AngelsWin.com Today: Exploring an Angels-Giancarlo Stanton trade

[floplag]

26 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I don't view you as mentally disciplined and mentally organized enough to have a discussion of any value. . .

Add edit:  no intention to insult, at all, just saying you seem wholly committed to a point emotionally and can't seem to back it up with any reliable logic with an objective, fair look.

Well, opinions are like assholes.... please do us both a favor and ignore my posts if that's the case rather than hiding insults behind this nonsense.  

[Dtwncbad]

3 minutes ago, floplag said:

Well, opinions are like assholes.... please do us both a favor and ignore my posts if that's the case rather than hiding insults behind this nonsense.  

I didn't call you names and I specifically was careful to make sure you knew I had no intention of insulting.  Emotions in being a fan is normal.  Nothing wrong with it.  It just doesn't work that great in a discussion on a message board that kinda relies on some objectivity to make a good points.

Hiding behind?  That's sort of funny since my point to you is you have committed emotions you want to express "hiding behind" basically fake logic due to a lack of objectivity.

Do you a favor?  I did.  You just didn't see it objectively.  Irony.

[Dtwncbad]

They probably didn't call because they are stupid and are not committed to winning.  Or they called but it wasn't a serious call because they are stupid and lazy and are not committed to winning.  Or they called and were serious but their proposal was probably stupid and wouldn't help the team.  Or they called and were serious and made an offer and the Marlins made an offer that was great but the Angels were too stupid to see a good deal and they passed on it.

They are dumb to not bring in elite players but they are also dumb for bringing in Simmons since they have not brought in more elite players.

They are dumb for spending big in free agency but they are also dumb for not spending in free agency.

Do I have this about right, approximately?

[NorCal Halo]

45 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I don't view you as mentally disciplined and mentally organized enough to have a discussion of any value. . .

Add edit:  no intention to insult, at all, just saying you seem wholly committed to a point emotionally and can't seem to back it up with any reliable logic with an objective, fair look.

So says the logician that employs an ad hominem.

[Dtwncbad]

5 minutes ago, NorCal Halo said:

So says the logician that employs an ad hominem.

100% incorrect.  I have literally nothing against this guy.  An observation that emotion is driving his positions and logic is passive in his arguments is an analysis of the validity of his arguments, not an insult to him.

Unless he chooses to take it that way.  I have said clearly multiple times now my intentions.

This may be a catch 22.  If I am right that his emotions are driving, then he very well may not be able to see any of what I am saying here objectively.

It's all good.  He isn't optimistic.  OK.  That either comes from emotion which is fine or analysis which is fine or part of each, also fine.

The point is if it comes from emotion, a debate on facts is running in circles.

If someone saw that in me on a message board, I would want to know.

 

[floplag]

36 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I didn't call you names and I specifically was careful to make sure you knew I had no intention of insulting.  Emotions in being a fan is normal.  Nothing wrong with it.  It just doesn't work that great in a discussion on a message board that kinda relies on some objectivity to make a good points.

Hiding behind?  That's sort of funny since my point to you is you have committed emotions you want to express "hiding behind" basically fake logic due to a lack of objectivity.

Do you a favor?  I did.  You just didn't see it objectively.  Irony.

How do you expect that to not be insulting?  lol  
No matter, i feel ive been very consistent and clear, you disagree thats fine.  I wont lose sleep over it 

[Dtwncbad]

7 minutes ago, floplag said:

How do you expect that to not be insulting?  lol  
No matter, i feel ive been very consistent and clear, you disagree thats fine.  I wont lose sleep over it 

All cool.  I made my point too and I hope you take it at face and nothing more.

[ettin]

4 hours ago, floplag said:

Again you choose to give them credit, i wont till i see something from this regime. 

And once again you are saying they are not doing their jobs and that is just a ludicrous and untrue statement. You even use the word 'regime' like they are some 3rd world dictatorship doing whatever they want, when they want.

Flop, respectfully, you are just dead wrong about them checking in on Stanton. It is LITERALLY their job to do so and measure the teams ability, given their available resources, to potentially acquire him. Just because they don't post those conversations to AW.com to assuage our worried souls doesn't mean they aren't doing their jobs, every day, all day. Eppler is a professional baseball GM who holds his cards, as he should, close to the vest.

[floplag]

8 minutes ago, ettin said:

And once again you are saying they are not doing their jobs and that is just a ludicrous and untrue statement. You even use the word 'regime' like they are some 3rd world dictatorship doing whatever they want, when they want.

Flop, respectfully, you are just dead wrong about them checking in on Stanton. It is LITERALLY their job to do so and measure the teams ability, given their available resources, to potentially acquire him. Just because they don't post those conversations to AW.com to assuage our worried souls doesn't mean they aren't doing their jobs, every day, all day. Eppler is a professional baseball GM who holds his cards, as he should, close to the vest.

You cannot know that though, you assume they did all these things just as i so.   You dont know what was said or done or what the plan is anymore than i do. The bottom line is that nothing happened and we have dropped out of the conversation.  That we know to be fact.   Why is my assumption so wrong and yours so right?

The difference is you chose to give them credit for whatever they may or may not have done without seeing it or knowing what that entails, and i do not.  I criticize them for what is in my view wasting this seasons opportunity.   How that makes me so wrong i don't get, but you're welcome to your opinion.   I'm not insulted by opposing views. 

As for my use of regime, thats nit picky, the expression has been used many times in a completely benign manner on the forum. 

Look i'm sorry that it irks many of you that i wont unconditionally give this front office all the credit in the world for some master plan but until i see convert into the product on the field it it isn't going to change.  

[ettin]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

You cannot know that though, you assume they did all these things just as i so.   You dont know what was said or done or what the plan is anymore than i do. The bottom line is that nothing happened and we have dropped out of the conversation.  That we know to be fact.   Why is my assumption so wrong and yours so right?

The difference is you chose to give them credit for whatever they may or may not have done without seeing it or knowing what that entails, and i do not.  I criticize them for what is in my view wasting this seasons opportunity.   How that makes me so wrong i don't get, but you're welcome to your opinion.   I'm not insulted by opposing views. 

As for my use of regime, thats nit picky, the expression has been used many times in a completely benign manner on the forum. 

Look i'm sorry that it irks many of you that i wont unconditionally give this front office all the credit in the world for some master plan but until i see convert into the product on the field it it isn't going to change.  

How do you know this is the case and that it is a fact. Read your first two sentences.

As far as the rest I'm done trying to convince you that Eppler knows what his job is. You clearly love turning this into a Lifetime conversation of getting the last word in so feel free I'm done with trying to convince you of the obvious. Oh did you ever consider that the Angels offered and the Marlins decided NOT to sell him since they are only about 4.5 games out of their WC? Never mind don't answer that, let's just move on.

[floplag]

Just now, ettin said:

How do you know this is the case and that it is a fact. Read your first two sentences.

As far as the rest I'm done trying to convince you that Eppler knows what his job is. You clearly love turning this into a Lifetime conversation of getting the last word in so feel free I'm done with trying to convince you of the obvious. Oh did you ever consider that the Angels offered and the Marlins decided NOT to sell him since they are only about 4.5 games out of their WC? Never mind don't answer that, let's just move on.

The early talk had us involved, the most recent doesnt, its not hard to make that leap. 
Love the last word accusations as you keep asking questions and justifying though.. say what you will after this, its all yours. 

[Jeff Fletcher]

26 minutes ago, ettin said:

And once again you are saying they are not doing their jobs and that is just a ludicrous and untrue statement. You even use the word 'regime' like they are some 3rd world dictatorship doing whatever they want, when they want.

Flop, respectfully, you are just dead wrong about them checking in on Stanton. It is LITERALLY their job to do so and measure the teams ability, given their available resources, to potentially acquire him. Just because they don't post those conversations to AW.com to assuage our worried souls doesn't mean they aren't doing their jobs, every day, all day. Eppler is a professional baseball GM who holds his cards, as he should, close to the vest.

 

9 minutes ago, floplag said:

You cannot know that though, you assume they did all these things just as i so.   You dont know what was said or done or what the plan is anymore than i do. The bottom line is that nothing happened and we have dropped out of the conversation.  That we know to be fact. 

Until you see Billy Eppler or some other high ranking official quoted on the record describing what the Angels did or are doing as it relates to Stanton, just assume you know nothing. 

(This is only in response the second quote. I couldn't get rid of the first one on my phone.)

[nate]

I hope the Angels do not acquire Stanton.  Too inconsistent to be worth the $ he is guaranteed.  We have already been down that road.

[Jeff Fletcher]

Here's a story to illustrate what I'm talking about....

A GM I once covered was trying to trade a player at the winter meetings. He wasn't getting as much interest as he'd like. So he goes on TV and said "I've talked to 10 teams today about Player X." That was basically a lie. He may have said that player's name at some point in the conversation but in no way were 10 teams actually interested in him. 

Sure enough, though, soon after he said that the offers improved from the 2-3 teams who were interested. The player was traded and the deal turned out to be pretty good. 

The point is, any baseball exec who tells anyone in the media anything is doing so strictly to help his own situation, so you can't necessarily believe any of it. 

[Angel Oracle]

3 minutes ago, nate said:

I hope the Angels do not acquire Stanton.  Too inconsistent to be worth the $ he is guaranteed.  We have already been down that road.

And too many years with too many games missed? 

[Dtwncbad]

When have the Angels been down the road of acquiring a 60 homer hitter at age 27 going INTO his power prime?

When was that?  I missed it.

[beatlesrule]

They almost certainly did inquire about Stanton but obviously did not want to commit to taking on that contract since they don't have much in the way of prospects to be able to get the Marlins to pay for some of it.  Like it's been stated, no one really knows for sure if the Marlins are serious about trading him or what they expect or want in return but as of today, he is not an Angel and there have been no indications to expect otherwise before the Aug 31st deadline.

[Dick B Back]

43 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

 

Until you see Billy Eppler or some other high ranking official quoted on the record describing what the Angels did or are doing as it relates to Stanton, just assume you know nothing. 

(This is only in response the second quote. I couldn't get rid of the first one on my phone.)

I'm with you... I always assume I know nothing and that's not just about baseball.

[Dtwncbad]

8 minutes ago, beatlesrule said:

They almost certainly did inquire about Stanton but obviously did not want to commit to taking on that contract since they don't have much in the way of prospects to be able to get the Marlins to pay for some of it.  Like it's been stated, no one really knows for sure if the Marlins are serious about trading him or what they expect or want in return but as of today, he is not an Angel and there have been no indications to expect otherwise before the Aug 31st deadline.

We have no idea if they are miles apart and not even talking now, or if they are inches from a deal here as the 31st is on top of us.

I view it like fishing.  If you don't get to be on the boat and watch the fishing you don't know what they are doing and what gets caught until the boat comes in.

We are not on the boat.  Even if you go Marlin fishing it's long odds to land one.  (Funny mentioning Marlin)

If the boat comes back with no Marlin that doesn"t mean they didn't try.  Or maybe they tried and did everything right but the fish just didn't bite.

We don't know.  They can tell is things or tell the media things but the reality is there are always hundreds of details we never know.

I would find it very hard to believe that the Angels have not fully explored this as professionals to see if and how they could acquire Stanton.

[70runner]

Ah yes, the nautical corollary...if the boat does return with the Marlin will it bump The GIDP Machine down the order...inquiring minds want to know...

[UndertheHalo]

I think the thing everyone should think about is whether adding Stanton to this group and that's it makes us a division winner.  I'm not sure that he does.  We'll need to give the massive super star contract to Trout.  The commitment that we would make to Stanton would probably cost us any other good acquisitions.  The Angels, despite being in the race (a consequence of the AL being dog shit) should not be fooled about how close they are.  We are not close but we might be able to be soon with smart moves.  We need to fill at least 3 field positions with decent players and we probably need a top of the rotation sort pitcher. 

Stanton is a huge gamble for us. 

[ten ocho recon scout]

Im a huge stsnton fan, and would love to have him. But i also wonder if this year of his is a bit flukey. Nothing to back that up, but say we took on all the money ans gavw up talent, and he becomes "only" a 35 home run type guy with the league switch....are we happy with the trade?

Again, if by sime miracle we got him id be excatstic. But its worth pondering. (And i dont think hes getting moved).

[AngelsLakersFan]

6 hours ago, UndertheHalo said:

I think the thing everyone should think about is whether adding Stanton to this group and that's it makes us a division winner.  I'm not sure that he does.  We'll need to give the massive super star contract to Trout.  The commitment that we would make to Stanton would probably cost us any other good acquisitions.  The Angels, despite being in the race (a consequence of the AL being dog shit) should not be fooled about how close they are.  We are not close but we might be able to be soon with smart moves.  We need to fill at least 3 field positions with decent players and we probably need a top of the rotation sort pitcher. 

Stanton is a huge gamble for us. 

Who else are we getting? The money we could allocate to Stanton is not going to get us a bunch of good players. Maybe we could have Darvish instead, or maybe we could use the money to re-up / bring a group of guys like Escobar, Maybin and Nolasco, who I think are making about $25 mill this year combined.

 

 

[UndertheHalo]

20 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

Who else are we getting? The money we could allocate to Stanton is not going to get us a bunch of good players. Maybe we could have Darvish instead, or maybe we could use the money to re-up / bring a group of guys like Escobar, Maybin and Nolasco, who I think are making about $25 mill this year combined.

 

 

Some of you are so inpatient.  This semi rebuild was always going to take a few years for Eppler.   2018/2019 is chock full of really nice FA opportunities.  Maybe we get 1 guy this offseason and more the next year. 

Im not even opposed to Stanton.  He's a great player with monster power.  The injury stuff concerns me a lot more then the contract.  I'm just saying.  It's not Stanton or bust.  He's a pretty big gamble and probably not even our best . For all we know maybe Harper is into the idea of coming here to play with Trout. 

People on here are all spazzed out about one report in August from Bob Nightengale that doesn't mention us. It's silly man. 

Edited August 30, 2017 by UndertheHalo

[UndertheHalo]

And I'll say it.  Maybe the best thing for the Angels to do is give Revere/Maybin 1 year deals and maybe only do one big contract this off season.  Maybe the best play is to save our bullets for the next offseason.