halodground

1 hour ago, Tank said:

dana needs to stay put, period. 

everyone except neto, silseth, detmers, o'hoppe, soriano, and schanuel should be available in the right trade. the question will be whether or not perry can get a fair return. 

I don't think there is a single player in the organization that I would say is completely unavailable. Granted it would take a nearly perfect offer to get Dana, O'Hoppe, Neto, Soriano, etc., but I'd move those guys in a heartbeat if it was a clear upgrade for the Angels and there were controllable years. None of them have the track record or upside to convince me they are untouchable. 

I’d hate to see them rush Dana, but agree that it wouldn’t come as a shock. I think you have to make Rengifo and Ward available at least, see what kind of return is offered.

1 hour ago, BTH said:

I’d trade Anderson, but the question they need to answer is what’s more important: saving money or getting the best return?

I’d say it’s the latter, so I’d be willing to eat money to get a better return (within reason).

But it depends on the offer.

The goal should be to get the best return. Let’s hope that Arte allows Perry to go that route. I’d absolutely pay some of his salary for a quality return.

1 hour ago, tdawg87 said:

Definitely trade him at the deadline. Canning as well. 

I would add Sandoval to this group for sure. I’d even consider trading Detmers for the right return. The question then becomes can the Angels FO evaluate talent well enough to improve the team down the road in a trade like that?

Anderson has been getting results to start the season. Limiting base runners, pitching deep into games, and giving the rotation some stability. But he’s still a back end of the rotation guy. What is the smart thing for the Angels to do with him?

-Trade him for the first decent offer received?

-Hold on to him until closer to the trade deadline and hope he continues to perform?

-With either trade option, should they eat some salary to increase the value of the trade return? Is that even necessary?

-Should they just hang on to him since he’s relatively affordable and they have a pretty good idea of his floor with the hope that he has more stretches like his current one?

What other ideas do you have?

I'm going with Altuve. Various players from the Dodgers, Mariners, and Red Sox were considered but I just don't have any fondness for them, despite being able to recognize that they are good to excellent players. Altuve is at least entertaining, being a little person and all. He's kinda hard to hate even with his cheating.

Was anyone else's first time trying Sushi of any kind (California Roll) at the sushi place in the stadium back before the remodel? I think it was on the Field Level and I'm pretty sure it was total crap but it was tasty enough that I've been a sushi fan since.

First game I can remember attending in person was Game 2 of the 1982 playoffs against the Brewers. I was 9, just about to turn 10. The only things I can remember with any clarity are Reggie Jackson hitting a long home run to center field and getting lost trying to find my way back to our seats after going to the bathroom. We sat up in the View section near the left field foul pole, but nearly all the way up to the top.  I know I went to games before this one, but I can't remember any details.  Reggie always had a reputation of being a first class jerk.  I can attest that he was in fact a genuine dick. I've somehow randomly managed to interact with him on 3 different occasions and he was unpleasant all 3 times.

35 minutes ago, No Roles said:

this team is pretty much burnt to the ground ! Unless you say trade our best prospects for even less experienced prospects and trade the whole starting pitching staff?

I was referring more to organizational structure and philosophy.  But yes, if they could trade the whole starting staff and/or any of their prospects for players who project to be better down the road, I don't see any reason not to. The current product is crud. Obviously that isn't a realistic idea, but I support the sentiment.

I've been a fan since I was old enough to have an interest, I'd say since 1980 or so when I was 8.  I can clearly remember the 82 playoffs and was lucky enough to go to one of the home games. There wasn't much to be excited about from 88-94, that was a rough period. At least the late 90's had some exciting talent coming out of the system. It was fun watching Salmon, GA, Edmonds, Disar, and that group play, even though they never won anything in that decade. What makes the current era the worst one (and by a lot IMO) isn't just the expectation of winning with the continuous let down of then losing.  It's that 2002-2009 was such a tease. It seemed like the organization had figured it out.  We were becoming a model organization that was a perennial winner with an owner who would spend and seemed to let the baseball people do the baseballing. The system provided continuous talent.  There seemed to be an organizational plan. Stability in the front office and the on field manager. Then we drafted Trout and the future looked that much brighter.  Was Stoneman retiring the catalyst for the unraveling? Was Arte always a meddling owner and those years of success were just the residual product of what Disney did before he bought the team? Having the two most talented Angels of all time during the worst period just compounds the frustration.  It feels like the only way out of the current situation is to burn it all to the ground and start from scratch. 

I'd do it.

They have a night dive on the Big Island where they have huge lights and giant manta rays are drawn to them. It looks amazing. But also terrifying. Just thinking about doing it gives me intense anxiety. Not the manta rays, it's what is outside that circle of light, just waiting for a snack. A fear to overcome!

I spend a decent amount of time in and on the ocean. I've seen one shark (a blue shark decades ago off Newport). I still have to overcome the fear of sharks every time I go in the water. I understand the probability of being attacked is crazy low but it's one of those irrational fears. I blame Jaws for us Gen Xers.

7 hours ago, AngelsFaninGA said:

They don't suck, but a roster where those guys are among your best players is probably a 65 win team every year, which we're already seeing (and yes I know they're all young and can improve but the Angels have a dismal recent history of continued development from their major league guys). 

Come on now, that's a 70-75 win team at least!

Seriously though, Neto and Schanuel are guys who could be nice complementary players on a good team. I think it is unrealistic to think of them as players to build around, but good teams need guys like them. O'Hoppe could be a bit more, but playing catcher really limits how much you can count on a player for a full season of star level production. Still, he definitely seems like a guy who could develop and be a leader on a championship team if things progress well. Adell is a guy to dream on, but still very much a work in progress and has as much probability of being a career AAAA guy as he does of being a quality major leaguer. The pitching is dismal. Detmers is a 4-5 guy at best at this point in a good organization. He could still develop, but I think mid rotation is a good deal of improvement away for him. Anderson is a known commodity and shouldn't be anything more than a backend of the rotation guy. Sandoval and Canning both are backend of the rotation guys or Triple A insurance on a championship caliber roster. Nothing reassuring in the bullpen either. I don't think Minasian can take the full blame, though he certainly hasn't done anything that makes me hopeful for the future. The organization is a mess, top to bottom. I don't see that changing until Arte either sells or brings in an Epstein type and divests control to them entirely. Restructuring from the ground up is needed.

It would be great if Ward, Rengifo, Drury, Anderson, Estevez, etc. can perform well enough to get some value in return. 

There isn't a single player in the organization that shouldn't be available for the right offer.

I tend to be a homer but anyone looking at the organization at this point and seeing anything other than disfunction is deluding themselves. It works for Arte, he's gotten an amazing return on his investment and continues to benefit from the market he was fortunate to buy his way into. But the on field baseball portion of Angels baseball is very broken at all levels.

57 minutes ago, HanfordGuy said:

Let me tell you the tale of a reliever named Brian Fuentes.

Their stats are eerily similar for their Angel careers.

35 minutes ago, ThisismineScios said:

There's a hundred things to look at here, but I just can't stand Estevez. He's been bad since the All Star Break, but he acts like he's a dominant closer. His quotes are just outlandish. I actually went back and looked at some Rockies ones from blown saves. It's always, "Look, Ok, it happens. Guys get lucky. Tomorrow's a new day. I am full of confidence." 

He has no confidence. I watched this guy end our season on a grand slam last year to a guy that is currently struggling in AAA. Quote? "It's tough, but we got a lot more games." And still, it's always excuses. The Rays blown save? "It's unfortunate we lost on a weak grounder." Giants? "Honestly I feel good. Felt really good." 

Tonight? Castellanos "Cheated fastball...he's really strong...and unfortunately it went out." Rojas, he of the 3 career HR? "It happens...hopefully next time I'll go out with the same mentality." 

The arrogance and ignorance just bugs me. You have an ERA over 7.00. As a closer. Have some pride and acknowledge letting Anderson, Rengifo, and your entire team down. 
 

You did a better job of capturing why he is so aggravating than I did. Walks around like he is a dominant reliever, seems to get that treatment from the press and many fans, and the dude is a guy who might (MIGHT!) be a 7th inning guy on a decent team. Saves totals don't mean a thing when you routinely have zero command of your pitches and don't seem to even recognize when you don't have your best stuff. I wish he'd go on a good run so they can at least get some return for him in trade, but even when he has an effective stretch, he's too wild to be trusted.  

14 minutes ago, Mark68 said:

Fuentes?

Yes, even more than Fuentes. Fuentes sucked, but his suckage made sense to me. Estevez annoys me because A) he has some tools and the stuff to be solid but is emblematic of the general issue with the entire staff; he can’t or won’t stick to a plan and regularly implodes, I assume by overthrowing. Just throw fukin’ strikes. And 2) people seem to think because he throws high 90s he’s good and he gets way more credit for his save count than he should. 
 
 

I don’t think there has been an Angel closer that I detest more than Estevez. Dude needs to go away.

That picture makes Winslow look like somewhere you might want to spend some time. It doesn't really have much to offer. I'd put it on par with Barstow or Needles, just colder in the winter.  If you do find yourself in Winslow, definitely check out the Turquoise Room in the La Posada hotel.  Super cool vibe with excellent food. Lots of locally sourced ingredients and even some Navajo dishes.

I've probably mentioned this on here before, but the inspiration for the "Standin' on a corner" part of that song was a girl getting into a flatbed Ford on what is actually the corner of Switzer Canyon Dr. and Rt. 66 in Flagstaff, AZ. There used to be a Der Weinerschnitzel there, which is now the Dog Haus. Decent hot dogs, pretty good breakfast burritos. They always seem to get voted "Best in Flagstaff" for their breakfast burrito but its not anywhere close to the actual best breakfast burrito in Flagstaff. Anyway, Jackson Browne didn't like how Flagstaff sounded in it and I think the story goes that Don Henley suggested the Winslow line.

How does Hicks go up there swinging for the fences with a runner on first and nobody out? It drives me crazy. Get that runner into scoring position! I know they just focus on repeating the same swing every at bat, but holy hell I feel like shortening up your swing and making sure you don’t K or pop-up still has some value.

ok, old man rant over.

Things to be pleased about -

     -Taylor Ward seems like he isn't affected by the face trauma

     -Mike Trout doesn't appear to be washed and can still destroy a baseball

     -Bullpen results are improving

     -Starting pitching looked better past 4 games

     -Ron Washington has a plan

     -Neto, O'Hoppe, Schanuel, are off to not terrible starts

     -Soriano looked electric

Things to be concerned about-

     -Taylor Ward is super streaky

     -Mike Trout still hasn't made the adjustment to the high FB (his ability to make adjustments in game and over the course of a season is probably his most amazing talent) and is striking out a ton

     -Bullpen struggles to throw strikes, has a WHIP of 1.30, and the second worst K/BB ratio in MLB

     -Starters still struggle to get ahead of hitters, Sandoval remains an enigma, and Tyler Anderson has the best start of the year

     -Ron Washington's plan has to be a good plan AND be executed for 162 games

     -Neto and Schanuel are not off to great starts

     -Soriano looked electric for a grand total of 3 innings

     -The defense and fundamentals have looked meh

     -Anthony Rendon is 0-19. He's not worried though.

TLDR - Sample size is everything. At least it's been a good start. I wish that was a better predictor of the next 156 games.

9 hours ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

This is the best they've looked without Ohtani in 6 years.

I think it was the prospect analyst in the thread about the Angels top young players that said something along the lines of Dana could become a “mid-rotation starter”. Seems like all of our pitchers are projected mid rotation, and that is if things work out. Obviously you need a steady influx of those guys too, but it feels problematic that the guys we have to be excited about aren’t projected for bigger things than mid-rotation. Why aren’t we seeing more pitchers in the system that if things break right have higher ceilings? Like the pitcher equivalent of Jo Adell. Everyone seems to recognize that Adell COULD be a special player with the raw tools he has, he just needs to put it together. But I haven't heard the same type of comments made about Angels pitching. Are there those type of talents lurking in the minors and I’m just not hearing about it or is this really an organizational issue?

Just now, mmc said:

We had one.  Arte didn’t think he was worth keeping around

Ohtani?

The Athletic recently had an article, "The Aces Project", ranking the top 50 active starting pitchers in MLB (no Angels), with Gerrit Cole being rated the highest. Scores were tabulated based on a 20  person panel of executives, scouts, and analysts rating the pitcher on durability and performance on a 1-5 scale. It's pretty clear that the definition of a "#1", TOR arm has evolved quite a lot over the past 10-15 years, but the article made me realize that the Angels haven't drafted and developed a guy who you could argue is a true ace since Weaver. It seems like even when we draft someone, they usually come with a tag like "could develop into a mid rotation starter with #2 upside". Two guys would get an asterisk - Ohtani and Garrett Richards. Ohtani certainly has TOR stuff and results, but his status as a unicorn, the injuries, and the need for the 6 man rotation would knock him down a tier for me, plus he was playing professionally in Japan so there wasn't much "development" to be done.  Richards seemed like he was on the path to being the Angels next ace but the bad luck of the patellar tendon rupture seemed to cascade into endless injuries.  Outside of those two, I can't think of a time since Weaver that we drafted anyone that was expected to become an ace, and we certainly haven't molded anyone into that type of pitcher either.  The Angels do a decent job of producing mid rotation guys, but why no true aces?  Is this a scouting and drafting issue? A player development issue? Just bad luck? It's been nearly 20 years since we drafted Weaver. 

Rengifo is the best hitter on the Angels and has his most complete season. .285/.355/.485 with 20+ HR and 30+doubles. 

The ghost of Nibs is finally exorcised and the whole staff embraces the idea of throwing strikes and getting ahead of hitters (except Estevez, who still makes every save stressful).

The Angels play meaningful games in September but fall a few wins short of the post-season.

The Angels are more fun than frustrating again.