Angelsjunky

He's a mess. Watching him regularly its hard to imagine how he hit 43 HR last year or .359 in 2010. I'm sure he'll start hitting at some point but I'm guessing we're going to see something more like 2011 than 2012 or 2010. Yet another over-priced free agent signing by the Angels. Hopefully Arte and Jerry will learn this time.

Wells got regular playing time in 2011 and still sucked. Then once he started 2012 with exactly the same numbers as 2011, he lost his starting job. Can't blame Scioscia for not giving him a chance. After his excellent 2011, Bourjos should have had more of a chance last year to get in a rhythm, but the simple fact was that Trumbo and Morales were more productive and there were regular starts for all three.

Remember when Vernon Wells sucked?

Is he just taking it one day at a time?

Short-term or long-term? I'll do both. PLAYER: This year/long-term TROUT: 3/1 - I was expecting some regressing, into the .290-.300ish, .850-.900ish, 25 HR, 40 SB range. My only worry is that might have been too optimistic. Long-term he'll be fine, and more than fine - he'll be great. But my only small, nagging worry is that he'll never be as great as we saw last year. I think he will, but we'll have to wait and see. PUJOLS: 7/7 - Dude is old, old and injured. Albert needs to rest. Start by taking a few days off of bed-rest, see if he feels better. If not, DL time. I'd rather see 100-120 games of vintage Pujols than 140-150 of this. Long-term, well...this isn't a good sign. Even if he was on the rebound from last year's performance, this injury could nag him for years. Its going to be a long next 9 years. HAMILTON: 4/5 - He'll turn it around - he's just pressing. The only reason I give him a 4 and not lower is because he's...well, Josh Hamilton. Will he hit .280 with 25 HR or .330 with 45 HR? Will he play 100 or 145 games? We just won't know and it will be a year-to-year question. The contract was a massive overpay because it reflects his talent but not his erratic performance and injury history.

I appreciate the gist, Chuck, and agree that the sky isn't falling - but there are some serious concerns, especially the rotation. My earlier prediction of a 13-14 April may turn out about right--they'd have to go 5-2, which will be hard but is do-able. But the point is, there are lots of degrees between "everything's great" and "the sky is falling." This remains a very talented team--with the talent to contend--but one with some major problems that may not be fixable in the course of the season.

I don't know about "dismal." I think it is possible to go from top 5 to, at worst, around 15-20 - with proper tending and guiadance. The Angels went from top 5 about eight years ago and now have arguably the worst farm system in baseball. That's extreme and indicative of poor management and/or drafting.

Yes and no. Yes, it is cyclical but no, it doesn't have to go from excellent (top 5) to completely barren (bottom 5). A smart franchise will keep it relatively healthy, even in lean times. See the Red Sox or Yankees, for example.

I hear you and believe that Dipoto, in his Angelswin interview, spoke honestly about their plan - that they're trying to both rebuild the farm system and remain competitive at the same time. But the problem is that they keep paying huge sums of money for players past their prime, or that just aren't very good - and the number of prospects they've traded away has left the farm system barren, to such an extent that it will be 2-3 years at least before it is respectable and 3-5 before it is producing a large number of major league ready prospects. It isn't all bad - I'm not giving up hope and think that some changes have been positive and I like Dipoto's general philosophy. I just haven't liked a lot of his actual big moves, and obviously the results have been poor (so far). But it is a gamble, a risk - and the story isn't over. If everything gels right this team could be very good and make it to the playoffs, but I really think they need at least another starter - in addition to Weaver coming back strong, Wilson improving, and at least one of Vargas, Hanson or Richards notching it up. I just don't think you can win it all without three very good starters and right now the Angels don't even have one.

Not that we need another doom-and-gloom thread--and of course we must remember that the Angels DID just sweep the Tigers--but there are some legitimate concerns that aren't going away, and pose problems to this being a championship club. Namely: - The starting pitching is mediocre at best. They don't have their best pitcher for another few weeks, and how he'll come back is a question-mark because he was throwing like a little leaguer before. CJ Wilson seems to be the pitcher he mysteriously turned to halfway through last year: a league average pitcher. Vargas and Hanson are, at best, average - maybe worse. Blanton is bad. Richards is the lone hope, but he's questionable. - The superstars are not superstars. Pujols is injured, Hamilton is just terrible and looks lost, and Trout looks like he did late last season - that the league figured him out and he has still yet to adjust, and is still striking out 20% of the time. None are hitting for much power. - The bullpen is....the bullpen, and hasn't really improved all that much from last year. The problem is that there are no quick or obvious fixes. The team has already spent its resources - the farm system is possibly the worst in baseball and Arte Moreno has emptied his pockets and pushed the salary to the edge of the luxury tax. The only changes that can help this team are from within. Now I was feeling this about a week ago and then was heartened by their performance in Detroit. Why the change? Is it so shameful to lose 2-of-3 to the Rangers? No, of course not. But the series highlighted the weaknesses above and reminded me that they aren't going away. The problems continue and the team continues to sputter. Though I think my preseason prediction of 93 wins is possible, unless there are significant improvements I see more like ~85, and both the Rangers and Athletics are both 90+ win teams so it is unlikely the Angels would make the playoffs. Finally, as a sidenote, for the love of all that's holy, please Arte stop with the George Steinbrenner impersonation. It didn't work for George - in fact, it pushed the most successful franchise in baseball history into its longest World Series slump - and it won't work for you. You can't build a perennial champion by gutting the farm system and focusing on past-their-prime overpriced stars. You've got to focus on the core, the heart, which is the farm and the homegrown players it produces. Actually, the bright spots on this team right now - Trumbo, Bourjos, and Richards in particular - are homegrown. The problems and underachievers are all mercenaries, for the most part. Think about that, Mr. Moreno (and Dipoto) and think of the long-range plan.

One think I like about Trumbo is that he seems really serious about improving himself. This year he seems to have a much smarter approach at the plate. I don't want to speak too soon but I think he may be able to retain at least some of that average. I was thinking .270 or so was about all we could hope for but now I'm wondering if he could hit ~.290 or so.

That's a huge jump in reasoning, Scotty. As some have said, it remains to be seen how those prospects will pan out. Segura and Corbin are in the majors and look good--although it is early. Skaggs still projects as a #2-3 starter, Roach #3-4 (I'm guessing). Amarista looks like a fringe starter or decent UT guy, and both Hellweg and Pena look destined to be back-end starters or relievers. A solid bunch, but not great - and no surefire or even likely stars.

As far as long-term goes, I guess I worry a bit about two things: One, that his BA will fluctuate a good deal due to his high strikeout totals and trend downward sooner than later; possible (probable?) decrease in speed over the next five years, exacerbating the first issue. .320 with 30 HR, 50 SB and Gold Glove defense is super sexy; .260 with 25 HR and 15 SB and above average defense is good but unspectacular. I'm not saying it will be so drastic, but that he's going to have to A) work on reducing those strikeouts and slow down on the cheeseburgers.

I said it in the offseason and I'll say it again: Trout is likely to regress this year, but it will be regressing from "godlike" to "awesome but mortal." I'm expecting something around .300/.850-.900 with 25 HR and 40 SB this year, and improvement next year. I've heard some fans predict ridiculous lines like .340 with 40 HR and 60 SB and I just have to shake my head. I mean it could happen but why expect that? Its almost unfair for the poor kid. Give him a chance to be mortal.

I never made it past little league, but thanks Vern, I appreciate the sentiment.

Sure. Blanton's WHIP?

2.00 WHIP through six innings. Great stuff.

But, but, but...Howie was a future batting champion.

At least if Blanton gets bombed (again), the decision to put him long relief when Weaver gets back and keep Richards in the rotation will be that much easier to make.

Reveille84, it doesn't have to be either/or. There's a big difference between playing every day in the field and sitting on the bench coming to the plate and (hopefully) running the bases four times a game. Not to mention that if Pujols gets on late in the game he can be pinch-run for. So we're really only talking about 4 times at bat and 0-4 times running the bases. Not being out in the field for nine innings should help and, if coupled with anti-inflammatories, will at least hopefully keep it from getting worse.

They already made a statement by sweeping the AL Champs. I agree with Chuck that taking 2 of 3 is enough to further it.

If I'm Jerry Dipoto I'm wondering WTF is wrong with this coaching staff and clubhouse that players frequently do better once they leave the team? Napoli, Wells, Santana especially so, but even Vlad to some extent. Dan Haren and Chone Figgins didn't, of course, so maybe this isn't true across the board. But you do have to wonder about Wells. I think it also points to just how important psychology is to the game. That said, he'll come back down to earth. I see him more as a .270, 30 HR hitter, not a .315, 35 HR type. He did the latter once or twice in his career but they were exceptions. When the Angels traded for him I hated it but thought he'd at least manage .270, 25-30 HR and only be another overpaid borderline star. Even though it was a bad trade at the time, no one could have foreseen how he played the last two years.

This is simple, really. As some have said, the best "cure" is rest. Pujols should not be playing 1B. He should be the full-time DH for the rest of the season and then, if need be, have surgery in the offseason (didn't know there was a surgery for it). Trumbo is not a bad first baseman. The question, though, is why is this a problem in April? Is this another case of a ballplayer being overly macho and trying to muscle through it? If there is a surgery for it, why didn't it happen back in November? Seems like Albert f-ed up on this one.

After a sweep of the AL Champs I think its safe to say the Angels are back.

Wells > Hamilton