ettin

Considering that the budget is tight I see no reason to start his service clock, pay him the big league miinimum simply to pitch when we are out of contention. It all adds up, even the little stuff.

Players accumulate service time every single day they are in the Major Leagues. Here is a link: http://www.fangraphs.com/library/principles/contract-details/service-time-super-two/

FanGraphs has him at 2.9 so far this season. Even if you take the best seasons of Stanton and Fernandez they are still the equivalent of Mike Trout but not only are you having to give up two rosters spots for one you also have to pay two star salaries instead of one? You need more than those two in my opinion. Actually my real opinion is that we never trade Mike Trout and we pay him to stay here the rest of his career.

Is there a reason to start his service clock to come up to the Majors on a team that is out of contention?

Stanton at 3 years/4 WAR per season = 12 WAR Fernandez at 5 years/4 WAR per season = 20 WAR Trout at 4 years/10 WAR per season = 40 WAR Not to mention that Trout takes up one roster space. We can and should get more. Even if you up Stanton's yearly WAR to 6 per season you are still short of what Trout produces.

Boy I hate losing seasons. More importantly I hate losing seasons back-to-back-to-back-to-back. Sometimes we all need a fresh look and a new voice. I have defended S-C-I-O-S-C-I-A over the last couple of years but beyond what you may or may not think about his managerial skills it seems like it might be time for a change in Anaheim. Maybe Mike needs a change too? If the Angels don't fire him (or trade him) this offseason, he should be on a short leash to start 2014. As a leader you ultimately have to take responsibility for the success or lack of success of those you lead. Mike has had four disappointing seasons in a row and it is time for the Angels to really evaluate what each and every component of this team is doing to drive the club towards success. Those that are standing in the way of that should be cast-off the boat.

I don't think that it is enough to be honest. Stanton and Fernandez, over their remaining controllable years would still give us less production overall than Trout over his remaining controlled years. We'd have to get more to make it even a consideration.

Sneaking in after the game was over and placing your Chuck Norris sex dolls all over the field doesn't count.

You guys really make me laugh sometimes. I remember all of the talk about Weaver leaving and that there was no way we would be able to convince him to not go out into free agency. I was one of the handful of people who argued otherwise. There is absolutely no reason that the Angels won't lock Trout up in the near future for an extended contract. They will do everything in their power to make this happen. An extension that at, the VERY MINIMUM, keeps him in Anaheim through his age 28-29 seasons is a doable thing. As far as the other contracts on the books you just back-load the contract so that when Wilson's and Hamilton's contracts are expiring you are paying him more in those years. Money is not the issue here and I know Moreno sees the potential to not only have the best player in baseball play for his team, he also sees the marketing opportunites and the chance to have Mike Trout go into the Hall of Fame (yes I went there) as an Angel. These are not invaluable things to him as both an owner and a fan of baseball. If I were the Angels I would seriously consider offering him a 20 year contract at $400 million+. This would not only be a record-breaking contract but it would also allow the Angels to load the contract more heavily in Trout's prime years (26-29) while keeping the AAV at a number more reasonable for luxury tax purposes. The Angels either need to go short extension through some of his prime years or they need to go really long term over the rest of his career. I believe they will get it done and get it done within the next year.

It is amazing what can happen in a short 12 hours on this board.

That is probably true about the lack of disparity in talent level but baseball is played more prolificly in California, Arizona, Florida, etc. Then it is a numbers game where you have thousands of players in those states to scout where you may only have hundreds in states that don't have a strong baseball system. Then it does become about resource allocation for MLB teams as they want to scout more heavily in the larger populations of players. I do agree that they should broaden their horizons more (and in fact they are expanding into countries like China, Phillipines, etc.) but until those areas develop more advanced baseball leagues and systems, the teams are putting their resources into the known commodity areas.

You know what AO, the Madson signing wasn't a bad risk move. The problem was that we didn't have enough depth behind him and we kept thinking "when is our bullpen savior" coming and he never did. A low base salary signing for a, formerly ace, relief pitcher coming off of TMJ surgery was a risk move and it didn't pay off. It's just that the rest of the bullpen really didn't meet the standards of a MLB relief corps.

I don't think he has even resumed baseball activities yet? It does open a chance for us to expand the trade and send Aybar and Iannetta to the Cardinals for Carlos Martinez or Michael Wacha. Apparently, before the deadline, there was some discussion between the Angels and the Cardinals on Aybar but I don't think the Cardinals wanted to give up either one of those young arms. Perhaps an extended Molina injury might change the Cardinals minds? I'd love either one of those pitchers but Carlos Martinez is my personal choice.

Maybe, but Iannetta is relatively cheap at $4.975 (2014) and $5.525 (2015) the next two seasons. As of today, among catchers with 100 or more plate appearances, he is ranked 27th out of 54 catchers in OPS, so there might be a team like the Tigers that would have interest in acquiring him (or perhaps the Cardinals if Yadier Molina is out longer than they expect). A team weak in OBP might want him too (or a team that wants to keep its OBP high, like the Tigers and Cardinals).

As I mentioned in the other Iannetta thread, it could simply be that they are showcasing Iannetta right now for a trade and S-C-I-O-S-C-I-A is saying nice things to support the idea that Iannetta is good. That could be totally wrong but if you are trying to sell a product you don't talk about how shitty it is?

It wouldn't suprise me either, AO, if they had Hank also DH on some of the days he's not catching. His bat has value.

Did any of you stop to think that perhaps (and this may not be the case I'm just sayin'!) they are trying to "showcase" Iannetta for a possible trade? I'm pretty sure the Angels think Conger is their main catcher moving forward but if another team or teams have shown interest in catching, Iannetta is a tradeable asset.

Craig enjoyed it!

I remember reading something similar to this about a year or two ago (may have been the same author). It seems the theory is the younger you get them started in a professional baseball system, the more time they have to develop, train, and play against high level competition which generally results in increased productivity during their careers. The Houston Astros will be a huge threat in 3-5 years.

More Trout Porn: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/happy-22nd-birthday-mike-trout-2/

Nice find!

Happy Anniversary AJ!

He may not be able to? If he was injured, as was suggested, then it could just be a matter of getting healthy. Players make adjustments all of the time so it may be a timing mechanism such as a foot tap or could be him raising his hands higher.... who knows for sure? I'm not an expert I'm just making an observation. He clearly gets out in front of the off speed stuff and when he does make contact his bat is already to far through the zone and he hits it to the right side and he hits it weakly. Hamilton is a pretty strong guy and his fly ball distance is down so it could be the weight loss. Could be a lot of things! And it could very well be that he is in decline mode and won't ever get back to a semblance of his former self. I like to think that he will make some adjustments and at least improve from what he did this year. It may not be enough to make us happy but if he at least gets back to some type of productivity it will soften the blow over the next four years.

It really could be all of those. The article was not a defense of Hamilton but more of focusing on the real main issue which is his pitch recognition. If he fixes that he can fix a lot of things. He should have some type of minor bounce back just based on some of the BABIP issues I discussed but he will only have a real true bounce back if he is able to adjust to the off speed stuff.

Well that was the main point I was trying to make about his pitch recognition on off speed stuff especially sinkers and changeups. If he can't adjust we are in trouble. He has been unlucky this year and has been the victim of the defensive shift but as I said a lot points to his pitch recognition skills. If he fixes or at least moves back towards that then he'll be more like what we expected. However I don't think he'll ever get back to being what he was before 2012.