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

[rafibomb]

10 minutes ago, Angels 1961 said:

Angels have ZERO LOCKS for next year in the pen.

Danish

[rafibomb]

Silseth’s Double-A debut:

3.0 IP, 2 H, 1 R, 0 BB, 3 SO, 41 pitches (28 strikes)

 

[Angelsjunky]

Silseth: intriguing. First, they have him start in AA, unlike Bachman, Bush, and Marceaux - all drafted ahead of him. Not a huge amount of scouting info, but there's some solid upside here. I wonder why he fell to the 11th round - he seems more like a 3rd-5th round type who could surprise.

[Docwaukee]

45 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Silseth: intriguing. First, they have him start in AA, unlike Bachman, Bush, and Marceaux - all drafted ahead of him. Not a huge amount of scouting info, but there's some solid upside here. I wonder why he fell to the 11th round - he seems more like a 3rd-5th round type who could surprise.

this is purely conjecture, but my guess is they liked the guys they got from those rounds more or equal to that of Silseth and pretty much after that they try to get good players and see how much money left over they can anticipate.  Bearing in mind that they have a full day in between rounds 10 and 11 so they are probably on the horn after days 1 and 2 trying to lock in bonus amounts so they know what they can do on day 3.  My guess is that they knew there were going to be some good players fall to day 3 so they tried to get good value on day 2 and then knew they could go pretty big with 11 and 12.  They did a good job of anticipating guys who might have signability issues and targeting them later it seems.  

There were probably several targets and they're just actively doing the math on these guys as they go.  

[Chuck]

@totdprods just dropped the latest prospect hotlist. 

Check it out! 

 

[UndertheHalo]

This sucks 

 

 

[totdprods]

I mean, yeah, it sucks, but I think it's just another example reinforcing that while Arte is the owner, he does not want to see the Angels be a team that tanks and sucks for 2-3-4 years - or at least expects to suck. If we didn't have Mike Trout or Shohei, maybe it would be different, but if we went the tanking route the last 5 years there'd be just as much criticism directed to the team (from us and folks in general) about how much of a travesty it was the Angels ran out a AAA team around a generational talent. 

I realize the irony in how things wound up playing out that way regardless, but there's a difference in trying to win with guys like Harvey, Maybin, Kinsler, Bundy, Quintana, Simmons instead of 4A filler like the Mariners ran out there for a few years. 

In some ways I respect Arte for not tanking and pulling that shit because, while it makes sense to build a pipeline of cheap, young talent fast, it truly does come at the expense of fan enjoyment - which is especially critical when the Angels' attendance unfortunately relies so heavily on casual SoCal fans since they lack a diehard NYY/BOS/STL/SFG/LAD base.

Where Arte's really failed is keeping the Angels in this 50/50 purgatory for so long. Yeah, it's kept us on the fringes of contention for most of the last few seasons, but it's done jack to help go for it or even really develop a farm. We've just been stuck without any real clear-cut vision, or if we had one, watched it be handicapped by organizational dysfunction or lack of authority from the people who needed it most. So we stay stuck.

Kinda backs a point made recently that recently this team is built to win solely based on two things out of our control - luck and health.

Edited September 8, 2021 by totdprods

[Make Angels Great Again]

1 hour ago, totdprods said:

I mean, yeah, it sucks, but I think it's just another example reinforcing that while Arte is the owner, he does not want to see the Angels be a team that tanks and sucks for 2-3-4 years - or at least expects to suck. If we didn't have Mike Trout or Shohei, maybe it would be different, but if we went the tanking route the last 5 years there'd be just as much criticism directed to the team (from us and folks in general) about how much of a travesty it was the Angels ran out a AAA team around a generational talent. 

I realize the irony in how things wound up playing out that way regardless, but there's a difference in trying to win with guys like Harvey, Maybin, Kinsler, Bundy, Quintana, Simmons instead of 4A filler like the Mariners ran out there for a few years. 

In some ways I respect Arte for not tanking and pulling that shit because, while it makes sense to build a pipeline of cheap, young talent fast, it truly does come at the expense of fan enjoyment - which is especially critical when the Angels' attendance unfortunately relies so heavily on casual SoCal fans since they lack a diehard NYY/BOS/STL/SFG/LAD base.

Where Arte's really failed is keeping the Angels in this 50/50 purgatory for so long. Yeah, it's kept us on the fringes of contention for most of the last few seasons, but it's done jack to help go for it or even really develop a farm. We've just been stuck without any real clear-cut vision, or if we had one, watched it be handicapped by organizational dysfunction or lack of authority from the people who needed it most. So we stay stuck.

Kinda backs a point made recently that recently this team is built to win solely based on two things out of our control - luck and health.

 

But really, does the win-loss record of the major league team have that big of an impact on the overall quality of a franchise's minor league system? Yeah, your first three or four picks might have a slightly better shot at being a difference maker than if you picked 12 picks later, but do you honestly think that the difference between the Mariner's minor league performance vs the Angels is all because the M's have sucked at the major league level? I don't think you believe that. There are so many more pieces that go into developing a quality minor league system than the MLB team's win-loss record. The Rays are a pretty good example of that I think.

 

Fans here love to see Dipoto fail, and I get it. He really didn't implement a good vision in his time here. But clearly, whatever he's doing in Seattle should result in some level of success in the coming years for them. Burying your heads in the sand doesn't change that fact.

[Angels 1961]

22 hours ago, rafibomb said:

Danish

Danish is working as a starter now at SLC. If he continues putting doughnut holes on scoreboard maybe in mix for rotation.

[Angelsjunky]

It is pretty impressive what Dipoto has done with the Mariners. He somehow traded away the entire farm, then built it back up super quick and they now have both a good major league team and an excellent farm.

If I remember correctly, he tried to make a big splash his first few years but it didn't pan out. After winning 89 games in 2018, rather than floating in the mediocre-to-good range, he traded off major league talent and restocked the farm, and it only took a couple bad years (2019-20) to return to being good.

[totdprods]

27 minutes ago, Make Angels Great Again said:

 

But really, does the win-loss record of the major league team have that big of an impact on the overall quality of a franchise's minor league system? Yeah, your first three or four picks might have a slightly better shot at being a difference maker than if you picked 12 picks later, but do you honestly think that the difference between the Mariner's minor league performance vs the Angels is all because the M's have sucked at the major league level? I don't think you believe that. There are so many more pieces that go into developing a quality minor league system than the MLB team's win-loss record. The Rays are a pretty good example of that I think.

 

Fans here love to see Dipoto fail, and I get it. He really didn't implement a good vision in his time here. But clearly, whatever he's doing in Seattle should result in some level of success in the coming years for them. Burying your heads in the sand doesn't change that fact.

No, it's not that simple...tanking and drafting top choices are just one piece. Being able to trade off any asset as it became valuable on the trade market - plus top picks from tanking and a focus on finding talent with an less on MLB results now and more on MLB results later - are factors in play here. The Angels simply could not do that because there was at least an internal expectation to compete until they couldn't, usually after the trade deadline. Now part of that is the Mariners also wound up with more pieces to sell than the Angels, part of which gets back to the luck/health thing I had mentioned. Had Bundy been good this year, or Maybin or Espinosa or Kinsler or Heaney or Skaggs or Richards in years prior and the Angels hadn't been clinging to fringe contention - they might look dramatically different today. Where could we be today had Eppler moved Heaney in his strong '18 season, or Bundy at last year's deadline? Simmons in one of his better years? We couldn't because we always needed them to compete. The Mariners didn't have that worry year-to-year.

Basically, Dipoto and the Mariners were able to part with talent by trade when they saw a chance to remove, and didn't worry if 4A fodder or rushed prospects sucked. 
The Angels didn't have a choice. They had to rely on 4A fodder and rushed prospects not because they didn't trade talent away, but because that supposed talent wound up getting hurt or sucking. That's the big difference. The draft picks are just cherries on top.

Also, I think the Angels have perhaps focused a little too much on culture and chemistry - probably to try and refocus from what was happening behind closed doors - and the Mariners very likely are focusing on it too little.

Edited September 8, 2021 by totdprods

[Angelsjunky]

 

Just now, totdprods said:

No, it's not that simple...tanking and drafting top choices are just one piece. Being able to trade off any asset as it became valuable on the trade market - plus top picks from tanking and a focus on finding talent with an less on MLB results now and more on MLB results later - are factors in play here. The Angels simply could not do that because there was at least an internal expectation to compete. 

Now part of that is the Mariners also wound up with more pieces to sell than the Angels, part of which gets back to the luck/health thing I had mentioned. Had Bundy been good this year, or Maybin or Espinosa or Kinsler or Heaney or Skaggs or Richards in years prior and the Angels hadn't been clinging to fringe contention - they might look dramatically different today. 

I know it is obvious and overstated, but the most crucial ingredient of a winning franchise is a good farm system, and only some of that comes from first rounders. It is the "root system" of a franchise. If it is healthy, it feeds the entire "tree" - not only with rising talent, but by not relying on filling holes via free agency. And of course if you have a thriving farm system, a lot of your major league team ends up being cheap because they're young, and you don't have to sign the Joe Blantons and Jose Quintanas of the world and can instead use those funds on the occasional premium free agent.

As you said, it is really a shame that none of the one-year deals turned into tradable assets at the deadline. We all (mostly) liked the Iglesiases, Quintana, and Cobb acquisitions because the idea was that they were relatively low risk and if the Angels didn't contend, they were all tradable. Only Raisel was tradable and Minasian evidently didn't receive an offer he couldn't refuse (Cobb was probably not traded because his injury was worse than it seemed).

That said, I like what we have now more going into the offseason than in years going back. Adell and Marsh are coming along, and hopefully Rendon and Trout will be healthy next year. The only real lineup questions are who plays SS and who is the back-up catcher.

And the Angels have real depth in the rotation, for the first time in years. Some question marks obviously, but it is a nice group of young arms and even if they only re-up Cobb, I like our rotation next year. 

The bullpen will benefit from the pitching depth. Re-signing Raisel is important, but if not there may be other options. They can acquire two or three quality relievers via free agency and trade.

 

[rafibomb]

Yeah so Swanda might not be ready for Double-A just yet. Maybe it was just a spot start with the Dust Devil’s COVID problems though. Hopefully Silseth stays in Rocket City.

Edited September 9, 2021 by rafibomb

[Chuck]

I'll be there in Tri-Cities next weekend. Hoping they're over their Covid issues so I can get some Bachman, Paris, Bush coverage and interviews. 

[rafibomb]

5th rounder Brett Kerry is now making the jump from Low-A to Double-A.

His numbers this season:

9.1 IP  1.93 ERA  1.07 WHIP  6 H  2 R (earned)  4 BB  17 SO  0 HR allowed

[mmc]

 

[tdawg87]

6 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

I'll be there in Tri-Cities next weekend. Hoping they're over their Covid issues so I can get some Bachman, Paris, Bush coverage and interviews. 

You want some Bush coverage?

[mmc]

Similarly to how I asked which prospects performance disappointed you the most, which prospect would you guys say most exceeded your expectations this season?

[Inside Pitch]

2 hours ago, mmc said:

Similarly to how I asked which prospects performance disappointed you the most, which prospect would you guys say most exceeded your expectations this season?

Detmers, Crow, Jackson while he was healthy....  

Detmers stuff just flat out played well above where it was safe to expect.  He was a safe pick that I expected to move quickly based on polish, but his stuff actually drove his performance.  Crow was someone I was aware of/wondered about, I was not expecting him to show a legit MLB pitch so early on.  He's far from a finished product, he's got a lot of learning to do but Crow can possibly ride that one pitch to a RP spot very quickly.  I do however hope they keep him as SP.  I have been high on Jackson, I think I've ranked him as high as 5th in our rankings, I did not however expect to see him take a big step forward with his approach, he did that after a bad start.  He showed legit signs of pitch recognition and a willingness not to swing.  Damn shame he and Paris were injured as they likely were on the verge of busting out.

Btw the guys who neither surprised nor disappointed me are Daniel, and CRod.  I expected Daniel to do well, but I expected him to do it differently.  I will forever wish CRod had been brought along differently, but there was never any question in my mind he could get MLB hitters out.

[Inside Pitch]

On 9/8/2021 at 5:39 PM, Angelsjunky said:

It is pretty impressive what Dipoto has done with the Mariners. He somehow traded away the entire farm, then built it back up super quick and they now have both a good major league team and an excellent farm.

If I remember correctly, he tried to make a big splash his first few years but it didn't pan out. After winning 89 games in 2018, rather than floating in the mediocre-to-good range, he traded off major league talent and restocked the farm, and it only took a couple bad years (2019-20) to return to being good.

Do you really think they are good? 

They have a well below average offense and a below average pitching staff overall -- what they do have going for them is they play good to well above average defense and have seen well above average to legit great RPing.  They have ridden clutch performances at historic levels to a surprising W/L record but I don't see sustainability on that front.  Still, I think they are a perfect example of the importance of run prevention and holding leads, areas the Angels have been utter failures at.  But good? I see more smoke and mirrors than good.

I'm looking forward to seeing how they handle their off-season.  They are one of those teams where they could go either way next year.  They'll play defense no question but bullpen volatility is real and their much ballyhooed prospects have yet to live up to the hype save for Lewis.   If Evan White, Shed Long, Taylor Trammell, Cal Raleigh, and Jarred Kelenic were Angels, fans would be writing their eulogies and labeling all busts.  Still, I can see some  positives and they have money/prospects to spend and Jerry Dipoto as a GM, so their fans are likely in for an exciting off-season.

A's, Rangers, Mariners, all could have interesting winters.  The Astros' Correa/Verlander/Greinke situations might be worth watching too. 

The AL West is a happening place.

[Angelsjunky]

19 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Do you really think they are good? 

They have a well below average offense and a below average pitching staff overall -- what they do have going for them is they play good to well above average defense and have seen well above average to legit great RPing.  They have ridden clutch performances at historic levels to a surprising W/L record but I don't see sustainability on that front.  Still, I think they are a perfect example of the importance of run prevention and holding leads, areas the Angels have been utter failures at.  But good? I see more smoke and mirrors than good.

I'm looking forward to seeing how they handle their off-season.  They are one of those teams where they could go either way next year.  They'll play defense no question but bullpen volatility is real and their much ballyhooed prospects have yet to live up to the hype save for Lewis.   If Evan White, Shed Long, Taylor Trammell, Cal Raleigh, and Jarred Kelenic were Angels, fans would be writing their eulogies and labeling all busts.  Still, I can see some  positives and they have money/prospects to spend and Jerry Dipoto as a GM, so their fans are likely in for an exciting off-season.

A's, Rangers, Mariners, all could have interesting winters.  The Astros' Correa/Verlander/Greinke situations might be worth watching too. 

The AL West is a happening place.

What makes a team good can't fully be quantified on paper. The Mariners are good enough to be 12 games over .500 and 2 GB in the wildcard. 

The Angels were "better" on paper going into the season, but here we are. We complain about injuries--which are there--but it is the same thing, year after year. And here we are, another ~.500 season, the seventh in a row. 

That said, I like the Angels core better than the Mariners, so hope springs eternal for the next half decade.

Edited September 10, 2021 by Angelsjunky

[greginpsca]

49 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Detmers, Crow, Jackson while he was healthy....  

Detmers stuff just flat out played well above where it was safe to expect.  He was a safe pick that I expected to move quickly based on polish, but his stuff actually drove his performance.  Crow was someone I was aware of/wondered about, I was not expecting him to show a legit MLB pitch so early on.  He's far from a finished product, he's got a lot of learning to do but Crow can possibly ride that one pitch to a RP spot very quickly.  I do however hops they keep him as SP.  I have been high on Jackson, I think I've ranked him as high as 5th in our rankings, I did not however expect to see him take a big step forward with his approach, he dud that after a bad start.  He showed legit signs of pitch recognition and a willingness not to swing.  Damn shame he and Paris were injured as they likely were on the verge of busting out.

Btw the guys who neither surprised nor disappointed me are Daniel, and CRod.  I expected Daniel to do well, but I expected him to do it differently.  I will forever wish CRod had been brought along differently, but there was never any question in my mind he could get MLB hitters out.

The pitching improvement organizationally as a whole has really impressed me. The guys like  Criswell, Tyler, Warren, Wantz, Crow, Smith, along with several more have made the future  more promising.  This is not even counting the guys from this years draft.  The position player side , to me has been a different story. The guys i was hoping to make big steps, all seemed to have injury problems. Hopefully next season will be healthy.  Again, pitching wise, i think we have 12-15 guys who are capable of making the staff in the next 2-3 years.

[rafibomb]

Ryan Smith was decent (for the PCL?) in his Triple-A Debut:

5.0 IP  6 H  4 R (all earned)  0 BB  8 SO

Just encouraging to see him continue the high strikeouts with low walks.

[Docwaukee]

4 hours ago, mmc said:

Similarly to how I asked which prospects performance disappointed you the most, which prospect would you guys say most exceeded your expectations this season?

For me it's Daniel.  He's actually getting better as the year goes on.  10 of his 28 walks on the season came in his first 6.2 ip.  I was hopeful he'd be good but didn't expect him to be dominant.  

[Inside Pitch]

2 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

What makes a team good can't fully be quantified on paper. The Mariners are good enough to be 12 games over .500 and 2 GB in the wildcard. 

Let's try this again.   

Do you REALLY believe they are good?  

I'm aware of what their record is, I also see why -- mostly because despite it not being possible to be "fully" quantified, I'm of the opinion it's pretty easy to quantify what they are and aren't good at using readily available data.  That very same data allows me to safely (IMO), argue that the Astros are good/great, the A's are good, the Angels and Rangers have been bad, and the Mariners have been inordinately fortunate despite not being good.  That data also allows me to argue why I believe what I do for each of those teams.

Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.   I believe that's the best thing that can be said about the 2021 Mariners.

2 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

The Angels were "better" on paper going into the season, but here we are. We complain about injuries--which are there--but it is the same thing, year after year. And here we are, another ~.500 season, the seventh in a row. 

The Angels continued crappiness has no bearing on whether or not the Mariners are a "good" team, same would be true if the Angels were in the playoff hunt.  If you'd like to discuss all the reasons why the Angels aren't a good team this year we can do that too, I've made my feelings on that subject known throughout the season.   

2 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

That said, I like the Angels core better than the Mariners, so hope springs eternal for the next half decade.

Meh.  Different conversation -- irrelevant to the question are they actually good.

FWIW, I actually believe the Mariners will be a better team next season.  Whether that translates into wins and losses -- anyone's guess.  But at the "risk" of looking foolish I doubt they will repeat as the most clutch team in MLB history and that is what's driven their success most of the year.  I also have greater faith in the Mariners continuing to play good defense than I do the Angels miraculously altering how they position their defense.  Unless that happens it's entirely possible we see more of the same next year.

But back on topic... I don't particularly think the M's have been all that good this year despite what I would easily classify as great results.  I mean, they they are 12 games over .500 despite a pythag record nearly identical to that of the Rockies, a bad team that has actually pitched to near league average levels. 

Again..... sometimes it's better to be lucky than good.