Sign in to follow this  
AngelsWin.com

OC Register: Source: Stephen Strasburg, Angels had face-to-face meeting

Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

the only people kept in the dark about who's meeting with whom are the fans.  

Yeah but that’s not true. It’s widely reported who meets with whom. 
The agents make sure of this through their media darlings. It’s in the best interests of their clients. It’s how the game is played. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, RBM said:

Yeah but that’s not true. It’s widely reported who meets with whom. 
The agents make sure of this through their media darlings. It’s in the best interests of their clients. It’s how the game is played. 

This is not true at all. All teams and agents are different. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jeff Fletcher any insight into how the Angels meetings with Cole & Strasburg went? Who was there representing the Halos, if money was discussed, if the players are the Angels priorities?

We seem to only hear how the Yankees meetings went, who was there to rep them and some of what was discussed.

Is Boras leaking this stuff to the Heyman's, Passan's and Rosenthal's of the world to drive up the price or?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

This is not true at all. All teams and agents are different. 
 

So what part is not true?

The use of the adverb “widely”?

You’re not saying it doesn’t happen, are you?

Should I have substituted widely for “often” or “occasionally”?

Is your argument against the line “It’s widely reported who meets with whom” based on semantics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

@Jeff Fletcher any insight into how the Angels meetings with Cole & Strasburg went? Who was there representing the Halos, if money was discussed, if the players are the Angels priorities?

We seem to only hear how the Yankees meetings went, who was there to rep them and some of what was discussed.

Is Boras leaking this stuff to the Heyman's, Passan's and Rosenthal's of the world to drive up the price or?

I would have reported any of that if I knew it. The Angels keep it locked down pretty well, unfortunately. I try to dig up any morsels I can, but it’s not much. 
 

One of the factors is that there are a lot more writers digging for info on the Yankees than there are digging on the angels, so they are going to find out more. 
 

It could be the Yankees leaking it so their fans aren’t pissed that they aren’t trying. Or to drive up the price for the Angels, although it’s less likely they care about that. That would be more of a thing if the Red Sox were the competition. It could be Boras leaking it to drive up the price. 
 

In any case, everything anyone says to the media is done for a reason. Remember that. Also, a lot of things come from third parties who may not necessarily know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, RBM said:

So what part is not true?

The use of the adverb “widely”?

You’re not saying it doesn’t happen, are you?

Should I have substituted widely for “often” or “occasionally”?

Is your argument against the line “It’s widely reported who meets with whom” based on semantics?

I would say “sometimes it’s reported who meets with who. Most of the time it’s not.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, bloodbrother said:

Agreed. This past year was the first time he pitched over 200 innings since 2014. TJS under his belt and routinely been on the DL with shoulder/elbow issues over the years. Rather let someone else pay for his 30+ age years

Just curious - are you on the sign Cole train? Most on here are getting off hard to the idea of signing Cole for 8 years, who turns 30 next season. But those same people are wary about other pitchers in their 30s as you mentioned. I'm not following any of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

Just curious - are you on the sign Cole train? Most on here are getting off hard to the idea of signing Cole for 8 years, who turns 30 next season. But those same people are wary about other pitchers in their 30s as you mentioned. I'm not following any of it.

i haven't seen most people "getting off hard" on giving Cole 8 years. 

Where are you reading this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

Just curious - are you on the sign Cole train? Most on here are getting off hard to the idea of signing Cole for 8 years, who turns 30 next season. But those same people are wary about other pitchers in their 30s as you mentioned. I'm not following any of it.

I just don’t think Strasburg will hold up as well long term as Cole will. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lou said:

i haven't seen most people "getting off hard" on giving Cole 8 years. 

Where are you reading this?

They aren’t which is why you haven’t read it.  I think virtually everyone knows it’s going to take 7 years and a record breaking contract, and we’re good with that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Stradling said:

They aren’t which is why you haven’t read it.  I think virtually everyone knows it’s going to take 7 years and a record breaking contract, and we’re good with that.  

Which speaks to my point. When it comes to every other player people don't want to pay for their past success. With Cole everyone does. Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

Which speaks to my point. When it comes to every other player people don't want to pay for their past success. With Cole everyone does. Why?

I have no idea what you are talking about.  I mean I do, but you are asking people why other people don’t want to pay for past success.  I am pretty sure if you read the thread he answers why he doesn’t want to pay Straus and it has to do with his worry about Straus breaking down.  So when you have a player with an injury history I’d assume there is more risk of future injury.  You know all of this.  I think most of us see Cole as someone who can remain dominant for 3-4 years and then a couple of years where he is good and maybe a clunker or two at the end.  It’s called free agency, it happens.  

You will never be on board with any of this because you feel as though the team should sell off all of its major league parts and play for the future.  You thought that Trout was leaving, and when he signed his contract you felt the Angels made a mistake.  You are part of that very small percentage that believes the team should not have signed Trout to an extension.  Since this is your belief you should probably stay out of the free agent threads because you can’t really add value since you hate the direction of the team if they add free agents.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I have no idea what you are talking about.  I mean I do, but you are asking people why other people don’t want to pay for past success.  I am pretty sure if you read the thread he answers why he doesn’t want to pay Straus and it has to do with his worry about Straus breaking down.  So when you have a player with an injury history I’d assume there is more risk of future injury.  You know all of this.  I think most of us see Cole as someone who can remain dominant for 3-4 years and then a couple of years where he is good and maybe a clunker or two at the end.  It’s called free agency, it happens.  

You will never be on board with any of this because you feel as though the team should sell off all of its major league parts and play for the future.  You thought that Trout was leaving, and when he signed his contract you felt the Angels made a mistake.  You are part of that very small percentage that believes the team should not have signed Trout to an extension.  Since this is your belief you should probably stay out of the free agent threads because you can’t really add value since you hate the direction of the team if they add free agents.  

Anyone with a differing opinion than yours should stay out of the discussion. What's the point of this site then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

Anyone with a differing opinion than yours should stay out of the discussion. What's the point of this site then?

Ok, the point is to discuss things, but you don’t really want to discuss free agents you want to tell us all it is a bad idea.  It has nothing to do with my opinion, it has to do with you having zero interest to discuss it.  When it comes to free agency you are the epitome of the guy that goes into a thread and says, “who cares”.  I engaged you because you asked a question about the difference between Cole and Strasburg.  I told you and you focused on that part of my response instead of keeping the conversation going.  I will assume the rest of what I said was accurate.  Discuss away.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

Which speaks to my point. When it comes to every other player people don't want to pay for their past success. With Cole everyone does. Why?

The Angels have hit the desperation button. After a death, injuries and the lack of qualify player development in pitching they have no other choice but to buy a pitcher. Now they’re going to have to go overboard to pay for one. Looking back at Wilson, Skaggs, Heaney, Tropeano, Richards, Ohtani and a few others, none of them either through injuries or lack of talent stepped up to be a true long term Ace. Ohtani still has that potential but being a two-way player will most likely prevent that. Cole would certainly fill that role but 7 or 8 years for a 30 year old is a huge gamble for any team. 

Edited by Calzone 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Vladdylonglegs said:

And you say it's a good idea. What's the difference? We should all be free to chime in. 

Yes, we should all be able to discuss it.  Not come in tell us it is a bad idea and then leave.  So if its a bad idea, what is a good idea.  It also wouldn’t hurt to live in the reality of the Angels.  They are not going to trade Trout or Upton or Albert.  So with the team going in a certain direction, how would you improve the team?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this