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

[UndertheHalo]

This narrative that Arte Moreno threw a hissy fit that resulted in the trade for Stripling and Pederson being nuked is completely absurd.  There is 1 point that matters. 

• WAS THE ORIGINALLY AGREED UPON DEAL STILL ON THE TABLE ?

i have seen exactly Zero reporting that the Dodgers closed their Betts deal and then came back offering the same deal that they had agreed to previously.  What appears to be the time line is as follows. 

• Dodgers are trying to get Betts and Price while staying under luxury tax threshold.  They supposedly complete 3 way trade with Red Sox and Twins concurrently.
• Dodgers agree to trade Joc Pederson and Ross Stripling (and their salaries) to Angels for Luis Rengifo and a prospect not regarded as a top prospect within the Angels organization.
• Medical issue with player in the separate Betts trade as well as other clusterfuck business causes the Red Sox to withdraw from original 3 way trade.
• Angels trade apparently placed on hold pending resolution of that other nonsense. 
   
• New trades arranged between Dodgers and Red Sox/dodgers and Twins. 
   
• apparently based on new $ dollar figures between Red Sox and Dodgers, trading Pederson and or Stripling is no longer important to the Dodgers.  
   
• originally proposed trade no longer on the table.  Arte apparently directs Angels to stop pursuing trade with Dodgers.  

based on what we know this is the time line of events.  What I see here is that the Dodgers were no longer interested in the original trade.  That has nothing to do with hissy fits.  That’s about 1 party (Not the angels) no longer wishing to pursue a trade.   It’s not incumbent on the Angels  to give up negotiating leverage and chase the Dodgers to complete a trade that they’ve already reneged on.  The original deal was off the table.  A new deal probably would have required paying up more.  Fuck. That. Noise.  
 

the teams that win never make trades that aren’t 100% to their benefit.  This is how the Angels have to operate.  Rengifo is a good trade asset that we simply do no need to trade.  Depth is leverage.  We finally have some.  Get a deal that is great for the Angels.  

[tdawg87]

If the original deal wasn't on the table, that's Eppler's job to deal with. Why is the owner stepping on his toes?

Maybe that's not what happened, but it sure as hell seems like it at this point.

[kevinb]

Nothing being reported suggests that the original deal wasn't still on the table before what is being reported that Arte nixed the deal. Why can't we just deal with what are the facts and what we know instead of playing make believe and defense. I don't know where people are calling Arte dumb or where people want Arte to be fired. Not everything needs to be defended behind the A logo. Angels had an amazing offseason with or with out the Dodger trade. But until things are being reported it really is just a guessing game. The most someone can say is I don't know maybe. Even Eppler's response was very blank statement. It basically said we didn't get close enough to notify people. Maybe that's what happened maybe he's saving face. I agree with what someone said in another thread. I don't believe any of these stories/people 100% everyone wants to save face, take everything with a grain of salt.

[UndertheHalo]

Lol another troll vote for me.  You guys are babies. 
 

and the reporting has been exactly that the Dodgers no longer needed to trade to get under the threshold and therefore didn’t want the deal any more.  But sure, keeping hating. 

[Pancake Bear]

What I saw is that the Angels pulled out early Sunday. I’ve seen no reporting at all that the Angels pulled out *because* the deal was changed. I’ve seen some that said that because the deal for the Dodgers changed with the Twins and Red Sox that their deal with the Angels might have been tweaked (that doesn’t mean they asked for more), but as far as I’ve seen the Angels had already dropped out before it got there. 

I can be pretty confident that if the Dodgers asked for more, someone would have reported that. No one has. Until that happens, this is on Arte since we know he’s the one who pulled the plug.

[UndertheHalo]

18 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

If the original deal wasn't on the table, that's Eppler's job to deal with. Why is the owner stepping on his toes?

Maybe that's not what happened, but it sure as hell seems like it at this point.

No it doesn’t dude.  Eppler can’t stop the dodgers from changing the terms.  And to allow them to do so and still get a new deal on their terms puts you into a position of negotiating weakness. 

[UndertheHalo]

What does the “dodgers no longer saw as necessary” mean to you guys ? 
 

just because the fucking idiot bow tie decided to toss the anecdote that Moreno got impatient doesn’t change the primary issues that the dodgers decided their prerogative had changed.  

Edited February 10, 2020 by UndertheHalo

[tdawg87]

1 minute ago, UndertheHalo said:

No it doesn’t dude.  Eppler can’t stop the dodgers from changing the terms.  And to allow them to do so and still get a new deal on their terms puts you into a position of negotiating weakness. 

Where are you getting that it's the Dodgers that changed the terms? I haven't heard that.

Maybe that's true. But my point still stands that Eppler is the man to deal with it at that point. Maybe he did. But reports are saying it was Arte who pulled out. 

[UndertheHalo]

Just now, tdawg87 said:

Where are you getting that it's the Dodgers that changed the terms? I haven't heard that.

Maybe that's true. But my point still stands that Eppler is the man to deal with it at that point. Maybe he did. But reports are saying it was Arte who pulled out. 

All of the information about this was that the dodgers no longer thought they needed the trade.  What does that mean.  The Angels chose not to renegotiate, as is justified. 
 

You guys are treated Ross Stripling like a completely essential piece.  Let’s have some perspective about who he is and what the Angels were giving up. 

[kevinb]

1 minute ago, UndertheHalo said:

All of the information about this was that the dodgers no longer thought they needed the trade.  What does that mean.  The Angels chose not to renegotiate, as is justified. 
 

You guys are treated Ross Stripling like a completely essential piece.  Let’s have some perspective about who he is and what the Angels were giving up. 

No ones treating Stripling like an essential piece but you are treating this like Arte did something he didn't do or isn't reported doing. No one has reported the Angels and the Dodgers went back to the drawing board to renegotiate the deal. What's being reported is Arte backed out of the deal. With or with out Stripling this is a good rotation and much better than last year. But stop making things into things they aren't. 

[floplag]

This is the question.  Was it or did they want to change it.
Im actually shocked no one seems to know.

[kevinb]

Just now, floplag said:

This is the question.  Was it or did they want to change it.
Im actually shocked no one seems to know.

There is one thing that people seem to know and it's that Arte nixed the deal. Other than that no one has any information on what happened after he nixed it. 

[UndertheHalo]

Just now, Kevinb said:

No ones treating Stripling like an essential piece but you are treating this like Arte did something he didn't do or isn't reported doing. No one has reported the Angels and the Dodgers went back to the drawing board to renegotiate the deal. What's being reported is Arte backed out of the deal. With or with out Stripling this is a good rotation and much better than last year. But stop making things into things they aren't. 

No, I’m saying that Arte being frustrated isn’t the reason the trade didn’t happen.  In addition, if you use basic inference skills it’s safe to presume that the original deal was no longer on the table and that’s the reason we don’t have a trade.  This caricature of Arte, that he just got pissy and chopped off his nose in spite of his face is fucking dumb.  It doesn’t make sense.  It’s dumb. 

[T.G.]

1 minute ago, UndertheHalo said:

No, I’m saying that Arte being frustrated isn’t the reason the trade didn’t happen.  In addition, if you use basic inference skills it’s safe to presume that the original deal was no longer on the table and that’s the reason we don’t have a trade.  This caricature of Arte, that he just got pissy and chopped off his nose in spite of his face is fucking dumb.  It doesn’t make sense.  It’s dumb. 

Given his priors... it's believable. Whether or not it's actually tue is another thing - but it seems feasible based on past actions.  There's a history here. There's a reputation here.

Again... I've moved on because I don't really care, but nothing would surprise me.

[kevinb]

7 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

No, I’m saying that Arte being frustrated isn’t the reason the trade didn’t happen.  In addition, if you use basic inference skills it’s safe to presume that the original deal was no longer on the table and that’s the reason we don’t have a trade.  This caricature of Arte, that he just got pissy and chopped off his nose in spite of his face is fucking dumb.  It doesn’t make sense.  It’s dumb. 

Well you nor I have no clue why he did it. But people do things everyday in business deals that don’t make sense. Just take what is being reported as that. No ones reported deals changed. They are just stating he nixed it. Stop jumping to conclusions that aren’t there yet. There is no conspiracy against the Angels or Arte. If what’s being reported is true then oh well. He had his reasons. Anything the Angels put out will be to paint Arte and the Angels in a good light. We will never know his motivations. Until someone reports the deal changed then all we have to go on is Arte nixed it. 
 

we do know that from reports that Arte was getting frustrated by how long the deal was taking. So I mean there is something to that. But no one knows if that got the best of him and cancelled the deal. 

[tdawg87]

6 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

No, I’m saying that Arte being frustrated isn’t the reason the trade didn’t happen.  In addition, if you use basic inference skills it’s safe to presume that the original deal was no longer on the table and that’s the reason we don’t have a trade.  This caricature of Arte, that he just got pissy and chopped off his nose in spite of his face is fucking dumb.  It doesn’t make sense.  It’s dumb. 

You seem angrier than the people you proclaim to be against in this whole ordeal. 

I'm still waiting on a link that says the Dodgers altered the deal. All I've seen is Arte pulled out. 

[UndertheHalo]

18 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

What does the “dodgers no longer saw as necessary” mean to you guys ? 
 

just because the fucking idiot bow tie decided to toss the anecdote that Moreno got impatient doesn’t change the primary issues that the dodgers decided their prerogative had changed.  

 

[Angel Oracle]

As TG implies, time to move on.   ST is here tomorrow!   As for Stripling, that ship sailed.    

Here's the mantra that Ohtani, Heaney, Canning, Bundy, Teheran, Sandoval, et al will be having.   ICWT 

[tdawg87]

That isn't a link UTH. That's you quoting yourself. Where did you get that quote from originally?

[floplag]

13 minutes ago, Kevinb said:

There is one thing that people seem to know and it's that Arte nixed the deal. Other than that no one has any information on what happened after he nixed it. 

Im more interested in the before than the after.  What made him make that decision.
There is a titanic difference between him simply getting fed up and saying fuck it, versus the dodgers coming back asking for more in a revised deal since they didnt think they needed it anymore.
One im 100% ok with, the other, not so much. 

[floplag]

24 minutes ago, UndertheHalo said:

What does the “dodgers no longer saw as necessary” mean to you guys ? 
 

just because the fucking idiot bow tie decided to toss the anecdote that Moreno got impatient doesn’t change the primary issues that the dodgers decided their prerogative had changed.  

It means they may have come back and tried to alter it since it was no longer necessary.
If so then i could see why arte would shitcan it.
Bottom line we just dont know but i cannot believe a man of his success would blow up such a deal over impatience, thats literally something a 6 year old would do. 

[kevinb]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

Im more interested in the before than the after.  What made him make that decision.
There is a titanic difference between him simply getting fed up and saying fuck it, versus the dodgers coming back asking for more in a revised deal since they didnt think they needed it anymore.
One im 100% ok with, the other, not so much. 

I agree. But from reports it doesn’t look like or at the very least nothings been reported that the deal changed. And from one of the reporters Arte was getting frustrated that the deal was taking so long. So like I have said who knows. At the end of it the Angels would have been better with those three additions then with out them. 

[kevinb]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

It means they may have come back and tried to alter it since it was no longer necessary.
If so then i could see why arte would shitcan it.
Bottom line we just dont know but i cannot believe a man of his success would blow up such a deal over impatience, thats literally something a 6 year old would do. 

I’ve had deals shit canned over less than impatience before and it baffled all parties but people sometimes get really emotional about the smallest details. Never can tell what people are willing to throw away million dollar deals for people are silly doesn’t matter if your worth a billion dollars or $25. Bezos threw away how many billion dollars on an affair. People do strange things. 

[eligrba]

Sounds like Arte walked out of a dealership when the car salesman starting jerking him around.

He is a self-made billionaire.....you do not get there without developing some spidey-senses about deals.  We all should give Arte some slack after paying a shit-ton of money for trash last year.

[UndertheHalo]

12 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

That isn't a link UTH. That's you quoting yourself. Where did you get that quote from originally?

From rosenthal.  I presume you saw it.  If not here ya go.