kevinb

2 minutes ago, floplag said:

I think we do, but i also dont think we can afford to lose them easily or that people would want to.
Who do you trade for that, you know Adell likely is top of that list... his value isnt super high after struggling a bit in small sample... You going to trade Ohtani?   Is Marsh going to get you that?  To get what we truly need you might be talking multiples off that list including Rengifo.
I just dont see it, it isnt that we dont have them, its that we cant really afford to lose as many of them as it might take to get the true ace, and trading for anything less makes no real sense to me. 

True... That's why I think it's Bauer and nothing else. I'd disagree with Stroman he isn't the ace we need and it's wasting money for that ace. Stroman is a nice piece but if I were Arte it's Bauer and if not then save that money and go another route and wait for the right opportunity whether it be trade something down the line. I wouldn't risk throwing that money away on someone not ace material at the moment. But that's just me.  

2 hours ago, floplag said:

Exactly

See above but yeah, i agree.
I would add Stroman as i think hes a good fit, keeps the ball down etc...  After that, what we need just isnt there and will be a huge overpay in what i think is a weaker FA SP market.
We might be better of putting the money elsewhere and waiting on the next couple years SP crops which look much better.
Winning 8-7 is still winning  

You don't think we have assets that people would want to trade for a top of the line starter?

3 hours ago, floplag said:

What assets do we have to get the level of guy we need though?

I think there’s people. Adell Marsh Ohtani other minor league guys. There’s basically one pitcher I want and that’s Bauer I hope we sign him and if we don’t I don’t wanna spend any money on free agent pitchers. I don’t trust the rest of them. 

3 hours ago, Stradling said:

And without Eppler there’s a pretty good chance Trout would be gone 

Sure and again I’m ok with that. But we both know Arte was going to pay whatever it took to keep him. But sure Eppler was the one to re sign him. I never said he didn’t. Eppler had Trout for his peak. The next GM will have Trout during his decline. 

11 minutes ago, Stradling said:

And when the next GM is signed and when he gets to the playoffs it will more than likely be due to the work and players brought in by Eppler. Meanwhile Eppler took over a dumpster fire.  New GM is taking over a team that lacks front line pitching, and that’s about it. 

The next GM will have to do deal with Trout going from the best player on the planet to aging and in his eventual decline. Every GM has issues they have to deal with. 

On 11/3/2020 at 10:40 AM, floplag said:

OK so im not sure they all will, i could easily see a couple of them not, but for the sake of argument lets assume that they all do, effectively taking all the top FA arms that most here have targeted off the board, im curious what some of you would do?

Do you go for the lesser arms?  Tanaka, Odorizzi types?  Its clear we will have to dip into this market in some form, but how far is debatable. 

Do you keep trying to beat people with pure offense?  Realmuto, Springer, Ozuna, and the like?  Winning games 7-5 still counts as much as winning them 2-1 after all. 

Im not sure where I am on this, we all know that SP are typically terrible investments, as are closers like Hand or Hendricks.

WE cant create the parts we need, were bound by whats available, and i dont think were making a splash for what would be called an ace so... 

What would you do if the arms arent there? 
 

Use assets to trade for pitchers. 

8 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

once again, you've failed to account for any semblance of context.  To say that 5 years is enough based on any situation is not reasonable in my opinion.  Eppler made mistakes.  Enough of them to get him fired in the opinion of the guy running the show.  

I have my doubts whether anyone the Angels bring in will be able to have success in the expected time frame set forth by the HMFIC under the parameters he sets which I consider to be somewhat unrealistic.  

The margin for error in doing it the way he was being asked to do it was close to zero.  

I hope the next guy does a better job.  Best of luck to him.  

I’ll bet the next guy gets a 5 year contract and if that guy doesn’t get to the playoffs within that 5 year span the powers that be will find a new guy to try and make it happen with a 5 year contract. 
 

Eppler had his shot and while he did well he didn’t do well enough. I don’t know how many GMs get extended on their contract with out success and success meaning getting to the playoffs. Eppler was a good hire and a good GM do I think we can find better yes. But doesn’t mean I think he wasn’t good. Just wasn’t good enough at the end of the day. 

5 hours ago, Hufflepuff said:

I say that cause I’m sad to see him go. I thought he was a great GM and just needed a couple more years to turn us into a sustainable playoff contender. I hate to see him do that for another team when I feel like he could have done that in Anaheim 

He had 5 the next GM will build upon what he started. With hopefully more success. 

Good work. But it’s only 60 games and these awards don’t mean anything because it’s not a real season. Wait did I do that right? Haha

congrats! That’s awesome love seeing Angels players win awards!

I actually love all the rules they implemented. A lot more fun this year. The double header 7 inning was really fun to watch. 

Good call he wasn’t one of the top 3 it makes sense he wouldn’t be a top 3 vote getter. 

Oh no not Hermosillo he was going to be such a great 7th outfielder for us. 

7 hours ago, Stradling said:

Stoneman and Carpino is my guess. 

There’s zero chance that Arte is not in that room “zoom call” for the interview process 

1 hour ago, rafibomb said:

 

Should we be worried that we are hiring our GM about 2 weeks after free agents are free to start signing? 

I'd rather we take too long to hire the right guy then rush it and hire the wrong guy. Take your time Angels. 

8 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

For those who are hand wringing about bringing in someone with a president or EVP title instead of GM, I would ask why it matters.  Carpino isn't going anywhere.  Arte isn't going anywhere.  Giving someone a different sig on their email isn't going to change who they'll be beholden to.  

I think for me at least it’s about getting two good guys rather than one. With a lot of these organizations going with that structure it only makes sense to move in that direction. The fact we aren’t looking for two makes me feel less confident anything will be different with the next GM. 

11 hours ago, Vlad27Trout27 said:

If Hahn does decide to resign as the gm for the Sox, he id my number one pick for our gm! 

Why what have the White Sox done?

9 minutes ago, Stradling said:

All things being equal the better manager wins. The Dodgers have had the best team on paper for years and they lost all but one year.  

Did they really? I don't care enough to look it up but which team was favored in both those series?Also I believed at the time that Houston and Boston were both better. They played in the better league than LA did. Also what we now know is that Boston and Houston both cheated in the WS so there's that. 

Also things are never equal. Teams aren't playing against themselves so things will never be equal. 

1 minute ago, Lou said:

"couldn't

And the "best team" wins the world series every year, right?

The better team wins ya I would bet on that. Especially in a 7 game series. Which would you bet on best team or better manager? 

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

So no manager should get in, got it.

Correct. 

Just now, Lou said:

Who cares?

You are right. I could care less who won the World Series. I didn't watch it. But that's the point, the best team won the manager had nothing to do with it. 

3 minutes ago, Lou said:

He won the world series.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bruin.

Who had the better team on paper? Who was favored to win the series? Who had more stars? 

5 minutes ago, Stradling said:

And yet some still make it to the hall.  He is one of them.  

Sure an archaic system built on writers voting people in whether they like the person or not. 

13 minutes ago, Inside Pitch said:

Not really looking to get into a big argument because I don't really disagree with your main point, but I think people underestimate the importance a manager can have in the clubhouse and how that plays out over the course of 162 games.  A case can be made that there isn't much of a difference between a good in game manager and a bad one, but a guy that can't control a clubhouse is death IMO.

Ok what's that mean in terms of wins and losses. Do I think a manager is valuable sure. But do I think they matter more than a couple wins a year no. These professional athletes are professionals for a reason I don't think having a dog sh*t manager matters. Is Trout going to perform the same numbers as he did with a bad manager to a good one? Yes. Of all the professional sports coaches/managers MLB is the least important one. NFL is by far the most with NHL and then NBA being next. MLB manager is given numbers and they send in the hitter or pitcher either tries to get the person out or get a hit as best they can. This isn't an argument or a big argument. We all have opinions mine is clearly right , but you can disagree if you so choose. 

10 minutes ago, Lou said:

Cash had quite an impact on the world series.

How'd Dave Roberts do?

10 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Because they have a team that is ready to be great and he has a long history of success.  I’m not sure his age will work but it’s not like he wasn’t great.  He’s in the Hall. 

He's in the Hall because he had good teams. A manager doesn't make a good team, player or anything else. Managers in baseball are the least important manager position in all of professional sports could possibly be least important position in all of professional sports.