floplag

40 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Common sense. Because we will have spent $175 million on the first 8 players. So we have 18 more players to sign.  That doesn’t include that soon Sandoval and Ward will take another $20 million of that.  

Then we should not have spent what we did on those 8 players if we didnt have the capacity to go beyond.

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

I’d be fine with signing Bassitt and trading Sandoval for a SS, like Adames.  The difference between Adames and our current SS is greater than the difference between Sandoval and Bassitt. I’d rather keep Sandoval, but I also wouldn’t want to see us nickel and dime the next few years to fill holes, which is what will happen if we give $25 million to a SS.  Don’t get me wrong, I will take the $25 million SS, but I won’t be the least surprised if they don’t go that route.  Oh and the only thing that puts us over the top is health and playing well at the right time.  There isn’t a path to make us better on paper than Houston.  

Why is it assumed that if we make a big move we have to nickle and dime elsewhere... thats where we differ. 
We put ourselves in this place with past contracts, if we did that al the while knowing we had some limitations then we were stupid as hades. 

18 minutes ago, TempeAngel said:

His idea is to trade Sandoval. So the scenario is also without Sandoval.

Smart teams don't trade young, cost controlled pitchers with front of the rotation potential.

Perry seems smart. Sandoval is not going anywhere. He is building around Sandoval, not trading him.

This is what im wondering... who do we trade to make these deals and are we better off with the changes... does adding Bassitt and subtracting Sandoval make us better?   I dont think it does. 
The theory is sound, but the details will determine if it makes sense or not.  It needs context
I like our young pitching, im not wild about dealing any of it unless its for an absolute no brainer, and im not sure an Adames type is that. 

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

Do you want to be a contender for one year?  Or for the long haul?  You have to live in the reality that every team has a budget, and while they can exceed the budget, they aren’t likely to put themselves in a position to go over the threshold every year.  Signing a $30 million free agent SS puts them above the threshold for this year, and if they sign Ohtani, they will be above the threshold for 4 years until Rendon comes off the books.  They’ll still need to fill left field after this coming year, they’ll have to replace Urshela after this year.  You can’t simply say budget like it is a bad thing, because it is the reality. Hell my budget is right at the threshold.  Even the Yankees and Dodgers try to get under the threshold every couple of years.  The Angels won’t be able to do that if $140 million go to 4 players, and $35 million go to 4 more players.  So you will have 8 players (Trout, Ohtani, Rendon, SS, Fletcher, Anderson, Stassi, Estevez) getting $175 million.  Now you have to fill the other 16 spots with about $60 million.   

We have never agreed on what this club can or cannot do, and thats fine, but the idea that they cant exceed the tax, even for a few years, seems nonsensical to me. 
They just  tried to spend billions on a land deal, the idea that 10-20 million is a show stopper makes little sense. 
If the existing budget is the only factor, then were already out of our depth. 

2 hours ago, Stradling said:

Ok provide context to what winning looks like signing a big money SS. And yes a Bassit or Senga. 

Thats what i asked you to do... Tell me how your plan makes this team more than a wildcard contender. 
How does Bassit and Adames put us over the top?

19 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok provide context to what winning looks like signing a big money SS. And yes a Bassit or Senga. 

So, sign Bassit lets say, then trade for an Adames type.   Thats the plan?  Just so were clear?

Assuming yes, those guys are going to likely cost 20M+-ish, plus what you give up in prospects or young talent, something we dont have a ton of.

Yes, its a shorter term commitment and fits within the budget if thats the driving concern.  I can see this IF the extend Ohtani and dont want another massive contract. 

Again im not saying it isnt a valid plan, but is that roster enough to be more than a wildcard contender?
  

12 hours ago, stormngt said:

Then play Rengifo on SS.  My point is we could take a middle infielder for 2nd base. 

There is a large difference in skillset between SS and 2B.. just because a person is a middle infielder, doenst mean its interchangeable. have we not proven that?

15 hours ago, Stradling said:

Right so you sign a pitcher and trade a pitcher for a SS. 

It isnt that i dont think the idea is valid, but it needs context.
The SS your talking about trading for are not as big an upgrade as those available at this point and the pitchers may or may not be as big an upgrade over what we have to trade to get them.
The idea is sound, but put some names to it... i assume youre talking about a Bassitt Type not a Rodon for example. 
Unless the driving concern is budget, over performance, this isnt the best path to winning.

7 minutes ago, Stradling said:

And neither has signing high priced free agents.  So if we want to talk about this club and logic, those two probably cancel each other out.

Thats fair... but for me it still comes down to what makes the club better to fit the need now.
Is a quality SP a better improvement than a quality SS?  SP was perhaps our best area last year where the bottom half of the lineup our worst so yeah, im looking at that for the biggest bang.

7 hours ago, Stradling said:

I disagree with you I’m not arguing with you. You are right, they need to finish the job. I believe the smart thing to do is to finish the job by improving the overall roster.  You feel they improve the team by going after the best player available. I’ll take three 3 win players for the price of that one 6 win player. 

You and i both know that logic hasnt worked for this club in the past.

7 hours ago, Stradling said:

We can trade for Adames if we acquire another starting pitcher. 

Thats a big if, and it would have to be a pretty strong one to justify what we would need to give up.  Who are you thinking would justify that?.  

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

Velasquez is a great defender with no bat.  We improve the bat at 2nd we could go with light hitting ss.

Rengifo had a very good year, and that wasnt true.  

17 hours ago, Warfarin said:

Adames actually posted a superior fWAR to Correa in a similar amount of games - 4.7 vs 4.4.  I think Adames is pretty valuable.  He is not as good as Turner, but I think he's in the upper echelon.

Im not going to put him at the same level as those guys, bu again im not knocking him.  But if thats true we probably dont have the farm to trade for him anyway. 

16 hours ago, stormngt said:

If he is more of 2b than let him play 2b.  Fletcher to bench and Velazquez at short for defense.

Trade Rengifo 

And ignore the position we need the most?

17 hours ago, Stradling said:

Ok, then we should spend big money on a free agent, since that has worked out so well.  You got me.  

There is no position on this you wont argue, but the point is simple, for once we ned to finish the job.  In the past we made the splash and let hole elsewhere filled with clean peanuts, or went cheap and stayed dry, so far this off season we have in my view made al the right moves so far that just needs to bow on top. 
Will they do it, probably not, but if they did it would make a tremendous difference.  

8 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok.  Or you trade for a guy like Torres and if things play out and you are good, you make upgrades throughout the year.  If not, you trade Ohtani.  Either way at least then the new owner can actually make decisions on the roster.  

Im sorry but this is like a time warp... "if things play out"... are we really playing that game still?   Every off season the same narrative, and it never in fact actually works out. 

5 hours ago, Stradling said:

Here is the thing.  If we sign a SS, it is going to be a 5-8 year commitment.  We will absolutely be above the tax threshold not just for this year, but for the next 4 years, until Rendon comes off the books, assuming we sign Ohtani.  That means in years 3 and 4 the new owner is paying a 50% tax on every dollar over the threshold and the new owner didn’t have a hand in actually picking the players that are on that roster.  So this is why I say a trade for a Torres type of guy is the smart move as it gets you a 3-4 WAR player for a couple of years at a reasonable price and allows the next owner to build his roster and to be the one that makes the financial decisions on whether or not he goes over the threshold.

I get all that and your right, but it doesnt change the problem.  You trade fo a guy like Torres, or Adames, sure, youre better, and you stay under the tax, BUT, are you competitive enough to do anything other than play for a wildcard spot?  Does it help you keep Ohtani?  
If the tax is all were worried about then thats all well ever be.
Yeah, you bust the tax for a few years, but you keep Ohtani, generate revenue from playoffs and playing relevant baseball, and maybe balance all that out.
If all were orried about is the tax, then we should trade Ohtani now as he wont be staying. 

20 hours ago, Stradling said:

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. 

Perhaps. but does it make us competitive once we get there?   Thats the point.  
Im not a huge Torres guy myself, is he better than what we have, sure, at least offensively, but he seems more of a natural 2B based on how hes been used and we havent had the best of luck playing that game. 
I believe we need a strong SS on both sides to be the difference maker to support the young pitchers, not a bat first SS which to me is what he is as his stats defensively are far below the top guys.

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.  

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. 

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. 

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?

None of these options are bad, obviously, although im not wild about Torres defensively and i think we need someone with a better glove up the middle for our young arms... but for me these are not difference makers. 
None of these guys put us over the top or in the mix for the playoffs in my view.
Its the kind of move you make to tread water, not the kind that you make to take the next step.
Better than what we have, sure, enough to put us into the conversation, to convince Ohtani to extend, no. 
If this is what we do we should be shopping him, now. 

2 hours ago, Angels 1961 said:

I agree, after 2023 he could be gone and get nothing. 

Which is the crux of the problem, that cant be allowed. 
You dont give up the golden ticket, for nothing.  As an org weve been so incompetent at so many things for so long, this isnt one we can afford to miss.
Extend him, or trade him... letting him walk for nothing, would be the largest mistake we may ever make as an org since losing Ryan.
They extended Trout right about this time, history need to repeat, or he must be dealt. 
Just my opinion but i feel strongly this is what should happen.  You cant bank on an if.

19 hours ago, Pancake Bear said:

Ohtani returning to the Angels depends on several things, imo. Obviously the new owner will matter, as well as what Ohtani thinks of Minasian and the coaches. I don't think Ohtani is all about the money or he wouldn't have come over to MLB when he did. He had a golden ticket with his team to come over any time and he chose to come over early and forego the extra money he could've made to enter the league on a rookie deal. I also think Ohtani has a certain level of loyalty to his teammates - I don't think he's just all about himself - which could give us a slight edge, all else being equal. The real question is how much he values winning and whether he thinks the Angels can win. The one quote attributed to him, "I want to win. That's the biggest thing for me. I"ll leave it at that." would seem to indicate that's the only thing that matters. But if that's the case, I don't know why he would've chosen the Angels in the first place. Let's face it, Trout said the same things for several years and ended up re-signing. So, I won't be shocked if he comes back and I won't be shocked if he leaves. I just hope the sale gets finalzied quickly since his agent said they don't want to do an extension until they know who the new owner(s) will be.

So much we dont know, but, lets go back to why he signed with us in the first place, we had a huge advantage, we were the only club that could offer him what he wanted in terms of his role as a 2 way player, in the SoCal market. 
So did we do anything to win him or were we just the choice that fit his needs? 
If the universal DH was a thing back then would he have signed here at all?
That advantage is gone, anyone can now give him that same role.
I want to extend and keep him i truly do, but for me this is so simple... if he wont extend, you deal him, period.  Just like you would any other player that has his kind of value. 
The Dodgers could offer a monster package, and are also looking at guys like Rengifo on the open market, there is a super easy fit there and they can afford to make that deal both in prospects and money.
WE would be fools to not at least consider it.