PDA

View Full Version : Josh Hamilton to the Angels



gorilla777
12-13-2012, 02:26 PM
Huh? That was under the radar...

Ben

joelsabi
12-13-2012, 03:36 PM
i wonder who protect who? im thinking hamilton at cleanup. expect a great year from pujols as he now knows AL pitching and now has great protection.

frikativ54
12-13-2012, 03:39 PM
Geez - LAA is stacked! :eek: Especially now that my two teams are both in the AL West. :eek:

yanks12025
12-13-2012, 04:32 PM
I want to know who when the Yankees signed a player it's called trying to buy championships and ruining baseball. Yet what the Dodgers have done and also with the Angels buying everyone, no one says a thing about them trying to buy championships or ruin baseball. In fact the Dodgers will have been worse then the Yankees and have a payroll over $220 million, will be sweet to see them both fail again and miss the postseason.

xpress34
12-13-2012, 06:41 PM
I want to know who when the Yankees signed a player it's called trying to buy championships and ruining baseball. Yet what the Dodgers have done and also with the Angels buying everyone, no one says a thing about them trying to buy championships or ruin baseball. In fact the Dodgers will have been worse then the Yankees and have a payroll over $220 million, will be sweet to see them both fail again and miss the postseason.
Yanks -

It's called 'historical perspective'. The Yankees had been doing it on and off for decades starting with getting Babe Ruth from the Red Sox.

In the 50's and 60's, many people in sports considered the KC Athletics the 'farm team' of the Yankees as NY would pluck their best players on a regular basis - including Maris.

If the Dodgers and Angels start actually 'winning' Championships (like the Yankees did), then it will be called 'Buying a Championship''. No one said squat about the team the Marlins put together last year and look where they are now - almost all of those big money moves and the 'splash' storeis from last year's Winter Meetings are on other teams now and the Marlins (Jeffrey L) basically killed Tampa's chances of a new stadium by what they did.

We'll see how the Angels and Dodgers do this year - part of it for them too is the hype that since Magic's group took over the Dodgers, they want to be THE L.A. Baseball Team again and the Angels will spend to keep up with them.

Just my .02

Smitty

xpress34
12-13-2012, 06:47 PM
So now neither team that I follow (Rangers and Rockies) have done jack $h!t during the off season.

The Rockies basically gave away the few reliable bullpen arms they had, have picked up two or three guys that have had arm troubles the last couple of years and they added another unknown infielder to an already crowded group.

The Rangers (thinking they had the inside scoop on Greinke) never got serious about Hamilton (who they also thought would not get the years he wanted) and instead missed out on every opportunity because they weren't aggressive enough even though they had the funds. To add insult to injury, they traded away the 'captain' (Michael Young) to the Phillies and did absolutely nothing to really try to keep fan favorite Hamilton in the fold.

Only time will tell if it was wise to let him go - but to a Division Rival? That could really come back to haunt them. Will they walk Hambone at Arlington next year or pitch to him in a park he knows all too well?

- Smitty

gingi79
12-13-2012, 09:50 PM
I want to know who when the Yankees signed a player it's called trying to buy championships and ruining baseball. Yet what the Dodgers have done and also with the Angels buying everyone, no one says a thing about them trying to buy championships or ruin baseball. In fact the Dodgers will have been worse then the Yankees and have a payroll over $220 million, will be sweet to see them both fail again and miss the postseason.


I had the same thought too. When the Yanks, Mets or Boston do it, everyone has a canary. The Dodgers and Angels do it and it's met with zero criticism.

Miami has a history of buying large, winning it all and selling everything; wash, rinse, repeat. They skipped the winning part but their fire sale is just like 1997 and 2003.

I will say in my humble opinion that the Angels have a lineup that warrants failure as underachievers if they don't win a title in the next 2 seasons. Otherwise, I get the feeling the Boston Massacre and the poaching of the Marlins from last season will be a blueprint for the Bonfire of the Angels.

Rob L
12-13-2012, 10:00 PM
Sweet!!!!!!!!!

jppopma
12-13-2012, 11:36 PM
So much for that "tight on cash" story they fed Hunter before he signed with the Tigers....

OaklandAsFan
12-14-2012, 02:40 AM
Angels, Yankees of the West. Being an A's fan I'm glad to see that they haven't learned that throwing ridiculous sums of money for a "name" doesn't equate anything. How was golfing in October for the boys in red?

coxfan
12-14-2012, 07:36 AM
xpress34 is correct in his historical perspective on the Yankees. Articles at the time said the Red Sox "shopped around" Babe Ruth; the high price the Yankees paid came from their ability to outbid others for Ruth, already an established superstar.

I recall how the Kansas City A's regularly made trades to the Yankees that were favorable to the Yankees in their 1950's dynasty years. (I was a little boy in those years, but the idea that the A's were a "farm club" of the Yankees was already prevalent.) Many believed that the A's owner had improper connections to the Yankee owners at the time; these things wouldn't be allowed today.

Parity is basic to the success of any sport, because uncertainty of success is basic to the enjoyment of sports and games in general. Baseball fell behind other sports right partly because of its determination to impede parity for the sake of a dynasty mentality. These days, big bucks only buy division titles and nothing in the playoffs. So the mania for big budgets and (even worse) long contracts seems doomed to fall short of its goals for any club. And the Braves proved that pitching, not sluggers, are what's needed.

These days,

jake33
12-17-2012, 02:43 PM
With baseball's wildcard round being a ONE game playoff, that is really a lot of pressure for 1 game. Hamilton for 5-years? I would assume one or two of those years the Angels could slip into the wildcard round and leave it up to a lot of chance for a 1-game playoff.

---

Even more can that be said with what the Royals did by getting James Shields. Let's say this, I would be very very surprised if KC wins their division in 2013 or 2014. With that, it means you traded a few prospects for the chance at a 1-game playoff. Is that really worth it?

legaleagle92481
12-22-2012, 01:57 PM
Prediction neither the Angels or Dodgers make the playoffs next year.