Perry and Jerry

[Taylor]

I like Perry's temperament and personality more than Jerry Dipoto, but after a few years of his presence in the organization ... are the two any different?

Our farm is still one of the worst in baseball. All of our acquisitions seem to be for high floor/low ceiling types. Maybe (probably) it's ultimately Arte who is the problem. But I just wonder what Perry offers that Dipoto (and Eppler) didn't.

[totdprods]

6 minutes ago, Taylor said:

Maybe (probably) it's ultimately Arte who is the problem

I know this gets beat to death here, and obviously Arte's lack of investing in a proper analytics wing and minor league development is a huge systemic failure, but the problem IMO isn't so much Arte but the year-in, year-out mindset of having to build a contender. No one can say Arte is cheap. This has consistently been one of the higher payroll teams in baseball. It's not distributed well, no one will argue otherwise, but it's not because of a lack of money.

Coming off of Trout's injuries, another managerial change, and Ohtani's likely departure, there is no better year to 'take a year off' from this mindset than 2024. 

Dipoto was somewhat good at trading value for value. His FA track record was overall very underwhelming, but I would not say it was disastrous (understandably up for debate in terms of payroll clutter). I think the negative view of Dipoto's tenure is a little over-exaggerated due to trades like Clevinger for Pestano, but the Trumbo for Skaggs + Santiago, the Huston Street trade, even the Greinke trade, the Frieri trade, even Kendrick for Heaney were not bad trades, all things considered. I think he tried to be too cute with his trades and was aiming to look more savvy in his deals than he actually was. The bigger problems with Jerry were that he could not work with Sosh, and on top of subtracting from the farm, literally did not do a single thing for it in his entire time. CJ Cron was maybe his best draft pick. It's one thing to trade the farm away, but the lack of adding or developing anything to it over an entire tenure, even if being tasked to 'win at all costs', was 100% inexcusable. A good GM should be able to at least tread some water here, and Dipoto could not...
strengths: trading, not totally bombing in free agency weaknesses: could not draft or develop any minor league talent in any way, traded/interacted in a way that clashed with team chemistry (Here and in SEA), trading too much

...and that ultimately is why I still think Eppler was an overall solid GM. Almost every single one of his FA deals were total failures, but they were relatively few and low-impact. The Simmons trade was good. The Sandoval trade was fantastic. He did a tremendous job finding value off the scrap heap, and his ability to keep the team afloat via creative waiver claims while everything crumbled around him is often overlooked. And he did largely turn the farm around. What really sunk Eppler, IMO, were the injuries. They were beyond the norm and no GM would have really been able to compete over that two-year span or so where everything came apart with pretty much every SP (and most of their replacements) having TJS. Add that to the devoid farm he inherited, and there was no way he was going to succeed. 
strengths: waiver claims, 40 man depth, trading weaknesses: could not sign a quality FA, could not establish analytics, seemed to play it a little too conservatively

Perry has been an interesting cat. In some ways, he actually reminds me a little more of a blend of Dipoto and Tony Reagins. He's been able to make, IMO, mostly good trades. He's acquired usable pieces, he's sold well, and time will tell, but I think he's bought pretty well too. They've perhaps been a little rosy and over-eager (perhaps due to Arte's influence, hence the Reagins comp) and have eaten away at the farm a la Dipoto, but he's also been able to counter that by drafting for quick-impact exceptionally well (though I'm still a little leery about the overall farm depth building, again a bit like Dipoto). Additionally, his FA track record isn't bad, but it isn't great. It's been mixed, which is IMO typical of most GMs, even those of higher repute. His biggest 'failures' have been where Eppler really stood out...he has really struggled filling out sort of the 30th-40th guys on the roster. The 4-A guys, the upper-level depth...it hasn't been there when they've needed it. Last year's injuries were akin to Eppler's dark days where no GM could weather what happened, but overall the replacement depth has really killed the team in Perry's time. 
strengths: drafting impact players, selling via trade, not totally sucking in trades/free agency weaknesses: can't seem to build upper-level depth, has yet to really find big-win FAs/trades

[mmc]

5 minutes ago, totdprods said:

 but the problem IMO isn't so much Arte but the year-in, year-out mindset of having to build a contender.

Who do you think it is that mandates this?

[totdprods]

1 minute ago, mmc said:

Who do you think it is that mandates this?

Obviously that is Arte, but it's not the more specific Arte issues that everyone focuses on (meddling, not spending on farm, spending on wrong FAs, firing everyone, not letting GM have more say, not broadening analytics/scouting). 

Those are issues, but I think they could be somewhat overcome if the org just chilled for a year or two and there wasn't a push to try and win year-in, year-out, especially when we're the 4th best team in the division.

[mmc]

4 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Obviously that is Arte, but it's not the more specific Arte issues that everyone focuses on (meddling, not spending on farm, spending on wrong FAs, firing everyone, not letting GM have more say, not broadening analytics/scouting). 

Those are issues, but I think they could be somewhat overcome if the org just chilled for a year or two and there wasn't a push to try and win year-in, year-out, especially when we're the 4th best team in the division.

If you agree that it’s Arte that how can you say the problem isn’t Arte?  No point in saying it could be overcome if they changed that when there’s no reason to think that will ever happen here

[totdprods]

2 minutes ago, mmc said:

If you agree that it’s Arte that how can you say the problem isn’t Arte?  No point in saying it could be overcome if they changed that when there’s no reason to think that will ever happen here

I just explained it. We don't need another thread about how Arte is the problem behind everything, when he isn't the actual problem behind everything. He still is not the guy making all of the baseball decisions, he's not out there injuring the players, he's not scouting. @Taylor started this post with an invitation to have a dialogue on the GMs, and I as took it, their differences, strengths, weaknesses.

To me, that's a far more interesting nuanced discussion to have here other than it devolving into another 'Arte is the problem and we'll never win with him' simplification. Obviously he's the owner, obviously he sets the course of the team, but I don't buy that he's so involved that he's making day-to-day decisions that the baseball ops wing is making. Hence the thread.

 

 

[Taylor]

mmc, when did you become the authority here on what discussions are relevant and worth having?

[mmc]

6 minutes ago, totdprods said:

I just explained it. We don't need another thread about how Arte is the problem behind everything, when he isn't the actual problem behind everything. He still is not the guy making all of the baseball decisions, he's not out there injuring the players, he's not scouting. @Taylor started this post with an invitation to have a dialogue on the GMs, and I as took it, their differences, strengths, weaknesses.

To me, that's a far more interesting nuanced discussion to have here other than it devolving into another 'Arte is the problem and we'll never win with him' simplification. Obviously he's the owner, obviously he sets the course of the team, but I don't buy that he's so involved that he's making day-to-day decisions that the baseball ops wing is making. Hence the thread.

 

 

I mean you were the one who originally started to take this discussion down that route.  Just saying your own explanation admits that Arte is the overall problem so saying he isn’t makes no sense to me

[mmc]

2 minutes ago, Taylor said:

mmc, when did you become the authority here on what discussions are relevant and worth having?

Wtf are you talking about?  Never told anyone not to discuss anything here

[totdprods]

12 minutes ago, mmc said:

I mean you were the one who originally started to take this discussion down that route.  Just saying your own explanation admits that Arte is the overall problem so saying he isn’t makes no sense to me

The initial couple sentences were me basically getting ahead of that to avoid exactly what this is, another thread bashing Arte, before everyone whined about all the things he does wrong, and then went on to write paragraphs about the GMs.

[mmc]

12 minutes ago, totdprods said:

The initial couple sentences were me basically getting ahead of that to avoid exactly what this is, another thread bashing Arte, before everyone whined about all the things he does wrong, and then went on to write paragraphs about the GMs.

Don’t think you can have an honest discussion about the performance of the GMs without acknowledging that they both have no say in the direction of the team (must compete every year regardless if it’s the best interest of the franchise), and simultaneously aren’t permitted to exceed the luxury tax (essentially giving them a hard cap).  What any of Reagins, Dipoto, Eppler, or Minasian might have done if given full control over baseball ops could be completely different than the results we’re debating.  As far as your assessment of how they performed within those confines, I for the most part agree with you

[Slegnaac]

2 hours ago, totdprods said:

....

 

Those are issues, but I think they could be somewhat overcome if the org just chilled for a year or two and there wasn't a push to try and win year-in, year-out, especially when we're the 4th best team in the division.

So don't attempt to sign or trade for players that could help the team win in 2024 / 2025?

Edited November 27, 2023 by Slegnaac

[totdprods]

1 minute ago, Slegnaac said:

So don't attempt to sign players that could help the team win in 2024 / 2025?

There are basically no bats - or real clear openings - on the position player side.

There are some mid/back of rotation arms worth signing to multi-year deals. 

Assuming we only have room financially and in rotation for one expensive FA frontline arm, I’d rather explore Burnes, Fried, Bieber, Buehler, Glasnow, next winter than Snell, Montgomery, or Yamamoto this year. The former seem to have less uncertainty around them, and have more SoCal ties. 

I’d still sign free agents this winter, but they’d be more like Giolito, Montas, Severino, Flaherty type 1-yr deals, guys that can be dealt mid-year to help rebuild some farm depth. maybe a couple relievers to 2-yr deals. I’d be open to a Stroman on 2-3 years, maybe a corner infielder like Candelario for 3-years, but that’s only to really add depth.

[Angel Oracle]

16 minutes ago, totdprods said:

There are basically no bats - or real clear openings - on the position player side.

There are some mid/back of rotation arms worth signing to multi-year deals. 

Assuming we only have room financially and in rotation for one expensive FA frontline arm, I’d rather explore Burnes, Fried, Bieber, Buehler, Glasnow, next winter than Snell, Montgomery, or Yamamoto this year. The former seem to have less uncertainty around them, and have more SoCal ties. 

I’d still sign free agents this winter, but they’d be more like Giolito, Montas, Severino, Flaherty type 1-yr deals, guys that can be dealt mid-year to help rebuild some farm depth. maybe a couple relievers to 2-yr deals. I’d be open to a Stroman on 2-3 years, maybe a corner infielder like Candelario for 3-years, but that’s only to really add depth.

How about Japanese closer Matsui?

Desperately need a good closer.

Edited November 27, 2023 by Angel Oracle

[totdprods]

6 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

How about Japanese closer Matsui?

Desperately need a good closer.

Open to any deal that makes the team better this year, so long as it makes the team next year better as well. Just don't want to lock up payroll on someone like Snell or Bellinger when I don't see either being worth the risk, not for a team with this many needs. 

In essence, if I were GM and treating this year as a transitional year, I would move Drury and Estevez simply because both aren't likely to impact the 2025 team, which is where I'm focusing (and beyond). I'd deal both this winter while they have the most value.

And I would have no problem replacing both via free agency this year as well, signing guys to 2-yr deals so we do have that talent in '25. 

For instance, flipping Drury then signing Candelario to replace him in '24 and be in the fold for '25, and signing someone like Phil Maton to be the closer to replace Estevez and have next year's closer role locked up too. Or Matsui.

[Inside Pitch]

4 hours ago, Taylor said:

I like Perry's temperament and personality more than Jerry Dipoto, but after a few years of his presence in the organization ... are the two any different?

Our farm is still one of the worst in baseball. All of our acquisitions seem to be for high floor/low ceiling types. Maybe (probably) it's ultimately Arte who is the problem. But I just wonder what Perry offers that Dipoto (and Eppler) didn't.

You know that scene from Billy Madison....  yeah, that one.   Youre the puppy that lost his way.

[Redondo]

40 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

You know that scene from Billy Madison....  yeah, that one.   Youre the puppy that lost his way.

 

[Second Base]

Honestly, Billy Eppler was the best GM this team has had since Stoneman. The results weren't there at the top level but the manner in which he unfu**ed everything Dipoto did, with an owner interfering where he shouldn't, was nothing short of spectacular. 

Perry, he drafts well. So good that the top prospect lists won't recognize it because the guys he keeps picking are major leaguers before they have a chance to build up that Adell type of hype. As far as being a GM, I'm not impressed. The jury's still out though. 

Like if we could have Perry as a scouting director, running the drafts and hiring internal personnel, while having Billy in charge of the minor league system and contract negotiations, we'd be good to go. 

Edited November 28, 2023 by Second Base

[Taylor]

Fun Fact: Bill Stoneman was the last Angels GM whose first name didn't end in a 'y'.

[mmc]

19 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Honestly, Billy Eppler was the best GM this team has had since Stoneman. The results weren't there at the top level but the manner in which he unfu**ed everything Dipoto did, with an owner interfering where he shouldn't, was nothing short of spectacular. 

Perry, he drafts well. So good that the top prospect lists won't recognize it because the guys he keeps picking are major leaguers before they have a chance to build up that Adell type of hype. As far as being a GM, I'm not impressed. The jury's still out though. 

Like if we could have Perry as a scouting director, running the drafts and hiring internal personnel, while having Billy in charge of the minor league system and contract negotiations, we'd be good to go. 

He really didn’t unfuck much.  He left the team with 2 disastrous contracts and an improved but still bottom 10 farm system just like his predecessor

[Wisconsin27]

6 hours ago, totdprods said:

Obviously that is Arte, but it's not the more specific Arte issues that everyone focuses on (meddling, not spending on farm, spending on wrong FAs, firing everyone, not letting GM have more say, not broadening analytics/scouting). 

Those are issues, but I think they could be somewhat overcome if the org just chilled for a year or two and there wasn't a push to try and win year-in, year-out, especially when we're the 4th best team in the division.

I respect your contributions, totprods, but just can't agree with this.  No organization came overcome those obstacles long-term regardless of a short-term plan (of which, I agree with you on).  Winning organizations don't have meddling owners reluctant to spend on the farm or analytics, and fire people who don't perform under their "keep the revenue streams going" approach.  None, in any sport.

The idea we can properly evaluate any GM knowing the parameters our owner puts in front of them is almost comical.  As fans, we just clamor so much for the next season that I sometimes think we lose perspective of the big picture (forrest from the trees, so to speak).

 

[totdprods]

20 minutes ago, mmc said:

He really didn’t unfuck much.  He left the team with 2 disastrous contracts and an improved but still bottom 10 farm system just like his predecessor

The Dipoto farms were beyond bad. If they could’ve been ranked like 50th out of 30 they would have. Some of those top prospects lists from the middle of his tenure are abysmal. 

Billy got the Halos most of their rotation; Sandoval, Canning, Detmers, plus Kyle Bradish, Rengifo, Adell, Marsh (who got us O’Hoppe), Stassi, then other guys who’ve cracked the majors like Warren, Wantz, Mattson, CRod, Criswell, Paris, Adams, Daniel, Soto, Kochanowicz, Caceres. He had several misses, and a lot of those guys have still yet to pan out, but that is a pretty solid success rate for a GM that had to both rebuild a farm and keep attempting to build a contender, and a critically valuable portion of this team still today. And what he was able to squeeze out of guys like JC Ramirez, Felix Pena, Parker Bridwell, Blake Parker, Taylor Cole and Hansel Robles, plus Jefry Marte, Tommy LaStella and Brian Goodwin, if only for even just a year of success out of each. All of those guys had at least one season for the Angels that was objectively solid if not good before they also became hurt or ineffective. It was an impressive track record of low-key transaction success.

It was still a bottom ten farm at best in that time, but the hole he had to dig out of capped what he could have done, not to mention a shortened 2020 draft. And landing Ohtani was still a master stroke. 

Dude could not get anything done via free agency though. Miss after miss. 

[totdprods]

9 minutes ago, Wisconsin27 said:

I respect your contributions, totprods, but just can't agree with this.  No organization came overcome those obstacles long-term regardless of a short-term plan (of which, I agree with you on).  Winning organizations don't have meddling owners reluctant to spend on the farm or analytics, and fire people who don't perform under their "keep the revenue streams going" approach.  None, in any sport.

The idea we can properly evaluate any GM knowing the parameters our owner puts in front of them is almost comical.  As fans, we just clamor so much for the next season that I sometimes think we lose perspective of the big picture (forrest from the trees, so to speak).

 

I don’t disagree with this, generally. I might have benefitted from wording my original reply better…I don’t disagree that Arte isn’t an obstacle to their success, and that as head honcho he does take blame regardless of any GM, or that the aspects in which he does ‘meddle’ or skimp affect the team’s outlook or the GM’s ability…but I was trying to get out ahead of that to keep it from being simply another thread that focused on just Arte-bashing because it’s tiresome.

This past offseason was a deviation from year’s prior. Arte increased payroll by a solid amount. He let a GM talk him out of a Dipoto big splash in Turner and into a number of investments that were not the Eppler one-year specials a la Cahill or Harvey. The Angels distributed their money around in several moves for once - Anderson, Urshela, Renfroe, Drury, Estevez - that were largely approved of by fan and critic. They didn’t all work out but it was a noted difference from years prior. And perhaps all credit should go to Perry, but the ‘farm’ has quickly produced MLBers from amateur scouting. Maybe that is in part a result of Perry purely, or perhaps the Angels have allocated some resources or scouting that is paying off. 

So while I have no doubt that Arte’s been a significant barrier in many ways, I also don’t think that means it *has* to continue that way. Last winter proved there can be some shift in their approach. Perhaps Ohtani walking furthers that, or the success of the young core. Perhaps a combo of those things and trusting Perry’s vision could allow Arte to step back or change a few of his negative habits. Do I expect that to happen overnight? No. A 180° shift? No. Comprehensive change? No. But he’s capable of change and we may be seeing that these last 12 months, which was my motivation in trying to steer this thread away from focusing on Arte and instead focusing on an organic approach Perry could take that could help Arte view a holistic change in how they do things for a year, provided it’s yielding results this time next year.

[Wisconsin27]

36 minutes ago, totdprods said:

I don’t disagree with this, generally. I might have benefitted from wording my original reply better…I don’t disagree that Arte isn’t an obstacle to their success, and that as head honcho he does take blame regardless of any GM, or that the aspects in which he does ‘meddle’ or skimp affect the team’s outlook or the GM’s ability…but I was trying to get out ahead of that to keep it from being simply another thread that focused on just Arte-bashing because it’s tiresome.

This past offseason was a deviation from year’s prior. Arte increased payroll by a solid amount. He let a GM talk him out of a Dipoto big splash in Turner and into a number of investments that were not the Eppler one-year specials a la Cahill or Harvey. The Angels distributed their money around in several moves for once - Anderson, Urshela, Renfroe, Drury, Estevez - that were largely approved of by fan and critic. They didn’t all work out but it was a noted difference from years prior. And perhaps all credit should go to Perry, but the ‘farm’ has quickly produced MLBers from amateur scouting. Maybe that is in part a result of Perry purely, or perhaps the Angels have allocated some resources or scouting that is paying off. 

So while I have no doubt that Arte’s been a significant barrier in many ways, I also don’t think that means it *has* to continue that way. Last winter proved there can be some shift in their approach. Perhaps Ohtani walking furthers that, or the success of the young core. Perhaps a combo of those things and trusting Perry’s vision could allow Arte to step back or change a few of his negative habits. Do I expect that to happen overnight? No. A 180° shift? No. Comprehensive change? No. But he’s capable of change and we may be seeing that these last 12 months, which was my motivation in trying to steer this thread away from focusing on Arte and instead focusing on an organic approach Perry could take that could help Arte view a holistic change in how they do things for a year, provided it’s yielding results this time next year.

Now THAT's the totdprods I am accustomed to.  Well stated and agree (almost) wholeheartedly (as the decision to not trade Othani the last two deadlines still chaps me!).  But I totally get where you are coming from, so thanks for clarifying.

[Inside Pitch]

@totdprods CJ Cron was drafted the year before JD came on board. 

And the Trumbo trade was imo an example of JD trying to be the smartest guy in the room.  The Angels had been without a LFer since GA, a true leadoff hitter since Figgins, he was gifted both in that Trumbo trade in the name of Adam Eaton, only he saw fit to trade him to CWS for Santiago.

Adam Eaton means no Hamilton signing, likely no Upton trade, and a legit leadoff hitter.  But he thought Santiago had another gear.  He did not.

Also that trade was completely initiated by Kevin Towers, he admitted as much basically said he just got the call offering Eaton and Skaggs but he wanted two pitchers...  Not unlike when he offered up Grichuk as sweetener to get Salas.  

They could have had Trout, Eaton, Calhoun and Grichuk.... But Jerry.

He was a twat.