I was wrong. This is not a .500 team.

[m0nkey]

It’s just about watching to see if trout can stat pad enough for another MVP

[jsnpritchett]

Just now, m0nkey said:

It’s just about watching to see if trout can stat pad enough for another MVP

He would need to start actually getting some hits for that to occur. 

[Angelsjunky]

28 minutes ago, HeavenlyHalos said:

I agree with most of this but an argument can be made that Neto and/or Schanuel would be better off developing in the minors to achieve their best possible long-term potential. Neto especially looks completely lost right now at the ML level, especially against breaking balls. Most fans agree that Adell was brought up way too early and it may have significantly impacted his development. That could also be the case here, of course it is hard to ascertain if that is the case or not. On the other hand, Adell is having the best plate appearance of the "future" hitters (0 WAR, 110 OPS+), sans O'Hoppe, and he has the fewest starts (7). Neto has 20 starts (-0.1 WAR, 37 OPS+), O'Hoppe has 17 (0.5 WAR, 134 OPS+), Schanuel 16 (-0.1 WAR, 52 OPS+), and Moniak 12 (-0.7 WAR, 39 OPPS+). I get that part of that is due to the respective positions they play and all but it is still pretty crazy, especially considering that Adell still has a high ceiling.

I hear your point, but Neto did just fine last year. He wasn't great, but he held his own. Schanuel it is less clear. He didn't play enough last year to really show that he could handle major league pitching, so I'm more open to the possibility that he's best served in the minors for a couple months. But I think his main problem is a bit of confusion about who he is as a hitter. To me, he is a contact and walks guy, yet there's been all this talk about him putting on muscle and trying to hit for more power. That's a quick route to ruining what is already a great skill set. 

[Jeremiah]

I always figured this year, and possibly next, would time for rebuilding and seeing what they have in terms of players in the system. I never understood the the vets on one-year deals unless they were there to fill in when the younger players needed a game or two off. Some folks keep saying, “trade value,” but what are you realistically going to get for any of those guys? You may get a lottery ticket or two, but nothing of any consequence from any other org. So that argument makes no sense. I don’t mind if they need to stink for a few seasons if they have a clear plan to rebuild. My biggest issue with the team is just that it seems like this team lacks any clear direction or prospect depth, with no sense that they will set a course and stay with it.

[m0nkey]

7 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

He would need to start actually getting some hits for that to occur. 

Meaningless solo homers here and there can do the trick 

[samwum]

6 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

I hear your point, but Neto did just fine last year. He wasn't great, but he held his own. Schanuel it is less clear. He didn't play enough last year to really show that he could handle major league pitching, so I'm more open to the possibility that he's best served in the minors for a couple months. But I think his main problem is a bit of confusion about who he is as a hitter. To me, he is a contact and walks guy, yet there's been all this talk about him putting on muscle and trying to hit for more power. That's a quick route to ruining what is already a great skill set. 

I think the thing to consider with these prospects is that how they perform right off the bat isn't all that significant. Pitchers are going to adjust, hitter is going to have to adjust, it's going to be a cat and mouse game forever. 

Neto is showing he might have a timing problem with his leg kick. Schanuel is showing he might have a problem driving the ball. These are mechanical issues with their swings that ideally would be ironed out by the time they get to the bigs so that they can just focus on the cat and mouse game of smaller adjustments. 

At the same time, Taylor Ward basically sucked for years when he got called up and completely re-did his swing. So I guess its possible to do in the majors, but Ward also wasn't relied on until he had proved himself.

[jsnpritchett]

5 minutes ago, Jeremiah said:

I always figured this year, and possibly next, would time for rebuilding and seeing what they have in terms of players in the system. I never understood the the vets on one-year deals unless they were there to fill in when the younger players needed a game or two off. Some folks keep saying, “trade value,” but what are you realistically going to get for any of those guys? You may get a lottery ticket or two, but nothing of any consequence from any other org. So that argument makes no sense. I don’t mind if they need to stink for a few seasons if they have a clear plan to rebuild. My biggest issue with the team is just that it seems like this team lacks any clear direction or prospect depth, with no sense that they will set a course and stay with it.

[Angelsjunky]

30 minutes ago, samwum said:

This isn't constructed as a taking stock/rebuilding team. 

Drury, Estevez, and Moore might bring back a fringe prospect at the deadline, but there are a shit ton of other veterans taking up playing time who are on expiring contracts and presumably have no trade value.

There is no reason for Hicks, Sano, Garcia, Cisnero, Strickland, Fulmer, or Adrianza to be on a rebuilding team. They aren't good, they don't have any team control, and they don't have any trade value.

Altogether, the Halos probably have minimum 10 guys on this roster who won't be here next year. 

It's not like they are building towards a better future or something. This is just a shitty team with a ton of journeymen hoping to tread water long enough for the front office to keep their jobs. 

If 2024 wasn't primarily about taking stock, why didn't Perry spend more? He signed no major free agents - just a bunch of bench guys and relievers. As you say, they've got some trade fodder and the rest of the guys you mention are cheap filler. They're on the team because the Angels don't have enough minor league depth to fill a major league roster.

I agree that it is a "shitty team with ton of journeymen," but there's also some young talent. And again, who do you want to see playing that isn't playing? We can nitpick details, like giving Hicks playing time over Adell, but I'm guessing that will change eventually.

Or to put it another way, if they accept that they need to take stock and rebuild, what else could they have done? Rebuilding a team takes time; signing and developing young players takes years. The fact that the Angels didn't max out their payroll with (more) dubious free agent contracts is a good thing - it means they've accepted the fact that their approach of the last eight years hasn't worked, and they need to try something else.

[Angelsjunky]

10 minutes ago, samwum said:

I think the thing to consider with these prospects is that how they perform right off the bat isn't all that significant. Pitchers are going to adjust, hitter is going to have to adjust, it's going to be a cat and mouse game forever. 

Neto is showing he might have a timing problem with his leg kick. Schanuel is showing he might have a problem driving the ball. These are mechanical issues with their swings that ideally would be ironed out by the time they get to the bigs so that they can just focus on the cat and mouse game of smaller adjustments. 

At the same time, Taylor Ward basically sucked for years when he got called up and completely re-did his swing. So I guess its possible to do in the majors, but Ward also wasn't relied on until he had proved himself.

You might be right, but I'm not sure 22 games is enough to pull the plug. I think you give it another couple weeks. Also, Schanuel has 7 hits in his last four games, hitting .467. Clearly you're not sending him down right now. If he falls into another abyss, maybe.

Neto looks really lost, but who are you going to replace him with? 

Edited April 21 by Angelsjunky

[samwum]

22 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

If 2024 wasn't primarily about taking stock, why didn't Perry spend more? He signed no major free agents - just a bunch of bench guys and relievers. As you say, they've got some trade fodder and the rest of the guys you mention are cheap filler. They're on the team because the Angels don't have enough minor league depth to fill a major league roster.

I agree that it is a "shitty team with ton of journeymen," but there's also some young talent. And again, who do you want to see playing that isn't playing? We can nitpick details, like giving Hicks playing time over Adell, but I'm guessing that will change eventually.

Or to put it another way, if they accept that they need to take stock and rebuild, what else could they have done? Rebuilding a team takes time; signing and developing young players takes years. The fact that the Angels didn't max out their payroll with (more) dubious free agent contracts is a good thing - it means they've accepted the fact that their approach of the last eight years hasn't worked, and they need to try something else.

Perry is in the last year of his deal. I think he would have spent $1bn on free agents if he were allowed to. This is purely speculation, but I think Arte looked at his track record with free agents and last year's trade deadline deals, and said, "Perry, you're cut off". 

To answer your question regarding what they could have done -- they needed to be highly active in the trade and waiver market to find players under team control to fill in on depth. A guy like Oliver Dunn would have been perfect. Raked in AAA but not a top prospect, Phillies couldn't find a roster spot for him, Brewers acquired him for basically free, and he's got 6 years of team control. Left handed hitting 2B/3B with promising plate discipline and power -- there's our Sano spot.

Also, there are some roster decisions which could have been differently. I would have had Andrew Wantz, Davis Daniel, Kyren Paris, and Jordyn Adams in the majors. I would have kept Trey Cabbage and Austin Warren. I would have kept Fletcher and Stassi, who presumably were only traded because Minasian wanted to escape the stain of the contract extensions he gave them. Even Walsh might have been worth one more year as insurance for Schanuel.

Would these guys have sucked? Probably. But Ward and Rengifo sucked for years before they figured it out. If you give these young guys under team control reps now, you're at least starting the clock on hopefully building towards a better future. The Cisnero and Hicks of the world-- they suck just as bad anyways. Total waste of time. 

[Swordsman78]

1 hour ago, Jason said:

Anyone that thought this team was a .500 team going into the season had their fan blinders on. 

Unfortunately a lot of guys on here did. 

[ScottM]

Hopefully Sano, Estevez, Moore, and Anderson continue to have good years. Could get some shiny peanuts at the deadline.

[Angelsjunky]

9 minutes ago, samwum said:

Perry is in the last year of his deal. I think he would have spent $1bn on free agents if he were allowed to. This is purely speculation, but I think Arte looked at his track record with free agents and last year's trade deadline deals, and said, "Perry, you're cut off".

This might be true, but goes against what we've heard - that he was given increased payroll. So my guess is that he was told to spend if the deals and players were right, but don't spend just to spend (like previous years). It may also be that players didn't want to sign with the Angels.

9 minutes ago, samwum said:

To answer your question regarding what they could have done -- they needed to be highly active in the trade and waiver market to find players under team control to fill in on depth. A guy like Oliver Dunn would have been perfect. Raked in AAA but not a top prospect, Phillies couldn't find a roster spot for him, Brewers acquired him for basically free, and he's got 6 years of team control. Left handed hitting 2B/3B with promising plate discipline and power -- there's our Sano spot.

Sure. There are lots of things that savvy GMs do, that Angels GMs don't seem able to do. In that regard, I haven't seen anything about Perry to think he's particularly special or even above average.

9 minutes ago, samwum said:

Also, there are some roster decisions which could have been differently. I would have had Andrew Wantz, Davis Daniel, Kyren Paris, and Jordyn Adams in the majors. I would have kept Trey Cabbage and Austin Warren. I would have kept Fletcher and Stassi, who presumably were only traded because Minasian wanted to escape the stain of the contract extensions he gave them. Even Walsh might have been worth one more year as insurance for Schanuel.

Would these guys have sucked? Probably. But Ward and Rengifo sucked for years before they figured it out. If you give these young guys under team control reps now, you're at least starting the clock on hopefully building towards a better future. The Cisnero and Hicks of the world-- they suck just as bad anyways. Total waste of time. 

I basically agree with this, though think Paris and Adams are even more green than Neto and Schanuel. 

[samwum]

10 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

This might be true, but goes against what we've heard - that he was given increased payroll. So my guess is that he was told to spend if the deals and players were right, but don't spend just to spend (like previous years). It may also be that players didn't want to sign with the Angels.

I just think it would be nuts for a GM to be in the last year of his deal, with questionable job security, and somehow choose to not max out his budget. 

10 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Sure. There are lots of things that savvy GMs do, that Angels GMs don't seem able to do. In that regard, I haven't seen anything about Perry to think he's particularly special or even above average.

Fair enough.

10 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

I basically agree with this, though think Paris and Adams are even more green than Neto and Schanuel. 

That's fair too. It's just the decision making process of a journeyman on a 1 yr deal who sucks, versus a young guy under team control who sucks. If the Angels were actually taking stock/rebuilding they would be prioritizing youth and team control. 

[Angelsjunky]

9 minutes ago, samwum said:

I just think it would be nuts for a GM to be in the last year of his deal, with questionable job security, and somehow choose to not max out his budget. 

Fair enough.

That's fair too. It's just the decision making process of a journeyman on a 1 yr deal who sucks, versus a young guy under contract for 6 more years who sucks. A rebuilding team prioritizes youth and team control. 

Think of it this way: He hasn't done any more damage. That's one of the things I like about this year - no more albatross contracts, no more prospects given away. The worst of it is probably Stephenson, but even that might prove somewhat useful next year. And guys like Paris and Adams are still around. If the Angels fall deep into a hole, there's no real loss to releasing Hicks and calling Adams up (for example). And it isn't like Adams (and Paris) can't use more seasoning in AAA.

The real damage, of course, was done in July of last year. That was a debacle that will likely haunt us for year's to come (look at Edgar Quero's numbers this year). I know, hindsight and all, but the end result was still devastating.

And we can give Perry and the Angels credit for getting Soriano back.

Edited April 21 by Angelsjunky

[samwum]

34 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Think of it this way: He hasn't done any more damage. That's one of the things I like about this year - no more albatross contracts, no more prospects given away. The worst of it is probably Stephenson, but even that might prove somewhat useful next year.

The real damage, of course, was done in July of last year. That was a debacle that will likely haunt us for year's to come (look at Edgar Quero's numbers this year). I know, hindsight and all, but the end result was still devastating.

And we can give Perry and the Angels credit for getting Soriano back.

The Stephenson deal might be damage. He's the 10th highest paid reliever in the league with a career 4.64 ERA. Kind of an insane deal to give a guy with 38IP of good baseball in 2023, but I will try to be optimistic about him. 

Playing a shit ton of journeymen who won't be here next year is also conceivably.... damaging. As I mentioned, there's probably at least 10 roster spots for 2025 that are open simply just based on expiring contracts. By not prioritizing youth, team control, and development for those spots, we aren't making any progress on those 10 spots. That's kind of a ridiculous amount of roster spots to have in question like that.

I'm also not sure how Soriano comes up. Perry initially lost Soriano in the minor league rule 5 draft. I'm stoked we got him back, but kind of a odd story to bring up. If you want to talk about young and controllable pitchers Perry DFA'd, Hoby Milner, Austin Warren, Oliver Ortega, and Packy Naughton would probably all make today's Angels' top 8 relievers. Milner had a 1.82 ERA in 62 IP for the Brewers last year. I mean, holy shit. Even Packy Naughton is going through elbow surgery recovery, but he had a 3.36 FIP and 3.26 SIERA in 30+ IP with the Cardinals in 2022. Those are really, really solid numbers. Fixing the Soriano rule 5 mistake was great, but unfortunately Perry actually has done some damage to the bullpen by prioritizing 1 year shitty journeymen over developing the guys he inherited in house. 

I think I'm becoming the de-facto president of the Minasian hate party on here so I'd like to refrain from continuing to post too much more on the topic, but things really are getting worse as long as he continues to be here. 

[Tank]

this year was never going to be a success with the record. success for this team for this year was always going to be about the kids improving.

it would be a pretty amazing season for this team to finish .500, but i'd rather see the kids make forward progress as preparation for next year and beyond.

[Skankhunt42]

This is definitely a .500 team.  .500 of the time they lose a close game, .500 of the time they get blown out.

[Blarg]

5 hours ago, samwum said:

I just think it would be nuts for a GM to be in the last year of his deal, with questionable job security, and somehow choose to not max out his budget. 

In last off season's free agency crop, which players were you maxing out the budget on, when you have to live with those contracts and use them as the reason for an extension? 

Or, do you save the payroll space for the 2024 off season where the talent pool is greater? 

It's one thing to make definitive statements about what the GM should have done but not have a plan of you're own that isn't 20/20 hindsight. 

[NrM]

I think we need a complete 4-5 year rebuild. That will never happen under arte though.

[notherhalo]

I'm surprised Trout isn't yet injured 

[Slegnaac]

14 minutes ago, notherhalo said:

I'm surprised Trout isn't yet injured 

BSOHL

[Jay]

13 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

The real damage, of course, was done in July of last year. That was a debacle that will likely haunt us for year's to come (look at Edgar Quero's numbers this year). I know, hindsight and all, but the end result was still devastating.

This.

[Angels 1961]

What is sad halos have nothing in minors that can help this year. It's early but Neto and Schanuel have not looked good. Rendon hurt Trout slumping team just hard to watch right now.

[AngelsFaninGA]

They're in the middle of an extended rebuild until there's new ownership. Not sure what people were expecting. At least Detmers is solid and Trout still hits some HR's.