Eppler Polls

[kevinb]

Just now, IIIII said:

I kinda feel like we're the Memphis Grizzlies the last 5 years. Just kind of there. Not good enough to really compete but not bad enough to be one of the worst teams in the league and get a great draft pick. 

Didn’t Memphis get the 2nd pick in the draft?

[IIIII]

2 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

Didn’t Memphis get the 2nd pick in the draft?

Not Memphis this year but how they largely have been since 01. Everybody knew they didn't have a chance at contention but they were also not bad (most years). Maybe the Blazers are a better comparison. Just slightly above middle of the road which is one of the worst places to be in sports. I believe in the full tank or all in philosophy that's become prominent in every sport.  

[kevinb]

30 minutes ago, IIIII said:

Not Memphis this year but how they largely have been since 01. Everybody knew they didn't have a chance at contention but they were also not bad (most years). Maybe the Blazers are a better comparison. Just slightly above middle of the road which is one of the worst places to be in sports. I believe in the full tank or all in philosophy that's become prominent in every sport.  

I agree I would rather be all and go for first then to middle around and finish 3rd or 4th. Similarly I’d rather be dead last than finish 3rd or fourth. It does nothing for me personally to watch a team just be mediocre. 

[IIIII]

49 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

I agree I would rather be all and go for first then to middle around and finish 3rd or 4th. Similarly I’d rather be dead last than finish 3rd or fourth. It does nothing for me personally to watch a team just be mediocre. 

Yeah that's the main point I was getting at. Our current position leads to disappointment because there is some level of expectation. 

[GrittyVeterans]

I'm okay with giving him one more offseason, but if you have a repeat of this past offseason, he needs to go. The results this year are not in line with where we should be in our "rebuild" process to me. 

If it doesn't start to turn around by year 5 of his rebuild, then it's time to go.

[aznhockeyguy]

That's the thing with rebuilds, the other teams that did rebuilds, their GMs were allowed to lose and lose a lot for 3-4 years.  Eppler hasn't been afforaded this luxury and yet he's been able to rebuild the farm system to a respectable level, while improving the MLB roster incrementally. 

[Stradling]

16 minutes ago, aznhockeyguy said:

That's the thing with rebuilds, the other teams that did rebuilds, their GMs were allowed to lose and lose a lot for 3-4 years.  Eppler hasn't been afforaded this luxury and yet he's been able to rebuild the farm system to a respectable level, while improving the MLB roster incrementally. 

Right he wasn’t allowed to trade Trout.  

[Docwaukee]

his start on the 2020 season with Stassi is not a good start.   He doesn't look too capable so far.  Too early to draw any conclusions, but not a good first impression.  

[aznhockeyguy]

6 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Right he wasn’t allowed to trade Trout.  

I wouldn't trade him either

[2112]

My take is that Eppler has improved the team given the abhorrent amount of injuries in an organization with little depth. 

If the Angel's move away from Eppler, it will mean another 3 to 5 years of building from another GM.  Might as well stay with him.  It would be nice to have a 500 record this year, but I'm less and less optimistic of that happening. 

[VariousCrap]

I voted 70% and one more year.  IMO, the Angels need to be a playoff team in 2020.

 

 

[Stradling]

No it shouldn’t.  

[Angel Oracle]

20 hours ago, Dochalo said:

his start on the 2020 season with Stassi is not a good start.   He doesn't look too capable so far.  Too early to draw any conclusions, but not a good first impression.  

Hitting wise yes, but as far as the behind the plate work, it probably takes time to get acclimated to a new set of pitchers? 

[kevinb]

22 hours ago, 2112 said:

My take is that Eppler has improved the team given the abhorrent amount of injuries in an organization with little depth. 

If the Angel's move away from Eppler, it will mean another 3 to 5 years of building from another GM.  Might as well stay with him.  It would be nice to have a 500 record this year, but I'm less and less optimistic of that happening. 

I don't understand this logic? So if it takes Eppler 6 years to make the playoffs? If we hire a new it's going to take him the same amount of time? It looks like most people on the board are willing to give Eppler 1 more year to make the playoffs. I am in the same boat. No one can be given 6 plus years to make the playoffs. Heck I know it's a different sport but the GM of the Buffalo terrible Bills got them to the playoffs after an 18 year drought after two years. 

[Troll Daddy]

As far as I know Eppler doesn’t have a job next season until the Angels pickup his option.?

@Jeff Fletcher

[angelsnationtalk]

I gave Eppler a 70% and a 1 year window. Next year we should be competing for the Wild Card and if we fall short then I think there will be some serious questions to be asked. We can all admit he’s brilliant with the farm system and trades, however some free agent signings are head scratchers. I still believe he gave us a 1 year window as well with all the 1 years signings we did this year. I think he know things will change heading into 2020 and I’m excited but optimistic.

[AngelsFaninGA]

He's doing a great job and he's trying hard. He gets all the time he needs. 

[Erstad Grit]

He has done very well assembling a bull pen with a minimal budget.

FA signings have been horrendous. 

Some nice trades. 

Ohtani and Trout deserves credit.

If he gets Cole and another 2/3 type SP this is a good team. 

[Jeff Fletcher]

3 hours ago, Troll Daddy said:

As far as I know Eppler doesn’t have a job next season until the Angels pickup his option.?

@Jeff Fletcher

That’s correct. However, I expect them to pick it up (if they haven’t already).

They picked up Dipoto’s option without telling anyone. 

[totdprods]

I’d still like to think that Eppler’s FA signings were less about the players ability to be good at a safe level, and more about the possibility of them turning into high-value deadline trade pieces, and from the optics side, to prop up pre-season casual fan interest.

Signing Matt Harvey gives off a much better impression to Joe Schmo than Wade Miley. Cody Allen returned to form brings back a much better July haul than Daniel Hudson.

Now, I’m not saying Eppler specifically targeted these FA for just those reasons alone, just simply that potential trade value and name recognition had weight in the calculus, especially if the internal plan is all about the rebuild, developing the youth, and sticking to a 2020+ timeline. If they’re deadset on a specific date and a specific plan and have $35m to burn on FAs in the meantime, why not go after guys like Cahill, Harvey, Allen, and Lucroy? It’d be like finding a $20 outside a gas station and dropping it on one of those insane $20 scratch-offs with horrible odds on a huge payout. The odds of making back that $20 are pretty much nil, but it’s not your money and if you do win, you win big.

Now, I can see how that approach to FA could be a bit lazy or reckless or a missed opportunity, but we don’t know the internal workings or plans of the org. They’re not working with infinite time and resources. All of that might be focused on bettering the minor league coaching staffs and scouting. It might be the reason they found Jo Adell, or traded for Adrian Rondon, or got the solid results from almost all guys on the A/A+ pitching staffs. It might be figuring out who else they could apply Reed’s Calhoun voodoo too (La Stella) instead of figuring out which $6m-$11m vet arm is going to be best, when they know that asset will be here only briefly anyways. Maybe it’s focusing intently on players who might be available one or two years out in trade, free agency, or waivers, and gathering info and recommendations on prime talent that could become available when the real window of contention has kicked in.

Or maybe they’ve just had bad luck. Either way, to me, it’s been crystal clear for a couple seasons now that we’ve been in an intense rebuild that the FO has tried to mask as a WC contender, and that there would be a focus on building a good, sustainable, young, cheap team for the length of Trout’s next contract. Those marks seem to be getting met, so 80% and two years.

Edited August 8, 2019 by totdprods

[WeaverFever]

1 hour ago, totdprods said:

I’d still like to think that Eppler’s FA signings were less about the players ability to be good at a safe level, and more about the possibility of them turning into high-value deadline trade pieces, and from the optics side, to prop up pre-season casual fan interest.

Signing Matt Harvey gives off a much better impression to Joe Schmo than Wade Miley. Cody Allen returned to form brings back a much better July haul than Daniel Hudson.

Now, I’m not saying Eppler specifically targeted these FA for just those reasons alone, just simply that potential trade value and name recognition had weight in the calculus, especially if the internal plan is all about the rebuild, developing the youth, and sticking to a 2020+ timeline. If they’re deadset on a specific date and a specific plan and have $35m to burn on FAs in the meantime, why not go after guys like Cahill, Harvey, Allen, and Lucroy? It’d be like finding a $20 outside a gas station and dropping it on one of those insane $20 scratch-offs with horrible odds on a huge payout. The odds of making back that $20 are pretty much nil, but it’s not your money and if you do win, you win big.

Now, I can see how that approach to FA could be a bit lazy or reckless or a missed opportunity, but we don’t know the internal workings or plans of the org. They’re not working with infinite time and resources. All of that might be focused on bettering the minor league coaching staffs and scouting. It might be the reason they found Jo Adell, or traded for Adrian Rondon, or got the solid results from almost all guys on the A/A+ pitching staffs. It might be figuring out who else they could apply Reed’s Calhoun voodoo too (La Stella) instead of figuring out which $6m-$11m vet arm is going to be best, when they know that asset will be here only briefly anyways. Maybe it’s focusing intently on players who might be available one or two years out in trade, free agency, or waivers, and gathering info and recommendations on prime talent that could become available when the real window of contention has kicked in.

Or maybe they’ve just had bad luck. Either way, to me, it’s been crystal clear for a couple seasons now that we’re been in an intense rebuild that the FO has tried to mask as a WC contender, and that there would be a focus on building a good, sustainable, young, cheap team for the length of Trout’s next contract. Those marks seem to be getting met, so 80% and two years.

I think this is a relatively thought out assumption. There were many posters on here that thought the same when these guys were signed. To get these guys traded in July. I for one am just getting impatient. To me, it doesn’t matter what guys we sign as long as we win. Why can’t we go the Twins model? Where a slight retool/rebuild puts them into first place in less than a year. I know, I know, you can’t target Nelson Cruz when you already have Albert Pujols... Bummer!!! 

[totdprods]

1 minute ago, WeaverFever said:

I think this is a relatively thought out assumption. There were many posters on here that thought the same when these guys were signed. That was get these guys traded in July. I for one am just getting impatient. It doesn’t matter what guys we sign as long as we win. Why can’t we go the Twins model? Where a slight retool/rebuild puts them into first place in less than a year. I know, I know, you can’t target Nelson Cruz when you already have Albert Pujols... bummer!!! 

I'd actually say the Twins followed a pretty similar plan to the Angels. Relied on a lot of middling/rebound vets (Schoop, Cron, Odorizzi, Gonzalez,  Perez) on top of a good core, but they stayed healthy, and it doesn't hurt that the AL Central is also pretty weak.

[WeaverFever]

36 minutes ago, totdprods said:

I'd actually say the Twins followed a pretty similar plan to the Angels. Relied on a lot of middling/rebound vets (Schoop, Cron, Odorizzi, Gonzalez,  Perez) on top of a good core, but they stayed healthy, and it doesn't hurt that the AL Central is also pretty weak.

Their signings worked out... ours didn’t. It happens. I just hope next year is our year. 

[totdprods]

12 minutes ago, WeaverFever said:

Their signings worked out... ours didn’t. It happens. I just hope next year is our year. 

Yup. I also voted for two years, because I actually think the Angels are ahead of schedule. I really don't think Eppler went into the '17-'18 offseason expecting his '19 rotation would already feature three guys who started the previous year in A+ (Canning, Suarez, Sandoval) and one (Barria) only one year further year removed. I don't think he expected Adell to reach AAA after 190 games. I doubt he saw Rengifo or Fletcher producing at an average level so quickly. It's fair to assume that if everyone had been healthy the last two years, we'd just now be seeing Jaime Barria making his MLB debut, and Canning, Suarez, and Sandoval would be in AA/AAA tightening up still. Injuries to the MLB club really sped up some timelines.

Considering that, there are a lot of things that have gone right for this team - it's just really hard to see given how dramatically things have gone wrong. And because I doubt Eppler expected his 2019 team to be basically one year early, it wouldn't surprise me if he still sticks to the The Plan for one more year before really pushing things. I think 2020, for a couple years now, has been the target year for when most of this talent would actually start making their debuts, not '18-'19.

So the question is, does he feel this youth movement has shown enough to go all in this offseason? Or does he want to stick to the plan and give them the extra year of MLB experience before charging forward?

Edited August 8, 2019 by totdprods

[Jay]

3 minutes ago, totdprods said:

So the question is, does he feel this youth movement has shown enough to go all in this offseason? Or does he want to stick to the plan and give them the extra year of MLB experience before charging forward?

I wonder what Eppler promised Trout?

All in in 2020?

or 2021?

or...?