Two basic near-certainties that frame the future

[BTH]

17 minutes ago, Docwaukee said:

because if there's anything that young players need it's consistency.  And at some point you have to trust that your process is good.  You also have to know when to blow it up.  But you do your best to put something in place based on all your research and experience and intelligence.  And you don't change it every year because that's even more of a problem.

Reed has been the hitting coach since Brad Ausmus took over as manager in 2019.

I agree that consistency is needed, but I also think the GM needs to have his own coaching staff in place.

It should work like this: hire a GM, let the new GM pick his manager, and let those two pick their coaching staff.

Instead, it has worked like this:

Reagins comes in, doesn’t get to choose his manager/coaching staff

Dipoto comes in, doesn’t get to choose his manager but changes a couple coaches.

Eppler comes in, doesn’t get to choose his manager for 3 years but changes a couple coaches along the way before choosing all his coaches with his new manager.

Eppler’s manager gets fired after 1 year and doesn’t get to choose his next manager, while the new manager brings in some of his new coaches.

Minasian comes in and doesn’t get to choose his own manager, but brings in some new coaches.

[Docwaukee]

And this may sound too 'out there' for some, but you have to establish a probabilistic framework for potential success because all of these decisions are made under a veil of uncertainty.

it's sports.  Nothing is black and white.  Like anything that involves people. 

Every roster should be looked at critically and evaluated internally.  A huge mistake is not being realistic with what you have and what you want.  And if you start from the standpoint of being unrealistic then it's going to guide your decision making process into a place that doesn't have good odds of success.   

There is a threshold of talent necessary to achieve certain levels of success.  Whether it's the playoffs or a championship.  If you can't realistically determine that based on all the information you're provided as a GM then go get more information.  If you can't have a frank conversation with your owner about what you are and what you realistically expect to be, then you're going to swirl in a sea of noise and force a path that just doesn't make sense.  

Many.  Most of the decisions made for this franchise over the last decade have been set in place by an unrealistic expectation.  Go back to the core and be honest about who and what you are and then make decisions for the future based on that.  

[Stradling]

1 hour ago, Trendon said:

this, 100%
 

so why do they keep rolling with the same coaching staff that has proven to be incapable of developing those players?

Who are you referring to?

[Docwaukee]

21 minutes ago, Trendon said:

Reed has been the hitting coach since Brad Ausmus took over as manager in 2019.

I agree that consistency is needed, but I also think the GM needs to have his own coaching staff in place.

It should work like this: hire a GM, let the new GM pick his manager, and let those two pick their coaching staff.

Instead, it has worked like this:

Reagins comes in, doesn’t get to choose his manager/coaching staff

Dipoto comes in, doesn’t get to choose his manager but changes a couple coaches.

Eppler comes in, doesn’t get to choose his manager for 3 years but changes a couple coaches along the way before choosing all his coaches with his new manager.

Eppler’s manager gets fired after 1 year and doesn’t get to choose his next manager, while the new manager brings in some of his new coaches.

Minasian comes in and doesn’t get to choose his own manager, but brings in some new coaches.

while I agree that coaching is somewhat important, it's a micro as to the big picture of leadership for this franchise.  

[AngelsLakersFan]

20 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

They have been quietly “rebuilding” for a few years now.  You just refuse to see it.

The rebuild didn't work unfortunately.

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Docwaukee said:

while I agree that coaching is somewhat important, it's a micro as to the big picture of leadership for this franchise.  

And we were talking about the development of young players and when I think development I’m thinking before they get to the big leagues. Reed should be there to help with their swing, not develop their swing or rework their swing at the major league level. 

[Docwaukee]

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

And we were talking about the development of young players and when I think development I’m thinking before they get to the big leagues. Reed should be there to help with their swing, not develop their swing or rework their swing at the major league level. 

of course.  coaching at the major league level should help to reiterate and sustain whatever success was happening in the minors but also work with vets who may have come up under a different philosophy.  

[Stradling]

Just now, Docwaukee said:

of course.  coaching at the major league level should help to reiterate and sustain whatever success was happening in the minors but also work with vets who may have come up under a different philosophy.  

Yep. Reed won’t be the guy moving forward. 

[BTH]

9 minutes ago, Stradling said:

And we were talking about the development of young players and when I think development I’m thinking before they get to the big leagues. Reed should be there to help with their swing, not develop their swing or rework their swing at the major league level. 

I mean, Reed was the minor league hitting coordinator when Adell, Marsh, etc. were in the minors.

And on that same note, Wise was the minor league pitching coordinator when the young pitchers were in the minors as well.

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, Trendon said:

I mean, Reed was the minor league hitting coordinator when Adell, Marsh, etc. were in the minors.

And on that same note, Wise was the minor league pitching coordinator when the young pitchers were in the minors as well.

Ok and when Reed was the minor league hitting instructor how were Adell and Marsh hitting in the minors?  Wise had nothing to work with in the minors, I mean Barria and Suarez?  Really?

[Angelsjunky]

16 minutes ago, Docwaukee said:

It's kinda like when the favorite toy gets broken.  And you spend hours trying to fix it.  You go buy glue and tape and jerry rig the shit out of it and maybe get it back to functional but it never really works right after that and you can sure as shit tell that it was and pretty much still is broken.   

That pretty much describes the Angels from 2010 on. Arte's toy (the 2004-09 perennial contender) broke, and he tried to fix it, first through Reagins then through Dipoto, with hilarity ensuing. 

The problem is that the 2004-09 toy was largely built through the savvy GMing of Bill Stoneman, both in terms of drafting, farm development, trades, and free agent signings. The top performers during that time were Lackey, Figgins, and Vlad. Lackey was drafted and developed through the farm, Figgins was traded for as a prospect for Kimera Bartee, and Vlad was a free agent signing. All very smart moves.

That said, Stoneman isn't entirely off the hook. The Angels' top-ranked farm system during that time yielded some good players, but also lots of disappointments, which in turn led to a depleted farm c. 2010, with not as much to show for it in the majors as hoped. Kotchman, Mathis, McPherson, and Wood were all "supposed to be" fixtures of that post-2009 team.

But the real "breaking of the franchise" was the series of acquisitions made from pre-2011 (Wells) to pre-2013 (Hamilton), with Pujols the meat in that shit sandwich. Wilson and Weaver were also meh-to-bad contracts.

What "should" have happened is a rebuild in 2010. Arte didn't want to lose his status of a first tier contender - he wanted to complete with the Dodgers. What he didn't realize is that even good teams go through cycles, unless you're the Yankees and can just continually sign more and more free agents. And of course the Yankees put lots of money into scouting and development, something Arte has seemed unwilling to do.

I think you are right that 2014 had a long-term bad effect, but the Angels were also hit with some terrible lucking in 2015-16 when every young pitcher went down for an extended time, and almost none of them came back and fulfilled their promise. So for the next five years, the Eppler Era, we had a team that was never bad enough to completely scrap, but never good enough to contend. And of course for some of that, the looming prospect of Trout's free agency.

TLDR: So we had the missed rebuild of 2010, and then again around 2015, and the crippling albatross contracts and a slow-to-recover farm system. As has been said, the Angels are in a kind of long-term rebuild, but it is slow to actualize. But for better or worse, all the Angels can really do is stay the course and hope the farm starts bearing fruits, and avoid more desperation albatross contracts. Oh, and learn from past mistakes and make smarter moves in the future.

[AngelsLakersFan]

1 hour ago, Angelsjunky said:

What I find concerning is how many of these guys have disappointed - it isn't a very good ratio. 

Let's take the three outfielders you mentioned. I still believe that Marsh and Adell will become good major leaguers, maybe even All-Star caliber players at some point. But it has gone from "probable stars" to "hopefully decent major leaguers" in just a couple years. The potential is there - we've seen it in bursts. But the fact that they showed up in the majors looking so raw, with huge gaps in their development, is concerning. And the fact that we see no signs of those gaps being addressed is also concerning.

I still think Adams could become a dynamic fourth outfielder/fringe starter. But he also has shown no development. Paris is too young to give up on, but he has had a disappointing year. Etc.

So I'm not sure where the problem is: Are the Angels drafting the wrong guys, or is it more a problem of the development within the system? Given the obvious talent of these guys, I'm thinking the latter, but it could also be some of the former: e.g. drafting a guy like Adams--with "sexy athleticism" but no baseball skills--in the first round. He looks like the type of guy you're willing to take a risk on as a 2nd or 3rd round pick, not a 1st rounder.

Obviously I think the issue is on the development side, and I think Jo Adell is a great example of this. The fact that he was called up when he was, and showed defense as bad as he did has to prove that there is a disconnect.

My scouting report on him would have read, "not a major league capable defender at the moment." You have to know Eppler had the report on Jo, so either he ignored that piece of the report or that report did not state it in the first place.

If your own scouts and development guys didn't realize that Adell couldn't play defense, then how can we expect them to be capable of teaching him to play defense in the first place??

[Angelsjunky]

14 minutes ago, Stradling said:

And we were talking about the development of young players and when I think development I’m thinking before they get to the big leagues. Reed should be there to help with their swing, not develop their swing or rework their swing at the major league level. 

This makes me think that the missed 2020 minor league season had a huge impact. That was the year that Adell and Marsh should have been fine-turning in AAA. Instead, Adell was rushed and Marsh was rushed in 2021. Both could have used a couple uninterrupted seasons in AA/AAA, rather than the piecemeal and up-and-down seasons they got.

But I agree with Doc: send Marsh down for a few weeks to rebuild his confidence, and play Adell everyday to see if things can start clicking for him.

[AngelsLakersFan]

41 minutes ago, Docwaukee said:

And this may sound too 'out there' for some, but you have to establish a probabilistic framework for potential success because all of these decisions are made under a veil of uncertainty.

it's sports.  Nothing is black and white.  Like anything that involves people. 

Every roster should be looked at critically and evaluated internally.  A huge mistake is not being realistic with what you have and what you want.  And if you start from the standpoint of being unrealistic then it's going to guide your decision making process into a place that doesn't have good odds of success.   

There is a threshold of talent necessary to achieve certain levels of success.  Whether it's the playoffs or a championship.  If you can't realistically determine that based on all the information you're provided as a GM then go get more information.  If you can't have a frank conversation with your owner about what you are and what you realistically expect to be, then you're going to swirl in a sea of noise and force a path that just doesn't make sense.  

Many.  Most of the decisions made for this franchise over the last decade have been set in place by an unrealistic expectation.  Go back to the core and be honest about who and what you are and then make decisions for the future based on that.  

The guys who interviewed for the GM position and gave Arte an honest and realistic take on the organization were not hired.

[AngelsLakersFan]

21 minutes ago, Docwaukee said:

while I agree that coaching is somewhat important, it's a micro as to the big picture of leadership for this franchise.  

When you can point to just about everything as "not working" then the problem is always at the top.

[Angelsjunky]

32 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

The rebuild hasn't worked yet, unfortunately.

Fixed. Consider:

- Ward looked like he was having a breakout season at 28. The jury is still out on who he "really" is, but presumably still better than he was last year and before, and a quality major league regular.

- Adell and Marsh are still young enough to expect improvement.

- Rengifo is becoming a solid major leaguer at 25.

- Patrick Sandoval is at least a good #3, and a major part of the rebuild. Detmers is doing OK in his first full year, and is just 22.

- The Angels AA pitching staff is doing very well - with lots of potential future major leaguers, some of whom we might see get auditions this year.

- There's still a bunch of position player talent in the low minors, who can hopefully start percolating to the majors over the next few years. Stand-outs include Edgar Quero (a catcher!), Werner Blakely, Adrian Placencia, and hopefully Zach Neto.

 

[Duren, Duren]

Too many GM and managerial changes. In other words, lack of patience and frustration that positive results aren't appearing fast enough. 

I think a factor may be that part of the urgency has been to take advantage of Trout's prime. Everyone knows that age will eventually reduce his greatness. And this negates over a longer term radical rebuild. 

Around baseball, one of the first things you hear about the team is how Trout has been absent from the post season virtually all his career. With the three losing games he did play early on  held up as a kind of mockery of the franchise.

When Eppler extended him the general feeling was that they were focussed on building a contending team around him in the next couple of years. I doubt they sign Rendon otherwise. Or go with that makeshift assortment of broken down starters on one year contracts. And since then it's been a kind of panic of patchwork adaptations. Different general managers, different managers, no continuity at all.

At the same time, when Trout was extended Ohtani hadn't shown his full potential and was dealing with injuries. His emerging as a double threat MVP with looming free agency has just complicated any Angel roster strategy. Ironically, signs of Trout becoming less than the best while Ohtani is peaking may indicate different trajectories. 

It seems the window of both Trout and Ohtani leading the team together into the playoffs has virtually shut. Maybe next year will be the only chance they have. Potentially Ohtani's last and Trout still better than most, but injury prone with slight but recognizable decline.

The team needs a long term rebuild. But that means multiple changes, an infusion of youth, more experimentation,  accepting the fact that they won't contend for some more seasons. 

Trout and Ohtani don't really fit that scheme. They are much more valuable as assets. Yet they are the face of the franchise, and losing either or both will seriously impact attendence and income. 

Don't forget that Arte isn't getting any younger either. Maybe he will still try to remain the eternal optimist.  Hope against hope that Perry can magically find pieces to fill in for one last push next year. 

 

 

 

[AngelsLakersFan]

10 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Fixed. Consider:

- Ward looked like he was having a breakout season at 28. The jury is still out on who he "really" is, but presumably still better than he was last year and before, and a quality major league regular.

- Adell and Marsh are still young enough to expect improvement.

- Rengifo is becoming a solid major leaguer at 25.

- Patrick Sandoval is at least a good #3, and a major part of the rebuild. Detmers is doing OK in his first full year, and is just 22.

- The Angels AA pitching staff is doing very well - with lots of potential future major leaguers, some of whom we might see get auditions this year.

- There's still a bunch of position player talent in the low minors, who can hopefully start percolating to the majors over the next few years. Stand-outs include Edgar Quero (a catcher!), Werner Blakely, Adrian Placencia, and hopefully Zach Neto.

 

The problem is these guys didn't contribute in time to make an impact.

The window closes next year when Ohtani walks, and Trout and Rendon are a year older and more expensive. Maybe they all put it together next year, but as it looks right now these guys are a ways off.

If the farm really does bear fruit two years from now they are going to need to improve by 10-15 war just to break even with this garbage team. In other words, the rebuild failed.

[Docwaukee]

10 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

The problem is these guys didn't contribute in time to make an impact.

The window closes next year when Ohtani walks, and Trout and Rendon are a year older and more expensive. Maybe they all put it together next year, but as it looks right now these guys are a ways off.

If the farm really does bear fruit two years from now they are going to need to improve by 10-15 war just to break even with this garbage team. In other words, the rebuild failed.

that's why this year is such a disaster.  And I don't think the rebuild has totally failed.  It just yet another massive miscalculation of what you thought you had from what you actually had for this year.  And the decision making process of how to build the team based on that.  They've got some potential talent.  Some good young players.  But they've constantly overestimated the level of contribution from certain players in certain areas and built the team on a year to year based on that.  

Did the org sit in a room like an AW roundtable and assume 3-4 WAR from Marsh?  And 3 WAR from Stassi?  And a combined 2-3 WAR from the MIF?  And 25 WAR from Ohtani, Rendon and Trout?  And another 1.5 WAR season from Loup?  And Tepera?  

It legitimately sound like @Angelsjunky (no offense) trying to craft 90 wins out of a roster that's probably closer to 80 without disasters and is now 70 with said disasters.  

Delusional roster construction propagates further delusional decision making.  If players x, y, and z do this, then all we need are these other two guys who need to do that.  It's how you end up with the motley crew of FA's and trades they've put together over the last decade.  

and all because the mantra for many of those seasons was to 'remain competitive' when it was never a realistic option.  

you'd think that most teams would be better at not letting hope get in the way of reality.  

[AngelsLakersFan]

10 minutes ago, Docwaukee said:

that's why this year is such a disaster.  And I don't think the rebuild has totally failed.  It just yet another massive miscalculation of what you thought you had from what you actually had for this year.  And the decision making process of how to build the team based on that.  They've got some potential talent.  Some good young players.  But they've constantly overestimated the level of contribution from certain players in certain areas and built the team on a year to year based on that.  

Did the org sit in a room like an AW roundtable and assume 3-4 WAR from Marsh?  And 3 WAR from Stassi?  And a combined 2-3 WAR from the MIF?  And 25 WAR from Ohtani, Rendon and Trout?  And another 1.5 WAR season from Loup?  And Tepera?  

It legitimately sound like @Angelsjunky (no offense) trying to craft 90 wins out of a roster that's probably closer to 80 without disasters and is now 70 with said disasters.  

Delusional roster construction propagates further delusional decision making.  If players x, y, and z do this, then all we need are these other two guys who need to do that.  It's how you end up with the motley crew of FA's and trades they've put together over the last decade.  

and all because the mantra for many of those seasons was to 'remain competitive' when it was never a realistic option.  

you'd think that most teams would be better at not letting hope get in the way of reality.  

It's really become a Christmas tradition at this point.

And I'll agree with you that the rebuild hasn't totally failed, but where it did fail was in it's timing in relation to the window this team legitimately had for contention. It speaks to the disaster that was the concept of a soft rebuild. The soft rebuild meant it was going to take longer and the fruits of it would be spread out over a longer time frame. So here we are now, watching Ohtani dominate the game, likely to leave in a year, while Trout sits on the IL with a career high strike out rate and our young core remains a season or two away. 

So the rebuild philosophy has meant that the fruits of the rebuild will not contribute at the same time as Ohtani and Trout and big money Rendon. The organization will now have to sustain itself on this young core which is not producing a lot of value at the moment along with a farm system that is rated among the worst in baseball.

[Docwaukee]

6 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

It's really become a Christmas tradition at this point.

And I'll agree with you that the rebuild hasn't totally failed, but where it did fail was in it's timing in relation to the window this team legitimately had for contention. It speaks to the disaster that was the concept of a soft rebuild. The soft rebuild meant it was going to take longer and the fruits of it would be spread out over a longer time frame. So here we are now, watching Ohtani dominate the game, likely to leave in a year, while Trout sits on the IL with a career high strike out rate and our young core remains a season or two away. 

So the rebuild philosophy has meant that the fruits of the rebuild will not contribute at the same time as Ohtani and Trout and big money Rendon. The organization will now have to sustain itself on this young core which is not producing a lot of value at the moment along with a farm system that is rated among the worst in baseball.

yep.  and that's my point.  being unrealistic about the process.  Forcing unrealistic expectations on guys and then thinking that ignoring other areas or focusing on certain areas.  

Why do you sign Loup and Tepera and keep Raisel?  Because you delude yourself that you've got enough elsewhere and that they are the missing pieces.  Same applies to Rendon.  

And the 2019 free agent disaster.  

Every year it's some sort of exercise in hoping that 1/3rd of the roster does something they've never done or they did once or they did a really long time ago.  You can pull the occasional rabbit out of your hat.  You should.  That should be a reasonable expectation for a good GM.  If you think you can pull nine rabbits out of your hat, you better be cheating or smarter than everyone else in an industry that probably has one of the larger collections of smart people.  

[AngelsFaninGA]

On 7/22/2022 at 1:16 PM, Angels 1961 said:

Angels have planned on contending the last 7 years how has that worked out? Please let's go in a different direction tear this mess down.

Maybe they should try the opposite approach. Fire sale and intentionally field the worst team possible. Then suddenly they win 105 games and make the WS

[Angelsjunky]

No offense taken, @Docwaukee, but wasn't their good reason to be more optimistic about this year? 

Was there any reason to think that Raisel would start blowing saves left and right, and all three of Loup, Tepera and Bradley would be significantly worse than last year?

Was there any reason to think that both Adell and Marsh would be this bad? Or that Rendon couldn't stay healthy for at least most of the year? Or that Fletcher would be out most of the year? Or that Walsh and Stassi would regress this badly?

It was reasonable to assume that the Angels were a legit 85-win team that could win 90+ games if more went right then wrong. I think that's what Minasian hope for.

So it was reasonable for Minasian to build the team he did--at least in terms of the lineup, rotation and bullpen--and for us to hope for more. Where the error came - which you pointed out before the year started - is that Minasian didn't build any depth beyond the regulars. Part of that is simply the problem of a weak farm system, but he could have anticipated the problems and done a better job with the bench he assembled. 

My point being, I don't think Minasian erred in thinking the frontline players would be pretty good - and they were for the first 40 games. Where he erred is that the talent of the team was paper-thin, sort of like the Old West town in Blazing Saddles. 

And props to you for pointing this out before the season even started. 

 

[ThisismineScios]

To me, a major thing missing is the lack of a true breakthrough from a young player. Good teams that develop talent always have it. Arozarena, Will Smith, Austin Riley, Jeremy Pena, Devers, et al just to name a few--young guys that had major breakouts that vaulted their team to another level. This kind of stuff only happens with good development staffs. The Angels have really been lacking in this department for awhile. But what kind of strikes me about the last two years--and forgive me if this is a milquetoast idea--is that guys experiencing some level of success do not attain prolonged success when they are promoted. Blah blah, fire Reed and Wise. But Adell and Marsh have had a lot of ABs after doing well in AAA. Detmers tore through AA and AAA last year and hit a wall--to be expected, sure, but he struggled again this year. Suarez. Rengifo, until now. Thaiss. Peguero. Marte. Silseth (after his first start). I can't remember a guy getting promoted and breaking out since...? It isn't unrealistic to expect guys to do that. But it can't all fall on the players or the minor league coaches when these guys have a good amount of success in the minors, are promoted, and can't sustain nearly any of that success. This is where I believe the hitting coaches and the pitching coaches do have a direct impact, or at least CAN have a direct impact. I don't blame Reed for Adell and Marsh's struggles; but would a better hitting coach have helped them? I do believe so. Same with Wise and Suarez, Peguero, Marte, Detmers and Silseth. No prolonged success. I will give him whatever credit he is due for Sandoval; but what other pitchers have come up and solidified a role? 

[Angels 1961]

7 hours ago, Docwaukee said:

And this may sound too 'out there' for some, but you have to establish a probabilistic framework for potential success because all of these decisions are made under a veil of uncertainty.

it's sports.  Nothing is black and white.  Like anything that involves people. 

Every roster should be looked at critically and evaluated internally.  A huge mistake is not being realistic with what you have and what you want.  And if you start from the standpoint of being unrealistic then it's going to guide your decision making process into a place that doesn't have good odds of success.   

There is a threshold of talent necessary to achieve certain levels of success.  Whether it's the playoffs or a championship.  If you can't realistically determine that based on all the information you're provided as a GM then go get more information.  If you can't have a frank conversation with your owner about what you are and what you realistically expect to be, then you're going to swirl in a sea of noise and force a path that just doesn't make sense.  

Many.  Most of the decisions made for this franchise over the last decade have been set in place by an unrealistic expectation.  Go back to the core and be honest about who and what you are and then make decisions for the future based on that.  

I understand they need a rebuild