Duren, Duren

Kelly should have been out after the ninth. They played with fire and got burned.
All that great young regular season talent for the Dodgers have choked. Except Buehler. 
And an old time Angel/Dodger delivers the decisive blow.
Back to the drawing board for them once again. And six months of a deadened regular season.
Robert's exposed again as less than a great big game manager. Too much analytics, not enough intuition.

Kelly should have been out after the ninth. They played with fire and got burned.
All that great young regular season talent for the Dodgers have choked. Except Buehler. 
And an old time Angel/Dodger delivers the decisive blow.
Back to the drawing board for them once again. And six months of a deadened regular season.
Robert's exposed again as less than a great big game manager. Too much analytics, not enough intuition.

Kelly should have been out after the ninth. They played with fire and got burned.
All that great young regular season talent for the Dodgers have choked. Except Buehler. 
And an old time Angel/Dodger delivers the decisive blow.
Back to the drawing board for them once again. And six months of a deadened regular season.
Robert's exposed again as less than a great big game manager. Too much analytics, not enough intuition.

Very proud of my Expos taking this game to extra innings. 

Mantle played his entire career dealing with a string of injuries. Starting in the 1951 WS.
This is an amazing review of the entire incident with graphic pictures.
Seems DiMaggio really was a jerk as a person.
But Mantle never was as good as he potentially could have been. However, still iconic, a great player and my first childhood hero. 
I have his autograph next to a signed Trout jersey. So many similarities on and off the field.
http://jrsbullpen.com/pwigogallery/index.php?/category/384
 

Mantle played his entire career dealing with a string of injuries. Starting in the 1951 WS.
This is an amazing review of the entire incident with graphic pictures.
Seems DiMaggio really was a jerk as a person.
But Mantle never was as good as he potentially could have been. However, still iconic, a great player and my first childhood hero. 
I have his autograph next to a signed Trout jersey. So many similarities on and off the field.
http://jrsbullpen.com/pwigogallery/index.php?/category/384
 

Two sides to the story.
What do the Angels want/expect from him? What does he want/expect to do with them? 
Looking from his perspective, what would be appealing? 
Location and organizational familiarity. Basic things beyond the job itself. And probably a nice increase in salary/future benefits.
Managing Trout might just be all anyone could desire. The intrigue of Ohtani's potential. Presiding over Pujols career closure. Trout and Pujols may arguably end up amongst the top ten/twenty players in history. Ohtani potentially a one of a kind phenomena. Just as a veteran manager he might like to experience something unique.
That's just the icing on the cake. But the real work is turning the team into contenders. 
That implies being in sync and on the same page as Eppler as they evaluate the roster and formulate a philosophy that works for both of them. Without that shared approach, there could be friction along the way.
Maddon has seen it all. Small market anonymity and big market intense fan base. He succeeded both ways. .
The roster obviously is a work in progress. He knows it will take work, time and patience. But also needs signs of immediate progress. Realistically, with some solid off season changes and a healthy core, reaching .500 next season is attainable. Eppler has to provide an improved talent mix. Especially on the mound. 
In Chicago he had more pieces in place and was the missing factor that got the best from that talent. Tampa was a harder, year by year scramble, but he worked within their philosophy and kept them over achieving. 
The Angels would be a new challenge, but a potentially rewarding way to end his career. 
What do the Angels want? 
A winner. A proven winner in recent years who is comfortable with old and new school input. Hopefully not the time for experimenting with a hotshot young up and coming manager who is generating buzz. Another time but not now. 
Seems like a good fit, but never assume the obvious.

Two sides to the story.
What do the Angels want/expect from him? What does he want/expect to do with them? 
Looking from his perspective, what would be appealing? 
Location and organizational familiarity. Basic things beyond the job itself. And probably a nice increase in salary/future benefits.
Managing Trout might just be all anyone could desire. The intrigue of Ohtani's potential. Presiding over Pujols career closure. Trout and Pujols may arguably end up amongst the top ten/twenty players in history. Ohtani potentially a one of a kind phenomena. Just as a veteran manager he might like to experience something unique.
That's just the icing on the cake. But the real work is turning the team into contenders. 
That implies being in sync and on the same page as Eppler as they evaluate the roster and formulate a philosophy that works for both of them. Without that shared approach, there could be friction along the way.
Maddon has seen it all. Small market anonymity and big market intense fan base. He succeeded both ways. .
The roster obviously is a work in progress. He knows it will take work, time and patience. But also needs signs of immediate progress. Realistically, with some solid off season changes and a healthy core, reaching .500 next season is attainable. Eppler has to provide an improved talent mix. Especially on the mound. 
In Chicago he had more pieces in place and was the missing factor that got the best from that talent. Tampa was a harder, year by year scramble, but he worked within their philosophy and kept them over achieving. 
The Angels would be a new challenge, but a potentially rewarding way to end his career. 
What do the Angels want? 
A winner. A proven winner in recent years who is comfortable with old and new school input. Hopefully not the time for experimenting with a hotshot young up and coming manager who is generating buzz. Another time but not now. 
Seems like a good fit, but never assume the obvious.

The original A's/Rays model came well before the term 'money ball.' But now is consigned to the dustbin of history.
The Expos of the 90s. Forced by necessity (essentially sabotaged internally by rogue ownership (Jeffery Loria and team president Claude Brouchu) they were still shrewd enough to find ways to compensate. Even when essentially a lame duck franchise under the control of evil Bud Selig.
A very strong presence in Latin America before other teams recognized the value there. Pragmatic trades. Usually out of budget necessity Focus on farm system and development. With smart baseball minds like Stoneman and a young Dombrosky. And one of the all time great managers, Felipe Alou, who was a master at orchestrating talent and creating chemistry. 
There are books written that go into the details (Up, Up and Away by Jonah Keri being the most recent). 
It really was amazing how a team with a high budget, multiple all stars and very good attendance through the mid eighties was decimated, yet still able to reinvent themselves and become a powerhouse, and even better by 1994 using an entirely different formula. 
One of the never to be answered enigmas. How far would they have gone had the season been played out? An equal odds chance to win the World Series that never will be known. 
And as a sidenote, I detest the Washington team. Virtually no acknowledgment to their franchise history. Hopefully they too flounder like their real predecessors, the Senators. 

I think it’s pretty obvious it won’t be an inexperienced or young guy.
I assume it’s going to be someone you’ve heard of like Maddon or Girardi.
Also, I promise that whoever they hire will do many of the same things you guys complained about with Scioscia and Ausmus. 

Managers are hired to be fired. That is just the business. Brad seemed like he was competent, but not exceptional or intuitive. Too much preset formula style managing without a deep feel for the moment and the ebbs and flow of a game. Oh well, he will be financially comfortable and land somewhere else eventually.
If it is Maddon, it means more than just managing at the beginning of his tenure.
Credibility and appeal for free agents deciding on different teams with their positives and negatives.
A long track record as a winner who instills confidence that he will turn team fortunes around.
And his associates. Managers usually bring some of their trusted assistants and position coaches with them. Assuming Eppler gives him authority to create his own staff then we probably will see some new faces. Not sure of his favorites, but he (or anyone else) will want familiarity and loyalty on the bench. 
Good PR. After this tragic and depressing season a Maddon or equally prestigious manager will immediately instill a positive attitude for fans and franchise. The idea of starting a new chapter for the team applies perfectly. 
It buys some time. No one expects instant magic, but seeing evidence that things are on the right (or at least better) path provides for some optimism.
Since he only wants to manage 3 - 5 years according to statements then it really is a perfect window for where the franchise stands. Long enough to demonstrate a solid turnaround, and enough time to prepare for the future beyond. 
I expect that if he is hired soon it really boosts the Angels chances when free agency begins.
 

An automatic would have been Dave Martinez in the past.    But he was successful this season managing the Nats, post-Harper. 

Managers are hired to be fired. That is just the business. Brad seemed like he was competent, but not exceptional or intuitive. Too much preset formula style managing without a deep feel for the moment and the ebbs and flow of a game. Oh well, he will be financially comfortable and land somewhere else eventually.
If it is Maddon, it means more than just managing at the beginning of his tenure.
Credibility and appeal for free agents deciding on different teams with their positives and negatives.
A long track record as a winner who instills confidence that he will turn team fortunes around.
And his associates. Managers usually bring some of their trusted assistants and position coaches with them. Assuming Eppler gives him authority to create his own staff then we probably will see some new faces. Not sure of his favorites, but he (or anyone else) will want familiarity and loyalty on the bench. 
Good PR. After this tragic and depressing season a Maddon or equally prestigious manager will immediately instill a positive attitude for fans and franchise. The idea of starting a new chapter for the team applies perfectly. 
It buys some time. No one expects instant magic, but seeing evidence that things are on the right (or at least better) path provides for some optimism.
Since he only wants to manage 3 - 5 years according to statements then it really is a perfect window for where the franchise stands. Long enough to demonstrate a solid turnaround, and enough time to prepare for the future beyond. 
I expect that if he is hired soon it really boosts the Angels chances when free agency begins.
 

I still think that many voters are trying to impress their own peers and audience by showing that they have unique interpretations of the player and season.
Many arguments start off noting in agreement that "Trout is the best player in baseball."
Then they get clever with a "but ...."
Trying to showcase their own views to get attention from their peers.
As if "my insights/views" deserve  more  attention than conventional thinkers. An ego and professionally motivated approach. Create controversy, generate audience interest.
MVP choices have been made for decades in all sports. A combination of intellectual and expertise and knowledge with gut feeling and the personal "eye test." Stats analysis, observation, comparison of different variables. 
And do not neglect conscious or unconscious bias. Voters do not attend or watch the candidates equally. Geography, familiarity, hype, team success and so on factor in to overall opinion. 
Right now, I think A segment of the media are fixated on one relatively minor issue. Games played.
But if the consensus is that Trout is the best player in the game, and his numbers are MVP deserving, these media types are trying to show that they don't want to admit the obvious. 
Trout has been taken for granted as a yearly MVP candidate so often that the media find it a stale story. 
 
 
 

It looked like a rare, decent low scoring game with a minimum of Angel mistakes. Some nice pitching all the way till the ninth. 
I am so sick and tired of this script. 
Not just this game, but all of baseball during this obscene, inflated homerun monstrosity of a season. 
Bloody homeruns almost anytime a hitter makes solid contact. Strikeouts and homers. Monotony personified. 
Static, slow almost immobile games lasting over three hours with few real bursts of athletic activity. 
Baseball may have stronger, bigger, better trained players than in the past, but the game itself has become one dimensional. 

Over hype or substantive future stars?
The Dodgers are realistically one of the best team in baseball. And just keeping bringing in young talent year after year. Strings of consecutive rookies of the year. Mid season callups who dazzle or at least are almost all productive and find their way onto the roster.
This year alone, in a runaway playoff spot they have introduced five seemingly quality new players from their farm system.
Alex Verdugo, Will Smith, Tony Gonsolin, Dustin May, and now Gavin Lux.
The law of averages says they all won't be stars, but that team just keeps replenishing and builds up a perennial contender. And prospects with Dodger hype are always attractive on the trade market if necessary.
What do they do that separates them from most teams?
Money to some degree. But that doesn't produce the final product.
It would seem that they spare no effort in scouting, training, coaching, indoctrinating, their prospects in the 'Dodger way.' Rolling off an assembly line the way the classic Yankees did for decades and still do to some extent. Plus you add in the modern analytics departments, which the Dodgers highly value. Mystique may also be part of the equation. Especially in Latin America.
The Dodgers haven't had the greatest mangers for a while, and that may be partially responsible for post season failure. But they sure put good teams together year after year.
 
 
 

Over hype or substantive future stars?
The Dodgers are realistically one of the best team in baseball. And just keeping bringing in young talent year after year. Strings of consecutive rookies of the year. Mid season callups who dazzle or at least are almost all productive and find their way onto the roster.
This year alone, in a runaway playoff spot they have introduced five seemingly quality new players from their farm system.
Alex Verdugo, Will Smith, Tony Gonsolin, Dustin May, and now Gavin Lux.
The law of averages says they all won't be stars, but that team just keeps replenishing and builds up a perennial contender. And prospects with Dodger hype are always attractive on the trade market if necessary.
What do they do that separates them from most teams?
Money to some degree. But that doesn't produce the final product.
It would seem that they spare no effort in scouting, training, coaching, indoctrinating, their prospects in the 'Dodger way.' Rolling off an assembly line the way the classic Yankees did for decades and still do to some extent. Plus you add in the modern analytics departments, which the Dodgers highly value. Mystique may also be part of the equation. Especially in Latin America.
The Dodgers haven't had the greatest mangers for a while, and that may be partially responsible for post season failure. But they sure put good teams together year after year.
 
 
 

It would have been worse for the team and organization if this came out in October. The entire off season clouded and under investigation with all personnel scattered and on their own.
At least now they are all together, and can work through to try and reach a collective state of closure. Not that it makes things any better, but at least they can process things and head into the offseason on the same page.
The investigative and legal stuff will get ugly. Hopefully the person(s) within the organization will be identied and face justice. And any clubhouse malaise or toxic culture will come to light and be cleansed.
Easier said than done. 
Presumably Arte will bring in outside resources with professional medical/psychological/social work expertise.  Eppler is a baseball man, not a counselor.
Some young athletic multi millionaires  are surrounded by enablers. Or think they are invincible. Many are sadly naive and ignorant of things beyond sports.
I lived through first hand family experience (sister in law who was a nurse) every nuance of this addiction or overdose pattern. With the same ultimate  result. If Skaggs was unfortunate enough to have met his fate after one bad decision then maybe it was purely a personal mistake. But if a pattern had been ongoing  then there should have been warning signs and signals. 
Sadly, until the facts are known there will be constant innuendo and speculation. With the potential to carry into next season.

As it stands right now, this is what I see:
Albert +1m
Upton +3m
Simmons +2m
Calhoun buyout +1m
Heaney +2.5m (estimate)
Tropeano +0.5mil
Bedrosian +1m 
Robles +2m
La Stella +2m
Middleton +0.5m
Stassi +1m
Smith +1m
Noe +1m
So conservatively, I would call it about +19m in arb increases, new arb, and fixed salary increases.  
Calhoun -10.5m
Cahill -9m
Garcia -1.7m
Skaggs -3.7m (would have been +2-3 on top of that)
Harvey -11m
Allen -8.5m 
Bour -2.5m 
Lucroy -3.3m
JC Ramirez -2m
or about -52.2 mil.  
That's a delta of about 33.2 mil from 2019.  
Current payroll according to sportrac is about 155 mil but I am not seeing them include Trout's bonus of about 19-20 mil.  So i think it's closer to 175 mil.  Subtracting out that delta of 33.2 mil leaves commitments of about 142 mil.  I'll leave everyone the opportunity to speculate where payroll will end up.  I think it'll be around 180m or about 35-40 in possible additions for just this off season.  
Also of note are some roster management issues that are going to be encountered.  
Most of that dead money has already be jettisoned from the current roster.  Keep in mind that when the Angels report their 40 man in the off season, they have to include those that are injured.  You can't use the 40 to hide guys during that time.  
Based on the anticipated roster from the above (and that includes losing Calhoun, Bour, Cahill, Garcia off the 40 but keeping Trop, Bard, Del Pozo, Jewell, Middleton, Pena, Jose Rodriguez, Bemboom, Cozart, Ward, Walsh, Hermosillo) that would put us at 37 players without adding any by any other means (FA, trade, waiver pickup, or covered from the R5).  
Those requiring protection from the R5 as of dec 2019 include Rojas, Lund, Kruger, Jones, Justus, Ortega that could be of interest.  A couple guys who haven't be covered in the past include Luis Pena, Adrian De Horta, Jeremy Rhoades, Joe Gatto, Ryan Clark.  None of whom are likely to be protected.  
I would say that Rojas, Jones and Ortega get covered and pretty much everyone on the current keep list with maybe the exception of Ward, Walsh, Herm and Key are at risk for getting DFA'd.  So that's an additional 7 spots on the 40 man.  
I honestly think the lineup is pretty set as far as the 26 and 40 man for next year with the exception of Cozart and Bemboom.  There are easy internal options to replace Cozart whereas I see them going scrap heap on the catching side.  Could be a LHed bat for them out there but I kinda doubt it.  And of course I think we let Calhoun go.  
That 15 position players on the 40 man who are currently there plus Jones and Rojas or 17 total.  
There are currently 13 pitchers a lock for a the 40 man (not counting Ohtani who I already counted on the position player side).  Heaney, Sandoval, Suarez, Peters, Barria, Robles, Buttrey, Bedrosian, Ramirez, Canning, Anderson, Middleton, Madero.   
I think Pena will also stay as will Bard, Trop, and Ortega will get protected.  
So overall, I would expect about 6-7 new players added to the 40 man.  2-3 SP, 2-3 pen arms, a C, and  maybe a position player.  
 
 
 

As long as the starting pitching is shaky, it would be a waste of resources making this trade. 
If Upton were miraculously off the books in some kind of trade/buyout and Calhoun not resigned it may be more theoretically possible. But at a great risk. Especially if Adell develops to his maximum potential. 
I still would try to stay mostly one pointed in focusing on pitching. Greatest need. The hitters as a group are good enough mostly. 

As long as the starting pitching is shaky, it would be a waste of resources making this trade. 
If Upton were miraculously off the books in some kind of trade/buyout and Calhoun not resigned it may be more theoretically possible. But at a great risk. Especially if Adell develops to his maximum potential. 
I still would try to stay mostly one pointed in focusing on pitching. Greatest need. The hitters as a group are good enough mostly. 

This is a real microcosm of how the team can be a serious contender. Excellent starting   pitching that goes deep. 
Of course no one can expect career type games regularly, but having at least three starters that mostly keep the game close through six plus innings would be transformative. 
Every series would have a quasi workhorse or two that can be depended on to provide some rest for the bullpen. Even one day off from warming up each series would have long term results over the season. 
The role of middle relievers is often overlooked. They can keep a game within reach or blow up any hope for a comeback. In recent times the Angels starters have gone the fewest innings per start, and the entire staff subsequently has to feel the effects over time. 
If Ohtani progresses on the mound to what he did before, Heaney becomes consistent, and any other  current starter finds a dependable groove we have a bare nucleus of a quality rotation. But we still need that veteran top end workhorse to be the ace. Cole is the obvious choice, though trades may pry a surprise starter from another team. 
Really, two new starters are needed. A clear ace and a reliable inning eater who can keep the game close through six innings. Far too many games this season have blown up because of a big inning. 
With that hypothetical ace, Ohtani can be spotted carefully till he regains his pitching form. If Heaney can earn a place as second or third starter there are many more possibilities for juggling the mound talent. 

I hate this trend in baseball. No doubt somewhere in the MLB offices this was strategized as part of a way to increase the marketing of the sport. Especially to young kids. And whatever changes to the baseball, strike zone and anything else play into this.
Look how the homerun derby has been glorified and promoted as a main event unto itself. No other all star week event gets even a fraction of the attention.
The connection to video gaming is part of the mindset. No doubt kids watch the homerun derby consciously or subconsciously imagining they are manipulating a player through a game controller. Then they watch games, expecting home runs. 
And the instant measure of 'launch angles', distance and exit velocity turn the sport into a personal competition. Not only who hits more, but who hits it further and who is stronger. Focus devolves from the team to the individual slugger. And not how good he is, but how strong 
Unless you have years of experience watching the changes in the game you don't realize what has been lost. Of course changes and evolution are inevitable, but I think the balance of all around skills that have made the sport great is becoming lopsided. And it ties into strategy. Which then ties into scouting and analytics. 
It's more complex, but I don't have the time now to get deeper into this stuff.
Suffice it to say that I think 1968 scared the shit out of the baseball powers. That 'year of the pitcher' was the polar opposite of what we see now. And things were tweaked accordingly the next year to restore the balance. With that recognition that rule changes and physical changes to ball, bat, mound, etc. refigured the game. And baseball has tweaked more and more over the years.
And let's not forget the steroid era was essentially a prelude to what we have now. Bodies were manipulated rather than rules or objects. But that period showed that the public had an appetite for massive displays of power. 
Babe Ruth was the first transformative figure to reveal the appeal for home runs. And he single handedly led the  change to the game in radical ways. Was it 1930 that we saw an insane increase in power and scoring? More drastic even than now? 
Lust for homeruns always is the emotion that the powers in baseball periodically stimulate. But if the players are now naturally stronger, bigger, better trained and prepared, maybe baseball should tweak things in ways to restore the symmetry of the game.
Bring back a 1968 mindset that gives pitchers, spray hitters and speedsters more importance. And also revisits classic baseball managerial strategies.
Honestly, who gives a rat"s ass counting homers or gasping at exit velocity? 
 
 

I hate this trend in baseball. No doubt somewhere in the MLB offices this was strategized as part of a way to increase the marketing of the sport. Especially to young kids. And whatever changes to the baseball, strike zone and anything else play into this.
Look how the homerun derby has been glorified and promoted as a main event unto itself. No other all star week event gets even a fraction of the attention.
The connection to video gaming is part of the mindset. No doubt kids watch the homerun derby consciously or subconsciously imagining they are manipulating a player through a game controller. Then they watch games, expecting home runs. 
And the instant measure of 'launch angles', distance and exit velocity turn the sport into a personal competition. Not only who hits more, but who hits it further and who is stronger. Focus devolves from the team to the individual slugger. And not how good he is, but how strong 
Unless you have years of experience watching the changes in the game you don't realize what has been lost. Of course changes and evolution are inevitable, but I think the balance of all around skills that have made the sport great is becoming lopsided. And it ties into strategy. Which then ties into scouting and analytics. 
It's more complex, but I don't have the time now to get deeper into this stuff.
Suffice it to say that I think 1968 scared the shit out of the baseball powers. That 'year of the pitcher' was the polar opposite of what we see now. And things were tweaked accordingly the next year to restore the balance. With that recognition that rule changes and physical changes to ball, bat, mound, etc. refigured the game. And baseball has tweaked more and more over the years.
And let's not forget the steroid era was essentially a prelude to what we have now. Bodies were manipulated rather than rules or objects. But that period showed that the public had an appetite for massive displays of power. 
Babe Ruth was the first transformative figure to reveal the appeal for home runs. And he single handedly led the  change to the game in radical ways. Was it 1930 that we saw an insane increase in power and scoring? More drastic even than now? 
Lust for homeruns always is the emotion that the powers in baseball periodically stimulate. But if the players are now naturally stronger, bigger, better trained and prepared, maybe baseball should tweak things in ways to restore the symmetry of the game.
Bring back a 1968 mindset that gives pitchers, spray hitters and speedsters more importance. And also revisits classic baseball managerial strategies.
Honestly, who gives a rat"s ass counting homers or gasping at exit velocity? 
 
 

Nice to see a well informed historical discussion. Baseball is such a great game with so much history that I think we all want to be assured the integrity of the game is solid and the quality of play is the best it can be.