monkeywithahalo

Oh, hey, I knew my ears were ringing for a reason. Yeah, the Rodriguez link is done by the B-R linker mechanism. Totally automated. Clearly it makes bad choices, like me and the the Freese trade, apparently. It might very well be a pipe dream. There is a pretty good chance that I'm not very good at the imaginary trade thing, you know, like everyone else on the internet. My logic at the time was one season of Freese was worth more than two months of Andrew Miller, who Boston acquired him for. The transitive property may not apply to trades though. In fact, it almost certainly doesn't. I do think that Boston could be a landing spot for Freese though if the Sawx whiff on Panda. Like I said in the post, it is more the general idea I'm trying to convey which is add Holt as a superutilty guy and also bring back a back-of-the-rotation prospect for depth.

+100

#11 was Nick Maronde. I like him more than Scotty does, I think. He just completely lost the strike zone last year, which is really weird given that control was a big strength of his previously. There was definitely some mechanical and health issues there though, so I'm hoping that means a speedy turnaround. I think he has the ability to be the kind of lefty reliever that can take on right-handed pitching too. Also, for future reference, the entire top 30 list can be found here.

I'd say look at the 2009 line that Ryan put up (.292/.340/.400 and 14 steals) and that is probably Stamets' ceiling, probably with more steals

I think you are definitely onto something. Noticed it myself last week and wrote about it. The signings are beyond the point of being a coincidence. After a lot rumors last year that the clubhouse was lacking in leadership, it looks like Dipoto is trying to address that since at least one of these guys should make the team (along with Ibanez, another "good clubhouse guy"). Very interesting to see Dipoto pursue the fabled "team chemistry" even though he is more of a SABR guy.

I'd give Wood at least one more year. If he can get things to click, he is a frontline starter and those are hard to find. High leverage relievers are almost a commodity at this point (although the Angels haven't even been able to produce one of those in awhile). I think this applies to a lot of the Angel pitching prospects. Scoggins, Wood and Sappington all seem like they are destined for the bullpen, but they have so little quality starting pitching talent, the Halos owe it to themselves to try and make it work with those three.

You also have to factor in the value Balfour provides. If he can be worth two wins over those two seasons, the production on the field offsets the additional expenditure. Also, he makes the Angels better and isn't that ultimately the point? The monetary savings on Frieri are just a happy side effect.

No, not at all seriously. I specifically started this post that I only suggested it because it purely out of humor. There is nothing that will stop this channel from launching and making a ton of money, but it would amuse me if a campaign against it caused even a tiny bit of strife for the rival Dodgers and their fans.

I suppose I should add this. The channel is already trying to orchestrate a letter writing campaign to get the channel added. Seems like one could just as easily be run counter to that effort: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-dodgers-sportsnet-time-warner-cable-20140122,0,7610460.story#axzz2r9vPnPG5

OK, I will say upfront that I am only suggesting this for the pure humor of it. As most of you know, the Dodgers got their own fancypants cable network and they (and Time Warner) are now going through the process of trying to force other local cable carriers to add the channel to their package and charge customers an exorbitant amount of money. This feels like a situation prime to be messed with. I'd like to see an organized effort of Angels fans to petition all the cable companies to NOT carry SportsNet LA or at the very least stick it on a very specific programming tier rather than the basic cable tier like most RSNs. Why? Because RSNs are making all of our cable bills rise at alarming rates. Because Angels fans don't want to watch the Dodgers. Well, those are the reasons we can give the cable companies. Because cable companies run virtual monopolies. Because offering only tier packages and not a la carte programming in tyrannical. Really though, I just see this as an opportunity to tweak Time Warner, the Dodgers, and their fans. If it so much as causes a subset of Dodger fans to miss one game on TV, then I think we've done the Lord's work. Really, I don't give a crap. I live in Seattle. This won't affect my cable bill at all and it won't affect the Angels because FS West already has carriage agreements. I think with a coordinated enough effort, it might actually stand a chance at working (or at least make things a little harder for the Dodgers and Time Warner). Anyone in? Also, I'm far too lazy to actually coordinate this, so if anyone wants to run point, go for it.

I think you're spot on, wopphil. It would save the Angels a bit of money in arbitration as save numbers play well in that structure. Even without that, I think it is a pretty sound strategy to add Balfour to the bullpen and sign a lower end starter like Maholm, Hammel or Capuano rather than signing Garza if his price tag starts to get too high.

I love Petey's speed, but I don't think the Cardinals are going to allow him to steal 40 bases. The Cards aren't a team blessed with much speed, but they only attempted 67 steals as a team in all of 2013. That just isn't part of their gameplan so I have a hard time imagining him being given the green light enough to even attempt 40 steals.

That, my friend, is why he only comes in at #22 on the list. The results don't match the stuff. The issue for now appears to be that he has a bit of Blanton-itis. He can consistently get the ball over the plate, but he can't hit his spots. He's over the middle and up in the zone. Even with good stuff, that is hard to get away with. If he ever figures it out though, watch out.

Tagging up on Scotty's behalf, here is our first prospect profile: Brian Moran at #30 Obviously not the most exciting of prospects, but he is at least a guy who could log some time in the bigs this season.

An agent who is arrogant and ego-driven? I, for one, am shocked, SHOCKED, to think such a person could exist in the venerable profession of sports agency.