Angels_Fan

Members
  • Content Count

    224
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Angels_Fan

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

103 profile views
  1. The only things Arte accomplished by doing this was making the team much worse and sparing the Dodgers from getting ripped off. Congratulations! If the Angels barely miss out on the postseason this year, we can look back at this fiasco as the reason why. It seemed pretty obvious yesterday that Arte was the reason the deal died. It would’ve been a bad look on the Dodgers had they reneged on the agreement.
  2. This deal could’ve been the difference between making the postseason and missing the postseason. All the Angels had to do was give up Rengifo (who is very much redundant). Hopefully Eppler has something else up his sleeve...
  3. Well, yes. Going from the Dodgers to the Angels is a massive downgrade, not gonna lie.
  4. We’re talking who is better. You’re talking about value. Someone can be more valuable and still not better than another player. Point: 200 innings of 4.5 ERA from Teheran vs 100 innings of 3.5 ERA from Ohtani. Ohtani is better, but not as valuable (most likely) because Teheran appears in more games.
  5. Good catch. If we remove Trout’s 50 worst games, he’d be Bondsian (and more). But you know what I meant. 100 games of typical Trout is worth more than another players typical 100 games.
  6. I know. That’s why I said Trout wouldn’t be better according to WAR/value, but he would be better during the games when he did play. Ohtani may not provide the same value as many #1/#2 starters from making fewer starts, but that doesn’t mean he cannot be as good as them when he is actually in a game.
  7. All I’m saying is that Trout’s 100 games would be worth more than anyone else’s best 100 games. As a result, he would be the best player in baseball when he did play.
  8. If Teheran pitches 200 innings with a 4.5 ERA while Ohtani pitches 100 innings with a 3.5 ERA, and Teheran ends up with the higher WAR, would you say Teheran is “better” than Ohtani? He would provide more value through sheer innings, but making more starts doesn’t suddenly make one better.
  9. Someone like Ohtani is a pitcher and a hitter, though. As a result, he will never have the innings necessary to be among the league leaders in WAR. Had he focused solely on pitching, he probably wouldn’t be on an innings limit and could even show improved results. But even if he ‘only’ makes 20-25 starts per year, it doesn’t mean he can’t be as good as some of the best starters in the game or be a legit ace - he can, just in a limited capacity.
  10. Not according to WAR, no. But he would be better than everyone else during the games that he did play, though. Another player may provide more value by appearing in more games than Trout, but that wouldn’t make them better than Trout when they both played at the same time. It just means they accumulated more value by playing more games.
  11. Does a pitcher really have to pitch 180+ innings to be a number 1, though? Ohtani may not have the same value as many others who are not on an innings/starts limit, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t as good or even better when he actually is playing. It’s like saying Trout wouldn’t be the best player in baseball if he had only played in 100 games.
  12. The starting rotation is far from good (as a whole), but saying that every other team has at least one starter better than anyone the Angels have is disingenuous, imo. Ohtani, for example, may be on an innings limit and coming back from injury, but he has potential to be one of the best starters in baseball. Let’s also not forget that he was pretty good in 2018.
  13. Truth. The Indians are in win-now mode, so they have no real reason to trade Clevinger unless they get an offer they can’t refuse....they’d have to be overwhelmed. I don’t think Eppler would trade Adell for Clevinger straight up, anyway. He seems close to untouchable. And an Adell for Buehler type swap would never happen, so...