play SS -- so that gap between him and AROD is even bigger but we both agree that's not any sort of indictment.  He's been a great 3B, no doubt -- but not so great as to make up the 20+% difference in offense between him and the most recent 300 million dollar guy.   So, while Stanton doesn't play 3B, he also isn't known for dogging it, playing dirty or being an all around asshole -- not sure those things should be ignored.

FWIW, I don't disagree there is greater value in his being able to play 3B, but your argument might be better served comparing each of those players to their peers at their respective positions and not to each other  -- in both cases the assumption is you're trying to get value above the league average at the position.   AL 3B averaged an OPS of .755 .vs .770 for RFers last year...   So, go ahead and try to argue that offensive gap between them isn't significant -- but it is.   Now if you want to argue that defense is worth that much, I haven't given it enough thought to have a non ignorant opinion.

Back to my motivation for initially responding..  Disregarding the neutral park data when a guy plays in an offensively charged park is purposely blinding oneself to facts.   Trying to paint that as an anything other than an attempt to shed some light on the player was weak.

Edited December 25, 2018 by Inside Pitch