DCAngelsFan

I literally just got back from a root canal - and I enjoyed that more than I'd enjoy listening to those bozos.

I really can't see including Sandoval - there's risk that attaches to Kluber - at best, he's gone in 2 years. At worst, Sandoval out-performs him. Even if we pick up another FA from your list, they'll be someone trending towards the end of their careers, and we have to think about replacing them as soon as we get them.

https://www.mlb.com/news/how-the-angels-can-get-mike-trout-back-to-playoffs Short version (to 95 wins) - sign Cole, Keuchel, trade for Wilson Contreras, and hope Trout, Upton, Simba, Ohtani all stay healthy, Pujols rides the pine more, Adell contributes 3 WAR - and the Astros come back to earth. Add 12 wins through roster adds and "hope." Rationale for Keuchel is he's low-risk and good for +3 wins - I think saying Keuchel is "low-risk" is a little over-stated, long-term - I like Keuchel for a 1-year, maybe even 2-year deal - but there are signs he's reaching a tipping point ...

Exactly - Exactly - I kind of wondered if we hired Callaway with this in mind? This could play out in a number of ways - Boras wants to keep us in play for Cole - even if he doesn't care who ultimately signs him - keeps the bidding going. Knowing we're in on Wheeler puts a little pressure on Cole - and Boras - to deal early. (Boras and Cole may well have somewhat different agendas.) (assuming he wants to be on the Angels.) An interesting game - does Eppler leverage that - imply to Cole that it's him *or* Wheeler? Or does he use that as "look at this team we're building - you want to be part of this" and try to sign both?

This was probably already posted somewhere but https://www.mlb.com/news/gerrit-cole-rumors If you don't care to read it, Morosi says we're one of four teams in on Wheeler, that we're (obviously) a "perfect fit" for Cole, and asks the question - can we afford both?

As long as guys like Tony Reagins can be a GM, a guy like Vernon ("effin") Wells can be an agent. Ugh, was having a bad day already - didn't really need to hear Vernon Wells' name p.s. - to be fair, I don't blame Wells at all - seems like a decent guy - but that trade ranks among the worst in baseball history for sheer, obvious, apoplectic stupidity - and that stupidity was glaringly obvious on the day it was made, not like many that looked fair at the outside only to blow up in retrospect.

They *do* work - but they take a long time, 6 months to a year for full healing. Giving a guy a prp shot, then putting him back on the mound in a month doesn't work - it's basically a month's rest. There'll be a bit of healing, but the underlying issue, the reason for the injury in the first place? Probably still there. He's showing all the signs of a TJ surgery in the near future.

I'm afraid there's a little too much interest in Wheeler - I think your 4/100 is probably closer to reality. He's got a fine arsenal of pitches and *could* be an ace with just a little nip and tuck; I'm sure lots of GM's are convincing themselves they could help him make that adjustment, and become an ace. Our hiring of Callaway might suggest we have a plan for Wheeler. (which doesn't tell us anything about *his* preferences.) I'd love to sign Wheeler *and* Cole - but seems a stretch. Conventional wisdom has Strasburg staying in DC to get a better extension - but if Boras puts him in play, the market will really seize up - the Nats have the room to pursue both Cole *and* Wheeler if Strasburg and Rendon both leave. That rotation would be sick ... Our need is so great we really can't afford to sign one guy, say Gibson, and enter March with Cole the only high-end guy still on the market. Boras would love that bidding war - (insert some tdawg-provided gif here) - but I don't think we can afford to be in that auction, and lose. Gibson our only sign this offseason would be a disaster. If Cole wants to play for the Angels, and I'm all-but certain he does, then he needs to sign early. He may not get every last nickel, but he'll still be rich, playing on the team he wants to play for, and the team will be more competitive for it, letting us move on to secondary signings before the market dries up. Hell, give him that 7/224 with a opt out after 3 if that's what it takes. As much as I want him, we can't be hung out to dry. (sorry for the stream-of-consciousness rambling)

This is also true of position players; when you look at who we've drafted, you have to look at what "stars" he passed on, and how well other teams have drafted. It's too early to be certain, but I think his draft success, relative to number of picks and draft position, puts him in the upper tier. I still think the Cardinals might be the best at consistently finding talent in the draft (which might explain the allegation that Houston stole their draft info) - and do I want to mention the Dodgers here? I do not. :\ Speaking of Houston, between 2010 and 2015, they had 12 picks in the 1st round or 1s round, the #1 pick 3 times, and the #2 pick once. Springer (#11), Correa (#1), and Bregman (#2) were drafted with those 1st round picks. (Our own disastrous 2010 draft and all the players we passed on, and the Hamilton signing - where for some reason, I have the idea we'd have drafted Judge in 2013 with that lost pick - make me regret what could have been.)

Betcha it's more than sign-stealing - https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/how-stephen-strasburg-avoided-tipping-his-pitches-against-the-astros-in-the-world-series/ Probably had cameras on Strasburg's hand's - be interesting if those same thuds were heard in that game ...

Also a Boras strategy - there's always some mystery team offering "more", breathlessly reported by, of course, Jon Heyman. I dunno what really happens in those conversations - seems an agent would stop dealing with a GM who makes offers in bad faith.

And just a reminder how that worked out - he signed an 8-year, $121m contract to start the 2001 season, he missed two years to injury, put up 2.9 bWar over those 8 years, and the Rockies cut him his last check a year ago for his deferred payments. I really want Cole - who doesn't? But that contract amount would be a huge gamble. If he's the only significant pitcher we can afford, and he's injured or fails to perform? We'll be in purgatory for years (more.)

I think that "ace" is more important in the post-season - but gotta get there first. And yeah, these contract estimates are eye-watering. I think what @totdprods proposed above - Wheeler, Odorizzi, Hamels, and Grandal - or some (endless) variation thereof - can get us closer to that post-season. But that's not my point - if Boras strings us along until March - and then Cole signs with some other club - and we're holding our dollars back in hopes of signing him, we'll have gotten nothing. All those guys will sign elsewhere long before then. And we'll have passed on them, reserving our budget for Cole. We can't let all of our plan b's sign elsewhere pursuing the big dog - we may need to cut bait on him early.

Harper left after last season for the Phillies. I guess you could say Adam Eaton replaced him? Or Juan Soto? Or, as some would say, Patrick Corbin did - replacing Harper's salary with Corbin's.

I agree in principle, but I think it could only be for players you actually have released - you can't get relief from the Pujols contract while still playing him. Of course, the AAV is only useful for the luxury tax calc - they still have to pay those contracts - so it would only benefit high-payroll teams that are near that "cap" - and have enough money to pay for someone to replace a bad contract. In any given year, that's 3-5 teams, maybe? I actually think the union might support it, as it might tend to increase total payrolls paid slightly, as teams can potentially spend more on FA's to replace cut players without hitting the luxury tax penalties. I think most teams without luxury tax implications would oppose it, so probably won't happen without some kind of spiff for them to support it.

A little surprised by this - the timing and the hat are a bit of a middle-finger to Houston - I gotta think Houston fans, mgt, and players are a little pissed by this. You'd think Boras would want them as suitors, too, if only to keep the price up. Of course, who needs that when he can just invent a mystery team bidding eleventy-billion-dollars and have Heyman report it as real? Whatever - my hope is he just quickly settles on a contract (with the Angels) that makes him unfathomably rich for the rest of his days, and still leaves enough money on the table so that the Angels can build a team that gets him back to the World Series. Being rich on a losing team probably isn't near as much fun as being rich and on a team contending for a World Series ring.

Acuna would probably have ranked higher on this list had he actually *had* a 2017 ML season - he was given "zero" for that - and his WAR in 2018 was short-changed b/c he played in AAA, and only played 111 ML games. Obviously, he's a special case - most of these players are older and have a longer track record (and presumably, are closer to their decline - but as you said, that's not the point of your list.) As for projections, well, there's this: https://www.fangraphs.com/projections.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&type=zips2020&team=1&lg=all&players=0&sort=24,d (seems to me those projections haven't been updated for awhile) I don't much care for ZiPS, but it's a start - and it does become painfully obvious that there are just not that many "Angels" in the first few pages ... I like your write-ups - looking forward to seeing the rest of the series.

I was at a concert in DC last night, and some of the bars around the venue had watch parties - and they were basically empty, just a few people watching the tv's. The regular season has, what, 2420 games? And the World Series takes 7 games - that's too much for the casual bandwagon "fans". It's like a cricket test, taking place over 5 days - very hard to sustain drama and excitement for the casual fan. I imagine the watch parties tonight will be packed with people who haven't a clue about how baseball is played, but who want to be part of an "event."

I think we'll probably have to put in an opt-out for Cole - that has some tangible $$ value attached to it, and will help reduce the total value / AAV on the contract. Maybe a 7/225 with a 3-year opt-out, a $32m AAV. That plus playing "at home" might be enough - but I think that's probably the "min max", if you will. That could leave enough to maybe sign Hamels and Grandal, or "just" Wheeler alone, (no Grandal.) Cole, Wheeler *and* Grandal seems out of reach - but is my "magical thinking" haul for the offseason.

They have fans? (well, they do *now*) Sort of ironically, this year's attendance is significantly down (11th in the NL.) As an area of transplants and lifelong O's fans, Nats games are mostly attended by people rooting for the visitors and millennials who attend semi-ironically, who spend the entire game taking selfies of themselves drinking beer and eating Ben's half-smokes. (The food offerings are pretty decent, tho.)

Be one of our premier FA pitching sign-ees - signing the contract, he throws the pen in joy, tearing his ucl and, for good measure, the pen, flying at 90 mph, embeds itself in Maddon's eye, instantly, (and cheaply), lobotomizing him. This *is* the Angels we're talking about so, it's about 50:50 this happens ...

I took Nats in 6 - but I don't really believe it - the emotional momentum they had has probably fizzled out. Playoffs are all about who's "hot." Their starting pitching gives them a punchers chance, tho.

Even if Strasburg opts out, I'd push hard for Wheeler - with Cole and Strasburg both Boras players, we can't put all of our eggs in the Boras basket - he'll want to string it out - can't let the market pass us by while we wait. Make an early run at all 3, but I'd see us making a strong push to sign Wheeler quickly, then Cole. Of course, can hope Cole wants to play for the Angels, and will settle quickly on a contract.

Look at this way - by trading him, we put him on a course that ended last night, sticking a dagger in the heart of the Dodgers. Do you still want to undo that trade?

Dunno - some counties around here, there's some serious graft to be made building affordable complexes via "non-profits" - with taxpayers left holding the bag to fund the acquisition, development, and infrastructure build-out, as well as rental subsidies from now until the end of time, while the non-profits and their development partners skim all day, every day. Throw in some kick-backs and lots of non-comp set-asides, a lot of people get personally wealthy, while using other people's money - but no worries, it's all in a "good cause."