If Trout was already extended to a 10 year deal. . .

[Dtwncbad]

How would you want this offseason to be different, or what would you want the team to do now in January if Trout signed a ten year extension?

It is at least conceivable that Trout inks a deal right after Machado and Harper sign.  If that happened before any other free agents signed, what would you want the Angels to do?

[Angel Oracle]

Approach Simba next about extending.   Both he and Trout are generational talents at their respective positions.

Obviously, Trout is the more overall talented player.   Simba is an infield leader, a generational defensive player, and an already emerging offense talent.   

[Stradling]

Kinda what they’d doing now.  Basically not hamstring the team going forward and wait for the farm to be ready to produce.  Oh and if you can buy out Albert ok.  

[CDiaz27?]

Pujols should give Trout the remainder of his contract 

[Docwaukee]

Extending Simba, Skaggs, and Heaney.  Otherwise, nothing different.  

My plan for the rest of the off season would be to take a chance on a couple of high end relievers on 1yr deals.  I would grab any top guy that would accept such.  Maybe like Greg Holland and Ryan Madson.  Or any other 1yr player that could help for this year yet would be worth something in trade at the deadline.  

 

[floplag]

If Trout was already extended i think a lot more people might be willing to buy into the patience plan knowing he was on board with it  

[Stradling]

I can’t imagine Trout isn’t on board with it.  If any of us ran a business and had a guy like Trout you’d clue him in on your plan.  If he wasn’t on board you’d either change that plan or trade him.   Since we would do that you’d have to assume Arte or Eppler has done just that.   These aren’t stupid guys.  

[Docwaukee]

7 minutes ago, floplag said:

If Trout was already extended i think a lot more people might be willing to buy into the patience plan knowing he was on board with it  

maybe that's the big difference.  

those with confidence a Trout extension will get done vs. those who are nervous about it.  

to me, the path is the same either way so even if we don't sign him long term, I like the direction.  

[Dtwncbad]

10 minutes ago, floplag said:

If Trout was already extended i think a lot more people might be willing to buy into the patience plan knowing he was on board with it  

Conversely would more people be open to splurging a little on a free agent today to be better in the interim, given that the Trout expense would be known?

[floplag]

3 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I can’t imagine Trout isn’t on board with it.  If any of us ran a business and had a guy like Trout you’d clue him in on your plan.  If he wasn’t on board you’d either change that plan or trade him.   Since we would do that you’d have to assume Arte or Eppler has done just that.   These aren’t stupid guys.  

Perhaps, but i also think we see what we want to see. 
I dont think a decision has been made till it is known what Harper/Machado might get to know if its a feasable thing. 

[floplag]

7 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

maybe that's the big difference.  

those with confidence a Trout extension will get done vs. those who are nervous about it.  

to me, the path is the same either way so even if we don't sign him long term, I like the direction.  

If the plan is the same either way then whether or not he buys into it is moot. 

[floplag]

5 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Conversely would more people be open to splurging a little on a free agent today to be better in the interim, given that the Trout expense would be known?

Good question.  I think most would say no that back the patience plan exclusively whereas those of us that would prefer a more aggressive approach would still say yes.   
Im not sure it would matter in that regard on the short term for 19 or 20.  

[Angel Oracle]

29 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

Extending Simba, Skaggs, and Heaney.  Otherwise, nothing different.  

My plan for the rest of the off season would be to take a chance on a couple of high end relievers on 1yr deals.  I would grab any top guy that would accept such.  Maybe like Greg Holland and Ryan Madson.  Or any other 1yr player that could help for this year yet would be worth something in trade at the deadline.  

 

Agreed, except part of me wants to wait a year on Skaggs, unless he is willing to extend at the Halos offer.   Still concerned about his durability 

Otherwise, at least add an experienced and solid enough late innings guy, of which zero exists currently for the Halos. 

[Stradling]

6 minutes ago, floplag said:

Perhaps, but i also think we see what we want to see. 
I dont think a decision has been made till it is known what Harper/Machado might get to know if its a feasable thing. 

Well it isn’t about seeing what we want when it comes to common sense and leadership.  Also if we are waiting to see what those two get then we should all be happy because I think the prices won’t be the crazy numbers people were throwing around earlier.  

[Second Base]

Teams with a good core typically win and then become very expensive, and win a little more, before becoming old and overpaid. The Angels have built a strong core, with Trout, Ohtani, Upton, Simmons at the plate and Ohtani, Heaney and Skaggs on the mound. Eventually, Canning and Barria may join. 

The unfortunate part is that this group has been inexpensive during an era of expensive contracts like Pujols and Hamilton. The Angels really just haven't had much money to play with.

The very best thing the Angels can do right now, is extend the entire core if thy can. Extend Trout, Simmons, Heaney, Skaggs, then wait a couple years and extend Ohtani. Those, combined Upton's contract, won't make the Angels any more expensive than they already are. Those costs will largely be offset by Pujols' retirement and Cozart and Calhoun going elsewhere, which opens up 50+ million annually.

From there, the plan is simple. Grow as much internal talent as possible to create a young, athletic and inexpensive team. And by the time those prospects like Adell, Canning, Marsh, Jones, Thaiss, Maitan, Knowles, Adams and Jackson  are all ready to be extended, the previous extensions signed will be expiring, hopefully with ththe exception of Trout and Ohtani, which will create a perpetually competitive team that always has a little money to spend in free agency when the right players come along. 

[floplag]

8 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Well it isn’t about seeing what we want when it comes to common sense and leadership.  Also if we are waiting to see what those two get then we should all be happy because I think the prices won’t be the crazy numbers people were throwing around earlier.  

It does when people differ on the definitions of those terms as it pertains to this club.  
I do agree that they arent likely to get what the early estimates suggested at this point however if even the Yanks have started to move on from Manny. 

[Docwaukee]

you can't be held hostage by a single player.  This isn't the NBA.  

that said, there is no doubt that the Angel's though process for the future has Trout in mind.  But you don't sacrifice the future.  

the Angels have made a decision on how to proceed.  I would like to think that there have been discussions with Mike and his representation about whether that fits with their process as well.  

Shame on both sides if there hasn't been proper communication one way or another.  If the Angels haven't had meaningful discussions with Mike, then it's their own fault if they lose him.  

[Angelsjunky]

Oh, and try to figure out who Stradling's next Opponent of the Day is.

[Docwaukee]

2 minutes ago, floplag said:

It does when people differ on the definitions of those terms as it pertains to this club.  
I do agree that they arent likely to get what the early estimates suggested at this point however if even the Yanks have started to move on from Manny. 

as in maybe we should get involved?  

[floplag]

2 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

as in maybe we should get involved?  

Moot, not in the budget.
But to answer the question before the non answer becomes something silly... no, thats not what i meant.  Unless it falls to about half the early rumors, which it wont, hes never been part of any of my plans/hopes.

[Lou]

6 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

If the Angels haven't had meaningful discussions with Mike, then it's their own fault if they lose him.  

Mike has to want these discussions to occur, too. 

it's a two-way street 

[Stradling]

14 minutes ago, floplag said:

It does when people differ on the definitions of those terms as it pertains to this club.  
I do agree that they arent likely to get what the early estimates suggested at this point however if even the Yanks have started to move on from Manny. 

The Yankees haven’t moved on from Manny.  At least I have no indication they have.  You aren’t interested in Manny, sign Tulo and then move on from Manny, not when he’s still available. 

[floplag]

Just now, Stradling said:

The Yankees haven’t moved on from Manny.  At least I have no indication they have.  You aren’t interested in Manny, sign Tulo and then move on from Manny, not when he’s still available. 

They did sign Tulo.  I cant imagine Tulo signing there to be a backup.   
Gregorius is out part of the year of course but unless they find a taker for Andujar where are 3 guys playing 2 spots by the time hes back?  Add Manny thats 4.    Unless they have a number of moves in the works that certainly looks like a move on.  They could i suppose force Stanton back into the OF full time and leverage DH for him more and bump one of the other OF but they dont seem wild about him defensively having gotten twice the at bats at DH than the OF last year. 

[Docwaukee]

6 minutes ago, Lou said:

Mike has to want these discussions to occur, too. 

it's a two-way street 

exactly.  you have to gauge interest.  the team can't just sit and wait for Mike to come to them.  If either side is waiting for the other and nothing happens because of it, that dumb.  

If you go to Mike and he's not interested, or says not right now then you have to find out when.  

[Docwaukee]

2 minutes ago, floplag said:

They did sign Tulo.  I cant imagine Tulo signing there to be a backup.   
Gregorius is out part of the year of course but unless they find a taker for Andujar where are 3 guys playing 2 spots by the time hes back?  Add Manny thats 4.    Unless they have a number of moves in the works that certainly looks like a move on.  They could i suppose force Stanton back into the OF full time and leverage DH for him more and bump one of the other OF but they dont seem wild about him defensively having gotten twice the at bats at DH than the OF last year. 

They're offering Tulo at least half a season's worth of SS.  Gregorius is out till mid year plus rehab.