Angelsjunky

This new era of Angels baseball sucks.

My Trout prediction: .250/.320/.400, 10 HR, 20 SB

Wow, Adam, that's pretty pessimistic - especially for the payroll that Moreno's shelling out. Lifetime, my name is Jonathan, not Justin. And you might realize that i'm not one to overly "Scioscia bash." I do wonder, though, if he's past his prime as a manager.

As I've said before, a more reasonable expectation for Trout this year is more like .290/.900, 25 HR and 40 SB. That would still be a great year, especially with his defense - around 7 WAR. I'm not saying he won't out-play that, but if we're talking reasonable expectations - a line under which performance would be disappointing - I think that's about right.

Lifetime, the point is for a bit of fun and as a mental exercise. There's no harm in it. Honestly, I don't know what the point is of coming into a thread and asking what the point of it is. To Brian et al, as for Scioscia's role in the team's struggles, I think it is less a factor after 8 games - unless we're talking about bad call after bad call, which I don't think we are - and more a factor 50 or so games into the season. If the Angels are 20-30 and we're hearing grumblings about clubhouse tensions then you've got wonder what Scioscia's doing wrong. But at 2-6 we're more in a "Hmm, interesting, hope they figure things out soon" state. Good post, Dochalo. I can't help but think the Angels are in their "Hellenistic phase" (if you know your Greek history) or Empire phase of Rome - over-ripe after an earlier golden age, and trying to compensate for lack of the "It-factor" that championship teams always have with big contracts. I also agree that huge contracts almost never work out well, which is one of the reasons I'm more hesitant to applaud Dipoto as the supposed "JeDi Master." He seems to ignore that history. If the team tanks this year I think the best we can hope for is that Moreno and Dipoto realize something is rotten and they sell off what parts they can and go for a leaner, meaner look, focus on the farm and bargain hunting until the farm is thriving. This might mean some only-decent years but it would also mean that once Trout hits his prime years the farm would be churning out prospects.

First, a disclaimer. I honestly think the Angels will figure things out and win 90ish games and sneak into the playoffs, if only barely. They're just too talented not to and, well, it is early. But let's talk about the alternative for a moment - the worst-case scenario. What if...Trout truly regresses, Pujols continues his only-good performance from last year, Hamilton struggles and/or is injured, Trumbo bombs in the wrong way, Bourjos sucks, the pitching staff is awful, etc....and the Angels end up with 80-something wins and miss the playoffs. What happens? Do heads roll? Certainly Scioscia and Dipoto would be on the hot-seat but do you think Arte would make any major changes? Even go the firesale route and re-build the team (as much as possible) from scratch? Re-trade for Vernon Wells? Or would it be another year of "We played well but had our struggles; let's see how we do next year"? Again, remember that this team has one of the highest payrolls in baseball and the is predicted by many to not only be a shoe-in for the playoffs but a World Series favorite. To win 80-something games would be a complete disaster. What would Arte do?

If Richards pitches well maybe when Weaver gets back Blanton can become the most expensive batting practice machine in the world. His soft lobs would be perfect for it. I think I could make contact with his pitching.

I hear ya, my friend, but one way to fight that melancholy is with humor.

Alright, the Angels will eventually pull themselves out of this funk but for now let's enjoy the misery. I'll start... Remember when the Angels had good starting pitching? Remember when Mike Trout was good?

Ha ha. Yeah, it looks like a good one. I assume you've seen the movie, Talent for the Game? It isn't really about the Angels in any historical way but the main character is a scout for the Angels. One of the more unknown, under-rated baseball movies.

I didn't know you could read, Chuck.

Agreed. But as I said, we're more in "greenish yellow" than "orangish yellow." If we're 9-18 on May 1st I think we can start to worry, and if May is little better we can ramp it up to Red.

Or: BLUE: A raving lunatic of un-concern. GREEN: Not concerned at all. YELLOW: A little concerned. ORANGE: Very concerned. RED: A raving lunatic of concern.

Of course there are folks who are always in Blue-to-Green or always in Orange-to-Red.

So let's make a scale of Zones: BLUE: We're going to win no matter what! No one can stop us! 100 wins here we come!!! GREEN: Everything looks good - just the usual bumps in the road. Should win 90-something with relative ease. YELLOW: Starting to get worried here - some signs things could get worse. ORANGE: Major concerns - the team is definitely not what we thought it was. RED: We're screwed!!!! Time to AO on yo asses! I'd say we're comfortably in the Yellow Zone, but closer to Green than Orange.

Here are the reasons: 1) The starting pitching is not good. It isn't necessarily bad, but with Weaver out and CJ Wilson seemingly unable to recapture his #2 form, the Angels are left with five #3-5 starters. And even Weaver wasn't pitching well. 2) The offense might not be as good as hoped. This is my least concern of the three because at worst it should still be very good, and could be great, but it might not be as good as we hoped it would be, and not good enough to carry a mediocre pitching staff. 3) The bullpen "hiccup." Or is that hiccups? While it has been much improved since last year thus far, there is still the sense that there are no truly dominant relievers on this team. But again, we're only seven games in. I've been predicting a 13-14 April as I think it will take them time to figure things out and gel. But beneath the 2-5 record are some worrying things...let's hope they get ironed out.

"We'll settle for third."

Really, Chuck? Did you read my post? Evidently not. It has nothing to do with the article itself but the pictures. Relax.

Have you looked at their lineup? It begs to different with your assertion that they are "by far the best team..." As for the OP, good post. The AL East might actually be the most interesting division in baseball with no clearly dominant team, but no clearly bad teams. I do think it is too early to write DIckey off - I mean he's had two starts. Give the old guy a chance.

I stand by what I perceive based upon the footage and pictures that I've seen. Wrong call? Probably. A terrible one? No, at least not based upon the actual footage.

I disagree, and it has nothing to do with reading Fangraphs or which team someone is a fan of. Brian, just because you're completely unable to get past your own bias doesn't mean others can't. I'm just expressing what I see, not what I want to see. To be clear, I'm not saying it was a good call, just not as bad as people are making it out to be - and that's because of Pierzynski's handling which made it look much worse. It was actually a fantastic pitch with incredible break.

Yeah, its going to be Richards. Perfect opportunity for him. If he does well, I wouldn't be suprised if he knocks someone else out of the rotation when Jered gets back.

You guys are way over-reacting. It wasn't a terrible call at all - check out the Fangraphs article because you can see through slow motion that it was at least close to the strike zone when it crossed the plate. It is just that Pierzynski did poor glove work.

I'd say its a pretty significant concern and if you're not at least a bit worried you're in denial. Look at the Fangraphs article linked and check out the trends in his velocity over the last few years...not good.

If you want to be exact, the Angels were 3-8 through the first two weeks of 2002. I'm not sure what that has to do with 2013, but just informing you.