wopphil

This is just another example of how terrible Obama's presidency has been. He is largely to blame for allowing ISIS to proliferate, for underestimating its influence and strength, and for taking action way too slowly.

What blows my mind is that they are giving him $325m *and* an opt out clause. It seems like if you are guaranteeing that kind of money, you shouldn't have to give an opt out (which is never beneficial to a team).

I like Upton now, even though she has an oddly wide stomach. However, I don't think she is going to age well.

I think Trout will always struggle with the high pitch, but will adjust and won't strike out as much going forward. I also think a return to 30+ stolen bases is possible. His stolen base percentage this year was still great, he just didn't run as much. He has plenty of speed to steal bases at an elite clip. I would expect that Trout will settle in as a guy who goes .300/.400/.550/.950 the next 6+ years. He will be a perennial MVP candidate.

Trout is the last guy on Earth who should be in a committed relationship right now. He should be cleaning up at the Goat Hill after every home game.

Or worse. That contract is downright scary. Verlander's is horrendous too.

Pujols was substantially better as a DH than a first baseman (.943 OPS v. .731 OPS). If those numbers weren't a fluke, and the sample size is large enough to indicate they weren't, it probably makes the most sense to move him to DH full-time.

He did. Won his second MVP that year.

That is a trade that I think makes a lot of sense, but Samardzija's perceived value is so much higher than Kendrick's that it could not happen without another significant piece heading to Oakland.

I think the only pieces they might want would be Cron or Calhoun (most likely the latter). Not sure I would give up Cron for a year of Kennedy, and I don't think Calhoun would be enough to land Cashner.

All of the question marks that existed last year were answered as favorably as possible. I wouldn't bank on that happening again this year. That being said, I think we need only one decent second tier arm to markedly improve our depth.

Therein lies one of the problems with the approach. But if you just limit the analysis to Weaver and Wilson, you are still looking at about $35 mil coming off the books. If you are replacing that $35 mil with $25 for scherzer or Lester, you still have some money to play with.

I'd be ok with signing Lester or Scherzer at 6/140-150, but I suspect they will get more. Although such a deal would cause the Angels to exceed the tax threshold, there is a lot of money that will be off the books by the end of 2016 (including Weaver, Wilson, Kendrick, Aybar, Smith, and Street).

Add McBryde onto the depth chart as well. He was given a major league deal, so I presume that means they think he is 25-man roster material (or that they have to put him on the 25-man?)? And I agree with Ukyah....Grilli is a much better option than Salas.

Watch yourself, the race police are never far away.

But that being said, I am all for bringing back Grilli on the right terms.

I am guessing it does. The pen is quite full already, assuming Jepsen and Salas get tendered: Street Smith Jeppy Salas Ramos Morin Rasmus Pestano And then: Bedrosian Gott

I think they are completely done with the pen. Perhaps they make a run at a starting pitcher via free agency if the can't trade for one. I honestly would not be surprised if the only other move made is a bench depth signing. The pen and position players are set, and with Tropeano we now have six starting pitchers. Probably going to be a very quiet off-season.

Dude, I have a mountain bike you can use if need be. My son's razor scooter might even be an upgrade.

Good suggestion on Masterson, but I wouldn't guarantee him anywhere near $10 mil.

I love the Middle east. Thinking of taking my family on vacation there in a few months. I hear Syria is nice these days. Iraq too. And the Saudis and Iranians have always embraced Americans. It will be nice going somewhere that I know will treat my wife equally and where my religious views will be respected.

A comment can't be racist MT, only a person. And a person can't be racist unless he/she has sincerely held racist beliefs. Words by themselves don't have meaning. I went back and re-read my original post. Again, it seems to me that any reasonable person would not have struggled to see the comment was a joke. Most people know Indians are not considered Middle Easterners, and therefore would have understood I wasn't being serious. And you are obviously a smart person, so I struggle to believe you didn't get the joke. Instead, I think you looked for a reason to pick a fight, which I think you often do on here.

The questions were Great, and the answers were great. A far more interesting interview than what you will get out of something on am830.

I prefer Guinea Dago, if you wouldn't mind.

You know nothing about me, yet you have chosen to assume the absolute worst of me because you claim an obviously farcical comment is proof that I am "racist." So either you are picking a fight, which is possible since you like to play internet tough guy, or you are rushing to judgment about people based on short written message board comments. Either way, you are choosing to be adversarial. Again, easy to do from a computer in Montana. And for the record, I have never had a bad interaction with an Indian person. In college, one of my best friends was Indian. He is a kind, generous person, with whom I am still friends. It would be hard for me to dislike Indians after such a positive experience with my friend. But go ahead and keep calling me racist.