Arte Moreno Speaks

[Vegas Halo Fan]

Clearly we have spent a lot of money on free agents. Just as clearly, we have not spent that money wisely. Not giving a ten-year contract to a player on the wrong side of 30 would have been a good place to start. Not many people were against signing Pujols per se, but the length of the contract and the amount of money in it (not to mention it being heavily backloaded) made it a franchise killer. Hamilton (drugs and attitude) and Wilson (injuries and underproducing) were just cherries on the turd sundae that has been our foray into free agency.

[Troll Daddy]

8 minutes ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

Clearly we have spent a lot of money on free agents. Just as clearly, we have not spent that money wisely. Not giving a ten-year contract to a player on the wrong side of 30 would have been a good place to start. Not many people were against signing Pujols per se, but the length of the contract and the amount of money in it (not to mention it being heavily backloaded) made it a franchise killer. Hamilton (drugs and attitude) and Wilson (injuries and underproducing) were just cherries on the turd sundae that has been our foray into free agency.

True but isn't this ancient news.

[Homebrewer]

8 minutes ago, Vegas Halo Fan said:

Clearly we have spent a lot of money on free agents. Just as clearly, we have not spent that money wisely. Not giving a ten-year contract to a player on the wrong side of 30 would have been a good place to start. Not many people were against signing Pujols per se, but the length of the contract and the amount of money in it (not to mention it being heavily backloaded) made it a franchise killer. Hamilton (drugs and attitude) and Wilson (injuries and underproducing) were just cherries on the turd sundae that has been our foray into free agency.

As mentioned here...Arte wasn't as concerned with the teams future successes, as he was with asses through the turnstiles. Hamilton and Pujols were moves to put bodies in seats...so was GMJ. Arte's true colors are unmistakeable now. There is no longer any doubt where his true concern lies,,,,not that there ever was...but now he has said it himself.

I'm not surprised, nor should anyone else be. 

The big winner in all of this this is Mike Scioscia...he is laughing all the way to the bank.

[Vegas Halo Fan]

Arte is a marketing guy, and those moves have marketing written all over them. Unfortunately, marketing moves don't win ballgames.

[Troll Daddy]

1 minute ago, Homebrewer said:

As mentioned here...Arte wasn't as concerned with the teams future successes, as he was with asses through the turnstiles. Hamilton and Pujols were moves to put bodies in seats...so was GMJ. Arte's true colors are unmistakeable now. There is no longer any doubt where his true concern lies,,,,not that there ever was...but now he has said it himself.

I'm not surprised, nor should anyone else be. 

The big winner in all of this this is Mike Scioscia...he is laughing all the way to the bank.

For some reason Arte thought owning a team was a business ... go figure 

[ten ocho recon scout]

To be fair, i think you have to also remember this team was kind of burned prospect wise. Howie was great, better than many on here want to remember. But he never lived up to the "batting title". Aybar was great, and napoli was great. But the woods, kotchmans, mcphersons, mathis', etc etc probably played a role in the "screw it, if we can't develop a few all stars, ill buy some" mentality. 

This team was one or two pieces away for a decent run. Sadly, they were in the pen...not in the lineup. But i think seeing us come so close and getting knocked out by the yankees and red sox (in 09 and 08), then seeing the texas renaissance probably made arte feel like a big offense would put our (at the the time) very solid pitching over the hump. 

I cant at all get behind his ownership the last two seasons. But i think the crazy spending in 11 and 12 was truly with the best intent, not a marketing scheme 

[Lou]

On August 20, 2016 at 0:56 PM, AngelsLakersFan said:

I'm just looking at long term consistency in terms of not being terrible. 

The Cards haven't won less than 70 games in a full season since 1978. The Yankees have not finished under .500 since 1992. I'm not expecting the Angels to dominate the league, but we appear to be entering a significant down period that is more representative of small market bottom dwellers, not teams with aspirations of being "Yankees of the west coast." Heck the Red Sox, with all their failures, went on a stretch from 1966 to 2012 where they didn't win less than 70 games in a full season. 

we haven't won less than 70 games in a full season since 1980. in fact, in one of the strike-shortened seasons we still won more than 70 games, something the cardinals didn't do.

[NrM]

Realistically, this is Pujols' last productive season of his career.

The Angels are going to be terrible next year. They should've committed to a rebuild/restock years ago. Not doing so has set this franchise back many years. This year and the next was supposed to be our last 2 years of contention. Shit has hit the fan sooner than anticipated, and the shit aint going anywhere for a very long time. It's some disgusting shit. Like 30 minutes after eating taco bell shit.

 

[Oz27]

3 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

Realistically, this is Pujols' last productive season of his career.

The Angels are going to be terrible next year. They should've committed to a rebuild/restock years ago. Not doing so has set this franchise back many years.

His decline from last year to this year is alarming. It's entirely possible he is sub replacement level next year.

[tdawg87]

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect him to hit 25-30 HR and 90-100 RBI next year. I know he's declining fast everywhere else but it seems he can at least be productive on the most basic level for the next couple years.

[Lou]

On August 20, 2016 at 0:51 PM, Dochalo said:

I don't understand.  Are you saying that every team allocates an equal number of resources toward that stuff?  Take a look at some of the other teams who have been winning over the same period we have.  Now take a look at the ones with good farm systems (StL, NYY, LAD).  Those teams dumped tons of money into foreign talent while having high payrolls at the major league level.  We have that kind of money as an org too.  Where were we?  

Smaller market teams don't have that luxury.  Their periods of high and low are going to be more accentuated because they can't supplement.  Their winning window's of time are way more narrow.   

We had an opportunity and we missed it.  Don't give me the 'everything is cyclical bullshit' and then compare us to tampa, cleveland and kc.  We are where we are more because we were stupid and less because of 'market forces'  

I usually agree with most of everything you post, doc. I agree that we are where we are because of some dumb moves, most of which are drafting and player development, in my opinion. However, to compare the kind of money we have to that of the dodgers and yankees is way off base. We aren't even close. They can afford annual payrolls of $220-270 million, not including luxury taxes. We cannot. We have to eat a contract like Hamilton's and it greatly damages our major league club. The dogs can waste money on guys like Crawford, who had just had shoulder surgery when they acquired him, and Kemp and not blink twice. They can afford to give a guy like Hector Olivera a $28 million signing bonus and dump him a few months later before he played an inning in the majors. Same goes for the yanks. 

We've been near the top in payroll for a while now. Remember, our tv deal didn't kick in until last year. A lot of those small market teams that have people feeling sorry for them have the money to spend, they just choose not to. They are owned by billionaires or billion dollar corporations, many who have bank accounts that dwarf that of Arte Moreno. 

[ScruffytheJanitor]

2 hours ago, Lou said:

We've been near the top in payroll for a while now. Remember, our tv deal didn't kick in until last year. A lot of those small market teams that have people feeling sorry for them have the money to spend, they just choose not to. They are owned by billionaires or billion dollar corporations, many who have bank accounts that dwarf that of Arte Moreno. 

I agree that "spending money" isn't a great argument for why we suck; Arte has paid money time and time again. The issue is that we gambled on a series of players that have either not panned out in terms of production (Pujols, Hamilton) or have produced fine but drained the farm system in the process (Greinke, Haren). 

[totdprods]

34 minutes ago, ScruffytheJanitor said:

I agree that "spending money" isn't a great argument for why we suck; Arte has paid money time and time again. The issue is that we gambled on a series of players that have either not panned out in terms of production (Pujols, Hamilton) or have produced fine but drained the farm system in the process (Greinke, Haren). 

I think the lack of international scouting and bad drafts - be it lack of first round picks or just plain bad amateur scouting - hurt us more than the Greinke/Haren trades. We really haven't been fleeced on trades that badly. We could have sold better on Napoli, and losing Segura hurts based off what he did in his first year and this year, but we really haven't been hurt too badly in that department.

[AngelsLakersFan]

13 hours ago, Lou said:

we haven't won less than 70 games in a full season since 1980. in fact, in one of the strike-shortened seasons we still won more than 70 games, something the cardinals didn't do.

You are right, we have done well as a franchise over the years despite what most long time fans would say. I would say this helps bolster my point actually. The point I'm trying to make was to counter Blarg's post stating that this was merely an unavoidable, cyclical downturn. We appear to be entering a period of significant decline as a franchise. Seasons like the one were are having now are not cyclical but rather a combination of years of mismanagement and bad luck. Moreno inherited a team with the #1 farm system in baseball, coming off of a world series championship, and 14 years later we have become the doormat on the American League, with the worst farm system in baseball. Generally well managed teams do not end up in this situation with any sort of regularity.

[Ohtaniland]

"Generally well managed teams do not end up in this situation with any sort of regularity."

 

Take away the 2014 (not built for playoffs team) and we've had a pretty bad run since 2009. Arte, Reagins, Dipoto and Scioscia all have a hand in this mess. Hopefully Eppler is taking two steps back and evaluates Dipoto's work before jumping in on every available dumpster dive.

[Stradling]

Throwing away 2014 to prove your point about the performance of the team since 2009 would be as bad as throwing away this year to prove how good they've been in recent years.  From 2010-2015 they have averaged 86 wins, not bad, not great.   

[Ohtaniland]

13 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Throwing away 2014 to prove your point about the performance of the team since 2009 would be as bad as throwing away this year to prove how good they've been in recent years.  From 2010-2015 they have averaged 86 wins, not bad, not great.   

You can't compare the the 2002-2009 teams to the 2010-2016 teams. We had some huge opportunities to win it all with Vlad and Co. We've never been a factor with Pujols and Co. The 2014 team was soft and their regular season record proved unsustainable. Vlads teams were much more exciting to watch.

[Stradling]

I didn't compare the recent teams to 2002-2009 teams.  The Pujols teams haven't been as good, it is as simple as that.  It isn't Pujols or Trout's fault, other than the fact those two didn't perform in 2014 playoffs.  It is the supporting cast and bullpen that hasn't been as good as the 2002-2009 teams.  Also the competition is probably a little better now than it was back then.  Our defense was pretty great back then as well.  

[kevinb]

I wonder do baseball players who never win the big game have similar reputations to that of golfers, basketball and football players who don't win the big one 

[Stradling]

Golfers are individuals so that doesn't apply.  In basketball it's a sport where one guy can make a huge difference.  Do people think Bonds is less great because of no WS wins?  

[kevinb]

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

Golfers are individuals so that doesn't apply.  In basketball it's a sport where one guy can make a huge difference.  Do people think Bonds is less great because of no WS wins?  

That's my question. Players in the NFL and NBA get that a lot I was curious if baseball players do? 

[Stradling]

They aren't shit on they are just referred to as the best players never to win a championship. 

[kevinb]

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

They aren't shit on they are just referred to as the best players never to win a championship. 

I didn't say they were shit on. But it was a curious thing I don't know baseball historically like some people here. It was just a question do they get talked about like Marino does or Barkley. 

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Kevinb said:

I didn't say they were shit on. But it was a curious thing I don't know baseball historically like some people here. It was just a question do they get talked about like Marino does or Barkley. 

Nah, I dont think so. 

[stormngt]

5 hours ago, Stradling said:

I didn't compare the recent teams to 2002-2009 teams.  The Pujols teams haven't been as good, it is as simple as that.  It isn't Pujols or Trout's fault, other than the fact those two didn't perform in 2014 playoffs.  It is the supporting cast and bullpen that hasn't been as good as the 2002-2009 teams.  Also the competition is probably a little better now than it was back then.  Our defense was pretty great back then as well.  

Our bull pen was lights out.  It's been the blowpen 2009.