Dtwncbad

The way his game has evolved even his home runs seem pretty boring . .  It's like driving 90 minutes in traffic to a restaurant to get a free appetizer.  Cool free appetizer??

1 hour ago, thebloob said:

Is that a real offer?   I'm ready to invest with you for guaranteed 9% interest for 35 years.  

Heck yes.  Gladly give you 9% with no payment due for a decade.  I would consider it a gift.

Marginal product at a premium price. Maybe he should open a chain of steak houses with that same value proposition.

I don't want to be too pessimistic but I am concerned about the reported detail that he was clocked at 82mph left handed.

4 hours ago, Chuckster70 said:

Can you imagine Segura at 2B and Simmons at SS?

Damn...

Segura has been in the majors 4 years.  2 excellent years and 2 years where he kind of stunk.  I would like to have Segura now too but just saying remember how much fans were hot and cold on Ervin Santana.  I just don't want to pretend Segura hasn't had some long frustrating stretches for fans of his team.  0 WAR in 146 games in 2014.  .3 WAR in 142 games in 2015. . . .

Angel fans would have been calling for his head over that 288 game stretch of 0 WAR. . .

1 hour ago, well_red said:

don't know the timing of everything, but wasn't madoff's fund "returning" 10%+ at that time?  anyway, bonilla was smart, insisting on 8% of the principal per year until he was paid in full, 35 years later, as if he had put into a great investment himself.

I seriously don't get how people think this was dumb for the Mets.  They borrowed almost 6 million bucks basically unsecured, at 8%, with zero payments due for years and years and years.  The no payments due period is a HUGE detail.

Bonilla could have invested that money into something secured, like real estate development, and yielded double the return.

Please, anyone, if you want Bonilla's deal contact me.  Ill give you 9% instead of 8%, no problem.

I'll build a mini storage warehouse or an industrial park or a wedding venue. . .. and collect rents for years and years and years and build equity in the property and then pay you back with future cash flow and i will end up owning a multi million dollar cash flowing property risking none of my own money.

The key to making this deal sweet for the borrower is the fact that no payments were due for a long long time. That kind of loan can be very risky to the investor and they typically want much more than 8% in that structure.

The Mets got 6 million at 8% with no payments due for 11 years!!!

11 years!  Look up private construction loans where people needs millions to build properties and cannot start a payment stream back to the investor for years.  Look it up.

12% rates AND 10% equity.  Bonilla got 8% and no equity.

I'm not saying an 8% return isn't nice security for Bonilla.  But it was also a very nice deal for the Mets who were in a hard money cash crunch situation.

Once you include a term for an extended no payment period like 10 or 11 years, 8% is cheap money.

I really don't understand how Trout can be healthy enough to play in live baseball games but he can't play in the All Star Game.  I am not a big AS Game guy. .  But Trout has been building an All STAR game performance history that is becoming part of his legacy.  If he is healthy enough to play then let him play.

3 hours ago, CALZONE said:

Count me in as the 0.0001 guy that knows he's a jerk.

More fun with numbers:

My guess is there is a .0001 percent chance he actually is a jerk.  And 99.9999 percent chance you just hate him because you are jealous.

Sports is full of obvious jerks.  I have seen zero evidence Pujols belongs in that club.

I hate his current production.  I fear his future production.  I see the inefficient albatross contract going forward.  But I don't think he is a jerk.  He has given me no reason to think that.

I bet you hate him most on the 1st and 15th of every month.

13 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Also, if he slips from being better at his job than 99.9999 percent of the people in the world to being better than 99.9998 percent, then people call him a jerk. 

Let me borrow your number to argue with you.  99.9999 percent of people people frustrated with his regression have not called him a jerk.  Noticing the obvious and talking about it isn't calling him a jerk.

Is the manager position part of the entertainment package you are selling?

I know having a good manager is important, and stability is also important.  But you can't get stale either.

Scioscia has been here long enough.  If nothing else, I am just bored with him.

I don't believe in a revolving door annually for the manager but a new one every 5-7 years seems healthy to me.

18 years with one manager would also be fine if the team was collecting poatseason series trophies.

It's time for a change.  And that doesn't mean I hate Scioscia or that I think he has been terrible.

Good or bad, that is a long enough run.

59 minutes ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Yes, I'm sure there are lots of guys who could outproduce Pujols if you let them play for 30-40 games. But you pretty much have to KNOW they will before you begin that. 

You can't just experiment: "Let's see if Kaleb Cowart can do it." 

Cron didnt. Valbuena didn't. Marte didnt. 

To be fair, I also don't KNOW Pujols can even keep his OPS at .662.  My brain tells me this is a one way street going South.

At some point (at OPS under 600?) you may have to make a decision even if you don't KNOW for sure what that decision brings.

Mistake letting Vargas go?  Really?  Sure because the Angels have suffered from being just one #4 starter away. . . 

Maybe the DL is the best spot for him for like 80% of the time over the next 4 years.  I can't see any way to get out of the money.  That money is gone.  So now its about playing time and a roster spot.  Just a sidenote I laugh when I hear people say he still has his power.  That's absurd.  His hr/fly ball ratio is like half is what it was in his prime.  He has warning track power now.  A few sneak over the wall. . .but the guy absolutely is a shell of his former self in terms of power.

Please trade Nolasco.  Please.  I want to open a roster spot for Jack Lazorko.

I am afraid of Darvish.  We haven't done very well buying "stars" away from Texas.

2 minutes ago, tdawg87 said:

That's all well and good except the winner determines hfa in the World Series.

I get that.  But since I am quite sure the Angels will not be in the World Series, that doesn't make me care who is in the game or who wins.

It's an exhibition.  It doesn't matter.  It's for marketing.  It's for kids.

And the biggest point is it is an All STAR Game.  Star is the key word.  Derek Jeter was not often the best shortstop in the league but he was a huge STAR.

If there was one "All STAR Cast" movie made every year, I doubt anyone would be complaining that it wasn't a perfect representation of the greatest actors.

I literally could not care less personally who is on that team.  My kid wants to see Trout vs. Harper.

Keep it simple.  It's stars.  It's for the kids.

I heard he is healthy he is just making sure he has his "stuff".  He was recently spotted at Smoke and Mirrors Depot.

I would take a bucket of sunflower seeds.

Actual financial analysis says Bonilla gave up a tremendous amount of upside to have a fair return.  It is just mathematically incorrect to look at this deal as "stupid" foe the Mets.  The Mets (And lots of other financially savvy individuals) can easily do better than 8% with that money, including in a close ro zero interest bank deposit environment.

This very easily defended as a win for the Mets. . .if you take the time to use actual financial analysis and resist the fun of poking ridicule at the Mets with a glance analysis.

http://www.businessinsider.com/mets-bobby-bonilla-deal-smart-2015-7

It's terrible nit picking and petty but his practice half swing with cocked wrists at the plate setting up to hit is annoying.

Keeping it food related:

We have had plenty of Scioscia.  As if he himself has been an all you can eat buffet and we are all slumped over in a red leather booth stuffed to our gills fighting the onset of a food coma after 17 seasons of eating the same old dishes.

That one serving of Calamari Steak in 2002 was good though, I will admit that.

No I am not looking forward to getting back in that same food line again.  I can't even taste it anymore.  Maybe it's good but the reality I am sick of it and not enjoying it so it doesn't matter if someone tells me it's good.

Please, please can we go to another restaurant?

Don't anybody misinterpret that I am pulling for him to fail. . .

I want him to be good.  Just concerned that late bloomers often don't really make it.

And this guy was a first rounder. Unfortunately he is one of the people that get notived in terma of the Angel farm system shortcomings of late.

5 minutes ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

Why look at what he did 5 years ago and ignore the last three?  He has turn it around, plus he plays a terrific third base,with mid 90s throw across the diamond. You know what they what have you done lately. He has done plenty lately. He couldn't be any worse than Espinosa has been this year.

I'm not ignoring it.  He is hitting well.

The question us what is more likely?

We just lucked into Josh Donaldson?

Or. . .I've seen lots of guys at 25 or 26 "click" at AAA and prove to be someone that just can't make that last jump?

What is unfair or out of context in my concern? (And subsequent lack of peeing my pants optimism with this guy)

1 hour ago, Make Angels Great Again said:

 

That's pretty much solely because of his time at AA, which is to be expected. He was a pitcher converted to a third baseman, so he is going to have a bigger adjustment than most. And AA is the biggest test of all.

 

Looking at lifetime minor league numbers out of context is pretty laughable.

What is out of context?  We all know the conversion from pitcher.  You still have to compete.  He isn't 20 yrs old.  His top ranking was about #60 and that was in 2012, when he probably got a lot of points for the "context" of being a converted player.  Now many years later, in a wider context he is nowhere to be found on top prospect lists.  Why?  I think the answer is context.  25 yr olds that finally start hitting in AAA normally are tweeners.

That's the analysis from a fair context.  But you can massage his history any way you want if you want to maintain your optimism.  That's up to you.

But I am pretty sure my opinion doesn't have a context problem.