Trout/Harper

[Dtwncbad]

I know that Harper has a "different" personality, but as I think about signing Harper, I can theorize that it would really boost Trout's legendary legacy.

Trout's quiet and composed disposition is part of his greatness.  Very classy.

Imagine how much more obvious and appreciated this would be next to the hair flipping Harper.  Imagine Harper hitting behind Trout and how Trout's numbers would benefit.

Just having that additional media magnet in Harper would bring a higher level of national attention to Trout.

Some might say they don't want a media circus, but I am simply saying that bringing in Harper would be a huge net positive for the legend of Mike Trout historically.

Plus I just about freak out at the idea of:

1). Leadoff whomever

2). Ohtani

3). Trout

4). Harper

5). Upton

I mean that is bone chilling.

 

[hangin n wangin]

3 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I know that Harper has a "different" personality, but as I think about signing Harper, I can theorize that it would really boost Trout's legendary legacy.

Trout's quiet and composed disposition is part of his greatness.  Very classy.

Imagine how much more obvious and appreciated this would be next to the hair flipping Harper.  Imagine Harper hitting behind Trout and how Trout's numbers would benefit.

Just having that additional media magnet in Harper would bring a higher level of national attention to Trout.

Some might say they don't want a media circus, but I am simply saying that bringing in Harper would be a huge net positive for the legend of Mike Trout historically.

Plus I just about freak out at the idea of:

1). Leadoff whomever

2). Ohtani

3). Trout

4). Harper

5). Upton

I mean that is bone chilling.

 

Tell me about it. I would get a boner like.....everyday.

[T.G.]

Trout is already considered the best player in baseball and possibly in the history of baseball.  He doesn't need Harper to boost his "legendary legacy"

I"m a Harper fan.  I'd love to see him in Anaheim, but I know it's not going to happen.

It's not like Harper is even the second best player in baseball either... Top 20, possibly.

[Second Base]

I mean.....it worked with Mantle and Maris. 

[Dtwncbad]

I think we more hard core fans sometimes can't see the forest for the trees.  We get hung up on salary/WAR formulas and OPS+ value for the money, etc.

What we hard core fans sometimes miss entirely is the pure emotion of the less hard core fans.  And that really, really matters in terms of marketing, attendance, ratings, and ultimately building lifelong emotional attachment with fans.

Bryce Harper is a huge, huge star.  Having him would bring another large following to the team.  Trout is the greatest treat I could imagine as a 52 year old Angel fan.

But the Harper fan is probably a little bit different fan than me.

Imagine it.  Trout has already "won" the Trout/Harper debate.

The most value for both of them, the Angels, and the fans is to put them in the same uniform.

[Dtwncbad]

3 minutes ago, Second Base said:

I mean.....it worked with Mantle and Maris. 

Maris might be about half as famous if he didn't play with Mantle.

The Yankee teams of that time are more legendary with the Mantle/Maris storyline.

That additional attention to that team helps Mantle's legend.

Harper doesn't have to be the 2nd best player for the "pairing" to work.

And addressing multiple posters here in the same response, no Trout doesn't need any help to boost his legend.  But playing with Harper would.  So he goes from the greatest ever to the greatest ever that is even more famous and even more appreciated and even more talked about. . .

 

 

[Angelsfan1984]

1 minute ago, Dtwncbad said:

Maris might be about half as famous if he didn't play with Mantle.

The Yankee teams of that time are more legendary with the Mantle/Maris storyline.

That additional attention to that team helps Mantle's legend.

Harper doesn't have to be the 2nd best player for the "pairing" to work.

And addressing multiple posters here in the same response, no Trout doesn't need any help to boost his legend.  But playing with Harper would.  So he goes from the greatest ever to the greatest ever that is even more famous and even more appreciated and even more talked about. . .

 

 

Trout doesn't want to be the next Dan Marino. He wants to win. I don't think he cares who he plays with.

[eligrba]

Can't wait to see Trout and Harper play together for the Phillies.

[Blarg]

2 minutes ago, True Grich said:

It's not like Harper is even the second best player in baseball either... Top 20, possibly.

That is the crux of why teams are not jumping on the $300 million deal for him. His career is a roller coaster of inconsistency and in no way measures up to Trout. 

Bring that number down and it could be a dynamic duo but you are talking about an outfield costing in the $80-90 million per year mark. That's not payroll efficiency and would require cut backs in other positions and pitching for a very long time.

[Angelsfan1984]

Just now, Blarg said:

That is the crux of why teams are not jumping on the $300 million deal for him. His career is a roller coaster of inconsistency and in no way measures up to Trout. 

Bring that number down and it could be a dynamic duo but you are talking about an outfield costing in the $80-90 million per year mark. That's not payroll efficiency and would require cut backs in other positions and pitching for a very long time.

Aren't they already doing that?

[Inside Pitch]

17 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

I think we more hard core fans sometimes can't see the forest for the trees.  We get hung up on salary/WAR formulas and OPS+ value for the money, etc.

What we hard core fans sometimes miss entirely is the pure emotion of the less hard core fans.  And that really, really matters in terms of marketing, attendance, ratings, and ultimately building lifelong emotional attachment with fans

Those types still think Albert Pujols is still THAT Albert Pujols.... 

I'm not being argumentative, I get where you're going but they probably believe they have that covered... If anything Albert Pujols might be making easier for them not to add another guy that could grab the casual fans attention...

 

[Angelsjunky]

1 hour ago, hangin n wangin said:

Tell me about it. I would get a boner like.....everyday.

Wait, you don’t get boners every day? How old are you?

[hangin n wangin]

7 minutes ago, Angelsjunky said:

Wait, you don’t get boners every day? How old are you?

I stand here corrected....with a boner. I would get MORE boners everyday. 

[T.G.]

1 hour ago, Dtwncbad said:

I think we more hard core fans sometimes can't see the forest for the trees.  We get hung up on salary/WAR formulas and OPS+ value for the money, etc.

What we hard core fans sometimes miss entirely is the pure emotion of the less hard core fans.  And that really, really matters in terms of marketing, attendance, ratings, and ultimately building lifelong emotional attachment with fans.

Bryce Harper is a huge, huge star.  Having him would bring another large following to the team.  Trout is the greatest treat I could imagine as a 52 year old Angel fan.

But the Harper fan is probably a little bit different fan than me.

Imagine it.  Trout has already "won" the Trout/Harper debate.

The most value for both of them, the Angels, and the fans is to put them in the same uniform.

Thanks for defining who the hard core fans are.  I had no idea.  No, really.  Clearly, if you're not "hung up on salary/WAR formulas and OPS+ value for the money, etc." - you're not a hard core fan.  Got it.  Thanks again.

[Dtwncbad]

4 minutes ago, True Grich said:

Thanks for defining who the hard core fans are.  I had no idea.  No, really.  Clearly, if you're not "hung up on salary/WAR formulas and OPS+ value for the money, etc." - you're not a hard core fan.  Got it.  Thanks again.

Uh, never said that.

I thought it was clear that I was saying some types of "hard core" fans forget there are other types of "hard core" fans.

I'll tell you what.  You describe the exact kind of fan you are and I will forever agree that YOUR type of fan can exclusively be called "hard core" and you can call me whatever kind of fan you want with no argument.

Will that work?

[WeaverFever]

“I heard there was also a fued.”  - 61* 

[T.G.]

31 minutes ago, Dtwncbad said:

Uh, never said that.

I thought it was clear that I was saying some types of "hard core" fans forget there are other types of "hard core" fans.

It wasn't clear at all.  I read that is your thinking "more hard core fans" are into sabermetrics...  Implying "more" is better. To be honest, I really don't care.  Everyone appreciates baseball in different ways. Again, it doesn't really matter. I was just making a point.

[Taylor]

Harper could teach Trout how to be more of a douche.

[Taylor]

Also, if the Angels signed Harper, he'd be hitting .220 with 1 HR, 5 RBI, and a .640 OPS on May 15.

[T.G.]

3 minutes ago, Taylor said:

Also, if the Angels signed Harper, he'd be hitting .220 with 1 HR, 5 RBI, and a .640 OPS on May 15.

and it would be Scioscia's fault.

[UndertheHalo]

And think of all of money Arte could have spent on yacht fuel ! 

[Dtwncbad]

17 minutes ago, True Grich said:

It wasn't clear at all.  I read that is your thinking "more hard core fans" are into sabermetrics...  Implying "more" is better. To be honest, I really don't care.  Everyone appreciates baseball in different ways. Again, it doesn't really matter. I was just making a point.

This is why message boards sometimes suck.

I was trying to say sometimes the stat geeks FAIL to realize the value of more emotional fans.

I love stats, but I also just dig certain players with no statistical justification.

Reggie Jackson had some years better than others.  But he always was a star that drew fans and ratings and made it fun to watch a game.

It would be easy for a stat geeks to miscalculate whether Reggie was worth his contract if they FAIL to see the pure emotional value of having a high profile (even controversial) star, even if they are not having their best year.

Nothing in my post was valuing one type of fan over another.  It was the exact opposite. 

[T.G.]

So, what you're saying is Reggie Jackson is better than Bryce Harper, right?

j/k

[Lou]

I get what Dtwn is saying. I know Machado fills a need, has been more consistent and will cost less, but I'd still be more excited about signing Harper. 

Machado doesn't inspire me to go to more games. 

Harper does. 

[IEAngelsfan]

5 hours ago, hangin n wangin said:

I stand here corrected....with a boner. I would get MORE boners everyday. 

Too late to try to explain your way out of it.  That was a slip on your part that exposed the truth.

We all know now why you named yourself hangin n wangin.