12 hours ago, angelsnationtalk said:

Not sure when Ken Rosenthal talked about the Angels being especially interested in Stroman, Syndergaard or Alex Wood. But any news is cool.

54 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Both the Angels and the Mariners have the prospect capital to make a deal for Castillo.

Castillo is FA in 2024.  We'd have to deal Marsh (Adell only has a 12.9 score per BTV) and at least a couple of other significant prospects to make up the remaining 20pt differential.  That's a LOT of years to give up for 2 of Castillo.  

First off, I would headhunt a pitching coach and if successful, ask Matt Wise to accept the assistant job until he finds a new home. 

Free Agents (contract estimates using AAV)

Kendall Graveman  2/16 (+8) as the GM I see the writing on the wall regarding Iglesias signing here and go for the second tier closer, save a few bucks  and take the draft pick

John Gray - 3/45 (+15) 

Joe Kelly - just spitballin on salary since I cant find any projections so lets say 2/12 (+6).  (There are likely better choices but had to throw in a setup candidate)

Yan Gomes C - 2/14 (+7)   

Random Backup C - (+2)

Random 4OF (+1.5) Adell in minors unless Marsh struggles.

Still working on an additional starter but let's plug in (+7m). That makes Ohtani, Gray, Sandoval, mystery starter, Suarez, Detmers.

That's +46.5m,  Stassi, Guerra, and/or others traded for a SS.  Trade scenarios aren't my forte so I'll expound and edit later.  Anticipating including Marsh or Adell (more likely Adell) in a trade deadline deal for pitching.  Was considering an Adell trade scenario for Marlins' Lopez, but BBTV values for Adell is ridiculously low right now (12.9).  Hopefully that changes by the deadline.

3 hours ago, Angels 1961 said:

Raisel will end up with Dodgers

I think they pencil in Treinen as closer and acquire a setup man or two.  They actually have a few other slots to fill.

54 minutes ago, totdprods said:

I think it's entirely possible that the Angels still consider dealing one of Adell or Marsh for a top arm and sign a reasonable OF. Is it Plan A? Doubtful. 
But acquiring a frontline arm by trade tends to be cheaper and a surer bet than free agency, and would allow the Angels a little more financial flexibility in the near future. 

I hate to say it, but the Angels outfield could arguably be a big question mark. Trout has missed consistent time annually, Upton has cratered, Marsh and Adell are still unproven. The potential of that quartet is huge, but hard to deny there's also big questions across the board. Even if Trout is Trout, both corners could be black holes all season long, much as they have been most of the last two seasons. 

If you could nab a solid corner bat for $8-$18m, trade Adell (say for Castillo), and keep Marsh rotating as a 4th OF or in AAA in the wings, that offers a lot of financial flexibility still to address 2nd SP, RP, and SS, and that FA OF would also likely be a more safer and flexible investment over the next 2-3 seasons than a $25m+ Robbie Ray or Kevin Gausman. Reallocate that risk to a cheaper (and perhaps less mileaged) arm like Castillo.

I'd have to think Suzuki could be an option.

Good points.  I just don't see Minasian as comfortable as being a wheeler-dealer yet re: trading Marsh/Adell.  Being that Castillo's and other similar targets potential have been more vetted, Minasian will probably not get full return on their value in a trade package especially due to the premium an SP like Castillo would bring.  Does it make sense in the Angels current situation and allow them to bridge to the up and coming pitchers in the pipeline?  Absolutely.  Just that Minasian is still quite unknown being a sophomore GM.

As far as Suzuki (in a scenario where Adell or Marsh is traded), I like it for his offensive potential, despite not being known for his defense, and for the pairing of Japanese players.  It seems that a Fowler type, knowing that Jordyn Adams is going to get some time in the second half, is more likely.

9 hours ago, HanfordGuy said:

 

She mispronounced Angel Hernandez.

The only player that comes to mind that would work for them is Stassi.  Area of need, Arb 3.

They'll be in on a couple TORS but will drop out when the term goes too long to justify ("we tried!").  They will sign Gray or Desclafani, and, either Cobb or trade for another mid-rotation guy.

With 65 million committed to LF/CF, hard to see the Angels add significant payroll in the OF when they have their 3rd and 4th OFers cost controlled.  I'm not sure that the Angels can reap commensurate Japanese advertising dollars to offset Seiya's posting and salary.  With Ohtani, they are probably already getting all that is available out of that market.  It'd be fun to see though.

With the way the Dogs like to use starters in relief in the playoffs, well, just LOL.  Good luck.

I haven't thought of him as a starter since his last injury but Minasian may have had him penciled in a Sandoval/Suarez/C-Rod 3/4/5 mix.  Hopefully this will lead to getting two 2/3 starters and help him make the decision not to spend big on SS so they can pay for Iglesias or other back end BP arms.

19 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Yeah it changed about five years ago.

This is from MLB and covers 2017-2021.  It's second selection, not 2nd round.  Splitting hairs really due to the rarity of the scenario.

Quote

 

-The qualifying offer is a competitive balance measure that was implemented as part of the 2012-16 Collective Bargaining Agreement and restructured under the 2017-21 Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Any team that signs a player who has rejected a qualifying offer is subject to the loss of one or more Draft picks. While a team's highest first-round pick is exempt from forfeiture, any additional first-round picks are eligible. Three tiers of Draft pick forfeiture -- which are based on the financial status of the signing team -- are in place to serve as a penalty for signing a player who rejected a qualifying offer.

(Note: Each pick in the first 10 rounds of the Draft has an assigned value, and the total for each of a club's selections equals what it can spend on signing bonuses for players selected in those rounds without incurring a penalty. When a team forfeits a Draft pick, it also surrenders the accompanying bonus pool money associated that pick, independent from any money forfeited from its international bonus pool per the rules below.)

• A team that exceeded the luxury tax in the preceding season will lose its second- and fifth-highest selections in the following year's Draft as well $1 million from its international bonus pool. If such a team signs multiple qualifying offer free agents, it will forfeit its third- and sixth-highest remaining picks as well. If that team loses a free agent, it will be awarded a Draft pick immediately following the fourth round. The Astros, Cubs and Yankees exceeded the threshold in 2020.

Examples: A team with one pick in each round of the 2021 Rule 4 Draft would lose its second- and fifth-round picks. A team with two first-round picks and one pick in each subsequent round would lose its second-highest first-round pick and its fourth-round pick.

• A team that receives revenue sharing will lose its third-highest selection in the following year's Draft. If it signs two such players, it will also forfeit its fourth-highest remaining pick. If that team loses a free agent, it will be awarded a pick between the first round and Competitive Balance Round A if -- and only if -- the lost player signs for at least $50 million. If the lost player signs for less than $50 million, the team's compensation pick would come after Competitive Balance Round B, which follows the second round.

The following 14 teams qualify for these picks during the 2020-21 offseason: Brewers, D-backs, Indians, Mariners, Marlins, Orioles, Padres, Pirates, Rays, Reds, Rockies, Royals, Tigers and Twins.

Examples: A team with one pick in each round of the 2021 Rule 4 Draft would lose its third-round pick. A team with two first-round picks and one pick in each subsequent round would lose its second-round pick.

 

https://www.mlb.com/glossary/transactions/qualifying-offer

19 minutes ago, Stradling said:

This is how I feel.  If the budget is between $50-60 million and Raisel for whatever reason accepts the QO then its going to be very difficult to fill the other spots.  We will most likely see a drop off in his actual performance from last year, because the team went undefeated when leading going into the 9th.  That isn’t happening again.  I personally just see $16-18 million for a guy pitching 60 innings as a bad way to spend money, especially with the volatility of closers.  But as someone upthread said, the best thing to come out of this is maybe Arte is willing to spend a bit more money, which will help complete the roster.  

I would rather have an overpaid Iglesias anchor the BP and hope Minasian's primary reliever aqcuisition(s) adequately fill the setup role, pushing Meyers, Quijada, Warren back to earlier innings.  With Iglesias, I have more faith that Minasian can find an adequate setup arm and a #2 type starter, which can make the BP an area of strength and the rotation slightly above average, than him building an excellent rotation while having to fill in setup AND closer roles.

Overpayment and slight downturn yes, but I see Iglesias as close to a good bet on continued performance as Minasian is likely to find in any starter.  And I see the BP as their primary need for building stability being that the rotation just needs to be augmented and filling SS may be one of his easier tasks.

21 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Yes. It’s a 2nd round pick 

The way MLB.com and MLBTR states it , it is is the 2nd highest selection, which appears to mean that if a team had two 1sts, it would lose its 2nd 1st rounder.  Did that change recently?

Quote

• A team that neither exceeded the luxury tax in the preceding season nor receives revenue sharing will lose its second-highest selection in the following year's Draft, as well as $500,000 from its international bonus pool for the upcoming signing period. If it signs two such players, it will also forfeit its third-highest remaining pick and an additional $500,000.

Examples: A team with one pick in each round of the 2019 Draft would lose its second-round pick. A team with two first-round picks would lose its second-highest first-round pick.

2 hours ago, Tank said:

olympic event, you plebeian.

Lost scene from Caligula?

3 hours ago, FromJapan said:

Japanese OF Suzuki to be posted (source) - MLB News

His wife had been a group rhythmic gymnast and has participated in the Olympics twice.

 

 

Is that a sanitized phrasing for orgy?

1 hour ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

It's a trash rule and the players were stupid enough to accept it in exchange for some meaningless concession like foot massages on the bus or something equally as frivolous. 

It's one of the many things the owners do under the guise of 'competitive balance' that only serves to weigh down player salaries. The players are likely too egotistical to realize that in many cases a first round draft pick is actually more valuable than a 30+ year old free agent.

I think the only scenario where a team has to give up a first if they have two selections in the first round and they'd give up the second of those picks.

6 hours ago, gotbeer said:

San Francisco officer arrested on suspicion of robbing Rite-Aid pharmacy

Everyone else is doing it.  

Sounds like SF was implementing an empathy training exercise and he got caught mid-funding stoppage.  He should have checked with HQ before heading out for his final exam.

On 11/4/2021 at 12:45 AM, Tank said:

Zombie killing kit. @gotbeer

I think you mean vampire kit.  The wooden stakes, vials of presumably garlic and salt, holy water. crucifixes and silver bullets (upper right corner) would suggest that.  Zombie kits look more like this:

5 hours ago, floplag said:

Ive been mostly lurking of late for various reasons but i gotta chime in here...
Those kids, also have the potential to be a very solid rotation.  Why relegate them to the pen for more expensive FA starters when SP is being so heavily devalued by the metrics and no one is going more than 5/6 innings tops anymore? 
They have the ability to be a good rotation, if we put a bullpen behind them to shorten games.
This is where the game seems headed.. ATL won a WS with 2 bullpen games!   Greinke went 4 was it, in the WS?  Freid was cruising and got pulled anyway... the era of the ace is over. 
Overpaying for SP which was already a bad investment just to push the kids to the pen seems counter productive in the current paradigm.
Build a lockdown pen, first... add an ace or anchor, whatever fine, but we cant have another year of clean peanut bullpen. 

Good points.  There has been talk about MLB being concerned with starters going fewer innings and the number of pitching changes per game.  I've heard two things may come out of the CBA negotiations, one very plausible and another questionable.  The plausible is reverting back to the 25-man roster, or setting a specific pitching roster allotment which would to some extent put back a little of the premium that starters hold.  The other is attaching the double hook to the universal DH, where the DH is lost when the starter comes out.  This seems less plausible but it is interesting in that it would create a NL/AL hybrid and also make it less attractive to managers to pull starters from the game.  It seems likely to me at least that MLB will address the trend to use the bullpen at the expense of the rotation.  Either way though, with the bullpen trend or if MLB takes some action, quality bullpen depth will remain crucial to team success, not just the closer and setup man.

9 hours ago, Taylor said:

50 years, $3M per year

We're no strangers to Weekend at Bernie's starters so this should do nicely

spendthrift

On 10/26/2021 at 8:00 AM, Dtwncbad said:

He is more valuable to the Dodgers than to any other team.  Other teams will make offers and the Dodgers will gladly pay up to keep him in Dodger blue.

I certainly don’t want Kershaw on the Angels at any price.  He is a true, pure Dodger. 

Interesting presser with Friedman yesterday.  Besides essentially disavowing involvement with in-game pitching decisions and the whole Urias overuse issue, saying those were questions better proposed to Roberts and the pitching coach, he sounded non-committal towards re=signing Kershaw.  No doubt there is some posturing there to let Kershaw know they aren't going to offer far above what they view as his value, and that he will have to make his own decision as to whether more money/term is worth it to him to leave the org.  Tried to find the whole interview but only found this snippet of his comments on Kershaw.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CVi__i3B49 (click the right arrow on the first image to get to the next image which contains the Friedman blurb)

Reminds me of the Kinison bit when love knocks on the door for the tenth time (at the 1:00 mark)