One player linked to the Angels in ESPN's newest article

The Los Angeles Angels have already had an eventful offseason, signing Tyler Anderson and trading for Gio Urshela. The Anderson signing addressed a rotation that needed more arms, and the Urshela trade addressed the serious problem the Angels had with their infield depth.

Another issue the Angels have is the shortstop position, and ESPN's David Schoenfield has what he thinks is the solution.

Schoenfield has the Angels signing Xander Bogaerts to a six-year $184 million dollar contract.

Xander Bogaerts is one of the four big-name free agent shortstops available and is the only one linked to the Angels in this article. I'm a little bit surprised to see them linked to one at all.

It's just so unlikely the Angels spend big money on any player, as much as I hope they do. The Halos are already paying Anthony Rendon and Mike Trout a ton of money per year and if they somehow convince Shohei Ohtani to stay that's even more money. With Arte Moreno looking to sell he probably won't want to spend this kind of money on a free agent.

With all of that being said, the impact Bogaerts would have on this roster cannot be overestimated and if the Angels were to sign him, I'd be thrilled.

First of all, the Angels would be getting a big-time leader with Bogaerts. He's a guy with a ton of playoff experience and two World Series championships under his belt. That alone makes any team better.

The player Bogaerts is cannot be overstated either. He had a down year in the power department but slashed .307/.377/.456 with 15 home runs and 73 RBI. He won the AL Silver Slugger at shortstop, was an all-star, and finished ninth in the MVP balloting. It's his fifth straight year receiving MVP votes. He's finished as high as fifth back in 2019.

The one flaw in Bogaerts' game has always been his defense. He worked hard and improved drastically, ranking in the 88th percentile in outs above average according to baseball savant.

He's a complete player who the Angels would be fortunate to sign. Unfortunately, I can't see that happening.