Wisconsin27

I'm rooting for the guy and hope he does well.

I may be off, but I suspect Arte will spend when attendance and fan interest wanes.  Our owner is a businessman first and always has been, imo.  He'll ultimately make sure his product sells.

I love Wash's response.  It's so anti-Mike S., but I love it.  

FFS!

Really nice piece.  Very measured.

Two thoughts.

1.  Rushing Dana would be the most Angels-thing ever.  Let him cook, we are not winning it all this year.

2.  I'd be really interested to hear IP's take/thoughts.  I know he references a lot of predictive data that might be useful in continuation of this thread.

I wonder why not?  This team, as constructed, should put it's resources towards the future and pitching.  I want to barf when I see the Snell rumors.

School is in session for us, but I hope like hell you do something like this in 4+ years when I able to retire.  Would love to join all of you!

6 hours ago, T.G. said:

Not Hot Stove news... but didn't know where else to put this.

Man, thanks for sharing this.  What a wonderful kid and someone I hope we treat the right way moving forward.  You can just tell he's got it together and is super respectful.  In this day and age, its refreshing.

No interest whatsoever in Yellich.  The bill will come due and we'll have to watch and suffer.  When will we learn these long-term contracts given to 33+ year old position players rarely, if ever, work out?  I'm exhausted with this approach.

I'm in the minority for sure, but I have no interest in signing a player to a 500 million dollar deal.  We've been, and continue to be, down the road of having a few high-priced star position players that hinder our ability to complete a roster (read: resources towards high-end SP and BP).  I'm exhausted with the approach.

36 minutes ago, totdprods said:

I don’t disagree with this, generally. I might have benefitted from wording my original reply better…I don’t disagree that Arte isn’t an obstacle to their success, and that as head honcho he does take blame regardless of any GM, or that the aspects in which he does ‘meddle’ or skimp affect the team’s outlook or the GM’s ability…but I was trying to get out ahead of that to keep it from being simply another thread that focused on just Arte-bashing because it’s tiresome.

This past offseason was a deviation from year’s prior. Arte increased payroll by a solid amount. He let a GM talk him out of a Dipoto big splash in Turner and into a number of investments that were not the Eppler one-year specials a la Cahill or Harvey. The Angels distributed their money around in several moves for once - Anderson, Urshela, Renfroe, Drury, Estevez - that were largely approved of by fan and critic. They didn’t all work out but it was a noted difference from years prior. And perhaps all credit should go to Perry, but the ‘farm’ has quickly produced MLBers from amateur scouting. Maybe that is in part a result of Perry purely, or perhaps the Angels have allocated some resources or scouting that is paying off. 

So while I have no doubt that Arte’s been a significant barrier in many ways, I also don’t think that means it *has* to continue that way. Last winter proved there can be some shift in their approach. Perhaps Ohtani walking furthers that, or the success of the young core. Perhaps a combo of those things and trusting Perry’s vision could allow Arte to step back or change a few of his negative habits. Do I expect that to happen overnight? No. A 180° shift? No. Comprehensive change? No. But he’s capable of change and we may be seeing that these last 12 months, which was my motivation in trying to steer this thread away from focusing on Arte and instead focusing on an organic approach Perry could take that could help Arte view a holistic change in how they do things for a year, provided it’s yielding results this time next year.

Now THAT's the totdprods I am accustomed to.  Well stated and agree (almost) wholeheartedly (as the decision to not trade Othani the last two deadlines still chaps me!).  But I totally get where you are coming from, so thanks for clarifying.

6 hours ago, totdprods said:

Obviously that is Arte, but it's not the more specific Arte issues that everyone focuses on (meddling, not spending on farm, spending on wrong FAs, firing everyone, not letting GM have more say, not broadening analytics/scouting). 

Those are issues, but I think they could be somewhat overcome if the org just chilled for a year or two and there wasn't a push to try and win year-in, year-out, especially when we're the 4th best team in the division.

I respect your contributions, totprods, but just can't agree with this.  No organization came overcome those obstacles long-term regardless of a short-term plan (of which, I agree with you on).  Winning organizations don't have meddling owners reluctant to spend on the farm or analytics, and fire people who don't perform under their "keep the revenue streams going" approach.  None, in any sport.

The idea we can properly evaluate any GM knowing the parameters our owner puts in front of them is almost comical.  As fans, we just clamor so much for the next season that I sometimes think we lose perspective of the big picture (forrest from the trees, so to speak).

3 hours ago, mmc said:

If the organizational no longer believes he will be able to pitch in the majors, his potential is 0

I can appreciate your faith in our organization's abilities.  I wish I had the same faith, but two decades of incredibly questionable decision-making has me quite down.  And yes, I believe it starts with Arte, but that has been regurgitated to death.

6 hours ago, Angelsjunky said:

I get it, and I think the chances of him every being truly healthy are very low -- as I implied. But my point is that I'd rather keep a guy with his upside and only 10% of fulfilling it than some of the scrub-level players the Angels have on the 40-man roster. The Kenny Rosenbergs of the world are a dime a dozen and easily replaced; C-Rod isn't. Not to mention I'm not sure anyone would have claimed Rosenberg (or Wantz or Warren), and if they did, well, you've got other guys with similar talent.

You couldn't have worded my pending reply to MMC any better.  To me, it's more about what we are "protecting" in terms of potential help versus the rather small chance of what he could become.  Entirely different discussion if we were loaded at the younger levels.  But we're not.  

As has been stated, we should be looking for guys from other teams with this profile given our baren organization.

I know I shouldn't regurgitate this, but can't help myself.

Under Arte, I didn't ever feel it was going to be a good idea to resign Ohtani from an organizational perspective.  Three really high-priced players, none of who pitch, and all of whom would be 29+ and signed for multiple years simply never made sense with an owner that was luxury-tax avoidant.  There was simply no way to put the necessary roster, specifically to pitching, around those three with a salary ceiling.  It's why I'll never understand why we didn't trade him for max value earlier.  And as a fan, it pains me to say this because he's been awesome to watch.

There are no easy solutions moving forward, particularly with the free agent class being so weak.  I'm bracing myself for some ridiculous move, initiated by Arte, for someone that will put butts in the seats/generate excitement to the casual fan that will ultimately be a disaster (and certainly not for pitching).  It's the cycle we've been on over and over again, but has been successful for Arte's business plan.

Sorry for the rant.

8 hours ago, ettin said:

So I have to disagree with Blum here.

It's not the fact that Arte hasn't spent enough -- he has run consistently large payrolls (but of course never really stepping over the Luxury Tax in any significant manner).

Really the story, here, is HOW the money was spent. There you can point to poor investments in the Minor League system, large contracts handed out players that really, in retrospect (or heck, even at  the time they were signed!), should never have been paid that kind of money. Pujols, Rendon, et. al., the Angels have not invested well for the most part.

I have a bit of a different take.  I have come to view Arte as a businessman with a sole purpose of increasing the value and revenue of his business.  And he has done this very well.  

He's managed to put his resources in the areas that convince his fans that the product they purchase is a solid one and worth following (i.e. spending their money on his product).  There is defined amount of money he's willing to spend, like all owners, and he allocates his resources for the sole purpose of encouraging his clients (fans) to purchase more.  

This is to say, I don't believe for a minute that Arte has ever had ambitions of creating a strong organization.  To the contrary, he understands that making an occasional and well-timed splash will maintain his clients (fans) interest and drive them to his business.  He has been a master at this as the increase in his club's net value over his tenure would demonstrate.

Strong organizations that rely on baseball minds shy away from the many deals the Angels have offered; an aging Albert or Rendon, Josh, and many, many others.  I fear his desire to resign Ohtani for revenue purposes only may be another example.  However, Arte has been a wise-enough businessman to know that those moves would excite his clients and put butts in the seats.  More intelligent "baseball-moves" would not provide him what he desires as they don't excite the average fan.  The average fan doesn't "see" the work done in the background (i.e. the technology reference in the article), investments overseas, or any other money placed into infrastructure in an organization.  That doesn't sell excitement, which Arte has always been interested in.

I just don't believe for a minute the reason the Angels haven't been successful for the past two decades is because they've mistakenly chose where to invest in high-priced players.  Strong baseball organizations have shown us time and time again they can overcome the occasional error.   But Arte is different.  He's successfully managed to create excitement regardless of the deals he's signed player to.  He's managed to get 3 million customers to purchase his product routinely.  That's successful business from his view.  

At the end of the day, his vision doesn't align with most/all diehard fans.  But he controls the signings and the narrative.  And it's the reason why it has sucked to be a diehard fan of his team, and will continue to be while his owner, for many of us.

RIP Brandon and condolences to his family.

What an awful week for the AW Brotherhood.  My heart goes out to some of you guys who had personal relationships with Lou and Brandon.

Been thinking about Lou ever since I learned of the news.  RIP Lou!  You will continue to be in my thoughts and prayers.

3 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

I'm not a big Arte fan, but I doubt the following is Arte's fault:

He goes for Gerrit Cole,  but Cole a Yankees fan growing up goes to New York.

He pivots and signs the best free agent bat on the market in Anthony Rendon coming off a World Series MVP and one of the more consistent bats in MLB ahead of signing with the Angels.

Rendon becomes the most injury prone player that I've seen in Angels history, though a lot of those injuries were not necessarily his fault. 

Arte had nothing to do with the way the Angels have been unable to stay healthy this season. Could be a totally different story if their key guys stay relatively healthy this season. 

"Pivoting" and signing Rendon was on Arte, Chuck.  And it wasn't the first time he chased a flashy, low-30's position player in free agency.  The W-L of this team during his ownership is certainly on Arte.

I don't think he deserves to get blamed for injuries or not a willingness to spend.  But he likes to spend on 7-day a week players (position players) who attract at that gate and have name recognition.  The Rendon signing seemed like a panic at the time, tbh.  And no one could have predicted it would end up being this bad.  I mean, it's just horrible.

Find Peace, Lou!  You have been a pillar here for as long as I can remember.  All the love to you and your family!

5 minutes ago, Second Base said:

At some point, when will we acknowledge....

Dipoto - Bloated payroll, empty farm system, failed to build a winner.

Eppler - Bloated payroll, empty farm system, failed to build a winner.

Minasian - Bloated payroll, empty farm system, failed to build a winner.

The hard truth is, the Angels have tell avenues for contention...

1. Outspend everyone in free agency.

2. Enter the difficult period of a rebuild where they sell off anything of value in return for prospects, lower payroll to be reallocated much later on to extend homegrown players, shop the bargain bin in FA to fill out rosters until the trade deadline when you can flip them for more prospects, draft at the top of the first round because of your piss poor record, spend big on teenage lotto tickets in international free agency and return to contention in 2028 with a sustainable model of success, which is a combination of a strong farm, and the ability to spend big. 

You're going to catch hell for this post, too:-)

47 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

First, let's compare:

A reasonable, if risky approach: Go into debt setting up a business that has a good chance of being profitable. The idea being, you borrow from the future but establish a means to not only pay it back, but eventually earn a profit.

Perry Minasian's approach this trade deadline: Go into debt on lottery tickets in the hope that you get lucky and, if so, you can get lucky again and again.

What he's done is (further) empty the farm and brought in only mediocre and/or short-term talent in return. The Angels didn't exactly have a nest of golden-egg prospects, but they had a dozen or so decent ones and traded a bunch of them away. And for what?

Perhaps the worst example is actually from about a month ago: Coleman Crow and Landon Marceaux for Eduardo Escobar. Now Crow and Marceaux aren't great prospects (Fangraphs had them at 40 and 35+ FV, respectively), but both have solid chances of becoming back-end starters and/or solid middle relievers, and Crow maybe a bit more.

Escobar has been nothing short of terrible: in 23 games for the Angels he's had a 60 wRC+ and produced -0.6 WAR, which is second only to Walsh (-0.7) in negative value. He's been worse than the players he was supposed to replace. In other words, Minasian basically threw away two decent prospects for a player that made the team worse.

Book-ending Minasian's dubious--and rather Dipotoan--trade season is today's trade, Jeremiah Jackson (40+ FV) for Dominic Leone. Jackson is a toolsy shortstop who impressed back in 2019 when he hit 23 in 65 Rookie ball games at 19. His rise was slowed by injuries and swing-and-miss issues and is currently in his second season in AA at age 23, hitting .248/.321/.447 -- hardly a sure thing but still with a bit of upside. In other words, not a guy you dream on (anymore), but someone you stash in the hopes that he surprises.

And who is Leone? A 31-year old reliever who has produced a 3.75 ERA and 1.8 WAR in 386.2 major league innings, though aside from two good years in 2017 and 2021 (1.5 and 0.9 WAR) most of that has been just above or below 0.0 WAR. In other words, he's a mediocre journeyman reliever. I would argue that the difference between Leone and half a dozen pitchers on most AAA teams is that when Leone got a chance, he didn't blow it, but he's essentially no better than those dozens of AAA pitchers. He's the 50-year old guy you work with that doesn't really improve the company, but is a known quantity of mediocrity.

All things told, Minasian has traded away six players in the Angelswin pre-season top 20 prospects--Crow and Marceaux, plus Edgar Quero, Ky Bush, Jake Madden, and Mason Albright--and received a who's who of journeyman hitters and pitchers in return. Lucas Giolito and Reynaldo Lopez are both above average, though both seem to have fallen a notch from their prime.

But more importantly, all of them are heading for free agency (assuming the Angels don't take Escobar's option). Meanwhile, the Angels are six solid prospects poorer than they were a month ago.

Was it worth it? Well, all of Minasian's trades were made to increase the slim possibility that the Angels can eek out a wildcard spot, thereby helping convince Shohei Ohtani to stay and then build a perennial contender around him. According to Fangraphs, the Angels chances have gone from 22.7% the morning after the Giolito-Lopez trade to 16.6% going into today's game (certainly lower now after today's loss). Meaning, these moves didn't move the dial, at least not in the right direction. To be fair, I'm not sure how much Fangraphs' algorithm takes into account roster moves; since then, the Angels are 2-3. So the returns so far aren't positive, if not (yet) disastrous.

Back to the initial point. Using a credit card is sometimes likened to borrowing from your own future. It makes fiscal sense when you are investing in something that can earn it back, and when the risk is balanced by potential reward, with a minimal chance of destitution. What are the Angels investing in? A slightly greater chance of making the playoffs this year - or at least the appearance of a better chance. But at what cost? And what do they expect to do next year, with or without Ohtani? With Ohtani, payroll will be higher than ever; presumably Arte would be willing to spend even more, but considering the gaps on the roster, he's going to have to get into Yankees-Dodgers payroll territory, if not quite the stratospheric heights the Mets reached this year. Is he willing to do that?

Meanwhile, the biggest franchise problem remains the biggest franchise problem: a farm system almost totally devoid of talent. There is a bit here and there, but there's always been a bit here and there. And we have to give credit for drafting Zack Neto and trading for Logan O'Hoppe, and there's even room to be mildly optimistic on Chase Silseth, Sam Bachman, and Ben Joyce -- all Minasian draftees. But with recent trades and graduations, there are literally no prospects--aside, perhaps, from recent 1st rounder Nolan Schanuel--who look to be probable major league regulars or better. A few sorta upside guys and a few lottery picks, but you can probably count the "maybe, if you squint just right wearing your rosiest tinted glasses" guys on two hands. 

The issue is not the risk itself. it is that it is a risk that A) Doesn't move the dial on playoff probabilities that much (if at all), and B) Worsens an already weakened farm system to anemic level. It would be one thing if the latter factor brought in significant talent, that is if the risk was balanced with a significantly better possibility of reward. But what I see, at least, is that all Minasian really did was plug mediocre holes with new mediocre players, and lost a half a dozen prospect in the process. It was desperation move after desperation move, clear evidence that Minasian is throwing a Hail Mary -- probably on his career, but certainly on the year and the foreseeable future of the franchise. And we're not talking a Tom Brady Hail Mary to get into field goal position, down by two points. We're talking a Jimmy Garappolo Hail Mary against the best cornerbacks in the league, down by eight, hoping for a touchdown and two-point conversion to get into over-time.

I hope to be proven wrong, but we may someday look back on this last week as the point when the franchise committed itself to further years of mediocrity. In other words, as of this writing, there is a very good chance that the "Dark Age" we've been in for at least the last seven or eight years, is far from over, and Perry Minasian's trades over the last month have moved the needle on that dial, and not for the better. Gone are the days when we could dream of a return to glory as being N+1 or N+2 years; we're now in the rather ominous waters of...N+X. Who knows when or how this franchise will ever turn around, but the signs aren't good.

You're going to catch a lot of hell for this post.  And I understand why as we have suffered for what seems like forever and LONG for some sort of reason to be excited in August/September.

That said, I agree with your premise outside of two things.  I like what Perry did with the resources he had to work with.  And I don't buy for a second the decision was Perry's.  It was Arte's.  

If you have a moment, ESPN has a 1 minute clip on the decision that is worth a watch.

Perry has proven to be exceptional, imo.  Just exceptional.  His drafts have been wonderful and he took orders and put us in a position to fill gaps until the cavalry arrives.  It's got me more excited for the fall than I have been in over a decade.

Organizationally, the decision to "go for it" is an absolute disaster in terms of lost opportunity costs.  A 40 year old Verlander just landed the Astros top two prospects.  What would Ohtani have landed last year at this time?  Hell, even this year when our odds of making the playoffs were 15%ish and we had multiple starters out while facing a daunting August schedule?

More importantly, if it all works out and Ohtani resigns (honestly, regardless of whether we make the playoffs), Arte has to either sell the team or go over the luxury tax threshold (something he wouldn't do for Mike).  It's really that simple as anything short of either of those and we'll be in the same position we've lived in for the last 10 years.  It's really that simple.

I'll end with this and not targeted at any of my fellow Angel-brethren in particular.  I hope everyone remembers the last month accurately 2-4 years from now.  This decision is for the present/this year.  We will be paying for it for years to come (if Arte remains owner and maintains current payroll).  I wouldn't run my business that way and I don't pile up credit card debt at home for the same reasons.  The bill always comes due.

I'm jacked for this fall and think we have a true shot.  In the end, Ohtani will "get his" and likely go to the team he feels most comfortable with that hands out top-level dough.  We've seen it over and over in sports, but the hometown discount is increasingly becoming a thing of the past.  Ohtani may be different and I find myself thinking that at times.  But even then, it's up to Arte to deliver.

Arte is the primary reason our team struggles.  He injects far more than an owner should.  This organization doesn't make "organizational decisions," but is instead driven by Arte's business ($) approach.

Think about it.  We took Ohtani off the market (when he should have been shopped last year at this time) a week early, with multiple starters out indefinitely, while 3 games out of the wildcard and a very difficult schedule ahead, in one of the biggest "sellers" markets in recent history.  Just think about that.

Perry, whose job is on the line, then dealt what little we had in the way of the farm in an effort to go "all in."

What I feel is lost on people is this.....what if it works?  We make the playoffs AND sign Ohtani (assuming everyone understands the odds of making, much less winning, the World Series is extremely unlikely).  We "succeeded" with our plan to make the playoffs AND Ohtani decides to sign with us.  Wonderful.

Bear with me.  With Arte as owner and unwillingness to increase payroll beyond the threshold (it's been 20 years since he's owned the club and it's NEVER happened, even with Mike in his prime years), what the hell is the plan?  We have a baren farm system with Ohtani, Rendon, Mike and Anderson combining to 138+ million and they will all be 30 or older.  FFS, when will this team learn?

IF, IF, IF Arte was willing to spend as he hasn't in two decades, I would be behind it.  But this notion of "going for it to only make the playoffs because as fans we really have that as an end-goal" just doesn't resonate with me.  I wish my team was run organizationally with the idea they would compete every year.  Yet, here we are, with "stars" on our roster every single year for the past 20 with nothing to show for it.  

Just exhausting.

We have some wonderful young talent.  O'hoppe, Neto, Moniak, Detmers, Sandoval and many more.  I would have much preferred we traded Ohtani in an effort to acquire more farm/cusp talent, kept Bush/Quero, and build organizationally.  I honestly believe this pathway would have surely gotten Mike to the playoffs, rather regularly, in last half-decade than the current approach.  More importantly, it would have jived with the parameters the owner has set for the past 20 years in terms of salary limitations.  

Arte's fault from a baseball fans perspective isn't in his willingness to spend, but rather in his requirement it be on "stars" that will put people in the seats.  

I've been a Rams (and Angels) fan since '78.  Stan's approach to owning a team should have a book written about it.  Nothing gets done without his stamp, but he trusts the people he hires to the degree he almost never intercedes.  

My rant is over and I'll continue to have my mood change with the results of every Angels game as I have for the past few decades.  I'll do my best to go "all in" with the current club, which I honestly feel is as "put together" as any in recent memory (injuries aside).  I just don't understand the end game, but I will worry about that this winter!

17 hours ago, AngelsFanSince86 said:

My thoughts are this:

1) The trade clearly makes them better. 

2) I said it before and I'll say it again: I think they should have traded Ohtani. They have won 6 out of their last 7 and gained like 1 game. Their schedule only gets harder. 

3) If they don't make the playoffs and/or don't retain Ohtani, they will go from a position of being able to gain 1-2 top prospects to instead losing 1 top prospect (and their top 2) for literally nothing. 

Last, but not least:

4) None of that matters because what is done is done. I'm an Angels fan and have been disappointed in this organization for so long. I'm letting it all go for the rest of the season and going all in. I'll be there 8/3/23 cheering them on per usual with a little more optimism this time.

This is exactly where I am at, only I will add a couple of more:

- We also lost the prospective prospect haul that would have certainly been better than the comp pick we will gain.  Though I don't buy he would be worth what the media wants us to believe.

- IF Ohtani does decide to remain with us, then what?  Arte won't go over the threshold, so we will be trying to once again fill holes on cheap fliers to surround our 3 high-priced players.  Which leads to the farm, where ideally those players come from....

- We will now be buyers in one of the worst buyer markets in recent memory, thus depleting our farm even further.

It's the most "Angel decision" ever, but sure promises to be a fun ride this year!

Predicting relievers ability to get outs sucks.