LSB Around the Horn
BaseballGirl over at AthleticsNation posted an email she received from an Angels fan about how the AL West battles are going to develop. In an effort to shatter the stereotype that the only people who trot out the "Rangers can hit but don't have starting pitching" meme are national writers and uninformed Ranger fans, her correspondent says:
"Texas doesn’t even enter this conversation. Let’s talk about that. They did nothing in the offseason to improve their perennial weakness: starting pitching. They did add Josh Hamilton to the OF, so I guess the old “we’ll bludgeon our way to a pennant” strategy still holds sway in the Ranger front office. Oh, those Texans. In a way it’s almost loveable.
Threat assessment: none."
I think that even Ben Broussard's mother will acknowledge that this lineup, as constituted, isn't going to do much bludgeoning. As a matter of fact, I believe they mentioned on Norm's show today that there were more homeruns at Safeco last year than at TBIA. And it's weird that no one seems to acknowledge that this is a staff with a high beta... sure, Millwood, Padilla and Jennings could all serve up piping hot mugs of suck all year, but none are all that far removed from decent seasons. At least with Padilla in the rotation, we can raise the threat assessment to "elevated chance of concussion" every five days. To cap off the post, BaseballGirl includes a poll about how the race will end up, with the Rangers in last for every option but one, which says facetiously, "The Rangers will win it all." Ha ha! It's funny because we suck!
Over at BeyondtheBoxscore, R.J. Anderson has a post that has pitching advice from Nolan Ryan and George Bush. Suprisingly, the President does not recommend push-polling in an effort to hurt the opposing batters' reputations... instead, he suggests calling in precision airstrikes on them. Anderson analyzes all of the no-hitters since 1970 in an effort to validate his hypothesis that pitchers with a higher BB/9 rate would have a higher incidence of no-hitters. He concludes that there doesn't seem to be a correlation, but it's an interesting post nonetheless.
Over at Sickels' site, he had an April Fool's joke about a "sleeper" prospect that incorporates some Star Wars humor. After reading it, I was reminded a bit of this, from The Onion. Ah, dorky in-jokes, you gotta love 'em.
0 recs |
50
comments
Read Related
Comments
That letter shows you exactly what Angels fans know about baseball, and divison rivals: nothing.
My theory is Angel fans have melted brains from listening to Rex Hudler and that Physioc guy.
I have met exactly two smart Angel fans out here in Southern California, and they work at sports cards shop, and are sports buffs in general. Which is why they are smarter than the average Angel fan.
by lonestarJon on Apr 3, 2008 7:43 PM CDT 0 recs
hudler and physioc
more than likely, i'm going to have to listen to them tonight. F
by ab03 on
Apr 4, 2008 10:26 AM CDT
up
0 recs
interesting tags.
anyway when bradley is in RF and Salty is brought back up then i think some bludgeoning shall be done.
by DSheppard on Apr 3, 2008 7:52 PM CDT 0 recs
Concur
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
by slc ranger on
Apr 3, 2008 9:34 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Well, I'm a Rangers fan and I agree
Starting pitching is our biggest weakness. Bigger than our offense. If we played in a division with starters equal to our own, then I'd say we need to improve our offense.
But we don't.
The fact is, we won't content in this division with the M's and the Angels' starters being substantially better than ours. Even the A's, who mind you are not a good team, have an advantage over our starters based on home field advantage alone.
by chief on Apr 3, 2008 8:16 PM CDT 0 recs
But that's why we've got so much pitching in the system
We're trying to improve our pitching. It may be our biggest weakness, but we also have a rotation that could be a suprise. K-Mill and Vinny won 16 and 15 games two years ago, and Jennings can be a 200 inning workhorse.
The Angels right now have Jered Weaver, John Garland, Joe Saunders, Ervin Santana, and Dustin Mosely. That's solid, but it's not gonna blow anyone away until Lackey comes back.
The M's have Bedard, Felix, Silva, Washburn, and Bautista. Two good aces, but only average-mediocrity after that.
The A's have Blanton, Harden, Dutscherer, Dana Eveland, I'm assuming Lenny Dinardo.
None of those are exactly invincable rotations in theirselves.
I'm not saying we're any better, we're not - but my point is, the Angels aren't exactly head and shoulders above the rest of the division, like that dumb fan seems to think so.
And furthermore, that fan obviously has no idea the direction the Rangers are taking, or what our farm system looks like. And you wouldn't expact a rival fan to know too much about that, but this particular Angle fan has obviously never read anything from Baseball Amrerica, or has ever heard about the Teixeira/Gagne trades.
But that's fine, it just means it'll be more fun when our young guys develop in 3-5 years, and we stun everone like the Rockies did.
by lonestarJon on
Apr 3, 2008 8:32 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I'm speaking of the current roster, not the farm
I fully support rebuilding and one-year contracts. I think it's going to make us better in a few years. But I also think Angels fans have every right to assume they have the best team in the division. They've added a few players (by ridiculously overspending, mind you) and have waltzed into the playoffs, what, 6 out of the last 7 years?
However, until our young pitchers are ready (and really, who's to say they'll even pan out), our weakness will always be pitching. Hitters don't mind signing a one year deal to come here and boost their stats, but pitchers steer clear.
by chief on
Apr 3, 2008 8:45 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Very true
But getting back to the Angels, they may have waltzed into the playoffs lately, but every time they get there they get steamrolled. They are really not that good a team, compared to some of the actualt elite teams in baseball (Red Sox, Tigers, Indians, ext.)
That's my point. So what if they're the class of the ALW - that's not much of a bragging right.
by lonestarJon on
Apr 3, 2008 8:49 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Not saying much at all
But it does give them basis for their opinions of us, since they generally stomp the shit out of the Rangers. But you're right... I think their last few feeble attempts at playoff ball will cause them to make a run at Bonds before all is said and done.
by chief on
Apr 3, 2008 8:52 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Hey, it was us sweeping them at the end of last year
That cost them home advantage against the Red Sox. We actually played a lot better against them last year compared to what we normally do. So they shouldn't just act like the rest of the ALW is a bunch of worthless schlubs.
The A's and the Rangers should only get better in the coming years, while the Angels have a huge, inflexible payroll and an aging team - the worm is gonna turn sooner or later, and unless the Angels make some big changes in the coming years, they're setting up to be behind the curve when that happens.
by lonestarJon on
Apr 3, 2008 8:57 PM CDT
up
0 recs
The Angels
aren't going anywhere, unfortunately. Saunders, Kotchman, Chone (Ranger killer), Napoli, Kendrick, Santana, Jered Weaver, and Willits. These are talented young players.... aaaaaand then there's Big Vladdy Guerrero. aaaaaand that outfield. Oh, and that rotation, which will improve after Lackey returns to form (Lackey is only 29). Tell me... exactly what curve are they gonna be behind? If they're gonna be behind some kind of curve, I'd hope the Rangers would be there with them, because that's a HELL of a nucleus.
What nucleus do the A's have to build on? We have much more promise for improvement than Oakland.
For the record, I hate the Angels. I just have to respect the hell out of them for their continued success in the division and Ranger killing.
by SarasotaRanger on
Apr 3, 2008 10:04 PM CDT
up
0 recs
The As
have a much, much better nucleus than the Angels, if nothing only for the fact that they have more players who might be stars. Your evaluation of young players is either biased, or you're an idiot because guys like Willits (a 4th OF), Santana (a mediocre starter), Saunders (a 5th starter), Napoli (a mediocre bat and a worse catcher) aren't very good at all.
The As with Suzuki, Cahill, Rodriguez, Gonzalez, Buck, et all are better. The Rangers with Salty, Andrus, Teagarden, Davis, et all are better. Seriously, what the hell is so good about 1/2 the players you list up there cause I'm not seeing it.
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 3, 2008 10:18 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Exactly what I was going to say
The Angels aren't going to dissapear overnight, but their three biggest offensive compentents - Anderson, Vlad, and Torri Hunter - are all going to decline in the next three years, if not sooner.
And they're paying those guys so much, it doesn't leave much flexibilty to replace the via free agency. They do have that Brandon Wood kid coming up, but they're going to need more than him to rescue their offense in the coming years.
by lonestarJon on
Apr 3, 2008 10:25 PM CDT
up
0 recs
How can you...
decline sooner than in the next 3 years?
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
by slc ranger on
Apr 3, 2008 10:30 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Injuries, old age
you can do it quite easily. Just ask Bret Boone.
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 3, 2008 10:37 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Ok...
but even if they are hurt tomorrow and their careers are over isn't tomorrow included in "the next 3 years". :)
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
by slc ranger on
Apr 3, 2008 11:06 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Well, Garret Anderson is really old
He's about had it. Torri and Vlad have a few years left, but Vlad's gotta stay healthy.
by lonestarJon on
Apr 3, 2008 10:38 PM CDT
up
0 recs
And neither Anderson nor Hunter
are really good bats either way and Hunter has injury issues as well, since he's played on the turf his entire career.
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 3, 2008 10:38 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Brandon Wood
is like their Chris Davis, good guy to have, but flawed as a prospect.
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 3, 2008 10:35 PM CDT
up
0 recs
LOL
Ok fire, whatever you say there, guy. Obviously those players for the Angels are budget. That's why they were starters and/or significant contributors on a division champ last year.
Ah, you forgot Cust along with your A's players. Possibly the best of the bunch.
by SarasotaRanger on
Apr 3, 2008 10:34 PM CDT
up
0 recs
You must not
watch baseball very often, because a lot of those guys were awful last year. Seriously, have you ever seen Santana pitch? Saunders? Have you seen Willits try to hit? They are decent players but to treat them as anything but role players is stupid.
The Angels have not 1 impact talent on either side of the ball coming up. Their best guys (Ardenhart and Wood) are good but flawed. Seriously, who in their team might be a star?
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 3, 2008 10:37 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Willits is actually one guy on that team
That might make a pretty good little player. I'd say he and David Murphy are about on the same level.
But you're right, if you look at their farm system, after Adenhart and Wood, it's a bunch of guys that are in Low-A or rookie league. There's not too much in their cupboard.
by lonestarJon on
Apr 3, 2008 10:45 PM CDT
up
0 recs
The problem is of course
that Willits has a minor league slgging % of .394 and a major league slgging % of .337. That's bad. I don't see how anyone that power inept is anything but a better Tug Hulett.
The best young player they have is probably Kotchman, but some are bigger believers of Kendrick than I. Personally, I don't think a 2B that doesn't walk, hits for little power and plays mediocre defense can be all that helpful.
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 3, 2008 11:47 PM CDT
up
0 recs
So basically....
Michael Young with less power?
by venturafearsnolan on
Apr 4, 2008 12:08 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Kendrick?
Yeah, that's probably a good comp. Less power, more speed.
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 4, 2008 12:17 PM CDT
up
0 recs
interesting
So if a young player doesn't come up and smack the F out of major league pitching right away, he's not a good talent? Does he have to smack around some AA pitching for a few years and get his face on Baseball America cover or something? Is that more important than playing at a major league level? Hell, I guess being a prospect is better than actually making it to the major leagues... keep that mystique about you that you're a hot up and coming player. Keep people talking about you on message boards that you're gonna be great.
For the record, you are correct that some of the Angels I listed were not stellar at the plate last year. That doesn't mean they're not a core nucleus of LA's future. I hope Andrus, Tea, CD, Salt, Kiker, Beavin, and company make it up and produce in a few years.
by SarasotaRanger on
Apr 3, 2008 10:45 PM CDT
up
0 recs
No
when you're a mediocre player, you're not a "core" player. If you'd watch more baseball, perhaps you'd understand that. In fact, you probably don't even need to watch more baseball, you just need to go to the www.thebaseballcube.com before you start posting.
None of those players you listed are star powers. A grand total of 2 MIGHT be above average major leaguers. That's not a "young, talented nucleus", that's a bunch of decent role players. If you think a team can be great with a bunch of role players, bully for you. But to say that teams with potentially impact players are inferior to the team with the said role players is pretty dumb.
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 3, 2008 11:50 PM CDT
up
0 recs
And you need to quit
reading magazines telling who is supposed to be good and watch players play. Don't tell me about watching baseball. Hypocrit. 2 players at most? You've just shown off your ignorance to the world. Congratulations.
by SarasotaRanger on
Apr 4, 2008 8:56 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Ah, the ol' Kornheiser skidoo
Mr. Tony's advice when you are losing badly in a sports argument:
Loudly declare your self the winner and storm out of the room.
Props...
Rex Hudler is in demand as a motivational speaker.
by Brian Thomas on
Apr 4, 2008 9:11 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Got a laugh out of me,
but I wasn't losing. Star power all around, as pointed out by Fire, apparently is required to have a strong nucleus. I disagree.
What is star power for a young player anyways? Minor league dominance? Major league performance? What star power do the A's have? Buck, Cust? Suzuki actually had lesser numbers at the plate than Napoli, although they were relatively similar.
by SarasotaRanger on
Apr 4, 2008 9:48 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Barton is well regarded
"I can only hope that you continue to monitor me, and help me out as I slowly work to take the training wheels off." - BG
by Chase Irwin on
Apr 4, 2008 10:38 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Cahill, Rodriguez, Buck and Gonzalez
are all seen as good players. Gio Gonzalez, Brett Anderson, et all are all seen as at least solid. Buck is already in the majors and so is Gonzalez.
Of coruse, you have no idea who any of those people are, so get googling.
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 4, 2008 11:50 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Gonzalez is in the majors...
hmmm... ok. Somebody might want to tell the A's that, because they sent him down before the season started. Thanks for your accurate facts, Fire.
by SarasotaRanger on
Apr 4, 2008 12:48 PM CDT
up
0 recs
My bad
they kept him in AAA. Good for them. He's still a much better player than any Angel not named Brandon Wood.
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 4, 2008 12:55 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I like the sound
of that Cahill kid.
"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck
by DJCahill on
Apr 4, 2008 2:24 PM CDT
up
0 recs
2 players at most.
Quote it, write it down. Whatever. The only two players on the Anaheim Angels squad that might be long-term, above average regulars are Casey Kotchman and Jered Weaver.
by FirebatM3 on
Apr 4, 2008 11:52 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Mark me down
as a proponent of getting the opportunity to get slammed in the playoffs every year. You can't win a World Series without getting to the playoffs. Sometimes the elite teams don't win. Were the Rockies elite last year? Were the Cardinals elite two years ago?
by badradiorules on
Apr 4, 2008 10:51 AM CDT
up
0 recs
The Angels
are just better. Period. I am not going to base my opinion on hope, but proven talent and experience. I hope to high hell I am wrong, but I am not going to look through rose colored glasses anymore. That being said... I am a fan and will watch and hope they win.
by SarasotaRanger on
Apr 3, 2008 9:36 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Sample size issues, of course...
but 1-3 pitched well enough, basically, to win games so far. The offense has been wretched.
"I know you're a bit dense but no, it doesn't. Obviously lying isn't a problem for me."
by benmor78 on
Apr 3, 2008 9:10 PM CDT
up
0 recs
it's hard to really counter
these arguments until our team actually does something. The starting pitching was attrocious last year, and we really didn't do much to improve it. Sure, we know there's a chance that Millwood, Padilla, and Jennings should produce better this year....but I'm not gonna call anyone an idiot who breaks out the ol' Rangers are all hit and no pitch until we actually DO pitch.
by SteveP on Apr 3, 2008 8:24 PM CDT 0 recs
¡Vámonos!
"I can only hope that you continue to monitor me, and help me out as I slowly work to take the training wheels off." - BG
by Chase Irwin on
Apr 4, 2008 10:48 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Ugh
Angels fandom and Athletics Nation, together at last. The meeting of the perfect mix of idiocy and weird internet subculture.
by FirebatM3 on Apr 3, 2008 9:42 PM CDT 0 recs
+1
A true confluence.
"I can only hope that you continue to monitor me, and help me out as I slowly work to take the training wheels off." - BG
by Chase Irwin on
Apr 4, 2008 10:45 AM CDT
up
0 recs
We all make the same mistake
When faced with uncertainties, we are more inclined to make positive assumptions regarding those on our own team than someone else's team. The Halo fan does this in his post, the A's fans do this consistently, the M fans do this in a bizarre and self-flagellating kind of way, and we are guilty of the same thing. It's not easy to think completely objectively when you want your team to do well so badly.
That said, I am not cutting any slacks for the obvious ignorance in that Halo dude's post.
by Telegraph on Apr 3, 2008 11:00 PM CDT 0 recs
Nice profile pic
And with the 22nd overall selection the Dallas Cowboys select Jonathan Stewart.
by TheBZA on
Apr 4, 2008 9:11 AM CDT
up
0 recs
It's funny,
because the reason I think this team will be a big upgrade over last year is because of pitching and defense. Offensively, they are probably the same as last year's team, as I think there isn't a huge downgrade from Teixeira and Lofton to Broussard and Hamilton.
"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck
by DJCahill on Apr 4, 2008 9:11 AM CDT 0 recs










