Shortstop candidates for the Halos

[AngelsLakersFan]

18 minutes ago, Warfarin said:

I think people are hopeful that he is a sure thing, but he is most definitely not at this point.  I think, though, it is clear the FO intends for him to be our future SS, given his high drafted position and how quickly they have moved him.  It is somewhat similar to seeing a football team draft a QB with their first pick - they are essentially pinning their future hopes to that player's success.  Obviously this is not nearly as dramatic, because a failed top MLB draft pick is not nearly as dramatic as a failed top QB draft pick, but I think it does reveal the direction of the FO and what it is hoping to see.

It’s a bad idea to “intend” anything when it comes to a player you just drafted. Unless he’s an elite college starting pitcher you just grabbed at the top of the draft. The Angels would be wise to assume they won’t get anything out of Neto.

[Warfarin]

1 minute ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

It’s a bad idea to “intend” anything when it comes to a player you just drafted. Unless he’s an elite college starting pitcher you just grabbed at the top of the draft. The Angels would be wise to assume they won’t get anything out of Neto.

While I agree with you and believe the best teams in baseball are deep enough to do the above, I think we are in a position where we need to draft for need and hope things pan out.  Financially speaking, we don’t have a lot of wiggle room to operate, so we need our high draft pick, such as Neto, to “hit.”  We simply can’t afford to sign a star FA SS.  So for now, we need to find a decent stopgap, and hope that Neto develops.  If he doesn’t, then we will have to see where this organization is and roll from there.

[Dtwncbad]

6 hours ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

McPherson was a failed prospect, it doesn't really matter why. Neto isn't some how shielded from that outcome. People are talking about him like he is a sure thing, just like they talked about the three players referenced.

Yes, it does matter why.

And I invite you to take a good, honest look at McPhersons actual mlb numbers (with a wrecked back).  That guy could hit.

Edited December 4, 2022 by Dtwncbad

[HeavenlyHalos]

On 12/2/2022 at 3:39 PM, Chuckster70 said:

Agreed. But I wouldn't trade Rengifo unless Neto rakes in AA/AAA in 2023 and looks every bit ready for the big leagues. 

Going into the season with Rengifo/Fletcher/Soto for two positions is a good thing and improves the overall depth. 

Couldn't agree more. Ideally, Fletcher is the utility guy entering the season.

[HeavenlyHalos]

8 hours ago, bruin5 said:

I would be happy just standing pat at SS. The combo of Fletcher/Soto is definitely serviceable and will provide a WAR increase over last year. However, I look at them both as placeholders because I can see Neto being called up next year. I think he has the ability and the mental make up to help the Angels next year. I don’t want us to trade pitching for a one or two year guy. We need that depth in the minors because you know we will need to tap into it at some point. 

I do not like a scenario of counting on Fletcher as anything but a Utility/bench player. Over his last 900 PA, he has a 71 OPS+ with an OBP of .295. Counting on him to be a regular starter (5-6 times a week) scares the crap out of me.

[AngelsLakersFan]

5 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Yes, it does matter why.

If you are penciling a prospect into your lineup a year down the road and making big decisions about the construction of the team today based on said prospect then no, it does not matter why they failed. 

Are we going to say Anthony Rendon was a good signing if only he had staid healthy, or Pujols was a great signing if only his legs didn’t give out on him… Healthy always needs to be part of the calculus and far too often we’ve given the front office a pass because of injuries that were “all bad luck.”

[UndertheHalo]

Personally, I think it’s bad to be trying to plan for the debut of a position player that they drafted 6 months ago.  Zach Neto isn’t like Bryce Harper or anything. 

[Blarg]

6 hours ago, tdawg87 said:

Kiner Falefa sounds like a rapper.

It sound like a middle eastern side dish. 

[Jason]

6 hours ago, tdawg87 said:

Kiner Falefa sounds like a rapper.

 

7 minutes ago, Blarg said:

It sound like a middle eastern side dish. 

A middle eastern rapper 

[Angels 1961]

45 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

A middle eastern rapper 

Sounds like a halo SS soon

[HanfordGuy]

7 hours ago, tdawg87 said:

Kiner Falefa sounds like a rapper.

Ich bin Isiah Kiner-Falefa!

[Angel Oracle]

I’d rather trade for Kiner-Falefa, just a shade below Squid defensively, and puts up mid .600s OPS with SB skills.

[TempeAngel]

I don't think Kiner-Falefa is the answer. Perry can do better.

[Warfarin]

14 hours ago, UndertheHalo said:

Personally, I think it’s bad to be trying to plan for the debut of a position player that they drafted 6 months ago.  Zach Neto isn’t like Bryce Harper or anything. 

So this is something I have heard said, and I think it's good to expound on this thought process.

It isn't so much that the FO should assume Neto will be a star level player and that the FO should clear the way for him.  But rather, it is that the FO will likely maintain the optimal level of flexibility moving forward, so that they can be open to multiple possible outcomes.

So, say for example we sign one of the star level SSs.  Neto will be blocked, so he will either need to be traded (best use of value for a SS), or shifted to second, where his value gets significantly devalued.  This is likely not the best overall use of financial and prospect resources, as SS is arguably the most expensive position to fill in free agency.

Alternatively, the FO can trade for a player with 1-2 years left, so that they can keep open the possibility that Neto DOES develop and he can eventually become our SS.  If he does, great!  If he doesn't?  Well, then we are somewhat back to square one, but at least then we can explore multiple options - trading for a SS, signing one, drafting one, etc.  Basically - it keeps as many options open as possible.

If we had a stronger farm, such that we were one of the best in baseball, I would strongly push for trading for Adames, who is essentially just as good as Swanson.  That would buy us 2 years, and that point, we could either pivot to Neto if he has developed, sign Adames to a long-term deal, or something else.

All that said, we don't have a farm system that's strong enough to trade for Adames right now, so we have to instead likely opt to find one of the lesser options, who will all still be a considerable upgrade for our current situation.

[Hubs]

1 hour ago, Angel Oracle said:

I’d rather trade for Kiner-Falefa, just a shade below Squid defensively, and puts up mid .600s OPS with SB skills.

So he’s David Fletcher? If they’re not going to get one of the top four or Adames or another trade target… I’d roll with Rengifo and Fletcher 

[floplag]

On 12/3/2022 at 8:39 AM, Stradling said:

Torres and some pen help puts us in playoff contention 

Im not sure i agree, but lets assume it does, is that all were trying to do?

[BTH]

2 hours ago, TempeAngel said:

I don't think Kiner-Falefa is the answer. Perry can do better.

I’m not sure if he can do better, but Kiner-Falefa just feels like a waste of (presumably) limited resources.

[floplag]

On 12/3/2022 at 8:35 AM, Warfarin said:

Torres and Hoerner are both pretty solid options, especially Hoerner, who likely is unavailable via trade.

While I hear what you are saying, people seem to conflate large free agent contracts with success.  The Rays, Guardians, Brewers, and various versions of Beane's A's have all shown that a winning team can be formed without this.  

Raising the floor, by replacing Velazquez and people like him with a solid but unspectacular player, is how teams are able to help improve considerably at a reasonable cost.  This is what we need to do, as we already have 3 players earning 30+ mil for the year.

All true, but wee also trying to keep Ohtani and just being in contention for a playoff spot isnt likely to do that, if its possible at all. 
Its better obviously, to me its just not enough. 

[Stradling]

4 minutes ago, floplag said:

Im not sure i agree, but lets assume it does, is that all were trying to do?

No.  We aren’t trying to make the playoffs. 

[Mark68]

I would love Hoerner. Do I think the Cubs make him available even if signing one of the Big Four? No, as he'll probably just slide over to second. 

[floplag]

45 minutes ago, Stradling said:

No.  We aren’t trying to make the playoffs. 

You miss the point... is all were trying to do is contend for a playoff spot, or be relevant once we get there. 

[Stradling]

4 minutes ago, floplag said:

You miss the point... is all were trying to do is contend for a playoff spot, or be relevant once we get there. 

There isn’t some unlimited budget reality. They have to create depth which they are. Then fill holes, which we will see if they do. Then if your team you put together in the off season plays well, then you upgrade it at the deadline. There aren’t reasonable additions available that will cover the loss of Trout and Rendon if they are hurt all year. So you build a roster with enough depth to be in contention for the playoffs. Then upgrade during the season. 

[floplag]

4 minutes ago, Stradling said:

There isn’t some unlimited budget reality. They have to create depth which they are. Then fill holes, which we will see if they do. Then if your team you put together in the off season plays well, then you upgrade it at the deadline. There aren’t reasonable additions available that will cover the loss of Trout and Rendon if they are hurt all year. So you build a roster with enough depth to be in contention for the playoffs. Then upgrade during the season. 

Yeah, we all know that, but thats again not the point.
But if you think the budget is the best this club can do there isnt much to say, i dont buy that for a second.  

[Stradling]

7 minutes ago, floplag said:

Yeah, we all know that, but thats again not the point.
But if you think the budget is the best this club can do there isnt much to say, i dont buy that for a second.  

I didn’t say that. I think they’ll sign a SS. But Torres, Anderson, Urshela, Renfroe along with bullpen additions put us in the playoffs. 

[AngelsLakersFan]

2 hours ago, Warfarin said:

So this is something I have heard said, and I think it's good to expound on this thought process.

It isn't so much that the FO should assume Neto will be a star level player and that the FO should clear the way for him.  But rather, it is that the FO will likely maintain the optimal level of flexibility moving forward, so that they can be open to multiple possible outcomes.

So, say for example we sign one of the star level SSs.  Neto will be blocked, so he will either need to be traded (best use of value for a SS), or shifted to second, where his value gets significantly devalued.  This is likely not the best overall use of financial and prospect resources, as SS is arguably the most expensive position to fill in free agency.

Alternatively, the FO can trade for a player with 1-2 years left, so that they can keep open the possibility that Neto DOES develop and he can eventually become our SS.  If he does, great!  If he doesn't?  Well, then we are somewhat back to square one, but at least then we can explore multiple options - trading for a SS, signing one, drafting one, etc.  Basically - it keeps as many options open as possible.

If we had a stronger farm, such that we were one of the best in baseball, I would strongly push for trading for Adames, who is essentially just as good as Swanson.  That would buy us 2 years, and that point, we could either pivot to Neto if he has developed, sign Adames to a long-term deal, or something else.

All that said, we don't have a farm system that's strong enough to trade for Adames right now, so we have to instead likely opt to find one of the lesser options, who will all still be a considerable upgrade for our current situation.

I just don't see this as the winning mindset. 

You need a shortstop now, the team shouldn't be limiting itself because of some potential future for Neto. Issues related to having "too much talent" tend to find a way of working themselves out. "Maintaining flexibility" is yet another middle ground, wishy washy strategy.