It's not our money!

[NrM]

I find it funny how the, "it's not out money" people who were all fine and dandy with the Vernon Wells, Albert Pujols, and Josh Hamilton acquisitions, have now changed their tune.

 

Now the Angels seem to be on a tight budget and signing a vet to a cheap one year deal is somehow the end of the world to you guys.

Edited February 10, 2014 by Poozy

[Vegas Halo Fan]

Not really the end of the world in my case, but the Angels have definitely painted themselves into a very avoidable corner by signing 30+ year old players to long-term big money deals.

[Stradling]

It's not my money. Also, show me the list of, "it's not my money people" that think the Angels shouldn't sign a cheap starting pitcher.

[SoWhat]

[FabulousFabregas]

I think Arte should give me money so it'd be my money.

[mancini79]

When the Wells trade occurred, I hated it. I was concerned that the contract would handicap the team financially (plus I knew he wouldn't help the team). Then the following year the Angels signed Pujols and Wilson. I then thought for sure that the Angels would be tapped out for any other signings. So the Angels shut me up again with the Hamilton signing. So I guess you can say I'm now in the "It's not your money" camp. Arte has shown he will increase payroll if he feels it's worth it regardless of what arbitrary number fans believe he's willing to spend.

 

The Angels need to get younger. Even if the Angels didn't have the Pujols or Hamilton contract, I feel the same moves would have occurred. Tanaka isn't worth the 7hr/$170 risk, and Garza at 30 yrs old isn't wise at 4yr/$50m. If there were a pitcher out there worth the money, Arte would have pulled the trigger. But lets face it, the pitching FA this year is weak. Now is the time to trade for young pitching. If it doesn't work, then splurge next off season when more quality pitchers are available.

[YouthofToday]

So the Albert Pujols was worth $250,000,000.00? Right...

[NrM]

When the Wells trade occurred, I hated it. I was concerned that the contract would handicap the team financially (plus I knew he wouldn't help the team). Then the following year the Angels signed Pujols and Wilson. I then thought for sure that the Angels would be tapped out for any other signings. So the Angels shut me up again with the Hamilton signing. So I guess you can say I'm now in the "It's not your money" camp. Arte has shown he will increase payroll if he feels it's worth it regardless of what arbitrary number fans believe he's willing to spend.

 

The Angels need to get younger. Even if the Angels didn't have the Pujols or Hamilton contract, I feel the same moves would have occurred. Tanaka isn't worth the 7hr/$170 risk, and Garza at 30 yrs old isn't wise at 4yr/$50m. If there were a pitcher out there worth the money, Arte would have pulled the trigger. But lets face it, the pitching FA this year is weak. Now is the time to trade for young pitching. If it doesn't work, then splurge next off season when more quality pitchers are available.

 

So you think Arte has no problem with going over the luxury tax?

[Docwaukee]

I find it funny how the, "it's not out money" people who were all fine and dandy with the Vernon Wells, Albert Pujols, and Josh Hamilton acquisitions, have now changed their tune.

 

Now the Angels seem to be on a tight budget and signing a vet to a cheap one year deal is somehow the end of the world to you guys.

How many people were fine with all three of those signings?  How many of those people are now against signing a vet to a cheap one year deal? 

 

I don't know if there is a person on this site who felt that the Angels were going to have an unlimited payroll. 

 

The 'it's not my money' thing started with many claiming that the wells deal would limit the team financially.  It didn't. 

 

Is the team limited financially now?  Of course.  They added half a billion in guaranteed contracts since the wells deal. 

 

I have no idea if Arte is maxed out at this point.  Frankly, I doubt it, but I am sure any additional big ticket players are going to get a much closer look.  I actually do think Arte would go over the luxury tax, but he's not going to go right to the edge for Matt Garza or Bronson Arroyo. 

 

I find it funny that some of those that thought the 'it's not my money' thing was ridiculous are now passing judgement on those folks for being ok with the team being more financially responsible. 

[OregonLAA]

Who could we have signed that would have significantly helped our team this year?

[ukyah]

nope.

[mancini79]

So you think Arte has no problem with going over the luxury tax?

 

If there were a player out there worth it, he would.

[Mark68]

I think the premise that all of the "It's not my money people" were on board for Wells, Pujols, AND Hamilton is an argument fail that renders the rest of your "point" moot.

[Brent Maguire]

Who has made a big deal about signing a cheap veteran? What cheap veteran really even exists out there that will help this staff?

Maholm was cheap but he posted an ERA over 4.5 in the NL.

[arch stanton]

Yeah, you guys suck. Whoever you are.

[Angelsjunky]

The 'it's not my money' thing started with many claiming that the wells deal would limit the team financially.  It didn't. 

 

I don't agree with this. It didn't stop Arte from signing other free agents, but it has limited their approach, especially post-Hamilton.

 

For example, if the Angels weren't on the edge of the luxury tax, they might be more likely to give Trout an extension this year rather than next.

 

If there were a player out there worth it, he would.

 

This is conjecture. It seems clear that he wants to stay under the luxury tax.

 

One player that, I think, is worth it is AJ Burnett.

 

Anyhow, the "its not our money" meme has been disproven many times and is just willful ignorance at this point. Time to face the music: this team has been mismanaged for years. five years ago it was one of the premier franchises in baseball, or just a step down from the Red Sox, Yankees, Phillies, Cardinals and Braves. Now it is teetering on the edge of oblivion. I'm not saying there is no hope, just that everything matters at this point. Its like having a ton of debt, student loans, credit cards, mortgage, etc, but also a solid paying job. You an dig yourself out of the debt, but you've got to be diligent and disavow splurging, because one more bad investment could cause the whole house of cards to collapse (this is why I'm very glad they didn't get Tanaka).

 

Time to tighten the belt with some savvy moves. So far Dipoto seems on the right track. But again, if he hadn't wasted money on Blanton, or if the Angels didn't have at least one of the three albatross contracts on the books (Wells, Pujols, Hamilton), they'd have had more money to play with for pitching.

[mtangelsfan]

"I told you so"

 

 

awesome

[OregonLAA]

I would like the OP to provide a name that we should have signed with the money we supposedly don't have

[YouthofToday]

Spending nearly $20 million for Vernon Wells to sit at a retirement home is a great way to spend money. There isn't a better way to spend $20 million to help the 2014 ball club.

[mtangelsfan]

This is a fabulous strawman argument by the way.

 

Can you show me one poster on this site that thinks the Wells contract was good?  Even the ones who initially thought it was have admitted how awful it is.  What this thread hints at is that is has stopped us from signing some great lockdown pitcher or great position player this off-season.  Can anyone give some names of free agents we have missed out on who were so great?

[nate]

Poozy is still mad that Arte didn't throw 250 million at Napoli.

Edited February 10, 2014 by nate

[stormngt]

What is so ridiculous with this post is the premise the "its not my money" argument suggest that there is never a cap on spending.  There is always a cap, the question is where is that cap.

 

Vernon Wells did not restrict our ability to improve the team.

Pujols did not restrict our ability to improve the team.

Hamilton did not restrict our ability to improve the team.

 

This year there was no one out there that really could improve the team so we don't know if the bad contracts where the reason why we didn't go after certain guys or was it other reason.  One argument could be debated:

 

Vernon Wells, Plus Albert Pujols, plus Josh Hamilton may have restricted our ability to improve the team.

 

OR

 

Maybe Moreno came to the realization that just throwing money at veterans isn't worth the money.  Its not that he won't spend it, but maybe he got burned by Wells, Hamilton, and Pujols not living up to expectations so he is reluctant to spend so much on the next guy.

[KevinStockerIsGod]

Moreno offered Garza a contract that would have taken us over the luxury tax...he didn't accept, it was pulled.  Santana and Jimenez would cost draft picks, so I agree they aren't a fit, plus who knows if they'd be worth it.  Tanaka spending went too crazy for an unknown. 

 

Dipoto got creative with trades to fill needs, it was a pretty good offseason. 

[OregonLAA]

Still not a name that we should have had. Looks like the "It's not my money" people have had the last laugh

[Blarg]

AJ, love ya man but they are not giving Trout an extension tis season because they only lose money doing it. It is pointless to blow your pre arbitration years on a player for the same long term contract that they will take the following season.

Hey, it isn't my money and it certainly isn't Poozys to spend, he would just blow it all on hookers, booze and a Mustang. What the organization has to spend and what risks they take is up for speculation but not investing in players is not making smart moves. It's just not doing anything then expecting better results.

Then you would have whiners like Ooozy yelling the Angels have cap room but refuse to spend money on what they need. It is a no win argument he proposed.