2023

[BigVladdy]

10 hours ago, tdawg87 said:

If all that happens, we can compete for a WC spot. 

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

As has been said, we NEED proven major leaguers. Not a bunch of "IF's".... "if he plays to his potential, if he stays healthy". I realize there's not much you can do to control health, but you can certainly do better than Wade, Velasquez, Duffy, and, excuse me while I throw up in my mouth, ... Suzuki. The list goes on.

Trout's gonna get hurt. Rendon's gonna get hurt. SIGN COMPETENT BACK UPS!!!!!

[Stradling]

19 minutes ago, BigVladdy said:

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

As has been said, we NEED proven major leaguers. Not a bunch of "IF's".... "if he plays to his potential, if he stays healthy". I realize there's not much you can do to control health, but you can certainly do better than Wade, Velasquez, Duffy, and, excuse me while I throw up in my mouth, ... Suzuki. The list goes on.

Trout's gonna get hurt. Rendon's gonna get hurt. SIGN COMPETENT BACK UPS!!!!!

They’ll have to sign a Justin Turner type that can play first and third, maybe a Drury type. Then sign an outfielder that is a starter.  

[Jeff Fletcher]

19 hours ago, Angels 1961 said:

Jeff, if Mike Trout wanted to be traded and new ownership wanted to trade him, could they decent prospects. Not paying any of his contract.

I don't think they'd get really good prospects unless they wanted to pay some of the money. And, honestly, if they did want to trade him, they'd be better off paying more of his contract to get better prospects. The money you save by not paying Trout is only good for signing other 29+ year old players. But if you can "buy" prospects, that can be a better use of money.

When the Yankees took all of Stanton's contract, what did the Marlins get?

Look at what just happened when the Braves took all of Iglesias' contract.

[Hubs]

Honestly, 2023 is going to feature a lot of tweaks. I think they'll have the same payroll as in 2022, but not more or much more anyway as I hoped Arte would put a few million more into the lineup. 

Spotrac has them at 97 before arbitration and club control contracts. The players under contract are Rendon, Trout, Loup, Tepera, Stassi, and Fletcher.

They have 20 spots to fill. 

Potential Arbitration contracts include: Barria, Canning, Mayers, Ohtani, Rengifo, Sandoval, Toussaint, Walsh, and Ward.

That's a big group, bigger than they've had in years. Not all of them will be back, but I feel most will, Mayers and Toussaint are the obvious possible non-tenders, but neither will make much money, so maybe they just bring them back. Let's say they bring back one of Mayers or Toussaint and the rest of them, so 7 of 9 spots. Canning can't be relied on to be on major league roster, so I will count him, but not on the 26.

Ohtani is gonna cost the most, 30? but Barria, Rengifo, Mayers, Sandoval, Walsh and Ward all probably get 10-15M total. Canning is an interesting case, as he won't get much more than the minimum, even if he's brought back or even eligible. I don't know how players arbitration works when they've missed most of the last two seasons. Let's say 45M for arb.

Pre-Arb Club Control Contracts include: Adell, Davidson, Detmers, Ford, Herget, Moniak, Quijada, Reyes, C-Rod, Rojas, Suarez, Silseth, Thaiss, Velazquez, Wantz and maybe Warren. All other guys at SLC and AA would be pre-arb as well.

A lot of these guys have options, so not all will be on team and not all will be out of organization. Also none cost money.

So lets say they're at 150 with their existing contracts and 8 of 9 arbitration guys, plus say 9 of the pre-arb group. (For my purposes, that's Adell, Detmers, Herget, Moniak, Quijada, C-Rod, Suarez, Velazquez and Wantz.

That's then 22 of 26 spots filled. 

They need 4 outside guys and let's say have 40M for those 4 guys.

What positions do they need?

Well, LF, RF, CF, OF, 3B, 2B, 1B, SS, MINF, and C are here, plus SP1/DH, SP2, SP4, SP5, and SP6. CL and 5 RP spots. So you need (2) hitters one being a backup or platoon C, (1) SP, and (1 or 2) Relievers. 

They're not going to spend wildly, but Syndergaard & Bradley can be back, and then you add a backup catcher for peanuts and one solid hitter. Or promote O'Hoppe or Thaiss or Wallach. No reason to spend money here with O' Hoppe close to major league ready.

What position to add as a hitter? Well, either an OF which pushes Adell or Moniak off the roster, or an MINF which pushes Velazquez off. Or you add two lower cost vets, one at 1B platoon, one at MINF.

I'd love Trey Mancini, Dansby Swanson, Noah Syndergaard and Archie Bradley, and promote O'Hoppe to platoon with Stassi.

That's gonna cost too much, but Mancini, Syndergaard, Bradley, and a part time infielder like Duffy or maybe Segura can be done. It depends on how much they pay Syndergaard and Mancini. Neto is gonna be up soon, as will Jackson, so... they may not add a SS/2B. But they should consider it.

 

 

 

[DMVol]

1 hour ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I don't think they'd get really good prospects unless they wanted to pay some of the money. And, honestly, if they did want to trade him, they'd be better off paying more of his contract to get better prospects. The money you save by not paying Trout is only good for signing other 29+ year old players. But if you can "buy" prospects, that can be a better use of money.

When the Yankees took all of Stanton's contract, what did the Marlins get?

Look at what just happened when the Braves took all of Iglesias' contract.

Jeff: Were there better offers for Iglesias and Syndegaard if the Angels had taken on money?

[Jeff Fletcher]

2 hours ago, DMVol said:

Jeff: Were there better offers for Iglesias and Syndegaard if the Angels had taken on money?

I don't know.

[Revad]

I’m sure there were better prospects available if the Angels picked up some or all of the salary.  Perhaps Arte had already decided to sell and just wanted the cost savings but it doesn’t seem smart for the future.

[BTH]

1 hour ago, Revad said:

I’m sure there were better prospects available if the Angels picked up some or all of the salary.  Perhaps Arte had already decided to sell and just wanted the cost savings but it doesn’t seem smart for the future.

Well I doubt Arte cares about what’s “smart for the future” when he’s not gonna be the owner for that future.

You’re right in that he just wanted the cost savings.

[ten ocho recon scout]

1 hour ago, Trendon said:

Well I doubt Arte cares about what’s “smart for the future” when he’s not gonna be the owner for that future.

You’re right in that he just wanted the cost savings.

The look during the little mini fire sale was that we were saving money for Ohtani. It's very possible it was just to make it more attractive to potential buyers.

Then again, it could be both. Perhaps Moreno intends to lock up Ohtani with a mega deal, but not have a whole lot left on the books after that.

[Angels 1961]

22 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I don't think they'd get really good prospects unless they wanted to pay some of the money. And, honestly, if they did want to trade him, they'd be better off paying more of his contract to get better prospects. The money you save by not paying Trout is only good for signing other 29+ year old players. But if you can "buy" prospects, that can be a better use of money.

When the Yankees took all of Stanton's contract, what did the Marlins get?

Look at what just happened when the Braves took all of Iglesias' contract.

I have no idea what direction new ownership will take. If it takes over 12 months to be in place Ohtani could be a free agent. Trout would have about 275 million left for 7 years. If halos paid 60 million of it how many teams would take Trout age 32 for 30 million a year for 7 years? I'm thinking if Ohtani is gone not much protection for Trout.