Dtwncbad

I don't see Ward as an impact player. I don't get very excited about prospects who are great bets to be major leaguers but not very likely to be high impact major leaguers. Example: Derek Norris is so easily attainable right now. I doubt Ward will be a better player than Norris. So other than saving a couple of bucks in controlling years of a young player, why should I be excited to follow Ward on his (looks like) path to mediocrity?

Maybe just for fun I won't answer and leave you as surely the only one confused and unclear on my content.

If Arod rode off in the sunset, would Wade Boggs be clutched up behind him on the horse?

We don't know if ANY of these people are truly good people for sure. That's built in. All we have to go on is what we see and hear. Aside from the built in unknown, Pujols seems to be pretty close to the top of the list for gobs of data suggesting he is a good dude.

He is not very likable, but his actual analysis is fine. His biggest mistake in his career was going to New York. He got bumped from short and was constantly compared to Jeter--a comparison that was never going to go his way.

Pujols got fat. He can't run. And he isn't nearly as dangerous as an Angel as any of us hoped he would be. But I don't see much to dislike him personally. Pretty much anything I hear about him is squarely positive in the "rate him as a human" conversation, so I inquired. What am I missing? I don't get the answer, but whatever.

Wow. That's a mess of a mess. I feel like I just sat through Thanksgiving dinner stuck listening to drunk uncle ranting about area 51. I was hoping for something that made sense, but thanks anyway.

No attempt to change your mind, but why? That's kind of puzzling to me. He is a very good person who is a family man and charitable and plays the game the right way. Is it the money? I personally will never hold a contract against a player unless they are cheaters or they quit (stop trying) once they have the guaranteed contract. Pujols doesn't fit those descriptions, so what's the beef? Just curious.

Except nobody pitched a no hitter. Nobody disputes that Seattle went hitless, but I cannot credit anyone with a no hitter. The spirit of the phrase is about one pitcher accomplishing something specific. Otherwise, if my left fielder hits .329 for half a season and I replace him with another player that hits .333 for the second half, can I combine the stats over the while season and claim they won the batting title? Everyday in the Majors there are probably 20 guys that pitch an inning or more in a game and give up no hits. For every additional inning you keep it up the more impressive it becomes. Fatigue and the challenge of getting the same hitter out a second and third time after they see your pitches that day makes it very hard. Once that pitcher comes out, it is far less impressive when a different pitcher gets that hitter out for the first time in a game compared to the original pitcher getting him out for a third time. Is four guys each running a quarter mile as impressive as one guy running a 4 minute mile? Would anyone really list a combo of 4 guys on the list of those individuals that ran a 4 minute mile? No hits happened. And nobody threw a no hitter.

Yes the problem is depth. But my point is if Bedrosian really is the better closer we have no idea if Street really helps the team's depth in another role in terms of wins and losses. Yes you can hand him the ball (depth) but is he helping you? He (to me) seems like somebody that very well could be not very good in another role. If his injury forces the team to go find another live arm, my guess is the team doesn't miss him.

Part of the lineup at the beginning of the game should include two pinch hitters. They must be used and used in the order they are listed. Also required are two bunts. You can bunt as much as you want but you must bunt two times minimum in the game. For those that love the cat and mouse strategy, this would be pretty interesting.

I can relate. Back in the day I do not recall ever hearing even a minor leaguer that I had never heard of. I spent hours and hours and hours scouring minor league statistics. By the time a guy got to the Majors I actually found the introductory media coverage of the player annoying since I had been following that player for

I can relate. Back in the day I do not recall ever hearing even a minor leaguer that I had never heard of. I spent hours and hours and hours scouring minor league statistics. By the time a guy got to the Majors I actually found the introductory media coverage of the player annoying since I had already been following that player forever. Now I often see major leaguers I never heard of who have been in the Majors for a couple years. Busy job, married, very active kids. . .it's a matter of available time. Life is good. But baseball now plays a totally different role than it did before. . .

I never like injuries. It's somebody's career and livelihood and health. But in terms of wins and losses I'm not sure this injury is significant. I think Bedrosian is better and I don't have any idea at all if Street would be effective in a different role so I cannot really quantify the loss. If this forces the Angels to make a move to make the bullpen better or deeper then maybe this ends up better.

I don't mean to be a buzz kill but I don't recognize a "combined no-hitter" any more than I would recognize a combined cycle where one guy gets a double and a Homer then leaves the game and his replacement gets a single and a triple. Langston had a great outing but he didn't pitch a no-hitter. Witt then did what a million guys have done in relief. You can't add them together to make something that didn't happen.

You heard it here first: "Howbout" Trout

I'm not really "here" either I just take a peek here and there. . .but yes that was a good natured swipe at what I believed was a pretty dumb position at the time.

I think he isn't physically ready to play right now because Moreno kept him out of Spring Training that one year. It set him back. . .

I think he will call him "Weetsy". "Weetsy called a good game today, and Troutsy did his thing of course, and Simsy made two great plays. Skaggsy didn't have his best stuff, but Maybsy picked him up good with that catch in left. Cronsy should be back tomorrow."

Seem to me this is kind of like trying to decide if I would rather have Heidi Klum at 26 yrs old or 27 yrs old.

So I can break my solar lease and tell my wife the seven year itch is legal?

I think he breaks none of the big records individually but ends up high on the list of many of the records. . .a testament to his overall game, and making him different from some of the guys who sit on top of one category but were more narrow in their overall game. The Toyota Camry is an excellent car. Nobody would argue otherwise. But the Hyundai has more legroom! The Subaru has more horsepower! The Nissan has a larger trunk! Mike Trout is a beast of a baseball player. I really don't care if: Rickey Henderson stole more bases! Pete Rose got more hits!

I think this is why Sherman Johnson's agent will not even discuss a 10 year extension for him that would otherwise be an obvious.

I think there have to be two big things on the minds of ownership and management. 1). having Mike Trout in an Angel uniform for his whole career 2). reaching a point where talent is grossly surging in the organization I am guilty as anyone in wanting to not throw away 2017, but I have to believe ownership and management are trying to time these two things. If they can stack up talent over the next couple of years to the point where the organization is at a peak of optimism going forward, and that coincides with Trout making a decision on staying or leaving through free agency, then they sand the best chance of achieving both. For the Angels to keep Trout, he has to believe the best days are ahead and he doesn't want to miss those days after spending so much time with the Angels. His legacy would be slightly damaged if he left and the Angels then went on to win without him. Provided the money is close, I don't think he would want that to even be a possible story line. So the key is to get the organization flush with young talent. . . I just have to hope they are competitive in the meantime, and I hope they have the nuts to make bold moves to accomplish this. If the Angels are 7 games out at the trade deadline, I hope they have the guts to trade every expiring contract for prospects. In the end, I want the Angels to win. I can keep hoping for 2017 to be a miracle year, but I have to be patient and digest the reality that the big picture is more important. It would be thrilling in 2-3 years if the Angels were bursting with young talent and extending Trout at the same time to be here through his extended prime. Thrilling. The Cubs have Bryant and a whole mess of other young talent around him. They just won a ring and their best days still look to be ahead of them. I am jealous. I have to have patience.

To be clear, he doesn't do all the Christmas shopping. He just finishes it.