Jeff Fletcher

I wouldn't count in the Angels trading any of the minor league deal types.
First of all, if anyone wanted them they wouldn't have signed minor league deals. Second, part of the agreement teams make when signing these guys is that if they are in the minors and someone else wants them, they release them.

The free agent compensation system existed before but instead of making it open to anyone who got a QO, it was a statistical formula that decided who came with what compensation. That was just as bad and actually more guys ended up tied to the compensation that now.
What's changed is there is now a draft slotting pool, so if you lose the pick you also lose the money. If the Angels give up the 15th pick, they also lose the $2M+ to spend on the draft.
Also, teams are now valuing draft picks more than 10 years ago because the major league salaries have gone up so much. It's more important than ever to develop some cheap talent.
Personally I don't think there's anything wrong with the system. When guys get screwed it's because of their own miscalculation of their value.
And by the way, no one has really gotten "screwed" yet. We all thought Lohse and Soriano and Bourn were victims last year but they ended up getting their deals. They just had to wait.

Did you notice the Angels have none of the top 100 prospects in baseball?
They can't get Price.
It's quality. Not quantity.
If the Rays are going to trade Price they need a pitcher back who has the upside to be a top of the rotation starter. (That's why you hear Zach Lee, Taijuan Walker, Archie Bradley). The Angels don't have that guy. No amount of adding volume to a deal changes that.

Did you notice the Angels have none of the top 100 prospects in baseball?
They can't get Price.
It's quality. Not quantity.
If the Rays are going to trade Price they need a pitcher back who has the upside to be a top of the rotation starter. (That's why you hear Zach Lee, Taijuan Walker, Archie Bradley). The Angels don't have that guy. No amount of adding volume to a deal changes that.

Someone will show up for spring training in the best shape of his life.

Someone will show up for spring training in the best shape of his life.

Green can't play defense every day in the majors at any position right now. Lindsey isn't ready. McDonald can't hit.
Kendrick is money in the bank reliable on both sides. You know exactly what you're going to get. For the Angels to take the immediate hit of losing him at 2B they'd have to definitely upgrade the rotation, not just better than what they have but better than they can get without trading Kendrick (Capuano, etc)
I just don't see that happening

Aybar is about the 13th best shortstop in the majors and he's signed for $8M a year. He's also coming off a not so good year.
The Cardinals, who were desperate for a SS, would not give up any of their starters for him.
As for Kendrick, the Angels no doubt would have preferred to trade him instead of Trumbo but no one wanted to give up a pitcher for him.
They won't get anyone who makes them better in 2014 for trading either guy. It will be either a guy who is no better than one of the FAs (Capuano, etc) or a risky prospect who isn't ready now.

Someone will show up for spring training in the best shape of his life.

Someone will show up for spring training in the best shape of his life.

Aybar is about the 13th best shortstop in the majors and he's signed for $8M a year. He's also coming off a not so good year.
The Cardinals, who were desperate for a SS, would not give up any of their starters for him.
As for Kendrick, the Angels no doubt would have preferred to trade him instead of Trumbo but no one wanted to give up a pitcher for him.
They won't get anyone who makes them better in 2014 for trading either guy. It will be either a guy who is no better than one of the FAs (Capuano, etc) or a risky prospect who isn't ready now.

Someone will show up for spring training in the best shape of his life.

Someone will show up for spring training in the best shape of his life.

Performance bonuses can't be based on things like ERA, strikeouts, wins.
 
Only playing time things like games, games finished, starts, plate appearances, innings.
 
That's why for guys who may be the closer, the performance bonus is always "games finished" and not saves.

FYI, here's a spreadsheet to show the Angels payroll against the luxury tax threshold....
 
It includes a lot of estimates, the big one of course is Trout's future salary. I'm putting him down for a $23M AAV with his extension, starting next year. If he doesn't take the money and gets a one-year deal next year, it'll be closer to $9-11M.
 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AqaE8E5tHZtndEZhbS0zbzMwWnVjRXo3T0VkMHNGd0E&single=true&gid=0&output=html

Performance bonuses can't be based on things like ERA, strikeouts, wins.
 
Only playing time things like games, games finished, starts, plate appearances, innings.
 
That's why for guys who may be the closer, the performance bonus is always "games finished" and not saves.

FYI, here's a spreadsheet to show the Angels payroll against the luxury tax threshold....
 
It includes a lot of estimates, the big one of course is Trout's future salary. I'm putting him down for a $23M AAV with his extension, starting next year. If he doesn't take the money and gets a one-year deal next year, it'll be closer to $9-11M.
 
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AqaE8E5tHZtndEZhbS0zbzMwWnVjRXo3T0VkMHNGd0E&single=true&gid=0&output=html

My guess is Dipoto talked to Tanaka's agent and said something like: "we love the guy but can't go over $x million. If he wants to play here and were in the neighborhood get back to us and we'll see what we can do."
That was their "formal offer." At that point it's up to Tanaka. If he had bigger offers from other places he'd like to play, there's no reason for the Angels to go further.
Just a guess at a very likely scenario.

My guess is Dipoto talked to Tanaka's agent and said something like: "we love the guy but can't go over $x million. If he wants to play here and were in the neighborhood get back to us and we'll see what we can do."
That was their "formal offer." At that point it's up to Tanaka. If he had bigger offers from other places he'd like to play, there's no reason for the Angels to go further.
Just a guess at a very likely scenario.

My guess is Dipoto talked to Tanaka's agent and said something like: "we love the guy but can't go over $x million. If he wants to play here and were in the neighborhood get back to us and we'll see what we can do."
That was their "formal offer." At that point it's up to Tanaka. If he had bigger offers from other places he'd like to play, there's no reason for the Angels to go further.
Just a guess at a very likely scenario.

My guess is Dipoto talked to Tanaka's agent and said something like: "we love the guy but can't go over $x million. If he wants to play here and were in the neighborhood get back to us and we'll see what we can do."
That was their "formal offer." At that point it's up to Tanaka. If he had bigger offers from other places he'd like to play, there's no reason for the Angels to go further.
Just a guess at a very likely scenario.

Don't get caught up in this whole "in" and "out" business. There isn't some board in Jerry Dipoto's office with players names and signs under them that he flips from "in" to "out."
The Angels position has not changed.
They like Tanaka. They would love to have him. It's not likely to happen because they aren't going to be the highest bidder. Period.

And one more point... The Hall of Fame decides who votes and what the criteria are. Not the BBWAA.
We are doing this because they ask us to.
If they wanted anyone else to vote, they could have invited them at any point in the last 75 years.

What bugs me is the constant focus on the few outliers.
There were 571 voters and people are griping about 5 or 6 of them.
My guesstimate...
70 percent do an awesome job and put a lot of thought into it
25 percent are old timers who go too much by the "eye" and "feel" tests for my tastes but still mostly produce thoughtful ballots
5 percent have no business voting
There are plenty of ways you could tweak it and make it better but I don't think any of them will change the end result of who gets in the HOF because the biggest issue in that respect now is PEDs, and that will be divisive no matter who votes.

I think the 75 percent rule is sufficient to limit too many people getting in.