In Soviet Russia, trade offers "start with" the worst player and are "completed with" the better players.

Um, yeah, good luck with that. Might as well ask for Vlad as a throw in too.

Arte is just plain allergic to bowlsheet.

I wonder if the Angels will ever be involved in a trade rumor where they get more value than they are giving up?

I would not trade either Kendrick or one of the allstar SP's for Holliday straight up, considering contracts and service time.

Holliday is an excellent player, but taking him out of Coors field, going to a slight pitchers park in LAA, and moving to a tougher league should knock some of his stats down.

Current projection, Matt Holliday
COL: 321/394/556
LAA: 292/361/483

It's just not worth that kind of package to gain a slight upgrade on Johnny Rivers:
274/327/453

Angels have upgraded the LF/DH spot just by giving Rivera actual playing time over Gary Matthews Jr. Right now Matthews' knee is bothering him, hopefully if he gets better the Angels won't downgrade by putting Rivera back on the bench. This would be a nice time to offer Rivera a contract like 3 years/21 million or something, then next year there will be no confusion about his playing time as Anderson's contract runs out.

We do have seasons in Southern California, at least on the sports calendar… July, of course, heralds the season when fans wonder whether their Angels will trade for a big bat.

They won’t.

“I don’t see anyone that can come in here for two months and hand me a World Series trophy,” owner Arte Moreno said

I wonder about this, given the Angels' recent history. They do have the best record in MLB, of course, but if they come up short in post-season again...I think this may be the time for a bold move. I thought the Angels should have offered ARod a gigantic contract.

As far as Holliday, I have read in a few places that many think his H/R splits are not as big of a deal as they would appear to be at first look and he would provide good value.

I have always thought Rivera was pretty good, though.

I hate Holiday-hugely overrated.
Plus, the Angels have like a million outfielders.

It's a frustrating team--great pitching, dumb FA signings and amazing prospects who fizzle.

Can you imagine how phenomenal they'd be if they made 3-4 big trades using their highly rated prospects from say 2004-2007?

Can you imagine how phenomenal they'd be if they made 3-4 big trades using their highly rated prospects from say 2004-2007

That's the thing--it seems like with one more big bat they'd be a really great team. Maybe Holliday is not that guy, but I think the Angels still need another hitter to take the next step and get another title.

If the Angels go into the playoffs with this roster, I would have to pick the Red Sox (not that anybody gives a damn who I pick) to win the pennant again.

Can you imagine how phenomenal they'd be if they made 3-4 big trades using their highly rated prospects from say 2004-2007?

Maybe they woulda won four Division Titles instead of three?

Some of those "highly rated prospects" are guys playing good baseball for the big club while drawing minimal salaries -- Santana, Weaver, Kotchman, Kendrick. Two others -- Aybar and Mathis -- are playing important roles this year, too. Could you have brought in a better bat three years ago for Jeff Mathis than you could now? Maybe ... but I'd rather have two very capable cheap players at that scarce position than face the prospect of living through 70 games a year from the likes of Ryan Budde or Jose Molina, just as I'd rather have Santana, Saunders and Weaver at the back end of the rotation instead of Dustin Moseley.

The Angels use prospects to create depth, and they use depth (plus Vlad) to win Division Titles. This then puts them in the best of eight for the World Series, which they won not long ago. All while keeping payroll flat, stadium prices low, and the brand of baseball exciting. I really don't see anything much to complain about, except for Matthews' contract and Scioscia's exaggerated deference to selected veterans.

It's just not worth that kind of package to gain a slight upgrade on Johnny Rivers:
274/327/453

"slight upgrade". 60 points of OPS is a slight upgrade? A 131 career OPS+ vs 108? Last 2.5 seasons of 137/150/144 in full-time play vs. 126, 91, 82 of injury-filled part-time play?

And we haven't even mentioned defense.

Matt Holliday is vastly superior to Juan Rivera. Juan Rivera is Matt Murton.

Still not worth a package of Kendrick plus Santana/Weaver, especially since you could easily get Bay or Nady for much less, so I'll agree with you there.

Can you imagine how phenomenal they'd be if they made 3-4 big trades using their highly rated prospects from say 2004-2007

Probably not very good. Generally those types of trades involve 2-4 prospects per big star brought in, so the Angels would have had to trade 3/5 of the rotation, plus pretty much the whole infield, both catchers, in addition to the whiffers who didn't (McPherson) or haven't yet panned out (Wood).

We'd be left with what, Bedard in the rotation, maybe some other expensive free agents, Tejada at short, Teixiera at 3rd, keeping Bengie Molina behind the plate and maybe Kennedy at 2nd.

That team would be mighty expensive, and not have as much depth as the current one to fill holes. In other words, we'd be the Yankees. I kinda like the team as it sits now better.

"slight upgrade". 60 points of OPS is a slight upgrade? A 131 career OPS+ vs 108?

About 20 runs I guess. Why bother fiddling with semantics when we both agree it isn't worth Kendrick AND a starter?

Payroll flat? They are at 120 million dollars. And if anything I think the Angels prove that payroll and ticket prices are not truly connected the way baseball and some of the salary critics like to make it out to be.

Looking back at the proposed prospect for superstar trades the Angels have been involved in recently, from Tejada to Teixiera to Miggy Cabrera, I don't regret not getting them done. In every case the cost looks like we would have given up too much.

If at some point over the last few years we could have packaged McPherson, Wood, and Mathis for Lance Berkman, that would have been nice, but I don't think it was ever on the table.

If the Angels go into the playoffs with this roster, I would have to pick the Red Sox (not that anybody gives a damn who I pick) to win the pennant again.

Angels have won their last 4 games against the Red Sox. Bring them on.

Angels have won their last 4 games against the Red Sox. Bring them on.

I kind of like the Angels and can't stand the Red Sox, but:

Ortiz is out

and

How does the Angels' recent playoff record look against the Red Sox?

I can see why, with the team hot, both Moreno and the fan base would be smacktalking and dismissive of needing another hitter right now, but things can change in a hurry--ask the Mets and Phillies fans.

Payroll flat? They are at 120 million dollars.

Adjusted for inflation, the Angels' payroll has indeed been flat the past five years. Using the Inflation Calculator to adjust every year to 2007 dollars, I get this:

Year: Nominal Adjusted
2004: $100.5 = $113.1
2005: $97.7 = $106.4
2006: $107.4 = $113.2
2007: $109.3 = $109.3
2008: $119.2 = $115.2

I can see why, with the team hot, both Moreno and the fan base would be smacktalking and dismissive of needing another hitter right now, but things can change in a hurry--ask the Mets and Phillies fans.

Yes indeed: Ask the Mets and the Phillies how much having a good #5 starter is worth to them....

Many, many Angels fans agree with you, and wish we could get that One Big Bat; I might be in the minority. But the contractual realities are such that the likeliest place for an upgrade (LF/DH) is precisely where there is the biggest logjam on the field. There is no way you can trade Garret Anderson, and no way he won't get the majority of ABs as long as he's healthy. Hell, it took 1.5 years of GMJ sucking eggs before Scioscia would even considering starting the vastly superior hitter Rivera. Holliday would be a great upgrade, but cows would also look pretty if they could only fly.

Meanwhile, unlike most other good teams right now, the Angels don't have a single player (I don't think) who you could look to and say that his offensive stats are likely to come down to earth. They've been this good *without* hitting as good as they should, so that's one reason for comparative complacency.

My point wasn't that it wasn't flat but that there "flat" happens to be 100+ million dollars year in year out.

Angels have won their last 4 games against the Red Sox. Bring them on.

If they played in the playoffs, it would come down to home field advantage. The Red Sox are insane at home and suck on the road. I know the Angels won two of three at Fenway in April, but I wouldn't expect that to happen again in October.

My point wasn't that it wasn't flat but that there "flat" happens to be 100+ million dollars year in year out.

Do you do legal work for Bill Clinton?

About 20 runs I guess. Why bother fiddling with semantics

2 wins is now semantics? And over a full season (not that Rivera has ever played one), it's closer to 2.5-3 wins by my quickie RC/G calculations. On offense alone. Juan Rivera's probably about as close to Holliday as Kendrick is to Utley.

My point is that if the Angels only have to give up prospects for Holliday, they should probably do that in a second. Yes, if picking up Holliday requires creating holes at 2B and in the rotation, that's just robbing Peter to pay Paul -- which is why you pretty much never see any team make this sort of deadline deal and of course the Rox know that. But if they could upgrade to him without hurting the ML roster, even over 2 months that's a substantial upgrade and greatly improves them for the playoffs.

19-

I agree, but given that Holliday is the MVP and still is not quite 30, no way the Rockies deal him just for prospects. I think Joe Sheehan, generally not a fave of mine, had this right. Holliday stays in COL. My guess is the COL brass believes--correctly IMO--that given the state of the division, they can contend on 2009 with a few tweaks and better luck.

Do you do legal work for Bill Clinton?

Timely!

given that Holliday is the MVP...

Well, who can really say how life might proceed in that weird alternate reality...

Rivera's a quality player, but I think a trade to the Mets could help both teams. Willits isn't as good in the abstract, but a switch-hitting OBP specialist is a much better fit for their lineup than another righty low-OBP type, so the Angels would lose less than the raw difference between them would imply. And the Mets just need a solid OF to stabilize the situation.

Also, I don't live in LA, but I think it's incumbent upon any organization not to let things get to the point where the fans are filling out the lineup. Keep Garret on the roster because he's popular? Sure. Have him start every day for that reason? You can't have that.

A similar thing has happened in contemporary music . . .

Angels have won their last 4 games against the Red Sox. Bring them on.

Asking anyone to bring it on didn't work too well for GWB, but since I posted that the Angels have won their 5th in a row, bringing out the brooms. The Angels, with the current roster, are capable of beating anybody. Doesn't mean they necessarily will of course. I hope the Red Sox look this pathetic in October. Never mind, I hope they are sitting at home in October, watching the Yankees and Rays play the Angels and Central winner.

Rivera's a quality player, but I think a trade to the Mets could help both teams.

What would the Mets be giving up for Rivera?

Can you imagine how phenomenal they'd be if they made 3-4 big trades using their highly rated prospects from say 2004-2007?

Yeah, I'm really bummed we don't have Mike Sweeney and are stuck with Casey Kotchman at first and Erick Aybar as a fifth infielder.

Man you Angels fans are nuts, the only guy really contributing is Kendrick no other position player would be missed.
Moralas, Kotchman, Aybar, Wood, Macphereson, Mathis- blah.
I understand the value of a 300k 90 ops+ guy, but the angels are one of the few teams that don't need to worry about that sort of thing.

Go back and read the hype BP and BA put on these guys, and look at the deadline and offseason deals made over the past 5 years, you rarely see more than one top-tier guy included in a deal.

If nothing else clearing out the logjam at every position might help development, I imagine it's hard for these guys to aclimate themselves when they're getting such sporadic PT.

Man you Angels fans are nuts, the only guy really contributing is Kendrick no other position player would be missed.

Great point. If the Angels would only throw around young talent they could have Miguel Tejada, Paul Konerko, and the best Pythagorean record in the league.

No.

They'd have a better, more balanced team instead of one that is slump-prone and overexposed in the playoffs.

Of course that means you'd be deprived watching Mike Socicia shoehorn young PCL stars into an already packed lineup.

I'd still like to know what the great trades were that were out there that were rejected. Kotchman/Aybar for Mike Sweeney is the only one that we know could have happened. There were also rumors of Ervin Santana + ? (Wood?) for Miguel Tejada, and Ervin Santana for Carl Crawford.

It was Santana and Aybar for Tejada. The rare trade where you give up two players better than the one you acquire. The Crawford trade, centered on Santana +, would also have been a disaster. The Sweeney deal, don't ask. Likewise, the Angels could have dumped Kendrick, Mathis, Santana + one more player in order to get Cabrera. Of course, bringing in a big bat like Cabrera would have virtually guaranteed success, so there's that.

Alas, the Angels are adrift with the best young pitching and defense in baseball. Maybe someday they'll be just like Detroit.

What would the Mets be giving up for Rivera?

Would the Angels be interested in a lefthanded reliever? Schoeneweis is a very good LOOGY and he could help a playoff team. Feliciano is cheaper and more versatile but not quite as good against lefties. The Mets also have some decent prospects in Mike Carp and Dan Murphy in AA who are guys Sickels would rate as B-prospects that I think they can afford to give up.

The Angels don't really need anything and the Mets don't have much they'd be willing to give up for Rivera. Not a good match.

Schoeneweis was run off the field during his last stint with the Angels. Notably, Scoiscia was thought to be a big detractor. There were whispers centering around terms like gutless and such.

The Angels don't figure to move Rivera without a substantial return in current big-league talent. They could use a good LOOGY, but Rivera won't be the bait.

I wouldn't trade him for Shoney. We had him, and came to the conclusion that our righties do a better job getting lhb out. George Sherill would be nice, but the O's should not be looking at Rivera, a potential free agent. Besides, right now Rivera is a starter, and the lineup looks far better than it did with GMJr in it.

I wouldn't trade him for Shoney. We had him, and came to the conclusion that our righties do a better job getting lhb out.

Really? Lefties career have a 593 OPS off him. Not that I can see the Angels giving Rivera up for him, but what righties do you have that could come close to that?

Shields I see. Damn, 625 career OPS vs lefties. That's very impressive.

The year we traded Shoney, Brendan Donnelly had a .552 OPS vs lefties.

Looking at the pitchers we have right now, Scott would probably be as effective as anybody vs lefties, but even loogies seem to wind up facing as many righties as lefties, due to pinch hitters or the need to sometimes get more than one batter out of them. Overall, he's just not that good a pitcher. I'm OK going without a lefty, our righties are pretty good. Including Oliver, a righthanded pitcher who just happens to pitch with his left hand.

Looking at the pitchers we have right now, Scott would probably be as effective as anybody vs lefties, but even loogies seem to wind up facing as many righties as lefties, due to pinch hitters or the need to sometimes get more than one batter out of them. Overall, he's just not that good a pitcher.

Don't disagree with this. I wouldn't think the Angels would trade Rivera for him. But he is very good against lefties was all I meant. Though I was surprised Shields was so impressive against them as well.

I think the Mets are a pretty good fit for Schoenweiss because they have a lefty closer, and a lefty in Feliciano who can do a decent job against righties, so if they want, they can really only use Schoenweiss against lefties or let him face more righties in low leverage situations.

Though I was surprised Shields was so impressive against them as well.

He's got a good slider that comes in like a fastball and dips hard, and he's got a great two seamer that often gets lefties looking. He starts in the batters box and it moves back over the inside corner. Really tough pitch for lefties.