jessecrall

FYI Keith Law's top-100 rolls out next week and he was generally higher on Angels prospects than most last year, putting Adell at #10 on his midseason update.

If you don't believe Donald Trump is a racist who ran a racist campaign, you may want to take a deep look at yourself. I know, I know "I'm not racist, calling someone a racist is the worst thing you can say about someone, the PC left thinks everyone's a racist, it's ILLEGAL immigration we don't like etc etc,"

Trump's approval rating is 15 points underwater and a moderate lost to him in 2016. I don't understand why media figures and even Democrats underestimate how popular progressive policies are when they're presented effectively.

I keep seeing people on here and elsewhere talking up Democrats who can appeal to "moderates," or conservatives who don't like Trump, ignoring the fact that the Dems spent 2016 chasing moderates, failed to land them and alienated parts of their base. What do Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan & Pennsylvania have a lot of? Union workers and college students. Who can appeal to them? Lefties. If Sherrod Brown can win Ohio and Tammy Baldwin, a progressive, pro-single-payer lesbian can win Wisconsin by DOUBLE DIGITS, it's crazy for Democrats to think they need some big tent, half-assed, watered-down candidate who yammers about the need for bipartisanship and common ground and then watches all the moderates they courted fall in line with Trump because they like tax cuts and dislike immigration. Court disillusioned voters, young voters, poor voters...people who are on your side but not necessarily inclined to make the effort to vote. Trump landed JUST enough in the right spots to win. Democrats can easily do the same if they run FOR progressive issues as opposed to AGAINST Trump.

That didn’t seem right to me so I looked it up. 
CBA, attachment 22 describes the debt-service rule. In part 2, #9 it says player compensation is considered debt, beyond the first $75M (if I’m reading it correctly.)
Again, I don’t know the Angels financials and whether this rule actually has an impact, but it is another unknown element that should prevent anyone here from claiming to have an informed opinion of what they “should” spend. 
In the end, it comes down to people simply wanting them to spend more because they want them to spend more. That’s no different than my son thinking I should buy him a car, someone thinking in-n-out should make its burgers bigger or .... Varuka Salt wanting an Oompa Loompa.
 

Stop it. No one is proposing a 70% tax rate.  

I keep seeing people on here and elsewhere talking up Democrats who can appeal to "moderates," or conservatives who don't like Trump, ignoring the fact that the Dems spent 2016 chasing moderates, failed to land them and alienated parts of their base. What do Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan & Pennsylvania have a lot of? Union workers and college students. Who can appeal to them? Lefties. If Sherrod Brown can win Ohio and Tammy Baldwin, a progressive, pro-single-payer lesbian can win Wisconsin by DOUBLE DIGITS, it's crazy for Democrats to think they need some big tent, half-assed, watered-down candidate who yammers about the need for bipartisanship and common ground and then watches all the moderates they courted fall in line with Trump because they like tax cuts and dislike immigration. Court disillusioned voters, young voters, poor voters...people who are on your side but not necessarily inclined to make the effort to vote. Trump landed JUST enough in the right spots to win. Democrats can easily do the same if they run FOR progressive issues as opposed to AGAINST Trump.

Sanders is the best option even though he's 131 years old, Sherrod Brown and Elizabeth Warren are solid consolation picks, Jay Inslee seems interesting enough that I hope he runs and Biden should pack it in.

I can't find specific data quickly enough to make it worth my while but he definitely improved statistically against lefties as the season went on. Coming into September, he had a .509 OPS against them so if he ended at .654, he obviously made serious progress over the last month. He also LOOKED much more comfortable against them in the 2nd half. He didn't have the "bailing out on pitches that hit the inside corner" or "flailing at breaking balls low and away" at bats that we saw early on. 

I can't find specific data quickly enough to make it worth my while but he definitely improved statistically against lefties as the season went on. Coming into September, he had a .509 OPS against them so if he ended at .654, he obviously made serious progress over the last month. He also LOOKED much more comfortable against them in the 2nd half. He didn't have the "bailing out on pitches that hit the inside corner" or "flailing at breaking balls low and away" at bats that we saw early on. 

That's waaaaaaaaaaaaay off.
He's got one year left and he was terrible last year and he's going to make like $10M. He wouldn't cost a top prospect.

I agree that it will happen but the players union has no leg to stand on if they attack this as older players aren’t getting fair offers.  I’m in favor of less control at the beginning of careers.  Hell they should turn it all upside down and fix the pay scale for the minor leaguers while they are at it.  

Did you write this article?
Upton makes $21M average for four more seasons, and is likely to do 3-5 WAR seasons for the majority of that time. In the next 4 years, we'd likely get 25-28 WAR total out of either Harper or Machado. So while it's an improvement, it's not a significant one. Especially Harper, who is coming off a 1.3 WAR season in 2018 and a 4.7 WAR season in 2017 (and 1.5 in 2016). His only truly elite season was in 2015, when he posted 10 WAR.
Machado has had three great seasons in the last 4, at 5.7 WAR in 2018, 3.4 in 2017, and then two truly elite years at 6.9 and 7.1 in 2016 and 2015.
Hopefully both of these guys do well in free agency dollars wise, but adding one of them would not likely have pushed the Angels over the salary tax threshold, but it would've been close at 31.5 M. If they could find a taker for Calhoun, that would probably be the difference in 2019.
But Jo Adell should be here in 2019 or 2020, and if he does a Juan Soto / Ronald Acuna impression, and puts up a 3.0 WAR rookie season, that value is a much better add, as he's paid 555k.
And he plays the same position as Harper.
Adding Machado wouldn't impact Adell position wise, but it would affect the amount of money the Angels have to throw at a front line starter in 2020 or 2021.
That ultimately is why they don't add these two guys. For the past few seasons, the amount of money dedicated to pitching was very low.
For 2019, at $164 or so million in payroll, only 33.5 +5 @ 555k or 36.275M is allocated to the pitching staff.
In 2018, the $167 or so million in payroll, only 30M or so was allocated.
In 2017, it was $42 million of $166.
Only in 2016, prior to Eppler, was the portion of payroll allocated higher, at $71M of $165. And $41M of that was to two players, Weaver and Wilson.
 
 
 
 
 

Calhoun's value is rock-bottom and Upton has a no trade clause. I think it makes a lot more sense to play out 2019 with the expectation (and hope) that Adell can take over in right, Marsh will push Upton to 1st if he's ready in a couple of years and if he isn't, Knowles or Adams should be by the time Upton's deal is done. And if you extend Trout at some point in the next 11 months, you can then fill in blanks with, say, Arenado or Cole depending on how the farm develops. 

i can guarantee you the liklihood of that being said or even conveyed by the angels to trout is somewhere below 0%.

He’s full of shit.  I’ll take Flether’s word over the word of a guy that might spend one day a year in our clubhouse.

Trout. Mookie. Extensions for Acuna & Soto. Bregman. Lindor. Obviously, the AAV matters but the odds of them either remaining productive for the next 10 years or being big enough stars for the 1st half that you can live with the ensuing decline are pretty good.

And an absolute monster (1.083 OPS) the year before. It's fluky, he'll be fine.

And an absolute monster (1.083 OPS) the year before. It's fluky, he'll be fine.

Ozzie played at an All Star-level through the age of 37 and Omar held his defensive value into his 40s...they're anomalies and it would be incredibly naive to EXPECT Simmons to repeat that paradigm...but it is possible. 

Marsh is probably the best defensive outfielder in their system. I imagine Upton would move to 1B if Marsh is good enough to start (assuming Trout's extended & Adell's a regular by 2021).

Because most people are ignorant about Justin Upton, pretty simple.  I will go out on a limb and say we will be very lucky if Adell ends up having Upton’s career.  

Simmons is on par with them currently.  He's an outlier to that level.  It's a small sample so one can't expect that.  But guys with Simmons talent at SS don't perform at his level because of physical tools greater than the next guy like speed or quickness.  It's innate.  Instinct.  He might lose a step over time or he might be so good at it that his experience actually offsets that.  Where the innate ability is so amazing that a little loss of foot speed or quickness actually only starts to matter in his late 30's.  
What Simmons has accumulated in defensive value to this point in his career is almost double that of any SS in history.  He's been better at defense relative to his peers than Mike Trout has been at baseball overall relative to his by a landslide.  For him to drop off to 'normal' would a pujolsian level of decline.  And just to sweeten the deal, he's doing it in far fewer chances per year because guys don't hit the ball on the ground as much anymore.  
The only real question is whether he maintains his current ability with the bat.  

Think of all the reasons why signing Manny Machado would be a good thing for the Angels. Now think of all the reasons why it isn't feasible or likely.
Simply put, the latter is more likely, by a mile.
Now ask yourself, is Billy Eppler an intelligent GM?
And one last question. Do you think if the common fan can see all the reasons why this is a terrible idea, do you think an intelligent professional, whose job it is to build a team can see that too?
The Angels aren't in on Machado. We could go through all the reasons why or we can keep it nice and short.