Oz27

You'll find he's MUCH worse than Trumbo...and that's in no way an endorsement of Trumbo's defensive "abilities".

Which pundits? Who? The OP seems to just be building up a strawman. The consensus is this trade was good for us and the Sox and pretty bad for the D'Backs and that's where I sit. Assuming the PTBNL is nothing special, we made a huge step towards addressing our pitching depth and added payroll flexibility in one. Of course the offense suffers, but it's a hell of a lot easier to find good hitting corner OF/DH types than it is to find two young pitchers under club control. Bag ourselves another experienced starter and I'm happier with the state of our rotation than I thought was possible a few weeks ago. Then all we need to do is find an OF or DH, relatively cheaply, to make sure Shuck isn't starting and we're set (probably still with a pretty average team, but a hell of a lot better than I thought we'd be).

As far as I'm concerned this sums it up perfectly. Before this, I was on board with giving Dipoto another crack to fix this sinking ship. Now I think every day he's in the job, the greater the pile of sh*t our next GM is going to have to deal with. I'd have been completely against this trade without throwing in Grichuk, throwing him in just stinks of stupidity. It means that over the past few months, we've given up Bourjos, Grichuk and Callaspo (the first two of whom were some of our most valuable trade chips, at a time of great need) for a decent reliever, a slight upgrade at 3B and a prospect with major flaws. How are people okay with that? How are people okay with giving up two of your best trade chips without fixing our primary need? It's idiotic and it shows why Dipoto isn't up to this job.

Ha, I thought so too. As for insults, with some of the vitriol directed at anyone who has dared to complain about this move today, I thought they were all good.

I don't think this is worse than the Wells trade or anything, but it stings quite a bit nonetheless.
 
By the time Vernon Wells happened, I fully expected Reagins to **** stuff up. Wells was a more spectacular one than I expected, but I had no confidence in him.
 
But I actually had some degree of confidence in Dipoto before this. However much of that was left is gone now though, he's a nitwit.

I thought Monkey was answering that very question with his last post.

If the Angels send Bourjos or Calhoun, let alone one of them plus anything else, for David Freese, I'm okay with letting the Rally Monkey wrap up the offseason as GM.

While the AAV for Vargas is quite reasonable, four years is not. We were right not to match it, even if it thins out our options quite considerably. You could look at it now and argue we should've extended a qualifying offer, but given how close we are to the luxury tax threshold it's probably smarter we didn't.
 
Just as before, we've got to have something pretty damn special up our sleeves if we want to fix this mess of a club.

I don't care how Fielder was in the postseason, I care how he was overall...a 1.7 WAR player. Over 8 full seasons in the MLB, he has one excellent season, two very good ones, a pretty good one, three mediocre ones and a bad one. Only 3 out of 8 times has he had a WAR above 3.5. He's gigantic, seemingly declining and was never THAT good anyway. And you're telling me Texas effectively just signed him to a 7-year, $138-million contract?
 
That, my friends, is brilliant. Even they are capable of stupid moves...thank God for that.

"So far, two years into their respective contracts, Fielder>>>>>>>Pujols."
 
Ah yes, comparing him to Albert Pujols. What a stellar way to evaluate baseball transactions. Signing Mathis to a 1 year, $12 million deal would be much less detrimental than the Pujols signing. Shall we do that too?

You think other teams are going to view a slugger with a career .299 OBP who plays every position he attempts rather badly and someone who has compiled a total of 1.9 WAR over the past two seasons as 'awesome'? Gee, talk about rose-colored glasses.

Every valuable asset the Angels have not named Trout may not even be enough to get Miller. Deals like that just aren't going to happen.

Every valuable asset the Angels have not named Trout may not even be enough to get Miller. Deals like that just aren't going to happen.

Lol, and people thought we could get something decent for Trumbo. If we do trade him, it will be for a Kluber-type player. 

A large amount of the ushers at Angel Stadium suck and have done for a long time. The customer service at most other places (team store etc.) is worse. In fact, one of my few positive experiences with staff at the stadium was when I got heat stroke and took myself to first aid (the usher was too f'n useless to be of any help), the people there were great. Given how much we crap on about being fan friendly and the like, we really need to fix how staff at the stadium interact with the fans.

He had an OPS above 1.000 before tonight's game. Basically, you're an idiot.

Bourjos for Kennedy would be Reaginsesque. Even Reagins wouldn't be dumb enough to give them Trumbo too.
 
Just so I'm clear, you're proposing we play with a lineup of....
Trout-Aybar-Pujols-Hamilton-Kendrick-Callaspo-Calhoun-Iannetta-God Knows (Schuck?)
 
You really think that 5-9 could win anything? And even if it could, what do we do with that hideous Blanton contract? Basically, this idea fails all over.

Some context? Like the 3.92 road ERA (a pretty good way of debunking the whole "he'd be awesome if he didn't pitch in Texas" argument)? That fantastic 4.2 BB/9? I really thought baseball was past the point where you needed to go to great lengths to prove a pitcher like Darvish isn't 'really good'. I guess not.

The eff? That's just moronic.

Ah yes, it's one of my favourite things to see at a baseball game...when entirely sold blocks suddenly empty because every single person decides to stand somewhere else.

Ah yes, it's one of my favourite things to see at a baseball game...when entirely sold blocks suddenly empty because every single person decides to stand somewhere else.