It's not our money!

[AngelsLakersFan]

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.

 

Tanaka, Garza and a handful of others are all upgrades to this team and could have been had. I'm not saying that any of them would be good investments, but they are would have helped had money not been made an issue.

[AngelsLakersFan]

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.

 

 

The Angels will have to give Trout more money for every year they choose not to extend him. They are extracting maximum value out of Trout now in exchange for future value, or letting him walk.

Edited February 11, 2014 by AngelsLakersFan

[arch stanton]

Tanaka, Garza and a handful of others are all upgrades to this team and could have been had. I'm not saying that any of them would be good investments, but they are would have helped had money not been made an issue.

Or maybe you were just stoked to have YoT have to learn to type "Masahirotross" on his Galaxy S6?

[Inside Pitch]

Or maybe you were just stoked to have YoT have to learn to type "Masahirotross" on his Galaxy S6?

 

Tanakatross actually rolls off the tongue pretty easily.

[Torridd]

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.

Well, I haven't changed mine and I'm part of that group. However, since I have no control over the roster, I can only hope this will be enough although I think Dipoto/Arte are making a big mistake in not getting at least one more starter and reliever.

[stormngt]

Tanaka, Garza and a handful of others are all upgrades to this team and could have been had. I'm not saying that any of them would be good investments, but they are would have helped had money not been made an issue.

 

At first glance Pujols and Hamlton were good acquisitions of the team.  However, it didn't turn out that way.  Maybe Moreno, and rightfully so, is a little more cautious before he hands over big money contracts.  After all, if Pujols and Hamllton wasn't going to turn the team around, why would we think Garza would?

 

Garza in best case scenario would have helped the team.  However, that was a risk with his injury issue.  Tanaka would have helped the team but to what extent?  Would it have been worth to out bid the Yanks...which I don't think would have happened. 

[Stradling]

Tanaka, Garza and a handful of others are all upgrades to this team and could have been had. I'm not saying that any of them would be good investments, but they are would have helped had money not been made an issue.

Ok, so if the team didn't have money issues because of paying guys like Wells, or the Albert or Josh, who aren't performing up to their contracts, then you would be ok with them basically doing the same thing and overpay Tanaka? That would essentially be wash, rinse, repeat. It is exactly why we are in this position. So here in 5 years when the next time we need a player, you would be saying, well if we didn't have all this money tied up in Tanaka we could sign so and so. This is the off season where we bite the bullet for the Wells deal, not that big of a deal. We at least now have three young pitchers to watch and develop.

[mtangelsfan]

There was no way we were getting Tanaka from the Yankees.  Look how much higher their bid was than anyone else's reported bid.  They were going to sign him no matter what. 

[Crampknees]

This may not help but, ya it really isn't our money.  Go to the political forum under "Obama" to see where your money is going. 

[Blarg]

Into the Trout Farm Bill.

 

 

 

This may not help but, ya it really isn't our money.  Go to the political forum under "Obama" to see where your money is going. 

[Mark68]

Tanakatross actually rolls off the tongue pretty easily.

What is the Japanese word for "albatross"?

[Blarg]

What is the Japanese word for "albatross"?

Pujols.

[Crampknees]

What is the Japanese word for "albatross"?

Soshimi

[Angel Oracle]

Now that the current AAV payroll is still some $15 million lower than the luxury tax threshold, what would it hurt now to pay Trout at least $2-3 million in 2014?    Yes, they can pay him whatever.   But doesn't it look cheap to pay him yet another piddling 5% raise for his 3rd season?   Yes, the reward comes later.   But at least reward him somehow, NOW. 

 

I am surprised they haven't finalized Trout's 2014 salary yet, and ST for non-pitchers/catchers is just a week away.  

Edited February 12, 2014 by Angel Oracle

[Inside Pitch]

Pujols.

 

 

LOLOL....  Nice...

[AngelsLakersFan]

Or maybe you were just stoked to have YoT have to learn to type "Masahirotross" on his Galaxy S6?

 

Just an added benefit really.

[AngelsLakersFan]

At first glance Pujols and Hamlton were good acquisitions of the team.  However, it didn't turn out that way.  Maybe Moreno, and rightfully so, is a little more cautious before he hands over big money contracts.  After all, if Pujols and Hamllton wasn't going to turn the team around, why would we think Garza would?

 

Garza in best case scenario would have helped the team.  However, that was a risk with his injury issue.  Tanaka would have helped the team but to what extent?  Would it have been worth to out bid the Yanks...which I don't think would have happened. 

 

I'm not talking about good value here, or whether or not these contracts are worth it. I'm simply saying there are upgrades that are available to this team IF MONEY WERE NOT AN ISSUE.

[AngelsLakersFan]

Ok, so if the team didn't have money issues because of paying guys like Wells, or the Albert or Josh, who aren't performing up to their contracts, then you would be ok with them basically doing the same thing and overpay Tanaka? That would essentially be wash, rinse, repeat. It is exactly why we are in this position. So here in 5 years when the next time we need a player, you would be saying, well if we didn't have all this money tied up in Tanaka we could sign so and so. This is the off season where we bite the bullet for the Wells deal, not that big of a deal. We at least now have three young pitchers to watch and develop.

 

You can't have it both ways. You can't absolve the organization for it's bad deals and then be critical of the idea of spending money on Tanaka/Garza. It'd be the same as someone being critical of the front office's spending and then being pro signing Tanaka/Garza. 

 

The bottom line is that free agents come at a significant cost based on an expected level of performance, and they come with large long term risks. We have struck out in every single way the past several years and because of that specifically we lack the ability to make moves in the current market that could improve the team. Are any of them value moves? No, but they never are, and at the team level, the value Arte is getting out of his money would look a lot better with the Pujols/Wells/Hamilton money invested elsewhere.

[laagamer]

In terms of the value for our money, we are currently getting the best deal in baseball with Trout.

 

I think that helps offset alot. 

[KevinStockerIsGod]

Again, this is the system in place between MLB and the MLBPA on pre-arb players.  Pay increases for players between 0-3 years service time is on a sliding scale.  The Angels follow the scale that was approved between both parties.  I totally agree that Trout deserves more, but that is the system.  The Angels aren't being cheap with Trout.  Trout's salary for 2014 is not figured like arbitration cases.

 

Now that the current AAV payroll is still some $15 million lower than the luxury tax threshold, what would it hurt now to pay Trout at least $2-3 million in 2014?    Yes, they can pay him whatever.   But doesn't it look cheap to pay him yet another piddling 5% raise for his 3rd season?   Yes, the reward comes later.   But at least reward him somehow, NOW. 

 

I am surprised they haven't finalized Trout's 2014 salary yet, and ST for non-pitchers/catchers is just a week away.  

[Stradling]

You can't have it both ways. You can't absolve the organization for it's bad deals and then be critical of the idea of spending money on Tanaka/Garza. It'd be the same as someone being critical of the front office's spending and then being pro signing Tanaka/Garza.

The bottom line is that free agents come at a significant cost based on an expected level of performance, and they come with large long term risks. We have struck out in every single way the past several years and because of that specifically we lack the ability to make moves in the current market that could improve the team. Are any of them value moves? No, but they never are, and at the team level, the value Arte is getting out of his money would look a lot better with the Pujols/Wells/Hamilton money invested elsewhere.

ALF, I think you are the one trying to have it both ways. You are complaining about the Angels lack of flexibility in payroll because of bad signings, but you are advocating paying Tanaka his going rate, which apparently is $175 million.

[jshep]

As far as names go: Anibal Sanchez sure would have been nice to have.

 

But then again, I guess that was more the team spending the money like ****ing idiots than not having money to spend.

[tdawg87]

In hindsight, the Josh Hamilton signing was far more retarded than the Pujols one.

 

>team needs pitching

>Greinke doesn't re-sign and there is no evidence a legit attempt was made to do so

>Haren is gone

>Santana is gone

>sign Josh Hamilton

[Stradling]

As far as names go: Anibal Sanchez sure would have been nice to have.

But then again, I guess that was more the team spending the money like ****ing idiots than not having money to spend.

Anibel Sanchez was not about money. They chose to sign Hamilton instead, which is probably worse.

[Angelsjunky]

In hindsight, the Josh Hamilton signing was far more retarded than the Pujols one.

 

Not even in hindsight. The Pujols contract made some sense in that:

- He was/is among the three or four greatest first basemen in the history of the game

- He was, at the time, "only" 32 and despite coming off the worst year of his career, his reduced numbers were at least partially due to a slow start and everyone thought he'd bounce back to some degree

- The marketing potential was huge - a great Latino star in the biggest Latino market

 

The Hamilton contract made absolutely no sense:

- The Angels' primary need was pitching

- Greinke's contract, 6/$147M, wasn't that much higher than Hamilton's 5/$125M contract

- Hamilton was known for being erratic

- With Trout, Bourjos, Trumbo, and Calhoun on the cusp, the Angels didn't need him

Edited February 13, 2014 by Angelsjunky