the14thjoey

Sorry, too busy playing with my bb gun.

I posted this in the other thread... This is fine.

This is fine.

Can't play well if you don't play.

I'll throw in $22.75 to get him to stay.

I heard that guy got hit by a bus as he was dying of COVID.

Sinclair doesn't appear to be winning this battle. They bought the networks for $20 billion and at the time it was reported they netted about $1.9 billion per year. With fewer carriage deals and fewer eyeballs, that number has to be lower now, but by how much? We know content is king so will teams be willing to stay on when nobody can watch? Here are the team's deals, which I'm guessing are the network's main source of income: Angels - 20 years, $3 billion - 11 years remaining, it appears they are married to each other for the next decade unless there are clauses allowing for either side to renegotiate. The Angels rely on on the network because there aren't many other avenues to broadcast games. The Lakers channel* and the Dodgers channel are options, but would those networks be interested? Beyond that, there are creative solutions to this, but nothing like what we see happening with major sports teams today. The network relies on the Angels as they provide 6+ months of daily content in addition to "magazine" style shows, pre-game, post-game, and other specials. Clippers - deal ends next year at ~$50 million per year - The Clippers may be our first test at what happens going forward. Kings - $21 million per year, ends in 2024 Ducks - $12 million per year, ends in 2024 As it stands, three of Sinclair's deals are expiring soon and with providers not willing to pay, my wild prediction is that they will sell at a loss and the buyer will settle with providers for a reduced fee. This may have an effect on the next Angels media deal, but assuming there were no changes to the original deal and assuming the deal was linear, they're on the hook for 11 more years and $1.65 billion. Perhaps Arte Moreno buys out the network. In case you couldn't tell, all of the above is based on crappy research and based on uninformed BS. *I wonder what Spectrum's carriage deal is currently, because they may hold the cards here. If they refuse to pay for Fox Sports, that will leave Sinclair with next to nothing. Then they can swoop in and take the Clippers, Ducks, and Kings, and buyout the Angels broadcast rights.

What?

Okay, I'll stick to super cool topics like discussing baseball on a message board!

I agree with this, but you said Eppler should not get credit. Of course he should get credit along with Arte.

That's like saying Bob Iger gets credit for the financial success of the Marvel movies and not Kevin Feige.

Yeah no rational reason but ego isn't rational. It seems Arte thought the Dodgers were using the Angels as leverage of some sort and I think it's pretty obvious he doesn't like being the supporting character in someone else's movie. Never mind making the team better.

Filmed on a potato.

I was hoping for the August 18, 2000 game against the Yankees. MLB has two videos from that game, Tim Salmon breaking Brian Downing's Angels home run record of 222 (Anderson and Trout both surpassed that and Pujols is 11 away) and Mo Vaughn crushing Mariano to tie the game late. However, Darin Erstad made a game saving catch and then hit a go-ahead home run and I've been unsuccessfully looking for video of this. If anyone has this video or a link, I'd love to see it.

Maybe he was helping Angels pitching and all the pitchers were getting injured on purpose so they didn't have to cheat.

It's a strong maybe for me. I'll try to go that weekend or the following one. Since I have no friends and I'm terrible at planning, I'll probably be alone so I'll be open to getting drinks with you guys.

I was ripping Torii one game. He made a few bad plays and I was being a huge asshole. He finally looks over at me with a look of “ok, I get it” and I say to him “I love you!” Got a smile out of him.

Why did you include Pujols in a post about hitting?

I like the idea in spirit but it heavily discounts Upton's value. I think we are in a position where we can give Upton the chance to show if he still has it. He's in a position where if he wants another contract (not likely from the Angels but anywhere else) he is going to need to hit. Any difference between what Upton gives us and what Bryant would give us is probably not worth what it will cost in trade and it's likely only for one year. If Upton was dead weight, then this could work for us, but then who wants to pay $72 mil for dead weight?

In 2019, Jared Walsh and Matt Thaiss were better options. In 2018, Jose Fernandez was a better option. In 2017, Cron, Cowart, and Valbuena were better options. In 2016, Marte was a better option. None of these guys were long term solutions, but they all had better performances than Pujols in those respective seasons. I'm one of the last guys to say move on from an aging vet and I wasn't calling for him to lose his job in those years, but it would be disingenous to say we never had options. We did. This year I'm calling for him to lose his job because Rendon pushed him out. Fletcher, La Stella, Simmons, and even Rengifo were clearly better last year and most likely will be this year if given a shot.

La Stella is a better option.

This thread is going to be sick.

There's a lot do dudes in this picture and then there's my "girlfriend at the time". LOL!

If they go 40-25, then let the chips fall where they may.