Do you think Eppler will get any more pitching?

[T.G.]

I always love how those who are on the optimistic side of things are viewed as "super fans," but the pessimists look at themselves as the realistic fans. Truth is they're just pessimists, nothing more.

 

Edited January 23, 2020 by True Grich

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, True Grich said:

I always love how those who are on the optimistic side of things are viewed as "super fans," but the pessimists look at themselves as the realistic fans. Truth is they're just pessimists, nothing more.

 

100%.  Vegas has the over under at 85.5 wins.  Other publications put us as a wild card team.   But someone calling other people delusional superfans said Eppler punted on the season and he’s just being “honest”, what a fucking joke. 

[mmc]

3 minutes ago, True Grich said:

I always love how those who are on the optimistic side of things are viewed as "super fans," but the pessimists look at themselves as the realistic fans. Truth is they're just pessimists, nothing more.

 

I don’t think it’s exactly a pessimistic view when it’s shared by 90% of the baseball community

[Stradling]

Just now, mymerlincat said:

I don’t think it’s exactly a pessimistic view when it’s shared by 90% of the baseball community

Bullshit, again. 

[Stradling]

4 hours ago, mymerlincat said:

Maybe, but I think we have no shot whatsoever at getting a guy like Clevinger, Boyd, Gray, or Ray.  Ardaya said in his Q&A yesterday that the Angels value these pitchers completely differently than the selling teams, and until they come down (which is don’t foresee happening any time soon, if at all), a trade isn’t happening.  Some team who is trying to win now may overpay but it isn’t going Billy.  I fully expect if we make another trade for a starter, it’s going to be of the same quality as Dylan Bundy.

That’s not pessimistic, haha, ok.  

[Drink More Yakult]

4 hours ago, mymerlincat said:

Can't imagine Rendon is too happy with the offseason.  He said a big reason of why he signed here is because we were going all in and would be adding more big pieces to go with him.  Since then we've added Teheran, Castro, and Andriese (who I don't buy has any starter potential whatsoever).

Rendon gives his thoughts at 27:10

[failos]

4 hours ago, mymerlincat said:

Can't imagine Rendon is too happy with the offseason.  He said a big reason of why he signed here is because we were going all in and would be adding more big pieces to go with him.  Since then we've added Teheran, Castro, and Andriese (who I don't buy has any starter potential whatsoever).

Stick to what you’re good at: posting breaking news. Leave the analysis to the big boys

[Jeff Fletcher]

3 hours ago, Stradling said:

.  I absolutely don’t want a GM to makes moves out of fear of losing his job.  Moves like that are moving Marsh for Kluber.

Eppler has said clearly a few times that he operates in the best interest of the organization. Not himself. 

[Taylor]

50 minutes ago, True Grich said:

I always love how those who are on the optimistic side of things are viewed as "super fans," but the pessimists look at themselves as the realistic fans. Truth is they're just pessimists, nothing more.

Terminology used to describe optimistic Angel fans on AW:

• Polyanna Patrol
• Nutswingers
• Super Fans
• INO Execs

[Inside Pitch]

1 hour ago, mymerlincat said:

  All this talk from Arte about going on and Billy fails to deliver once again.  And of course, the same posters are making the same excuses.

So, you're on record as saying Arte gave Eppler a blank check and he could have spent more but chose not to?  I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, I'm looking for a definitive answer.  

Also what are the excuses?

[Rally Gorilla]

1 hour ago, True Grich said:

I always love how those who are on the optimistic side of things are viewed as "super fans," but the pessimists look at themselves as the realistic fans. Truth is they're just pessimists, nothing more.

 

Both optimism and pessimism are distorted world views.     But it's fun to watch optimists and pessimists argue with each other.   

[Inside Pitch]

49 minutes ago, Stradling said:

That’s not pessimistic, haha, ok.  

It depends on the context, but right now none of those guys are really available or maybe, the Angels don't seem willing/interested in meeting their team's asking prices.   Three months from now, maybe it's different.

[Inside Pitch]

2 minutes ago, Rally Gorilla said:

Both optimism and pessimism are distorted world views.     But it's fun to watch optimists and pessimists argue about things.   

It's all fun and games until the shooting begins!   Oh, wait...this isn't Dodgerswin.com

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Inside Pitch said:

It's all fun and games until the shooting begins!   Oh, wait...this isn't Dodgerswin.com

You spelled stabbing wrong.

[Inside Pitch]

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

You spelled stabbing wrong.

Why not both?

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-sep-21-me-dodgers21-story.html

[Pancake Bear]

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

100%.  Vegas has the over under at 85.5 wins.  Other publications put us as a wild card team.   But someone calling other people delusional superfans said Eppler punted on the season and he’s just being “honest”, what a fucking joke. 

 

1 hour ago, mymerlincat said:

I don’t think it’s exactly a pessimistic view when it’s shared by 90% of the baseball community

“I’ll just ignore the posts that prove me wrong. That’ll show them.”

[ukyah]

25 minutes ago, Pancake Bear said:

 

“I’ll just ignore the posts that prove me wrong. That’ll show them.”

my only contribution to this back and forth will be, i feel like you're making merlingcat's argument for him. i don't think posting the vegas total of 85.5 wins projected is an argument for the angels making the playoffs. if the angels win 86 games next year, then i think they're almost certainly watching the playoffs from their living room couches. 86 wins kind of proves his point that they didn't do enough.

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

9 hours ago, Stradling said:

I still think the best deal is Gray and one of their expensive relievers for a lesser package.  

that bears repeating

[Lou]

I still think the best deal is Gray and one of their expensive relievers for a lesser package.  

[Pancake Bear]

1 hour ago, ukyah said:

my only contribution to this back and forth will be, i feel like you're making merlingcat's argument for him. i don't think posting the vegas total of 85.5 wins projected is an argument for the angels making the playoffs. if the angels win 86 games next year, then i think they're almost certainly watching the playoffs from their living room couches. 86 wins kind of proves his point that they didn't do enough.

“90% think the Angels aren’t a playoff team”. More teams competing means less top and bottom heavy. Means upper 80’s/90 puts us in range for the playoffs. Vegas oddsmakers I saw had us over Tampa. Only team I’m certain is better is NY. Aside from that, I’m not even positive the Astros will be.

There’s roughly 4 teams in the AL who aren’t competing (SEA, KC, DET, BAL). That means 11 teams are trying to get in. Who are the teams that are so much better they’ll be blowing everyone away? Not Houston. Maybe New York. 

[Claude]

2 hours ago, Inside Pitch said:

Why not both?

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-sep-21-me-dodgers21-story.html

 

2 hours ago, Stradling said:

You spelled stabbing wrong.

 

 

[DMVol]

1 hour ago, Lou said:

I still think the best deal is Gray and one of their expensive relievers for a lesser package.  

That would make some sense....but I have the feeling that the Rockies want Marsh as part of any package....same with Tigers and Dbacks with Boyd and Ray....

[Claude]

1 hour ago, Pancake Bear said:

“90% think the Angels aren’t a playoff team”. More teams competing means less top and bottom heavy. Means upper 80’s/90 puts us in range for the playoffs. Vegas oddsmakers I saw had us over Tampa. Only team I’m certain is better is NY. Aside from that, I’m not even positive the Astros will be.

There’s roughly 4 teams in the AL who aren’t competing (SEA, KC, DET, BAL). That means 11 teams are trying to get in. Who are the teams that are so much better they’ll be blowing everyone away? Not Houston. Maybe New York. 

21. Los Angeles Angels

The Angels made big changes this offseason with the addition of Anthony Rendon and manager Joe Maddon. Both are quality additions that, when paired with the acquisitions of Dylan Bundy and Julio Teheran, should help this club finish above. 500 for the first time since 2015.

Unfortunately, it still won’t be enough to realistically fight for a playoff spot. Shohei Ohtani will be limited this season in his return from Tommy John Surgery. A rotation headlined by Teheran, Andrew Heaney and Bundy cap this as an average rotation in a best-case scenario. In an offseason rich with free-agent pitching, the Angels struck out on front-line starters.

[Second Base]

1 hour ago, Pancake Bear said:

“90% think the Angels aren’t a playoff team”. More teams competing means less top and bottom heavy. Means upper 80’s/90 puts us in range for the playoffs. Vegas oddsmakers I saw had us over Tampa. Only team I’m certain is better is NY. Aside from that, I’m not even positive the Astros will be.

There’s roughly 4 teams in the AL who aren’t competing (SEA, KC, DET, BAL). That means 11 teams are trying to get in. Who are the teams that are so much better they’ll be blowing everyone away? Not Houston. Maybe New York. 

I think you can separate the AL into four groups. Not contending. Maybe contending, probably contending and shoe in for the playoffs.

Not contending: SEA, KC, BAL, DET

Maybe contending: LAA, CLE, CWS, BOS, TEX

Probably contending: OAK, HOU, TB

Shoe in: NY, MIN

Since 5 teams are going to make it into the playoffs, and 5 teams fall into the shoe in and probably contending category, it's a pretty strong get that those are your 5 playoff teams. 

Surprises do happen. Maybe one per year at the most, like the Red Sox not being very good in 2019. So there may be a surprise in store for 2020, but even if there is, whose to say it'll be the Angels? 

Why not the Indians? Great pitching, Jose Ramirez rediscovered his stroke, they're getting Zimmer back. No team has improved more than the White Sox, and they've got a great young core of players. Boston played like crap and still won 84 games. With neutral performances they can be right there at 90. Texas got some pitching and they're getting Gallo back. And the Angels? They're healthy, they brought in Rendon and they got some back end starters, so maybe.

I'm not confident saying the Angels will make the playoffs. Not at all. Will be be better than .500? Yeah, I'm confident there. But the difference between 81 wins and 90 wins is pretty significant. If they bring in a Jon Gray to, sure, I see 90+ wins, especially if Ohtani is as good as I think he will be. 

[Glen]

9 hours ago, mulwin444 said:

I get Eppler is harshing some people's buzzes around here with the thoughts that we could have conceivably bought a pitching staff in the offseason or that a wayward GM would trade a frontline starting pitcher for a handful of Rondons but the reality is he competing against other highly competitive teams, some with deeper pockets or farms, that are trying to win as well.  Fact is, we got better, all around, he did his job without sacrificing the immediate or longterm future and still has financial flexibility to make an impact move.

I get that.  However, to me our starting staff right now isn't much better than it was last season, and at the very least it has as many question marks.  It looks like Heaney will be our #1 starter, we're hoping to get 100+ innings from Ohtani, and it just gets more questionable after that.  I hope I'm wrong, but it looks like this season could be a repeat of last season for the starters.  Terheran and Bundy could be Harvey and Cahill, or they could be a decent improvement.  Sandoval could get better, but he also could flame out.  Just so many question marks again, and we did sorta the same thing we did last offseason.