The Official 2021 Los Angeles Angels Minor League Stats, Reports & Scouting Thread

[Docwaukee]

9 minutes ago, totdprods said:

The missed season last year for Adams and Knowles really hurt them, I think, so I'm giving them one more season before I start lowering my expectations. They were right at that point in their careers in which they needed a full year to work through.

my biggest concern is the general lack of any progress at all from either at the plate.  Maybe the injury to Adams has impacted him.  I'm worried about the contact ability for both.  Maybe the power shows up later and offsets some of that but to me their struggles can't totally be accounted for by just the time off.  But maybe it's just my bias that I've always felt the hit tool is the biggest factor in future success.  

[totdprods]

1 minute ago, Dochalo said:

my biggest concern is the general lack of any progress at all from either at the plate.  Maybe the injury to Adams has impacted him.  I'm worried about the contact ability for both.  Maybe the power shows up later and offsets some of that but to me their struggles can't totally be accounted for by just the time off.  But maybe it's just my bias that I've always felt the hit tool is the biggest factor in future success.  

I don't think it helps that they're on teams that are basically devoid of other offensive talent too...Inland Empire could be cookin' if Yon, Jackson, Martinez, Paris were all clicking at the same time, but too often two of them (Jackson and Paris) have been injured injured and Yon is streaky.

Adams has had it even worse. Brendon Davis and occasionally Livan Soto or Arocho were just about the only guys ever hitting in Tri-City. I can imagine, especially for someone like Adams, they can find themselves pressing and trying to be the star hitter on the team. Both he and Knowles have been on fringe Top 100 lists and are often mentioned as some of the Angels' best prospects - they're going to hear that one way or another, and it can make them try to do too much on a team that has too little. 

It's why sometimes the guys like Braxton, Yon, Aviles, Davis, Wilson, MacKinnon, Nay can impact their club in a big way even if they aren't prospects or may never see the light of the day with the big league team. They fill run-producing roles on their respective teams, allowing guys like Adams and Knowles to breathe a little more and focus on getting on base, taking extra bases, making contact, drawing walks, rather than trying to be that plus HR hitters. It could explain why Braxton has stayed at IE all season long despite being 27 and posting video game numbers there, and it also points to the very thin position player depth we have at those lower levels.

[Angel Oracle]

Time to focus more on position players  in the 2022 draft?

Or just rely on BPA?

[totdprods]

23 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

Time to focus more on position players  in the 2022 draft?

Or just rely on BPA?

Always BPA, even though I think our position player depth in the minors is thin, you can never have too much pitching. Much easier to trade for a bat if you have a ton of pitching too.

[Angelsjunky]

Regardless of any stagnation from a few players, the Angels still look really good in the infield and outfield for the 2020s, so I don't think especial focus needs to be made on position players. 

In the outfield you have Trout, Adell, and Marsh, with back-up options in Adams and Knowles, and eventually Calabrese and Ramirez.

In the infield you have Fletcher, Rendon, and Walsh, and then Stefanic, Rengifo and maybe Davis and Arocho playing some role. Then you have a talented group in Jackson, Paris, Vera, Placencia, Blakely, and Guzman.

For catchers we have Quero to dream on.

Not all of these guys will turn out as hoped. In fact, most won't. But there's enough talent there that the Angels may not need to sign any significant position players for the next decade. Or if they do, it will be choice picks - either a premier free agent, a stop-gap, or a bench player. 

Anyhow, for the draft next year, I'm thinking BPA, with an eye on a catcher, impact bat, or starter. I think they're fine on athletic infielders and outfielders. Assuming the Angels draft in the 10-15 range (they're currently 12th or 13th, tied with the Mets), the only way I see them drafting a toolsy infielder or outfielder is if someone drops to them that was expected to be drafted much sooner. All else being equal, I think they go for either a C, high impact bat, or starter.

[totdprods]

26 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Regardless of any stagnation from a few players, the Angels still look really good in the infield and outfield for the 2020s, so I don't think especial focus needs to be made on position players. 

In the outfield you have Trout, Adell, and Marsh, with back-up options in Adams and Knowles, and eventually Calabrese and Ramirez.

In the infield you have Fletcher, Rendon, and Walsh, and then Stefanic, Rengifo and maybe Davis and Arocho playing some role. Then you have a talented group in Jackson, Paris, Vera, Placencia, Blakely, and Guzman.

For catchers we have Quero to dream on.

Not all of these guys will turn out as hoped. In fact, most won't. But there's enough talent there that the Angels may not need to sign any significant position players for the next decade. Or if they do, it will be choice picks - either a premier free agent, a stop-gap, or a bench player. 

Anyhow, for the draft next year, I'm thinking BPA, with an eye on a catcher, impact bat, or starter. I think they're fine on athletic infielders and outfielders. Assuming the Angels draft in the 10-15 range (they're currently 12th or 13th, tied with the Mets), the only way I see them drafting a toolsy infielder or outfielder is if someone drops to them that was expected to be drafted much sooner. All else being equal, I think they go for either a C, high impact bat, or starter.

Finding a college level outfielder - particularly someone with some speed, defense, on-base skills who can cover any outfield position - and perhaps a college infielder who could comfortably work really any position would be a good add, even if they're not completely exciting. Someone with maybe a little more ceiling than Thaiss or Ward ever offered. 

Will Wilson sure would be nice to have right now, just to have another guy with Jeremiah Jackson bridging the gap between Rengifo/Stefanic and the Paris/Blakely/Vera/Placencia group. Livan Soto is the closest to that group and that's not very good since he's likely a defense-first UT guy.

[totdprods]

53 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

In the outfield you have Trout, Adell, and Marsh, with back-up options in Adams and Knowles, and eventually Calabrese and Ramirez.

In the infield you have Fletcher, Rendon, and Walsh, and then Stefanic, Rengifo and maybe Davis and Arocho playing some role. Then you have a talented group in Jackson, Paris, Vera, Placencia, Blakely, and Guzman.

This is partially true but also doesn't take into consideration how R5 eligibility (both major and minor) and minor league free agency can affect things. It's pretty safe to assume the Angels will protect Stefanic this winter - but they didn't protect Walsh or Rojas (different GM) and they raked in AAA too. Rengifo will be in his last option year next year, so he better produce. 

Knowles is R5 eligible this winter. It's incredibly unlikely the Angels protect him and even unlikelier he gets chosen, but at the same time, Pittsburgh could use him as OR/defensive-replacement and he's gone. Adams has one more year, but he could be in the exact same situation if he's still not producing and Calabrese and Ramirez are a ways off still. Ramirez is actually R5 eligible next year with Adams too.

Davis and Arocho were both minor league R5 selections or free agents - I'm not 100% how that's determined, but there's a chance neither are even controlled beyond this year.

Trust me, there is a noticeable gap between the guys currently on the 40-man and essentially the next tier being all the way down in Arizona where we are really hurting. We're relying almost entirely on guys plucked from other organizations - Yon, Arocho, Aviles, Davis, Wilson, Herrera - to be our position player depth essentially across A, A+, and AA. It's a little worrisome, and it might need addressing in the '22 draft by focusing on some college bats. 2021 wasn't the only year the Angels draft was pitching-heavy, they did the same thing in '18 and '19, just not to the same extent, and the org is feeling that now.

Depth is where we need some more progress - finding guys like Jack Mayfield and Phil Gosselin aren't particularly expensive or difficult, but the Angels really need to start producing some guys who can step in when players suck or get hurt so we don't need to go through a revolving door to find a solution. To me, being able to do this is a big precursor to becoming a championship-caliber team. Also why I kinda hope they pursue someone like Chris Taylor or Mark Canha in free agency. Could domino the depth downwards in a way that helps with the strain. Jeremiah Jackson also becomes extremely critical in his development since he could presumably fall into different IF or OF positions.

Edited August 24, 2021 by totdprods

[Angel Oracle]

The org will need to use all of it’s knowledge to correctly navigate R5, as there are more quality players in the org to choose from, than going back to the Stoneman era.

[Angelsjunky]

Fair enough, @totdprods - that's a more granular level than I intended.

It sounds like you're suggesting that the Angels may emphasize filling out the middle ranks with college position players. I mean, I certainly agree with catcher. But I'm not sure a college outfielder is going to reach the majors before, say, Adams or someone like Orlando Martinez, who is kind of the equivalent of an advanced college bat debuting this year. 

I also don't think "BPA" should ever be taken as an absolute. I've gone on record saying that I think that term is rather over-used, and that teams do target specific types of players based upon their needs, at least if the gap between two players is negligible. But if you think "BPA always," why would you think they'll target college bats? Or are you just saying that if the BPA is a college bat, that's who they'll go for?

I mean, clearly the Angels didn't draft the BPA every single round last year, as the odds that the BPA was always a pitcher would be rather astronomical. They saw a need and targeted within that: that is, the best pitcher available (to the best of their knowledge).

Just as in 2022, if the choice is between an advanced college catcher and a higher upside toolsy prep infielder, I think they go for the former, unless the talent gap is considerable. Of course it depends upon the specifics involved, but my point is that BPA is weighed with needs. IMO.

[totdprods]

29 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

It sounds like you're suggesting that the Angels may emphasize filling out the middle ranks with college position players. I mean, I certainly agree with catcher. But I'm not sure a college outfielder is going to reach the majors before, say, Adams or someone like Orlando Martinez, who is kind of the equivalent of an advanced college bat debuting this year. 

A college draftee will come with a lengthier window for R5 eligibility or minor league control though. Adams or Soto or Lund or Knowles or Martinez might be the types to fill those needs, but if they hit R5 eligibility before they're ready their future with the org can get very murky very fast. It's why guys like Hermosillo got 'squeezed' out. He would have been perfect for us earlier this year, but because he was R5 eligible years ago, added, and then missed his shot when Upton went down due to his own injury, he found himself leap-frogged when Adell was added last year and Marsh required his own 40-man spot this year.

There's a chance some of our UDFA's from this year help too, but I also wouldn't expect anyone who was basically a 21st round pick or later to be any sort of sure thing. 

And BPA is kind of a misnomer too...it's subjective. Kumar Rocker might have been the BPA, but his contract and potential health issues factor into the equation too. I basically think for us, going into a draft with an assumption of "we need pitching so we damn well better get a pitcher" or "why didn't we pick xxxx, he was the best (aka most hyped) name available!?" is unrealistic. The Angels shouldn't draft for MLB need, they should draft who they feel is the best player available with their choice, taking into account what they think of that player, his health, his contract demands, and maybe at the bottom of the totem pole, MLB-readiness or organizational depth. Focus on talent first and let that carry the weight of decision, and let org need/MLB-need be tertiary. 

It's just proof that it's really hard for projections like 'so and so by this year, then so and so by this year' can get askew quickly due to R5/minor league free agency, and who knows how the next CBA influences that as well. Placencia, Vera, Blakely, and Paris all become R5 eligible at end of '23 season. That'll be an interesting logjam.

Edited August 25, 2021 by totdprods

[mmc]

Pipeline ranks us 24th

 

[Angelsjunky]

1 hour ago, totdprods said:

A college draftee will come with a lengthier window for R5 eligibility or minor league control though. Adams or Soto or Lund or Knowles or Martinez might be the types to fill those needs, but if they hit R5 eligibility before they're ready their future with the org can get very murky very fast. It's why guys like Hermosillo got 'squeezed' out. He would have been perfect for us earlier this year, but because he was R5 eligible years ago, added, and then missed his shot when Upton went down due to his own injury, he found himself leap-frogged when Adell was added last year and Marsh required his own 40-man spot this year.

There's a chance some of our UDFA's from this year help too, but I also wouldn't expect anyone who was basically a 21st round pick or later to be any sort of sure thing. 

And BPA is kind of a misnomer too...it's subjective. Kumar Rocker might have been the BPA, but his contract and potential health issues factor into the equation too. I basically think for us, going into a draft with an assumption of "we need pitching so we damn well better get a pitcher" or "why didn't we pick xxxx, he was the best (aka most hyped) name available!?" is unrealistic. The Angels shouldn't draft for MLB need, they should draft who they feel is the best player available with their choice, taking into account what they think of that player, his health, his contract demands, and maybe at the bottom of the totem pole, MLB-readiness or organizational depth. Focus on talent first and let that carry the weight of decision, and let org need/MLB-need be tertiary. 

It's just proof that it's really hard for projections like 'so and so by this year, then so and so by this year' can get askew quickly due to R5/minor league free agency, and who knows how the next CBA influences that as well. Placencia, Vera, Blakely, and Paris all become R5 eligible at end of '23 season. That'll be an interesting logjam.

I hear what you're saying, and it especially adds weight to why teams sometimes draft lower ceiling college guys because they have a quicker path to the majors.

And again, I agree that talent comes first in drafting, but I think other factors are also very much part of consideration, such as organizational depth, signability, injury concerns, etc. Thus my example of the hypothetical college catcher vs. higher ceiling toolsy prep infielder. The Angels have a ton of the latter but are really lacking in catching depth, so might be more prone to tip the scale in that direction.

I'm just saying that while people talk about BPA as some kind of absolute, teams are often, even usually, making draft choices that imply other factors tipping the scale.

Meaning, BPA is an abstraction, a starting point, but in many cases, other factors play a significant role.

Just to clarify, Hermosillo wasn't claimed in the R5. He was released by the Angels, which was kind of strange at the time. I'm not sure why they didn't offer him a minor league contract. Who knows, maybe he wanted to move on.

[totdprods]

3 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

I hear what you're saying, and it especially adds weight to why teams sometimes draft lower ceiling college guys because they have a quicker path to the majors.

And again, I agree that talent comes first in drafting, but I think other factors are also very much part of consideration, such as organizational depth, signability, injury concerns, etc. Thus my example of the hypothetical college catcher vs. higher ceiling toolsy prep infielder. The Angels have a ton of the latter but are really lacking in catching depth, so might be more prone to tip the scale in that direction.

I'm just saying that while people talk about BPA as some kind of absolute, teams are often, even usually, making draft choices that imply other factors tipping the scale.

Meaning, BPA is an abstraction, a starting point, but in many cases, other factors play a significant role.

Just to clarify, Hermosillo wasn't claimed in the R5. He was released by the Angels, which was kind of strange at the time. I'm not sure why they didn't offer him a minor league contract. Who knows, maybe he wanted to move on.

Yeah, I know he wasn't claimed - but because he needed to be added to the 40-man when he did, and because Marsh needed to be added when he did - and Adell was added in between - it buried Hermosillo in the depth chart despite his utility to the club still and his remaining option. Similar things could happen to some of our upcoming shortstops or Adams and Knowles. They might have offered him a minor league deal but his hometown/favorite team offered him a chance too. It's all good. Just shows how roster crunches can really muck up timelines and depth, especially if you're thin.

Basically I'm worried we could find ourselves in a similar place with position players in a year or two that we did when we ran out of minor league arms and had to utilize Odrisamer Despaigne and Deck McGuire because all they could do was recycle filler through open 40-man spots. 

I suppose for this upcoming draft I hope to see a little more balanced approach - pitchers, position players, college, prep - just to even out a system that is quickly becoming pitcher-heavy and top-and-bottom heavy without much in the middle. This winter could change that quite a bit too depending on trades, though I have a feeling we'll see Minasian follow what he did this last year and try to acquire expiring vets on deals motivated primarily by opposing team's finances. Maybe Tucker Barnhart and his $7.5m option for back-up catcher, David Price and a portion of his $16m salary for cheap MLB help the Dodgers could use partially in guys like Ward, Thaiss, or Rengifo, maybe Will Smith from Atlanta, as opposed to big plays in free agency.

[Vlad27Trout27]

Bush 3.2 Innings with 6ks! 

Stefanic needs to get the Call up!

Tyler with 3 solid innings and 4 ks

 

[tdawg87]

I like that Bush keeps missing wood.

[Angelsjunky]

35 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Yeah, I know he wasn't claimed - but because he needed to be added to the 40-man when he did, and because Marsh needed to be added when he did - and Adell was added in between - it buried Hermosillo in the depth chart despite his utility to the club still and his remaining option. Similar things could happen to some of our upcoming shortstops or Adams and Knowles. They might have offered him a minor league deal but his hometown/favorite team offered him a chance too. It's all good. Just shows how roster crunches can really muck up timelines and depth, especially if you're thin.

Basically I'm worried we could find ourselves in a similar place with position players in a year or two that we did when we ran out of minor league arms and had to utilize Odrisamer Despaigne and Deck McGuire because all they could do was recycle filler through open 40-man spots. 

Man, I forgot about those two. The Clean Peanut Era. As you know, we're in a much better situation right now, with a solid group of pitchers in the high minors that can be called upon instead of the Deck Maguires of the world. 

35 minutes ago, totdprods said:

 

I suppose for this upcoming draft I hope to see a little more balanced approach - pitchers, position players, college, prep - just to even out a system that is quickly becoming pitcher-heavy and top-and-bottom heavy without much in the middle. This winter could change that quite a bit too depending on trades, though I have a feeling we'll see Minasian follow what he did this last year and try to acquire expiring vets on deals motivated primarily by opposing team's finances. Maybe Tucker Barnhart and his $7.5m option for back-up catcher, David Price and a portion of his $16m salary for cheap MLB help the Dodgers could use partially in guys like Ward, Thaiss, or Rengifo, maybe Will Smith from Atlanta, as opposed to big plays in free agency.

This sounds about right to me. Not necessarily what I want them to do, but sounds like what Minasian might do.

The Angels are in a bit of a funny spot, because as some of us recognize, they've got about 70% of a very good team. But there are two big questions:

1) Will more positive than negative developments occur with that 70% (or so)? Meaning, how will Adell and Marsh development; can Trout have a healthy season; will Detmers and Rodriguez adjust; which Walsh? Etc etc. But there's a solid amount of talent that if the answer to most such questions is in the positive, will be a really nice core for years to come.

2) How will Minasian address the "missing 30%"? Meaning, a bit more rotation depth, the majority of the bullpen, and defense? (Back up catcher and shortstop are less pressing, imo). This is what we've been talking about for months. The good news is that some of those answers can be found within. Even if guys like Criswell and Tyler don't amount to much more than filler, they provide a security blanket that the team hasn't had for a few years.

[totdprods]

4 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Man, I forgot about those two. The Clean Peanut Era. As you know, we're in a much better situation right now, with a solid group of pitchers in the high minors that can be called upon instead of the Deck Maguires of the world. 

This sounds about right to me. Not necessarily what I want them to do, but sounds like what Minasian might do.

The Angels are in a bit of a funny spot, because as some of us recognize, they've got about 70% of a very good team. But there are two big questions:

1) Will more positive than negative developments occur with that 70% (or so)? Meaning, how will Adell and Marsh development; can Trout have a healthy season; will Detmers and Rodriguez adjust; which Walsh? Etc etc. But there's a solid amount of talent that if the answer to most such questions is in the positive, will be a really nice core for years to come.

2) How will Minasian address the "missing 30%"? Meaning, a bit more rotation depth, the majority of the bullpen, and defense? (Back up catcher and shortstop are less pressing, imo). This is what we've been talking about for months. The good news is that some of those answers can be found within. Even if guys like Criswell and Tyler don't amount to much more than filler, they provide a security blanket that the team hasn't had for a few years.

Money really helped Minasian this winter, and not by spending in FA. Because the Reds needed to free up salary, they got Iglesias almost for nothing. Because the Angels were willing to eat money they got Cobb for a redundant prospect and convinced Baltimore to pay most of the salary. Fowler for a couple mil was a good move even if it didn't pan out. One thing he did well was make trades that were financially motivated. 

Given the mini-40-man crunch this winter with numerous intriguing AA/AAA arms being R5 eligible - probably a good 8-10 guys - I think the Angels should deal from that depth - to address some of the pitching need. Sure, in doing this they open themselves up to something like the Clevinger for Pestano deal, but something like Canning and Pina for Will Smith from the Braves or Kyle Tyler and Cooper Criswell for Caleb Thielbar or Tanner Scott, or David MacKinnon, Jose Rojas, D'Shawn Knowles, and Hector Yan for Miguel Rojas and Dylan Floro would be savvy ways to free up some 40-man space and lock in young, affordable, controlled talent that isn't necessarily difference-making, but should be productive and easier to obtain because those teams are looking to trim a couple mil here and there. 

[rafibomb]

Ky Bush with his best outing so far this season:

3.2 IP  1 H  0 R  0 BB  6 SO  56 pitches (39 strikes)

Overall numbers this season:

7.0 IP  1.29 ERA  1.14 WHIP  6 H  1 R (earned)  2 BB  14 SO  0 HR

[Angelsjunky]

37 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Money really helped Minasian this winter, and not by spending in FA. Because the Reds needed to free up salary, they got Iglesias almost for nothing. Because the Angels were willing to eat money they got Cobb for a redundant prospect and convinced Baltimore to pay most of the salary. Fowler for a couple mil was a good move even if it didn't pan out. One thing he did well was make trades that were financially motivated. 

Yes, good point. I think what you are saying is that Minasian was opportunistic. With a bit more money to spend this offseason (presumably), it will be interesting to see if he takes a different approach.

37 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Given the mini-40-man crunch this winter with numerous intriguing AA/AAA arms being R5 eligible - probably a good 8-10 guys - I think the Angels should deal from that depth - to address some of the pitching need. Sure, in doing this they open themselves up to something like the Clevinger for Pestano deal, but something like Canning and Pina for Will Smith from the Braves or Kyle Tyler and Cooper Criswell for Caleb Thielbar or Tanner Scott, or David MacKinnon, Jose Rojas, D'Shawn Knowles, and Hector Yan for Miguel Rojas and Dylan Floro would be savvy ways to free up some 40-man space and lock in young, affordable, controlled talent that isn't necessarily difference-making, but should be productive and easier to obtain because those teams are looking to trim a couple mil here and there. 

These are good ideas, but they also worry me - for the very reason you mentioned, the dreaded Clevinger trade. Tread carefully, is all. 

[rafibomb]

4-hit day with 2 doubles for Michael Stefanic brings his average up to .346.

[rafibomb]

3rd round pick Luke Murphy, one of college's top relievers before being drafted, locked down his first professional save today to give the Dust Devils a 3-2 win.

1.0 IP  2 H  0 R  0 BB  2 SO

He pitched a perfect 8th in his first outing.

Edited August 25, 2021 by rafibomb

[Docwaukee]

5 minutes ago, rafibomb said:

3rd round pick Luke Murphy, one of college's top relievers before being drafted, locked down his first professional save today to give the Dust Devils a 3-2 win.

1.0 IP  2 H  0 R  0 BB  2 SO

He pitched a perfect 8th in his first outing.

got a good feeling about him.  I could see him in our pen sometime mid next year.  

[Stradling]

 

[Docwaukee]

37 minutes ago, rafibomb said:

4-hit day with 2 doubles for Michael Stefanic brings his average up to .346.

I'm not terribly bullish on Stefanic being anything more than a AAAA player due to his defense and lack of power.  I think he's really going to have to hit a ton to be successful and by hit, I mean for a very high average.  That mentioned, it's time to call him up and get a lay of the land.  AAA is doing nothing for him right now.  There's no better time.  

[rafibomb]

5 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

got a good feeling about him.  I could see him in our pen sometime mid next year.  

I was a little worried the Angels were going to try him out as a starter. I completely agree with you on this. On a side not, I am extremely annoyed that the Dust Devils don't have any video feed of their home games.