ukyah

if a team acquires him, then yes, it's going to be about this years playoffs. but i don't believe any team is going to give up a serious package if they don't realistically believe they can sign him. any team that tries to acquire him is likely going to ask for a negotiation period before a trade, and that has some prospect value to the angels as well. baltimore and dbacks aren't signing any player to a 60 million per year deal. i'd be willing to believe the orioles could if they had a different owner and i just don't believe ohtani would consider baltimore. yankees obviously could do it financially, and while some believe they don't have the prospects to match up, i disagree. i think if we scored a jasson dominguez or austin wells, maybe with an oswald peraza, and some pitching. i'd think the angels did real well with some mish mash of that.

i think the only teams that will have any remotely serious discussion are the teams that can realistically expect to pay his FA rate. i would not expect more than a few teams to be in that position. giants probably, yankees, dodgers, mets. i mean who else can add a 60+ million per year player and still field a competitive roster? this has been the position with arte's unwillingness to go above the tax threshold. arte can't do it with the current salaries, and he's going to be able to do it when doubling ohtani's salary?

i'm hoping arte's "unfinished business" is finished now and he sells the team this offseason. stop throwing good money after bad, arte. you're no good at MLB ownership. go back to something you're good at.

i don't know if they would get back a greater return or not, but maybe getting back some prospects is a good idea on a likely go nowhere team. prospects pop all the time, nobody knows their future.

i'm calling 13-17 the first month, and i think i'm being optimistic.

i understand that there is a legitimate hatred for the dodgers by many angel fans, but i don't live in LA or the OC. so it's not really a part of my diet. coming from my perspective i can tell you i view ohtani playing for the mariners or the astros as the absolute two worst outcomes i could imagine. i'd take the dodgers 100 times over. giants, padres? fine. mets, yankees, red sox? whatever. it's just the big markets doing what they do and the national media getting the storylines they dream about. i can stomach all that. mariners or astros? fuck that.

don't forget griffey too.

i think they are the exact type of players that playoff hopeful teams add to help deepen their playoff roster.

i'm just happy that you found the right girl for you. do either of you have any other imaginative insights that you'd like to share?

i am not. there is one team in all of mlb that has a better than 667 winning percentage and that's the best team in baseball obviously, which is the braves at 674. the second highest winning percentage in all of mlb is the rays at 624. the angels need to be the second best team in all of baseball in the second half of the season by your calculations. not where i'd put my money.

dude, you're so damn argumentative. all i said was, i disagree. you will recover from this. i promise. would you like me to go back and pull up your post where you literally say, "the only reason..." it's not the only reason per jeff fletcher, whom we both agree is actually in the know. my opinion, which you are free to disagree with, is that arte and carpino are too self absorped and apparently dense to understand that getting nothing in return for ohtani is less than ideal. if he's so serious about signing ohtani that he's afraid he'll be locked out if he trades him, then i have several questions about that. why don't you offer him 600 million dollars yesterday, or the day before? why have you stayed below the luxury tax threshold when ohtani has repeatedly said, i want to play for a winner and the team is desperately in need of talent infusion to the major league roster? if he thinks he can sign ohtani in the FA period, then does he expect to finally blow way way past the luxury tax threshold for the next 12 years? because that's what it's going to take for ANY team that signs him to a 50 or 60+ million per year contract. no team will be able to field a winning team on paper with a single player taking up that much of a de facto salary cap without going over the tax. suddenly arte is willing to do that in perpetuity? why wasn't he willing to do that for the last 6 years with trout and ohtani?

fletcher gave you the inside scoop, so there it is.

the whole "guy who traded the best ever" thing is dumb. what's the alternative guy who couldn't even field a 500 team with two all time greats? guy who let the best player ever to leave for nothing? moreno doesn't come out good in any scenario here. best case scenario for him is he signs ohtani long term and the angels hopefully start to make the post season and do well. he'd still be the guy that wasted the majority of trout's career and the first half of ohtani's. best case scenario.

i don't believe that at all.

i'm feeling like the NL is gonna snap the 10 game streak and pull this one out.

he is leaving and they will trade him. i don't believe perry is stupid, but maybe he'll get cockblocked by carpino and moreno.

i wonder if every player on that team would just feel a sense of relief to find themselves traded. it's just got to be so damn demoralizing to be under 500 again.

i understood firing maddon, and i understood firing eppler before him, but firing minasian or nevin isn't fixing any of the angels problems. it's a case of the sickness attacking the symptoms.

i'm not advocating for this, but i wouldn't be surprised if they took someone slotted lower than 11 to sign for below slot, which may allow them to be more aggressive throughout the draft.

the white sox are 7.5 games under .500. shouldn't it be for teams that are reasonably playoff bound and would be interested in giving up significant prospects?

that lineup is garbage. angels win by 5.

it's crazy how the angels seasons continually work like a swiss clock. you can count on everything to go exactly as it did the year before and so on.

is the leadership different though? it almost was this offseason.

no, but they played in it.

it's subscribe to momentum. and there is no such thing as momentum in sports. it's a proven fallacy.