Questions about the assumed 30-million budget

[Chuck]

Has Arte or Eppler publicly said this is all they will spend or is this assumed from his spending the past 2-3 offseasons?  #YachtFuel

If we really offered Corbin, Eovaldi and Ramos competitive offers but they elected to stay on the east coast, wouldn't that have put us over the 30 million mark if we signed all 3, including Bour?

Is Arte adamant about not exceeding the luxury tax, even if it means signing or trading for the right players in an effort to win NOW and long term? 

How does Trout's future contract come into play here? Is Arte back loading that after Pujols' contract is up?

[Lou]

we would never have signed all 3.  one (or two) of the offers would have been pulled as soon as one player agreed to a deal. 

[UndertheHalo]

Honestly, I don’t believe that they aggressively pursued any of the guys you mentioned Chuck.  I think Arte won’t open up the purse strings much more then he already has until the team on the field demonstrates some ability to compete in the offseason.  IMO that’s what the “right player” talk has always been about.  

Edited December 29, 2018 by UndertheHalo

[tdawg87]

Mike Trout is the right player.

[Stradling]

4 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

Mike Trout is the right player.

Yep. 

[Stradling]

36 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

Honestly, I don’t believe that they aggressively pursued any of the guys you mentioned Chuck.  I think Arte won’t open up the purse strings much more then he already has until the team on the field demonstrates some ability to compete in the offseason.  IMO that’s what the “right player” talk has always been about.  

We have no idea if they did or not so whether you think they did or think they didn’t probably has more to do with your personal opinion on the direction of the team.  There were reports saying we offered 3 years and $45 million for Eovaldi and a report saying we offered Ramos what he actually signed for with the Mets.  If you believe the Ramos report then I’d call that aggressive since it’s what he actually signed for.   But that’s my defenition as I’m prone to trust this process. 

[UndertheHalo]

Just about everything everyone on here says is an opinion.  

I think that what we’ve seen is that they don’t want to make any long term commitments and that they don’t want to trade anything off the farm.  As far as the contracts, it is what it is.  Most FA will always be associated with risks.   I’m not judging whether they’re doing the right thing or not.  Like I said yesterday.  Probably, our best non Machado fit was Ramos.  And that didn’t work out.  I appreciate that they apparently made an offer equal to the Mets.  As you said, how we define “aggresssive” is probably different.  It’s possible also that Ramos was never going to come out to the west coast.  

We just don’t know.  I tend to think that if they Angels made him an offer he had probably indicated he would be willing to play for them.  Tho, it’s possible that he was playing them to drive up his price.  Who knows.  Anyway, he signed a pretty reasonable deal and they didn’t get him.  So for me it tends to make me think that they didn’t go that hard after him. 

I am happy they got Harvey.  I wanted him.  But that’s a deal that I wouldn’t consider significant. 

And Trouts our guy.  Of course he’s the right player.  We’ll see if he signs.  I still tend to think that he will. 

[Stradling]

To keep the discussion going if two clubs value the player at pretty much the same dollar amount which is what the Mets and Angels did why would you try to outbid what you think the player is worth?  These are the things that get ball clubs in trouble.  We don’t know what the offer would have to be to get him to come out west.  To you and me presumably $1 million is a lot of money, but to Ramos it probably isn’t.  So would that deal have to be $12 million a year for two years?  Or would it have to be an extra year at $9 million?  I don’t know, but with a guy that has knee surgery more than once and is a catcher, adding an extra year sounds like a bad idea.  

Now my belief and it has been stated on here before, I believe Eppler views the catcher position like a lot of us do in fantasy baseball.  If you don’t have one of the top guys, then the rest are relatively the same, so why not grab one each year until you have the chance to solve it long term.  

[AngelsLakersFan]

3 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

Has Arte or Eppler publicly said this is all they will spend or is this assumed from his spending the past 2-3 offseasons?  #YachtFuel

If we really offered Corbin, Eovaldi and Ramos competitive offers but they elected to stay on the east coast, wouldn't that have put us over the 30 million mark if we signed all 3, including Bour?

Is Arte adamant about not exceeding the luxury tax, even if it means signing or trading for the right players in an effort to win NOW and long term? 

How does Trout's future contract come into play here? Is Arte back loading that after Pujols' contract is up?

It has more to do with watching how the Angels have operated the last several years. In general they tend to stay around the same budgetary number. For a long time that number was the luxury tax limit, but the tax threshold has gone up and the Angels budget seems to have staid the same. In years past, when the team was well below the number they have ended their offseason by spending foolishly - the Vernon Wells trade comes to mind. Meanwhile, in years where they were already at their budget limits yet have huge holes they went into the season with those holes. I'm specifically referring to the Josh Hamilton situation. We didn't sign Upton until the Hamilton contract was off the books, and before that we filled those holes with a series of players on their way out of baseball making league minimum.

[Lou]

don't most teams stay around the same budgetary number in general? 

in fact, most big money teams have lowered payrolls lately. 

[Docwaukee]

3 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

Has Arte or Eppler publicly said this is all they will spend or is this assumed from his spending the past 2-3 offseasons?  #YachtFuel

If we really offered Corbin, Eovaldi and Ramos competitive offers but they elected to stay on the east coast, wouldn't that have put us over the 30 million mark if we signed all 3, including Bour?

Is Arte adamant about not exceeding the luxury tax, even if it means signing or trading for the right players in an effort to win NOW and long term? 

How does Trout's future contract come into play here? Is Arte back loading that after Pujols' contract is up?

@Jeff Fletcher mentioned that it's not (and I think he said it's never been) about the lux tax number but about the true payroll number.  With benefits, we are still about $40m below the tax threshold. 

Arte has said in the past that he'd go over the threshold for the 'right player', but I've always interpreted that as the 'right situation'.  Meaning that if the team ever gets to the point where one or two more players make us championship caliber, then he'll go for it.  

I agree we were never going to sign Corbin, Eovaldi and Ramos.   It could easily have been Corbin, Cahill, Ramos, Bour.  Corbin is actually making 13m in 2019.  Cahill 9m, Ramos 7m and bour 2.5m.  That's 31.5.  We'd still potentially have some dough left if we had done this.  

Fletch has also said that he thinks it's more important to Trout that the team will good during his extension than before it and I agree with this.  

I have maintained that they are positioning for a run starting in 2021/22.  I think Albert's last year will be 2020 (just a hunch) and his 2021 money will get deferred in order to clear some space.  Trout and Simmons will sign extensions and 2022 will be Upton's final year.  

Arte has spent to keep the team competitive the last three years and entering year four of the master plan.  Some of the reasoning behind that is multi-factorial is my guess.  To keep Trout happy.  To maintain fan interest and support.  To make at least a small to modest effort to win because he likes to win.  

Our true shortcomings the last three years have been pitching injuries.  We've never had enough talent to win the division, but we have had enough to grab a wild card spot and we do again for 2019.    

[Stradling]

Great post @Dochalo

[angelsnationtalk]

4 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

Has Arte or Eppler publicly said this is all they will spend or is this assumed from his spending the past 2-3 offseasons?  #YachtFuel

If we really offered Corbin, Eovaldi and Ramos competitive offers but they elected to stay on the east coast, wouldn't that have put us over the 30 million mark if we signed all 3, including Bour?

Is Arte adamant about not exceeding the luxury tax, even if it means signing or trading for the right players in an effort to win NOW and long term? 

How does Trout's future contract come into play here? Is Arte back loading that after Pujols' contract is up?

In earlier posts from this off-season I've been pushing for Arte to bust out the bank and win now. I'm starting to think that with all these 1 year deals, that the Angels want to have a low-risk mediocre season with a small chance of picking up a wildcard spot. As much as I hate to see this for Trout (and gosh I think it's so sad), I do believe that 2020 could be the year of the beginning of a dynasty team.

With that said, Trout could be looking for how the Angels will look for the next 10 seasons and not for the next two. That will make him want to sign a new deal.

[Lou]

I think we have more than a small chance to win a WC spot. 

[angelsnationtalk]

34 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

@Jeff Fletcher mentioned that it's not (and I think he said it's never been) about the lux tax number but about the true payroll number.  With benefits, we are still about $40m below the tax threshold. 

Arte has said in the past that he'd go over the threshold for the 'right player', but I've always interpreted that as the 'right situation'.  Meaning that if the team ever gets to the point where one or two more players make us championship caliber, then he'll go for it.  

I agree we were never going to sign Corbin, Eovaldi and Ramos.   It could easily have been Corbin, Cahill, Ramos, Bour.  Corbin is actually making 13m in 2019.  Cahill 9m, Ramos 7m and bour 2.5m.  That's 31.5.  We'd still potentially have some dough left if we had done this.  

Fletch has also said that he thinks it's more important to Trout that the team will good during his extension than before it and I agree with this.  

I have maintained that they are positioning for a run starting in 2021/22.  I think Albert's last year will be 2020 (just a hunch) and his 2021 money will get deferred in order to clear some space.  Trout and Simmons will sign extensions and 2022 will be Upton's final year.  

Arte has spent to keep the team competitive the last three years and entering year four of the master plan.  Some of the reasoning behind that is multi-factorial is my guess.  To keep Trout happy.  To maintain fan interest and support.  To make at least a small to modest effort to win because he likes to win.  

Our true shortcomings the last three years have been pitching injuries.  We've never had enough talent to win the division, but we have had enough to grab a wild card spot and we do again for 2019.    

I agree. Personally I think it starts in 2020. I think this could be Pujols' last season as well as Cozart. I think Calhoun, if not traded before the season, Could be delt at the deadline once we realize we won't make the playoffs and Adell (hopefully) gets called up.

Come 2020 the Cozart trade makes sense because we will have Rengifo and Fletcher as well as Jones knocking on the door. They will all compete for a second base spot if we strike a deal with Simba.

Clearing up the salary of Pujols, Cozart and Calhoun leaves up with cash to spend.

 

[floplag]

The only player from that list we were confirmed to have made a competitive offer was Ramos.   The offer we might have made to the rest didnt come out so we really dont know how close it was. 

As for the rest... the leap of faith some of you are willing to take is impressive, but the facts dont support it in my opinion.  

[jessecrall]

Ideally, most of the Canning-Suarez-Jones-Rengifo-Fletcher-Sandoval-Adell-Marsh prospect collection come up and show an ability to be big league regulars by the end of 2020, at which point, you have enough contributors under team control that you CAN break the bank for multiple people (Trout and Simmons extensions, signing Gerrit Cole or Arenado, trading surplus talent for a catcher, etc). I'm sure Eppler's just waiting for the farm to really come to fruition at a big league level before he risks long-term expenditures. Cole and Arenado are both OC products who would presumably show an interest playing for the Angels if they're competitive both on the field and in salary negotiations. You win 85 games this year and have minor leaguers coming up and making noise in the 2nd half, you're gonna appear real enticing for guys looking for 5+ year deals. 

[Stradling]

21 minutes ago, floplag said:

The only player from that list we were confirmed to have made a competitive offer was Ramos.   The offer we might have made to the rest didnt come out so we really dont know how close it was. 

As for the rest... the leap of faith some of you are willing to take is impressive, but the facts dont support it in my opinion.  

 

3 hours ago, Stradling said:

We have no idea if they did or not so whether you think they did or think they didn’t probably has more to do with your personal opinion on the direction of the team.  There were reports saying we offered 3 years and $45 million for Eovaldi and a report saying we offered Ramos what he actually signed for with the Mets.  If you believe the Ramos report then I’d call that aggressive since it’s what he actually signed for.   But that’s my defenition as I’m prone to trust this process. 

 

[angelsnationtalk]

14 minutes ago, jessecrall said:

Ideally, most of the Canning-Suarez-Jones-Rengifo-Fletcher-Sandoval-Adell-Marsh prospect collection come up and show an ability to be big league regulars by the end of 2020, at which point, you have enough contributors under team control that you CAN break the bank for multiple people (Trout and Simmons extensions, signing Gerrit Cole or Arenado, trading surplus talent for a catcher, etc). I'm sure Eppler's just waiting for the farm to really come to fruition at a big league level before he risks long-term expenditures. Cole and Arenado are both OC products who would presumably show an interest playing for the Angels if they're competitive both on the field and in salary negotiations. You win 85 games this year and have minor leaguers coming up and making noise in the 2nd half, you're gonna appear real enticing for guys looking for 5+ year deals. 

Completely agree. Having the young cost-controlled talent really allows us to, as Eppler puts it, grow from within and use our financial might to supplement the holes. Arenado is someone to keep an eye on if he becomes a FA. Trading for a catcher would work with whoever is moveable between Fletcher, Rengifo, Jones, Ward and likely a starter.

[Docwaukee]

6 minutes ago, floplag said:

The only player from that list we were confirmed to have made a competitive offer was Ramos.   The offer we might have made to the rest didnt come out so we really dont know how close it was. 

As for the rest... the leap of faith some of you are willing to take is impressive, but the facts dont support it in my opinion.  

what facts?  you have facts from the future?  

the future is uncertain no matter what your plan is in the present.  

If you want to call support of what the team is doing a leap of faith in order to make it seem like it's rubbing a rabbits foot and hanging horseshoes then go ahead.  But the route that Eppler and the team has chosen is a well tested way to build a winner.  

you can go back and cite your narrative about now and that it would only take money to make things better, but that's not reality.  

 

[floplag]

21 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

what facts?  you have facts from the future?  

the future is uncertain no matter what your plan is in the present.  

If you want to call support of what the team is doing a leap of faith in order to make it seem like it's rubbing a rabbits foot and hanging horseshoes then go ahead.  But the route that Eppler and the team has chosen is a well tested way to build a winner.  

you can go back and cite your narrative about now and that it would only take money to make things better, but that's not reality.  

 

There is no such thing as facts from the future as you well know, but there are projections, estimates, trends... all stuff we talk about regarding guys we like or dont like in the bigs but which you seem to want to ignore when it comes to the kids on the farm.

The facts as we sit today are that our farm is rated somewhere between 10-12th and has fewer quality prospects than most above us including 2 in our own division already above us in the standings.  This is not debatable.  Yes, it is possible some may outpace them, some may develop and improve that fate but as of today the facts are as stated until such time as that happens.   Thats not knocking them or belittling them, most will be decent regulars, but there is a large gap between decent regulars and stars. 

Right now we have multiple stars to build around and are choosing not to do that.   Today, if we intended to compete now on the short term between now and this glorious date when the stars align in the future spending IS the only way to fix is as the farm isnt ready to contribute at significant levels.   That is as real as it gets. 

[jessecrall]

@floplag But Houston just won 103 games (with a 109 win pythag) because they have a ton of "decent regulars." They had 4 guys put up between 5-7 WAR, 2 of which they developed (Bregman & Altuve) and 2 for whom they traded (Verlander & Cole). Beyond that, Charlie Morton was their best player at 3.5 WAR. They won because they had a lot of decent starting players, good relievers, bench guys who were solid...the Angels gave a ton of innings and at bats to sub-replacement level players and below average regulars. The Astros didn't. If Jahmai Jones, Jose Suarez, Brandon Marsh and Patrick Sandoval become 2-3 WAR guys under team control and Adell and Canning are little better, that's great. That's the foundation of a contender with Trout, Simmons & Ohtani at the top. You don't need these guys to all become stars. If they did, the Angels would win 120 games a year.

[Stradling]

44 minutes ago, floplag said:

There is no such thing as facts from the future as you well know, but there are projections, estimates, trends... all stuff we talk about regarding guys we like or dont like in the bigs but which you seem to want to ignore when it comes to the kids on the farm.

The facts as we sit today are that our farm is rated somewhere between 10-12th and has fewer quality prospects than most above us including 2 in our own division already above us in the standings.  This is not debatable.  Yes, it is possible some may outpace them, some may develop and improve that fate but as of today the facts are as stated until such time as that happens.   Thats not knocking them or belittling them, most will be decent regulars, but there is a large gap between decent regulars and stars. 

Right now we have multiple stars to build around and are choosing not to do that.   Today, if we intended to compete now on the short term between now and this glorious date when the stars align in the future spending IS the only way to fix is as the farm isnt ready to contribute at significant levels.   That is as real as it gets. 

Yes they are building around them by building the farm.  I’d still love to see which free agents they could sign this off season that would put us on the same level as Houston.  I mean I guess if we signed Harper, Machado, Corbin and Kimbrel and then traded for Realmuto we’d compete.  It would only add about $100 million a year to the payroll. 

 You like to ignore the fact that we have twice as many mid level prospects than Houston.   So while they have two possible potential stars and we have one (as they are currently rated) we also have twice as many of the prospects rated just below that, which means we have twice the chance they do of having others making the next step and joining Adell or Forest as a top prospect.  Those also give us twice the chance to create major league average players at minimal costs, thus allowing more money to pay for premium free agent talent.   Doc or maybe it was IP has mentioned this to you but you have ignored it because it doesn’t fit your doomsday narrative.  

[Hubs]

3 hours ago, angelsnationtalk said:

I agree. Personally I think it starts in 2020. I think this could be Pujols' last season as well as Cozart. I think Calhoun, if not traded before the season, Could be delt at the deadline once we realize we won't make the playoffs and Adell (hopefully) gets called up.

Come 2020 the Cozart trade makes sense because we will have Rengifo and Fletcher as well as Jones knocking on the door. They will all compete for a second base spot if we strike a deal with Simba.

Clearing up the salary of Pujols, Cozart and Calhoun leaves up with cash to spend.

 

Contracts are guaranteed in MLB. We won’t be able to deal Pujols nor will we be able to deal Cozarts last year unless he hits like he did in 2017 and then why move him? 

None of the prospects you mentioned have proven anything in MLB.

Calhoun could even be back if the exercise his option for 2020 if he hits and Adell isnt quite ready to take over yet.

[Lou]

54 minutes ago, floplag said:

There is no such thing as facts from the future 

incorrect.

"Wonk will post something incredibly stupid in the future"

Fact.