WeatherWonk

VERY outside the box.

Every owner doesnt draw 3 mil/year and have a fat TV contract and no partnerships to share it with. Just Arte, the wife and the yacht.

Same as last year? I thought sure we would follow the one-year deal edict...........

Then why is baseball trying to shorten the game and screaming bloody murder every time the Yanks and Sox play a 4 hour, 9 inning game?

People probably said that about the concept of a DH at one time. Or lowering the mound. Or banning foreign substances on a baseball by pitchers. I like the idea. Make managers think several moves ahead with their pitchers and pinch hitters.

Amazingly, I am about 500 miles and an 8 hour drive from Seattle...........yet MLB blacks out games of the Mariners on my MLB.TV subscription. Somebody needs to challenge the MLB blackout policy. Threaten them with their cushy anti-trust exemption or something. It's ridiculous. That's when I'm not in Mexico.

Agree that the NFL has ruined the excitement level at the end of a game with all the stoppages for "official" reasons. But these would do just the opposite. They would force more matchups that tend to favor offense over defense. There is no judgement call or anything to review in these two. I think people also forget that part of the reason for games being so long is stuff associated with pitching changes. I'd rather see games be longer because there was more offense produced by stringing hits together and running the bases smartly. Offense today is two Ks, a HR and a ground out. And an occasional BB. We've lost the effects of speed creating runs in baseball, and that is exciting stuff. If all teams care about are bruisers who strive for launch angle and exit velocity, we minimize the speed angle. I love the stolen base. It's an exciting play. A lost art.

One of the articles I read pointed out that baseball has the fewest come-from-behind wins of any of the major sports. And, obviously, those create a lot of excitement. The lack of these is supposedly attributable to the increase in the dominance of the relief pitcher.

Based on several news reports, Manfred apparently did propose some specific changes to baseball. This happened in January. Some of these would be graduated in over a few years. These are the most prominent. -require a relief pitcher to face at least three batters -institute the DH in the NL -reduce a team's drafting position if they don't achieve an average number of wins over a specific number of seasons -reducing the overall number of mound visits from the dugout in the course of a game. -increasing rosters to 26 and reducing the September roster size to 28. The union has also made proposals about changing service length designations. Apparently, there is nothing related to banning infield shifts. Here is one of the articles I found on it. https://nypost.com/2019/02/05/mlb-union-propose-changes-to-rules-that-could-alter-baseball/ What do you all think of these changes? Personally, I am onboard with requiring pitchers to face three batters and with instituting the DH in the NL. I also like the roster size changes. I am ambivalent on the mound visits proposal.

The ultimate #7 when I was a kid. Look at all the male baseball fans in sport coats and ties!

I have my doubts that he will be that effective, overall. But it's another relatively soft-throwing, junk lefty that always seems to give the Angels fits.

Make no mistake. He must start in RF, IMO. We have no other good alternative that has as high a ceiling. And there are 11.5 million other reasons why he will be out there.

Like I said, I dont care about the WHY. I care that it is what it is. He is statistically not performing for about 2/3 of the time, over the past TWO seasons.

Sorry, but I disagree. Irrespective of why it is occurring (direction, velocity, whatever) Calhoun has hit at .255 or below for eight of the last twelve months he has played. Five of those eight months, he hit below .172. That's an incredible hole in a lineup from a position that teams rely upon for production. Especially when he is hitting in the top five positions in the lineup, which he usually has. He has had TWO consecutive years with major droughts occurring within them.

To simply say that Kole needs to be going opposite field more, ignores the fact that the opponent is pitching him inside so much. They want to increase the odds dramatically that he hits into the shift. It's not easy hitting inside pitches to the opposite field, unless you are Tony Gwynn or Rod Carew or Wade Boggs. He probably should practice bunting towards the left side. Lots of hitters should. Time to make adjustments to the shift.

There was a famous baseball player back in the 20s that was a very good pitcher. But the problem was, he HIT so well, that his team realized that he needed to be in the everyday lineup. This could certainly happen to Ohtani. Even missing three days/week might be foolish if his bat says so. I guess we will find out this year.

Blasphemy! A Doubting Thomas among the congregation!! Repent before The Coming !!!!

Not on that list. Notice the quote box. Oh that's right, I forgot to include a "cute" image. You're mystified without one. Well, think of this as an opportunity to work on other communication skills..........

Only one team has not made it to the World Series in the last ten years. Can you name that team?

Itemize that, too, while you're at it.

............there is a stoppage in play, because of the inability to agree to a new CBA? If the players strike, are their contracts still paid by the clubs? I am not talking about pay from any union strike fund. If the owners lock the players out, are the contracts still paid? I am beginning to wonder all this because I have a sneaking suspicion (shared by others, of course) that the potential demise of the current CBA might be having an effect on signing players to long-term contracts. Maybe the owners are going short-term with the idea of employing strike breaking players.

I think I'll take these in the order that I've highlighted them............ *OK, so the Yankees are the last place in the world he would ever go because he avoids the spotlight. He's loathe to enter the largest media market in baseball.............but he somehow manages to do just fine in the SECOND largest media market in baseball? I think he can handle more than you are giving him credit for. +my point on the salary of 200/7 was an arbitrary figure to point out the difference between what these super free agents are predicted to get and what they end up getting over the last two years. Only a few months ago, Machado and Harper were shoo-ins for 30+ mil/year over 10 years. Now, it's not looking like it. But even if my arbitrary figure is too low, and you feel it will be higher, you are just reinforcing my argument further. He will get north of the 345 mil minimum from several clubs, and so can pick and choose, based on his existing lifestyle. Money may become even less of a motivator, if he's gonna be richer than God, anyway. #you really cant know if the Angels will be a winning ballclub in two years. No one can. Trout will wait it out, if winning is truly his strongest motivator. But the Angels may need to know sooner, rather than later. I cant imagine they would be happy with letting Trout walk with only a QO in return. This is a very key year. If the Angels dont make serious progress in becoming a much better team, I doubt he bases his decision on whether we are on a lengthy winning track by virtue of only one year (2020). I think we are in agreement with that, based on your third to last paragraph. And we certainly could, even if many of our players dont perform as expected/hoped for. Our record could improve simply by an overall weakening of our division.

Look at Trout's life, to this point. What, if any, indication is there that he wants to stay on the West Coast? There really is none. He spends virtually all of his time on the east coast; outside of having to "work" on the West Coast. Well, except helicoptering in for pizza on State College Blvd, of course.................. Signing the contract to buy out a few years of arb and FAgency was a no-brainer. He would have done that even if he had been playing for the Mariners or the A's or the Padres. He knew that he would still be young enough to get a really fat contract when this extension expires. He would still be in his prime. He would be able to choose the location of his liking, after this. Signs point to that being on the east coast, IMO. And, as he has said on more than one occasion, he wants to win. Now, many on AW simply dismiss this statement as nothing more than an indication of his competitiveness. "Of course he wants to win! Everyone does! Don't read too much into this! Arte will offer him so much that he can't refuse!!!" I suppose it's possible, even after factoring in the 13.3% state income tax that CA will nick him for. But he doesnt seem like a guy that motivated by money alone. Still, at the end of your career, what does one remember the most? How much money you made? "Man, I'll never forget making 34 million with the Angels in 2018! That was awesome!" No, when you know you are going to have more money than you will ever need, NO MATTER WHERE YOU END UP, you can choose a location that conforms to your lifestyle, Conforms to your family's lifestyle. Conforms to your desire to WIN. At the end of your career, you will remember the championships you won or the playoff games you performed well in, regardless of the outcome. YOUR team against THEIR team, on the big stage! And baseball is a very TEAM sport. One person, even the GOTG, cannot carry a team to a championship. Even Mad Bum and Mariano Rivera had to GET a lead, to hold it. The playoffs look far from certain for the Angels in 2019-2020, the last two years of Trout's contract. The complementary players to build a better team around Trout, have not materialized. Three straight losing seasons with a top seven payroll. Yeah, I know, Dipoto, Dipoto, Dipoto and Albert, Albert, Albert, and Astro, Astros, Astros, blah, blah, blah.............. The farm system, while stronger than maybe the last ten years, is still only a hope. That's all farm hands ever are, until they perform at the ML level; the way the young players for the Yankees, the Red Sox, the Cubs, the Astros and the Braves have. The window for our young players to prove themselves, within Trout's window in Anaheim, is slowing coming down. Maybe Canning and Suarez and Adell and Marsh and Thaiss and Jones and Ward and Maitan and Rengifo will all become 2+ WAR players by the end of 2020. They will be plugged into our lineup and/or flipped for players who can (and fit within Arte's apparent salary constraints). We will overtake the Astros and have a better chance than a one-game play-in shot at the playoffs. But it is probable? Will Mike Trout and his agent feel this is probable? Here's something else to consider. What if Trout's wife becomes pregnant in the next year? This has a way of happening to newlyweds. Mightn't that be a factor in wanting to spend more time where his family is? If she has been traveling at all with Mike for the last seven years, as he spends so much time on the West Coast, wouldnt she want to remain where all of her family can assist her in raising the child? Very possibly. Another reason to want to be based on the east coast. I think if Mike Trout's wife is expecting in the next 12-18 months, he is absolutely GONE......................... I think about the only thing playing into the Angels hands, with respect to re-signing him, is the nature of the "super" free agent market, over the last two off seasons. HIs agent could, conceivably, recommend that he sign a fat extension, rather that be subjected to the whims of the owners, as the new CBA approaches. But even then, if we assume he gets a contract for "only" say 200 mil over 7 years, he will still have already earned about 145 million. The 345 million total might be enough for him to say, "I've made enough money, I'm playing where I want to, with the greatest chance of being in the playoffs." Is that really with an Arte owned team? The Angels have made the playoffs six times in his ownership. Only once since 2009. In the first 3-4 times, it was a team significantly configured by previous ownership, excepting the acquisition of Vlad. Teams with the full imprint of Arte's ownership, have not faired well, with respect to the playoffs. It's not from lack of trying, though. It's been mostly bad signings and bad luck (injuries and even death). Now, he's taking a different tack, thanks largely to Eppler. Build from within, as much as possible. Will there be time enough to satisfy Trout? Lots of players have trophy cases filled with individual awards. Trout is already one of them. But I suspect many would trade trophies and dollars for a World Series win and to be able to cherish those memories with their teammates, after they retire. Mike Trout seems like he would take all that over Arte's millions. Ya know, I never could resist stirring up an ant hill or throwing rocks at bee hives. Bring it on, AW goose-steppers!!!

The first sentence, yes. The second is not knowable, to any degree of certainty. It lies within what Trout wants to do. And he isn't saying, except that he wants to WIN.

.