saangels

I never said he should be taken out of the rotation!

Oh my god. First words of this post: "For the record, I would first like to make it clear that I like Jerome Williams. He definitely deserves to stay in the rotation." I simply made a case for Blanton, and said that I wouldn't be surprised if he out-pitches Williams during the second half. That's it! What "decision" sucks, MT? I never made a decision.

Like I said, I should have made the case of Blanton vs Hanson. Nevertheless, tennis, I find it difficult to compare 600 innings pitched by a starter to 283 thrown by a starter/long reliever. Out of curiosity, where are you finding these second half stats? I looked on ESPN put could only get season totals.

I completely agree, taimak. And, again, for the record: I hope Jerome stays in the rotation and keeps throwing lights out. In retrospect, tennis, you're probably right: I shouldn't have dragged him into this. This was supposed to be a pro-Joe Blanton thread. Not an anti-Jerome Williams one. If anything, like AO suggested, I should have made the case Blanton vs. Hanson.

No, you're right. But how many of those innings were the last three innings of a blowout, where half the starters were on the bench? Also, Blanton has logged over 1,500 career innings pitched as a starter. The difference in sample size is extensive, and you can't compare the numbers of a long reliever to a starter.

What do you mean "the 2nd half numbers are identical for both Blanton and Williams with Jerome having slightly better numbers"? If a guy has five major league at bats in his career and gets two hits, is he a better hitter than Pete Rose? You have to take sample size into consideration, my friend. What are Jerome's career numbers in September? How many innings pitched? And in what role--long relief? All these things make a difference.

I completely agree. I never said that we should bump Jerome from the rotation.

tennis, I think you're missing my point. I never tried to argue that Joe Blanton has out-pitched Jerome Williams to this point. I think the numbers are a pretty obvious indicator otherwise. All I'm saying is that I think Blanton could wind up surprising a lot of people and having a pretty good second half. And I'm basing this opinion off of trends and career numbers; it's not like I'm pulling this stuff out of my a$$.

Good point. I think Hanson definitely deserves a few more starts because he missed a month; but I wouldn't be surprised if Joe and/or Jerome out-pitch him for the rest of the year, or vice versa.

For the record, I would first like to make it clear that I like Jerome Williams. He definitely deserves to stay in the rotation. But I would also like to point out, for the sake of conversation, that with the exception of his first start of the season, against Baltimore, a game in which Jerome did not fare well, he has more or less pitched against a collection of some of the worst hitters in the American League. Chicago (twice), Seattle, Kansas City, and Houston. As much as Joe Blanton has sucked this year, I wouldn't be surprised if, given equal opportunity, he out-pitches Jerome from here on out. Of course, barring an injury, they won't be given equal opportunity. But nevertheless, I think it stands to reason. They're only a year apart in age, and Blanton has the more consistent career numbers. In addition, as I learned from Vin Scully the other day, Joe is a notorious "second half pitcher." His last three starts he has pitched like a completely different person. I think Vin said he's something like 16-8 in his career in September. I wouldn't be shocked. That's all I'm saying.

I don't see how he could have possibly escaped with 95% of Southern California hot on the case.

I, too, received an Amber Alert on my phone. First time it's happened.

This has proven to be an informative thread. Thanks Nate and MP. (And I'm not being sarcastic.)

For the sake of engaging in a philosophical debate by which I hope to learn about the world and other people's opinions I will happily play the liberal for you, MT. But frankly, the sooner we stop pointing the finger and playing liberal vs conservative, red vs. blue--or rather, black vs white--the sooner we can join forces, find common ground, and hopefully make some serious changes in this country. We all agree that congress is corrupt, that too much money is influencing politics, that the government is overstepping its bounds...let's start there. Gay marriage and abortion rights are minor issues in comparison to the potential totalitarian police state we are looking at down the road. My point is: I think we have a lot more in common than you might think. The more we haggle over paltry, relatively insignificant issues, the more we play into the pundits hands. p.s. remember the thread a week or so ago that asked loosely what "law" we would change, if given the option? I never answered because I couldn't decide; but now I know. It's not a law, per say, but I would do away with the labels "republican" and "democrat" and force politicians to run without labels. The way things are now people just flock one way or another like herds of cattle.

hahahah. that was great!

Hate is too strong of a word, but you're well within your rights to dislike the guy. I don't like C.J. Wilson. But I wouldn't say that I "hate" anybody on any team. I don't even hate Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens.

Congrats, Glen!

Even though we share the same alma mater, it's kinda hard for me to defend Villaraigosa. He's got scumbag written all over him.

LMAO. No, but seriously, Rand Paul and his dad are pretty cool. I don't necessarily agree with everything they have to say, but I believe that they believe in what they say--and that alone means a lot to me. They are consistent with the philosophy that they preach, and don't stumble over contradictions. More power to them.

Howie must have bulked up over the offseason or something. I don't remember ever seeing him hit an opposite field home run over the big wall in right field. Dude is straight mashing the ball right now.

I've been back!

That's because most of the Angels fans probably hadn't heard of Jim Edmonds. He was before 2002. The year our "fan base" quadrupled. I hate to say it, but--just because the Angels have more fans than the average major league franchise, it doesn't mean that those fans have a very high baseball IQ. Some of the conversations I hear at the ballpark are unbelievably idiotic. Half the crowd at Angel Stadium cries for the starting pitcher to be taken out if he gives up two runs in the first inning. Nobody has any clue about bullpen management. I tried to explain to someone once that a sinker baller usually takes an inning or so to find his groove. The guy looked at me like I'd asked him to solve the riddle of the Sphinx.

I don't care whether it's Richards or Williams--just get Blanton out of there. However, if I was the manager, and had to make a decision, I would probably put Williams into the rotation simply because he has been more consistent. Besides, Blanton can take over Williams long reliever duties, whereas Richards is more serviceable at the back end of the bullpen. Nobody wants to waste his arm in a mop up role. Blanton, on the other hand, has mop up (and washed up) written all over him.

You're absolutely correct, Adam: there are a lot of stupid people out there. Not only that, there are a lot of people with averge intelligence, who simply need to feed their families. Consequently, as a result, I think the employer has the upperhand. If history and human nature are any indication, these people in power will most likely abuse their power. See Belgium, the "capitalist paradise" of yore. No regulations. Middle class destroyed. In theory, I have no problem with anything you said. Unfortunately, whether it's big business, big government or big labor, the common element is big power, and big power is almost always abused. Even if a business owner has a good conscience, he must exploit the laborer in a free market in order to compete. How else will he keep his prices low? If you pay your workers more, more value is being transferred to the product which must be absorbed by the consumer. If business owner A tries to be a good guy, and pay his workers a fair rate, and business owner B, selling the same product, is hiring a bunch of illegal immigrants at $5 an hour, before long, business owner A is going to go out of business. So I think there should be some regulation of the market. The only question is: how much, and in what capacity? I, personally, don't really know how I feel about the minimum wage. But I do know that, if there is going to be a minimum wage, it should probably be above the poverty line.

Trading talented prospects is a two way street. I'm all for developing and holding onto the youngsters. But think how much we could have got once upon a time for Brandon Wood and Dallas McPherson. George Arias was supposed to hit 40 home runs a year back in the early 90's. These guys don't always pan out. If you have two guys who are roughly the same age and play the same position (Aybar, Kendrick, Segura), I think it's smart to trade one of them away and improve at a position with less depth. The Angels' mistake is not their over-reliance on the FA market. It's their over-reliance on older, declining players. Vlad was 27 or 28 when we signed him. He panned out great. Pujols and Hamilton are going to ruin us.