Is it time to add?

[Docwaukee]

15 minutes ago, floplag said:

Again then why not dump more?  why only one trivial move?  
Its not emotional, you list a ton of reasons why we are in it that are completely relevant.  I listed a lot of the differential stuff in another post BEFORE the deadline as reason we should be aggressive.  
you can say were only in because thus and so then say were not actually in it.    Thus and so matter.  I always felt we were in it, thats the difference.  

you can't dump players if no one wants them.  No offense to Bud Norris, but he started showing cracks before his recent melt down.  Other teams saw it coming.  We keep thinking Yunel is worth something, but he's not.  Eppler didn't get a box of balls for David Hernandez.  He got a guy that was likely a very particular target.  One that his team had likely been all over, and he only traded David because the team on the other side was willing to give up that particular target.  He didn't pull a name out of a hat.  It's not trivial because you don't know anything about that player.  

You have been proven right (ie us being in it) by a collection of unusual circumstances coming together to make that happen.  You can't make moves to supplement something that is of low odds in order to make those odds only slightly better.  That's a recipe for disaster.  It's frankly how they ran the team before and it failed miserably.  

Here's something else to think about.  What if it was the Hernandez move that kicked the team into gear?  Likely not the reason eppler did it, but what if the team, upon being discounted, felt slighted and now they've got a chip on their shoulder?  Maybe they don't get that chip otherwise.  

We are where we are because of all factors involved.  To undo one and wish it were something else is revisionist history.  We can play the alternate outcome game but no one can win.  

From where we are now, I would like to see them add some talent if possible without touching any meaningful farm talent.  What I wish we would have done means nothing.  

[VariousCrap]

If the Angels decide to go for it this season and taking on big contracts is the only way to do anything, I say get both Verlander and Kemp.

[CanadianHalo]

Cespedes would be even cheaper than Upton I believe and get him playing in some meaningful games again and I think he comes back to life 

[floplag]

22 minutes ago, CanadianHalo said:

Cespedes would be even cheaper than Upton I believe and get him playing in some meaningful games again and I think he comes back to life 

Still angry we didnt make a run at him long ago.  To me the perfect fit for LF.  
 

[VariousCrap]

1 hour ago, Dochalo said:

Here's something else to think about.  What if it was the Hernandez move that kicked the team into gear?  Likely not the reason eppler did it, but what if the team, upon being discounted, felt slighted and now they've got a chip on their shoulder?  Maybe they don't get that chip otherwise.  

 

That is an Elastic Man stretch right there.

 

 

[stormngt]

2 hours ago, Stradling said:

Since Bud was the closer and he blew those leads almost single handily coupled with Scioscia's approach, I'm guessing exactly where we are.  

That makes no sense.  If we didn't blow those two games we would be a game and a half up in the wild card.  What difference would who was closing?  If we didn't blow those = we won those games.

[CanadianHalo]

Does anyone know if Brandon Phillips was sent through and cleared waivers?

Would be a solid add. Cowart can go to 3rd until Escobar comes back

Edit: he has indeed cleared waivers. Get him!

[Stradling]

Ok @floplag, who would you like to see them add?  What cost are you willing to pay in prospects?  What is proof the office is "doing their job"?

[floplag]

4 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok @floplag, who would you like to see them add?  What cost are you willing to pay in prospects?  What is proof the office is "doing their job"?

and were back on prospects again, havent we been thru this?  im not re-hashing this all over again its pointless.  

[Stradling]

Just now, floplag said:

and were back on prospects again, havent we been thru this?  im not re-hashing this all over again its pointless.  

But you are the one starting threads that are basically the same as this one, telling the front office to do their job.  The ONLY way to do what you are asking is to trade prospects to acquire expensive players.  Useful players that aren't expensive don't clear waivers.  Then you have to find a team that is willing to take on our prospects that are 2-3 years away.  It's much harder than you apparently think it is because it takes two.  We can't just go to MLB shop and buy a third baseman. 

[floplag]

Just now, Stradling said:

But you are the one starting threads that are basically the same as this one, telling the front office to do their job.  The ONLY way to do what you are asking is to trade prospects to acquire expensive players.  Useful players that aren't expensive don't clear waivers.  Then you have to find a team that is willing to take on our prospects that are 2-3 years away.  It's much harder than you apparently think it is because it takes two.  We can't just go to MLB shop and buy a third baseman. 

No, thats not the only way, and weve talked about this.  Not re-hashing.  

[Stradling]

Just now, floplag said:

No, thats not the only way, and weve talked about this.  Not re-hashing.  

Ok, so answer your own question.  How do we add a player?  Once they clear waivers you have to trade for them.  You can't just claim them and hope they give them to you.

[floplag]

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok, so answer your own question.  How do we add a player?  Once they clear waivers you have to trade for them.  You can't just claim them and hope they give them to you.

waiver claims?  take on salary, lots of ways it happens without necessarily requiring prospects.   As previously discussed, again not re-hashing.   I want to see them do something other than trade away usable assets. 

[Stradling]

2 minutes ago, floplag said:

waiver claims?  take on salary, lots of ways it happens without necessarily requiring prospects.   As previously discussed, again not re-hashing.   I want to see them do something other than trade away usable assets. 

Ok, so a team puts a player on waivers.  Each team has a chance at claiming that player.  Once a player is claimed, that team and only that team has a chance to work out a deal to trade for that player or the team exposing them to waivers, can simply hand that player over.  If a deal can not be reached then that player is no longer available to be traded or claimed by another team, they simply go back and play for the team that put them on revocable waivers.  

Here is the other way you can acquire a player.  They get put on revocable waivers, they clear waivers (no team puts a claim on them), that player can now be traded for anyone that has ALSO cleared waivers or isn't on the 40 man roster.  Granted an expensive player can be traded for simply taking on his contract and as little as a PTBN.  

There are not lots of ways, there are two ways.  We have no idea if we put the claim in on Kinsler (although that stuff usually comes out).  But if the team that did put a claim on him had a worse record than the Angels and was in the American League, then we never had a chance at him.  

The rest is just speculation.  We don't really know if Justin Upton has been put on waivers, which I find hard to believe he wouldn't have been claimed.  Teams simply put these guys on waivers, not to release the Upton's or the Stanton's but to see if a team will take on their contracts and give up top prospects that aren't on 40 man rosters.  

I am pretty sure what I just said is all true, that is my understanding of it, I am sure an IP or Scotty, or Ettin can correct me if I am wrong as they know more about this stuff than I do.  I'll just add this in conclusion, the addition of the 2nd wild card has made these types of trades less likely to happen because more teams  think they are in it.  The Brewers just acquired Walker, and they are 6.5 games out of a wild card.  

[floplag]

2 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Ok, so a team puts a player on waivers.  Each team has a chance at claiming that player.  Once a player is claimed, that team and only that team has a chance to work out a deal to trade for that player or the team exposing them to waivers, can simply hand that player over.  If a deal can not be reached then that player is no longer available to be traded or claimed by another team, they simply go back and play for the team that put them on revocable waivers.  

Here is the other way you can acquire a player.  They get put on revocable waivers, they clear waivers (no team puts a claim on them), that player can now be traded for anyone that has ALSO cleared waivers or isn't on the 40 man roster.  Granted an expensive player can be traded for simply taking on his contract and as little as a PTBN.  

There are not lots of ways, there are two ways.  We have no idea if we put the claim in on Kinsler (although that stuff usually comes out).  But if the team that did put a claim on him had a worse record than the Angels and was in the American League, then we never had a chance at him.  

The rest is just speculation.  We don't really know if Justin Upton has been put on waivers, which I find hard to believe he wouldn't have been claimed.  Teams simply put these guys on waivers, not to release the Upton's or the Stanton's but to see if a team will take on their contracts and give up top prospects that aren't on 40 man rosters.  

I am pretty sure what I just said is all true, that is my understanding of it, I am sure an IP or Scotty, or Ettin can correct me if I am wrong as they know more about this stuff than I do.  I'll just add this in conclusion, the addition of the 2nd wild card has made these types of trades less likely to happen because more teams  think they are in it.  The Brewers just acquired Walker, and they are 6.5 games out of a wild card.  

So not the point, so not re-hashing.  
As you say who does what usually comes out, i haven't heard our name yet in connection with anything.   I want to see their effort match what the players are doing, its really that simple.  If they cant get it done then they cant but so far we have zero indication they are even trying.
You are obviously content with what they have done or are doing, I am not, i want to see more.   The proof is in the pudding so to speak.   
We can leave it at that. 

[Stradling]

Just now, floplag said:

So not the point, so not re-hashing.  
As you say who does what usually comes out, i haven't heard our name yet in connection with anything.   I want to see their effort match what the players are doing, its really that simple.  If they cant get it done then they cant but so far we have zero indication they are even trying.
You are obviously content with what they have done or are doing, I am not, i want to see more.   The proof is in the pudding so to speak.   
We can leave it at that. 

Ok, this is stupid.  Sorry, you simply want to hear our name out there "trying".  So you will be content if we were the team that put a claim on Kinsler?  No you will be pissed because "we didn't do enough" to make it happen.  

I don't have any idea what the point is if that wasn't the point.  You want the team to try and improve.  Eppler's job is to improve the team, so I am guessing every single day he does just that, try to improve the team.  But since you haven't seen our name attached to these waiver claims he isn't trying.  That is the point?  Ok. 

Oh and whether or not I am content has nothing to do with it.  You see I have the ability to separate what I want from whether or not I think the team is trying to do things.  

[floplag]

Just now, Stradling said:

Ok, this is stupid.  Sorry, you simply want to hear our name out there "trying".  So you will be content if we were the team that put a claim on Kinsler?  No you will be pissed because "we didn't do enough" to make it happen.  

I don't have any idea what the point is if that wasn't the point.  You want the team to try and improve.  Eppler's job is to improve the team, so I am guessing every single day he does just that, try to improve the team.  But since you haven't seen our name attached to these waiver claims he isn't trying.  That is the point?  Ok. 

Oh and whether or not I am content has nothing to do with it.  You see I have the ability to separate what I want from whether or not I think the team is trying to do things.  

yeah, your right, its stupid.  
Its stupid to see them do nothing for the last few years but dumpster dive.  Its stupid to waste the prime years of the best player of the generation.  
It's easy to disagree and call others stupid for wanting more from this team i guess and assume that you have these innate abilities they don't.
I've made excuses, ive been patient, ive tried to stay positive, im out of gas.  If you cant understand that, its on you, there nothing else i can say.  

[Stradling]

Just now, floplag said:

yeah, your right, its stupid.  
Its stupid to see them do nothing for the last few years but dumpster dive.  Its stupid to waste the prime years of the best player of the generation.  
It's easy to disagree and call others stupid for wanting more from this team i guess and assume that you have these innate abilities they don't.
I've made excuses, ive been patient, ive tried to stay positive, im out of gas.  If you cant understand that, its on you, there nothing else i can say.  

I can understand all of it.  I just don't think you understand that it is much more difficult to add in August than it is at any other time in the season.  

[Inside Pitch]

22 hours ago, floplag said:

The highlighted above is what i dont get.  Isnt making the post season in some form the goal?  I mean isnt that why we play the season?   To have a chance at a championship?  We were never going to win the division, Hou started too hot, so that one game has always been our only shot at making anything.  

We as fans should know more than most that anything can happen but you have to get there first.  

How much do they make per ho,me game?  per playoff game?   I dont know the detailed answer but i recall it being enough to offset a large part of taking on 5-10 mil for the rest of he year and probably make it a break even.   Per this article (the quickest one i could fine) its certainly worth it for even one game.  
http://thefieldsofgreen.com/2014/10/02/how-much-value-does-a-postseason-appearance-hold-for-mlb-franchises/

Yes -- a team trying to crawl out from under the mess left behind after years of playing to get to the postseason should undermine their efforts and...  do whatever it takes to make the postseason.   I hope they stay the course.   They are already ahead of where I thought they could be given the mess Dipoto helped create.   if someone is willing to trade a useful player for Bo Way -- great.  But if it's Jam Jones.  Hard pass..     This isn't a new stance for me ...  I was one of those that groaned when we made the Clevenger deal...  and before the overvaluing prospects narrative starts -- please note my position on the Simmons and Grienke trades.

As far as the potential financial benefits of making the post season..  I'm not interesting in lining Arte's pockets -- he's already rolling it in..   I'm interested in them making a return to being perennial contenders..    What they are doing right now given everything that's gone on is pure gravy...   I'm enjoying it, and I won't lose any sleep if they ultimately fall back into the second division...   Any money Arte makes this year isn't likely to get thrown into the team next year -- he's pretty much said as much.  He goes year to year and the limit is the tax figure unless "something makes sense".  To date -- nothing has "made sense".

[floplag]

Just now, Stradling said:

I can understand all of it.  I just don't think you understand that it is much more difficult to add in August than it is at any other time in the season.  

ok, whats the excuse for last off season?  or July?  or any other time in the last 2 years? 
i'm done, think what you will but i assure you i understand all of that, im just sick of seeing them do nothing

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, floplag said:

ok, whats the excuse for last off season?  or July?  or any other time in the last 2 years? 
i'm done, think what you will but i assure you i understand all of that, im just sick of seeing them do nothing

They were rebuilding.  Also you said earlier today you were basically turning the page and focusing on improving going forward,, you even started a thread to state just that,  are you no longer doing that?

[Stradling]

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

They were rebuilding.  Also you said earlier today you were basically turning the page and focusing on improving going forward,, you even started a thread to state just that,  are you no longer doing that?

Instead of saying rebuilding, read IP's post above yours, that describes it a lot better.

[Stradling]

I think it was Phil that suggested Barria and Thias for Verlander.  I'd do that.

[Chuck]

10 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I think it was Phil that suggested Barria and Thias for Verlander.  I'd do that.

I would too.

[ettin]

49 minutes ago, Stradling said:

I think it was Phil that suggested Barria and Thias for Verlander.  I'd do that.

 

38 minutes ago, Chuckster70 said:

I would too.

I think that is about twice as much as he's worth at $28M per season the next two years, IMO. Not to mention the approximate $10M left on his contract this year.

Maybe one of them plus a low-tier if the Tigers eat some of hist 2017 salary. Also Verlander will put us very close to the CBT threshold too so I think the Tigers would definitely have to absorb money this year.

This potential move seems antithetical to the recovery course the team is taking, primarily due to the serious amount of cash involved. I'd rather see the Angels grab Daniel Norris or Michael Fulmer (who is injured now though) from the Tigers.