DCAngelsFan

145 IP, 2.90 ERA, 150 K, 50 BB
.250/.310/.460  - 18 homeruns (kinda optimistic on power - he's older (23), stronger, and healthier, and until pitchers find his weaknesses, will punish mistakes) 
combined WAR ~6, ROY, WS MVP runner-up 
The interesting thing is his age - he's well short of his peak - his real power, both pitching and hitting, may well lie ahead of him.
 

Geez, reading his quotes about him personally scouting him and finding him Major-League ready and listing all his incredible attributes  - I'm embarrassed for DiPoto over that.  And the amount of money - we were bidding against ourselves, no doubt - and more than twice what Vlad Guerrero, Jr signed for.  And putting us in penalty for subsequent years.  All bad., really bad.   
But the thing that made it unforgivable to me, look at what other teams did when they went into the penalty - once you've exceeded the pool amount, you might as well go crazy and sign everyone under the sun, like the Yanks and Red Sox did - the only additional penalty is a dollar penalty.  Yankees signed 10 of the top 30 prospects that year, the Red Sox signed 40+ players including Moncada, and iirc, spent like $70m - I think we signed Baldoquin and one other.  So, he turned the mistake of Baldoquin  into disaster by "stopping."
Basically, he mishandled that in every conceivable way.  
I cringe over that - I try to comfort myself with the thought that those GM's and baseball guys who mocked us that day (and they did) - they (mostly) passed on Trout.
 
 

Geez, reading his quotes about him personally scouting him and finding him Major-League ready and listing all his incredible attributes  - I'm embarrassed for DiPoto over that.  And the amount of money - we were bidding against ourselves, no doubt - and more than twice what Vlad Guerrero, Jr signed for.  And putting us in penalty for subsequent years.  All bad., really bad.   
But the thing that made it unforgivable to me, look at what other teams did when they went into the penalty - once you've exceeded the pool amount, you might as well go crazy and sign everyone under the sun, like the Yanks and Red Sox did - the only additional penalty is a dollar penalty.  Yankees signed 10 of the top 30 prospects that year, the Red Sox signed 40+ players including Moncada, and iirc, spent like $70m - I think we signed Baldoquin and one other.  So, he turned the mistake of Baldoquin  into disaster by "stopping."
Basically, he mishandled that in every conceivable way.  
I cringe over that - I try to comfort myself with the thought that those GM's and baseball guys who mocked us that day (and they did) - they (mostly) passed on Trout.
 
 

Geez, reading his quotes about him personally scouting him and finding him Major-League ready and listing all his incredible attributes  - I'm embarrassed for DiPoto over that.  And the amount of money - we were bidding against ourselves, no doubt - and more than twice what Vlad Guerrero, Jr signed for.  And putting us in penalty for subsequent years.  All bad., really bad.   
But the thing that made it unforgivable to me, look at what other teams did when they went into the penalty - once you've exceeded the pool amount, you might as well go crazy and sign everyone under the sun, like the Yanks and Red Sox did - the only additional penalty is a dollar penalty.  Yankees signed 10 of the top 30 prospects that year, the Red Sox signed 40+ players including Moncada, and iirc, spent like $70m - I think we signed Baldoquin and one other.  So, he turned the mistake of Baldoquin  into disaster by "stopping."
Basically, he mishandled that in every conceivable way.  
I cringe over that - I try to comfort myself with the thought that those GM's and baseball guys who mocked us that day (and they did) - they (mostly) passed on Trout.
 
 

Can't wait to see this guy - but I'm not sure about that "65" forkball - that thing is pure evil (when it's "on", at any rate.)
But, oh, man, I  just had to look down the page to see Vladimir Jr ... 
I don't think I'd said "eff you, Dipoto" today, but seeing that took care of that ... 
An 80 bat??  An 80-effin bat??  
meh ...
 

Can't wait to see this guy - but I'm not sure about that "65" forkball - that thing is pure evil (when it's "on", at any rate.)
But, oh, man, I  just had to look down the page to see Vladimir Jr ... 
I don't think I'd said "eff you, Dipoto" today, but seeing that took care of that ... 
An 80 bat??  An 80-effin bat??  
meh ...
 

Can't wait to see this guy - but I'm not sure about that "65" forkball - that thing is pure evil (when it's "on", at any rate.)
But, oh, man, I  just had to look down the page to see Vladimir Jr ... 
I don't think I'd said "eff you, Dipoto" today, but seeing that took care of that ... 
An 80 bat??  An 80-effin bat??  
meh ...
 

Can't wait to see this guy - but I'm not sure about that "65" forkball - that thing is pure evil (when it's "on", at any rate.)
But, oh, man, I  just had to look down the page to see Vladimir Jr ... 
I don't think I'd said "eff you, Dipoto" today, but seeing that took care of that ... 
An 80 bat??  An 80-effin bat??  
meh ...
 

I'll admit to giving Erstad a lot of grief back in the day. That said, I have generally always referred to him as the best defensive center fielder I had ever seen - it's just that at the time I hadn't really seen all that many (considering I was in elementary school when he came up). I really undervalued the weight of his defensive strengths in comparison to his offensive shortcomings.

I think a lot of the "hate" directed at Erstad was about his contract - (remember Rob Neyer's obsession with Erstad?  Couldn't write a column without taking a swipe at him - I thought Erstad must've screwed his wife, wiped himself on the curtains, and took his dog, the way he wrote about him) 
But you're right, looking back at WAR and the cost/win over the contract, he arguably had surplus value - he produced 32.6 bWAR for a salary of $45,725,000 or about $1.4m/WAR, in retrospect, even ab it of a bargain when the cost/win was $4- to 6m over his career.  Kind of amusing that WAR could be used to show he was better than we thought.  
I mean, yeah, as he started to break down, it was easy to get frustrated with his deficiencies and injuries - playing 1B with his poor bat in 04 and -5, and then barely playing his last year, well, he was a guy that stayed a year or two too long.
But does 2002 happen without him?  Probably not.  Hard to hate on anyone on the team that gave me the best baseball season, probably ever.  

I think a lot of the "hate" directed at Erstad was about his contract - (remember Rob Neyer's obsession with Erstad?  Couldn't write a column without taking a swipe at him - I thought Erstad must've screwed his wife, wiped himself on the curtains, and took his dog, the way he wrote about him) 
But you're right, looking back at WAR and the cost/win over the contract, he arguably had surplus value - he produced 32.6 bWAR for a salary of $45,725,000 or about $1.4m/WAR, in retrospect, even ab it of a bargain when the cost/win was $4- to 6m over his career.  Kind of amusing that WAR could be used to show he was better than we thought.  
I mean, yeah, as he started to break down, it was easy to get frustrated with his deficiencies and injuries - playing 1B with his poor bat in 04 and -5, and then barely playing his last year, well, he was a guy that stayed a year or two too long.
But does 2002 happen without him?  Probably not.  Hard to hate on anyone on the team that gave me the best baseball season, probably ever.  

I remember reading it described as a "Nintendo slider" or something like - I thought it a perfect description, it was, for a time, practically unhittable - his K/9 rate that year was 20.65, and in facing 21 batters, struck out 13 of them.  

I know back in those days, we couldn't afford many games - and when we went, we'd always make sure Ryan was pitching - there was nothing like him - can still remember the sound of his fastball hissing through the air and popping the catcher's mitt, and hearing it echo.  
Trout and Guerrero are certainly worthy - but as a pitcher, Ryan was front and center for half of the game - and for that half of the game, he could dominate like few others - even when he couldn't find the strike zone
 

I know back in those days, we couldn't afford many games - and when we went, we'd always make sure Ryan was pitching - there was nothing like him - can still remember the sound of his fastball hissing through the air and popping the catcher's mitt, and hearing it echo.  
Trout and Guerrero are certainly worthy - but as a pitcher, Ryan was front and center for half of the game - and for that half of the game, he could dominate like few others - even when he couldn't find the strike zone
 

I know back in those days, we couldn't afford many games - and when we went, we'd always make sure Ryan was pitching - there was nothing like him - can still remember the sound of his fastball hissing through the air and popping the catcher's mitt, and hearing it echo.  
Trout and Guerrero are certainly worthy - but as a pitcher, Ryan was front and center for half of the game - and for that half of the game, he could dominate like few others - even when he couldn't find the strike zone
 

The advent of how we get our entertainment is certainly a factor these days - if you look at how people view TV these days, how much of is is watched live, over-the-air?  (And of that tiny percentage, how much of that demographic is something advertisers care about?)
People are becoming used to having every form of entertainment available to them, when they want it - movies, music, tv series - streamed on-demand.
That - and the declines in NFL attendance (I saw Redskins tickets going for $6 last weekend) must certainly give MLB pause.   Will future fans accustomed to getting their entertainment when and where they want sit in front of tv's to watch live baseball?  And if not, how will they become fans?  
And of course, there's the penalties of exceeding the CBT and signing free agents.  The loss of picks and international bonus pool money for signing a FA who was offered a QO has an effect - teams are seeing that as another, and necessary way to create a pipeline of cost-controlled talent to their club.  The big money teams already *have* big payrolls - they're not sitting around with $200m of salary space - they're bumping up against the threshhold already.  
The length of the contracts demanded (and signed in the past) must certainly give pause - paying someone a mega-contract for production they achieved for another club doesn't really translate - I mean, who wants to be stuck paying someone over $100m for years of a replacement player?  (cough, cough)
And that's the other thing - the player are all at or past their prime - which means it's all downhill from here in terms of results.  
With revenue sharing, teams don't have to "win or go broke" - they can be patient -- or cheap - with few consequences.  
I think these are all factors, but perhaps none of them definitive - I think the most important factor is that analytics and  the objective valuations that result are letting teams look at these players in dispassionate and unbiased ways - which may have been true for years, but old-school baseball guys are either finally accepting of these tools, or have retired and replaced by those who treat roster building as an economics equation and not based on "guys that look like ballplayers."
 
 
 

Umm ... 
 

He'd be a phenomenal RF - he has a rocket of an arm. In fact, he may be better suited as a corner outfielder. In his career as a LF, he's totaled 32 defensive runs saved. As a CF? -12 DRS. Kole has accumulated 6 DRS over his career. Additionally, if Christian Yelich is your RF, you don't need a traditional 4th OF who has to play CF. Much like with Cozart;s presence, it allows Eppler to change up how he builds our bench. That spot on the roster can instead go to another CIF/COF type, and Yelich can cover CF if Trout needs a day off. So, it isn't really rendered moot, it actually gives Eppler a lot more flexibility. 
That would help, and I would not be opposed at all to keeping Calhoun as a COF/1B despite his height - it really isn't that big of a factor except perhaps in the long-term - I'd just question if it was the best use for him or if he'd be better off swapped with a pitcher like Corbin.
Christian Yelich is younger than Mike Trout. Let that sink in. They're basically equal in age, but this isn't a vet player in the middle of or on his way out of his prime. 
In 2018, Yelich will be 26, Calhoun will be 30. 
Yelich is controlled through '22 his age 30 season, Calhoun through '20, his age 32 season.
Assuming both their options are picked up, Yelich is owed $58.25m over 5 years, $11.65m annually. Calhoun's future salary for 3 seasons, is $33m ($11m annually).
Yelich stole 21 bases in 2014, and averages 18 each season. Calhoun has 19 stolen bases in his career. 
Yelich averages 76 walks a season. Calhoun's career high is 71.
Yelich has never had an OBP below .362. Kole's career high is .348, and average is .330.
Edge? Lowell. Yelich would be everything we'd need from Kole, and then some - great defense, improved speed, improved OBP, the ability to lead-off, the ability to cover CF.

He's young enough to be a prospect on some teams still (if he hadn't reached the majors already) and by the end of his age 22 season, he already had  206 games, nearly 1,000 plate appearances, an OPS+ of 114 (higher than Calhoun's career 110 mark) and a slash of .285/.365/.400/.765 (also higher than Kole's) to his name. We'd be beyond lucky if any of Jones, Marsh, or Adell made it to the bigs and produced at that level by that age. 

And to put prospects in perspective....
Jahmai Jones, age 19, A: .282/.348/.446/.794 with 29 2B, 7 3B, 14 HR, 27 SB, 45 BB, 106 K.
Cam Maybin, age 19, A: .304/.387/.457/.844 with 20 2B, 6 3B, 9 HR, 27 SB, 50 BB, 116 K.
Christian Yelich, 19, A: .312/.388/.484/.871 with 32 2B, 1 3B, 15 HR, 32 SB, 55 BB, 102 K.

There are few players I'd move a package of players like that for, but Yelich is the real deal. He is everything we hope one of prospects could be, and he's doing it at the age of a prospect with the cost control of a prospect through his prime. He's a player both for winning now and the future. Chris Archer certainly falls into that category as well, but if you move your OF prospects for an arm, you really stretch your chances of developing a competent replacement for Calhoun, Trout, or Upton within the next couple years. I'd feel more comfortable dealing OF prospects for a stud young OF.
Kole probably lands you a mid-rotation arm, maybe a prospect too, so that's money/prospects saved on a pitcher, and it frees up the 4th OF bench spot with a more versatile bat if needed. Also money/prospects saved.

Nope, I'm sure this conversation will be repeated and repeated until  the end of time - or 2021, whichever comes first.  
The backloading of this contract probably seemed a good idea at the time - but makes it nearly impossible for him to walk away.   Sure, it costs more - money now is worth more than money later - but if we'd have front-loaded it, he'd find it much easier to walk away.  Owing him, what, $114m over the next four years?  He's not going anywhere.   
I mean, look at Fielder - he announced he would no longer play; but didn't retire - he wanted the money.   Pujols won't retire even if he's in a wheelchair - why should he?  
 

Yeah, I was in Philly that day, I'd have crashed, too, since my invite obviously got lost in the mail ...
Now we know why it snowed - he wanted snow on his wedding day, and thus it was so ...
 

I think he'll always suffer (unfairly) in fans minds as they recall the Angels draft room celebrating like Trout just fell into their laps again when they drafted Ward - and the world said "who the hell is Taylor Ward?"
Hey, at least he's not Baldoquin ....

Great movie, there were no good guys, or bad guys - or rather, everyone was both - pretty much buried every preceding Western with its finesse and actual complicated characters, instead of 2d stereotypes.  Set the stage for Deadwood, one of the great (and similarly under-appreciated) TV series.
"And there was nothing on the marker to explain to Mrs Feathers why her only daughter had married a known thief and murderer, a man of notoriously vicious and intemperate disposition."

And I'm hearing there's a possibility that it might snow in hell sometime ... 
Weathermen and hot stove league prognosticators have the easiest jobs - will anyone be impressed if I tweeted "I'm hearing that a decision will certainly be made in the next 2 weeks" ... ?

I agree 100% - the U.S. suspected Japan might attack - but thought the attack would come elsewhere, not what was very nearly a decapitation at Pearl - had the fuel bunkers been hit, had a ship sunk in the ship channel, things might've turned out much differently - Pearl would've have been useless for months,  and  without fuel, we'd have had to operate from the West Coast, Midway would never have happened, and all those front-line Japanese carriers, and all those pilots would've stayed on the board.   And Yamamoto wouldn't sit back and let us rebuild our navy; without Pearl at his back, the West Coast shipyards and naval base and oil storage would surely be bombed, merchant shipping would never survive the trip to Hawaii, so Pearl would never be re-constituted and Hawaii would eventually have been invaded and lost. - or at least the threat of such would've been used by Japan to force us into capitulation, yielding the Pacific to Japan forever.    Today, we might be sending our best players to play in the NPBL.  
So, basically, we took the chance of losing the Pacific war from day 1 because we somehow knew that Japan would cancel their second strike and not destroy the 4.5m barrels of oil at Pearl?  That's beyond ludicrous.   
Really, the only thing to add here is there's a pretty solid suggestion that the USSR knew either about the Pearl attack, or that *something* was coming, when Richard Sorge gave information about Japanese plans - variously, Japan was going to attack somewhere in the South Pacific, or possibly, Pearl Harbor itself, depending on who you believe.   At any rate, the information passed allowed Stalin to strip the Mongolian frontier of the modern divisions that were then used to shore up Moscow's defenses, and launch a counter-attack in front Moscow which effectively permanently ended the German advance.    Without that information, Moscow would likely have fallen.  And had Japan attacked the Soviet Union instead of the US, the world map would look far different today.
 
 

I agree 100% - the U.S. suspected Japan might attack - but thought the attack would come elsewhere, not what was very nearly a decapitation at Pearl - had the fuel bunkers been hit, had a ship sunk in the ship channel, things might've turned out much differently - Pearl would've have been useless for months,  and  without fuel, we'd have had to operate from the West Coast, Midway would never have happened, and all those front-line Japanese carriers, and all those pilots would've stayed on the board.   And Yamamoto wouldn't sit back and let us rebuild our navy; without Pearl at his back, the West Coast shipyards and naval base and oil storage would surely be bombed, merchant shipping would never survive the trip to Hawaii, so Pearl would never be re-constituted and Hawaii would eventually have been invaded and lost. - or at least the threat of such would've been used by Japan to force us into capitulation, yielding the Pacific to Japan forever.    Today, we might be sending our best players to play in the NPBL.  
So, basically, we took the chance of losing the Pacific war from day 1 because we somehow knew that Japan would cancel their second strike and not destroy the 4.5m barrels of oil at Pearl?  That's beyond ludicrous.   
Really, the only thing to add here is there's a pretty solid suggestion that the USSR knew either about the Pearl attack, or that *something* was coming, when Richard Sorge gave information about Japanese plans - variously, Japan was going to attack somewhere in the South Pacific, or possibly, Pearl Harbor itself, depending on who you believe.   At any rate, the information passed allowed Stalin to strip the Mongolian frontier of the modern divisions that were then used to shore up Moscow's defenses, and launch a counter-attack in front Moscow which effectively permanently ended the German advance.    Without that information, Moscow would likely have fallen.  And had Japan attacked the Soviet Union instead of the US, the world map would look far different today.