Harper vs What we actually did

[Erstad Grit]

I'd rather not have Pujols or Upton like I stated at the time and have enough money for Machado and then some. 

[Torridd]

7 hours ago, Stradling said:

Ok so we have spent about $35 million this off season on one year deals for Bour, Lucroy, LaStella, Allen, Cahill and Harvey.  So would you rather have these guys that we signed or Bryce Harper and no other moves?  Things to consider, our starting rotation would be Skaggs, Heaney, Barria, Pena and Trop.  Our 6-10 starters would be minor league guys.  Our catching duo would be Briceno and Smith.  Probably would have kept Cowart to be a utility guy.  More at bats for Albert.  Our free agents that we signed don’t have good hair.  We would have far fewer trade assets at the deadline to further build the farm that will be our future.  

Easy answer is Harper.

[Stradling]

7 minutes ago, Torridd said:

Easy answer is Harper.

That is a fair opinion.  Team would win about 75 games, top with just him added.  

[Torridd]

39 minutes ago, Stradling said:

That is a fair opinion.  Team would win about 75 games, top with just him added.  

You're probably right, but your conditions aren't realistic. If we got Harper, we would still fix the pitching.

[Stradling]

16 minutes ago, Torridd said:

You're probably right, but your conditions aren't realistic. If we got Harper, we would still fix the pitching.

Possibly.  But this off season is boring as F so I figured I would give us a discussion point.  

[zenmaster]

We would sell a whole lotta tickets but really suck. 

[2112]

On 1/19/2019 at 11:48 AM, beatlesrule said:

I am also wondering this. I haven't read anywhere about the Angels trying to trade Calhoun.

There hasn’t been much coverage at all on the Angels.  Most of the focus has been on:

The big free agents

The Yankees

And the Phillies getting Trout.