Gotta turn the page..

[Glen]

The last two nights sucked donkey balls, but a win tonight and we're back on track.

[Stradling]

5 hours ago, OHTANILAND said:

Strad they needed a 3B / 1B and they shortened the RF wall. A left handed power hitting Mouse would’ve been a perfect fit and he himself said he wanted to play here. 

Yep and we signed the better allaround player.  

[Taylor]

1 hour ago, Chuckster70 said:

WE FACED THE CLEVELAND INDIANS AND BEAT THEM 2/3. We also beat the best starting pitcher in baseball in Corey Kluber. 

Quit ruining the narrative that we only played against the 2003 Tigers in the first 16 games of the season.

[Taylor]

If the Angels had signed Moustakas, they may have lost 9-1 last night instead of 9-0.

[T.G.]

Yeah, Moustakas' career .306 OBP really would have been a difference maker.

 

[T.G.]

Good point...  but he did improve significantly last season.  Maybe Moustakes will too...

[WeatherWonk]

7 hours ago, laagamer said:

Disagree with most of that. 

Well, I don't KNOW, either. Just what I suspect.

[Lou]

7 hours ago, WeatherWonk said:

THEY CANT BEAT GOOD TEAMS, CONSISTENTLY!

Coming into this season, we had a 4-1-1 series record over the last 6 series vs Boston (and a record of 26-15 since 2012).

[WeatherWonk]

3 minutes ago, Lou said:

Coming into this season, we had a 4-1-1 series record over the last 6 series vs Boston (and a record of 26-15 since 2012).

Uh, didn't Boston finish LAST in the AL East a couple of those years? 

Look at our record against teams that are > or = to .500 over the last few years. Include our vaunted 2014 year. To paraphrase a common AW analogy, we defecate the linens.

[Lou]

7 minutes ago, WeatherWonk said:

Uh, didn't Boston finish LAST in the AL East a couple of those years? 

Look at our record against teams that are > or = to .500 over the last few years. Include our vaunted 2014 year. To paraphrase a common AW analogy, we defecate the linens.

Wait, you're bashing the team as not being able to consistently beat good teams based on two losses to Boston, yet we can't use our recent history vs them to prove otherwise? Or is your definition of consistently limited to a 2-game span? 

If not, then you have characterized Boston as a bad team, so your claim needs evidence to support it. 

Edited April 20, 2018 by Lou

[WeatherWonk]

4 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

WE FACED THE CLEVELAND INDIANS AND BEAT THEM 2/3. We also beat the best starting pitcher in baseball in Corey Kluber. 

The Indians were below .500 when we faced them. They are still dead last in MLB in hitting.

In fact, Boston is the only team that we have faced that was over .500 when we faced them. Well, excluding the fact that OAK won the first game of the season and were technically above .500. That changed the next night and continues to be the case.

I think the Angels are improved this year. We just have to prove it against teams that are good. So far, we are zippo.

[WeatherWonk]

3 minutes ago, Lou said:

Wait, you're bashing the team as not being able to consistently beat good teams based on two losses to Boston, yet we can't use our recent history vs them to prove otherwise? Or is your definition of consistently limited to a 2-game span? 

I'm basing my definition on the criteria I listed above. We tend to suck against teams that are > or = to .500.

But it's early in the season. I am not as down on the Angels as many are, based on these last two games. The Red Sox are REALLY good. I never understood all these writers that were picking the Yankees in the AL EAST. The Sox have way better starters and their bullpen is almost as good.

[Lou]

13 minutes ago, WeatherWonk said:

The Indians were below .500 when we faced them. They are still dead last in MLB in hitting.

In fact, Boston is the only team that we have faced that was over .500 when we faced them. Well, excluding the fact that OAK won the first game of the season and were technically above .500. That changed the next night and continues to be the case.

I think the Angels are improved this year. We just have to prove it against teams that are good. So far, we are zippo.

And we're the only team over .500 that the Red Sox have played. 

They loaded up their record by going 11-1 vs 3 of the worst teams in MLB - TB, Miami and Baltimore.

[Lou]

32 minutes ago, WeatherWonk said:

Uh, didn't Boston finish LAST in the AL East a couple of those years? 

Look at our record against teams that are > or = to .500 over the last few years. Include our vaunted 2014 year. To paraphrase a common AW analogy, we defecate the linens.

Ok, how about going 7-6 vs Boston the last 2 years when they won AL East both seasons? 

 

[WeatherWonk]

29 minutes ago, Lou said:

And we're the only team over .500 that the Red Sox have played. 

They loaded up their record by going 11-1 vs 3 of the worst teams in MLB - TB, Miami and Baltimore.

So, you've concluded that the Red Sox are no good?

[Lou]

Just now, WeatherWonk said:

So, you've concluded that the Red Sox are no good?

Is that what you got from that post? 

[Jobu]

17 hours ago, Glen said:

The last two nights sucked donkey balls, but a win tonight and we're back on track.

NOW WHAT????

[Lou]

We do what we always do in times like this. We man up and . . . 

 

 

 

[Angel Dog and Beer]

After studying the game films and pouring over the statistical analysis, I've come to the conclusion that we just peaked too soon. 

[Lou]

lol

we're ruined for the playoffs 

[bloodbrother]

The ball was clearly not coming out of the Angels pitchers hands well, but they were exiting Boston's bats and into the stands very well. That was my big takeaway from this series

[Angelsfan1984]

37 minutes ago, Lou said:

We do what we always do in times like this. We man up and . . . 

 

 

 

This looks more like Scioscia at the olive garden when the waiter asks him if there's room for dessert.

[Ohtaniland]

What page are we on now? 

[Angelsfan1984]

3 minutes ago, OHTANILAND said:

What page are we on now? 

Chapter 61 of the 3 Lord of the Rings.

[Blarg]

The one preceding a winning streak. But you can quit reading now if you'd like to.