Sign in to follow this  
Dochalo

Is it time to add?

101 posts in this topic

DMVol    1,101
Just now, floplag said:

Nor do you, but why is it only about controllable?  Some of you have such a narrow focus.    If we could get even a rental for salary dump that helps us make the post isnt that worth it?  Isnt that the goal?   

I would have considered a salary dump but not one that would have hamstrung us too much next year and beyond....a pure rental, somebody who could really help, just made no sense because we are so thin in the minors....My thinking hasn't changed since July 31 about that---a really expensive rental (in terms of trading young talent) made no sense then or now.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dochalo    10,644
13 minutes ago, floplag said:

Perhaps, but still missing the point.  That's where he chose to spend his time and effort.   Pretty clear indications what the front office thinks of the club.  

what else were they supposed to think at the time?  They were 4 games below .500.  Call me crazy but that's not very good and not something I'd be overly inclined to throw money or prospects at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stradling    11,377
14 minutes ago, stormngt said:

Two of those three losses are due to bullpen blowing up.  Where would we be if we didn't bw those two games?l

Since Bud was the closer and he blew those leads almost single handily coupled with Scioscia's approach, I'm guessing exactly where we are.  

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dochalo    10,644
18 minutes ago, floplag said:

A sub 500 team that was still in a WC race even sub 500.  Perhaps not the best signal to send to the team at that point.  It speaks a lot to the character of the players that they went on that run after that message was sent. 

it's speaks a lot to the character (or talent) of the team that they were below .500 before that.  You are viewing the team from it's current situation as if that's how we should have viewed it two weeks ago.   There was no indication at the time they could go on even a small run like this, and frankly, I'm not overly confident they'll continue to play over .500 the rest of the way.  But at least now it's worth considering whereas before, there was a very low chance.  

You have to manage risk Flop.  Eppler is there to handicap the situation.  It's his job to try to think about these situations without the emotion of a fan(atic).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
floplag    579
3 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

My guess is that he tried to sell other parts as well.  I bet he also had some discussions about controllable players.  Not big salary additions but guys that would require legit prospects.  He may have even laid a foundation for the off season.  

But you are right.  do.  or do not.  there is no try.  

I don't see us taking on any big money right now so I think it's more Arte than Eppler.  If we push over the tax, then Arte will want to reset it next year.   I really don't have a problem with the deadline moves (or lack thereof) that Eppler made.  

On July 31st, we were 4 games below .500 and 4.5gb of the second WC.  Many players were under performing (still are) and we had a lot less clarity on players returning from injury.  That's not a situation justifying any sort of investment.  Even if it's 'just' monetary.  Hey Arte, I know we are injured and playing like crap, but how about we take on some money and push the team over the CBT threshold to give us a slightly better chance of having one more game to play?  Hey Billy, how about you're fired.  

But now, the team is showing signs of life.  The offensive disappointments are coming around (a bit), guys are coming back from injury, and most importantly, even though we've played well over the last couple weeks, no one else we're competing against has taken off in any meaningful way.  

So why not find a way to improve a bit by eating some other team's money?  

Even though Verlander sort of fit's that mold, he owed 60 mil for his age 35 and 36 yo seasons.  Either you suck that entire amount up or you give up talent to bring it down.  The one thing that bodes well for him is that his velo is really good.  So do you make a 60+ mil commitment to a guy age 35 and 36 when only 9 more of his starts are potentially the only meaningful ones he could make during his entire 2+ year stretch?  Tough call.  Don't see it being justified though.  

The guys I mentioned were a max extra year of commitment after the rest of this one.   Guys that could give a boost but wouldn't cost really anything but a few bucks.  

The highlighted above is what i dont get.  Isnt making the post season in some form the goal?  I mean isnt that why we play the season?   To have a chance at a championship?  We were never going to win the division, Hou started too hot, so that one game has always been our only shot at making anything.  

We as fans should know more than most that anything can happen but you have to get there first.  

How much do they make per ho,me game?  per playoff game?   I dont know the detailed answer but i recall it being enough to offset a large part of taking on 5-10 mil for the rest of he year and probably make it a break even.   Per this article (the quickest one i could fine) its certainly worth it for even one game.  
http://thefieldsofgreen.com/2014/10/02/how-much-value-does-a-postseason-appearance-hold-for-mlb-franchises/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DMVol    1,101
5 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Since Bud was the closer and he blew those leads almost single handily coupled with Scioscia's approach, I'm guessing exactly where we are.  

Hell, Hernandez pitched in the Toronto grand slam game Norris lost, can't blame the loss of Hernandez on that one....Pounders was terrible in that game, Norris had help....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
floplag    579
10 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

what else were they supposed to think at the time?  They were 4 games below .500.  Call me crazy but that's not very good and not something I'd be overly inclined to throw money or prospects at.

If thats the case why not sell off more?  Could argue it either way but this team has always had the ability to make up a few games in my mind  so filling in the blanks changes this team completely.  None of the WC teams are that great, none of them.  
But my frustrations go back further than just this seasons trade deadline, its the last couple years of dumpster diving, this just made it more irritating to see that we were no further along and that they had obviously given up.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stradling    11,377
2 minutes ago, floplag said:

If thats the case why not sell off more?  Could argue it either way but this team has always had the ability to make up a few games in my mind  so filling in the blanks changes this team completely.  None of the WC teams are that great, none of them.  
But my frustrations go back further than just this seasons trade deadline, its the last couple years of dumpster diving, this just made it more irritating to see that we were no further along and that they had obviously given up.  

And most of the big name free agents we all wanted, including or especially me, have sucked, so that would further hurt this term long term.  So you would have been further pissed off.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dochalo    10,644
Just now, floplag said:

The highlighted above is what i dont get.  Isnt making the post season in some form the goal?  I mean isnt that why we play the season?   To have a chance at a championship?  We were never going to win the division, Hou started too hot, so that one game has always been our only shot at making anything.  

We as fans should know more than most that anything can happen but you have to get there first.  

How much do they make per ho,me game?  per playoff game?   I dont know the detailed answer but i recall it being enough to offset a large part of taking on 5-10 mil for the rest of he year and probably make it a break even.   Per this article (the quickest one i could fine) its certainly worth it for even one game.  
http://thefieldsofgreen.com/2014/10/02/how-much-value-does-a-postseason-appearance-hold-for-mlb-franchises/

dude.  at the time they were  4 games below .500 and 4.5gb of the WC with a bunch of teams ahead of us.  Adding 10 mil in payroll to that is an almost guaranteed way to flush money down the toilet.  

you have to remember that we are only 1 game above .500.  The only reason we are in it is because we went on a run to get there AND (a very important AND) we are looking at an unprecedented situation where the 2nd WC holder is only two games over .500.  Something that's never happened.  The fewest wins for the 2nd WC team is 87.  We're still on pace for 81-82 wins.  We have a negative run differential.  We have a hugely negative base runs differential (more accurate than run diff).  Those thing are just stats, but it means we have more wins that we should relative to the numbers we've put up.  It also means that our current situation is going to be tough to sustain.  

take a step back from 'having a chance' for a second.  Here's another way to look at it.  Take the Rangers.  They are 3 gb of the WC and 4 games below .500 right now.  We are not emotionally attached to that team.  Is is realistic to think they could go on a run and win the WC?  No.  Is there a chance?  sure.  Would you add to that team to improve that chance?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
floplag    579
3 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

dude.  at the time they were  4 games below .500 and 4.5gb of the WC with a bunch of teams ahead of us.  Adding 10 mil in payroll to that is an almost guaranteed way to flush money down the toilet.  

you have to remember that we are only 1 game above .500.  The only reason we are in it is because we went on a run to get there AND (a very important AND) we are looking at an unprecedented situation where the 2nd WC holder is only two games over .500.  Something that's never happened.  The fewest wins for the 2nd WC team is 87.  We're still on pace for 81-82 wins.  We have a negative run differential.  We have a hugely negative base runs differential (more accurate than run diff).  Those thing are just stats, but it means we have more wins that we should relative to the numbers we've put up.  It also means that our current situation is going to be tough to sustain.  

take a step back from 'having a chance' for a second.  Here's another way to look at it.  Take the Rangers.  They are 3 gb of the WC and 4 games below .500 right now.  We are not emotionally attached to that team.  Is is realistic to think they could go on a run and win the WC?  No.  Is there a chance?  sure.  Would you add to that team to improve that chance?  

Again then why not dump more?  why only one trivial move?  
Its not emotional, you list a ton of reasons why we are in it that are completely relevant.  I listed a lot of the differential stuff in another post BEFORE the deadline as reason we should be aggressive.  
you can say were only in because thus and so then say were not actually in it.    Thus and so matter.  I always felt we were in it, thats the difference.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DMVol    1,101
5 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

.....Here's another way to look at it.  Take the Rangers.  They are 3 gb of the WC and 4 games below .500 right now.  We are not emotionally attached to that team.  Is is realistic to think they could go on a run and win the WC?  No.  Is there a chance?  sure.  Would you add to that team to improve that chance?  

They not only didn't add, they traded their best pitcher....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GrittyVeterans    201

I'd get Kinsler and bat him leadoff. Yeah, he's not having a good year but he's got a proven track record and I think he would get the job done. Imagine having Cowart at 3B, Simmons at SS, Kinsler at 2B...no ball would make it through that infield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Troll Daddy    2,837

No reason not to trade prospects ... I believe Eppler will pull the trigger if the right deal comes about. 

That doesn't mean trade away your best prospects. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dochalo    10,644
7 minutes ago, floplag said:

If thats the case why not sell off more?  Could argue it either way but this team has always had the ability to make up a few games in my mind  so filling in the blanks changes this team completely.  None of the WC teams are that great, none of them.  
But my frustrations go back further than just this seasons trade deadline, its the last couple years of dumpster diving, this just made it more irritating to see that we were no further along and that they had obviously given up.  

I can't disagree that there were missteps putting us in the position we currently sit.  The one that hurts is our post 2014 off season.  Coming off 98 wins and the hamilton debacle.  Ending up with Johnny Giavotella at 2b, Joyce in LF and a horrendous bull pen.  And with all that, ending up 1 game back of the WC in 2015 with 85 wins.  That, to me, was our biggest missed opportunity.  Last year, no amount of FA luck could have over come 74 wins and the injuries to our pitching staff.  

This year we are showing signs of life again.  The farm is improving and payroll is opening up.  If we can do a little something now then great.  If not, we are actually in a a great position to take another step forward.  A position created by Eppler and his patience.  One that substantially increases the odds of making good of Trout's remaining time but also, and more importantly luring him to stay an Angel his entire career.  

None of that opportunity exists if we signed Pablo Sandoval or Jordan Zimmermann, or Jeff Samardzija, or Wei-Yin Chen or Ian Kennedy or Alex Gordon, or Pablo Sandoval, or David Price, or Jason Heyward, or Russel Martin or James Shields, or Johnny Cueto, or Mike Leake or Ian Desmond or Mark Trumbo.  Sure there are couple FA we could have signed of the entire lot that have done decently well or even really well.  Daniel Murphy.  Yoenis Cespedes.  Justing Upton.  But again, the risk was huge.  

I am not a huge fan of being .500 right now.  We could have been better with near perfect moves.  But I certainly like the idea of what we could be for 2018, 2019 and 2020 vs. what those years could have looked like had those move not been perfect.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GrittyVeterans    201

Eppler has done a very good job being patient and allowing albatross contracts (Wilson, Hamilton, Weaver - at the end of his time) expire and not blowing that money on other underperforming players. He's going to get an opportunity this offseason to show what he's got in free agency

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dochalo    10,644
15 minutes ago, floplag said:

Again then why not dump more?  why only one trivial move?  
Its not emotional, you list a ton of reasons why we are in it that are completely relevant.  I listed a lot of the differential stuff in another post BEFORE the deadline as reason we should be aggressive.  
you can say were only in because thus and so then say were not actually in it.    Thus and so matter.  I always felt we were in it, thats the difference.  

you can't dump players if no one wants them.  No offense to Bud Norris, but he started showing cracks before his recent melt down.  Other teams saw it coming.  We keep thinking Yunel is worth something, but he's not.  Eppler didn't get a box of balls for David Hernandez.  He got a guy that was likely a very particular target.  One that his team had likely been all over, and he only traded David because the team on the other side was willing to give up that particular target.  He didn't pull a name out of a hat.  It's not trivial because you don't know anything about that player.  

You have been proven right (ie us being in it) by a collection of unusual circumstances coming together to make that happen.  You can't make moves to supplement something that is of low odds in order to make those odds only slightly better.  That's a recipe for disaster.  It's frankly how they ran the team before and it failed miserably.  

Here's something else to think about.  What if it was the Hernandez move that kicked the team into gear?  Likely not the reason eppler did it, but what if the team, upon being discounted, felt slighted and now they've got a chip on their shoulder?  Maybe they don't get that chip otherwise.  

We are where we are because of all factors involved.  To undo one and wish it were something else is revisionist history.  We can play the alternate outcome game but no one can win.  

From where we are now, I would like to see them add some talent if possible without touching any meaningful farm talent.  What I wish we would have done means nothing.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VariousCrap    869

If the Angels decide to go for it this season and taking on big contracts is the only way to do anything, I say get both Verlander and Kemp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CanadianHalo    927

Cespedes would be even cheaper than Upton I believe and get him playing in some meaningful games again and I think he comes back to life 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
floplag    579
22 minutes ago, CanadianHalo said:

Cespedes would be even cheaper than Upton I believe and get him playing in some meaningful games again and I think he comes back to life 

Still angry we didnt make a run at him long ago.  To me the perfect fit for LF.  
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VariousCrap    869
1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

Here's something else to think about.  What if it was the Hernandez move that kicked the team into gear?  Likely not the reason eppler did it, but what if the team, upon being discounted, felt slighted and now they've got a chip on their shoulder?  Maybe they don't get that chip otherwise.  

 


That is an Elastic Man stretch right there.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stormngt    1,066
2 hours ago, Stradling said:

Since Bud was the closer and he blew those leads almost single handily coupled with Scioscia's approach, I'm guessing exactly where we are.  

That makes no sense.  If we didn't blow those two games we would be a game and a half up in the wild card.  What difference would who was closing?  If we didn't blow those = we won those games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CanadianHalo    927

Does anyone know if Brandon Phillips was sent through and cleared waivers?

Would be a solid add. Cowart can go to 3rd until Escobar comes back

Edit: he has indeed cleared waivers. Get him!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
floplag    579
4 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok @floplag, who would you like to see them add?  What cost are you willing to pay in prospects?  What is proof the office is "doing their job"?

and were back on prospects again, havent we been thru this?  im not re-hashing this all over again its pointless.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stradling    11,377
Just now, floplag said:

and were back on prospects again, havent we been thru this?  im not re-hashing this all over again its pointless.  

But you are the one starting threads that are basically the same as this one, telling the front office to do their job.  The ONLY way to do what you are asking is to trade prospects to acquire expensive players.  Useful players that aren't expensive don't clear waivers.  Then you have to find a team that is willing to take on our prospects that are 2-3 years away.  It's much harder than you apparently think it is because it takes two.  We can't just go to MLB shop and buy a third baseman. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
floplag    579
Just now, Stradling said:

But you are the one starting threads that are basically the same as this one, telling the front office to do their job.  The ONLY way to do what you are asking is to trade prospects to acquire expensive players.  Useful players that aren't expensive don't clear waivers.  Then you have to find a team that is willing to take on our prospects that are 2-3 years away.  It's much harder than you apparently think it is because it takes two.  We can't just go to MLB shop and buy a third baseman. 

No, thats not the only way, and weve talked about this.  Not re-hashing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stradling    11,377
Just now, floplag said:

No, thats not the only way, and weve talked about this.  Not re-hashing.  

Ok, so answer your own question.  How do we add a player?  Once they clear waivers you have to trade for them.  You can't just claim them and hope they give them to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
floplag    579
2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok, so answer your own question.  How do we add a player?  Once they clear waivers you have to trade for them.  You can't just claim them and hope they give them to you.

waiver claims?  take on salary, lots of ways it happens without necessarily requiring prospects.   As previously discussed, again not re-hashing.   I want to see them do something other than trade away usable assets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stradling    11,377
2 minutes ago, floplag said:

waiver claims?  take on salary, lots of ways it happens without necessarily requiring prospects.   As previously discussed, again not re-hashing.   I want to see them do something other than trade away usable assets. 

Ok, so a team puts a player on waivers.  Each team has a chance at claiming that player.  Once a player is claimed, that team and only that team has a chance to work out a deal to trade for that player or the team exposing them to waivers, can simply hand that player over.  If a deal can not be reached then that player is no longer available to be traded or claimed by another team, they simply go back and play for the team that put them on revocable waivers.  

Here is the other way you can acquire a player.  They get put on revocable waivers, they clear waivers (no team puts a claim on them), that player can now be traded for anyone that has ALSO cleared waivers or isn't on the 40 man roster.  Granted an expensive player can be traded for simply taking on his contract and as little as a PTBN.  

There are not lots of ways, there are two ways.  We have no idea if we put the claim in on Kinsler (although that stuff usually comes out).  But if the team that did put a claim on him had a worse record than the Angels and was in the American League, then we never had a chance at him.  

The rest is just speculation.  We don't really know if Justin Upton has been put on waivers, which I find hard to believe he wouldn't have been claimed.  Teams simply put these guys on waivers, not to release the Upton's or the Stanton's but to see if a team will take on their contracts and give up top prospects that aren't on 40 man rosters.  

I am pretty sure what I just said is all true, that is my understanding of it, I am sure an IP or Scotty, or Ettin can correct me if I am wrong as they know more about this stuff than I do.  I'll just add this in conclusion, the addition of the 2nd wild card has made these types of trades less likely to happen because more teams  think they are in it.  The Brewers just acquired Walker, and they are 6.5 games out of a wild card.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
floplag    579
2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok, so a team puts a player on waivers.  Each team has a chance at claiming that player.  Once a player is claimed, that team and only that team has a chance to work out a deal to trade for that player or the team exposing them to waivers, can simply hand that player over.  If a deal can not be reached then that player is no longer available to be traded or claimed by another team, they simply go back and play for the team that put them on revocable waivers.  

Here is the other way you can acquire a player.  They get put on revocable waivers, they clear waivers (no team puts a claim on them), that player can now be traded for anyone that has ALSO cleared waivers or isn't on the 40 man roster.  Granted an expensive player can be traded for simply taking on his contract and as little as a PTBN.  

There are not lots of ways, there are two ways.  We have no idea if we put the claim in on Kinsler (although that stuff usually comes out).  But if the team that did put a claim on him had a worse record than the Angels and was in the American League, then we never had a chance at him.  

The rest is just speculation.  We don't really know if Justin Upton has been put on waivers, which I find hard to believe he wouldn't have been claimed.  Teams simply put these guys on waivers, not to release the Upton's or the Stanton's but to see if a team will take on their contracts and give up top prospects that aren't on 40 man rosters.  

I am pretty sure what I just said is all true, that is my understanding of it, I am sure an IP or Scotty, or Ettin can correct me if I am wrong as they know more about this stuff than I do.  I'll just add this in conclusion, the addition of the 2nd wild card has made these types of trades less likely to happen because more teams  think they are in it.  The Brewers just acquired Walker, and they are 6.5 games out of a wild card.  

So not the point, so not re-hashing.  
As you say who does what usually comes out, i haven't heard our name yet in connection with anything.   I want to see their effort match what the players are doing, its really that simple.  If they cant get it done then they cant but so far we have zero indication they are even trying.
You are obviously content with what they have done or are doing, I am not, i want to see more.   The proof is in the pudding so to speak.   
We can leave it at that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this