my idea: padres/angels

[Second Base]

How about buying low on Fister?

1.Richards

2.Wilson

3.Fister

4.Heaney

5.Tropeano/Weaver/Skaggs (when ready)/Shoemaker

Edit: 

This is assuming we trade Santiago.

I like it. Fister or Chen both seem like solid options that'll cost less than anticipated given the deep market.

[Stradling]

I would start the year with Cowart at third because between him and Kubitza he has at least shown a proven skill set at the major league with his glove. I have no issue with Kubitza but he will have to adjust to the bigs and perform.

[ukyah]

I would start the year with Cowart at third because between him and Kubitza he has at least shown a proven skill set at the major league with his glove. I have no issue with Kubitza but he will have to adjust to the bigs and perform.

 

 

i'd like to be wrong and perhaps i will be. kubitza has a long swing and although there are definitely some guys that have success with that type, i'm just not a fan. they tend to struggle with contact and pitch recognition.

[DailyHalo]

How about buying low on Fister?

1.Richards

2.Wilson

3.Fister

4.Heaney

5.Tropeano/Weaver/Skaggs (when ready)/Shoemaker

Edit: 

This is assuming we trade Santiago.

There is no way you should be happy or comfortable with that rotation. C.J. a few months ago was bout too be hunted down with pitchforks. Fister is about as scary as it gets and Skaggs will start in the minors. Richard and Heaney are locks, so thats 3 spots for Weaver, Tropeano, Shoemaker, Wilson and Santiago. Weaver is going to get every opportunity too show he is healthy and can compete first. Santiago is one of this teams best trade chips and it comes from a position of strength for once, it should be a no-brainer. Tropeano has show that all he needed was a chance and impressed imo. He should he be given that chance and more in 2016. That leaves one more spot in the rotation for a possible FA, Shoe or Wilson. Pitching and defense wins Championships. It should be blatantly obviously especially after this year, how important quality pitching is from ace to closer.

Edited November 21, 2015 by DailyHalo

[Second Base]

I would start the year with Cowart at third because between him and Kubitza he has at least shown a proven skill set at the major league with his glove. I have no issue with Kubitza but he will have to adjust to the bigs and perform.

If Cowart wasn't so gifted defensively I might disagree, but I really am intrigued by the idea of Simmons and Cowart on the left side.

[Brent Maguire]

I can live with Cowart IF the team addresses 2B. A Giavotella-Simmons-Cowart bottom part of the lineup scares the crap out of me. 

[DailyHalo]

Why, though? Their our 7, 8, and 9 hitters! Gia is a better 9 hole hitter than most in the league and the other two spots are a defensive wiz at worst and a rookie. They have too go somewhere, plus you cant have fully polished offensive and defensive players at every position in the lineup (Although we all wish).

[Brent Maguire]

Why, though? Their our 7, 8, and 9 hitters! Gia is a better 9 hole hitter than most in the league and the other two spots are a defensive wiz at worst and a rookie. They have too go somewhere, plus you cant have fully polished offensive and defensive players at every position in the lineup (Although we all wish).

Unless they're adding one of the legit guys in LF, they can't roll with that bottom of the order. Plus, you'll have Perez, whose probably still a below average hitter, batting 6th and Cron will be 4/5 and nobody really knows what we'll exactly get out of him. 

 

Giavotella isn't starter worthy in my eyes either, FWIW. 

[ukyah]

Why, though? Their our 7, 8, and 9 hitters! Gia is a better 9 hole hitter than most in the league and the other two spots are a defensive wiz at worst and a rookie. They have too go somewhere, plus you cant have fully polished offensive and defensive players at every position in the lineup (Although we all wish).

 

 

this is not the NL. you can't have 1/3 of your lineup being subpar and expect to have the advantage in too many contests.

[Docwaukee]

I am not sure why kubitza can't be a serviceable 3bman.  I'm not overly high on him, but I think there is capable in there.  

 

Cowart is far more interesting because of his upside.  In a small sample, he showed that he can put an at bat together.  

 

I'd give Cowart the job.  Mostly because I'm curious. With his upside, I'd rather see what we've got with him.  Contingent upon having a big bat in LF and an upgrade at 2b.  I'd rather go with Cowart at 3b than Gia at 2b for that reason.  

[DailyHalo]

this is not the NL. you can't have 1/3 of your lineup being subpar and expect to have the advantage in too many contests.

So what exactly are all the other ball clubs 7, 8, and 9 hitters doing, that ours are not? If your expecting a .300 batting average and a glove like clockwork, your going to be very disappointed in our order but also the rest of the leagues as well.

[ukyah]

So what exactly are all the other ball clubs 7, 8, and 9 hitters doing, that ours are not? If your expecting a .300 batting average and a glove like clockwork, your going to be very disappointed in our order but also the rest of the leagues as well.

 

listen, this is a classic straw man argument. i say that you can't have 1/3 of your lineup being weak hitters in the AL and you respond by saying i expect everyone to have a .300 batting average and be a GG fielder. that's not what i said.

 

it's more expected in the NL, obviously because of the lack of dh. they've got a dead spot in the nine hole.

[DailyHalo]

No your not telling me anything. your just saying that you cant have a weak bottom third and everyone knows that. What I'm saying, is that not every player is a stud and can slot into the top half. Not every player is a star, or a veteran, or a highly touted prospect. you have to compare them too the other 7,8 and 9 hitters throughout the league.

[ukyah]

No your not telling me anything. your just saying that you cant have a weak bottom third and everyone knows that. What I'm saying, is that not every player is a stud and can slot into the top half. Not every player is a star, or a veteran, or a highly touted prospect. you have to compare them too the other 7,8 and 9 hitters throughout the league.

 

 

i'm doing you a favor by not comparing them to the other bottom 3rd hitters in the AL because it'll blow you out of the water. either way, you're not getting it.

 

let me just give you a taste, astros vs royals alds 2015: salvador perez, alex gordon, alex rios vs luis valbuena, chris carter, and jason castro. 

 

do you really want to compare any combination of those guys with cowart, simmons and gia? 

Edited November 23, 2015 by ukyah

[Second Base]

Pretty much regardless of what we do, this team is going to have Andrelton Simmons and Carlos Perez at the bottom of the lineup. More than likely, we'll also see one of Giavotella, Kubitza, Pennington or Cowart as well. So no use is crying about that.

They need to focus more on a #2, 4 or 5 hitter.

[ukyah]

Pretty much regardless of what we do, this team is going to have Andrelton Simmons and Carlos Perez at the bottom of the lineup. More than likely, we'll also see one of Giavotella, Kubitza, Pennington or Cowart as well. So no use is crying about that.

They need to focus more on a #2, 4 or 5 hitter.

 

 

true enough, but i think the message shouldn't be to just accept it, because that's a recipe for not making the playoffs in the AL. the angels have chosen to accept simmons offense in exchange for his glove. they're also likely to choose to accept perez's developing offense in the bottom 1/3 of their lineup, although that's far from assured. adding a 3rd weak hitter to the lineup may be catastrophic to their playoff chances. at least in regards to lineup construction.

Edited November 23, 2015 by ukyah

[DailyHalo]

No, please tell me what they are doing that our guys aren't? You just compared the Angels to the team that just won it all. Their the team or one of the only teams in the league that have that deep of a lineup. They were quietly by far the best team in the league, as were the Cardinals and no one talked about em'

Edited November 23, 2015 by DailyHalo

[DailyHalo]

.......At least it felt like that, especially while being the best teams all year.

[ukyah]

No, please tell me what they are doing that our guys aren't? You just compared the Angels to the team that just won it all. Their the team or one of the only teams in the league that have that deep of a lineup. They were quietly by far the best team in the league, as were the Cardinals and no one talked about em'

 

 

no, i compared them to two teams in the alds. feel free to look at other teams. i assume we'd like the angels to be playoff caliber. blue jays went with guys like martin and pillar. rangers are probably the worst with andrus and odor.

 

the cardinals had yadier molina and kolten wong hitting 7,8. two of the best offensive players at their positions.

 

you're completely wrong about this. i'll say it again, you can't give up 1/3 of your lineup in the AL and reasonably expect to have the day to day advantage.

Edited November 23, 2015 by ukyah

[DailyHalo]

no, i compared them to two teams in the alds. feel free to look at other teams. i assume we'd like the angels to be playoff caliber. blue jays went with guys like martin and pillar. rangers are probably the worst with andrus and odor.

 

the cardinals had yadier molina and kolten wong hitting 7,8. two of the best offensive players at their positions.

 

you're completely wrong about this. i'll say it again, you can't give up 1/3 of your lineup in the AL and reasonably expect to have the day to day advantage.

I'm getting the impression your acting like a bratty school girl right here.

[DailyHalo]

The Royals, the Cardinals and the Blue Jays (as you just mentioned) are all in different positions than the Angels. They have all constructed way different rosters than ours, so your comparing apples and oranges. The Blue Jays had a borderline all-star team, i'm not impressed and the Royals didn't have any superstars but an above average lineup throughout. As for the Cardinals, I think anyone would like to replicate their success. You can "give up"  the BOTTOM third (although I don't feel we would be), as long as you have adequate strength in other areas. I.E, a top rotation arm would fit the bill.

[ukyah]

I'm getting the impression your acting like a bratty school girl right here.

 

 

oh, you're one of those people.

 

so, is fire good or is fire baaaaaaad?

[DailyHalo]

What do you want me too say? I've answered the questions and you don't like the answers, so you add a little stipulation to it. For example, the Royals were in the ALDS and also one of the best teams in the league but you hinged on that for some reason. It absolutely depends, just like do guns kill people or do people kill people?

Edited November 23, 2015 by DailyHalo

[ukyah]

What do you want me too say? I've answered the questions and you don't like the answers, so you add a little stipulation to it. For example, the Royals were in the ALDS and also one of the best teams in the league but you hinged on that for some reason. It absolutely depends, just like do guns kill people or do people kill people?

 

 

what stipulation have i added? that we would prefer to compare the angels to playoff rosters? is that really a stipulation you care to debate? do you really want to even discuss the merits of comparing the angels bottom 3rd to the rays, mariners, red sox, tigers, etc.? because if you did, your proposed bottom 3rd still would shake out badly by comparison. 

 

i have no idea what you're talking about when you mention guns. honestly, in all your posts, you're putting two halves of different ideas together and calling it one thought.

 

for example, your second most recent post. you said, "You can "give up"  the BOTTOM third (although I don't feel we would be), as long as you have adequate strength in other areas. I.E, a top rotation arm would fit the bill."

 

having a weak hitting bottom 3rd isn't balanced out by other areas. if you have an ace on the mound, he hasn't improved the offense from the bottom 3rd. it's not only a fallacy, but it's also incongruous.

 

you completely ignored when i called out your argument being a straw man because you didn't even wrap your mind around it. instead you called me a little school girl.