Angelsjunky

Not sure what constitutes "bold," but here goes. Logan O'Hoppe hits 30 HR. Zach Neto makes the All-Star game. Four starters win 10+ games, three with sub 4.00 ERAs, and five with 2 WAR or better (but none with 4 WAR). Nolan Schanuel has a .400 OBP and walks more than he strikes out. Anthony Rendon plays 100 games. Almost; 90ish sounds more likely. Mike Trout plays 130 games. Almost. I'll predict 129. Jose Soriano is the best reliever in the pen. Moniak and Adell are both good enough to earn significant playing time, but neither good enough to win a starting job outright.

"Relatively stretched out." @tdawg87?

That's a pretty even distribution of votes, with the average being on the upper end of 75-79, so probably 78-79 being our consensus prediction.

Part One: The Cycle of Ages - Angels Baseball version After the dead-cat bounce of the post-Golden Era (2014-15), the Angels dipped below .500 in 2016 and have stayed there since, with a .465 Win% from 2016-23, which equates with a 75-87 record. In other words, for the last eight seasons, the Angels have been, on average, a 75-win team. Without going back into it again in too much depth, the Angels are long overdue for a rebuild, or at least, a shift in the organizational approach of the last decade plus. One could argue that they should have rebuilt way back in 2010-11 but Arte wouldn't accept that the Golden Age was over. What commenced was a serious of blunders that proved disastrous to the franchise for the last 15 years. They had another window in 2015-2016 and didn't take it, for a variety of reasons: they had a promising core of young starters, all of whom went under the knife. Next, they had the Trout Window, and then the Ohtani Window. So we have, ala the Greek/Indian ages, four distinct periods of 21st Century Angels Baseball: 2002-09: Golden Age - no comment needed. If you're a Millenial or older, you remember. If you're a Zennial, no, it isn't fake news - the Angels really were one of the half dozen best franchises in baseball for the first decade of the new millenium. 2010-15: Silver Age - At the time it was frustrating, but they won 85+ games in four out of six seasons, and we saw the arrival of the Promised One. Oh, and We Got Pujols; we'll extend Greinke; Hamilton is just so talented, isn't he? 2016-20: Bronze Age - Things started looking grim, but we got a smart GM in Eppler. Right? 2020-23: Iron (or Dark) Age - This era, despite the gloriousness of Ohtani, was embodied by Trout's injuries and Rendon's suckitude. It was probably the most dismal three-year span since, I don't know, the early 90s. If you want a Darkest Hour of the Dark Age, it is probably either the losing streak in 2022 or the trade deadline last year and what followed. Or possibly Ohtani signing with the Dodgers. But it's over, right? Now the ancients had a few different versions of the cycle of ages. One is that the Dark Age eventually led to a new Golden Age. Yeah, right. Another is that the cycles goes back in reverse, and a new "ascending" Bronze Age follows the Dark Age, and then up to Silver and eventually Golden. Seems more plausible - or at least possible. A third is, well, Ragnarok: the Dark Age ends in cataclysm and the world ends. Let's hope that the trade deadline, team collapse, and departure of Ohtani is that Ragnarok and that we'll get to start seeing the ascent again. I mean, how much worse can it get? Anyhow, the various factors mentioned above kept the Angels brass from doing what long needed doing: taking stock and pushing the reset button. Of course there wasn't much to take stock of, but at least they could have held off on spending more money on mediocre free agents in a lame attempt to kinda compete each year. So now Ohtani's gone and the Angels had one of their quietest offseasons in the last couple decades: No big splashes, no long contracts at all, just a handful of gap-fills and somewhat random free agent signings. It was a bit confusing at first, because Minasian's early offseason emphasis on building a stronger bullpen implied that he was going to go big on free agency. But nothing significant manifested -- no new starting position players or pitchers, just a handful of bench and bullpen guys. Barring a last minute Snellsplash, it looks like the Angels are truly--and finally--taking a beat, taking stock, and maybe eventually replenishing the farm a bit (barring contention come trade deadline). And I say, hallelujah! It is long overdue. Consider the above as being a summation of my offseason thoughts, with the disclaimer that I've only paid passing attention the last few months and haven't really followed the Cactus League. On to part two... Part Two: 2024 - the Year of Stock-Taking Here's the new part, or at least new to me. "Taking stock" implies seeing how good the young guys are. But I think that is somewhat secondary to the Minasian Plan. We know that in 2025 and beyond, the under-25s of Detmers, Silseth, O'Hoppe, Neto and Schanuel will be around - there isn't really a likely scenario in which they don't form the nucleus of whatever this iteration of the Angels morphs into. But what Minasian will really be looking at, aside from whether (and to what degree) Trout and Rendon can salvage their careers, is how the not-so-young guys will do. Meaning, the 25-30 group that includes Sandoval, Canning, Ward, Rengifo, Adell, and Moniak. Really, it is all of the above and more - but I wanted to highlight that middle group, because those are the guys who are "on the clock" in one form or fashion. Sandoval and Canning have shown promise but struggled at various points in their career; Ward is coming off a major injury and it remains to be who the real Taylor Ward is; Rengifo is deciding whether he's going to be a quality regular or a bench guy; and Adell and Moniak are fighting for a starting gig, and at least for Adell, whether or not he's an Angel long-term. So in summary, we have several groups that bear watching: The young pups (under 25): Detmers, Silseth, O'Hoppe, Neto, Schanuel, also Joyce, Bachman, and Soriano (who is 25, but belongs with this group). The mid guys (age 25-30): Sandoval, Canning, Ward, Rengifo, Adell, Moniak, and Suarez. The old guys (over 30s): Trout and Rendon. The mercs (possible trade fodder): Anderson, Drury, most of the bullpen, especially Estevez, Moore, and Stephenson. The last group, the "mercs," are solid players but are ultimately expendable, and the type of guys you dangle in July if you're out of the playoff hunt. Meaning, they only "stock-taking" is whether any of them have value - either for an unlikely postseason hunt in the second half or, more likely, as trade fodder. The young guys are here to stay and are the nucleus for the next half decade plus, along with Old Man Trout. The middle guys are the ones whose place on the Angels are most in question - thus my relating the term "taking stock" most especially to them. Minasian will be looking at who is worth keeping and who joins the trade fodder, in the likelihood that the Angels are sellers in July. Not sure what to say about the Decrepit Duo that hasn't already been said. The hope is obviously that both have a renaissance of some kind - that Trout returns at least to 2022 form but with better health, and Rendon is at least a solid on-base hitter. I'm guessing that of the two, he team's hopes is 95% on Trout, and anything Rendon produces is viewed as a pleasant surprise. All of the above are under the eye of "taking stock" but, I think, the mid guys most especially. So even if the Angels struggle and don't ever really contend, it should be interesting to see how this year pans out.

I'm optimistically predicting an 82-80 record. Sad that is optimistic, but realistically the over/under is probably around 75, but I'm thinking that they'll find a groove and surprise us a bit.

We've had most of Spring Training, so make your prediction. Poll closes at noon on Opening Day, March 28.

Arte's taking advice from Ippei.

How about:

I'll be worried if he looks like this a month into the season. He hasn't really played baseball since early last July. Probably still working on getting his timing back.

Dodgers farm system : Angels farm system :: Sydney Sweeney : Melissa McCarthy

There's how the roster looks to start the season vs. how it looks in June-July when we have a better sense of how good the team is, vs. how it looks in August-Oct for a hypothetical stretch run. Sort of like Billy Beane's old saw, "You use the first third to see what you have, the second third to get what you need, and then ride the last third to the playoffs." Or something like that. So, for the outfield, it seems likely that, as the author says, they start with Trout and Ward, with Moniak on the strong side of a platoon with Hicks and Adell. Trout and Ward can get DH starts, so after 50 games we might see games started like so: Trout 45, Ward 45, Moniak 35, Hicks 20, Adell 20 (150 outfield + 15 DH starts). Adjust for injury and performance. By June, you've got a third of the season in the bank and have a better sense of things, and can re-adjust. Adell pretty much has to start on the big league club, unless someone offers a similar "tarnished former top prospect with untapped upside" in return, which is very unlikely. You just can't trade him for peanuts, not at 25 years old (can't believe he's going to be 25 in a few weeks). That said, Hicks and Marisniak, despite strong springs, are unlikely to be anything more than the 4th outfield types they've been for most of their careers. Meaning, their upside is limited - and quite a bit below Adell's (and probably Moniak's) - so you really don't want to completely block Adell from getting his chances. The scenario in which one of them retains a job over Adell for the entire season is basically if all of the above happens: Trout and Ward are healthy, Moniak is playing well, AND the Angels are competing. Then you want a high floor 4th outfielder. But that's a lot of "ifs." Chances are someone gets hurt and/or disappoints, or the Angels simply aren't that good. Then Adell's sporadic playing time expands come June. And of course Adell could theoretically force the issue by earning more playing time. But unfortunately for him (and the Angels), he probably needs a solid 400+ PA of consistent play to un-tap his potential. Meaning, it is hard to see him mashing in a sporadic 100 PA in the first couple months, forcing a full-time gig. But I hope to be proven wrong.

If Sano gets 550 PA, it will be something like .190/.280/.430 with 30 HR and 200 Ks.

Trevor Bauer is the Colin Kaepernick of white wife beaters.

As much as I dislike the money it is going to take to sign Snell, there's no doubt that it improves the rotation substantially - and not just in the rotation itself, but the depth. Meaning, not only does it replace Silseth with Snell in the rotation, but it replaces whichever shmuck is their first depth starter in AAA (Plesac, Rosenberg, Daniel, Mederos) with Silseth. In other words, signing Snell would mean: Snell/Silseth instead of... Silseth/Plesac

Just a warning: Once that phase begins, it doesn't really end. Best you can hope for is "fond eye-rolling," but that probably doesn't kick in until late teens and maybe not until deep in their 20s.

Can you see it now?

Should be self-explanatory - dark red is already paid (not including 2024), lighter red is still to be paid/played (including 2024). Money is adjusted using an inflation calculator, from the first year of the contract to 2024 dollars. I set it so that the $10M cells is slightly larger than 1 WAR, going with the idea that a free agent contract is "worth" roughly $8-9M per WAR, at least by market rate. So the idea being, that for a player's contract to be worth the money, the green part has to be about as tall as the dark red. All of these have fallen far from that, obviously. Matthews Jr produced -0.5 WAR as an Angel, but was paid $85M in 2024 money. But they're all bad, with Pujols being the worst so far. If he doesn't turn around, Rendon's will be similar to Albert.

Is he in the BSOHL, though?

Jesus, it is March 3 - let's not worry about Trout yet. Plus, he talked about fixing a perceived problem with his approach, so maybe he's trying to figure it out.

But it wasn't simply "suicide." It was a form of protest, albeit an extreme one. He sacrificed his life for a cause, and there was no sign of "mental illness" reported by people who actually know him. There is also a long tradition of this form of protest, at least going back to the famous Buddhist monk in the Vietnam war. Now I personally don't like the idea of this form of extreme protest, but I still respect the guy for giving himself fully to what he saw as extreme injustice and genocide. Not also who is doubling down on the mental illness narrative: Zionists/pro-Israeli. So we have BS like this: While a couple years before...

Good to know you just lap up MSM propaganda ("mentally ill").

And while I'm at it, Aaron Bushnell is a fucking badass. It was the most complete form of protest - he sacrificed himself for a cause, that of the genocide of Palestinians. And yes, he's having an impact: "If a man is capable of self-immolating, are we not capable of raising a united voice in Latin America?" - Nicolas Maduro calls for Global South Unity against Israeli barbarity citing the courage of the martyr Aaron Bushnell

LOL - that's literally 1%, and it is $150M going to food and peace-keeping vs. weapons. The genocidal edgelords can't compute.