Official 2021-22 Hot Stove League Thread.

[Docwaukee]

4 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Homework assignment -- Please list all the FA signings in 2016 and 2017.  Add them all up, tell us what you came up with.  

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/2019-top-50-free-agents/

I was very vocally against Harvey/Allen and went on record regarding what I viewed as Teheran's red flags prior to ANY of them being signed...  I don't think I ever had an opinion on Cahill prior to his being signed but that was less to do with how I would have predicted he would perform and everything to do with what I viewed as his inability to stay healthy. 

But when you say "everyone knew" you're ignoring what sites like FGs had to say about them and Cahill.  Hindsight is 20/20.   

what we did know was that they were all very high risk/high reward type players and we needed every one of them to work out for the team to even have a shot.  

One of my nits about Eppler though was that he could have spent on a more sure player and just filled gaps with total bargain basement instead of spending in the low to intermediate range on 1yr guys.  Then he might have had some more tradeable pieces at the deadline.  But that would essentially have been admitting defeat even before the season which he was not allowed to do.  

[mmc]

1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

you should really reread what you wrote and ask yourself the same question.  What's more likely?  That he has more freedom to make better moves because of fewer restrictions and more resources(whether financial or prospect driven) due to ownership or that he suddenly had an epiphany about wanting to sign good players instead of shitty ones now that he's with the mets? 

And no one is arguing that he made good moves with the money he did have.  It's why he got fired and what made him the wrong man for the job.  But the franchise was headed to a black hole and he left it far better than what he started with.   He had so many holes to fill each year with so few resources to do so that he had to go down a very difficult path and he did so poorly.  For sure he could have done better in that regard. 

And I like what Minasian has done so far but there is no real indication that he doesn't have the same restrictions.  I like that he's been aggressive on pitching so far but he could sign one of the top pitchers and his money could go dry.  If he's allow to take payroll to $200 mil, would that show you it's a different situation than Eppler was dealing with?     

I personally think the reason for the change in approach is that he learned the hard way he's not being a GM in this league by aiming to play it safe like he did every year with the Angels.  Particularly in a market like New York, which is way more unforgiving when teams don't produce results.  

Yes if Minasian can get a payroll near $200 million it would be pretty clear Arte himself has a change in philosophy but I still don't really believe it will happen until it does.  

[Docwaukee]

3 minutes ago, mmc said:

I don't know why you think I'm insinuating he was supposed to spend our way to contention.  My point is I don't think he ever was aggressive, or went for upside, and year after year we paid the price for it and he never learned.  

then how was he supposed to make the team a contender?  We weren't going to be and he wasn't allowed to show that.  He had to constantly fill several positions, a bunch of pen spots and anywhere from 2-4 rotation spots on a yearly basis.  

[Inside Pitch]

1 hour ago, mmc said:

I don’t like the guy, but I really don’t care if anyone else likes him, I just think people are seriously in denial of his shortcomings.  If people feel he accomplished more good here then he did bad, fine, but I don’t see how it can be argued that his track record in free agency here was crap and he went after very low upside players.  Whereas in New York, he’s already made much better deals for players that could actually be useful.  I have no idea why people are saying “the situation is different” in regards to this fact.  If you want to talk about his tenure as a whole, sure Ill agree the situations are very different but I see absolutely no reason he couldn’t make Canha/Escobar type deals here, and the only response I’ve gotten as to why is that “it was different here”.  

His track record in FA was awful and it cost him his job. 

How much of that track record was due to the situation he stepped into and the limitations placed on him is unknown, but math is pretty easy and the numbers are pretty clear regarding what and how much he spent, particularly early on..   It's also pretty clear based both on Cohen's comments publicly and Eppler's actions early on that he is not being constrained in his current situation.

Three years from now all three of these deals might have ended up being massive mistakes and the notion that Eppler is bad at FA will only be that much worse.  

[Inside Pitch]

4 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

what we did know was that they were all very high risk/high reward type players and we needed every one of them to work out for the team to even have a shot.  

One of my nits about Eppler though was that he could have spent on a more sure player and just filled gaps with total bargain basement instead of spending in the low to intermediate range on 1yr guys.  Then he might have had some more tradeable pieces at the deadline.  But that would essentially have been admitting defeat even before the season which he was not allowed to do.  

And then you see a guy that is as close to a sure player as you will see signed to a one year deal only to have him go boom.  Joe Quintana says hello.  

[Docwaukee]

1 minute ago, mmc said:

I personally think the reason for the change in approach is that he learned the hard way he's not being a GM in this league by aiming to play it safe like he did every year with the Angels.  Particularly in a market like New York, which is way more unforgiving when teams don't produce results.  

Yes if Minasian can get a payroll near $200 million it would be pretty clear Arte himself has a change in philosophy but I still don't really believe it will happen until it does.  

I think you're wrong.  He was a GM for 5 years with the halos and if he had the option to do otherwise, he clearly would have which is what his brief stint with the mets has shown.  

And just because Minasian gets pitching and did so early in the off season, if he runs out of money and tries to cover his craters with some combo of adobe and duct tape, will you be satisfied with his aggression?  If the budget stays the same or goes up it still proves that Eppler's situation with the mets is different.  

[mmc]

41 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

OMG stop making excuses for Eppler's cowardice!!!   

Pay no mind that his first act as GM was to "aggressively' trade the only two prospects he had for a SS most people here wanted no part of. 

He CHOSE not to spend, he totally could have!!!  His lack of FA moves early or had NOTHING, absolute nothing to do with the reality that the 2016 roster he inherited had 46.5 mil of dead money... and that's before taking AP's 25 mil or Weaver's 20 mil that year into consideration.  That's 86 million outstanding for Wilson, Weaver, Hamilton and Pujols -- as a group those 4 combined for 0.9 bWAR... Meanwhile the SS that nobody wanted (making 6 mil) made 4.4 bWAR that season.  

Who cares if CJ Wilson was owed 20 mil, and Hamilton 52 Mil, or that neither guy would ever actually play a single inning for Eppler.  What difference does it make they still owed AP his 170 mil...  Perry "Braveheart" Minasian had no problem cutting AP loose in his final season when he was due 30 mil -- damn reality, I see no difference.   

Edit: forgot about good ole Huston Street and his 15 mil for 16 and 17.

2016 was a special time..   Dead money.  Bad contracts.  No farm system..  No LFer, No C, no 3B, a AAAA 2B.  No payroll flexibility, and the need to be able to resign a generational talent..  Noooo problem!  He should have plopped his teabag on Arte's forehead and said "Listen Missy, I'm the guy calling the shots now!"

Meanwhile in NYC, you have an owner giving Eppler blank checks and telling him to go get it done.   I see no differences between the two situations and anyone who disagrees is just an obsessive Eppler fanboy.   

 

Very little of this tangent is relevant to anything I was ever arguing, my point this entire time has been he's taking a much more aggressive approach to free agency in New York, but also not making any risky deals either, which would be in character for his time here.  Do you not think that if he would've been more aggressive to get desirable players on 2-3 year deals we would have such awful teams from 2018-20, as we did when he pieced together teams dumpster diving on one year deals?  I'm just annoyed because it feels like what should have been some of the best years for this club went to hell and in none of the 5 did it ever feel like the GM was really trying to win.

[mmc]

1 minute ago, Dochalo said:

I think you're wrong.  He was a GM for 5 years with the halos and if he had the option to do otherwise, he clearly would have which is what his brief stint with the mets has shown.  

And just because Minasian gets pitching and did so early in the off season, if he runs out of money and tries to cover his craters with some combo of adobe and duct tape, will you be satisfied with his aggression?  If the budget stays the same or goes up it still proves that Eppler's situation with the mets is different.  

No because I care about results of the major league team more than anything else.  I give every new addition to the club a one year pass but eventually you have to start to produce.  I like his aggression towards improving the team now so far, but if his acquisitions don't work I won't think any higher of him than I do Eppler.  Of course the situations of the teams as a whole are different, but in terms of having to spend, he's going from having vastly different budgets to work with, with both teams he has had more than enough money to spend to where you can expect some serious impact on the major league team from free agent acquisitions.  He had money to spend to improve the team but rarely did it ever feel like any of his acquisitions were anything that would be helpful, and their in-season results only proved it.

[Docwaukee]

2 minutes ago, mmc said:

Very little of this tangent is relevant to anything I was ever arguing, my point this entire time has been he's taking a much more aggressive approach to free agency in New York, but also not making any risky deals either, which would be in character for his time here.  Do you not think that if he would've been more aggressive to get desirable players on 2-3 year deals we would have such awful teams from 2018-20, as we did when he pieced together teams dumpster diving on one year deals?  I'm just annoyed because it feels like what should have been some of the best years for this club went to hell and in none of the 5 did it ever feel like the GM was really trying to win.

because he know he has more money to do so.  because the team he was handed isn't in shambles.  

and as a side note, he was pretty aggressive with Cozart.  And we have no idea how Canha, Escobar and Marte are gonna work out.  Marte is entering his age 33 season and he just gave him a 4 year deal.  Canha is entering age 33.  Escobar is entering age 33.  Frankly, I really only like the Escobar deal as I think he'd have been a really nice add to the depth of this team.  Canha is the poster child for someone who's going to turn into a pumpkin and Marte is gonna make a lot of money for a guy who had a resurgent year yet is well past his prime.  

[Inside Pitch]

40 minutes ago, mmc said:

Very little of this tangent is relevant to anything I was ever arguing

So, dead money, bad contracts and payroll issues had no impact whatsoever in his decision making?  Those are the things you believe to be irrelevant tangents?  

40 minutes ago, mmc said:

my point this entire time has been he's taking a much more aggressive approach to free agency in New York, but also not making any risky deals either, which would be in character for his time here. 

And you don't believe an owner who has essentially said "he will have whatever money he sees fit at his disposal in order to do what he needs to do" matters here? 

Are you actually trying to argue he was working under the same mandate under Arte and he willingly chose to bypass longer deals in favor of go for broke one year deals because -- that was the SAFE thing to do? 

Please, help me understand how you support the logic that goes into getting from point A to B.
 

40 minutes ago, mmc said:

Do you not think that if he would've been more aggressive to get desirable players on 2-3 year deals we would have such awful teams from 2018-20, as we did when he pieced together teams dumpster diving on one year deals? 

No, I believe ownership's long standing mandate of "we will extend for the right guy" and the Cosart fuck up limited his flexibility.  He had already blown his mad money, so he was left with trying to find someone Arte would consider to be "the right guy" and plugging holes on the cheap.

You may have missed my posts at the time but the year he was trading for Bundy and signing Teheran I publicly argued in favor of signing Kyle Gibson and Michal Pineda.  I had gone on record as saying they needed to get ahead of the pack and sign an innings guy early then work to get someone better.  So, no I'm not guilty of blindly falling in line with whatever he did, but I'm not going to stick my head in the sand and pretend his decision making wasn't a result of the limitations in place.

40 minutes ago, mmc said:

I'm just annoyed because it feels like what should have been some of the best years for this club went to hell and in none of the 5 did it ever feel like the GM was really trying to win.

Fine your frustrated, I can get that and I'll never fault anyone for feeling that way..  But I can't fathom how anyone would actually allow themselves to believe that Billy Eppler willingly chose to bypass better more productive players in favor of lesser players.

[HanfordGuy]

https://nypost.com/2021/11/27/marcus-stroman-mets-arent-going-to-re-sign-me/

Marcus Stroman: Mets aren’t going to re-sign me

By Jared Schwartz

except:

The Mets’ new front office doesn’t appear eager to bring back the team’s most consistent and healthiest pitcher from a season ago.

Marcus Stroman, who is a free agent after starting 33 games for the Mets in 2021, hinted that his pitching services will likely be used elsewhere next season.

“I would love to be back on the squad next year,” Stroman tweeted Friday. “I’ve proven that I can pitch in NY…others usually crumble under that New York pressure. However, I know a source who says the front office rather [go for] the other pitchers on the market. I’m going to dominate wherever I end up!”

[mmc]

2 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

So, dead money, bad contracts and payroll issues had no impact whatsoever in his decision making?  Those are the things you believe to be irrelevant tangents?  

And you don't believe an owner who has essentially said "he will have whatever money he sees fit at his disposal in order to do what he needs to do" matters here? 

Are you actually trying to argue he was working under the same mandate under Arte and he willingly chose to bypass longer deals in favor of go for broke one year deals because -- that was the SAFE thing to do? 

Please, help me understand how you support the logic that goes into getting from point A to B.
 

No, I believe ownership's long standing mandate of "we will extend for the right guy" and the Cosart fuck up limited his flexibility.  He had already blown his mad money, so he was left with trying to find someone Arte felt was "the right guy" and plugging holes on the cheap.

You may have missed my posts at the time but the year he was trading for Bundy and signing Teheran I publicly argued in favor of signing Kyle Gibson and Michal Pineda.  I had gone on record as saying they needed to get ahead of the pack and sign an innings guy early then work to get someone better.  So, no I'm not guilty of blindly falling in line with whatever he did, but I'm not going to stick my head in the sand and pretend his decision making wasn't a result of the limitations in place.

Fine your frustrated, I can get that and I'll never fault anyone for feeling that way..  But I can't fathom how anyone would actually allow themselves to believe that Billy Eppler willingly chose to bypass better more productive players in favor of lesser players.

I think it has a bit of an impact but I don't see what makes you so convinced it's enough of one to make a 1/11 for Harvey possible but not a 2/20 for Escobar type contract

[HanfordGuy]

[eligrba]

I have no idea if Eppler’s signings are good or bad until baseball is actually played, but I’m glad Eppler is doing it for another team.

[Angel Oracle]

3 hours ago, HanfordGuy said:

Great show, even if only 6 episodes long

[Angel Oracle]

3 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

OMG stop making excuses for Eppler's cowardice!!!   

Pay no mind that his first act as GM was to "aggressively' trade the only two prospects he had for a SS most people here wanted no part of. 

He CHOSE not to spend, he totally could have!!!  His lack of FA moves early or had NOTHING, absolute nothing to do with the reality that the 2016 roster he inherited had 46.5 mil of dead money... and that's before taking AP's 25 mil or Weaver's 20 mil that year into consideration.  That's 86 million outstanding for Wilson, Weaver, Hamilton and Pujols -- as a group those 4 combined for 0.9 bWAR... Meanwhile the SS that nobody wanted (making 6 mil) made 4.4 bWAR that season.  

Who cares if CJ Wilson was owed 20 mil, and Hamilton 52 Mil, or that neither guy would ever actually play a single inning for Eppler.  What difference does it make they still owed AP his 170 mil...  Perry "Braveheart" Minasian had no problem cutting AP loose in his final season when he was due 30 mil -- damn reality, I see no difference.   

Edit: forgot about good ole Huston Street and his 15 mil for 16 and 17.

2016 was a special time..   Dead money.  Bad contracts.  No farm system..  No LFer, No C, no 3B, a AAAA 2B.  No payroll flexibility, and the need to be able to resign a generational talent..  Noooo problem!  He should have plopped his teabag on Arte's forehead and said "Listen Missy, I'm the guy calling the shots now!"

Meanwhile in NYC, you have an owner giving Eppler blank checks and telling him to go get it done.   I see no differences between the two situations and anyone who disagrees is just an obsessive Eppler fanboy.   

 

This

In 2016, Trout would have had to morph into Bugs Bunny on the diamond, in order for them to be even a .500 team.

Take away Trout and Simba, and they might as well have been the 2003 Tigers.

[Angel Oracle]

The little birdie is running short on time.  Figure that someone needs to sign by Sunday in order to get a physical done before the Tuesday deadline.

[DMVol]

Sorry if already posted but a good article on Ray if you have an Athletic subscription: https://theathletic.com/2980603/2021/11/27/blue-jays-angels-or-rangers-exploring-which-teams-could-be-interested-in-robbie-ray/

[DMVol]

3 hours ago, Dochalo said:

because he know he has more money to do so.  because the team he was handed isn't in shambles.  

and as a side note, he was pretty aggressive with Cozart.  And we have no idea how Canha, Escobar and Marte are gonna work out.  Marte is entering his age 33 season and he just gave him a 4 year deal.  Canha is entering age 33.  Escobar is entering age 33.  Frankly, I really only like the Escobar deal as I think he'd have been a really nice add to the depth of this team.  Canha is the poster child for someone who's going to turn into a pumpkin and Marte is gonna make a lot of money for a guy who had a resurgent year yet is well past his prime.  

Feels a little like Luis Valbuena to me….overpay for an aging utility guy…..we’ll see….

[tdawg87]

1 hour ago, Angel Oracle said:

The little birdie is running short on time.  Figure that someone needs to sign by Sunday in order to get a physical done before the Tuesday deadline.

Not necessarily. If it happens it will be Monday IMO.

Also wondering about Iglesias.

[Warfarin]

5 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

His track record in FA was awful and it cost him his job. 

How much of that track record was due to the situation he stepped into and the limitations placed on him is unknown, but math is pretty easy and the numbers are pretty clear regarding what and how much he spent, particularly early on..   It's also pretty clear based both on Cohen's comments publicly and Eppler's actions early on that he is not being constrained in his current situation.

Three years from now all three of these deals might have ended up being massive mistakes and the notion that Eppler is bad at FA will only be that much worse.  

Bingo.

I think Eppler's biggest shortcoming though was that he didn't really build up the farm system, or, well, he wasn't very good at it.  We have a few good prospects, but we by no means have a top tier system.

Even with his misses, if he drafted better, he could have gotten away with some of his free agency mistakes.

He did inherit a terrible system (courtesy of DiPoto), so I don't blame him for that, but he did have 5 years, which is enough time to overturn the farm system and start to see a flurry of impact players.

He wasn't awful at it, as we do have some legit prospects, but I don't think he was that good at it, either.

This is what I am most hopeful with when it comes to Minasian - given his background, I'm hoping we can see significant improvement in how we draft and develop players, such that we don't need our GM to enter free agency and spend 60+ million to fill all the holes that we have.

[Warfarin]

2 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

The little birdie is running short on time.  Figure that someone needs to sign by Sunday in order to get a physical done before the Tuesday deadline.

I think the Angels agreed with Syndergaard on Monday and he was out to have his physical by Tuesday.  I imagine given the urgency of the situation, once a contract is agreed upon, the player will basically board a plane immediately and fly out for the physical.  Probably will happen quickly.

Chuck's been great with info, so I believe we'll see a significant signing by Tuesday.

[Warfarin]

 

 

 

 

While I don't think we'll necessarily see the above, it'd be neat if the Mets/Eppler's spending spree triggers Arte to spend more, lol.  Then we'd all be thankful for what Eppler is doing

 

[Angels_Make_Me_Drink]

Can this birdie fly the nest soon so these dudeS can move past Eppler. He’s been gone for a full season now. 

[tdawg87]

We had the same idea when the Dodgers did this. 

I don’t think it matters that much to him.

Edited November 27, 2021 by tdawg87
Im fuckin dumb