Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to comment and join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. If you become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

It’s not about “impatience” if the original deal wasn’t on the table anymore.


UndertheHalo

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

are you going to keep at this until you get the answer you're looking for?  

Arte pulled out.  You should do the same.  

You didn’t get my comment.  If Fletcher has the real scoop, I would love for him to report it with his own source with details.

Edited by Dtwncbad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kevinb said:

Who’s passing judgement. He’s been a great owner. People owners businessmen make mistakes to. We are all emotional beings and none of us are perfect. There is no judgment being passed. I’d reports are true which look more and more likely then it stinks but. It’s still been a great offseason. No ones disputing it. 

Mistakes sure, massive clusterfuckups, not so much.
If this trade was blown over nothing more than impatience, thats a lot more than just a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

I thought exactly like you about 8 hours ago, and then I talked to someone who definitely knows exactly what happened. And now I don't think that way any more.

I don't know what else I can tell you.

So clarify, did we actually just blow this off over irritation and impatience?  Is that what im getting here or am i misunderstanding?  Ive been praying someone would tell us the dodgers tried to change it and we didnt throw this away for nothing.
I know theres only so much you can say, but yeah, help us out here.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, floplag said:

So clarify, did we actually just blow this off over irritation and impatience?  Is that what im getting here or am i misunderstanding?  Ive been praying someone would tell us the dodgers tried to change it and we didnt throw this away for nothing.
I know theres only so much you can say, but yeah, help us out here.   

He pretty much said it. He's not going to call Arte out. But he said Arte nixed the deal.

Whatever. It's over and done with. I've lost a fuckton of respect for Arte but whining about it isn't going to change anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

He pretty much said it. He's not going to call Arte out. But he said Arte nixed the deal.

Whatever. It's over and done with. I've lost a fuckton of respect for Arte but whining about it isn't going to change anything.

Arte nixed the deal isnt the point, the point is why.
was it changed, or did he just throw a fit.
If the later he made a huge blunder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, floplag said:

Mistakes sure, massive clusterfuckups, not so much.
If this trade was blown over nothing more than impatience, thats a lot more than just a mistake.

Well per Fletcher it looks like it was. But even if it was then I don’t know if I’d consider it a massive clusterfuck. Business deals fall through all the time for reasons. He’s still a great owner and every owner has their own things to them. 

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...