AngelsFanSince86

1 hour ago, DCAngelsFan said:

I was operating under the assumption that they were using the quick tests - the 15-minute ID Now platform, for example.

Some labs are taking 6-8 days to return results - this isn't tenable.

The only way this can possibly work is if they can return results in minutes or hours, certainly not days - in 6 days, a carrier can infect the entire team.

 

 

The rapid results tests are very inaccurate. All testing will produce false negatives to some degree, but from what I have read it's very high on the rapid results tests. 

When I wanted to get tested I called two urgent care centers that do testing and asked if they did rapid result. They both told me they were against the rapid result because of the inaccuracy. So I'm sure that's why there opted not to use those tests.

Angels make the playoffs, Rendon becomes the first big free agent signing in a long time to not disappoint, and Adell lives up to the hype.

15 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

My point is, the Dodgers aren't the ones who got pissy and aren't happy with the deal.  I realize they want Price and Betts, but seems like they're getting screwed if they're the ones who have to "make up the difference."

Yeah I agree, but the alternative is that they don't get Betts. Maybe they just give the Sox Josiah Gray instead of Gonsolin/Downs. Gives them a player fairly equal in value to Graterol but is a SP prospect (I think).

5 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

LOL.  No.  Why would the Dodgers basically give up Gonsolin and Downs for Graterol to make this deal happen?  Am I missing something? 

That's not really accurate. Thought is that the red Sox weren't getting enough of a return. So the Dodgers would be trading Gonsolin and Downs for Graterol and the remaining difference that needs to be made up to get betts and price. I don't know too much about them all, but Graterol is a top 50 prospect so he's worth more than Gonsolin. So Downs is used to make up that difference and the difference needed to give a better return for betts

When you factor in parks Bundy hasn't been much worse than Maeda and Teheran has definitely been better. Maeda getting old and is redundant. He pushes out younger players with more upside.

2 minutes ago, GrittyVeterans said:

Maeda is quite a bit better than Bundy and probably Tehran too. Let’s be real here

Maeda as a starter: 3.95 career ERA (105 ERA+ that includes his relief pitching. Likely closer to 100 if you exclude relief). Is entering age 32 season.

Bundy: 4.67 ERA, 95 ERA+ but played on an awful team and is only going into age 27 season.

Teheran: 3.67 ERA, 110 ERA+ entering age 29 season

Unless the Red Sox specifically want one of the Angels prospects (Marsh, for example) and the dodgers will trade the Angels one of their more elite pitching prospects in order to get that product, then the Angels should stay out of it. Maeda is redundant and I don't think the Angels should have any part of that. He's in the same category as Bundy and Tehran.

I don't know why they would do that though. Seems like the red Sox want pitching so they would just want one of those dodgers pitching prospects traded directly to them.

All OF prospects

1 hour ago, Stradling said:

Nope.  But the dudes who blame him for everything truly believe they could do a better job. 

I disagree with this..I think some people are just too reactive. I haven't blamed Eppler...yet. I think/know he was put in a tough spot. However, at a certain point you are the GM and you do have the best player in the world and a greater than average budget. At some point you have to address the glaring issue and stop hoping that guys perform to their potential while having no injuries. All how you do that is your issue, not mine. 

And I just don't get the sentiment of "well if you could do the job better"... We are fans. We are the reason these guys get paid (including Eppler). We are the customer. It is our right to criticize. I don't see why, as a paying customer (specifically a loyal one), it is taboo to expect those who are in charge of putting together the on field product shouldn't be expected to come through despite the surface issues. In other words, regardless of all of the excuses we are well within right and reason to expect Eppler to be able to make something happen. That's why he's the to GM of a multi billion dollar franchise.

Meh.  I'm taking the wait and see approach, but I'm not making any excuses for Eppler.  I know if you go player by player then you can make an argument for why it didn't work out.  But at the end of the day it is Eppler's job to put together a contender.  He has had 5 offseasons to do it and there has been many excuses, most of them legitimate.  However, the time has finally come.  If the Angels do not make the postseason this year it is 100% on Eppler.  I don't want to hear about injuries and poor performance.  And I don't want to hear that I or anyone else should be the GM then.  Thats his job that he gets paid the big bucks to do.  He is supposedly an expert.  

That being said, the year still has to play out and there is plenty of offseason left as well.  The end result is all that matters and if we fall short because of pitching, that will be 100% on Eppler.  

2 hours ago, Lou said:

lol at people getting upset over trading Wilson. 

Lou, the fact that we shouldn't be upset about trading Wilson is the problem. 

He was our first round pick this past year and his overall value should be significantly more than the approximate $9M we traded him for ($12M minus what they already had given him as a signing bonus). 

My frustrations on Wilson come more from the fact they drafted him to begin with then the fact they traded him. 

I will have to reserve judgment on the money aspect until the offseason is complete. As it stands, they aren't much higher then their "real" payroll has been set at the last few years.  So on the surface it makes it look like the Cozart/Wilson trade was made specifically to stay within reason of the same budget they have had the last few seasons (same one they've said they were willing to overshoot this offseason).

At this point the only way to improve the rotation is through trade which inevitably hurts the farm. They also need to improve at catcher. So if they already traded away this year's first rounder, then have to trade away for an arm, and again for a catcher, what does that do to our farm?

Great job Eppler. Your main goal was to get pitching and you got Bundy and Tehran...and traded away your first round pick from this year to save some cash. Now the only option is to sacrifice some of the farm to upgrade pitching. 

Didn't get a solid catcher either. Unless Eppler pulls a rabbit out of a hat this is a supremely disappointing offseason. 

If he had signed Keuchel or Ryu and traded for a catcher this would be a legit contending team. Instead, in order to get both a front end arm and a catcher they have to mortgage the future. Not happy with the outlook for the team.

Back to the, "if everyone stays healthy and takes a step forward this will be a solid rotation". And "better to save the resources till next year". 

4 hours ago, Brandon said:

Yeah, same here. It is odd. You can essentially do the same things in both areas and they are maybe an hour apart. Kobe lives in Newport but played in LA. A lot of players live in either area and play in either area. SoCal as a whole seems to be a different animal and pretty similar. I think when he made that comment it reminded me of everyone that has never been to LA but has that perception from a place like Houston, where he is from.

I think it has less to do with exactly where he would live and more to do with the franchise itself. Playing for the Dodgers and playing for the Angels are two different things. Maybe he just felt there would be more pressure on him and less anonymity playing for the Dodgers. More of the "celebrity" treatment, which obviously isn't preferable for a lot of players (particularly those with a family). Whether that is a reality or just his perception, I'm not sure. He's supposed to be a pretty low key guy.

12 hours ago, ten ocho recon scout said:

Not sure if anyone can still say arte is "cheap".

He ate like 75 mill on hamilton. And in the last 12 months, bought the stadium, gave trout the richest contract in sports history, extended upton, and gave rendon over 200 mill, after offering cole 300.

I doubt he.... was too cheap to eat 12 mill.

12 hours ago, Lou said:

and with that, everyone should shut tf up 

9 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

You forgot to mention he was too cheap to go 8 years on Rendon.

Yeah, that was kind of my point though.  I don't really think it was because he is cheap so they were willing to trade a highly valued prospect just to save $12M.

The main reason has to be that they didn't value Wilson nearly as much as they did on draft day.  And that, to me, is an issue regardless of what they do the rest of the offseason.  It seems incredible to me that you could value someone enough to take them with your first round pick and after 46 games realize what everyone else seemed to already know (since most of what I read at the time was that they reached for him).  

This is pretty much how I have felt from the beginning.  I know at the end of the day I will never know the whole story, but this is how I see it:

1) Arte is too cheap to take a 12M hit for one year and just release Cozart.

2) Their scouting is so inept that they took a guy as their first round pick and then 46 games later decided he actually isn't that great.

I just don't see how that trade doesn't have a bad look to it no matter how you swing it.  It's most likely that they just don't value Wilson that highly and are trying to capitalize on his 1st round status (I believe someone else has mentioned that here).  The problem with that is the fact that they literally just drafted him.  He's played 46 minor league games.  Why the hell did you draft him then? And what does that say about their competence going forward?

Edit:  I wanted to point out that my point is independent of everything else.  Regardless of what they do this offseason I don't see how this was necessary.  And if it was, as I have stated, it just looks bad on their scouting and drafting competency.

4 hours ago, SoPas Angel said:

Intellectually, I know it might be beneficial to lose every game once you've been eliminated from postseason contention. I tell myself that losing will yield a better draft pick. 

But then first pitch comes and I want the Angels to win. When they blow the lead - especially like yesterday against the goddamn A's - I get upset. 

Wanting the Angels to win is just too much a part of who I am for me to turn it off, even if I know I should. 

That is more or less how I feel.  I want them to get the best pick possible in the draft and so in a sense I want them to lose.  However, as long as I am tuned into the game I am cheering for them to win.    Yesterday made me shake my head, but ultimately I shrug it off since I know it actually helps us get closer to a better draft pick.  Plus I don't mind games that Angels keep themselves in and blow because the pitching sucks.  We know the pitching needs to be addressed already so as long as the pieces that we need to perform well to keep the 2020 optimism alive do well/make progress then I don't really care what the outcome of the games is.

I would go with Ryu. He's made 2 more starts and 18 more IP. His ERA+ is off the charts. How win-loss record is much better as well. I know wins are partially a team stat. To me it's more the losses than anything. The fact he only has 2 losses in 22 starts means he's basically a lock to do his part. It's either a win or the bullpen that's blowing the games. 

Scherzer is close and maybe if your were deciding which one to sign I would year FIP to steer me towards him. But on a CY decision I'm going Ryu all the way.

9 minutes ago, floplag said:

You are the master of saving shit to try to throw in peoples faces... and thank you capt obvious for the rest of that but if youre going to give Eppler the credit for progress the last few years does he not get the blame for the fallback?  I realize the farm is holy ground to some of you and any critique of it bring out the inner zealot but the fact is the fact, we fell back this year and also have mode no strides at the ML level.  We have our work cut out for us this off season if we are to be anything more than an indefinite 500 ballclub. 

I'm going to stay neutral on the main part of this conversation, but I've got to say something about this particular point. I understand that from a standings perspective, the club hasn't progressed much. However, you can't really definitively state that until the season is over. As of now they are 2 games over .500 despite dropping 5 of 7 to admittedly terrible teams. That is an improvement from last year. Despite having their best starting pitcher and reliever out for the season from Tommy John. They then tragically lost their second best pitcher.  

Going into the season, we were unsure about Calhoun. We figured Fletcher would be a solid utility player, but ultimately didn't know who would fill in for 2B and 3B long term. Cozart was a cross-your-fingers-and-hope-for-the-best guy.  Now we have seen Fletcher, Rengifo, and Thaiss come up from the farm and make an impact at the major league club. Calhoun has more or less righted the ship. On top of that, Canning has looked very solid despite his expected growing pains. 

Going into next season, the Angels no longer seem to have any real holes in their starting position players. This is a HUGE improvement over last season. The starting pitching was already an issue and this year was always a stop gap year because of the weak FA SP market and the Ohtani injury.  Going into next season the Angels need to just focus on starting pitching and maybe grab a reliever. This time last season we were talking about needing starting pitching, relievers, 2B, 3B, and RF. The amount of holes was insurmountable in just a season.

The Angels have definitely improved. They have a top 10 offense in baseball (top 5 in the AL) and they've done it mostly by adding from their farm in addition to grabbing Goodwin and LaStella.  I just don't see how you can look at this team and say they haven't improved.

2 hours ago, totdprods said:

Also in that same thread posted a couple up, with the Archer discussion. 

(Not trying to be a dick or anything, I'm just losing track of what discussions are happening where)

I should have elaborated.  The point of my post was that we don't necessarily need studs.  We need solid guys who can average a fair amount of innings (5-6 per start) and give solid production.  I just agree that Archer is a good example of someone who fits that bill.  The fact that there are people on here still criticizing him speaks to the OP's point. You can't get a sure thing without giving up a lot.  Middle rotation guys aren't sure things and that is why they are middle rotation guys and not aces.

2 hours ago, Angel Oracle said:

Archer the past 3 1/2 years has NOT been a middle of the rotation guy, though.   ERA around 4.30 and WHIP around 1.30 since 2016, and since 2018 has only averaged about 5.4 innings/start.   That's more like #4/#5, especially when factoring in 2018/2019 stats. 

4.10 ERA  and 5.9 innings/start...Archer's stats from 2016-2018 if you remove the portion with the Pirates. Not to mention his FIP and SO/9 are even better.  He has been a middle of the rotation guy outside of his time with the Pirates.  In 2018 a 4.10 ERA places him 41st in the league and 5.9 innings/start places him in the 30-40 range.  That means those stats make him one of the top #2 guys in the league if all pitchers were dispersed evenly and at worst makes him a middle of rotation guy.  I know we can't fully discount his Pirates stats, but something seems to be off with them given Cole's success after leaving as well as Glasnow's success early this season prior to getting hurt.

totdprods has had some good posts on this thread and they all point to the necessity of trading for a middle rotation type of guy.  And the OP was stating that there is always risk involved in these types of acquisitions.  There isn't one middle of the rotation pitcher that is perfect and can't be critiqued.  From what I can tell, a middle rotation guy is someone who has great stuff and has the ability to go 7 or 8 innings, but more consistently around 6.  However, is less consistent than an ace and so has more 1-3 inning games where he just isn't on and gets lit up.  These are guys like Lynn and Archer.  Guys who have 5-10 starts a year where they give up 4+ runs, including a couple 7+ runs games (as opposed to someone like Scherzer who average 3-5 of these types of games, including maybe 1 blowout).  We aren't going to trade for an ace and its expensive to sign middle rotation guys on the FA market.  You have to give them solid AAV, but also commit to them for years.  So the best is to try and trade for someone who's value may be down, but overall has proven to be a solid pitcher.  Lynn and Archer both have good stuff and both have been good throughout their entire careers outside of one year.  I like Archer because of his (lack of) injury history and because his trade value should be at an all time low.  But again, there are probably other guys that fit a similar bill and I hope the Angels can swing a deal for one of them because it will be necessary moving forward.

I know Archer was just an example, but I think he would be a great addition.  This year is really his only bad year. The 3 years prior he was averaging about 6 innings a game and his FIP suggests he was a bit better than his ERA showed (although not as dominant as he once was). He still has a SO/9 of over 10.  

And he's with the Pirates now. Remember Cole was headed in the wrong direction before being traded to the Astros and reviving his dominance. 

If Archer could pitch 6 innings a game at a 4ish ERA for 33 games a season, that would be far better than anyone on the Angels have currently and go a long way towards them being a true contender.

11 minutes ago, totdprods said:

That’s better but still not particularly good. A lot of HRs per 9, not a lot of strikeouts, and while the BB and hit numbers are better, still nothing very good.

At least the Angels are beating him up. This feels like the type of pitcher that would have owned us every time out a few years back. 

Agreed.  I wasn't really trying to make a point, just thought it would be a fun exercise to show it.  I mean, in totality without the Angels starts he has been OK.  Better than most of our pitchers.  And at $10M that's not so bad.  However, like you said, his cost is going up. And you can't really just discount his Angels starts. 

I'd say they should just not have him pitch against the Angels, but I really hope that doesn't happen.

2 hours ago, totdprods said:

This signing isn't looking so good. Harvey and Cahill might have flopped, but at least it was only one year. 

Pretty much every aspect of Kikuchi's game has sucked...
He's hittable...121 hits allowed in 107 innings (10+ hits per 9) 81 hits in 87 innings (8.4 hits/9IP)
He doesn't walk too many people, but it's still below-average...38 on the year, or 3.2 per 9 innings. 26 walks, or 2.2 walks/9IP
He gives up a lot of home runs...22 in 21 starts, almost 2 per 9 innings. 14 in 16 starts or 1.5 HR/9IP
And he doesn't really strike many out...only 79 on the year, a K/9 of 6.6  69 SO for a 7.1 SO/9IP

$10m this year, $16m next year, $17m the year after...and then a $13m player option for '22. 
As it stands right now, doubtful the Mariners will want to pick up the '22-'25 options at $16.5m per.

Adjusted in red to remove starts against Angels

Edit:  And has a 3.93 ERA against non-Angels opponents

I think it generally considered "bad form" by true fans.  It mostly bothers me unless the game is a blow out and its towards the end of the game.  Drives me nuts when its like the 3rd inning and they are doing the beach balls.  My son likes both regardless.

But I do have one friend who is definitely a big Angels fan, yet really doesn't mind either and kind of enjoys the wave for whatever reason.

Meh, shouldn't be allowed to play anymore as far as I'm concerned.  Either he did it on purpose (hit him on purpose, not injure him on purpose) or he really did it on accident in which case he is not fit to be called a professional baseball player.  Either way he's a danger on the field and shouldn't be allowed to play.  

I say this a bit tongue in cheek, but I definitely feel 2 games is not enough.  It should have been a 10 game suspension otherwise, as stated, it isn't enough to deter other players from doing it in the future.  

Angels I'm voting for are Trout, La Stella, Ohtani, and Fletcher. 

Ohtani partially because he's an Angels player, but partially because he's starting to heat up and I think he would be fun to see in the all Star game and I think by the time the game actually rolls around he will be deserving of a spot.  

Fletcher because he's awesome and does so much. Plus he's like 20th in the AL in fWAR along position players so he's definitely in the upper echelon of players so far this year.