Clickbait garbage from Bleacher Report re: Trout extension

[nate]

I read three paragraphs before I realized it was BR, what crap.  Have fun.

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2807776-angels-offseason-bust-could-push-mike-trout-to-bolt-for-500m-fa-payday?utm_source=cnn.com&utm_campaign=editorial&utm_medium=referral

[Dtwncbad]

That really was a lame article.  Anyone on this bord could have cranked that out in 3 minutes in their sleep.

[Angel Oracle]

Until those Rip Van Winkles (aka Harper and Machado) sign somewhere, nothing is happening.

[floplag]

What was so lame or crap about it i wonder?  Are we bashing how it was written, the source,  or what it says?   

[UndertheHalo]

We should have a challenge.  Who can resist posting these DURRR MIKEY TROUT WILL ABANDON THE ANGELS articles the longest. 

I am betting on myself. 

Edited November 28, 2018 by UndertheHalo

[fan_since79]

I ran into Mike at a Roger Dunn Golf Shop and asked him about it. He chased me out of the store.

[Tank]

i once saw mike at a jewelry store with his wife at south coast plaza.

[floplag]

1 hour ago, UndertheHalo said:

We should have a challenge.  Who can resist posting these DURRR MIKEY TROUT WILL ABANDON THE ANGELS articles the longest. 

I am betting on myself. 

the subject isnt going away till the ink is dry   

[Taylor]

3 hours ago, floplag said:

What was so lame or crap about it i wonder?  Are we bashing how it was written, the source,  or what it says?   

You're always the first to defend these stupid, click-baity articles.

[floplag]

4 minutes ago, Taylor said:

You're always the first to defend these stupid, click-baity articles.

I was curious why it was being blasted, not defending it. 
But anything that contradicts the Trout will be here for life no matter what dialog is obvious crap, lol 

[nate]

3 hours ago, Tank said:

i once saw mike at a jewelry store with his wife at south coast plaza.

Before or after you two had lunch?

[Tank]

3 minutes ago, nate said:

Before or after you two had lunch?

before! not as many people there that early on a tuesday.

[Stradling]

5 hours ago, floplag said:

I was curious why it was being blasted, not defending it. 
But anything that contradicts the Trout will be here for life no matter what dialog is obvious crap, lol 

Let me know when someone says a bleacher report article is legit.  I don’t think anyone here has ever spoken highly of BR.  So it has nothing to do with the topic and everything to do with the quality of the website.  It is the equivalent of our writers here writing an op ed article and expecting people to believe it as fact.  

[WeatherWonk]

8 hours ago, Stradling said:

Let me know when someone says a bleacher report article is legit.  I don’t think anyone here has ever spoken highly of BR.  So it has nothing to do with the topic and everything to do with the quality of the website.  It is the equivalent of our writers here writing an op ed article and expecting people to believe it as fact.  

Why not make your own decision about the legitimacy of the article on its own merits? Don't follow the herd. My experience is you are an intelligent, reasoning reader here, Strad. 

The topic is speculative. That's the nature of wondering what the Angels will do in the off-season and what Trout's motivations are. Both sides are playing it close to the vest. Trout is sticking with "I wanna win" and Eppler is, well, nowhere to be found, apparently, with regards to the press.

Based on Trout's past statements, especially this one included from Bill Shaikin of the LA Times, it is indicative of a very strong motivation to be with a winning organization.

The article also rings true, if what Jeff Fletcher says is true about the Angels having around 30 million to spend in some combination of trade salaries and/or free agent salaries. It addresses the potential for FA signings.

I dont see how you can fault this article, really, and those criticizing it aren't giving their reasons, except the usual anti-BR bias and "clickbait" accusations. There is a thinly-veiled animosity here to most ANY site that dares to compete with Angels Win for Angel information.

Maybe there is little new information there, especially if you read AngelsWin regularly. But the majority of BR readers probably don't read AW or the LA beat writers regularly. So, this is legitimate material for their site, given the popularity of Mike Trout.

Maybe a more interesting question is why an AW moderator would post this article he deems as somehow beneath reading (because it is BR) and dismisses it as "clickbait"?

An attempt to piggy-back on the "clickbait" for Angels Win metrics?

*******************

BTW, Strad, I DID have my first double-double in many years (with cheese and grilled onions, of course!) on my way south to Mexico, in Lake Havasu. While it is not the best burger patty, the best bun or the best cheese I have ever had on a burger, there is something very unique about that combination that makes In-N-out a winner. No secret there.

But just what is the sauce? Your version of Russian/T.I. dressing? I am a confirmed mustard/mayo combo guy, from the days I first had it at Knowlwood Burger. Are they still around in SoCal? Not a large chain, that's for sure.

I still say In-N-Out is MISSING OUT, if you don't get cracking in the exploding Boise area. It's all Californians fueling the growth. 80% of people moving to Idaho are from California, according to one recent study that was released. I couldnt believe it........until I started talking to people in bars, on the pickleball courts, on the rivers. Are you established  in Portland, Or? That's about eight hours from the Boise market. You could supply it from there.

[floplag]

10 hours ago, Stradling said:

Let me know when someone says a bleacher report article is legit.  I don’t think anyone here has ever spoken highly of BR.  So it has nothing to do with the topic and everything to do with the quality of the website.  It is the equivalent of our writers here writing an op ed article and expecting people to believe it as fact.  

I dont think it was presented as factual, it was basically an op-ed and was presented as such.  It wasnt earth shattering, there was nothing new, but it did sum up the various possibilities.  
I realize it echoed 2 things that dont fit the most common Trout isnt leaving dialog, his comments on wanting to win and how they are opposed to our current direction, which apparently automatically qualifies it as clickbait trash. 

[yk9001]

This organization has a terrible reputation for being boring and uninteresting.  Can't put lipstick on a pig.

[DCAngelsFan]

46 minutes ago, floplag said:

I dont think it was presented as factual, it was basically an op-ed and was presented as such.  It wasnt earth shattering, there was nothing new, but it did sum up the various possibilities.  
 

3

Actually, the quality of writing has improved - it no longer reads like a not-very-gifted high school student wrote it.  So, yay.  

But it's pretty much the same article written every week by *someone* about Trout - and it's not about "him", his new wife and life, his achievements, what he's doing on his break - nope, it's the same article, repeatedly - "he's gonna leave", "he should leave", and/or "The Angels should trade him to the team I cover."

Every damn week. 

If not more often.

The same article.

There was one last week, there'll be another next. 

It's Ground Hog day, and it's irritating.  

So, it's "clickbait" b/c there's absolutely no new information, just a regurgitation of what every baseball writer on the planet has already written - twice - but by putting a headline on it about Trout and leaving, they know they'll get "clicks."  It's practically plagiarism.  

It's like those "He bought an old house - and what he found in the attic will amaze you" headlines.

(I'll save you the trouble - he found Mike Trout in his attic.)

[floplag]

Just now, DCAngelsFan said:

Actually, the quality of writing has improved - it no longer reads like a not-very-gifted high school student wrote it.  So, yay.  

But it's pretty much the same article written every week by *someone* about Trout - and it's not about "him", his new wife and life, his achievements, what he's doing on his break - nope, it's the same article, repeatedly - "he's gonna leave", "he should leave", and/or "The Angels should trade him to the team I cover."

Every damn week. 

If not more often.

The same article.

There was one last week, there'll be another next. 

It's Ground Hog day, and it's irritating.  

So, it's "clickbait" b/c there's absolutely no new information, just a regurgitation of what every baseball writer on the planet has already written - twice - but by putting a headline on it about Trout and leaving, they know they'll get "clicks."  It's practically plagiarism.  

It's like those "He bought an old house - and what he found in the attic will amaze you" headlines.

(I'll save you the trouble - he found Mike Trout in his attic.)

Only thats not completely true. 
It also very clearly suggested, as some here have including me, that another option was building a winner on the short term to avoid having to do that and give him a reason to stay.  

[Stradling]

If the Angels thought building a winner short term increased the odds of keeping Trout they would do it.  If they thought spending now will keep Trout later they would do it to an extent.  It would be asinine to think Eppler hasn’t talked directly to Trout about his vision.  

All this hang wringing is fan projecting of what you think you’d do in a similar situation, when the reality is you have ZERO idea what you’d do in this situation.   You have no idea if you’d choose to be loyal, or choose to be close to where you grew up.   You have no idea how close you’d feel to the team, owner and organization.  You have no idea if the idea if comfort playing here over rides the desire to go play somewhere else where atmosphere and success are unknown.   You also don’t know if you could turn down $400 million if it was offered to you two years before someone else could possibly offer you more.