thoughts: winter meetings & the angels offseason

The offseason is in full swing with several high-profile players already signed - much to my surprise. So much for collusion.

The Angels so far have made only one signing and appear to be (at this time) mostly an observer. Which has gotten some fans to be impatient, and maybe a bit desperate. Though I'm not thrilled that Tony took a day off from the Winter Meetings, I don't think it signifies anything drastic in the Angels' game plan for this offseason.

I trust that the FO knows what it's doing. And I'm sure they (+Arte and Sosh) know that the team cannot go into Spring Training as is. Last offseason I advocated for the Halos to fill small holes rather than go for the big fish. It's quite clear that that plan does not apply this offseason. The big debate in the halosphere has been how and who should be targeted by the FO. The Halos have been linked (by the media) with Crawford, Soriano, and Beltre, who all fill needs.

I'm undecided on who I think would best fit.

Before the season ended, I hoped that CC would be joining the Angels. He's young, dynamic (on both sides of the ball), could vastly improve the outfield defense, and has numerously been described as perfect for Sosh's style. However, with the rise of Mike Trout, would a long term deal for an outfielder be the most efficient use of Arte-anger spending? Maybe you could wait until Torii's contract runs out after 2012. And you never know if Bourjos will actually hit enough. I guess you can always make room for a prospect that is deserving, but I've come to doubt if CC is really the big prize this winter. And of course you have all the uncertainties and risks of bringing in a speed-reliant guy on a 6 or 7 year deal.

No, presently I'm leaning more towards wanting Beltre. With the struggles of BWood, third base this offseason is a huge question mark. Personally, I don't think that BWood should be handed another chance at the full-time gig. Heck, I'm wary of a BWood/Callaspo split. Or even a BWood/Callaspo/Izturis third base. I didn't like the Callaspo trade last summer, but even I grudgingly admit that some stability at third was needed. I don't think that Izzy can provide that due to his injuries, I don't think BWood can provide that due to his performance, and though I think Callaspo gives a pretty steady performance, it's a mediocre one. With offense being one of the major deficiencies last season, third base is an opportunity to upgrade. So why not upgrade as best as the Angels can? The Halos are thin on even-a-little-bit-close-to-MLB-ready 3Bmen. Having a multi-year contract, say 4-5 years won't lead to complications, except for the usual questions of age and worth. The good thing is that Beltre's market is narrowing. I think one of the common thoughts against Beltre in the beginning of the offseason was that Boras was going to make his price out of the Angels' comfort area. But that concern looks like it won't be a concern.

So is Beltre really worth giving a long-term, big splash, contract? I'm not convinced either way. Some in the halosphere accuse him of only performing when he's in a contract year. And others have tried to debunk that notion. Beltre is certainly an above-average 3Bman and is a superb defender. Like CC, he's a dynamic player on both sides of the ball. He's older than CC, but is generally thought to command less years.

With a lot of things being equal, I'd prefer Beltre. But I would also be very happy with CC. Between those two, I don't think that the Angels could really lose, unless they give a Werth-like ridiculous contract.

No, I chiefly have two concerns: that the FO will spend unwisely and that the FO will do too little.

First off, you'd notice I put a little qualifier in terms of my happiness with a Beltre and/or Crawford signing. Angels fans are well aware that the Halos are not the Yankees (or the Red Sox for that matter) and that Arte won't give Tony a credit card to spend greedily. I want the FO to be responsible. And that includes spending without overpaying, spending where there is a need, and spending where that money will have the greatest impact.

I remember someone laughing at me when I told them that I thought the Halos were perennial underdogs. He/She mada great point that the Halos' top-10 payroll should exclude them from that label. And while I'll still stubbornly insist that they are underdogs (!!!), in reality, that person was right. The Angels' payroll far exceeds those in its division, and yet, when I try and rack my brain into how the Angels have used that advantage, there are very few FA examples I can think of. Certainly the 2003 offseason, Arte's first, is well remembered by Halo fans since the FO signed Jose Guillen, Vlad, and Bartolo Colon. But of those three contracts, I'd say only Vlad was a win, and these days, could you really say that Vlad's contract was a big contract? Colon was an albatross for the latter part of his contract and Guillen is probably fans' most hated former Halo. Torii's contract is the only other big contract that I recall as being a clear WIN for the FO. Did I miss any other good ones? The Halos are touted as being a big payroll team, yet I don't recall a lot of instances where this advantage was exercised that actually gave the Halos an advantage. I remember the bad contracts. Mo Vaughn. And GMJ, who was signed in another instance of Arte-anger.

Tony has found that there is another way to leverage the Angels' payroll flexibility - the salary dump trade. First there was Kazmir, which so far, hasn't worked out as well as we all hoped. Then there is Haren. Funny thing with the Haren trade though. We didn't need more pitching at the time. I'm not saying that it wasn't a good trade. Haren is a great talent and it gives the Halos a great 1-2 punch at the top of the order. But the drawback of this trade was that it didn't address a need for the team. Some in the Halosphere argue that if the FO is going to give out a huge long-term deal this offseason, that Cliff Lee is the only player that deserves it. That thinking is narrow. The Halos do not need rotation help. Lee is a tremendous pitcher, an ace, a player any fan would want on his/her team. But the Halos do not need him. I think the FO has enough sense to know this. But I'm afraid that they will neglect the offense for....the bullpen. This isn't as big a crime as upgrading the rotation, since the bullpen was largly a mess last season (especially in the first half). But I do not want the offense to be ignored. I'd be perfectly okay with Takahashi as the only upgrade in the bullpen if that means that the offense gets the majority of the fixing. Please, Tony, fix the offense first.

My gripe with fixing the bullpen is the FO trend in pouring money into a part of the team that has a relatively small role in the game. It is well known in the baseball blogosphere that relievers are less valuable than other players because they participate in significantly less of the games than everyday players and starters. I'm not trying to lessen the significance of a good bullpen. It's been shown that the great Angels bullpens of the 2000s contributed in their success. I'm trying to point out that spending a lot of money on the bullpen isn't the most effective way to spend money! The Halo bullpens of the 2000s were spare parts and young guys anchored by Frankie and Sheilds at the back end. If you look at the San Diego's or Tampa Bay's great bullpens last year, there was one great closer getting the good money and the rest were low-money, no-name guys. The FO keeps pouring money into the bullpen (Spier, Fuentes, Rodney) with little success. It's why I wasn't thrilled with the Takahashi signing. I was encouraged, mostly by the reported $5.5M/2Yrs. I thought it was a great steal and a good sign for future bullpen contracts. Unfortunately the news that it was $8M deflated all that into a lukewarm feeling. I understood that the bullpen needed an upgrade, but I'm pretty wary of the FO's FA bullpen signings. There have been some rumblings that the Angels are on the lookout for a closer after Rodney made fans wish for Fuentes. Soriano anyone? I say no. I say spend the money where the FO has a better FA track record and where top dollar can have a bigger impact.

Of course, if the FO does nothing, it would be just as bad as signing another overpriced bullpen arm. If the Halos do not sign Beltre or Crawford, I believe that they will need to fill almost all of the other needs, even if it is with mediocrity. That includes upgrading the outfield defense, upgrading the bullpen and/or closer role, finding a leadoff hitter, finding a capable 3B on offense and defense, and finding more OBP. Some of those can be found in-house (like the young bullpen arms stepping up), but I think the FO would need to look elsewhere to fill all of them.

I said last offseason that it would be an interesting season for the Halos. I'd say the same applies for not only next season, but this offseason as well. Last season we saw how the "young core" responded. Most of that young core, KMo being the exception, and the veteran core (Abreu, Torii) are not under contract or club control for after 2012. If the FO does make a big sign this offseason, he just may be the beginning of the new core of Halos.