Inside Pitch

Baseball owner hamster wheel.

To be fair, if he finishes his business then he'll have nothing to look forward to.

Bro, you could make a comment about liking McDonald's egg McMuffins and it will turn into some inane argument about Arte, Rendon, or some other Angels hot topic if for no other reason because the entire fan-base; die-hards and bandwagon types alike are frustrated with the team and looking to vent. People are antsy AF, and yet the fan-base has probably never been more united on a lot of things, mostly that things need change. You say Arte could have been a great owner had he hired a great GM ect.. That's part of the frustration, most everyone here either remembers when or lived through the era of Angels baseball were they were considered an elite team with one of the best front offices in baseball so the current shit show is even more annoying. I seriously have come to wonder if part of why Stoneman retired was due his having grown weary of Arte trying to interfere. It's not like he wasn't out in front with his opinions in those days too, the dude loved Tejada, openly sang his praises to the point where the A's at one point had the Angels looked at for potential tampering charges. Most of MLB believed the Angels would be all over him and yet when they had the chance Stoneman said nope -- we have a couple guys we like. For whatever reasons, Stoneman managed to keep Arte in check... it's been very different ever since. IMO, Arte went off the rails the winter Reagins showed up late to the winter meetings. It's been stupid ever since.

Yeah, that was IMO again Bill Stoneman. Stoneman had to have been a difficult guy to bargain with, he essentially drew a line in the sand and wouldn't cross it. I think his tendency to know when to say "no", is why Arte didn't try his usual BS on him. The thing that set Stoneman aside from the guys that followed him was his absolute commitment to the farm system. People forget or maybe just don't know how much money Stoneman dumped into the system -- he consistently spent first round money on guys taken in the middle of the draft and on draft and follow types. Mark Trumbo was taken in the 18th round because of signability concerns and a college commitment to USC. Nick Adenhart was taken in the 14th or 15th round after having been considered a potential 1-1 pick. Adenhart's selection raised eyebrows because he had gone down to Tommy John surgery in HS but Stoneman convinced the family that his best shot at making a full recovery was to have him be taken care of by the Angels medical staff. Weaver, Adenhart, Trumbo were all taken in 2004. Stoneman swung and missed on other guys but at least they tried. Chris Davis, Buster Posey, Kyle Hendricks, Brian Matusz, Matt Harvey, Brandon Morrow, were all HS guys Stoneman attempted to throw money at, as were touted college FB guys Patrick White and Jake Locker. Some have attempted to lay the blame on Arte for not allowing him to offer more, but the reality is Stoneman was able to take more of those risks and offer more under Arte than he had at any point under Disney. Stoneman is the single most impactful person in Angels history other than the guy that set out to get the radio rights to an expansion team and ended up a MLB owner.

You're preaching to the choir, so I'm not seeing anything as argumentative. My point in it's simplest form is that regardless of what he did last year, Snell's history is hurting how he's perceived, not just among fans but with MLB front offices. He managed only 413.2 innings combined from 2019-2022. There is no way around the reality that he made 85 starts during that span resulting in an average start length of 4.86 innings. I'm willing to bet if he simply managed better than 5.5 innings over that span the perception would be altogether different. Thats what's hurting him IMO or rather, that's what's created the perception of what he is and isn't. Like I said in a different post, if he repeats his 2023 chances are there will be a lot more teams willing to pay up. He's unquestionably talented.

Bill Stoneman would have made Jackie look good.

Watch the TV BS get settled and teams go back to spending crazy money. Imo that may have been the biggest factor into this off-season's spending or lack thereof across MLB.

It's a perception thing with Snell, his pitch counts get him into trouble. It's possible it's being overstated but the reality is his lack of innings was/is constantly being brought up. And people can talk about how pitchers don't go as deep in games as they did in the past and how the game is evolving, I'd make that argument too. But the reality is the guys that make that sort of money tend to go deeper into games. The one thing all teams do a better job of these days is gauging value. It's possible that if the average performance of all 5-6 inning pitcher improves then their salaries come down when compared to the guys that go 6+ for the same reason you brought up in your other post, scarcity.

I've been arguing in favor of creating greater depth across the board all winter, those 2 WAR types. I'd argue there are fewer 2 WAR capable bats than there are pitchers currently available, but I'm not opposed to adding either. Mostly I think taking from one area to try to bolster another is akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Snell is a trip. If he simply ate more innings teams would be lining up to sign him. Incredibly talented guy, just hard to project based on past injury history

It's another pick you poison situation, IMO. You get cost certainty with a long term deal, but you won't get stuck with an anchor on a shorter one if a guy craters. It's one of those situations where a team is likely better off going case by case.

They need another bat IMO, not replace or improve on one they already have.

Snell is a bit of an outlier. His career has been marked by injuries and performances that could be viewed as below his talent level. If he manages to post back to back 180IP, sub 3.00 ERA seasons he might actually see his profile rise significantly. Look at how Carlos Rodon was able to turn his checkered past into a huge payday. He was coming off his age 29 season while Snell would be coming off his age 31 season but the dude had nowhere near the track record Snell does. If he has another meh season then you're probably right.

I agree. Boras has said he prefers shorter deals because they accelerate the climb of salaries. He's actually argued that players have hurt themselves long term by taking those longer deals. In the case of anyone with a QO, being able to get another shot at FA is potentially a win.

Bill Stoneman won in spite of Disney. The Angels would be a vastly better team today had he simply stayed on as GM for a couple more years or if more of the old guard survived the Dipoto purge.

If I was a pitcher signing a one year deal there is no park I'd rather pitch in than that one. I know his history, but if he's healthy he will pitch well and that place will mask some warts... Think MadBum.

Its the damage to the farm, that's been the issue. Many of us have said it but I don't think people realize just how truly bad the system was in 2015. The gap between the Angels and the next worst team was possibly bigger than the gap between that team and the very best farm system in MLB.

Montgomery isn't someone you go five years on. He's not a stuff guy. He's someone I wanted when I thought he could be had for 3, maybe 4 years but he apparently wants a lot more. Dude can pitch, he's tall and left handed, those guys can often buck the norms but he's got a pretty good shot at going Patrick Corbin on someone. Look at the bright side, Snell will likely be available again next season.

If they would have caved to his opt out request they would have had him. I was given very similar info on Snell from a member of the Yankees front office. He didn't have specifics on whatever deal the Angels might be working on but he claimed an average of 35 mil or an opt out after one season was what they were hearing Boras was looking for or had set as a starting point. The actual signing will get him close to the 35 Mil after the one season and gets him back out there next season year without the burden of the draft pick. If Arte was the reason they didn't do it, then its maybe the first time I'm happy he interfered with his GM.

So, like everyone else? Good thing nobody actually accused you of any of those things, huh?

They can do that AND try to add pieces. This just seems to be a situation where what he wants and what best suits the Angels doesn't really line up and to date neither side has been willing to make it work for both parties. The Angels shouldn't be trying to sign anyone who will cost them a pick to a one and done deal -they aren't one player away.

That is some seriously high octane gas-lighting. But sure, that's what you meant.