Moreno to eat duck?

Sawman · 12-05-2006, 03:49 PM

LA Times article, registration required.

Quote:

As you recall, the Angels were a huge disappointment last season and the last we heard from Moreno he was telling everyone, "I guarantee we're going to do something major this off-season."

When told that most people would expect him to eat crow, Moreno said, "If you make a mistake, you make a mistake. I knew as soon as the words came out of my mouth, my foot was going in there.

"In fact I will give money back to anyone who bought season tickets and doesn't believe we have a good team," Moreno said, while pointing out his UCLA furniture store-like offer must be accepted before the season begins. "I've always believed in refunding the tickets if someone doesn't believe we're giving them good service and that applies here."

The Angels have discussed a number of trades and have one deal on the table that might still come to fruition, but as Moreno said, "Basically the question is do we give up young pitching — not just one, but a young starter and reliever — for a hitter?

Link

Nice to see that Moreno understands when he may have made a mistake by promising a big splash. I don't know about everyone else, but I like Arte Moreno. He strikes me as a guy who knows what he wants, and trusts the people that he puts in place. When he realizes he may have stuck his foot in his mouth, he admits it. I'm glad he owns the Angels.

Laloosh · 12-05-2006, 05:08 PM

I'm glad he owns the Angels, too, but what he's basically saying is, "I promised something I'm not going to deliver." He's a great owner, but it's pretty disappointing to hear him say that. In essence, he's admitting that there will be no "major splash" this off-season.

And yes, Arte, you DO give up a young starter and reliever for a hitter. As long as it's not Ervin, of course

Sawman · 12-05-2006, 05:35 PM

Quote:

In essence, he's admitting that there will be no "major splash" this off-season.

Agreed, and considering the market, I'd prefer that the Angels didn't feel the need to make a big splash. Personally, I still think we have the guys in house to handle the job.

Laloosh · 12-05-2006, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sawman

Agreed, and considering the market, I'd prefer that the Angels didn't feel the need to make a big splash. Personally, I still think we have the guys in house to handle the job.

You're probably, right, Sawman. It's just disappointing that the Angels spent $50 million, and all they got to show for it was Sarge, Jr.

RTT · 12-06-2006, 04:25 AM

I'm happy that Arte admitted that nothing's going to happen but i'm still very, very, very dissapointed in him to the point of myself thinking if I should even be an Angels fan anymore. I'm tired of having the best pitching and the worst offense.

StecHouse · 12-07-2006, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTT

I'm happy that Arte admitted that nothing's going to happen but i'm still very, very, very dissapointed in him to the point of myself thinking if I should even be an Angels fan anymore. I'm tired of having the best pitching and the worst offense.

With all do respect, this statement reeks of ignorance. Baseball Championships are built around pitching and the Angels have a bunch of it. This is a wonderful problem. We are right on the brink of being something special and it is all because of our pitching. Stoneman is putting together solid packages to acquire a hitter via the trade route. However, other teams are trying to rape us. Stoneman offered Santana and Aybar for Tejada and it still wasn't enough for the O's. I would take two good players, much less a potential stud in Santana, for one any day and have plenty of money left over spend elsewhere. The O's were crazy not to take that deal. They wanted Shields also and another prospect. Boston was trying to do the same thing to us for Ramirez. Teams right now are expecting us to trade our pitching strength for hitting strength. I know it isn't a very sexy concept but it is by far the right concept. Hell, all it takes is for ONE of our young hitters to become productive like we expect Kotchman to do and what DMac could potentially do and we have our second World Series title. We should not trade Santana or Weaver for anybody right now. I know it sounds extreme, but you might be looking at the second coming of Pedro for Delino trade if we trade away Santana. He might very well be that good. Stoneman is trying his best. Other teams are simply asking for the moon and we shouldn't give in.

Laloosh · 12-07-2006, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StecHouse

With all do respect, this statement reeks of ignorance.

Ironically, you followed up "With all do (sic) respect" with a disrespectful statement. Dude is entitled to his opinion and you're entitled to yours, but there's no reason to judge him for his.

And how did that pitching pay off for us in 2006? Oh yeah, a second place finish in the second-worst division in baseball.

I agree that Santana is our ace of the future, but most teams carry 10 pitchers on their MLB roster. If we're so pitching rich, why not trade some to get a bat to protect Vlad?

RTT · 12-07-2006, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by StecHouse

With all do respect, this statement reeks of ignorance. Baseball Championships are built around pitching and the Angels have a bunch of it. This is a wonderful problem. We are right on the brink of being something special and it is all because of our pitching. Stoneman is putting together solid packages to acquire a hitter via the trade route. However, other teams are trying to rape us. Stoneman offered Santana and Aybar for Tejada and it still wasn't enough for the O's. I would take two good players, much less a potential stud in Santana, for one any day and have plenty of money left over spend elsewhere. The O's were crazy not to take that deal. They wanted Shields also and another prospect. Boston was trying to do the same thing to us for Ramirez. Teams right now are expecting us to trade our pitching strength for hitting strength. I know it isn't a very sexy concept but it is by far the right concept. Hell, all it takes is for ONE of our young hitters to become productive like we expect Kotchman to do and what DMac could potentially do and we have our second World Series title. We should not trade Santana or Weaver for anybody right now. I know it sounds extreme, but you might be looking at the second coming of Pedro for Delino trade if we trade away Santana. He might very well be that good. Stoneman is trying his best. Other teams are simply asking for the moon and we shouldn't give in.

I respect that you have your opinion and you don't want to offend me but you still did.

Sure trading Santana could be the second coming of when Pedro Martinez was traded but we'll turn into the Atlanta Braves if we don't get some hitting.

We'll continue to make the playoffs but imo, that isn't enough. With Guerrero, we can't just make the playoffs and exit stage right every-time in the first round. I'm looking for a championship, not a "maybe" upcoming star ace which we already have in Big John Lackey.

bedir than average · 12-07-2006, 01:22 PM

I would love to have a money back guaruntee from ownership. This is great for you guys. Would you rather be making huge splashes with no impact or trading useful players for nothings?

If Seattle had this policy half of the tickets would be returned this week.

Sawman · 12-07-2006, 01:25 PM

Nobody needs to get offended, but let's keep the comments here about baseball, rather than individual posters.

Regarding the issue, here are my thoughts:

Quote:

Oh yeah, a second place finish in the second-worst division in baseball.

The second worst division in baseball? Are you basing that on the individual team records, because the AL West has been one of the most competitive divisions in baseball for quite some time. The fact that the four teams in the division don't have a Tampa Bay or Kansas City to feast on should show that they are stronger, not weaker than the other divisions. With the exception of the A's vs. the Mariners this season, everybody played the division teams very hard. I disagree completely that this was the second worst division in baseball. Look deeper.

Quote:

Sure trading Santana could be the second coming of when Pedro Martinez was traded but we'll turn into the Atlanta Braves if we don't get some hitting.

The Atlanta Braves? The team that won their division 11 straight times and 14 out of 15 years? Included in there was a World Series championship and 4 National League championships. And you're worried about becoming the Braves? Do you remember the frustrations that this team went through during the 90's? I would be happy to see the Angels win the division 11 straight times.

Laloosh · 12-07-2006, 01:50 PM

Sawman, "competitive" doesn't equal strong. It just means that the teams are equally balanced. Only one team from the AL West (the '02 Angels

) has appeared in the World Series in the past 15 years (16, actually).

bedir than average · 12-07-2006, 02:17 PM

LaLoosh, how many AL West teams have been the Wild Card since its introduction?

Laloosh · 12-07-2006, 02:26 PM

3 in 12 years (Seattle in '00, Oakland in '01, Angels in '02). Not sure I follow what you're getting at ... ?

8 from the AL East, 1 from the AL Central have won the other wildcard spots

World Series appearances in that time: 4 from the AL Central, 7 from the AL East, 1 from the AL West

bedir than average · 12-07-2006, 02:29 PM

I had thought that it was higher, in which case I would have had a point...instead it seems moot.

Laloosh · 12-07-2006, 02:39 PM

Heh ... I applaud your effort.

And 3 in 12 years isn't horrible (3 divisions, 12 wild card winners, you'd think by law of averages that each division would have 4).

But it's the 1 World Series appearance in that time that is the telling number in my eyes.

12-06-2006, 04:25 AM	#5 (permalink)
RTT Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Cali Posts: 148	I'm happy that Arte admitted that nothing's going to happen but i'm still very, very, very dissapointed in him to the point of myself thinking if I should even be an Angels fan anymore. I'm tired of having the best pitching and the worst offense. __________________ http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y11...titled-1-3.gif

12-07-2006, 01:22 PM	#9 (permalink)
bedir than average Administrator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,256	I would love to have a money back guaruntee from ownership. This is great for you guys. Would you rather be making huge splashes with no impact or trading useful players for nothings? If Seattle had this policy half of the tickets would be returned this week. __________________ US Men's National Team World Cup Qualifying \| Democracy in Sports Meets My First Campaign "You're only so sure you're right because they're so sure you're wrong." Orson Scott Card in Xenocide

12-07-2006, 01:50 PM	#11 (permalink)
Laloosh Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Valencia, CA Posts: 43	Sawman, "competitive" doesn't equal strong. It just means that the teams are equally balanced. Only one team from the AL West (the '02 Angels ) has appeared in the World Series in the past 15 years (16, actually). Last edited by Laloosh; 12-07-2006 at 01:55 PM.

12-07-2006, 02:17 PM	#12 (permalink)
bedir than average Administrator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,256	LaLoosh, how many AL West teams have been the Wild Card since its introduction? __________________ US Men's National Team World Cup Qualifying \| Democracy in Sports Meets My First Campaign "You're only so sure you're right because they're so sure you're wrong." Orson Scott Card in Xenocide

12-07-2006, 02:26 PM	#13 (permalink)
Laloosh Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Valencia, CA Posts: 43	3 in 12 years (Seattle in '00, Oakland in '01, Angels in '02). Not sure I follow what you're getting at ... ? 8 from the AL East, 1 from the AL Central have won the other wildcard spots World Series appearances in that time: 4 from the AL Central, 7 from the AL East, 1 from the AL West Last edited by Laloosh; 12-07-2006 at 02:31 PM.

12-05-2006, 05:08 PM	#2 (permalink)
Laloosh Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Valencia, CA Posts: 43	I'm glad he owns the Angels, too, but what he's basically saying is, "I promised something I'm not going to deliver." He's a great owner, but it's pretty disappointing to hear him say that. In essence, he's admitting that there will be no "major splash" this off-season. And yes, Arte, you DO give up a young starter and reliever for a hitter. As long as it's not Ervin, of course

12-07-2006, 02:29 PM	#14 (permalink)
bedir than average Administrator Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Starbucks Posts: 8,256	I had thought that it was higher, in which case I would have had a point...instead it seems moot. __________________ US Men's National Team World Cup Qualifying \| Democracy in Sports Meets My First Campaign "You're only so sure you're right because they're so sure you're wrong." Orson Scott Card in Xenocide

12-07-2006, 02:39 PM	#15 (permalink)
Laloosh Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Valencia, CA Posts: 43	Heh ... I applaud your effort. And 3 in 12 years isn't horrible (3 divisions, 12 wild card winners, you'd think by law of averages that each division would have 4). But it's the 1 World Series appearance in that time that is the telling number in my eyes.