Angelsjunky

Back to the topic, let us not forget that at the start of the year Ward was drifting into fringe prospect territory. He and Fletcher were both considered future role players - bench/platoon guys. Both had great years in the high minors and now people may be expecting more than they should. I think the main difference is that where before the season they projected as good bench players, now they project as quality regulars.

Tell it to my heart, tell me I'm the only one, is this really love or just a game.

#bringbackvalbuena

If anything this makes it more likely that he'll be saying stupid shit about how he's going to have his best season in years and expecting a full-time gig. But I'm glad that this means we'll see more Ohtani, Fernandez, and Walsh.

Again, WAR accounts for this.

On what do you base this perspective? They are virtually tied for WAR. Trout's hitting numbers are slightly better, but Betts has been a better defender.

Not at all worried. But it also depends upon your expectations. I think it was Chuck who compared him to Josh Donaldson, who has been one of the half a dozen or so best players of the Trout Era. Now to be fair to @Chuckster70, maybe he was deliberately wishful thinking, but it obviously isn't a fair comparison. It is like expecting Michael Hermosillo to Grady Sizemore because they have a similar type of tools package. The extremes are Brandon Wood (or Kaleb Cowart, presumably) on one end and Josh Donaldson on the end. In other words, there is a tiny chance that Ward does, indeed, become Donaldson, and a small (but larger) chance he's Wood or Cowart. Here's how I see the different possible outcomes for peak-Ward: 5% (Worst-case scenario): Wood or Cowart, negative-WAR player. A complete dud. 35% (Low-end reasonable projection): marginal regular, good platoon player; maybe .250/.320/.400, 1-2 WAR/year. 45% (Moderate reasonable projection): quality to above average regular; .270/.350/.430, 2-4 WAR. 15% (High-end reasonable projection): impact player/borderline star; .280/.370/.480, 4-5 WAR. <1% (Best of all possible worlds): Josh Donaldson, .290+/.900+, 6+ WAR These are obviously just wild speculations, but expresses the basic idea. I will be at least mildly disappointed in 40% of the possible outcomes, happy in 45%, ecstatic in 15%.

Anyone know anything about Ramirez? Specifically, how do his tools match up with other outfielders in the system? Is he comparable to the Deveaux/Adams level of tools or is he a step down to Knowles/Hermosillo?

Not this year. Betts has been every bit as good of a player as Trout this year. Deal with it.

Blash is also going to have 30+ in the minors this year. But to answer the question, I'm guessing Mark Trumbo in 2010, when he hit 36 in AAA,.Can't think of anyone between then and now, but could be missing someone.

Fangraphs Top 5 WAR leaders since 2012: 2018: Betts, Trout, Ramirez, Lindor, Chapman 2017: Judge, Altuve, Stanton, Trout, Rendon 2016: Trout, Betts, Bryant, Donaldson, Seager 2015: Harper, Trout, Donaldson, Votto, Goldschmidt 2014: Trout, McCutchen, Stanton, Brantley, Rendon 2013: Trout, Cabrera, McCutchen, Donaldson, Carpenter 2012: Trout, Posey, McCutchen, Cano, Cabrera On first glance there could be a slight worry that Trout is losing his dominance, but it is worth noting that he was actually effectively tied with Harper in 2015 at 9.3--Fangraphs lists Harper ahead because he is presumably a fraction up--he was also injured in 2017 and would have led the majors, and in 2018 he still can take the lead. So yeah, he's pretty much either been the best player or tied for the best player every year since he became full-time. That said, there is a wave of young guys who could challenge him: Ronald Acuna, Juan Soto, and Vlad Guerrero Jr. I don't think Vlad or Soto will have the all-around game to challenge his WAR, but Vlad could challenge him for best hitter in a couple years. Acuna, I think, has the all-around game to challenge.

?

Is there something we should know about this game that's extra special?

Albert has a -0.1 fWAR and 93 wRC+, meaning he's an overall replacement level player and a below league average hitter. Let's say that to safely replace him, the Angels need to find someone who is at least 1-2 WAR, what we could call a marginal starter, and a league average 100 wRC+ hitter. That' probably not Jefry Marte, who is at -0.3 fWAR and 69 wRC+. He was even worse last year, -0.5 and 59. But in 2016 he was fairly decent: 1.3 and 113 in 88 games. But can he repeat that? Maybe given more regular at-bats, but do the Angels want to risk it just to replace Pujols? I think not. In the minors they have Matt Thaiss, Jared Walsh, and Jose Miguel Fernandez. Are these guys at least 1-2 WAR, league average hitters? I think so - all three of them, actually. And I think this is what we're going to find out starting in September, at least with Walsh and JMF. Thaiss can join the party later next year. But let us remember that these guys only reached AAA this year; it isn't like they've been chomping at the bit for a year or two, with Albert blocking the way. If we're having the same conversation a year from now, that's a different story. But I suspect that starting in September and going through the first half of next year, we'll see the "Albert phase out plan." Maybe by this time next year he's down to DHing only on Ohtani's off days.

Sorta, although then that would make Trout into Trump.

In other words, one route to Trout getting the MVP would look something like this in terms of first place votes: 9 Trout 8 Betts 7 Ramirez 4 Martinez 2 Lindor

Actually that might help Trout because it would split the "Boston Vote." That is already one advantage Trout has: both Boston and Cleveland have two superstars, and in both cases the "secondary" superstar (Martinez and Lindor) might steal a vote or two from the "primary" superstar (Betts and Ramirez).

Trout has a couple problems going for him as far as the MVP is concerned: 1. He's only got 62 RBI and in a best-case scenario will finish with something like 80-85. I know voters are more savvy now, but it will be hard for them to vote for a power-hitting MVP that has that few RBI. 2. There are two other great candidates, both of whom play for playoff bound teams. Given that, this is what I think needs to happen for Trout to win the MVP: 1. He needs to go on an absolute tear and finish with 10+ WAR, a batting line around .320/.470/.650, 40 HR, close to 90 RBI, 110 Runs. 2. Mookie and Ramirez both need to slump substantially and finish half a run or more behind in WAR. So really it is three moving parts: Trout needs to finish strong and both Mookie and Ramirez need to slump. That's a tall order.

I've spoken loudly and frequently about putting Albert to pasture, albeit gradually, but I'm not sure I agree that he is the biggest problem of the offense. I mean, I agree that the Angels need more than mediocrity from the high offense 1B/DH position, but I think a bigger problem than Albert has been the crap they've been getting from the bench and various platoons Scioscia has been employing the last couple years. Consider: Valbuena: .199/.253/.335 in 288 PA Young Jr: .221/.265/.364 in 83 PA Young: .168/.252/.363 in 128 PA Marte: .211/.256/.361 in 156 PA Cowart: .145/.242/.236 in 62 PA Not to mention suckage from Blash, Fontana, Hermosillo. That is just too much suckitude for a ton of plate appearances. I'm too lazy to crunch the numbers, but I'm guessing something like .200/.250/.330 in 750 or so PA from the above mentioned players. So yeah, the Angels need more out of 1B/DH but they also need better role/bench players. I think you improve 1B/DH by improving the bench, because the talent should percolate upward. Thaiss doesn't seem ready yet but could be by the second half next year. Walsh and Fernandez should replace Valbuena/Marte and should be an improvement, maybe substantially so. So I expect 1B/DH to be a combination of Ohtani, Pujols, Fernandez, Walsh, and maybe Thaiss next year. Should be better, and I think if you have a new manager, Albert's lock on a full-time job will be less certain. We can hope that the new manager will play the best players available.

Well, I'm optimistic because I'm thinking mostly about the 3+ year plan. If 2019-20 sees the Angels compete for the wildcard, great, but I'm thinking that 2021 is when they start getting really good again. That's when the youth movement will really be coming into its own, with "First Wave" players like Barria, Fletcher, Ward, Rengifo, Thaiss, Walsh, Canning, Suarez, and Sandoval wth a year or two under their belts, and the "Second Wave" players--Jones, Marsh, Adell, Soriano, C Rodriguez, etc--breaking into the majors (the "Third Wave" would be Adams, Knowles, Jackson, Maitan, Soto, etc). The future remains bright. I see 2018-20 as being the transitional years between the Dark Years of 2010-17 and the New Golden Era of 2020+. My biggest concern is not how to complete in 2019, but how Eppler is going to entice Trout to stick around for that next era. Of course one way to do that is try to compete in 2019, which I'm totally fine with--if his moves also improve the team in the long-term. My personal preference would be to make the following moves: 1. Sign Yasmani Grandal. Gives the Angels another very good bat and greatly strengthens a weak position. 2. Sign Jeurys Familia. High-end closer for sub-Kimbrel prices. 3. Sign David Robertson. A nice veteran arm in the bullpen, still very good and could be the elder statesman for the young guys. 4. Trade for a starter. The Angels have a growing body of excess minor league talent; they need don't both Thaiss and Walsh; all three of Fletcher, Rengifo and Jones; all three of Adell, Marsh and Hermosillo. 5. Youth Movement. Start by auditioning current AAA players in Sept: Along with Ward and Fletcher, bring up Rengifo, Walsh, and Fernandez. Phase Pujols out. If the Angels are out by the trade deadline next year, trade Cozart and Calhoun. That sort of thing. In 2019, the addition of Grandal, Familia, Robertson, and a new starter--plus improvement by replacing old dudes with younger ones--should get the Angels a solid 10 win bump into the 85-win range, and maybe close enough to compete for a wildcard. 2020 should see further improvement as the youth matures. By 2021, the team could start being really good. So my recommendation: Don't fret too much about 2019. It is the trajectory that counts.

Sure, but the problem is that trades are virtually impossible to predict. Our own @ettin is really good at coming up with trades but almost none of them ever come to pass. But your point is a good one, because Eppler has proven he's really good at making trades that improve the team, and ones that seemingly come out of nowhere. As I think Oscar Wilde said, "expect the unexpected."

I'm not comparing Arenado to those three. I'm guessing his contract would turn out much better. My point is that big contracts hamstring payrolls and team flexibility. I'd be very hesitant to hand out six-figure contracts to anyone but the true elite. Arenado is borderline. He's really good, but will probably command something like 8/$200-250MM. I'd rather see the Angels focus on keeping Trout and Ohtani around and building from within.

Yeah, but I'm considering anything in the 90ish to 110ish range as average. I suppose 95-105 is more accurate, but let's not quibble. So probably below 80 is bad, 80-95 is mediocre, 95-105 is average, 105-120 good, 120-150 very good, 150+ great. Or something like that.

Arenado is really good. Over the last four years he's 10th in the majors with a 20.3 fWAR, just ahead of Bryce Harper and just behind Manny Machado. He's essential the NL version of Machado: very good (but not great) hitter, Gold Glove third baseman. But I don't want him. Well, I'd happily slot him into 3B, but the cost. He's probably going to get something like 8/$200MM. I know, its not my money. But haven't we learned that lesson by now? (see: Pujols, Hamilton, Wells). But regardless, it doesn't really matter because it isn't for another year. By then we will have a better sense of what we have in Ward, Rengifo, Fletcher, Fernandez, and even Jose Rojas as possible third basemen. I'd rather see the Angels spend league minimum on a 2-3 WAR player who has a chance to turn into a 3-5 WAR player (Ward, Rengifo, Fletcher). Oh yeah, if you want to know what Arenado's stats would look like translated to Anaheim in 2018, here you go: https://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/neutralized-stats.cgi?request=1&amp;id=arenano01&amp;sum=0&amp;t=b&amp;offset=0&amp;to_yr=2018&amp;to_lg=AL&amp;to_tm=ANA&amp;orderby=year_ID&amp;number_matched=1&amp;order_by_asc=1 In short, he goes from a career .293/.348/.541 hitter to .270/.323/.499. In terms of his last four years, his line would be something like .275/.340/.520. Still pretty good, but not Coors-good.

In before @tdawg87 says "more black dudes."