Angels mailbag: Everybody’s looking ahead

What’s up, Angels fans? This is a day later than normal because of Monday’s Fourth of July holiday, but the news is not any less grim than normal. Your team has won 33 of 83 games it has played this season. It is on pace to lose 98 games.

Let’s take a look behind us and one ahead here with questions and answers. Mostly ahead, because do you really want to look back? As always, this is the place to ask anything you want about the Angels, with questions submitted through my email (pedro.moura@latimes.com) and Twitter account (@pedromoura).

Hey, this is kind of a fun question. The answer is yes, but not by all that much, which is weird. The real strength of the club, as you might expect, would be the hitters. The weakness is the pitching. 

Your ace is Kenta Maeda, Matt Shoemaker your No. 2, and some combination of Brandon McCarthy, Hector Santiago and Scott Kazmir as your back-end starters. Hyun-Jin Ryu might fit in there if this were asked next week.

Your lineup: Kole Calhoun, Mike Trout, Corey Seager, Justin Turner, Adrian Gonzalez, Yasiel Puig, Chase Utley and Yasmani Grandal. If a designated hitter is involved, it’d be Albert Pujols. 

Your bench: Andrelton Simmons, A.J. Ellis,  Trayce Thompson, Yunel Escobar and Howie Kendrick. Good bench.

Your bullpen: Kenley Jansen, Huston Street, Joe Smith, Joe Blanton, Cam Bedrosian, Adam Liberatore and Jered Weaver.

Next year’s rotation, not counting on Garrett Richards, starts with Matt Shoemaker. Behind him are Hector Santiago, Tyler Skaggs, and Nick Tropeano. Maybe Nate Smith could fill that fifth spot? You’ll probably get a good look at him before season’s end. There is not going to be a lot of starting-pitching talent available. Rich Hill is probably going to be the best guy available. 

See, the thing is: The Angels cannot spend more than $300,000 on an international prospect until a year from now, which is obviously severely hindering the team’s chances of procuring top talent. Blame former General Manager Jerry Dipoto for that. Dipoto went in big on a 20-year-old Cuban infielder named Roberto Baldoquin, and so far he has been a massive flop, hitting for no power, demonstrating no on-base acumen, and appearing more like a second baseman or utility defender than the shortstop he was purported to be.

The Angels effectively spent $14 million on Baldoquin, and appear likely to reap no major league value from that transaction. It has really hurt them. But they are not the only ones to suffer such a fate in attempting to sign Cuban ballplayers: Arizona signed a right-hander named Yoan Lopez for more money around the same time, and he is now mulling retirement, according to Nick Piecoro of the Arizona Republic.

See, now, because they can’t sign anyone to a large bonus, they are not looking too good. They signed five players last week, none of whom comes with any sort of Baseball America pedigree, none for more than $300,000. 

No.

Yes, I think he will be. If he is healthy or close to it, he should be worth what arbitration will dictate he be paid. The Angels aren’t going to just non-tender him, and they also won’t trade him when his value is that low. So, yes, I’d expect him to to be an Angel that opening day, beginning his last year of team control.

Trade Yunel Escobar and trade Joe Smith. Decide what the goal for next season is: If it’s to rebuild and gather talent for 2018-2020, trade Huston Street, too. Look for higher-risk, higher-reward prospects, someone like what San Diego received from Miami for Fernando Rodney, a 20-year-old hard thrower with great low-minors numbers.

This has been a common question this season. I have definitely answered it, in some form, a few times. This’ll be my version of the answer for July, and then I’ll probably address it again later. 

The Angels have $46 million coming off the books this winter, in the form of C.J. Wilson, Jered Weaver and Joe Smith’s contract. Much of that is offset by the set salary increases due Mike Trout and Andrelton Simmons. Another part of it will be allocated to the rising arbitration costs of Garrett Richards, Hector Santiago and Kole Calhoun, among others.

Assuming a similar budget to this season, it would seem the Angels might have about $20 million to spend in the free-agent market. I don’t think that will be enough to make them free-agent players, although I’d like to leave open the possibility that you and I have different understandings of what “players” means here.

Occam’s razor applies here, I believe. It is far easier to maintain a status quo, even an eminently flawed one, than it is to spawn and create a brand-new idea in limited time. It’s not impossible, but I would guess the Angels will still be playing their home games in Anaheim for a while.

Hey, man, hope is whatever you want it to be. Mike Trout is a hopeful player, both personally and in how he inspires others. I find inspiration in how hard Andrelton Simmons takes it when he does not come up with a ball hit in his area. 

I think he is still more likely than not to make a few starts for the Angels before season’s end, but it’s hard to foresee those coming before the Aug. 1 non-waiver deadline, and thus it’s hard to foresee him being traded. Now, a 35-year-old, $20-million-drawing Wilson is the type of player who could easily clear waivers and be traded after that deadline, so that’s something to monitor if his major league return ends up occurring in August. 

Also, they really don’t know what’s wrong with him, so all of that could be wrong.

Dear Pedro, 

To stop trade and/or availability speculation, do you think the Angels should now sign Michael Nelson Trout to a career-long contract similar to the 13-year deal signed by Giancarlo Stanton in 2014?

John Zanier, Long Beach

Sure, they should try, but Michael Nelson Trout has no motivation whatsoever to sign that sort of a deal now. There’s really no telling what kind of market might be waiting for him when he becomes a free agent at age 29 after 2020. If he continues to produce as he has and baseball salaries continue to increase as they have, there is no number too ridiculous. Four hundred million?

It is also important to note that the Stanton deal has so far worked out poorly for the Marlins. He played half of last season and is only an average hitter this year. Of course, the expectation is he’ll hit better. But there’s so much risk involved in signing a player to that long and strong a deal. 

Hi Pedro, Arte Moreno's reign as owner has been a mixed bag. The string of bad contracts given to Gary Matthews Jr., Vernon Wells, Josh Hamilton and Albert Pujols must be humbling. The questionable G.M. hirings of Bill Stoneman, Tony Reagins and the Jerry Dipoto fiasco shows the inability to develop a sustainable organization. The locking up of Mike Trout before free agency was great, but one can only wonder what Trout thinks of the organizational long-term prognosis for his second contract. The team has spent the last decade among the leaders in the division, but never advancing in the playoffs. The TV deal was big, but everyone gets those these days. Where do you stand on Moreno's tenure? 

Kirk Dingley

It is difficult to evaluate Moreno because I do not have a good grasp of what owners around the league do on a daily basis, and how much power they wield within their team’s decision-making processes. What makes a good owner? Putting in a bunch of money, hiring good people and letting them do their jobs?

Moreno has put in a fair amount of money, although he appears to have held the team to an artificial budget lately. He has hired talented people, at least in recent seasons. As far as allowing them to do what he’s employed them to do? That is in question. And Moreno has not granted any interview requests from the Los Angeles Times this year. So, what can we really say?

That concludes this week’s Angels mailbag. Send in your questions to the below addresses at any time, and check back each Monday for answers.

pedro.moura@latimes.com

Twitter: @pedromoura