My family has had a running joke for years now that has led me to the conclusion that Mark Trumbo is indeed a shark. We caution people to NEVER say that a shark cannot do something because the moment you say it, scientists will find a breed somewhere that can do exactly what it is they previously thought sharks could not do. For example, they said sharks couldn't breach the water like whales, then they caught some great whites on tape. They also used to say sharks couldn't sleep lying still, and that they couldn't swim in fresh water. Them freakish jumbo-guppies sure showed us, huh? So kids, if you dare to say a shark can't climb your tree house ladder and steal your s'mores, don't say I didn't warn you.

Continue reading this post »

I originally wrote this as a comment in another thread, and didn't really get any response. I apologize if that is against blogger protocol. But I genuinely want to know what other people remember about past team line-ups under Sosh. I don't always trust my memory.

Has Sosh ALWAYS been this bad about mixing up the lineups, or has it gotten worse the last year or two? I seem to recall 2002 being a very consistent team. 2004 as well. Maybe 2005 started to get spotty when he finally gave up on Finley in CF, and we had no Glaus at 3B, right?

Continue reading this post »

That was my epiphany last night as I watched Trumbo uselessly brought into the game to pinch run late in a game that the Angels already had sewn up. Trumbo has had a meager 16 AB thus far. That's three more than Dead Weight Bobby Abreu, and 3 fewer than Little Albert Callaspo. Not to mention Big Splash and his .256 OBP in 38 AB. However, in the small sample size of 13 AB's, unlike those guys he should be replacing in the lineup, Trumbo has produced. He has a .474 OBP and looks like he is becoming even more lethal by adding some discipline to his power with 3 BB already.

Continue reading this post »

After giving up 2 hits and 0 walks in his first 2 innings of work last week, Darvish suffered under the mighty tomahawk-chopping hands of the Cleveland Indians today. He gave up 2 runs on 3 hits and 4 walks. His line would've looked even worse if his defense hadn't picked him up with a double play and 2 caught stealing.

Continue reading this post »

In response to Rev's article ranking the bad decisions and unfortunate events that led to the Angel's second couch-warming off season in a row, I would like to begin a discussion about what went right in 2011. It's not that I disagree with Rev, nor am I a deluded optimist, but for my health's sake, I prefer not to revel too long in negativity. I'd rather move on in the grieving process toward acceptance, and look for the silver lining in this golden-haloed, 50th anniversary season of Angels baseball. So, here are some of what I consider to be the highlights of the season. I may not be able to come up with 10, but I'll start. Please add your own:

Continue reading this post »

As I tend to do every off-season around this time, I spent some time analyzing the Angel's 2011 schedule, and compared it to last year's. I'm wondering if others have done the same, and if they found anything encouraging or discouraging. Here's what I saw...

Continue reading this post »

The Angels have 30 games left against teams worse than us. We have 22 against teams with a better record. We currently have 54 wins. If we go 20-10 against the lousy teams, and 11-11 against the good teams, we will finish with only 85 wins. But a sweep or two of the lousy teams, and an extra win or two of the better teams could put us at 89 to 90 wins.

Texas, on the other hand, has a stretch of 20 games with no days off in August that includes 3 against BOS, 3 against TB, and 4 against MIN. Then, they have to finish the season with a 16 game stretch also with no days off. That includes 3 more against MIN and NY, and 7 against LAA. Meanwhile, the Angels will enjoy 4 days off at home in the cool breezes of Southern California between now and the end of the season.

It will not be easy to catch Texas. Admittedly, we almost have to bank on them choking as much as us winning. However, at least from the standpoint of the remaining schedules, it looks like the Angels may be set up for an epic comeback. I am daring to hope that they can do it. We just need the fire that has seemed to dwindle all season to finally flare up.

My uncle is a Rangers fan living in TX. We've had some good email discussions over the years about baseball, and I thought HHers might appreciate hearing from someone on the other side. So, here is what he has to say about 1) my comments on the their bankruptcy and how the Angels are essentially paying the Rangers to make big trades in order to beat themselves and 2) the big series that starts tonight. Let me know if you find it insightful.

.......

"You make a good point about the finances in the Rangers' bankruptcy - it's totally weird.  Here's one for the ages: Nolan Ryan is actually suing his own team in this process.  Go figure!   

Of course, the whole mess has been created by Rangers' owner, Tom Hicks, who is still largely protected by local media here.  With only one exception, (Randy Galloway), local commentators have been eulogizing Hicks for a decade, while he has defrauded his investors of 500 million dollars.   

But One Man - Ball Machine! [my uncle] - led the way by identifying Hicks as a gangster way back when he hired John Hart as GM, while lying to the A's and MLB about negotiations with Grady Fuson.  Later, his treatment of Pudge, A-Rod, and especially Kenny Rogers made the Rangers the off-scouring of MLB - making it impossible for them to sign top players, be they veterans or prospects.   

Throughout his tenure, Hicks' contempt for MLB - it's organization, players, and especially fans - has tainted the entire Rangers' organization.  The man is a certified pathological liar, whose worthless life is devoid of accomplishment.  Fortunately, Ryan's efforts have restored some credibility.  

As for the league's support of financially distressed teams, we often forget that the individual teams are not actually distinct business entities - they are franchised members of a single venture.  While they compete on the field, they still help each other because the failure of one franchise hurts all of them.   

This is especially true of the Rangers, who inhabit the 5th largest sports market overall.  I suspect the DFW area may actually be the largest in terms of available of discretionary money due to low taxes and housing costs.  Furthermore, the cost of operating the team is more like Kansas City, while the population is more like San Diego, without the cost of living.  Bottom line: I don't think the league would consider moving the team.  They realize that there's no reason the Rangers can't be America's Baseball Team, like the Cowboys are America's Football Team, and should be the most profitable team in MLB.  

Now to the upcoming series:  This is huge for both teams - 7 games in 11 days.  One local writer put it this way: "Win this seven-game block, and the Rangers might put themselves on the verge of being uncatchable over the last two months.  Lose it, and the battle-tested Angels will be even closer than they appear in the rear-view mirror."  Well said.  

The pitching match-ups promise some great contests:  Lee - Weaver, Wilson - Saunders, Feldman - Santana, Hunter - O'Sullivan.  Tonight could go either way, slight advantage to Lee, if the Rangers score any runs for him for a change.  Wilson should beat Saunders, but it's not a lock - advantage Rangers.  Feldman has no chance against Santana - game conceded to Angels.  Sunday, Hunter has a little longer record, but O'Sullivan has found something pretty special recently.  But how many teams could acquire Cliff Lee and have him actually be the #2 starter?  That's almost the case with Hunter.  Slight advantage - Rangers.  

One more little factoid, known only to Joe Morgan and Ball Machine [my uncle]:  While the Rangers' Ballpark is known as a hitters' park, in truth, that only applies to left hand hitters.  The idea of a hitters' park is largely the creation of our front office, with the help of local media, as usual, to cover up the Rangers' crappy pitching over the years.  Actual statistical measurement shows the Ballpark about even.  (The Ballpark stopped being a hitters' park when A-Rod was traded.)   

But with the 14' fence 354' down the left field line, the Ball Park is not particularly friendly to RH hitters.  The porch in RF reminds folks of the old Tigers Stadium, but in truth the dimensions are pretty standard there.   Alleged wind anomalies are also completely fictitious creations of the Rangers front office.  At least two independent aerodynamic studies have revealed no significant anomalies, but the stories were buried by local press.  Bottom line: the Ballpark has always slightly favored LH pitchers, and the Rangers are bringing two against the Angels' one.  Might not matter, but good lefties do well here.  

Likely outcome in the next seven games between the two:  4-3 either way.  In other words - the Rangers better take 3 here in Arlington it they want to widen the lead.  Neither team is going away soon. One thing is for sure: we're going to see some exciting baseball."

Fox sports reports that the Angels were among teams that had scouts at this D'backs vs. Marlins game featuring Danny Haren versus Ricky Nolasco. The report states that scouts may not have been there to watch either pitcher. If that's the case, what were they there to do? Do they have really good hotdogs there?

Assuming there is some interest in either pitcher, which do you think it is? Obviously, Haren is a guy a lot of teams want (now that Lee has gone to the Rangers). But the D'backs have already made it clear that a team would have to really pony up to make them happy.

If they were scouting Nolasco, does anyone think he would be that much of an improvement over Kazmir? Kazmir's WAR is 0.2 this season, and Nolasco's is 0.9. Hardly a great improvement. However, he would most likely eat up more innings than Kaz has been (which is not hard to do). Plus, he may come cheap.

Last year the Angels had 4 days off at home, not counting the All-Star break. They would have had 5, but had to make up the game against Oakland that they took off to mourn the loss of Nick Adenhart.

This year, the Angels are scheduled to have 8 days off at home. So far, they are an inconclusive 1-1 in games following a day off at home. But I think especially our aged outfielders will benefit from getting to have a few extra nights in their own beds, and even more so come August/September.

They always say they're fine, but we all know it's a grueling season, and even more taxing on the veterans' bodies than the young and spry. So, how much do you think it will aid our boys to have more days off at home this year?

A while back, I posted about how irritated I was that our broadcasters keep talking about how Bulger's ERA keeps going down, when he still lets a lot of the previous pitcher's runners come across. I also asked people to submit a request to bb-ref to add that stat to their site (which they haven't done yet). Well, I came across this cool article where Jesse Spector of the NY Daily has been keeping track of IRS for us, as well as some other good relief pitcher stats. 

The numbers show that Bulger is the 8th worst relief pitcher in baseball at stranding inherrited runners, allowing 8 of 16 to score so far this season. For you saberheads out there, that's half! If we could add those 8 runs to Bulger's current 9 earned runs, instead of charging them to the pitchers who he screwed over, his ERA would be 8.41 rather than his already unimpressive 4.34.

I have never liked that the pitcher who left the runner/s on base is the one who gets charged with the runs, if the reilef pitcher gives up a scoring hit, walk, etc. I understand the logic, but it's cold. There have been many times this season (it seems to happen to Saunders most, am I right?) when the SP is pulled, only to see the RP give up a crucial walk, hit, wild pitch, whatever. I always think, "The starting pitcher could have done that himself!" I know the stat will not change, but wouldn't it be more fair if the SP and RP split the ER when an inherited runner scores?

So, the bottom line is that Bulger sucks, and is also making other pitchers appear even more sucky than they really are. Long gone are the days when the Angels had a guy that we could trust to just come in and shut down the opposition. (Actually, not too far gone - Oliver.) When it used to be Good Shields and K-Rod setting up Percy, we played 6 inning baseball. We desperately need to get back to that. I, for one, hope we don't screw up our priorities and make a brash move to replace Morales before we figure out this bullpen problem. (Frankie2.0 has looked promising, but is he enough?) We need to see how Mathis does swinging the bat before we worry about the offense. The pen has been and remains the biggest problem, and the primary issue to address.

I feel so bad for that poor kid in Detroit. And all of baseball fandom was ripped off by not getting to witness history tonight, the 3rd perfect game in a single season. I have two questions about overturning the call. 1) Can't the Tigers protest the game and have it reviewed by the comissioner? If not 2) can't they do what Victor Rojas mentioned, change the ruling to E3 instead of a hit, and give the poor guy his perfect game?

Anyway, in light of Gallaraga's should-be perfect game. It's time for another discussion of the pros and cons of expanding instant replay in baseball. I, for one, am in favor of expanding it. I hate injustice in all its forms, and that is what a bad umpiring call is, in essence. I think the manager having one "red flag" to throw per game, similar to  the NFL, makes a lot of sense. And I think it should be able to be used once for any type of play: chalk line, balls/strikes, trapped catch, caught stealing,,,because any play is potentially the game-changing play. It would add a whole new strategy to the game, as it does in football. The manager would have to gamble on whether to use the flag, or save it. Just imagine how awesome it would have been if a red flag got to be used at the end of that game tonight!

I usually hear two arguments against expanding instant replay that are not very convincing to me, and if you are someone who adheres to either of the following, I crave your explanation. 1) "It will take away the 'human element' of baseball." This I really don't get. In the world of athletics, aren't we always striving to become MORE excellent? Why are we hanging on to this idea that mistakes are part of the game? The rulings on the field should be as fair and accurate as possible. If we have the technology to make that even better, we need to use it. It's like refusing to add power stearing to a car because it's more "natural" to have to wrench your arms out of socket to stear. 2) "The game is already long enough." First of all, I disagree because I love baseball. The more I can watch, the better. Second, with a "red flag" rule, the manager only gets to dispute one call per game, so he must choose wisely. As it is now, a lot more time is wasted on the umpire and coach arguing disputed calls than there ever would be to review an instant replay. It would almost make the long, drawn out, dirt kicking arguments a thing of the past.

So, please respond. I really want to hear from those of you, if there really are any out there besides all the nastolgic ex-players-turned-broadcasters, who do not wish to see instant replay expanded. Also, if there are any unforeseen problems with the "red flag" idea, let's hear them.

You may take some consolation in this. A review of this past week will reveal that the Angels were just part of the supporting cast in an unprecedented week of sweeps in the Big Show. Check this out:

TB swept SEA
NY swept BAL
TOR swept CLE
BOS swept LAA
MIN swept DET
SF swept FLA
PIT swept CHC
(PHI took 3 of 4 from STL)

I don't have the time or energy to research how rare it is for 7 sweeps to take place in the same week in baseball, but that seems amazing to me. I will now use this information to fool myself into thinking that it was all somehow part of a more grand, cosmological scheme for the Angels to be swept this week, and that perhaps the planets are now realigned to turn the tides for our Halos. (I didn't see or hear any reports on this, but I apologize if I'm inadvertently rehashing news that's hours old).

On to Seattle! Let's get Figgy with it!

So, my wife and I had been noticing that Ervin Santana will go to great lengths to NOT pitch to Mike Napoli. Mathis was his catcher of choice, and that's no secret. But when Mathis went down, who did Santana pitch to? Bobby Wilson. And when Bobby Wilson went down, who did Santana pitch to? Budde. We were under the impression that there must really be some pretty bad blood between Santana and Napoli, if Voodoo was willing to pitch to the 4th string catcher before he pitched to Napoli.

However, in yesterday's game, Naps was run out there, and how did Santana fair? He had his best game since the complete game in Toronto. So, what happened? Did Nipples and Voodoo have a heart to heart, and clear the air? After a mediocre performance pitching to Budde, did Ervin decide Napoli is the lesser of two evils? Or did Scioscia just lay down the law, tell him to quit being a baby, and pitch to Napoli?

None of us can really do anymore than speculate as to why Santana finally pitched to Naps again, but it is fun to notice some interesting coincidences and nuances from the game. First, Santana had his best game since the CG in Toronto. Second, Napoli was using a sequence of signs even when a runner was only on first base. As Victor Rojas and Gubi were saying, perhaps the opposition was relaying signs somehow, and the Angels caught wind. Third, Santana started using an unorthodox, overemphasized glove-jiggle when pitching from the wind-up. Again, Rojas and Gubi commented that perhaps Ervin and Butcher had reviewed video, and discovered that he was tipping his pitches. Fourth, Napoli had a 3 hit game, showing signs of getting his centerfield power stroke back.

Which of these points do you think are significant? Do you think this decent outing for Santana throwing to Napoli is a sign that Naps is improving defensively? How will it impact the team if Santana now feels he can pitch to Napoli and be successful? Is my post a complete waste of time? All in all, I think this is one positive to take away from an otherwise dismal loss in a string of abysmal losses.

If you're like me, and you want to know just how bad Jason Bulger has been at allowing inherited runners to score, but you just couldn't find a website with the proper info, please go to baseball-reference.com and suggest that they add IRS (inherited runners scored) to their relief pitcher stats. Here is a link.

On occasion, a relief pitcher can fool us with a moderate ERA, and could possibly even have a tolerable WHIP, but seems to allow a run to score almost every time he pitches. It is very frustrating because it affects the previous pitcher's performance, and (more importantly) may even blow a possible win. Yet, IRS is not a stat that is widely observed.

I was irritated a few days ago to here Angels commentators mention that Bulger had not allowed an earned run in __ # of innings (I don't recall exactly), but they were totally overlooking all the inherited runners he has allowed to score. I'm sure Sosh is all too aware of Bulger's problem in this area, but it would be nice for us laypeople to have access to those numbers without having to scrutinize past boxscores. That way our bitching and moaning can be even more well informed.

(Thanks to Downing Rules for the idea to petition bb-ref.)

First of all, let's get this out of the way - I am aware of how young the season is, and how small the sample size is that we are looking at. So, there is no need to respond along those lines.

Now, to the point. Thus far, Jeff Mathis has collected 8 hits in 24 AB (.333), including 1 HR and 2 RBI, while Mike Napoli has only had 9 AB. Defensively, Napoli did not erase a single base stealer in Spring Training, but has gotten 1 of 5 in the season. Mathis caught 8 is ST, but has gotten 0 of 2 in the season.

I would like to hear people's predictions, will Mathis continue to hit well? If so, does that make Mike Napoli trade bait this season, or will we let him waste away this year so he can DH next year? And if he is expendable, what area of the team could we stand to bolster in a possible deal? Did I hear someone say Granderson?

Personally, I have always favored Napoli. I think what he contributes offensively outways any shortcomings he may have defensively, and it is insane to bench a guy who could hit 40 HR if he's given the ABs. Conversely, I don't think Mathis will sustain his brief, early success in the box this season. However, if he somehow does establish himself as the better defensive catcher AND and an offensive threat, it creates some opportunity for the Angels.

Again, I know it's just the butt crack of dawn on long-ass seaon, but the serious lack of Naps has already got me thinking.