Angelsjunky

I have a hard time feeling bad for billionaires who make bad investments. We can only hope that Arte has learned his lesson and will keep out of making baseball decisions, which he's clearly bad at.

In actuality, "true" yoga isn't mostly physical but what we see in the media, in yoga studios etc, is largely the physical component of yoga. The word "yoga" means "to yoke," as in to connection oneself, to unite with the divine. There are many different forms of yoga, but the underlying purpose of all of them except the commercialized version most people associate the word with, is to unite oneself with "God." The different paths of yoga - karma, bhakti, jnana, raja, kundalini, etc - are different roads to the same goal. Some involve deep contemplative practice and self-inquiry, some involve devotion to a guru as a manifestation of the divine, some involve meditative practices to awaken the kundalini energy, some involve working in the world, but all are about "waking up" to one's true nature. Actually, Christianity has a lot in common with Bhakti Yoga, which is devotional. In Bhakti Yoga you "surrender" to a guru, who is an incarnation of deity, just as in Christianity you are "saved" by Jesus Christ. The basic principle is similar, although whereas in Christianity being saved gets you a ticket to Heaven, in Bhakti Yoga surrender to a guru allows one to realize one's own identity with God (which Jesus talked about when he said "the Kingdom of Heaven is within").

Yes, of course, but does that mean its inherently "demonic?" Are non-Christian religions, for that matter, inherently "evil" or "bad" or misguided? Not all Christians believe this and many do yoga and see an underlying unity to all religions.

Might as well throw in the Monsanto Protection Act, but...none of that has anything to do with the linked article.

I agree with this in principle, although what worries me is how a teacher's goodness or greatness is determined. SAT scores of students and college placement? No. Sense of well-being and ability to actualize potentials and focus on personal passions? Yes.

I like the thread idea, although haven't read through it all yet. I can't narrow it down to one but a few that come to mind: De-criminalize mind-altering substances and end the ridiculous "war on drugs." Force all food companies to use noticeable and vivid labels on GMO products, as well as a warning label akin to what's put on cigarettes. Screw that, how about outlaw all GMOs and regulate pesticides and move towards all food being (again) organic. Strict anti-cruelty regulations on factory farming.

All the libs are off doing satanic yoga postures. And Adam, mt was asking about "liberals" not "lesbians."

So says Virginia GOP gubernatorial candidate and pastor EW Jackson. As the article points out, he's not alone. Quite a few Christian conservatives have said similar things. There are some pretty extreme (and, I must say, kind of funny) remarks in that article: Pastor Mark Driscoll of WA state: "Yoga is demonic. If you just sign up for a little yoga class, you're signing up for a little demon class." Father Gabriele Amorth of the Vatican: "Practicing yoga is Satanic, it leads to evil just like reading Harry Potter." And no, the article isn't from the Onion.

Are you kidding?

OK, I'll shoot. Howie Kendrick had 4 hits and is now hitting .317/.354/.474 and is currently on pace for his highest OPS (.828). Mark Trumbo hit two bombs and has 15 on the season.

(pin drop)

Alternate title for this thread: "Angels hit rocker bottom."

Torii Hunter is slowly creeping down towards mediocrity - he's hitting .304/.353/.411 with only 2 HR. His reduced power trend seems to be continuing and once the BABIP reverts to the mean he'll be hitting .270-.280ish. But I wish Torii well.

Think about it. Last year at least the Angels started playing well and made the season reasonably interesting. 2010-11 were bad, but we were jaded and thought things would turn around eventually. 2003 wasn't so bad because we were still riding on the clouds of glory that was 2002, and weren't used to being World champs. 1987-2001 were, well, business as usual for a sucky franchise. 1995 was close, but only the last third - the first two-thirds were amazing. 1986 was bad, but only in the postseason, and hey, at least we made it. 1979-85 were a time of mercenary pseudo-contenders, with a couple playoff appearances and generally decent teams. 1961-78 were bad, but the franchise didn't know any better. Honestly, I can't think of a worse season than 2013, at least so far. Not only is it disappointing but it points to a rather crappy near future. The Athletics and Rangers are both great franchises with excellent farm systems and GMs who how to assemble a team. Maybe its time to bring Bill Stoneman back.

I'm still torn about whether to "proceed with caution" or "maybe the fat lady is singing." I think I'll choose proceed with caution because given the money invested on winning, the Angels really need to give a shot until they're certain they can't win with this core configuration - and that extends to at least next year. What they might want to do is if they're out by mid-July, sit Pujols for the rest of the year, trade Vargas, Hanson and Callaspo for prospects, give Calhoun and Jimenez a shot, maybe Cron. One ray of optimism is that even if Pujols and Hamilton continue to stink and with $50ish million tied up in them per year, they'll still have $80ish million to play with to build a great team. Oakland's total payroll is less than that and they're doing just fine. This, of course, means the Angels have to be savvy - and that's where I'm worried. Dipoto seems like he wants to be Billy Beane but doesn't quite have the smarts for it, or self restraint, or simply Arte's too involved.

Vote in the poll and discuss. If possible, pick one of my options but if none are close to what you prefer, pick other. Enjoy.

Good posts, dochalo. I'm torn between your position and ukyah's complete fire-sale. As you said, if the Angels were able to do a complete fire-sale--including at least one of Pujols and Hamilton--I'd be for it. Tear the whole thing down and build it up from scratch, with Trout the only untouchable player. But as you say, we're stuck with them and they can't possibly be this bad for all of the next 4+ years, so as long as they're both around you've got to at least somewhat try, and trading Howie and Erick, Vargas and Hanson, is giving up. That said, I do still advocate the partial fire-sale this July if they prove to be too far gone - say, 10+ games out of a wildcard spot. Then you can move players like Vargas and Hanson, maybe CJ, and get a few prospects back in return, and somewhat easily replace them in the off-season. 70runner, its hard not to believe that Pujols is older than his advertised age. Its a bit of a disgrace.

Hamilton sounds like a complete dumbass. Obviously, at age 32, he can't rely on his talent alone. He has no approach at the plate and, as when Vlad began to lose bat-speed, it gets ugly real quickly for players like that. I think the best-case scenario at this point is that he hits around .260 with 25ish HR, but that BA doesn't come back. Maybe next year we'll be lucky and he'll hit .280 with 30 HR, but the days are gone when this player hits .300+.

I highly doubt its going to happen, but the Angels have quite a few "salvageable parts" - meaning players they could trade and actually get decent prospects for, and not have to pay much of their contracts. Here is how I'd categorize the various players on the team: Keepers (players who will both be cheap the next few years and have significant value beyond that): Trout, Bourjos, Trumbo, Weaver, Richards Albatrosses (players that couldn't be traded without paying a significant portion of their contract): Pujols, Hamilton Salvageable Parts (players that have some trade value): Wilson, Vargas, Hanson, Kendrick, Aybar, Callaspo, Conger, Iannetta, Williams, Frieri, Downs, Burnett Extra Parts (players with little to no trade value): Everyone else Or something like that. So here's what I'd advocate: You can't do a fire-sale until, at the earliest, July. If the Angels aren't killing it by July 1 you start talking to potential trade partners. Then, if its mid-July and the Angels are clearly out of the running for the postseason, you start trading off the "Salvageable Parts" - as many as you can, really. The three starters will likely have the most trade value, but Kendrick and Aybar too. Some of the others could be traded for grade B prospects. But again, I don't think this will happen. I think we'll see the same thing we saw last offseason - throw more money around and try to patch a sinking ship.

I was one of those folks who, even at 9-17 or 15-27, thought the Angels would turn this ship around and sneak into the postseason (if, perhaps, to lose in a one game playoff, but that's another matter). Then, when they won 8 games in a row and then 10 of 12, I felt vindicated. But now, losing three in a row, at home, to the Houston frickin' Astros, I feel...well, I'm thinking its time to accept the inevitable: this team isn't going anywhere. The thing is, this team is talented enough ("on paper") that they'll have hot spells and we may even get further glimmers of hope. But it looks like both a case of too little, too late, and the simple fact is this team doesn't have the heart, the soul, the chutzpah, to win. What makes matters worse is that there is no end in sight. The team is built around Hamilton and Pujols, and we've got four more years of the former and eight more of the latter. The farm system is in shambles with no grade A prospects and only a few decent ones. It just doesn't seem like there's an end in sight. Our beloved Angels are, well, a pretty crappy organization right now from top to bottom. There are a few bright spots but they're all tarnished but the overall mediocrity. So here's the deal. Just as I can't really muster any hope, I see no point in being totally depressed. So here's the silver lining part: If we let go of expectations, if we stop believing that the Angels are what they were in 2002-09--one of the top five franchises in the game--and just return to a 90s mentality, well, we won't be disappointed and we'll be able to enjoy the little things: the small victories, the performances by our favorite players, and so forth. If we can just let go of this need to "win now, at all costs," maybe we can re-learn to enjoy the game of baseball. And here's the one thing that I do hope for: That Arte and Jerry do the same. Please, please, please....build us a team for the future. Stop trying to patch a sinking ship. Let it sink, unload as much of the extra weight as possible, and try to build a contender while Trout is still in his prime and an Angel. I can wait two or three years of rebuilding, but what I can't deal with is another 80ish win season. Thanks for listening.

...are swept by the Astros in a four game series AT HOME!!!, I....just don't know what to say. This is so pathetic, so ugly. Hopefully they'll pull this one out and win tomorrow, but at this point I'm at a loss. And let me ask you this question: If you're Mike Trout are you wanting to sign a 10-year contract with this team?

Getting to first base and not scoring...sounds like junior high.

You realize it is pretty funny using the greatest baseball player in the history of the game as your benchmark.

How about the Tigers rotation - Sanchez, Scherzer, Verlander, and Fister are all top 10 in WAR.

My biggest concern is not being competitive over the next few years - I think we will be - but the performances of "superstars" Pujols and Hamilton and the sheer weight of their massive contracts and how that will impact the team. I'm also concerned with an organizational philosophy that focuses on big contract players in the latter half of their careers and guts the already weak farm system at seemingly every opportunity. I know it isn't so simple as that, but that's the end result. So yeah, I think the Angels will win 85+ games this year and at least be on the edge of contention if not sneaking into the postseason. But as long as Pujols and Hamilton are performing poorly--and I see little signs of anything other than mild improvement on Hamilton's part, while Pujols has pretty much been consistently league average for the entire year--this team won't have the flexibility and internal core strength to build a truly great team. Its called "too many eggs in too few baskets." All that said, it could be that Dipoto's philosophy is to try to field a competitive enough team that, if all goes right, they can make the playoffs once or twice during Hamilton and Wilson's contracts. Meanwhile, rebuild from within, focus on international scouting and the farm and then build towards a powerhouse team in 4-5 years - when Trout is in his prime, Bourjos and Trumbo are hopefully still around and good, etc. But even 4-5 years seems optimistic when there are literally no star caliber players in the farm system. A truly fallow "field" takes quite awhile to bring back to fertility.