Random thought

[ten ocho recon scout]

Going back to when Vladdy was hitting FA, we let him walk. Because we were hesitant to give more than a one year deal.

It was understandable at the time. Sacred cow as he was, Vlad was declining. And it didnt help that he rebounded big time the next year for texas (and was at the all star game at angel stadium, wearing a rangers jersey....)

Fast forward 2 years. After being hesitant to give Vladdy 2 years, we gave Pujols 10. And then Hamilton 5. Later 7 (8?) to Rendon.

Not to mention the scores of names like Cozart we gave 3 year deals.

I know obviously Pujols was far better in St Louis than Vlad was here, and a safe bet to still be insanely good.

But its crazy how 2 years spooked us away from a team legend, and how a decade didnt seem like a big deal just two years later.

Not to mention, again with deals like cozart, that we spent the better part of the last decade handing out two year deals to guys who had 2008 Vlad numbers from other teams.

[tdawg87]

Arte is an asshat.

[failos]

I’ll never forgive Arte (or whoever made the decision) for not re-sign Vladdy.

[T.G.]

1 minute ago, failos said:

I’ll never forgive Arte (or whoever made the decision) for not re-sign Vladdy.

@EnglishCop will never forgive you.

[failos]

5 minutes ago, True Grich said:

@EnglishCop will never forgive you.

You misspelled @Taylor

[happybat4]

Vlad wasn't that great in Texas. We made the right call.

[greginpsca]

Vlad had only one good year after he left the Angels. As Buzzie use to say, " It's always better to let'em go a year early than a year late".

[Blarg]

Buzzie made the biggest fuck up in Angels history letting Nolan Ryan walk. 

[greginpsca]

4 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Buzzie made the biggest fuck up in Angels history letting Nolan Ryan walk. 

Agree. But his philosophy was so true regarding Vlad.

[Docwaukee]

people hated Matsui because he wasn't Vlad.  He had a 126 ops+ and 1.5 WAR with the Angels in 2010.  Vladdy had a 119 ops+ in 2010 with texas and 1.1 WAR.  And in 2009, Vlad had a 107 ops+ and 0.5 WAR with the halos.  

Was it a mistake not to bring him back from a PR standpoint?  Maybe a little.  

Lumping this into the category of Albert and Joshy is apples and oranges.  

Cozart was 8 years later after 2 gm changes.  

And player age as well as trajectory is a huge component of those types of decisions for multi year deals.  

The Albert and Hamilton deals were stupid independent of their thought process for Vlad.   Being afraid to sign someone for two years should have no bearing on whether you sign some other player for 5, 7, 10 years etc.  And it didn't.  Those were all uniquely stupid choices 

[Docwaukee]

except Rendon.  That probably ends up a garden variety over pay necessary for most free agents of his caliber as opposed to the atrocity unicorns that were Albert and Josh.  Somehow they found two of them.   

[Angelsjunky]

1 hour ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

Going back to when Vladdy was hitting FA, we let him walk. Because we were hesitant to give more than a one year deal.

It was understandable at the time. Sacred cow as he was, Vlad was declining. And it didnt help that he rebounded big time the next year for texas (and was at the all star game at angel stadium, wearing a rangers jersey....)

Fast forward 2 years. After being hesitant to give Vladdy 2 years, we gave Pujols 10. And then Hamilton 5. Later 7 (8?) to Rendon.

Not to mention the scores of names like Cozart we gave 3 year deals.

I know obviously Pujols was far better in St Louis than Vlad was here, and a safe bet to still be insanely good.

But its crazy how 2 years spooked us away from a team legend, and how a decade didnt seem like a big deal just two years later.

Not to mention, again with deals like cozart, that we spent the better part of the last decade handing out two year deals to guys who had 2008 Vlad numbers from other teams.

2009-13 was a total clusterfuck for this organization, and everything--including the org's mediocrity since then--pretty much followed from the collapse of the team after 2009.

But it wasn't really the loss of Vlad that led to what followed, at least no more than symbolically. And remember, it wasn't just Vlad, but also Figgins and Lackey who left the team. The team lost their best hitter, best starter, and best overall player (at least in 2009). 

But as has been said, it wasn't bad that the Angels didn't re-sign Vlad. He went from 0.5 WAR and 107 wRC+ for the Angels in 2009 to 1.1 and a 119 wRC+ in 2010. His replacement, Hideki Matsui, was actually a bit better: 126 wRC+ and 1.5 WAR.

But it wasn't just the departure of those three that saw the team tank: the lineup, in general, just sucked in 2010. Compare the top position players by WAR in each year:

2009: Figgins 6.6, Hunter 3.8, Aybar 3.8, Morales 3.7, Izturis 3.2, Abreu 2.7, Rivera 2.6, Kendrick 2.1, Napoli 2.1

2010: Hunter 3.2, Abreu 2.4, Napoli 2.1, Bourjos 1.8, Kendrick 1.7, Morales 1.6, Matsui 1.5, Aybar 1.2, Izturis 1.1

Meaning, the top four players in 2009 were all better than the best player in 2010, at least according to WAR.

Also, consider that they essentially replaced Figgins with a combination of Brandon Wood, Albert Callaspo, and Kevin Frandsen. That alone saw a massive WAR swing: Figgins' 6.6 was replaced with a cumulutive -2.3 from those three, a 9 WAR swing. Now Figgins probably wouldn't have repeated that--he certainly didn't for Seattle, losing his starting job by 2011. His collapse is a bit mysterious. But it does explain a lot of went wrong for the Angels in 2010.

Other factors include Morales infamous injury and an off year by Aybar.

And of course the team did bounce back somewhat in 2011, going from 80 wins in 2010 to 86 wins in 2011, with some really good seasons from Kendrick (5.4 WAR), Bourjos (4.3), Aybar (3.8), and Callaspo (3.6), although pretty weak after that. They also had one of the best 1-2 punches in the rotation they've ever had, with Haren and Weaver. But it wasn't enough to get them back to the playoffs and Arte got squirrelly. 

Anyhow, what I think really happened in 2010 is a natural down-swing after a strong era. Players were aging out, and several prospects (Wood, Mathis, McPherson, Kotchman, Morales, and of course Adenhart) didn't perform as hoped to replace them. 

What Arte did, in his desperation to remain relevant, strangely ignored Adrian Beltre and then, after (thankfully) missing out on Carl Crawford, pushed one disaster after another: the Vernon Wells trade before the 2011 season, the Pujols and Wilson contracts after that season, and then Josh Hamilton after 2012. In less than two years, he crippled the franchise for years to come, forever putting to bed the silly "But it's not my money!" notion.

What the Angels probably should have done is weather the natural down-turn, and remain focused on the farm. And most importantly: Not burden the franchise with multiple albatross contracts that saw the Angels spending the following:

2011: Wells 0.4 WAR ($26.2M) 

2012: Wells 0.2 ($21M), Pujols 3.3 ($12M) = 3.5 WAR for $33M

2013: Wells 0.0 ($14M*), Pujols 2.7 ($16M), Hamilton 1.3 ($17M) = 4.0 WAR for $47M

2014: Wells 0.0 ($14M*), Pujols 1.6 ($23M) Hamilton 1.1 ($17M) = 2.7 WAR for $54M

2015: Pujols 0.8 ($24M), Hamilton 0.0 ($20.7M) = 0.8 WAR for $45M

2016: Pujols -0.2 ($25M), Hamilton 0.0 ($26.4M) = -0.2 WAR for $51M

2017: Pujols -2.0 ($26M), Hamilton 0.0 ($26.4M) = -2.0 WAR for $52M

*The Angels miraculously got the Yankees to pay down $13.9M of what the Angels owed Wells, so I just subtracted $7M from each year.

As you can see above, the Angels were spending more and more on these players, for less and less performance. By the time you get to 2017, they paid $52M for -2 WAR from Pujols.

The team also had a ton of just terrible luck with their young starters in the 2014-16 range, so after Haren and Santana left and Weaver's arm went all gumby, there was no one really to replace them. And of course that period was the height of their "superstar and scrubs" approach to the lineup: from 2005-20, only one position players other than Trout surpassed 4 WAR: Simmons in both 2018 and '19.

And of course they had another dud on their hands in Wells who, after performing well in 27 games in 2017, was rewarded with a nine-figure five-year contract, which has yielded one solid season, a 2.9 WAR in 2018. From 2019-21, he's produced -0.1 WAR for $59M (adjusted for 2020). But Arte made up by signing Anthony Rendon, right? Right?! (tbd).

I'm being typically long-winded, but there is something morbidly entertaining about revisiting the sordid last 12 years of Angels baseball. But there's room to be hopeful, if for no other reason that Pujols is gone and this is the last year of Upton being on the books. Yes, they're paying Trout and Rendon a mint, and both are on the wrong side of 30 and will inevitably start declining within the next few years (if they aren't already), but at least their outlook is a whole lot better than Hamilton's, Pujols', and Wells' were when the Angels signed them.

I hope.

Edited February 3, 2022 by Angelsjunky

[Angelsjunky]

14 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

except Rendon.  That probably ends up a garden variety over pay necessary for most free agents of his caliber as opposed to the atrocity unicorns that were Albert and Josh.  Somehow they found two of them.   

As you can see, I gave a very wordy elaboration on some of the things you said, and added a bit of stuff.

But I wanted to comment on Rendon, who I briefly touched upon at the end of my post. I'm reasonably optimistic that they won't have a Wells/Pujols/Hamilton/Upton debacle on their hands, for a few reasons:

One, it is "only" five more years. That's still the whole contract of Hamilton and Upton, but only half that of Pujols.

Two and three, and more importantly, Rendon's plate discipline and overall approach. He's a very patient hitter and seems to have a laid back personality. Albert's BB% peaked in 2009 at 16.4%, dropped back to 14.7% in 2010, then plummeted to 9.4% in 2011, and continued to drop from that point on. What I think happened is that he started to lose a bit starting in 2010: if you look at his in-season numbers, his decline actually started in the second half of that year. He started pressing, and became a much less disciplined hitter. As I and others (probably you) have remarked, his decline probably could have been slowed if he accepted the impact of Father Time and just focused on getting the ball in play and/or on-base, rather than swinging for the fences every time.

If and when Rendon's skills start to erode, I think he'll be more laid back about it and focus on what he can do. He'll draw a bunch of walks, still hit some HR, hit for a decent average, and only slowly go down. Maybe he doesn't have another 7 WAR season in him, but I could see the next three or four being in the 4-5 WAR range.

 

 

Edited February 3, 2022 by Angelsjunky

[T.G.]

4 hours ago, greginpsca said:

Vlad had only one good year after he left the Angels. As Buzzie use to say, " It's always better to let'em go a year early than a year late".

That was actually Branch Rickey

[Dtwncbad]

I am comfortable with the Vlad legacy and how it played out.

The Angels seized on an opportunity and landed some good years.  I have no regrets overall.  Nothing is perfect.  I am good with the big picture without nitpicking at how it could have been better.

[ten ocho recon scout]

22 hours ago, Dochalo said:

people hated Matsui because he wasn't Vlad.  He had a 126 ops+ and 1.5 WAR with the Angels in 2010.  Vladdy had a 119 ops+ in 2010 with texas and 1.1 WAR.  And in 2009, Vlad had a 107 ops+ and 0.5 WAR with the halos.  

Was it a mistake not to bring him back from a PR standpoint?  Maybe a little.  

Lumping this into the category of Albert and Joshy is apples and oranges.  

Cozart was 8 years later after 2 gm changes.  

And player age as well as trajectory is a huge component of those types of decisions for multi year deals.  

The Albert and Hamilton deals were stupid independent of their thought process for Vlad.   Being afraid to sign someone for two years should have no bearing on whether you sign some other player for 5, 7, 10 years etc.  And it didn't.  Those were all uniquely stupid choices 

Yeah, I know that Vlad isnt at all the same as Pujols. And I (sort of) get hamilton... I think that was more Trout than anything. Trout shocked the world, and the idea of him and Trumbo, with Albert, adding Hamilton was pretty insane. (On paper, at the time)

And I get that Vlad was at the tail end, and was a shell at that point.

I was ok letting him walk... but also thought at the time (and now) that he was enough of an Angel legend to gamble a bad 2 year deal. 

We gave Abreu a 2 year deal that winter. And we can argue that he was the better guy at getting on base, and a better baserunner. But he was the same age, and its not like his 2010 with us was a whole lot better than Vlads w texas. And both sucked in 2011.

I just think Vlad was worth it, to the org, to throw money away on for a year.

Same as Trout, knowing well before hand that the end of his deal is going to be very ugly.