DCAngelsFan

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2020/10/latest-on-angels-gm-search-3.html Sounds like the very definition of a "fairly appealing situation" ...

All those people running towards the car with a fire near the gas tank made me think "this is gonna be like 'Apocalypse Now' meets 'Dumb and dumber'"

He was released in June, and was playing in independent ball - https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/team.cgi?id=5e3ef32d Based on those stats - .094 BA, and a near 50% SO rate, I think he's about done all he's gonna do in baseball.

Interesting - we drafted six SS's that year - obviously, none have made any kind of impact (other than the impact of their careers splatting on the floor - Nonnie is in independent ball, and failing there) - for as many "defensive-minded" MIF's we've drafted, you'd think we'd hit at least "once." Then again, looking at our draft history, other than 2009, it's a fairly depressing record of mediocrity - pretty much Fletcher is the only one who's been drafted and contributed in the last 6 drafts (Canning and Walsh are works in progress, and obviously, too soon to tell for recent drafts - there's some talent in the pipeline, we hope.) This has been a major failing - if there's *anything* I hope for for this org, is that we hire a President and GM who are committed to making us better, much better at finding and developing talent.

The fact they drafted many of these in late rounds says they didn't see them as "can't miss" draft prospects. Yet their overall success in the draft suggests they're better at it than pretty much every other club. Would love to compare/contrast their process and notes on their successes - did their scouts see something others didn't? Or is their development system superior, that if *we* drafted these same guys, they'd still be in "A" ball? Like you said - it's a rhetorical question, because we can't know the answer - only guess at it. But credit where credit is due - the Dodgers do this better than most everyone else, and I wish the Angels organization were as good at it. (international signings are a particular pain point - the Angels have so thoroughly screwed that up - and with an owner whose name is 'Arturo Moreno', you'd think every Latin/South American player would want to play for the Angels)

Agreed. Of course, the part I'm unclear on - are any of them actually interested in the job? I mean, I'd like the job of being a kept man by Charlize Theron, but I'm becoming suspicious the feeling isn't mutual (I'm told a restraining order is a bad sign )

We finished first in 2014 - and we lacked the talent to go any further. After that, we traded Howie for Heaney, Cron for a bag of balls (in a perfect world, Pujols should've been traded - not possible, I know - but it was all downhill from there), and we were basically out of guys out of any significant trade value except Trout. Our 2015 starting pitching was basically league-average - the 2nd half of 2015 was probably the time to blow up the team - trade anyone with excess value at the time for near-MLB-ready talent except Trout. Extremely risky, though, as there wasn't much to trade - Richards, Street, Santiago, Calhoun, Cron - not going to get a lot for them. And there wasn't *anything* left in the minors to replace them. We'd have been *really* bad, for quite some time - we were handcuffed by payroll to get better fast via FA - does Trout resign under those circumstances? And then - who'd have made those trades? Our "GM" resigned July 1st. The disaster that was the farm, from really poor drafting and development, and his comically-bad handling of the international market - seriously, could he have screwed that up any more? All that was made evident in 2015 - we had a bad team, a worse farm system, and no payroll to spend - DiPoto was the author of much of that (and I always half-suspected he quit because he saw *that* handwriting on the wall - he drove the car, but bailed out before it went over the cliff. )

Right - based on his previous, unsuccessful hirings, I'm sure he's thinking "you know, those worked out *so* well, I'm gonna do it again ..." Point being, he's more likely to pick someone "safe" - is my guess. And that's all it is, a guess.

This article is a little dated, but - https://www.si.com/mlb/2018/11/19/mlb-draft-high-school-pitchers-velocity-tommy-john-surgery-problem There's little chance this guy has a significant MLB career - nothing to do with him personally, other than his age and velocity - just statistically, a bad idea. (But of course, the thing that muddies the waters a bit is pitchers drafted out of college and seen as successful were *also* drafted as high schoolers - they just didn't sign.)

Good point - it's possible it's a "clean slate" situation, but I think he probably had some discussions at least through intermediaries. How stupid would Arte look if, having fired Eppler, found the only person willing to work for him as a GM is the Dodgers bat boy? Anyway, a Byrnes / White combo hire would get definitely alleviate my concerns - the hiring is a two-way street, they have good positions and reputations - they don't "need" jobs - so they probably wouldn't come here unless they were convinced they could succeed and could fix/improve all of the nuts-and-bolts non-sexy things that I think Arte ignores. That said, "Dombrowski" - for some reason - sounds more like an Arte choice to me.

The current roster caveat limits things, to be sure. The Vernon Wells trade was likely authored by him, the Hamilton signing, likely the GMJ signing, and Pujols, of course. These things still echo today, whether they're on the team or not. Aaron Judge, for example, was still on the board when we'd have picked in 2013 but instead lost that pick for the Hamilton signing. And of course, firing Ausmus and signing Maddon was probably Arte's idea. Not all meddling is "wrong" - but the issue, IMO, is no potential "Beane-caliber" GM will want to work for an owner that under-resources them, interferes with trades out of pique, like the Pederson-Stripling trade, and lead-foots free-agent signings - no matter how well-intentioned the meddling (ask Orioles and "Washington Football Club" fans). A GM wants the authority and resources to run things. Also, look at our front office staff compared to, say, the Dodgers - all of our execs are "business" people - while the Dodgers have "baseball" people Here, compare these: https://www.mlb.com/dodgers/team/front-office - https://www.mlb.com/angels/team/front-office (our list is obviously incomplete - but shows what the team values.) There are suggestions and symptoms that the Angels are under-resourced in scouting, drafting and development as compared to top-tier organizations. Ultimately the buck stops with Arte.

I voted "no" - not that Eppler is the best man for the job, but the best men are already gainfully employed, and Arte's history of meddling has consequences. So, "right decision" depends on who he hires to replace Eppler - could be great, could be a disaster.

I'd say Mike was speaking to Arte with those comments ... I mean, there's nothing menacing - Trout has a contract, he won't tank or foment dissension. But if I were Arte, I'd talk to a lot of people - including Trout - about how to take this team forward, and who are the people that can do it best.

I think "health" probably plays a big part in him - not to be pedantic, but the effect of his injuries are probably as much mental as physical. He velocity makes me feel optimistic for him improving his consistency next year - this short season might've been just what he needed.

You've written it - now I wish we could make Arte read it.

Honestly - and I have no way of knowing - but I've long had the feeling that Arte has run a shoestring (cheap) operation outside of the major league club. I mean, like you say, he's had all these years to build such an organization, and outside of one spectacular draft pick, the results from that part of the club has been mediocre, at best.

Hmm, maybe because this is how we *got* to be dogshit - bad drafts, bad trades, bad free agent signings - all thinking - "this is the deal that'll put us over the top! This is what'll get us back to the World Series!!" ... So, the fear (or being an Angels fan, the expectation) is that we'll blow up the farm, and trade for guys who'll fail spectacularly, perhaps some pitcher who needs TJ on *both* arms after one start or some guy who literally spontaneously combusts in the clubhouse and burns down the stadium - and then we'll continue to be dogshit until we're all dead.

This article was published yesterday - 2020 Rookies ranked by future value - in the top 25, there are 4 Dodgers in the top 30, 3 Mariners, 2 A's -- and 1 Angels (Walsh, at #28.) https://www.mlb.com/news/ranking-2020-mlb-rookies-by-future-value The Dodgers continue to shame us in terms of finding talent ...

This is the more nuanced view, I think - you're right, there's simply not enough depth in our system to put us over the top - especially if the "top" is a one-game postseason in a losing Wild Card play-in game. Our biggest need is quality, major-league, proven starting pitching - and that's (obviously) a commodity that's very expensive in prospects if you have to trade for them. If we were actually able to do the above - Bauer, Gausman, and Simba - Arte would be an absolute fool not to do it. Heck, if things don't work out, trade any with excess value for prospects. The team - via Arte - has a lot of cash resources - spend the cash, keep the players. Have said it before, will say it again, and again - this team needs to invest in nuts and bolts - better scouting and player development, including internationals.

Sounds like it has, a bit- https://blogs.fangraphs.com/keeping-up-with-the-al-wests-prospects/ Not that a FV in the"60's" is anything to sneeze at - but there's a big difference between "top 10" and a "top 20" prospect - there's an uncertainty about him that wasn't there before - and FG's "bust rate" looms increasingly large as a position player drops below 60. His trade value has taken a hit. Which is ok - he's really young, and I don't see him being traded now. But it's pretty unlikely anyone will trade an established impact player for him.

Should add an "all of the above" choice ...

Yeah - as a "baseball fan", he's a legendary player. As an "Angels Fan", he's a legendary waste of money. Yet another debacle on the list of bad Angels financial decisions (on the lists of worst trades and worst FA signings during the last 20 years, the Angels show up depressingly often.) We'd be a hell of a lot more forgiving if we'd gotten any of his early career good years. I thought we'd get 3 or 4 good, even great years out of him. But we all know how that turned out.

First episode was really solid. The 2nd episode? HBO should ask for their money back - that episode was a confused mess and I think they lost me - I may never watch #3 to give it another chance - just too many other ways to spend an hour.

I think the days around the time of Dipoto leaving were worse, in the sense that the future was obvious - we had arguably the worst farm in baseball, we had few tradeable assets - the major league team was a good as it was gonna get - and it was only going to get worse from there - we were looking at a low, slow, sad decline that would take years to recover from. These are better - but not good enough - sure, there's some young talent in the pipeline, but not enough to promote to the team to fill gaps *and* to make trades for impact ML starters. Everyone knows we need pitching - but everyone needs pitching - no one wants to trade their top-end arms, and FA aces are rare (and usually don't fare well.) Going forward, we have holes and so still not much chance of getting there from here. We need to draft high, and be brilliant at it. We need to get lucky in the FA market - some ace pitcher choosing to come here - and actually perform. We need some take a flyer on some pitcher, and have it pay off. Maybe get lucky in a NPB posting and pickup a decent pitcher. We need a hell of a lot to go right for us - and that's not really been our pattern lately, has it?

Anyone with a BA sub? I saw they announced a delayed 20-round draft next season, and based on the standings this - didn't see anything about a lottery - but that was just the first couple of sentences before paywall ... (geez, let's not have a lottery - somehow we'll wind up with the 45th pick - "toolsy MiFer" territory)