Angels explored RF upgrade.

[Mark68]

How about Avisail Garcia?  He had a much improved year this year (granted, his BABIP was .392 vs a career .340 mark), but he's also only 26, so just entered his prime. He'd be relatively cheap (2nd-year arb eligible).

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/garciav01-bat.shtml

[Tank]

17 hours ago, Blarg said:

A hell no to Heyward.

exactly. i don't get the fascination with this guy. i think he completely blows.

[totdprods]

9 minutes ago, Tank said:

exactly. i don't get the fascination with this guy. i think he completely blows.

Best reason why is currently on our team. 
Heyward was a young Brave with tremendous offensive potential that hasn't developed all at once but has had a career buoyed by elite defense and the promise of it all coming together. 

Different skill sets of course, but very similar situations. 

Andrelton was an unremarkable hitter until this year, age 27, but their have been glimpses of potential - high contact, decent speed, good plate discipline, occasional power. 
Jason Heyward is a mere twenty six days older than Andrelton Simmons, but it feels like he's been around a lot longer than that. Both will play their age 28 season in 2018. 

If Heyward puts it together like Andrelton did, which is totally possible, you're looking at a 7-8 win player with elite defense, good pop, and solid discipline. 

Now, at 8/$184m, that risk isn't anywhere close, but if the Cubs want to shed payroll....

[Tank]

too much risk of underperforming at way too much money. wouldn't touch him for all the tea in china.

[totdprods]

4 minutes ago, Tank said:

too much risk of underperforming at way too much money. wouldn't touch him for all the tea in china.

Hence the part about the Cubs dumping salary. 

As it stands, no way in hell do I commit anything close to what he has remaining, but if the Cubs are going to throw in some money and/or additional cheap talent (La Stella, Zagunis, stretching it with Schwarber but maybe if we were eating some Zobrist money too) I'd definitely consider it. 

[Blarg]

14 hours ago, totdprods said:

Sort of like how SS was set when we traded for Simmons? Or C was set when we traded for Maldonado? Or when 1B was set when we signed Valbuena?

Eppler preaches being opportunistic and he's proven to back that mindset frequently. And, I don't think anyone here is proposing straight one for one deals to acquire a RF - it'd be in a broader deal in which infielders are coming to Anaheim too. 

Plus it's a lot less stale than the million convos about whether or not Moose is worth it, how Dee Gordon sucks if he gets slow, or what fringe 1B is gonna be worse than Cron, or any of the other 'obvious' moves that Eppler invariably never makes. 

No, shortstop was not set. We had Aybar aging out and needed better defense, that was a shrewd trade. 

Catcher position has been a shithole for years so Maldonado was necessary. 

Valbuena is a shit comp, he failed miserably as the first base platoon. Cron actually out performed him and is better defensively.

Calhoun is a better than passable player on a team friendly contract and the Angels need to allocate money to positions that don't have a league average player. 

It's the infield, stupid.

[VariousCrap]

8 hours ago, CanadianHalo said:

hell freaking no to Heyward. 

I didn't want him two seasons ago I certainly don’t want him now 

 

I wanted him two years ago.  Boy, I was wrong about him.

[Troll Daddy]

I think Calhoun stays unless you trade for Giancarlo and sign Cain ... then trade Trout for the world in return. 

Seriously, Kole’s defense and friendly contract will keep him in Anaheim. He’s young enough where he can turn a corner offensively too. His arm in RF is also a big factor. 

[totdprods]

13 hours ago, Blarg said:

No, shortstop was not set. We had Aybar aging out and needed better defense, that was a shrewd trade. 
Catcher position has been a shithole for years so Maldonado was necessary. 
Valbuena is a shit comp, he failed miserably as the first base platoon. Cron actually out performed him and is better defensively.

Calhoun is a better than passable player on a team friendly contract and the Angels need to allocate money to positions that don't have a league average player. 

It's the infield, stupid.

Did you miss the part about a potential Heyward (or any other RF) trade involving infielders, or just ignore it?

You seem to also be missing the point on Simmons, Maldonado, and Valbuena too...those positions were, on paper, set when the new guy was brought in, regardless of how 'good' those existing players were. No one really saw those trades coming or saw at least a pressing need to go out and acquire a SS, another catcher, a 1B...by that same measure, if Eppler pulled out a surprise trade for a RF, we all wouldn't expect it then either.

When we traded for Simmons, the detractors mostly questioned it by saying that we were sacrificing offense and paying a lot of money for elite defense...
To me, that parallels (the general framework of) a Calhoun for Heyward swap. A lot more money involved, but similar players.

When we traded Bandy for Maldonado, the board overall was pretty mixed, mostly confused why we would trade a catcher with 5 years of control and what we assumed higher upside for a statistically similar catcher who was older, more expensive, less controlled, and seemingly at the peak of his upside. We were all expecting a Perez/Bandy platoon for the foreseeable future and instead we didn't see either really catch at all in 2017.

And when we signed Valbuena, for the most part, everyone was again sort of confused as to why it was needed and didn't think we needed an upgrade at 1B/3B at the time, but no one was too concerned about Escobar or Cron losing ABs to Luis. 

Am I advocating a trade for RF? Not at all, but there is plenty of precedent for Eppler making a move to upgrade a position that wasn't clearly in need at that exact moment, and with how speaks about being opportunistic and Scotty's little birds about Angels looking for a RF upgrade, I think it's fair to at least speculate.

If you want, I'm sure we can turn this thread around and make it into a Gordon vs. Hernandez thread or talk about whether or not Moustakas is worth it. 

[Stradling]

The difference is Aybar was in sharp decline and was going into the last year of his contract.  He had lost a step defensively and offensively.  

[totdprods]

7 minutes ago, Stradling said:

The difference is Aybar was in sharp decline and was going into the last year of his contract.  He had lost a step defensively and offensively.  

Absolutely - there's no question it was great move, but that isn't what's at question. I'm stressing that it is silly to dismiss the notion Eppler won't consider RF upgrades, not the value of Calhoun vs. whomever.

Did anyone really think Eppler's first move, his most significant move of that offseason, would be addressing SS when we still had a 'solution' at SS for one more season (and who was open to signing an extension) and other glaring needs at LF, 3B, 2B, (sound familiar?) etc.? No. It was a total surprise, and it wasn't addressing the glaring needs at the time. So, why would we be surprised if Eppler followed that route again and upgraded at a position that wasn't one of the clear first choices?

[Stradling]

5 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Absolutely - there's no question it was great move, but that isn't what's at question. I'm stressing that it is silly to dismiss the notion Eppler won't consider RF upgrades, not the value of Calhoun vs. whomever.

Did anyone really think Eppler's first move, his most significant move of that offseason, would be addressing SS when we still had a 'solution' at SS for one more season (and who was open to signing an extension) and other glaring needs at LF, 3B, 2B, (sound familiar?) etc.? No. It was a total surprise, and it wasn't addressing the glaring needs at the time. So, why would we be surprised if Eppler followed that route again and upgraded at a position that wasn't one of the clear first choices?

No.  I don’t think he is looking to upgrade right field and if he is it would have to be something major, basically Stanton.  

Would I be surprised if he traded Kole to get our future 2nd or 3rd baseman because it is easier to sign a Jay Bruce to play right then it is to sign an infielder, no that wouldn’t surprise me.  But that isn’t “upgrading” right field, that is using your resources to improve the overall team.