The Los Angeles Angels rotation: 2021 to 2022

[Angelsjunky]

Lots of folks are expressing concerns about the one-year deals, with the Angels top four--or at least, most experienced--starters all heading to free agency after this season. 

Maybe I'm more bullish on our pitching prospects, but it could be that the reason Minasian isn't signing multi-year deals is that he both doesn't want to commit long-term to less-than really good talent, and because he has some degree of faith in the pitching prospects.

Here is what we have for 2021, with club-controlled starters in 2022:

2021: Bundy, Heaney, Quintana, Cobb, Canning, Ohtani; plus, Barria, Sandoval, Suarez, McNaughton, etc.

2022: Canning, Ohtani, Barria, Sandoval, Detmers, C Rodriguez; plus, Suarez, McNaughton, Ortega, Yan, Hernandez, etc.

One would think that Minasian will re-sign at least one of the veterans, probably Bundy. As to when he does it, it is kind of a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't scenario, because it is difficult to know for sure whether Bundy's gains in 2020 are legitimate. Bundy probably thinks so, so he won't accept a low-ball offer right now. But because we only have 11 starts to go on, Minasian might be hesitant to make him an offer he can't resist. However, if they wait, Bundy's asking price could go up; if he has another season like 2020 but over 30+ starts (say, <3.50 ERA, ~5 WAR), all of a sudden he becomes one of the most desirable free agents in next year's crop, and might earn something like 5/$90M or more. Right now they might be able to extend him for $5M less AAV, say 4/$56M or 5/$65M, which would either be a bargain if he keeps his gains, or an overpay if he reverts to being a #4 starter.

But let's assume that they extend Bundy or, if not, a cheaper contract for Heaney or Quintana, or possible a trade or a free agent. Then you have the 2022 list above, plus a veteran starter.

That could be a good rotation, with the potential to be very good by 2023. Canning will hopefully round into solid #3 form. Detmers has that potential, and Chris Rodriguez could be a legit #1-2 starter. Barria is probably a good #4 and I still think Sandoval could be at least that good, as could be Yan. I'm not even giving up on Jose Suarez, who is in a similar category in terms of talent, and Ortega looked really good in 2019. Packy will never wow anyone, but his pitchability makes him a nice emergency #5 to have around. Chances are some of these guys--especially Suarez, Hernandez, and Ortega--turn into relievers, but there's some solid talent that could nicely flesh out the back of a rotation.

Meaning, in C-Rod and Ohtani, you've got two elite talents, although both with health concerns. In Detmers and Canning, you have two guys who should be good #3 starters, maybe even a tad better. In Barria, Sandoval, Suarez, Ortega, Yan, Hernandez, and Naughton, you have six guys who could be anything from #3-5 starters or good relievers.

So while all of the questions around the Angels' younger pitchers almost certainly won't be answered in the affirmative, there's some depth there, and we should know a lot before season's end. Meaning, they'll have a better sense of what sort of rotation moves they might need to make. In other words, it makes perfect sense why Minasian wouldn't want to have a lot of multi-year pitching contracts, because he's got a bunch of young--and cheap--internal options to assess this year, and he won't know what he has to work with--and thus what he needs long-term--until deep into the season.

[Junkballer]

16 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

 

 

So while all of the questions around the Angels' younger pitchers almost certainly won't be answered in the affirmative, there's some depth there, and we should know a lot before season's end. Meaning, they'll have a better sense of what sort of rotation moves they might need to make. In other words, it makes perfect sense why Minasian wouldn't want to have a lot of multi-year pitching contracts, because he's got a bunch of young--and cheap--internal options to assess this year, and he won't know what he has to work with--and thus what he needs long-term--until deep into the season.

This^^.

And I would tie this thought to the need for our 1st year GM to further evaluate position player prospects in that some of those pieces will return greater value in trades for pitching than they do currently as their MiLB season progresses.  Given that the Braves have been much more active under AA in in-season trading than the Angels have been, I'm inclined to believe there will be in-season rotation tweaking and perhaps significantly so.

[Warfarin]

8 minutes ago, Junkballer said:

This^^.

And I would tie this thought to the need for our 1st year GM to further evaluate position player prospects in that some of those pieces will return greater value in trades for pitching than they do currently as their MiLB season progresses.  Given that the Braves have been much more active under AA in in-season trading than the Angels have been, I'm inclined to believe there will be in-season rotation tweaking and perhaps significantly so.

I agree with this.

I do think it is likely we re-sign one of our FA SPs, whether it's Bundy, Heaney, or perhaps Quintana.  So I wouldn't be surprised if our 2022 rotation ends up something like this:

Bundy, Canning, Ohtani, Barria, Sandoval, Detmers.

That said, I think what is more likely is we re-sign one to a long-term deal, like Bundy, and we sign another 1-2 SPs on one year deals again, as we aim to have depth, while buying time for our SP prospects to continue to develop.

[Dtwncbad]

16 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

. . . could be a good rotation, with the potential to be very good by 2023.

 

[BTH]

The thing with extending Bundy or Heaney is that I'd rather wait to extend them and pay them the extra $3-5 million (just guessing) that they'd make if they follow up last season with a good 2021 than commit an extension to them without seeing how they follow up their 2020 season.

Basically, it'd be better to pay them $15M a year knowing they'll be a #2 starter than pay them $12M not knowing if they'll be a #2 starter or a #4 starter.

[Angelsjunky]

56 minutes ago, Trendon said:

The thing with extending Bundy or Heaney is that I'd rather wait to extend them and pay them the extra $3-5 million (just guessing) that they'd make if they follow up last season with a good 2021 than commit an extension to them without seeing how they follow up their 2020 season.

Basically, it'd be better to pay them $15M a year knowing they'll be a #2 starter than pay them $12M not knowing if they'll be a #2 starter or a #4 starter.

Sure. Or let's say Bundy establishes himself as a solid #2, and Heaney has a good #3 caliber season. It may be that Minasian will decide to offer Heaney a lower, shorter contract for solid performance (say, 3/$36M) than 5/$65M or more for Bundy. Bundy is not only more likely to be better, but is a few years younger and could conceivably earn a big paycheck.

[ThisismineScios]

7 hours ago, Junkballer said:

This^^.

And I would tie this thought to the need for our 1st year GM to further evaluate position player prospects in that some of those pieces will return greater value in trades for pitching than they do currently as their MiLB season progresses.  Given that the Braves have been much more active under AA in in-season trading than the Angels have been, I'm inclined to believe there will be in-season rotation tweaking and perhaps significantly so.

Hard part about walking into the job after 2020 was that Perry had no chance to evaluate our talent. We’ve been hoping he trades for SP, but Perry doesn’t even know what he has yet. What if Adams turns into a Top 100 guy this year? What if Marsh wins the job in Spring? What if Detmers is good enough to pitch in 3 months? So many unknowns. Perry seems to be stabilizing this year’s team as much as possible, keeping flexibility to evaluate and adjust going forward. 

[disarcina]

12 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

 

Perfect