Jump to content

Angels series 4/22-24


Frobby

Recommended Posts

Just now, Sports Guy said:

No question. No idea what we get out of Suarez tonight and like you said, Detmers has been legit good this year, so tonight could be tough but 2 out of 3 should certainly happen.

Yeah, if they're gonna drop a game in this series, tonight looks to be the one.  

They don't have a lot of hitters in the red on Statcast.  Sano seems to be going through some kind of a renaissance, Trout is doing Trout things but still only hitting .244 with a .323 on base...but 8 homers.  I'm not too worried about their offense, outside of Trout, Ward and Sano...quite frankly, this is the type of team I'd want to get Suarez that second start against to see if any of that magic from the first start carries over.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Moose Milligan said:

Yeah, if they're gonna drop a game in this series, tonight looks to be the one.  

They don't have a lot of hitters in the red on Statcast.  Sano seems to be going through some kind of a renaissance, Trout is doing Trout things but still only hitting .244 with a .323 on base...but 8 homers.  I'm not too worried about their offense, outside of Trout, Ward and Sano...quite frankly, this is the type of team I'd want to get Suarez that second start against to see if any of that magic from the first start carries over.

 

Plus the weather should be good and that has historically been a good park for pitchers.

Just tell him to stay away from Trout.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Yeah, if they're gonna drop a game in this series, tonight looks to be the one.  

They don't have a lot of hitters in the red on Statcast.  Sano seems to be going through some kind of a renaissance, Trout is doing Trout things but still only hitting .244 with a .323 on base...but 8 homers.  I'm not too worried about their offense, outside of Trout, Ward and Sano...quite frankly, this is the type of team I'd want to get Suarez that second start against to see if any of that magic from the first start carries over.

 

As the past two games showed, baseball can be rather unpredictable. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Angels announced Robert Stephenson out for the year recently.     Jose Soriano, who was big in relief in their win at OPACY, has joined the rotation and is out of this series.

They were just swept in Cincinnati with neither Carlos Estevez nor Matt Moore pitching at all, so Wash will get to be aggressive with his best relievers in close games.

After just six stolen bases in the last four years, Trout is up to 5 SB already as they are running.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

But how is his xWOSAUSAGE?

 

6 hours ago, Sports Guy said:
6 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

I don’t know how to respond to the idea that you feel his sausage is delicious but to quote Seinfeld…”not that there’s anything wrong with that”

 

Would you prefer "long and hot?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

Yeah, if they're gonna drop a game in this series, tonight looks to be the one.  

They don't have a lot of hitters in the red on Statcast.  Sano seems to be going through some kind of a renaissance, Trout is doing Trout things but still only hitting .244 with a .323 on base...but 8 homers.  I'm not too worried about their offense, outside of Trout, Ward and Sano...quite frankly, this is the type of team I'd want to get Suarez that second start against to see if any of that magic from the first start carries over.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another series W. Had Trout not hit that leadoff homer off GR in Game 2, then I think we sweep them. That HR got in GR’a head. This team sure is fun to watch. Never out of it. 

Job well done. On to the next one. Much appreciation for whoever does these series posts each time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Posts

    • I’m not saying we can’t trade for Scott. Or that we shouldn’t trade for someone. More that we basically already have one reliever we don’t have to trade for. But a guy who will likely have a relatively high whip due to command issues but have a well above average k rate… I also just don’t love rentals in general. Hit or miss as to whether they perform well anyway (hey jack flaherty) and then it’s gone. If you don’t win that year it’s all for nothing. For the right cost I’m okay with it, but I don’t want to give up a major prospect for a rental unless it’s the piece that puts us over the top 
    • They are not in a rebuild. And I don't want to waste time imagining that the team is bad and trading our best young players. As a matter of fact, I hope we don't have to do that for years to come. I envision adding good players not how can we get rid of the good ones that we have. I have waited my whole life to finally have a team this good. I don't mind at all trading good prospects. And have no delusional expectations that we can get value without surrendering value. Nor am I in love with the notion that we have to have a cheap, homegrown team. As a matter of fact, I want and expect the org to spend much more money on payroll than it is doing currently. Lastly, what happened with Gausman is in the past and under a totally different administration (ownership + front office). We were selling then. We are buying now.
    • Is there a reason it should be? He’s still walking 5.5+ batters per 9. He’s still got things he can work on. No rush to get him up unless it’s as a reliever down the stretch or a spot start. 
    • I mean Tanner Scott at least has a Major League track record. How much do you think Scott will really cost? Also, we have more position players and prospects that we could ever use. I understand maybe not wanting Scott, but I don't understand the logic of not wanting surrender any prospects (even some good ones). We almost have to at some point. Otherwise, you have 25 year old top level prospects like Kjerstad, who is in his prime now and killing it at AAA but has no place on the Big League roster. Stowers is even older and has contributed relatively nothing to the Orioles and is now age 26.
    • Way to avoid the question.  If the O's were in rebuild mode and had Gray Rod in the exact position he is now, what kind of prospect package would you want?  Fans here are notorious for not wanting to give up any good prospects for other team's best players but then want the world for their own less than perfect players.  When Gausman was about to be traded here (way less an impressive pitcher than Gray Rod is now), posters here were convinced that the O's would get 3 top 100 prospects for him.  The O's got none 
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...