Angels Off-season Prediction Thread

[Angelsjunky]

2 hours ago, Revad said:

I know how desperate we are for pitching but I’m not trading Adell and Marsh both.

I don't want them to trade both, or either really, but am just going on the idea that they do. I don't think they will trade both, but maybe one if they can get a Musgrove type.

[Second Base]

I don't predict they'll trade either of them.

1. Adell is a cornerstone you build around so in real life, it's a bad idea to trade those guys.

2. Adell's value probably took a hit because he clearly wasn't ready last year.

3. Minasian understands this isn't just a game of numbers or strategy. These are real people and Marsh and Adell really are close off the field. It's unhealthy for psyche, and could create a sense of narcissism or even cynicism to break up a pair like that. Of course it's a business but those two would do better flanking Trout than playing against one another. 

4. The Angels have started getting Marsh reps at 1B and that's a great idea. Yes, he's a great defensive outfielder, like Cody Bellinger is a good defensive 1B. But to get the bat in the lineup, sometimes you have to play different spots. So there is some sort of remote possibility that the long-term defensive alignment could be Trout in LF, Adams in CF, Adell in RF and Marsh at 1B.

5. The Angels have other commodities they could trade and still get value back without sacrificing Marsh and Adell, it just takes a bit of creativity. Rengifo, Barreto, Thaiss, Ward, Barria and Sandoval specifically could be used to acquire pitching.

6. Although I like him the best out of all of them, Minasian may feel like Jordyn Adams is expendable and swaps him for pitching.

7. Maybe Minasian likes the depth Eppler but and feels like he can build a contender through free agency without sacrificing his prospect stock that he inherited.

[Stradling]

1 hour ago, Second Base said:

I don't predict they'll trade either of them.

1. Adell is a cornerstone you build around so in real life, it's a bad idea to trade those guys.

2. Adell's value probably took a hit because he clearly wasn't ready last year.

3. Minasian understands this isn't just a game of numbers or strategy. These are real people and Marsh and Adell really are close off the field. It's unhealthy for psyche, and could create a sense of narcissism or even cynicism to break up a pair like that. Of course it's a business but those two would do better flanking Trout than playing against one another. 

4. The Angels have started getting Marsh reps at 1B and that's a great idea. Yes, he's a great defensive outfielder, like Cody Bellinger is a good defensive 1B. But to get the bat in the lineup, sometimes you have to play different spots. So there is some sort of remote possibility that the long-term defensive alignment could be Trout in LF, Adams in CF, Adell in RF and Marsh at 1B.

5. The Angels have other commodities they could trade and still get value back without sacrificing Marsh and Adell, it just takes a bit of creativity. Rengifo, Barreto, Thaiss, Ward, Barria and Sandoval specifically could be used to acquire pitching.

6. Although I like him the best out of all of them, Minasian may feel like Jordyn Adams is expendable and swaps him for pitching.

7. Maybe Minasian likes the depth Eppler but and feels like he can build a contender through free agency without sacrificing his prospect stock that he inherited.

Except all of those combined don’t get you as much as Adell.  

[Pancake Bear]

4 hours ago, Second Base said:

5. The Angels have other commodities they could trade and still get value back without sacrificing Marsh and Adell, it just takes a bit of creativity. Rengifo, Barreto, Thaiss, Ward, Barria and Sandoval specifically could be used to acquire pitching.

That's what Eppler did and mostly struck out. People whining about signing a guy like Happ: That would be about what you'd expect for The Scotty Creativity Special. Mediocrity the most likely scenario. Bad, the second most likely. 

[Second Base]

1 hour ago, Pancake Bear said:

That's what Eppler did and mostly struck out. People whining about signing a guy like Happ: That would be about what you'd expect for The Scotty Creativity Special. Mediocrity the most likely scenario. Bad, the second most likely. 

The Angels are on a budget, I think you might need to adjust your expectations on the route of pitchers the Angels will bring in. 

I think an example of creativity would be last year's trade that got nixed. Dealing Rengifo and a non-top 10 prospect would've landed them Joc and Ross Stripling. Clearly those guys weren't as good as they normally would've been. But at the time, it was finding a team that needed salary relief willing to deal a starting OF and a solid #4 starter for a couple of solid but not great prospects that fit their system. Another one that didn't work out but showed some creativity was dealing Hector Santiago for Ricky Nolasco and Alex Meyer. 

Nolasco was just an inning-eater, the prize was Meyer, a top pitching prospect they got for cheap. He finally turned a corner when his arm gave out. But again, creative. 

I figure they could probably find something intriguing asking those lines. Not saying it's necessarily the answer as much as I think it could be a better option for the backend of the rotation than dealing our two best prospects on Adell and Marsh.

[tdawg87]

I hope we can land an impact starter without trading anything we don't want to trade.

[Pancake Bear]

58 minutes ago, Second Base said:

The Angels are on a budget, I think you might need to adjust your expectations on the route of pitchers the Angels will bring in. 

We were talking about trades. I only mentioned Happ as a comparison in regards to the quality of guy you're going to get for what you suggested trading.

Unless you're saying Adell would only bring in a mediocre pitcher (like, on the level of a Happ), in which case I disagree.

Otherwise, trading has next to nothing to do with a budget.

[Docwaukee]

3 hours ago, Pancake Bear said:

That's what Eppler did and mostly struck out. People whining about signing a guy like Happ: That would be about what you'd expect for The Scotty Creativity Special. Mediocrity the most likely scenario. Bad, the second most likely. 

It's actually what most GM's do.  The good ones are just better at it.  Most guys with a pulse can sign a guy for 200+ mil or gut their farm for a top guy.  That's usually pretty obvious once you decide to do it.  

It's all the rest of the stuff that really matters.  The little stuff.  

Ironically enough, the Braves actually had starting pitching that was as bad as the halos in 2020.  By most accounts it was actually worse.  Their defense was just about as bad.  And their offense was only a couple wins better.  Their pen was a shade better by WAR and FIP but a full run better by ERA.  

The two teams really weren't that different.  In fact, I personally don't feel like the Braves had more talent than the Angels.  Yet they finished 9 games better.  Was it luck?  Honestly, I have no idea.  

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

On 11/19/2020 at 5:47 AM, Stradling said:

I just can’t see us adding the payroll to acquire all those guys. Darvish, Oddorizzi, Wong, Joc,  Melancon, Suzuki?  That’s gotta be $50-60 million added to the payroll.  
 

 

Just for one year, Pujols comes off the books next year saving $25M. That $25M is really money down the toilet one more year.

[Pancake Bear]

2 hours ago, Dochalo said:

It's actually what most GM's do.  The good ones are just better at it.  Most guys with a pulse can sign a guy for 200+ mil or gut their farm for a top guy.  That's usually pretty obvious once you decide to do it.  

 

My point that I was trying to make (which seems to have gotten lost multiple times - that's on me) was not about Eppler's skill at finding clean peanuts relative to other GM's, but rather that when you trade (or spend) meh, you generally get what you pay for.

If they're unwilling to trade Adell/Marsh, their chances of improving pitching from last year are probably dubious. If they want an impact arm, they have a better shot by actually investing trade capital or money into it. Whether they will remains to be seen. But trading guys like those listed below probably nets you very little. 

11 hours ago, Second Base said:

Rengifo, Barreto, Thaiss, Ward, Barria and Sandoval

I'm personally fine with trading any of them at this point. We have three shots at outfield with Adell, Marsh, and Adams - we should be moving one or more of them to acquire pitching if at all possible. Maybe they just aren't worth enough to pry a good pitcher away from anyone else. 

Incidentally, a better strategy this year might be to build an elite pen, especially of long relief, given that virtually everyone's innings were down this year, meaning that there probably won't be many pitchers going over 150 innings in 2021 (assuming there even is a full season), let alone 175 or 200. 

[DMVol]

9 hours ago, Dochalo said:

It's actually what most GM's do.  The good ones are just better at it.  Most guys with a pulse can sign a guy for 200+ mil or gut their farm for a top guy.  That's usually pretty obvious once you decide to do it.  

It's all the rest of the stuff that really matters.  The little stuff.  

Ironically enough, the Braves actually had starting pitching that was as bad as the halos in 2020.  By most accounts it was actually worse.  Their defense was just about as bad.  And their offense was only a couple wins better.  Their pen was a shade better by WAR and FIP but a full run better by ERA.  

The two teams really weren't that different.  In fact, I personally don't feel like the Braves had more talent than the Angels.  Yet they finished 9 games better.  Was it luck?  Honestly, I have no idea.  

Actually, their pitching held together pretty well after they lost their best starter, Soroka....Pretty impressive that, after losing their ace, they had enough organizational depth to get them through the season....Anderson was called up and was lights out, Fried stepped up as their #1 after Soroka went down....pitching was good in the playoffs (except for one really bad loss to the Dodgers)....they beat Bauer 1-0...they’ve impressed me with some low cost signings in the last few years...Anibal Sanchez was a steal in 2018...He wasn't as cheap as Sanchez but Keuchel was a good signing in 2019..He was kind of hot and cold, and they ultimately let him go, but I think they had the right idea in trading for Gausman in 2018....I like how they put together a bullpen at the trading deadline last year....and they damn sure knew when to get rid of Teheran....a whole lot better plan than Harvey, Cahill, Allen and Teheran....let’s hope Minasian was a key in some of those decisions and can repeat that with the Angels...

....

[Warfarin]

13 hours ago, Second Base said:

I don't predict they'll trade either of them.

1. Adell is a cornerstone you build around so in real life, it's a bad idea to trade those guys.

2. Adell's value probably took a hit because he clearly wasn't ready last year.

3. Minasian understands this isn't just a game of numbers or strategy. These are real people and Marsh and Adell really are close off the field. It's unhealthy for psyche, and could create a sense of narcissism or even cynicism to break up a pair like that. Of course it's a business but those two would do better flanking Trout than playing against one another. 

4. The Angels have started getting Marsh reps at 1B and that's a great idea. Yes, he's a great defensive outfielder, like Cody Bellinger is a good defensive 1B. But to get the bat in the lineup, sometimes you have to play different spots. So there is some sort of remote possibility that the long-term defensive alignment could be Trout in LF, Adams in CF, Adell in RF and Marsh at 1B.

5. The Angels have other commodities they could trade and still get value back without sacrificing Marsh and Adell, it just takes a bit of creativity. Rengifo, Barreto, Thaiss, Ward, Barria and Sandoval specifically could be used to acquire pitching.

6. Although I like him the best out of all of them, Minasian may feel like Jordyn Adams is expendable and swaps him for pitching.

7. Maybe Minasian likes the depth Eppler but and feels like he can build a contender through free agency without sacrificing his prospect stock that he inherited.

I appreciate the sentiment and do feel Adell, Marsh, and Adams all have very strong MLB futures ahead of them.  Ideally, I'd like to keep them all and find creative ways to have them all play.

But all of that said, between Trout, Adell, Marsh, Adams (not to mention Upton) .. we do appear to have a LOT of OF talent.  Sure, we can. keep them, or alternatively, we can use one of them to get a SP, which is an area we definitely need more help.

I've been on the "trade Adell for a legit stud SP prospect" bandwagon because even though Adell's debut fell flat, he is a top 10 prospect in the sport, and likely most FOs see the immense talent.  He can, very likely, secure a young #2-type SP prospect.  I would NOT trade Adell for someone like Musgrove, who only has 2 years of control left, but rather for someone like Pleasac (who has 5 years) or Manning, Mize, etc (6 years).

It is the easiest and quickest way to infuse SP talent on a team that likely needs a good amount of it.  If we trade Adell for one of those guys (Pleasac, Manning, Mize), and in turn either trade a few lower-tier prospects for someone like Musgrove or use most of our available $$ resources to sign Bauer, then our rotation suddenly has Bauer, Bundy, one of Pleasac/Manning/Mize, Heaney, and Canning - and that's a clear playoff team, IMO.

A successful offseason could be simply trading Adell for one of those guys (or some deal like Ruiz/Gonsolin, which would give us an SP3 + stud catching prospect ready to play), signing Bauer (25mil/yr), signing May (2/12), then using the same approach he did to find Schebler to help patch up 2B (find cost-controlled, cheap option).  

[Revad]

1 hour ago, Warfarin said:

I appreciate the sentiment and do feel Adell, Marsh, and Adams all have very strong MLB futures ahead of them.  Ideally, I'd like to keep them all and find creative ways to have them all play.

But all of that said, between Trout, Adell, Marsh, Adams (not to mention Upton) .. we do appear to have a LOT of OF talent.  Sure, we can. keep them, or alternatively, we can use one of them to get a SP, which is an area we definitely need more help.

I've been on the "trade Adell for a legit stud SP prospect" bandwagon because even though Adell's debut fell flat, he is a top 10 prospect in the sport, and likely most FOs see the immense talent.  He can, very likely, secure a young #2-type SP prospect.  I would NOT trade Adell for someone like Musgrove, who only has 2 years of control left, but rather for someone like Pleasac (who has 5 years) or Manning, Mize, etc (6 years).

It is the easiest and quickest way to infuse SP talent on a team that likely needs a good amount of it.  If we trade Adell for one of those guys (Pleasac, Manning, Mize), and in turn either trade a few lower-tier prospects for someone like Musgrove or use most of our available $$ resources to sign Bauer, then our rotation suddenly has Bauer, Bundy, one of Pleasac/Manning/Mize, Heaney, and Canning - and that's a clear playoff team, IMO.

A successful offseason could be simply trading Adell for one of those guys (or some deal like Ruiz/Gonsolin, which would give us an SP3 + stud catching prospect ready to play), signing Bauer (25mil/yr), signing May (2/12), then using the same approach he did to find Schebler to help patch up 2B (find cost-controlled, cheap option).  

Yes that makes sense but weigh it against the cost, one or two of our best prospects that have a better chance of any young pitcher at success.  And we’ll need both of Adell and Marsh by next year.

Edited November 22, 2020 by Revad

[Warfarin]

18 minutes ago, Revad said:

Yes that makes sense but weigh it against the cost, one or two of our best prospects that have a better chance of any young pitcher at success.  And we’ll need both of Adell and Marsh by next year.

I would definitely not trade them both for sure, but I'd likely trade one of them.  I say Adell because:

1.  He has the most value, which means he can fetch the best possible cost-controlled pitcher

2.  He's a RHH, and given we have two RHH stalwarts for years to come (Trout, Rendon), it'd be ideal to keep the LHH power hitter to provide some degree of lineup balance.

[Second Base]

2 hours ago, Warfarin said:

I appreciate the sentiment and do feel Adell, Marsh, and Adams all have very strong MLB futures ahead of them.  Ideally, I'd like to keep them all and find creative ways to have them all play.

But all of that said, between Trout, Adell, Marsh, Adams (not to mention Upton) .. we do appear to have a LOT of OF talent.  Sure, we can. keep them, or alternatively, we can use one of them to get a SP, which is an area we definitely need more help.

I've been on the "trade Adell for a legit stud SP prospect" bandwagon because even though Adell's debut fell flat, he is a top 10 prospect in the sport, and likely most FOs see the immense talent.  He can, very likely, secure a young #2-type SP prospect.  I would NOT trade Adell for someone like Musgrove, who only has 2 years of control left, but rather for someone like Pleasac (who has 5 years) or Manning, Mize, etc (6 years).

It is the easiest and quickest way to infuse SP talent on a team that likely needs a good amount of it.  If we trade Adell for one of those guys (Pleasac, Manning, Mize), and in turn either trade a few lower-tier prospects for someone like Musgrove or use most of our available $$ resources to sign Bauer, then our rotation suddenly has Bauer, Bundy, one of Pleasac/Manning/Mize, Heaney, and Canning - and that's a clear playoff team, IMO.

A successful offseason could be simply trading Adell for one of those guys (or some deal like Ruiz/Gonsolin, which would give us an SP3 + stud catching prospect ready to play), signing Bauer (25mil/yr), signing May (2/12), then using the same approach he did to find Schebler to help patch up 2B (find cost-controlled, cheap option).  

If it were, "What would I do?" then yes, I'd trade Adell to the Padres for multiple pitching prospects. But the thread in it's original form is, "what will the Angels do?" in which case, I find it doubtful they trade Jo Adell.

[beatlesrule]

From today's MLBTR chat:

 

Angels

12:16

Sign Hand, Hendrics, mid tier SP, Catcher, and trade for a SP. That a plausible Angels offseasons? They need legit bullpen arms PERIOD

 

Mark P

12:17

They've got to get a middle infielder in there as well, but overall, that's not a bad offseason of work.  Pivoting to build a great bullpen might be a sharp move if the Angels can't land any of their top SP targets

[AngelsLakersFan]

On 11/20/2020 at 8:32 PM, ukyah said:

i think you're being a little short on happ. his abbreviated time in ny hasn't been that bad. if they give him a 1 year deal for some modest amount of money, then i think he's got a much better chance of paying off on that investment than our previous one year flops.

With a guy like Happ the money isnt a big deal. The risk is in the performance. The Angels have a decent amount of pitching depth at this point, but what they cannot afford is another Teheran type shitting the bed. 

[Docwaukee]

8 hours ago, Pancake Bear said:

My point that I was trying to make (which seems to have gotten lost multiple times - that's on me) was not about Eppler's skill at finding clean peanuts relative to other GM's, but rather that when you trade (or spend) meh, you generally get what you pay for.

If they're unwilling to trade Adell/Marsh, their chances of improving pitching from last year are probably dubious. If they want an impact arm, they have a better shot by actually investing trade capital or money into it. Whether they will remains to be seen. But trading guys like those listed below probably nets you very little. 

I'm personally fine with trading any of them at this point. We have three shots at outfield with Adell, Marsh, and Adams - we should be moving one or more of them to acquire pitching if at all possible. Maybe they just aren't worth enough to pry a good pitcher away from anyone else. 

Incidentally, a better strategy this year might be to build an elite pen, especially of long relief, given that virtually everyone's innings were down this year, meaning that there probably won't be many pitchers going over 150 innings in 2021 (assuming there even is a full season), let alone 175 or 200. 

I understood your point but disagree.  You can easily improve the pitching staff without moving Adell or Marsh.  Will you get a front line starter?  No, but I think you have PTSD from how poor of a job Eppler did relative to what can be done or what has been done by other teams by avoiding absolute disasters.  

You don't have to replace absolutely awful with an all-star.   Sometimes solid is ok and a substantial improvement.   

[Pancake Bear]

1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

I understood your point but disagree.  You can easily improve the pitching staff without moving Adell or Marsh.  Will you get a front line starter?  No, but I think you have PTSD from how poor of a job Eppler did relative to what can be done or what has been done by other teams by avoiding absolute disasters.  

You don't have to replace absolutely awful with an all-star.   Sometimes solid is ok and a substantial improvement.   

Yes, but generally speaking you have a higher chance of hitting quality when you put quality out in money/trades, even though there are no guarantees on results with either. That really wasn't Eppler's strength. Obviously, you need to have some ability to find talent reasonably often (e.g. Bundy as opposed to Teheran) unless you intend to spend your way into the playoffs.

[Docwaukee]

42 minutes ago, Pancake Bear said:

Yes, but generally speaking you have a higher chance of hitting quality when you put quality out in money/trades, even though there are no guarantees on results with either. That really wasn't Eppler's strength. Obviously, you need to have some ability to find talent reasonably often (e.g. Bundy as opposed to Teheran) unless you intend to spend your way into the playoffs.

sure.  generally speaking it's proportional.  but you're kinda changing your narrative now.  

[Pancake Bear]

26 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

sure.  generally speaking it's proportional.  but you're kinda changing your narrative now.  

I don't believe so. It's more likely I was unclear and/or you misunderstood me. 

Wasn't saying never do cheaper moves. I was saying ruling out higher end moves (especially on the trade market) is likely to result in same-old results unless we get lucky. Which is why I explicitly advocated in an earlier post to trade one or more of Adell/Marsh/Adams for pitching if a solid option exists. If I appeared to say don't make any trades of lesser guys, I was misunderstood. What I was pushing back against was the notion that a strategy of holding on to all the top OF prospects is or should be (which Scotty wasn't saying, if I understood him) Minasian's approach.

If you think I changed on something else, you'll have to enlighten me, because I don't know what that would be. 

[Docwaukee]

11 hours ago, Pancake Bear said:

If they're unwilling to trade Adell/Marsh, their chances of improving pitching from last year are probably dubious.

 

8 minutes ago, Pancake Bear said:

I don't believe so. It's more likely I was unclear and/or you misunderstood me. 

Wasn't saying never do cheaper moves. I was saying ruling out higher end moves (especially on the trade market) is likely to result in same-old results unless we get lucky. Which is why I explicitly advocated in an earlier post to trade one or more of Adell/Marsh/Adams for pitching if a solid option exists. If I appeared to say don't make any trades of lesser guys, I was misunderstood. What I was pushing back against was the notion that a strategy of holding on to all the top OF prospects is or should be (which Scotty wasn't saying, if I understood him) Minasian's approach.

If you think I changed on something else, you'll have to enlighten me, because I don't know what that would be. 

that top quote is what I'm talking about.  

and I just disagree with the bolded text.  I think this team can get much better without trading our top prospects.  Was the Bundy move luck?  

give me two more Bundy type moves or even a shade less plus a couple pen pieces, a solid/avg 2bman, and someone better than a scott schebler as a 4th OFer and I think we've got a team that can win the division.   

Would I like a little more than that?  Maybe, but it depends.  Personally, I don't think getting Musgrove for Adell and others is something I'd be all that thrilled about.  So yah, don't close off the option but you better damn well get someone really really good for multiple years.  

[Revad]

I think we’re all anxious about how things play out this off-season.  I feel so desperate for pitching.  Do they have SP in strip clubs? 

 

[Pancake Bear]

42 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

 

that top quote is what I'm talking about.  

and I just disagree with the bolded text.  I think this team can get much better without trading our top prospects.  Was the Bundy move luck?  

give me two more Bundy type moves or even a shade less plus a couple pen pieces, a solid/avg 2bman, and someone better than a scott schebler as a 4th OFer and I think we've got a team that can win the division.   

Would I like a little more than that?  Maybe, but it depends.  Personally, I don't think getting Musgrove for Adell and others is something I'd be all that thrilled about.  So yah, don't close off the option but you better damn well get someone really really good for multiple years.  

Don't think I changed my view, but whatever.

As for Bundy, yeah it was a good move. How many bad ones happened before that? I don't know that we have time to shoot craps hoping for the dice to go our way. Could they? Sure. But Trout (and Rendon) aren't getting any younger. If the team is going to contend before Trout's prime is gone, they've got maybe a few more offseasons to get it right.

But I definitely agree that if teams aren't offering good value for Adell or the others (which is certainly possible, and may be why a trade hasn't happened), then he shouldn't be moved just to move him.

[Docwaukee]

27 minutes ago, Pancake Bear said:

Don't think I changed my view, but whatever.

As for Bundy, yeah it was a good move. How many bad ones happened before that? I don't know that we have time to shoot craps hoping for the dice to go our way. Could they? Sure. But Trout (and Rendon) aren't getting any younger. If the team is going to contend before Trout's prime is gone, they've got maybe a few more offseasons to get it right.

But I definitely agree that if teams aren't offering good value for Adell or the others (which is certainly possible, and may be why a trade hasn't happened), then he shouldn't be moved just to move him.

and my point is that maybe with the right talent evaluators it's not shooting craps.  Why do you think Eppler got fired?  He sucked at finding average talent.  Why do you assume that Minasian will perform similarly?  Good teams work the middle and bottom of the market all the time.  In fact, it's mostly what they do.  There are only so many premium talents available and if you can't succeed outside of that as a GM then you aren't doing your job well.